• 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!

Male Opt Out

Status
Not open for further replies.
OlNate said:
Nope. Their opt out takes place before they stick their dick in. Sorry, that's how she goes, bud. :)
Click to expand...

Incorrect. Opt out can and does happen already... it is just not widely accepted or easy.
 
OlNate said:
What was your argument, by the way...lol...
Click to expand...

Here it is:

Bodhisattva said:
Men need to be able to opt out of Child Support if they do not want to be a father (legally). The woman can use her legal Constitutiinal right to birth control if she does not want to or can not support the child on her own. (Of course there are some exceptions).

She informs him of pregnancy. He makes hos choice. She retains 100% bodily autonomy and then makes her choice to abort or not.

There will be some exceptions obviously...

This argument is about POST CONCEPTION OPTIONS.

AFTER CONCEPTION.

Please dont be one of the many that will show up and say... "golly darnit he had his choice when he came... or... he has no choice"

THE LAW forces his monetary contribution. Laws can change.

Without the law he could just walk away. This is about CHANGING THE CHILD SUPPORT LAWS.

Because people will undoubtedly try to insult me personally... dead beat and what not... I am pro choice. I have equal care of my kids. This is a hypothetical argument about creating fairness of post conception choices for men.

Yes. Practice safe sex and use birth control...

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
 
OlNate said:
I'd never be the kind of POS that needs one. :)
Click to expand...

This post gets to the heart of the bigotry at play here: The slut-shaming of men. Having sex without happily volunteering to turn over an arbitrary amount of money to the state every month for two decades makes you a POS. Because sex is dirty, and only tramps and trollops engage. And the missionary position is the only proper position, right Nate?
 
GhostlyJoe said:
This post gets to the heart of the bigotry at play here: The slut-shaming of men. Having sex without happily volunteering to turn over an arbitrary amount of money to the state every month for two decades makes you a POS. Because sex is dirty, and only tramps and trollops engage. And the missionary position is the only proper position, right Nate?
Click to expand...

Maybe with yo mamma, Joe... ;)

I'm not against sex at all. I'm against dumbasses trying to ditch their responsibility. Just because you're ****ing doesn't mean you have to be ****ing stupid.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Right. Because not wanting a kid makes a person a POS. :lol:
Click to expand...

No...but not wanting a kid and having one anyway because you're an idiot, and then trying to duck your responsibility most certainly does.
 
OlNate said:
No...but not wanting a kid and having one anyway because you're an idiot, and then trying to duck your responsibility most certainly does.
Click to expand...

Pro-choice argument: consenting to sex is not consenting to being a parent.

But I guess that only applies to women. Men... you guys can **** off, POS's.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Pro-choice argument: consenting to sex is not consenting to being a parent.

But I guess that only applies to women. Men... you guys can **** off, POS's.
Click to expand...

Bod, let me ask, before I spend a bunch of time crafting a serious response. Do you want to have a serious chat, or am I getting troll Bod today?
 
OlNate said:
lol...oh yeah, that's right, this is the one that you basically quoted me from another thread to disqualify me from participating in this one...lol... Oops. :lol:
Click to expand...

No idea what this refers to...

OlNate said:
Hey, look who's feeling all spicy, now that he's got some back up.

Look at the hate, "folks", you be the judge...


:lamo
Click to expand...

Vegas is my back up...
 
OlNate said:
Bod, let me ask, before I spend a bunch of time crafting a serious response.
Click to expand...

Craft a serious response and get a serious answer...
 
OlNate said:
Maybe with yo mamma, Joe... ;)

I'm not against sex at all. I'm against dumbasses trying to ditch their responsibility. Just because you're ****ing doesn't mean you have to be ****ing stupid.
Click to expand...

A responsibility that's been assigned to them, involuntarily, based on obsolete gender norms. The law doesn't care whether the pregnancy was accidental or whether birth control failed. The law prioritizes the choices of the woman and then the needs of the child. Men's desires are legally sidelined. No matter your personal ethics, there is a legitimate grievance here.
 
GhostlyJoe said:
A responsibility that's been assigned to them, involuntarily, based on obsolete gender norms. The law doesn't care whether the pregnancy was accidental or whether birth control failed. The law prioritizes the choices of the woman and then the needs of the child. Men's desires are legally sidelined. No matter your personal ethics, there is a legitimate grievance here.
Click to expand...

If men didnt desire to be fathers they should have decided before they had sex with a woman knowing that the decision on the pregnancy was hers alone.

it's not a legitimate grievance because men have complete control over putting themselves in that position. Yes or no? Of course they do....your position has been that men shouldnt have to make their choice before sex...in other words, men are entitled to sex without consequences.

WHile women are not, never have been. So the whole 'fairness, equality' stuff is a bunch of bull puckey.

And btw, men opting out isnt going to work because as I've written here and in the other thread a few times...if men try using it, women will just hide their pregnancies until it's too late. Constitutional privacy, over the counter pregnancy tests, big clothes, avoiding the man, etc etc etc... women now legitimately go into labor without even realizing they were pregnant...the law's not going to overcome all that if men start trying to use that opt out to manipulate the system.

Oh well, nothing noble in men gambling and then not paying up...so now there would just be more stupid games on both sides.
 
Last edited:
Lursa said:
The other stuff has been exposed as ridiculous and an unfair burden to kids, taxpayers, and society....there's no question about that.
Click to expand...

AGENT J said:
Thats claim is factually false, that actually that hasnt happened ONE time. not once. On the actual topic, nobody has been able to prove its currently equal because its factually not and nobody has been able to prove it cant be made equal because it can. But if you disagree and have those FACTS to support your claim a make it true please provide them. Id love to read them, Thanks!
Click to expand...

Crickets!!!!
 
Lursa said:
If men didnt desire to be fathers they should have decided before they had sex with a woman knowing that the decision on the pregnancy was hers alone.

it's not a legitimate grievance because men have complete control over putting themselves in that position. Yes or no? Of course they do....your position has been that men shouldnt have to make their choice before sex...in other words, men are entitled to sex without consequences.

WHile women are not, never have been. So the whole 'fairness, equality' stuff is a bunch of bull puckey.

And btw, men opting out isnt going to work because as I've written here and in the other thread a few times...if men try using it, women will just hide their pregnancies until it's too late. Constitutional privacy, over the counter pregnancy tests, big clothes, avoiding the man, etc etc etc... women now legitimately go into labor without even realizing they were pregnant...the law's not going to overcome all that if men start trying to use that opt out to manipulate the system.

Oh well, nothing noble in men gambling and then not paying up...so now there would just be more stupid games on both sides.
Click to expand...

Who said that theres zero consequence from women having sex? NOODY
What does that have to do with the topic and facts about it? NOTHING
Who said they want men to have zero consequences of sex? NOBODY
what does that have to do with the topic and facts about it? NOTHING
sweet irony of bull puckey.
another retarded and dishonest strawmen complete fails and bites the dust LMAO
 
Lursa said:
If men didnt desire to be fathers they should have decided before they had sex with a woman knowing that the decision on the pregnancy was hers alone.

it's not a legitimate grievance because men have complete control over putting themselves in that position. Yes or no? Of course they do....your position has been that men shouldnt have to make their choice before sex...in other words, men are entitled to sex without consequences.

WHile women are not, never have been. So the whole 'fairness, equality' stuff is a bunch of bull puckey.

And btw, men opting out isnt going to work because as I've written here and in the other thread a few times...if men try using it, women will just hide their pregnancies until it's too late. Constitutional privacy, over the counter pregnancy tests, big clothes, avoiding the man, etc etc etc... women now legitimately go into labor without even realizing they were pregnant...the law's not going to overcome all that if men start trying to use that opt out to manipulate the system.

Oh well, nothing noble in men gambling and then not paying up...so now there would just be more stupid games on both sides.
Click to expand...

Based on your logic, why should she have a choice? The only logically consistent opinion is either both men and women get a choice, or neither do. Again, your argument is the pro-life argument in a nutshell: It's morally wrong to shirk off the outcome of a sexual encounter, whether by medical procedure or by statute. You lack a consistent moral position if you advocate for women's choices and hand men the bill for that choice. Based on your own reasoning, she can either keep it in her pants or accept that men might choose not to support her decision to be a mother.

As to her just not telling him, the law must take that into account. A limited opt-out would still apply in cases where he wasn't informed of the pregnancy until after the age of viability. By choosing not to inform the father, she is also choosing not to accept support from the father.
 
OlNate said:
Pre-sex opt out... Yes, that is interesting. What do you mean?
Click to expand...

Sign a form prior to sex saying "if you get knocked up,...I will not accept financial responsibility" the form would be null and void if the woman goes after social services,
 
OlNate said:
Maybe with yo mamma, Joe... ;)

I'm not against sex at all. I'm against dumbasses trying to ditch their responsibility. Just because you're ****ing doesn't mean you have to be ****ing stupid.
Click to expand...

No hate here folks.

My god this is hilarious
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom