• 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

Lursa said:
Ah this is great! I'll just park it here for consideration and future use.
Click to expand...

Just so I can understand the stupid going on here...

Do you think that if you have more choices in guns styles that means that you have more rights to own a gun?
 
Bodhisattva said:
Just so I can understand the stupid going on here...

Do you think that if you have more choices in guns styles that means that you have more rights to own a gun?
Click to expand...

Please, be patient. I'm just keeping it available.

No need for your concern.
 
mrjurrs said:
No, any reasonable person knows that sex that can lead to pregnancy is different from sex that does not lead to pregnancy. He gave his consent when he participated. Could you give me the total number of males raped or victims of sperm theft? Have to think that that is a pretty small universe.
Click to expand...
So why no apply that same logic to women and only allow for abortions when its a medical emergency. After all she knows that sex could lead to pregsnsncy too. Whats the rstionsle for not treating them identically in terms of electively opting out of parenthood?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
now 1500+ Posts and we are in the same place and the OP stands

The reality is some people want the laws changed to support equality based on legality and some are fine with it being factually unequal based on legality.
The people that support / are fine with it currently being unequal have their right to feel that way but their feelings will never trump facts and legality.

And truth be told it isnt going to change in my lifetime or my kids lifetime. Im not even interested in changing anybody's mind to support legal equality . . . . . support what you want, but that doesnt mean honest educated objective people will not identify it for what it factually is . . unequal. The fact remains you support something unequal based on legality and parental rights.

I love this thread so much watching the hilarious beatdowns in it

FACTS:
The laws are currently factually set up unequal based on legality
Biology is meaningless to the topic of equality based on legality

Does anybody have anything to change those facts yet? . . ANYBODY . . one fact that changes anything? Please present it now, thanks!
 
trouble13 said:
So why no apply that same logic to women and only allow for abortions when its a medical emergency. After all she knows that sex could lead to pregsnsncy too. Whats the rstionsle for not treating them identically in terms of electively opting out of parenthood?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That implies that abortion is wrong. It's not, there's no reason to deny women that medical procedure.
 
Lursa said:
Please, be patient. I'm just keeping it available.

No need for your concern.
Click to expand...

Your posts are a complete waste of time and a combination of laughable ignorance and lies... :lol:


You are free to continue stalking me at this point.
 
trouble13 said:
So why no apply that same logic to women and only allow for abortions when its a medical emergency. After all she knows that sex could lead to pregsnsncy too. Whats the rstionsle for not treating them identically in terms of electively opting out of parenthood?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The woman is the pregnant one, she is sovereign in her own body. It is her choice, and her choice alone.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Your posts are a complete waste of time and a combination of laughable ignorance and lies... :lol:


You are free to continue stalking me at this point.
Click to expand...

It's odd that you consider people responding to your OP as stalking you :roll:

:lamo :lamo
 
Lursa said:
It's odd that you consider people responding to your OP as stalking you :roll:

:lamo :lamo
Click to expand...

More Lursa Ignorance.... I never said that responding to me was stalking me. :lol:

You are the gift that keeps giving!
 
Bodhisattva said:
More Lursa Ignorance.... I never said that responding to me was stalking me. :lol:

You are the gift that keeps giving!
Click to expand...

I'm glad you are getting at least something out of your failed cop-out OP.

Cheers!
 
AGENT J said:
The reality is some people want the laws changed to support equality based on legality and some are fine with it being factually unequal based on legality.
The people that support / are fine with it currently being unequal have their right to feel that way but their feelings will never trump facts and legality.

FACTS:
The laws are currently factually set up unequal based on legality
Biology is meaningless to the topic of equality based on legality

Does anybody have anything to change those facts yet? . . ANYBODY . . one fact that changes anything? Please present it now, thanks!
Click to expand...

The one fact is that society will not go back to the days when women with a child out of wedlock or divorced women were left completely without means of support. The 19th century laws that allowed abandonment created massive poverty. Debtors jails and poor houses were filled with women and children. Children growing up in poverty continue as adults to be poor. A huge poverty class is counter-productive to an economically and socially viable country.

And that's why the law won't let men abandon children they have conceived. It's bad for the social structure and the economic structure of a country.
 
weaver2 said:
The one fact is that society will not go back to the days when women with a child out of wedlock or divorced women were left completely without means of support.
Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with any of the facts i posted :shrug:
 
mrjurrs said:
The woman is the pregnant one, she is sovereign in her own body. It is her choice, and her choice alone.
Click to expand...
Is it accepctable for her to choose to abort because she does not feel ready to accept the responsibility of being a parent?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
Is it accepctable for her to choose to abort because she does not feel ready to accept the responsibility of being a parent?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Any choice she makes can adversely affect her body and her ability to support her family. Pregnancy more so. It is not just one thing.

When you impregnate a woman...if you do not want to be a parent...you just have to worry about whether or not to be a part of the child's life and child support.

When a woman gets pregnant...she has to worry about the same things a man does.....AND if she has adequate insurance to see good quality doctors in a safe setting, if she has complications - how will she support herself and her family, if she has severe complications - how will her born children be cared for....if she is working multiple per diem jobs to make ends meet....will her employers stop calling her as her pregnancy advances?

I was off nearly 6 months due to several VERY unexpected complications. The C-section was out of the blue. My OBGYN was as shocked as I was. that I needed one. But fetal presentation demanded it. By the way, if I had crappy insurance and a doctor that did not have the time to see me, I probably would be on dialysis or dead right now.

It is never about just one thing,
 
year2late said:
Any choice she makes can adversely affect her body and her ability to support her family. Pregnancy more so. It is not just one thing.

When you impregnate a woman...if you do not want to be a parent...you just have to worry about whether or not to be a part of the child's life and child support.

When a woman gets pregnant...she has to worry about the same things a man does.....AND if she has adequate insurance to see good quality doctors in a safe setting, if she has complications - how will she support herself and her family, if she has severe complications - how will her born children be cared for....if she is working multiple per diem jobs to make ends meet....will her employers stop calling her as her pregnancy advances?

I was off nearly 6 months due to several VERY unexpected complications. The C-section was out of the blue. My OBGYN was as shocked as I was. that I needed one. But fetal presentation demanded it. By the way, if I had crappy insurance and a doctor that did not have the time to see me, I probably would be on dialysis or dead right now.

It is never about just one thing,
Click to expand...
You did not answer my question.
Is it acceptable for a woman to chose to abort for the SOLE reason that she does not want the responsibility of being a mother to that child?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
weaver2 said:
The one fact is that society will not go back to the days when women with a child out of wedlock or divorced women were left completely without means of support. The 19th century laws that allowed abandonment created massive poverty. Debtors jails and poor houses were filled with women and children. Children growing up in poverty continue as adults to be poor. A huge poverty class is counter-productive to an economically and socially viable country.

And that's why the law won't let men abandon children they have conceived. It's bad for the social structure and the economic structure of a country.
Click to expand...

Why they believe (hope) that the govt would (in effect) do away with child support when the need for it has not gone away, is a mystery.

The claim that it's not equal doesnt work...that's been proven since legally-recognized men who gestate have the same 'right' to opt-out of parenthood as women.

So their victimization is just blind resentment.
 
Lursa said:
Why they believe (hope) that the govt would (in effect) do away with child support when the need for it has not gone away, is a mystery.

The claim that it's not equal doesnt work...that's been proven since legally-recognized men who gestate have the same 'right' to opt-out of parenthood as women.

So their victimization is just blind resentment.
Click to expand...

Your innate bigotry is preventing you from seeing this issue clearly. Your argument is the equivalent of arguments against gay marriage: "Gay people have the same right to marry people of the opposite sex as straight people do." Not only is the law not equal as it stands, but it goes beyond child support. Non-custodial parents are the only class of people expected to reimburse the state for welfare benefits. Can you can any other group that has their wages garnisheed to repay public assistance?
 
GhostlyJoe said:
Your innate bigotry is preventing you from seeing this issue clearly. Your argument is the equivalent of arguments against gay marriage: "Gay people have the same right to marry people of the opposite sex as straight people do." Not only is the law not equal as it stands, but it goes beyond child support. Non-custodial parents are the only class of people expected to reimburse the state for welfare benefits. Can you can any other group that has their wages garnisheed to repay public assistance?
Click to expand...

I have used the gay marriage analogy with her and others... they just lie, ignore or twist facts.

That is what Lursa posts, and it is pathetic.

EDIT: She also thinks that she has this great "GOTCHYA!" with this "legally recognized men" gestate bull****. :lol:
 
Last edited:
GhostlyJoe said:
Your innate bigotry is preventing you from seeing this issue clearly. Your argument is the equivalent of arguments against gay marriage: "Gay people have the same right to marry people of the opposite sex as straight people do." Not only is the law not equal as it stands, but it goes beyond child support. Non-custodial parents are the only class of people expected to reimburse the state for welfare benefits. Can you can any other group that has their wages garnisheed to repay public assistance?
Click to expand...

The OP has demanded we not use any biological factors in the discussion.

Legally-recognized men do gestate and give birth. They have the same *equal* right to opt-out of parenthood as women.

The law is equal.

And child support is not public assistance but people do have their wages garnished to pay alimony and any other money's owed. People dont "owe" pubilc assistance, however people do owe alimony, debt payments, child support, etc. Child support is not reimbursement for welfare...it is a completely different thing.
 
weaver2 said:
The one fact is that society will not go back to the days when women with a child out of wedlock or divorced women were left completely without means of support. The 19th century laws that allowed abandonment created massive poverty. Debtors jails and poor houses were filled with women and children. Children growing up in poverty continue as adults to be poor. A huge poverty class is counter-productive to an economically and socially viable country.

And that's why the law won't let men abandon children they have conceived. It's bad for the social structure and the economic structure of a country.
Click to expand...

The man is not abandoning a child because there is no child when he would be making his opt out decision...

... the woman is forcing a child onto society that she can not properly support. The woman is the selfish abusive person, in this situation.

It is all in how you look at it... and being honest about it is important.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I have used the gay marriage analogy with her and others... they just lie, ignore or twist facts.

That is what Lursa posts, and it is pathetic.
Click to expand...

That's total BS. Your only goal is to opt-out of parenthood...which legally-recognized men can.

The goal of gays was to marry a person of the same sex instead of the opposite sex. They wanted to do something 'different' from the legal privilege straight people were accorded. And straight people couldnt marry someone of the same sex either (hey, maybe they wanted to for reasons of convenience.) So the entire law concerning marriage was changed.

And btw, marriage isnt a 'right' anymore than parenthood is. They are personal liberties that the state cannot (no longer in the case of SSM) prevent without cause.
 
Last edited:
Bodhisattva said:
The man is not abandoning a child because there is no child when he would be making his opt out decision...

... the woman is forcing a child onto society that she can not properly support. The woman is the selfish abusive person, in this situation.

It is all in how you look at it... and being honest about it is important.
Click to expand...

Why do yo bring up the actions of the women, how they are 'selfishly forcing a financial burden on society?' How does that matter in your argument?

Be honest. If it's just about men not being held accountable financially...why do the woman's actions matter at all? Please explain? She's still going to do what she wants, right?
 
trouble13 said:
Is it accepctable for her to choose to abort because she does not feel ready to accept the responsibility of being a parent?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Of course
also who makes that subjective decision, maybe thats how YOU see it. Millions feel that abortion was the responsible thing to do and were driven to do so by thier own morals :shrug:
 
GhostlyJoe said:
Your innate bigotry is preventing you from seeing this issue clearly. Your argument is the equivalent of arguments against gay marriage: "Gay people have the same right to marry people of the opposite sex as straight people do." Not only is the law not equal as it stands, but it goes beyond child support. Non-custodial parents are the only class of people expected to reimburse the state for welfare benefits. Can you can any other group that has their wages garnisheed to repay public assistance?
Click to expand...

actually what is even more funny ia, the dishonest and factually wrong "argument" is the same many use again abortion lol . . its that type of vile dishonest hypocrisy that can never be undone by an individual and forever taints them
 
Lursa said:
Why do yo bring up the actions of the women, how they are 'selfishly forcing a financial burden on society?' How does that matter in your argument?
Click to expand...

It is all in how one frames the argument. I don't actually think that woman are selfishly abusing children by not aborting just as I don't think that men are dead beats "copping out" for not wanting to be forced into paying for a child that they don't want. You are the one displaying man hating bigotry... I am merely arguing points and in this case I am making a point to hopefully illustrate to people, like you, who are trying to turn this into a blame game instead of one about options and equality post conception.

...and stop already with your idiotic "women recognized legally as men" argument. It is literally retarded and beneath you (I would have thought)

Be honest. If it's just about men not being held accountable financially...why do the woman's actions matter at all? Please explain? She's still going to do what she wants, right?
Click to expand...

What do you mean? Currently, if the woman chooses to keep the child the man is liable. That is why the woman's actions matter.

Seems pretty obvious too...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom