• 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!

If you are pro-choice, do you think a man should have the choice not to pay alimony?

Re: Parents have to face the music

Continued:



Oh come on. What is the difference? Please explain? What do they want that 'window of opportuntity for?' You wrote it: to avoid being a parent which clearly is "a consequence" of having sex.

Please, dont lower yourself and deny this. If the man opts out pre-birth...he escapes consequences.

Why would I deny that it's the truth. Sometimes it's for good reasons and sometimes it's not but it's no more anyone place to judge that than it is to judge why a woman chooses to be or not be a parent. Its personal..

Do you deny women have abortions or put up babies for adoption for the same reason?

And it is equal, because women cannot escape the consequences of a pregnancy either. Never have been able to, still cannot.

Why do you think it's fair to hold men responsible for women's biology? Better question why do we allow women to not tell men they are fathers is it there fault that their biological differences preclude them from knowing unless informed.


This is what alot of men believe. I wrote earlier why it's ridiculous when just 'controlling a man' requires the pain and sacrifices of pregnancy and the disruption it does to a woman's life in general. Men that believe that must have some huge egos.
They believe it because its true and newsflash for you women's egos are the same size as mens. Your using misandry again to rationalize your position.

Some women do it to hang onto a specific relationship. And as I wrote earlier, so do men (holes in condoms for instance). That's not random casual sex, that's people in relationships. And if both parties arent careful, they can get hurt, no doubt. That's how ****ty some people are. But that's a relationship hazard....for everyone.

Many women do not believe in abortion. I know nothing is set in stone but if you dont find this out before sleeping with a woman, you have no right to complain. If you roll the dice, you pay the price...women have to. Why shouldnt men? That is equal.

That's all fine and wonderful but it does not change the fact that the law protects women from those things more than it does men. Why do you resist men being given more legal protections to at least narrow the disparity that currently exists is what I cant fathom.

You strike me as a decent person who believes in fairness but I get the impression that you have a very low opinion of men. You have this advaserial stance where you think men are trying to get something over on women. The only thing we want is to be treated with the same dignity and respect that women ask that they are treated with. Why is that asking too much?



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Re: Parents have to face the music

You are seeing women getting an orange and asking for an apple. Women have the ability to have anything removed from their body that they do not want in there, assuming that they can find the practitioner to do so. You have that same exact right. When we remove the "in her own body" factor, the mother does not have any more of a right to get out of parenthood than the father does. You are conflating the two situations. Yes, in removing the ZEF from her body she does remove her opportunity to be a parent, but that is a side result of exercising her right to bodily autonomy. Should you as a male ever find yourself with a ZEF developing inside you, then you will also have that right to have it removed, regardless of the wishes of the mother.

Basically you are asking for a financial withdraw, to her physical withdraw. That's not equal. And it is especially not equal because the inverse of the decision cannot be done. You can't keep it against her wishes. But that does nothing to remove the fact that it is her ability to have something removed from her body that is the key issue. The surrogate example shows how she has no right to simply remove herself from responsibility in and of itself, as you are asking for, for the man.
Your acting like women only get abortions for one reason.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Re: Parents have to face the music

Your acting like women only get abortions for one reason.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
You are inferring that, but that it not what I am saying. They have the right to an abortion for only one reason. That bodily autonomy allows them to remove or keep anything in or on their body that they wish. Which, BTW, is the exact same right a man has.

Now this is where the conflating part comes in. They do not have the right to opt out of parenthood in and of itself, however much the bodily autonomy choice makes it seem like it. This is why the surrogate example is key. It illustrates exactly where one right ends and the other begins. For that matter, my much earlier artificial womb examples also illustrates it, although executing it is not technologically possible right now.

You are asking for a right to self terminate parental responsibilities, feeling that women have this right. They don't so why should you get it? You can have that exact same effective result if you are in the exact same situation the woman is in. That is fair. It's not fair to allow you an option that is not available to women.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
 
Re: Parents have to face the music

You are inferring that, but that it not what I am saying. They have the right to an abortion for only one reason. That bodily autonomy allows them to remove or keep anything in or on their body that they wish. Which, BTW, is the exact same right a man has.

Now this is where the conflating part comes in. They do not have the right to opt out of parenthood in and of itself, however much the bodily autonomy choice makes it seem like it. This is why the surrogate example is key. It illustrates exactly where one right ends and the other begins. For that matter, my much earlier artificial womb examples also illustrates it, although executing it is not technologically possible right now.

You are asking for a right to self terminate parental responsibilities, feeling that women have this right. They don't so why should you get it? You can have that exact same effective result if you are in the exact same situation the woman is in. That is fair. It's not fair to allow you an option that is not available to women.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
Of course they have the right to opt of parenthood and abortion is one way for them to do it but it's not the only way provided to them. You have argued dismissed the males complaint by trying to say if men had a uterus too they could have the freedoms women have which is a sexist position. It's also something that women dont like when that standard puts them at a disadvantage. The Gov has lowered physical standards on tests because women complained it's unfair that biology makes them physically weaker but on this topic where its a perceived advantage they are happy to evoke it.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Re: Parents have to face the music

Of course they have the right to opt of parenthood and abortion is one way for them to do it but it's not the only way provided to them.

I will step back and say that there is one way to outright opt out of parental responsibilities. This opposed to avoiding them such as being a deadbeat parent. But this option is equally available to men as well as women, and that is the drop off option, where legal. A man who has been left with a newborn, either by abandonment by the mother or death of the mother, can walk up to the hospital,drop off the baby and leave no questions asked, just like for the woman.

What you continue to conflate is the right of opting out of responsibilities and the side effect of another right and action altogether.

You have argued dismissed the males complaint by trying to say if men had a uterus too they could have the freedoms women have which is a sexist position.

Hardly. Yours is more sexist because you are trying to compare apples to oranges, along with conflating two different things. Remember, if the ZEF isn't in her body, then she has no right to have it aborted. You continually fail to address this fact. It is the key point as to why the man actually has the same legal rights as the woman.

It's also something that women dont like when that standard puts them at a disadvantage. The Gov has lowered physical standards on tests because women complained it's unfair that biology makes them physically weaker but on this topic where its a perceived advantage they are happy to evoke it.

Fallacy, although the exact name is escaping me ATM. First off I have no issue with any given standards being lowered if they do not need to be as high anymore. That's with anything. If the job requires only able to lift 50 lbs instead of 100 lbs because equipment is now being used, then by all means lower the standard. This will also allow more men in as well. No standard should be lowered simply based upon gender/sex. There are plenty of places within our law where there is a disparity. In comparisons like this, the answer is not to try to fix what isn't related to each other, but to set the standards based upon the actual needs of the job or whatever. The standards are what's broken not the bodily autonomy issue.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
 
Re: Parents have to face the music

I will step back and say that there is one way to outright opt out of parental responsibilities. This opposed to avoiding them such as being a deadbeat parent. But this option is equally available to men as well as women, and that is the drop off option, where legal. A man who has been left with a newborn, either by abandonment by the mother or death of the mother, can walk up to the hospital,drop off the baby and leave no questions asked, just like for the woman.

What you continue to conflate is the right of opting out of responsibilities and the side effect of another right and action altogether.



Hardly. Yours is more sexist because you are trying to compare apples to oranges, along with conflating two different things. Remember, if the ZEF isn't in her body, then she has no right to have it aborted. You continually fail to address this fact. It is the key point as to why the man actually has the same legal rights as the woman.



Fallacy, although the exact name is escaping me ATM. First off I have no issue with any given standards being lowered if they do not need to be as high anymore. That's with anything. If the job requires only able to lift 50 lbs instead of 100 lbs because equipment is now being used, then by all means lower the standard. This will also allow more men in as well. No standard should be lowered simply based upon gender/sex. There are plenty of places within our law where there is a disparity. In comparisons like this, the answer is not to try to fix what isn't related to each other, but to set the standards based upon the actual needs of the job or whatever. The standards are what's broken not the bodily autonomy issue.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
When a woman gets an abortion does it or does it not also terminate her future parental responsibilities?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Re: Parents have to face the music

When a woman gets an abortion does it or does it not also terminate her future parental responsibilities?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
First to quote you.



... I have expanded my answer beyond a simple yes or no because to give you that over simplified of s (sic) response would lead to a misleading conclusion.

A woman cannot get an abortion in order to terminate parental responsibilities. Again this is highlighted by the surrogate example, where she cannot have an abortion done because the ZEF is not in her body. Any side benefit that comes from her right of bodily autonomy hold no relevance upon that right. Men have the exact same right of bodily autonomy that women do, regardless of what ever other effects it may have.


Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top Bottom