So now you simply assert that a point that was originally yours is irrelevant without argument because I corrected your ignorance? Your ad hom was not relevant or even remotely accurate.
Ignorance? Holy cow you think a lot of yourself. I made a grammatical error and admitted it. I then clarified that this is not the point of my argument. If you want to continue with this "tangent", then have fun. I leave you the last comment as I will not waste any further time with this.
Again, your point is not accurate. Abortion was used and legal in some areas before the legal precedents of child support began to develop. Try again.
Abortion was never really addressed. Whether it was legal or not is also irrelevant. It is legal now. I am talking about now. I don't care what happened 100 years ago any more than I care about Hammurabi's Code. It is irrelevant. Deal with the now. After all, that is the time that we live in.
By your stupid argument, slavery should never have been addressed since slavery was legal in most of the world until recently. Who cares? Times change. Catch up.
Relevance? I don't support forcing anyone to pay child support for an aborted child. We are talking about a born child.
Disingenuous. Just like arguing that a man has an equal right to an abortion or gays have an equal right to marriage. The whole argument wreaks of smelly doo doo.
Your incoherent claims of irrelevance proves your point valid?
Not my fault you have reading comprehension issues...
Nice counter argument. What's next. "I am right and you are wrong"?
Most people don't think of abortion as a form of birth control. But okay, if that is what you mean, again, her choice in that matter does not affect the father's responsibility for his part in reproduction which he chose.
This is like a math problem. 1 plus 1 does not equal 4. Well, her act in sex plus his act in sex does not equal a child. What's missing? What is the number three? Her choice. Her act plus his act plus her choice to not have an abortion = 4 (the child). He has no responsiblity without number 3. No responsibility without her choice to have the child.
You have been engaging in ad hom throughout. Again., this tangent started when the entire substance of your response was that I was naive.
That was not meant as an ad hom. But whatever... it was taken as such. I called you a couple of little things and you then started with the big bombs. The big insults about being a deatbeat, to put it mildly. The two don't equate. Be honest. You know that you actually, "started it". Unless I just don't remember a totally asshole like comment like you made that is...
I have taken you at your word. I don't care whether you are a good father. It has no bearing on the fact that your argument is wrong. I was simply pointing out that you were in no position to engage in ad homs.
... moving on.
You are basing it solely on emotion. You want to make the woman appear to be a villain which is why you bring up nonsense about tricking the man.
No. *sigh* I am not basing it on emotion. I am basing it on logic. You don't know me at all, let alone well enought to know if I am being emotive or not.
Women do trick men. Do you deny this? If so, you are naive. If not, then you have no counter argument against this line of reasoning. Either way you lose.
This is tangential to your main argument. You did not argue that if a woman had tricked the man into impregnating her... You added that after the fact and created a tangent within your main argument. But anyway.
Tricking the man and/or having a baby against his wishes is my entire argument. I have argued this in multiple threads for months now. It is not a tangent, it is the premise of my enitre argument. Without that, I would probably not even have an argument.
The man has taken part in the reproductive process and he is responsible for the result.
Biological sex leads to a pregnancy. Her LEGAL choice to abort comes AFTER sex and BEFORE birth. Her choice is a LEGAL CHOICE. It has nothing to do with the biological act of sex. Maybe your method of sex differs from mine but I don't have any legal contracts going on while we are engaged in intercourse. To each their own though...
The entire quote was incoherent.
No it wasn't. Go back to 4rth grade. Jeez. I left an "r" off of "you" and wrote "affective" instead of "affect
ED". Break out your grammar book and actually show how the rest of it, or how those two typos made the rest grammatically incorrect or in error of proper sytanx. Dude, give it up. LEARN TO READ. This is not a site where we are working on publishing papers for a journal. Most of us type as we think and Grammar Nazi's, expecially ones that are wrong, don't last long.
Who is being held responsible when there is no baby?
Irrelevant. Again.
Incomplete sentence. I can barely understand this incoherent rant.
Do you? You are a funny guy but no one is laughing with you. You are the one that made the appeal to popularity, Einstein. You said, "I am not the only one that thinks so either...", which is an appeal to popularity. I simply pointed out that your position was not that popular. I never said nor implied that you were wrong because your psoition was unpopular. I have given my reasons for why you are wrong and you have failed to respond in any substantive way.
I am not the only one that thinks so... HERE. Centrist and a hand full of others in this very thread have agreed with me. That is not an appeal, that is a fact. I have responded with appropriate and valid counter arguments as to why I am correct and as to why your argument has failed. What you simply need to do is to do better.
It does not. Child support is based on the child's needs not on who most wanted or did not want the child.
I have already agreed to this. But that is irrelevant. There is no child to support if she uses her choice to have an abortion.
There is no reason why the state should empower the man to force the woman to choose between abortion and his abandonment of the child.
They wouldn't be. They would be forcing her to take responsibility for her choice. I know that this idea scares many people, and even for some valid reasons. Those reasons though, should not be used to force a man into involuntary servitude.
Again, his choice in the reproductive process has already ended and he does not get to walk away from it after the fact.
Agreed and only says some sexist laws...
Abortions can lead to medical complications and the choice should be left solely to the woman since it is her health that is impacted.
Agreed.
Again, if a man wants an abortion he can have one done on himself.
THERE WE GO!! :roll:
It won't end the real pregnancy though, since that does not occur inside the man's body which is why he does not get any say in a real abortion.
Thanks for the sex ed pops... :roll:
You can continue to whine about how it's really just a conspiracy by the evil feminist to make men inferior but that has no connection to reality.
Who has all of the choice, and consequently power if a pregnancy occurs? Answer this with the man, the woman or both only please. Thank you.
Yes...