Should Woman's Choice Trump the Man's??

Centrist77 said:

reality is how so, where do you live in fantasy land?

condoms break all the time, other methods also fail including spermicide which some people are also allergic too or cant use.

Lots of couples have unprotected sex with just the girl using a form of birthcontrol

Like I said REALITY

I dont know where you live but thinking protection works so well and that people dont have unprotected sex is nonsense.
also the 98% rate is bogus because thats stated with "perfect use" and then its always stated like 85% with "typical use" and then you start to see the real picture really fast. Roughly that translates into what, 15 out of 100 times theres a chance of pregnancy! whats the work out to a year with a normal active young couple? about 45+ times in a year they could have got pregnant? if the couples lives together 90+ times in a year?

Sorry not buying it to much reality to trump your vacuum example

Click to expand...

if you prefer, a vasectomy is very effective. I had one 30 years ago and it has never let me down.

Catawba said:

I see you were unable to provide a quote to back up your claim.

Click to expand...

So then you fully agree with me, that if a women gets pregnant, a man shouldn't have to pay unless he conscents. Good, glad you turned yourself around to see it my way. :thumbs:

American said:

So then you fully agree with me, that if a women gets pregnant, a man shouldn't have to pay unless he conscents. Good, glad you turned yourself around to see it my way. :thumbs:

Click to expand...

If a man chooses provide his semen to a female that is currently ovulating, and she has a baby as a result, he has to support the child.

Catawba said:

if you prefer, a vasectomy is very effective. I had one 30 years ago and it has never let me down.

Click to expand...

LMAO
more dishonesty, avoidance of reality and simply unrealistic illogical thinking

its funny how you ignore reality

do you have anything of substance to offer?

American said:

So then you fully agree with me, that if a women gets pregnant, a man shouldn't have to pay unless he conscents. Good, glad you turned yourself around to see it my way. :thumbs:

Click to expand...

What are you smoking???? He consented when he had unprotected sex.

Catawba said:

What are you smoking???? He consented when he had unprotected sex.

Click to expand...

consented to what?, there is no consent except to engage in sex.

Wow, you guys really beat this horse to a pulp. I have personal experience with this subject, so I'll through my bit in and maybe we can kill it.
I became a father in 1997, I was 20 when my girlfriend told me she was pregnant. I was surprised because I helped her pay for birth control, however she neglected to tell me that she ran out of the pill. I told her I wanted her to have an abortion, she disagreed, obviously it's her body it's her choice. She said if I didn't want to be a dad she would do it on her own. So I talked to a lawyer, and he said that there is a way to do it legally. If she and I agreed to sign an affidavit stating that I am the biological father but am not responsible for the upbringing or support of the child. But... I could not change my mind after this is done. I decided that I would take responsibility for my actions and be a dad. 5 years later, we were married and living together in an apartment. Well she had an affair and got pregnant. We separated before the baby was born, but she still had my last name. So the baby has my last name. The biological father of this baby was on social security and the state could not get any child support out of him by some bull**** loophole, so they came after me for the money seeing that I was the considered the father by association. Thankfully my X had the decency to explain to the judge that this child was not mine, and that she wouldn't accept child support from me for this baby. Right there in the court room we sign the affidavit that absolved me from paying for a child that was not mine.
So, legally, if you find yourself in a similar situation then get a lawyer and ask about this. The man does have a choice to be a father or not, if and only if the woman was untruthful about the use of birth control. Of course you could say that men should always wear a condom, but if the girl says "No it's okay, I'm on the pill" when she really wasn't then the man has a choice. This is of course if you can prove it in a court of law, according to my lawyer. This all happened in the state of Rhode Island by the way, and I'm not sure what federal law says about this, or how other states deal with this.
In my opinion, the best way to stop unwanted birth is to use birth control, whether that is a condom or the pill or abstinence. And the only way to do it successfully is to educate our children about sex, and the various forms of birth control. Unfortunately there are too many people who refuse to see this philosophy is the way to go, and until people wake up to see the truths in life we will have this stupid debate on our plate.

Centrist77 said:

consented to what?, there is no consent except to engage in sex.

Click to expand...

And he is unaware that unprotected sex likely leads to pregnancy?

Catawba said:

And he is unaware that unprotected sex likely leads to pregnancy?

Click to expand...

depends? is she on the pill, other BC, did she say she cant get pregnant, maybe she didnt stop when need to etc etc etc

hell maybe they were into BDSM and he was tied down and she was on top????

why do you choose to live in a vacuum, in fantasy land, instead of reality.

Sorry the only consent given is the consent to have sex NOTHING ELSE lol

Centrist77 said:

depends? is she on the pill, other BC, did she say she cant get pregnant, maybe she didnt stop when need to etc etc etc

hell maybe they were into BDSM and he was tied down and she was on top????

why do you choose to live in a vacuum, in fantasy land, instead of reality.

Sorry the only consent given is the consent to have sex NOTHING ELSE lol

Click to expand...

If that is your attitude, you deserve to have to pay child support. I have no sympathy for your willfully ignorant position and will not waste further time on you.

Catawba said:

If that is your attitude, you deserve to have to pay child support. I have no sympathy for your willfully ignorant position and will not waste further time on you.

Click to expand...

translation: you have no logical or reality based argument or anything of merit so you give up

Its cool I knew that posts ago

Every time. It's her body to do with as she will, and if she chooses to have the baby he put there, he needs to man up and provide for his issue.

Catawba said:

If that is your attitude, you deserve to have to pay child support. I have no sympathy for your willfully ignorant position and will not waste further time on you.

Click to expand...

Still won't address the actual argument... dude, you're funny. Thinking that you are arguing well and all... :lol:

Manc Skipper said:

Every time. It's her body to do with as she will, and if she chooses to have the baby he put there, he needs to man up and provide for his issue.

Click to expand...

Man up? This isn't a battle... this is a legal construct designed by women and the feminist friendly courts that have magically given the woman ALL OF THE POWER hidden within the realistic point that she should have control over her own body, that's all. The two are not inter-connected by any biological fact. The whole argument has been twisted and twisted until everybody has been brainwashed into the idea that it is not politically correct to challenge the existing system. You are a dead beat dad if you do. You are a mysoginist if you do. You are a whiney man not being resonsible if you argue against it. It is all horse **** and those that can't at least question against the existing system are sheeple just but obtuse.

Bodhisattva said:

Man up? This isn't a battle... this is a legal construct designed by women and the feminist friendly courts that have magically given the woman ALL OF THE POWER hidden within the realistic point that she should have control over her own body, that's all. The two are not inter-connected by any biological fact. The whole argument has been twisted and twisted until everybody has been brainwashed into the idea that it is not politically correct to challenge the existing system. You are a dead beat dad if you do. You are a mysoginist if you do. You are a whiney man not being resonsible if you argue against it. It is all horse **** and those that can't at least question against the existing system are sheeple just but obtuse.

Click to expand...

Wow again for being very deep about it.
And yep, totally designed by women, woefully ignorant women, whose idea of all men is that we are all dead-beats. I would suggest that maybe those of you who haven't been to a family court hearing should go, even if you just stand outside the courtroom you will see. You will see all of the ugly truth.
Have fun!

Bodhisattva said:

Everything effects everything... that is no argument. Sorry...

Click to expand...

What a wimpy response. You said...

In reality the child isnt effected by forced "child support" so that debate is pointless

Click to expand...

Now you are saying it does but due to some "butterfly effect" bull****, but that it should not matter? If a parent abandons their child that is going to have a direct and severe effect on the child.

Centrist77 said:

Did somebody argue that parents abandoning a child has no effect?
nope

LMAO

Click to expand...

Bodhisattva said...

In reality the child isnt effected by forced "child support" so that debate is pointless

So... yep.

Bodhisattva said:

That is the basic scenario, yes. What of the other times though... when the woman tricks her partner or gets a guy purposely drunk or pricks wholes in the condom? What then? Screw him?

Click to expand...

Please. We should base laws on some stupid scenario that you have dreamed up and ignore the reality of how virtually all pregnancies occur?

RiverDad said:

And if she doesn't want to get stuck with all the responsibility for a child then she too shouldn't have sex. Problem solved.

Click to expand...

Again, a man's part in the reproductive process ends when he plants his seed. That is not even close to true for the woman. She has just begun and the sex act will seem grossly insignificant compared to the efforts that she will take to finish the pregnancy and bear a child. We can't make this equal by law. It is a fact of biology.

Each and every individual has an equal right to control what part they take in reproduction. The fact that the man's role is pretty minor does not change the fact he has taken part in the process willingly and is therefore responsible for the result.

Bodhisattva said:

Still won't address the actual argument... dude, you're funny. Thinking that you are arguing well and all... :lol:

Click to expand...

You have no argument. Pay your dues for your child, or keep the solution in your own hands.

RStringfield said:

What a wimpy response. You said...



Now you are saying it does but due to some "butterfly effect" bull****, but that it should not matter? If a parent abandons their child that is going to have a direct and severe effect on the child.

Click to expand...

It directly refuted the logic behind your argument. Everything affects everything. What matters is if the child is supported, not if a parent abandons it. Your argument that abandoning the child affects it is pointless within the context OF THIS DEBATE. We are talking about child support... not abandoning the child. If you want to take a comment out of context and think that you have made a point, even after I just thrashed your point, then that is good on you mate.

Bodhisattva said...

In reality the child isnt effected by forced "child support" so that debate is pointless

So... yep.

Click to expand...

Actually, he is smart enough to keep it in the proper context. That is why he made the comment that he did.

Please. We should base laws on some stupid scenario that you have dreamed up and ignore the reality of how virtually all pregnancies occur?

Click to expand...

Women tricking guys or women getting pregnant for selfish reasons are "Stupid scenarios"? I think that you need to live a little, buddy. You sound REALLY naive.

Again, a man's part in the reproductive process ends when he plants his seed. That is not even close to true for the woman. She has just begun and the sex act will seem grossly insignificant compared to the efforts that she will take to finish the pregnancy and bear a child. We can't make this equal by law. It is a fact of biology.

Each and every individual has an equal right to control what part they take in reproduction. The fact that the man's role is pretty minor does not change the fact he has taken part in the process willingly and is therefore responsible for the result.

Click to expand...

I have found that people that turn the argument of child support and her choice around to one of reproduction and his role ending at ejaculation to be those of limited intellect.

Manc Skipper said:

You have no argument. Pay your dues for your child, or keep the solution in your own hands.

Click to expand...

You simply don't understand the argument. That much is crystal clear.

RStringfield said:

Bodhisattva said...

In reality the child isnt effected by forced "child support" so that debate is pointless

So... yep.

Click to expand...

actually "I" said that and that is NOTHING like you are saying LMAO
so . . . NOPE

TRYING top make a person pay child support doesn't stop them from abandoning them if they choose, it happens EVERY DAY

so you are still wrong, nobody said what you are arguing and what you are arguing has nothing to do with child support

Bodhisattva said:

Man up? This isn't a battle... this is a legal construct designed by women and the feminist friendly courts that have magically given the woman ALL OF THE POWER hidden within the realistic point that she should have control over her own body, that's all. The two are not inter-connected by any biological fact. The whole argument has been twisted and twisted until everybody has been brainwashed into the idea that it is not politically correct to challenge the existing system. You are a dead beat dad if you do. You are a mysoginist if you do. You are a whiney man not being resonsible if you argue against it. It is all horse **** and those that can't at least question against the existing system are sheeple just but obtuse.

Click to expand...

LOL. Child support began in this country before women had the right to vote. The legal precedent and the laws that codified the principles were developed and passed by men, real men, not a bunch of wimps who want to run out on their responsibilities.

Bodhisattva said:

It directly refuted the logic behind your argument.

Click to expand...

What did? When you backed off of your previous point?

Everything affects everything. What matters is if the child is supported, not if a parent abandons it. Your argument that abandoning the child affects it is pointless within the context OF THIS DEBATE. We are talking about child support... not abandoning the child. If you want to take a comment out of context and think that you have made a point, even after I just thrashed your point, then that is good on you mate.

Click to expand...

The effect is direct and severe. Your argument that everything effects everything is nonsense and not at all relevant. We are not talking about some indirect action that might cause a long chain of events that would inevitably lead to something bad happening to the child. We are talking about a direct causal relationship that has a very severe impact. Before child support developed as a legal precedent in this country nearly all divorced women and their children ended up in poverty.

Actually, he is smart enough to keep it in the proper context. That is why he made the comment that he did.

Click to expand...

You said it had no effect. He said no one made such an argument. In what context could that even possibly be correct?

Women tricking guys or women getting pregnant for selfish reasons are "Stupid scenarios"? I think that you need to live a little, buddy. You sound REALLY naive.

Click to expand...

And you sound like some scumbag little wimp who has abandoned his children. I don't think you want to turn this argument into ad homs. It's not going to go well for you.

There is nothing in my argument that is naive at all. You don't write laws based on unlikely and highly unrealistic scenarios. If the man could somehow prove that he was tricked then he might have some legal grounds, but the burden of proving that would be on him.

I have found that people that turn the argument of child support and her choice around to one of reproduction and his role ending at ejaculation to be those of limited intellect.

Click to expand...

This is not a valid argument. It is just more ad hom. Please show where my arguments indicate a lack of intellect, other than yours. All you have done is attack those that disagree and claim that some phantom argument you made disproves their points. You are the one turning the argument around. You continue to make it a battle between the man and woman while ignoring the child.