It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Men's-rights activists seek right to decline fatherhood in event of unplanned pregnancy

page: 9
56
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Great subject and one that I have discussed with my husband many times.

My bottom line: If the man doesn't want the child and he signs papers to that effect within a reasonable time period (say 4 months into the pregnancy - so that the woman has time to get an early term abortion of she wants) it would "abort" the man's responsibility and any claim to the child.

The woman can then decide if she wants to continue the pregnancy, knowing that she will have to deal with it on her own.

Of course, there are problems that would have to be worked out. For example, what if she doesn't tell him that she's pregnant?


I hope you're not serious. 4 MONTHS!?

16 week of pregnancy:
Your baby now gets the hiccups, but since they have fluid instead of air in the trachea they don’t make any sound. They also like to play, by pulling and tugging and squeezing on the umbilical cord.

Usually between 16 and 20 weeks you’ll begin to feel the baby moving about

www.amazingpregnancy.com...

THATS early in pregnancy? Sounds like a baby to me and not some malignant tumor.




posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by SearchLightsInc
 


DNA tests prove parentage whether or not birth control was used. Test results positive? Tough luck. Deal with it.


Aye i get that, but what if the guy turns around as was like "I used a condom and it split" Would that not result in a deadlock? How exactly would that be overcome?



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 



Seems easier to me to use that method (abstinence) then to let the world know they are a dead beat by trying to "decline fatherhood".


A man is no more a deadbeat by denying fatherhood, than a women is for denying motherhood (by abortion). So, in effect the feminists who advocate women's choice are also advocating deadbeats and the right to be a deadbeat? Why can only the woman be a deadbeat? If they are advocating women deadbeats, then they are sexist if they don't also advocate for male deadbeats.


--airspoon



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:07 AM
link   


You may not see the problem with this concept but put simply, as natural as pregnancy is, women still fear it. If it was not for medicine then the death rate would still be considerate. A lot of the time after giving birth women’s body’s don’t return to how they were and there skin can be riddled with stretch marks.
reply to post by SearchLightsInc
 


Well, see there you go! That is the women’s share of the risk and the “play” part. Why do you think that the men must carry all the burden of fault? If they fear it that much then they should not “play”.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by xyankee
 


No sir. The post was in reply to bluemirage5 post.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Great subject and one that I have discussed with my husband many times.

My bottom line: If the man doesn't want the child and he signs papers to that effect within a reasonable time period (say 4 months into the pregnancy - so that the woman has time to get an early term abortion if she wants) it would "abort" the man's responsibility and any claim to the child.

The woman can then decide if she wants to continue the pregnancy, knowing that she will have to deal with it on her own.

Of course, there are problems that would have to be worked out. For example, what if she doesn't tell him that she's pregnant?


edit on 9/17/2010 by Benevolent Heretic because: she got the letters mixed up.
Surprised to hear this view from you, BH. You are joking, right? In your scenerio does the female have a choice whether he signs? Do they both have to agree on the absolving of the father's (deadbeats) rights?

Only the male gets to absolve himself of the responsibility he knew doggone good and well could occur?



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 



Seems easier to me to use that method (abstinence) then to let the world know they are a dead beat by trying to "decline fatherhood".


A man is no more a deadbeat by denying fatherhood, than a women is for denying motherhood (by abortion). So, in effect the feminists who advocate women's choice are also advocating deadbeats and the right to be a deadbeat? Why can only the woman be a deadbeat? If they are advocating women deadbeats, then they are sexist if they don't also advocate for male deadbeats.


--airspoon
Deadbeats eschew responsibility. Abortion is taking responsibility.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by xyankee
 


Only to the irresponsible ones out there



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater


A man does have access to 100 percent effective contraception.

Seems easier to me to use that method (abstinence) then to let the world know they are a dead beat by trying to "decline fatherhood".

The time to decline fatherhood is before it happens.



Now that would be ideal wouldn’t it? But the reality is that both genders love to have sex and sometimes, that results in unplanned pregnancy. I believe the 8 page discussion is about the rights of the father and not a guide of how to not get knocked up.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


Well then the women can get an abortion if the man also chooses not to have a child. Why should the woman get the choice if she isn't ready to have a child but the man doesn't? After all, they both choose to have sex. when a woman gets an abortion, she is a deatbeat just the same as if a man also chooses he is not ready. She can get an abortion if he also chooses he isn't ready. It shouldn't be her choice only and that notion is completely sexist and ignorant.

--airspoon



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by mayertuck
 


You brought the quantifier of "cheap" into the conversation. Not me, so how did I put words in your mouth? I stand by my post.


Your right I did bring it up. In response to you putting words in my mouth, when you asked if it riled me that it was cheap, I assumed you already thought I felt that way. If you didn't then I take responsibility and apologize. If however you did and that was the reason you asked then I do not apologize and stand by it.

You are allowed of course to stand by your post, I am however curious as to why pretty much every point I bring up, in our interactions has not really been addressed, without either sidestepping the issue, attacking the person instead of the arguments, or been ignored. Its no biggie if you do not feel like replying to them, it just lets me know if we are having an intelligent conversation or not about the issue, and therefore whether or not I chooses to continue to interact.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:15 AM
link   
reply to post by AzoriaCorp
 


Since when is exercising the choice to abort not taking responsibility?


It is part of a females valid legal and responsible birth control choices.

I am sorry you feel the need to degrade the woman by acting like abortion is not a valid legal responsible choice, and even comparing it to not paying child support or shirking parental duties as a father is disgusting reprehensive and very telling.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:15 AM
link   
In this day in age, a man doesn't even get the choice to be a dead beat, as the courts will force him to not only take care of the child but also the mother. This is nonsense. If she can easily choose whether she is ready, then so should he be able to do the same.

--airspoon



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2weird2live2rare2die
. i don't see the problem with this concept...


Really? You do not see the problem of someone being forced to have something happen to their body against their will?

And if the shoe were on the other foot?



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by xyankee



You may not see the problem with this concept but put simply, as natural as pregnancy is, women still fear it. If it was not for medicine then the death rate would still be considerate. A lot of the time after giving birth women’s body’s don’t return to how they were and there skin can be riddled with stretch marks.
reply to post by SearchLightsInc
 


Well, see there you go! That is the women’s share of the risk and the “play” part. Why do you think that the men must carry all the burden of fault? If they fear it that much then they should not “play”.


I dont remember ever saying men should carry the burden of fault
And also women fear pregnancy (as in, pushing a human out of a small hole) But women are also wired to want to get it on with a guy, so in retrospect, we are just as crossed as men. Blame should only be placed when nither party used contraception. The burden of blame should go with whoever said no to being careful.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by airspoon
In this day in age, a man doesn't even get the choice to be a dead beat, as the courts will force him to not only take care of the child but also the mother. This is nonsense. If she can easily choose whether she is ready, then so should he be able to do the same.


Paying child support and being a father to a child are two greatly different things. Paying child support is easy, there is no responsibility required.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by mayertuck
 


Hate to nitpick but I cannot stand to be misrepresented. I certainly did not bring the word cheap into the conversation. Please go back and make note of who did. You did.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by mayertuck
I agree its is a consequence, but it is a consequence that she chooses to do to not accept responsibility. Yea its not cheap, but compared with 18 years of child support is definetly the cheaper option is it not?

So if I am reading you correctly, you are saying that she is being responsible by getting an abortion because its birth control?

I was under the impression the aim of birth control was to prevent pregnancy in the first place. If the aim of birth control is to prevent pregnancy then how is getting an abortion truly facing the consequence of having sex?


edit on 17-9-2010 by mayertuck because: (no reason given)



I have addressed your points you just do not like how I have done so.

"



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by xyankee
 


If pregnant women chose to abort should be forced to go full term and hand the kid over to the father who does want it? Statistically, how many fathers be like that out there? A tiny handful perhaps?

Now how many non-custodial fathers out there pay 50% of the day to day living costs of their child from birth to 18 years of age? How many non-custodial fathers out there pay zero and avoid it like the plague? Keep in mind more than half of these children brought up in single parent homes come from broken homes so they were once wanted by their fathers.

No man has the right nor would he ever be given the right to force a woman to go full term - period! In saying that, no woman has the right to force the father of her child to spend time with it but he DOES have the responsibility of paying reasonable child support whether he likes it or not and most men don't like it and all men complain no matter how much he pays - they even complain when they don't pay it.

And these so-called men's rights movements expect the women's rights movement to help them out? Pffffffffff

Grow up, be a man, take responsibility for your own actions, and stop blaming women every time something goes wrong in your lives.

In my opinion, if a man does'nt pay child support, I think jail time is too soft but forced in to hard labour jobs instead.

Takes two to tango!!!


Then explain the higher percentage of noncustodial mothers that do not pay child support vs the percentage of noncustodial fathers that dont?



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unity_99
reply to post by TarzanBeta
 


Abortion is something many people do not believe in, or only under certain cirucumstances. And irregardless of whether someone aborts, or someone miscarriages, or whatever someones intention, the reality is, when a living child is born it has two dna contributors, mommy and daddy. No one is off the hook, and the ones that think they are have a lot to answer for unless they are extremely dysfunctional/ill/traumatized permanently.


Before a living child is born, it has two dna contributors.

On all other accounts, I am in full agreement.



posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


Well then the women can get an abortion if the man also chooses not to have a child. Why should the woman get the choice if she isn't ready to have a child but the man doesn't? After all, they both choose to have sex. when a woman gets an abortion, she is a deatbeat just the same as if a man also chooses he is not ready. She can get an abortion if he also chooses he isn't ready. It shouldn't be her choice only and that notion is completely sexist and ignorant.

--airspoon
It is her choice only because it her body only. Abortion is legal as of the date of this debate, thus it remains a valid choice. The notion is not sexist and ignorant it is logical and biological.



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join