• 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 Post-Conception Opt Out

Politics has nothing to do with the opt-out question.

That is the point of the analogy... because neither does, "women are required to carry a pregnancy full term and produce a child"
 
There is no child the at the Point of this argument so no... it has nothing to do with supporting a child

That's ridiculous. So what is the father opting out of: pregnancy? birth? nursing?. permanently stretched abdominal skin? No. He's opting out of changing diapers, wiping up messes, sleepless nights, and a thin wallet. What do you suppose causes those situations to happen? Bunny rabbits?

Only someone playing word games thinks there isn't a child involved in this discussion.
 
That's ridiculous. So what is the father opting out of: pregnancy? birth? nursing?. permanently stretched abdominal skin? No. He's opting out of changing diapers, wiping up messes, sleepless nights, and a thin wallet. What do you suppose causes those situations to happen? Bunny rabbits?

Only someone playing word games thinks there isn't a child involved in this discussion.

There is only a child if she gives birth to one...
 
That is the point of the analogy... because neither does, "women are required to carry a pregnancy full term and produce a child"

Both 13s are talking of restricting abortions. If a woman doesn't get an abortion because there are no clinics within 500 miles, exactly how is she not forced into carrying the pregnancy full term? Are there other options.
 
Both 13s are talking of restricting abortions. If a woman doesn't get an abortion because there are no clinics within 500 miles, exactly how is she not forced into carrying the pregnancy full term? Are there other options.

So the options are carrying a child that she does not want to have for 9 months, giving birth and then raising a child for 18 years OR driving for about 6 hours to an abortion clinic? Seriously?
 
Since the right of bodily autonomy is not limited to procreation, this is irrelevant. Especially since the argument is that the law is not applied fairly. The law is applied fairly. If something, not limited to a ZEF, is in your body, it is your choice alone as to whether it stays or goes, even if your decision would result in the death of another. That equally applied to men and women. Fact. If a ZEF is created by two people they are both legally responsible for that offspring once it becomes a child, the minimum of which is financial support. Fact. If a ZEF created by two people is gestatated in a third person or artificial womb (since that technology looks to be in or shortly after our lifetime), neither parent can have the ZEF terminated on their sole decision, nor can either parent choose to get out of their legal parental responsibilities. Fact.

The law is applied equally between men and women. For some reason, there is this idea that circumstances that are different should have the same results.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk

God, I hate leftspeak. It's an embryo, or a fetus, not a parasite.

My point stands, if you are worried about unborn children in your body you should abstain. Women have the choice to say yes or no as well as a man. If you are married and you don't want unborn children in your body, though, you know the job was dangerous when you took it. If you cant bear children for health reasons, choose sterilization. Problem solved. Don't blame it on your husband.
 
Men to should be able to opt out of Child Support if they do not want to be a father (legally). The woman can use her legal Constitutional 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).

This would give men the same rights as women... having a post-conception Opt Out of being a parent and not caring for the child.

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 don't 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 woman legally has a choice post-conception.
The man legally has not choice post-conception...

THE LAW forces his monetary contribution on the man for the woman's choice. This is a legal argument, not a biological one. Laws can change.

Without the law he could just walk away. This is about Potentially Changing Child Support Laws to attain EQUAL RIGHTS.

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?

Let's organize your argument so it isn't just a tossed salad of half sentences and partial thoughts. What you are saying is;

A woman has a legal choice post conception of aborting or not aborting.
A man has no choice post-conception...
THE LAW forces me to financially support our child if a woman chooses to give birth to my child.
I perceive this to be unfair.
I should be able to opt out of child support if I do not want to be a father; just as women are able to decide to be a mother or not.

This is how I think the law could be more fair and equal to men.

The woman informs the father of their pregnancy.
He makes a choice and tells the woman of his choice to opt-out of child support or to opt-in.
She can then then make her choice to abort or not.
In my mind this would give men the same rights as women... a post-conception Opt-Out of child support

My thoughts
I want to change the present law to attain EQUAL RIGHTS for men.
I believe my argument is just a hypothetical one about creating fairness in post conception choices for men.

I inadvertently posted this statement. "Without the child support law men could just walk away". without recognizing that it is the reason why opt-out isn't going to work. We tried it in the 19th century it didn't work then.

Thoughts?
 
Can a parfectly healthy woman experiencing a typically normal pregnancy not showing any signs of danger to herself or her baby elect to abort for the purpose of not wanting to take on all the responsibilities associated with being a parent, yes or no?

No. She can only do so if it is in her own body. If she is using a surrogate, even if the ZEF is biologically hers, she has no right to abort that baby.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 
God, I hate leftspeak. It's an embryo, or a fetus, not a parasite.

My point stands, if you are worried about unborn children in your body you should abstain. Women have the choice to say yes or no as well as a man. If you are married and you don't want unborn children in your body, though, you know the job was dangerous when you took it. If you cant bear children for health reasons, choose sterilization. Problem solved. Don't blame it on your husband.

Exactly the same thing can be said of men.

If you are worried about women getting a woman pregnant and having to support a child you should abstain. Men have a choice to say yes or no as well as a woman. If you are married and you don't want your wife to get pregnant even though you knew when you got married there was the possibility of conception choose a vasectomy. Problem solved. Don't blame the problem on your wife.
 
Let's organize your argument so it isn't just a tossed salad of half sentences and partial thoughts. What you are saying is;

A woman has a legal choice post conception of aborting or not aborting.
A man has no choice post-conception...
THE LAW forces me to financially support our child if a woman chooses to give birth to my child.
I perceive this to be unfair.
I should be able to opt out of child support if I do not want to be a father; just as women are able to decide to be a mother or not.

This is how I think the law could be more fair and equal to men.

The woman informs the father of their pregnancy.
He makes a choice and tells the woman of his choice to opt-out of child support or to opt-in.
She can then then make her choice to abort or not.
In my mind this would give men the same rights as women... a post-conception Opt-Out of child support

My thoughts
I want to change the present law to attain EQUAL RIGHTS for men.
I believe my argument is just a hypothetical one about creating fairness in post conception choices for men.

I inadvertently posted this statement. "Without the child support law men could just walk away". without recognizing that it is the reason why opt-out isn't going to work. We tried it in the 19th century it didn't work then.

Thoughts?

I am not sure if you are agreeing with me or paraphrasing what I have said, to be honest.
 
Both 13s are talking of restricting abortions. If a woman doesn't get an abortion because there are no clinics within 500 miles, exactly how is she not forced into carrying the pregnancy full term? Are there other options.
Legal forcing and lack of availability are two separate issues. You can no more force people to open and run an abortion clinic than you can force a woman to have or not have an abortion. Lack of facilities is a red herring.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 
Exactly the same thing can be said of men.

If you are worried about women getting a woman pregnant and having to support a child you should abstain. Men have a choice to say yes or no as well as a woman. If you are married and you don't want your wife to get pregnant even though you knew when you got married there was the possibility of conception choose a vasectomy. Problem solved. Don't blame the problem on your wife.

I'm not worried about having a "ZEF" in my body. I'm not the one who can say whether to abort ot not. So shall we speak plainly? I did have a vasectomy, only to find out that there are women who have made a cottage industry of popping out kids for the extortion and the money they can get out of it. So enough of the man hatred.
 
God, I hate leftspeak. It's an embryo, or a fetus, not a parasite.

Who ever said parasite? That's your word not mine. I have consistently used ZEF to cover any point during the gestation period.

My point stands, if you are worried about unborn children in your body you should abstain. Women have the choice to say yes or no as well as a man. If you are married and you don't want unborn children in your body, though, you know the job was dangerous when you took it. If you cant bear children for health reasons, choose sterilization. Problem solved. Don't blame it on your husband.

You point does nothing to counter mine. Bodily autonomy means that each of us, man and woman, gets to decide what goes into, stays in or gets removed from their own bodies. It doesn't matter what it is. If it's not in your body, you don't get a say. A woman using another woman as a surrogate, cannot chose to no longer have the child. The ZEF isn't in the biological mother's body, thus no choice. That is why a woman does not, in and of itself, have a right to end her parental responsibilities. The result of one right is not a right in and of itself.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 
Who ever said parasite? That's your word not mine. I have consistently used ZEF to cover any point during the gestation period.



You point does nothing to counter mine. Bodily autonomy means that each of us, man and woman, gets to decide what goes into, stays in or gets removed from their own bodies. It doesn't matter what it is. If it's not in your body, you don't get a say. A woman using another woman as a surrogate, cannot chose to no longer have the child. The ZEF isn't in the biological mother's body, thus no choice. That is why a woman does not, in and of itself, have a right to end her parental responsibilities. The result of one right is not a right in and of itself.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk

I'm surprised that mankind survives with this kind of thinking.
 
My thoughts
I want to change the present law to attain EQUAL RIGHTS for men.

Equal rights are currently present. However, per the faulty premises of the OP, you never could create equal rights. Under that ideal, both can opt in, both can opt out, she can opt in and he opt out, but never can he opt in and she opt out.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 
I am not sure if you are agreeing with me or paraphrasing what I have said, to be honest.
He seems to be agreeing with you, but finding your wording... clumsy, to choose an option. So he paraphrased it in the hope of being more clear and probably to ensure he understands what you said. I remember paraphrasing another's statement was a key to effective communication in one of my parenting classes.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 
I'm surprised that mankind survives with this kind of thinking.
Why? Statistically speaking medical abortions are rare. There is varying ideas on the rarity of natural abortions (miscarriages) in the first couple of months, but later terms ones are about the same rate as medical ones. Chosen abortions, medical necessity aside, are not occuring at a rate as to threaten global population. Hell, a small draw back probably would be good, but that is a different discussion.

Now do you have an actual counter?

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 
So the options are carrying a child that she does not want to have for 9 months, giving birth and then raising a child for 18 years OR driving for about 6 hours to an abortion clinic? Seriously?


Yes, seriously. You probably don't know much about pregnancy abortion laws, travel and abortions if you think 500 miles is not a barrier. When abortion is going to be done in a PP clinic instead of a private doctors office, which most abortions are, you are talking about women that are living at or close to the poverty level and have few options for a lot of things. For one thing in most clinics abortions are done only once a week and sometimes only once every two weeks. The woman may not have a car that can reliably go that far and that fast (averaging 80 +mph). She may not know how to drive and is dependent on getting someone else to drive. She may not have ever been outside of the county and doesn't know how to get to the clinic. Most women are required by law to wait anywhere from 24 48 hours after the initial consultation in order to get an abortion. She may not have the cost of a motel and meals out. If she has a job they may not hold it open for the 4 to 6 days it will take to get an abortion. The employer may require a written note from the doctor in order to hold the job. There may be delaying issues with family, husband, partner. There may be violence issues.

Reading up on abortion statistics and the the barriers to abortion could make you more aware of the issues.
 
I'm not worried about having a "ZEF" in my body. I'm not the one who can say whether to abort ot not. So shall we speak plainly? I did have a vasectomy, only to find out that there are women who have made a cottage industry of popping out kids for the extortion and the money they can get out of it. So enough of the man hatred.

You definitely need to find a better crowd to run with.
 
Legal forcing and lack of availability are two separate issues. You can no more force people to open and run an abortion clinic than you can force a woman to have or not have an abortion. Lack of facilities is a red herring.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk


When you restrict PP so there is only one clinic in the state like Alabama or you ban PP entirely from the state like Missouri the lack of availability is essentially making almost every pregnancy produce a child. It is not a red herring. Just because you haven't had any problems looking for a clinic doesn't mean the women in more that 25 states have found themselves our of options.
 
I'm not worried about having a "ZEF" in my body. I'm not the one who can say whether to abort ot not. So shall we speak plainly? I did have a vasectomy, only to find out that there are women who have made a cottage industry of popping out kids for the extortion and the money they can get out of it. So enough of the man hatred.

Oh pray tell did having a vasectomy lead you discover this cottage industry?
 
When you restrict PP so there is only one clinic in the state like Alabama or you ban PP entirely from the state like Missouri the lack of availability is essentially making almost every pregnancy produce a child. It is not a red herring. Just because you haven't had any problems looking for a clinic doesn't mean the women in more that 25 states have found themselves our of options.
It still is an issue separate from what the OP is trying to discuss. But lack of availability has nothing to do with the rights of a man or woman.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 
It still is an issue separate from what the OP is trying to discuss. But lack of availability has nothing to do with the rights of a man or woman.

Here's what Bodie is saying in the op

A woman has a legal choice post conception of aborting or not aborting.
A man has no choice post-conception...
THE LAW forces me to financially support our child if a woman chooses to give birth to my child.
I perceive this to be unfair.
I should be able to opt out of child support if I do not want to be a father; just as women are able to decide to be a mother or not.

This is how I think the law could be more fair and equal to men.

The woman informs the father of their pregnancy.
He makes a choice and tells the woman of his choice to opt-out of child support or to opt-in.
She can then then make her choice to abort or not.
In my mind this would give men the same rights as women... a post-conception Opt-Out of child support

Opt-out in the above rational for a woman means getting an abortion. There is no way to discuss Bodie''s for equality without talking about abortions. And if you talk about abortion, accessibility, while it may be a side issue is, going to come up. If abortion is not accessible the woman can't opt-out.
 
Back
Top Bottom