Regardless of the womanís choice, men should choose whether their baby will be born or not
A woman should be able to choose whether to give birth or not, regardless of the manís choice
If the man doesnít want a baby, he should be able to choose whether to give financial support or not
I am ďpro-choiceĒ (I think women should be able to choose to abort their babies if they want to)
I am "pro-life" (against abortion)
I see. You're responsible enough to pay for it, but you won't actually father the child. How nice of youI do- and I accept, that when I do that, if a child results I will do everything in my power to make sure the child isn’t aborted, and I will pay for however much of the child’s upbringing the woman deems I should pay. I would not be a good father figure- I only have sex with those who know me well enough to know that. I would stand out of the way, but would send however much money the woman needed to raise the child as best she could. If I can possibly prevent it, no child of mine will ever be aborted. I would consider that murder, and would at all costs avoid having any further contact with the woman who aborted. While I don’t know for sure whether or not that unborn was a human being or not, the 50% chance it was is plenty to deter me. I don’t understand why it isn’t enough to deter anyone else.
And as long as she can keep the baby without his consent, she can assume all financial responsiblity for her well earned and legal "choice".And the father is just as responsible for his lack of commitment and his irresponsibility for fathering a child outside of a committed relationship. It takes two schmucks to make a baby outside of a committed relationship. He's a big boy too. He can make decisions and be responsible for them too.
Not as long as one has all the choice and power and the other is relegated to nothing more than the "wallet"...The abortion is her responsibility and she is the one who will pay the price, both literally and figuratively. But both parents are responsibility for the children they spawn
She is the dangerous weapon that can deliver a child much like a missile silo delivers a nuke. The destructive person is the woman and she should be locked up... or be forced to wear lockable panties.She didn't make the baby on her own. Masturbation doesn't lead to pregnancy. Sex leads to pregnancy, and that take two. If that is problem, maybe it's time to reconsider if he should be making such decisions on his own in the first place. Maybe he should be locked up or otherwise prevented from having sex.
Correct, not patriachical... just sexist.There is nothing patriarchical about holding BOTH parents responsible for the support of any children they produce.
It has nothng to do with consent. Both parents are held responsible for the consequences of their actions.And as long as she can keep the baby without his consent, she can assume all financial responsiblity for her well earned and legal "choice".
Both parents have a choice. Both are held responsible for the children they produceNot as long as one has all the choice and power and the other is relegated to nothing more than the "wallet"...
Nonsense. Your need to resort to overblown hyperbole undermines the credibility of your argument.She is the dangerous weapon that can deliver a child much like a missile silo delivers a nuke. The destructive person is the woman and she should be locked up... or be forced to wear lockable panties.
Equal rights and responsibility; There's nothing sexist about itCorrect, not patriachical... just sexist.