• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Child Support Payments

True, unfortunate indeed. Yet so long as one is alive, there is always hope of a better tomorrow.


Why do you feel the government should be the one deciding what a woman does with her body?
 
There are consequences when you partake in sex. This is not unknown. It's basic biology. But at conception, you've made a life. I cannot see how it is fair to eliminate that life for the convenience of those already in existence. You know that going into it. Better alive then dead.

Conception is impossible to prevent on the absolute scale, yes. There are means to drastically lower the probabilities, but it won't be zero. This must be understood because I cannot see it as fair as to take out the shortsightedness of the parents on the unborn child whom has done nothing wrong. It does not seem rational.

What are you complaining about exactly? Ending a pregnancy or the fact that abortion ends a life? There is nothing inherently wrong with ending a pregnancy. If it could be done without ending the life of the unborn, then I'd support it... Yes, it's incredibly convenient to end a pregnancy if you're 11 years old and/or a victim of rape, or domestic violence. Doing things out of convenience doesn't automatically make it wrong. Rational people don't inconvenience themselves every chance they can in life. And you seem to be arguing that ending pregnancy is just simply wrong because it goes against biology, and I don't understand that POV. People are going to want to end pregnancies because pregnancies and life situations aren't easy for some women or young girls. I should come to realize and admit that.
 
What are you complaining about exactly? Ending a pregnancy or the fact that abortion ends a life? There is nothing inherently wrong with ending a pregnancy. If it could be done without ending the life of the unborn, then I'd support it... Yes, it's incredibly convenient to end a pregnancy if you're 11 years old and/or a victim of rape, or domestic violence. Doing things out of convenience doesn't automatically make it wrong. Rational people don't inconvenience themselves every chance they can in life. And you seem to be arguing that ending pregnancy is just simply wrong because it goes against biology, and I don't understand that POV. People are going to want to end pregnancies because pregnancies and life situations aren't easy for some women or young girls. I should come to realize and admit that.

If all abortions were 11 year old girls or rape victims or domestic violence, I'm sure it could in general be more understandable. But you and me both know those are the outliers, not mean value. It's not so much that it's wrong because it goes against biology. It's that the biology is well known and understood. We thus engage in acts which can create child knowing the possible repercussions of it. It is "wrong" in the sense that one has created life through their own choices; but punish the life for their choices by destroying it. It's truly unfortunate.
 
Abortion is not the same as flippantly signing a piece of paper disavowing legal responsibility for one's offspring. Many people view it as tantamount to murder and would never even consider it. Many others view it as something that's not quite that bad, but still something that's awful and would be extremely upset if they had to make that decision. To just callously say that she "should" have had an abortion unless she wants to raise the kid herself is the opposite of choice: it's making abortion into a DUTY...something that she had better do if she wants to avoid getting shouldered with the ENTIRE financial burden of caring for the child.

It is not a burden or a duty. Most people that view abortion as murder I would suspect are not having casual sex in the first place. Women “callously” have abortions all the time when they don’t want the child, how is this any different? It isn’t. It is just another time that a woman will initiate birth control for a pregnancy that she wants to terminate. That’s all and all the emotional posturing going on will not refute this simple fact.

Umm it IS about conception. That's why the courts don't order random people to pay child support for children they had nothing to do with; the responsibility is on the biological parents unless otherwise specified.

If there is no child, there is no child support. I have already explained this. It is about her choice.

It is NOT "all about her choice"; it's a child who needs to be supported, not a punishment for the actions of one or both parents. The adults in question are not the only ones whose interests are at stake...and more specifically, the MAN in question is not the only one whose interest is at stake.

Yes it is all about her choice. If she chooses to abort then there is no child that needs to be supported. How can you not see this, let alone admit it. If the seed is taken out of the ground then there will be no tree to water and care for. Basic fact…

It will soon become a kid and need to be supported. Actually, it needs to be financially supported even as a zygote. Many woman don't bother to press the issue legally and it's usually not resolved until after the birth, but in most states a man is technically on the hook for half of her maternity costs as well. As he should be.

As he should be? For her choice? I thought forced servitude was unconstitutional in this country…

And I notice you didn't address the actual point of that section: A woman unilaterally deciding to have an abortion doesn't make the man any worse off financially; a man unilaterally deciding to disown his kids DOES make the woman worse off financially.

And I notice that you didn’t address what I said about emotional insults either…

A woman unilaterally deciding to have an abortion doesn't make the man any worse off financially; a man unilaterally deciding to disown his kids DOES make the woman worse off financially… and if this is the case she can use birth control. Simple.

I had a feeling that this was all about you and your selfish desire to avoid paying for your children. What an immature rant.

Grow up child. We were married for eight years and had two daughters. I was making a point about your percentages… which are false. I am a happy father and pay more than what was asked of me since I can and I love my kids. Not many times that I would actually like to stand in front of the faceless sissy that I am debating and hear him say something like that, but this is one of those times. Oh well…

You made a comment about finances being 50/50 when they aren’t. I used myself as an example not to complain, but to demonstrate how naïve you sound. If I was being selfish I would not have said that I pay far more. Actually it is far worse than you seem to understand. My ex is playing a custody game for money with me, a game that she has admitted to me and to the lawyer for child.

The system is so screwed up that I have to take her to court, and this has gone on for almost two years now as well. We agreed to 50/50 once the girls were both in school and she has gone back not only on her word, but a written contract. I have them two nights and two other afternoons, in which one of those I have them right up until bedtime, where I drop them off to her in their PJ’s with brushed teeth and hair as well as bathed. They simply fall asleep at her house and wake up for breakfast. If I simply had them from 7pm when they fall asleep until they wake up and for breakfast the next morning, I would save $600 a month. I pay her $600 a month extra to let the sleep at her house. That is ridiculous.

The child support system has been corrupted by women and lawyers. You should really research it all a bit further.

Regarding the insults… gain some composure and move on. It is all good and we can continue to debate. If you continue on though I will ignore you.

Abortion is not the same as a man disavowing responsibility because if a woman has an abortion, it doesn't make the man any worse off financially. In fact, it makes them both better off (financially) than if she'd had the child. If the man disavows responsibility for his kid, it makes himself better off and the woman worse off.

So what? She has a choice, doesn’t she? If she can’t afford the child then she can have an abortion. You are making an illogical argument about supporting a non-existent child and confusing yourself.

This is simply incorrect. From the moment the offspring is conceived (whatever label you want to use), both parents are expected to contribute to its financial wellbeing until it becomes an adult or until it dies. There are some states where women are unfortunately expected to bear the cost of the entire pregnancy, but I believe they are in the minority. And they should be nonexistent.

Fine. He should have to pay for equal or more share of the abortion should she choose to use that option. If she chooses to not use that option, it is on her. Existing law is irrelevant. All that does is show that the legal system is sexist and illogical.

If you want to turn the "right" to an abortion into a "duty" to get an abortion, you are entitled to that ignorant opinion. But don't pretend that that isn't what you are arguing. No one is "forcing the man" to do anything; he was on the hook for his share of the financial costs for raising the kid to age 18 the moment that their child was conceived. And regardless of whether or not the woman has an abortion, her actions will not increase his share of the costs. It will either eliminate them entirely (if she has an abortion) or maintain the status quo in terms of his financial responsibilities (if she doesn't).

:lol: How is that opinion “ignorant” again? Seems more like a fact to me:

She has the right to get an abortion.
She has the right to continue the pregnancy.

You are the one claiming that it is a burden or a duty, not me.

The man is obviously being forced. Men can be locked up or fined for not paying child support. That is an obvious sign of force if ever there was one and you still haven’t once addressed why she can’t simply have an abortion if she does not want to support the child on her own.

Call it what you like. I use "child" as a neutral term to mean their offspring at whatever stage of development. But depending on where you live you may be incorrect if you believe that the man's financial responsibilities are "mythical" until the baby is born. That may have been YOUR experience if you didn't help pay for maternal care and no one forced you to, but it's not what the law of many states says, and it's not what common decency would dictate REGARDLESS of legal responsibility.

I paid for ALL of the maternal care and perhaps 98% of ALL CARE for their entire lives thus far. I would love to pay for 100% of everything and go for what I am going for, and that is 100% custody, and have her out of our lives. I am not your typical man and I suggest that you cast out yours simplistic notions that I am some guy bitching about child support since it affects me as if I hooked up with some woman and she got pregnant and instead see that I am arguing a position that has merit based on illogical and sexist laws.
 
If all abortions were 11 year old girls or rape victims or domestic violence, I'm sure it could in general be more understandable. But you and me both know those are the outliers, not mean value. It's not so much that it's wrong because it goes against biology. It's that the biology is well known and understood. We thus engage in acts which can create child knowing the possible repercussions of it. It is "wrong" in the sense that one has created life through their own choices; but punish the life for their choices by destroying it. It's truly unfortunate.

Statistically, women with children and in bad situations are the most likely to abort. I understand that statistic because I know somebody who had an abortion and fits that demographic. She was also in an abusive situation and trying to leave it. As a survivor of domestic violence, she didn't want to be a parent and give the father rights over her. As a mother of a child, she knew she couldn't go through an adoption, nor did she feel it was a good idea to put her 6 year old through a secret pregnancy and adoption ontop of that.

I'll ask again, what's inherently wrong with ending a pregnancy? Is it just because a female should pay the price of having sex and submit to biology, or is it because abortion ends a life?
 
That actually happens very infrequently. In my state, the dept of health requires a name for the father. It's not very easy for a female to say she doesn't know, unless she is giving it up for adoption. And the only women I know who don't go after the father early on, is because he is a POS and they don't want him around the kid. If he wasn't a POS, if would exercise his right to fight for his custody rights in the first place. The only reason why men get hit with back child support, is because they fail to pay once they get a notice to pay.

whats infrequently?
In my life time Ive come across about 8 people at least.
And you are wrong about the back pay, if a woman files today and the kid is 2 YES there most certainly can be back pay even though the guy didnt know.
Also the guys name can be put down without hm knowing and still not taken to court until later.

Theres MANY reasons to fix the law in this area and thats obvious.
 
I'll ask again, what's inherently wrong with ending a pregnancy? Is it just because a female should pay the price of having sex and submit to biology, or is it because abortion ends a life?

The fundamental is the life created and destroying it seems neither fair nor just.
 
Why do you feel the government should be the one deciding what a woman does with her body?

The government messes things up when it gets involved...
 
The government messes things up when it gets involved...

This is your reasoning for wanting the government be the entity to decide when a woman can have an abortion or not???
 
This is your reasoning for wanting the government be the entity to decide when a woman can have an abortion or not???

I don't want the government involved in abortion.
 
So you are pro-choice then?
Yes. I wish that women would not have abortions for the most part and I discourage them and argue pro-life generally, but yes, I think that abortion should be legal.
 
Yes. I wish that women would not have abortions for the most part and I discourage them and argue pro-life generally, but yes, I think that abortion should be legal.

Then we are in agreement! I feel the same way.
 
Yes. I wish that women would not have abortions for the most part and I discourage them and argue pro-life generally, but yes, I think that abortion should be legal.

How long have you been that way?
 
..................................................
 
Last edited:
How long have you been that way?

A couple of years after we had our first daughter and a friend had an abortion. Before that I didn't think about it and was, if asked as I never was, firmly pro-choice and didn't care if an abortion occured or not. I care now, though it is and should be the woman's right. I would just try to discourage them if possible with friendly discussion if i had the chance again.
 
A couple of years after we had our first daughter and a friend had an abortion. Before that I didn't think about it and was, if asked as I never was, firmly pro-choice and didn't care if an abortion occured or not. I care now, though it is and should be the woman's right. I would just try to discourage them if possible with friendly discussion if i had the chance again.

I agree, I wouldnt try to discourage them though but I would give them a shoulder and ear to lean on and talk to. I would also tell them to make sure they are sure (no matter their decision) IF they ask or I am a close enough friend.

I have also been pro-choice my whole live, before and after my daughter just cant honestly imagine being any other way. Nothing gets me there, no logic makes me want to force women to give birth.
 
I agree, I wouldnt try to discourage them though but I would give them a shoulder and ear to lean on and talk to. I would also tell them to make sure they are sure (no matter their decision) IF they ask or I am a close enough friend.

I have also been pro-choice my whole live, before and after my daughter just cant honestly imagine being any other way. Nothing gets me there, no logic makes me want to force women to give birth.

I don't mean discourage as in trying to actively talk them out of it, just that I would listen and very very subtly discuss how great my kids are, or something...
 
I don't mean discourage as in trying to actively talk them out of it, just that I would listen and very very subtly discuss how great my kids are, or something...

Sorry didnt really mean to imply that if it seemed that way, I was just trying to be clear on how I felt more than anything.

My daughter is also GREAT, I love my little mini-me :D
 
I don't believe any of us are "pro-abortion". We're just real, and reality isn't always pretty. Having said that, I think abortion is an UGLY necessity. I hate re-reading it - and I hope I don't get a truck load of crap thrown at me for it - but its true. We cant provide for people as it is, and there are already 500 thousand kids stuck in foster care - some being tossed from one place to the next never finding the love and security they NEED. And all the GOP wants to do is make things harder for people - just imagine how worse things would be if Roe v Wade were ever overturned. No Birth Control funding, no federal funding for state Child Protective Service agencies (good bye foster care, hello streets), no cash, food, shelter or medical assistance ... This country would be an awful sight ... poverty & illness everywhere.

This is the kind of dimensional thinking the GOP is lacking. You cant just scream and holler "pro-life" and think that's all there is to it. There has to be some kind of plan as to how you're going to help the very life that you demanded be saved.
 
I don't believe any of us are "pro-abortion". We're just real, and reality isn't always pretty. Having said that, I think abortion is an UGLY necessity. I hate re-reading it - and I hope I don't get a truck load of crap thrown at me for it - but its true. We cant provide for people as it is, and there are already 500 thousand kids stuck in foster care - some being tossed from one place to the next never finding the love and security they NEED. And all the GOP wants to do is make things harder for people - just imagine how worse things would be if Roe v Wade were ever overturned. No Birth Control funding, no federal funding for state Child Protective Service agencies (good bye foster care, hello streets), no cash, food, shelter or medical assistance ... This country would be an awful sight ... poverty & illness everywhere.

This is the kind of dimensional thinking the GOP is lacking. You cant just scream and holler "pro-life" and think that's all there is to it. There has to be some kind of plan as to how you're going to help the very life that you demanded be saved.

I think there is a lot we can do to help with adoption procedures and making sure that kids who have parents that don't want them can find those who do. I still don't believe abortion is a "necessity". Not generally anyway. There is too much red tape involved in our own orphanages and while there must be screening for parents and such; we should also strive to lower costs and make it a bit easier. We should probably invest a bit more into state run orphanages too in order to ensure the children have at least a decent upbringing even in State care. Better alive then dead I say. Abortion won't go away, so the best move is to make life the easier and more accepted choice.
 
damn, there is that pesky double standard thing again. it's all fine and good to remove the child aspect from the debate.....as long as we are talking about the woman's choice.

Agreed, and something that will never be addressed in a serious or sincere manner....
 
Back
Top Bottom