• 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!

Should Woman's Choice Trump the Man's??

Should the woman's choice dictate that the man has to pay child support?


  • Total voters
    32
Well I'm going to continue talking about child support (i.e. money), because the state has a limited ability to compel the parents to do anything more than that. If you want to talk about something other than the question that was asked, have fun. :2wave:
translation: your going to run and deflect because you know you were wrong. I get it.

I accept your concession.
 
This question starts from the wrong place.

Child support is not about a battle of the sexes. It's not about seeing that justice is done to the mother or the father. It's about the child.

Further, who pays child support is not determined by gender.

Likewise, abortion is not a gender issue. All men that want to have an abortion and can find a doctor that is willing to perform the procedure should be free to "abort" too.

Abortion affects women differently than men due to biological differences, not political ones.
 
This question starts from the wrong place.

Child support is not about a battle of the sexes. It's not about seeing that justice is done to the mother or the father. It's about the child.

Further, who pays child support is not determined by gender.

Likewise, abortion is not a gender issue. All men that want to have an abortion and can find a doctor that is willing to perform the procedure should be free to "abort" too.

Abortion affects women differently than men due to biological differences, not political ones.

this was brought up already and addressed.
In reality the child isnt effected by forced "child support" so that debate is pointless

the other argument about men getting an abortion if a doctor will do it is just dishonest and nonsense.

Also just to be clear I dont think anybody in the thread wants the man to be able to FORCE the women to give birth, not saying you said that just making that clear.
 
Watching you ignore the fact that a man disavowing responsibility (which would result in a 0-100 split in child support payments) is not the same as a woman having an abortion (which would result in a 0-0 split in child support payments) is comical. Abortion makes them both BETTER off financially; disavowing responsibility makes the deadbeat dad better off and the mother worse off. Oh, and in the latter scenario there's a kid who is worse off than if both parents supported him. :roll:



I already posted these basic mathematical facts, and rather than respond to it you said "zomg emotion." Here it is again for your convenience. An economic example of how these decisions would actually play out. Assuming equal incomes and a 50-50 split in child support for simplicity, but the numbers can be adjusted and the point still stands.

Woman chooses to have an abortion: Man pays 0%, woman pays 0% (of the cost of raising the child to adulthood)
Woman chooses not to have an abortion: Man pays 50%, woman pays 50%

Man chooses to disavow responsibility: Man pays 0%, woman pays 100%
Man chooses to take responsibility: Man pays 50%, woman pays 50%

Of these four decisions, only the one you are advocating results in an unequal distribution in the burden of child support. In other words, the man is able to burden the woman with his share, but the woman is not able to do the same to him. Abortion is not the same as what you are advocating, and to call these laws "sexist" for keeping the burden on BOTH parents is bull****, when you are advocating an unequal distribution in child support costs in the man's favor (for parents in equal financial situations).

And again there is an actual CHILD who is harmed if a parent unilaterally disavows financial responsibility for it. That isn't the case if the mother unilaterally decides to have an abortion; there is no child who needs child support then.

Post this over and over if you like, what you literally don't seem to be able to comprehend is her choice. I agree with pretty much everything that you are saying, another thing that you don't get. The point is that it is IRRELEVANT. Why? Her choice determines, or is the foundation of, all end results. I have already explained this, so go back and read it again if you think that it will help you. If not, don't. Either way debating you further is a waste of time since you can't grasp this basic fact.

Her choice to use birth control means that there is no need for child support. It is all, literally, about her choice. Support for the child can come from areas other than the father, adoption, the mother, grandparents... all that matters is that the child is supported. If it can't be, then she should make the responsible choice and abort. If she chooses to not do this, then that is her choice.
 
Her choice to use birth control means that there is no need for child support. It is all, literally, about her choice. Support for the child can come from areas other than the father, adoption, the mother, grandparents... all that matters is that the child is supported. If it can't be, then she should make the responsible choice and abort. If she chooses to not do this, then that is her choice.

Are you really suggesting that if a woman can't afford a child without the father's financial support, she should have an abortion or give her baby up for adoption?
 
Are you really suggesting that if a woman can't afford a child without the father's financial support, she should have an abortion or give her baby up for adoption?

Cant answer for him but for me YES i would at least suggest that as it is ONE of the responsible choices if financially its impossible.
 
Cant answer for him but for me YES i would at least suggest that as it is ONE of the responsible choices if financially its impossible.

I'm pro-choice, but I don't agree that abortion should be a substitute for paternal responsibility.
 
I'm pro-choice, but I don't agree that abortion should be a substitute for paternal responsibility.

and im fine with that opinion but some view it as doing their parental responsibility. Opinions vary.
 
Cant answer for him but for me YES i would at least suggest that as it is ONE of the responsible choices if financially its impossible.

It is one responsible choice, but it is unacceptable to many people. Many people are very religious and would never dream of having an abortion. Even among those who aren't, many would view it as a heartbreaking decision and might opt against it. To say "the woman should have had an abortion" is, to many people, saying that she should have committed murder if she didn't want to raise the child by herself. While I don't agree with that assessment, I respect their moral viewpoint and I'm certainly not comfortable with the law strongarming women into having an abortion against their morals (which is exactly what would happen).

Some people want to deny the human element even exists in this discussion. Just because something is LEGAL doesn't mean that it should be forced (or at least strongly favored) by the government when it's something that a lot of people have serious moral objections to. I would liken it to denying someone financial assistance for being a lazy freeloader, because there was a job available in a porno and they refused to take it (which actually happened in Germany a few years ago).
 
Last edited:
It is one responsible choice, but it is unacceptable to many people. Many people are very religious and would never dream of having an abortion. Even among those who aren't, many would view it as a heartbreaking decision and might opt against it. To say "the woman should have had an abortion" is, to many people, saying that she should have committed murder if she didn't want to raise the child by herself. While I don't agree with that assessment, I respect their moral viewpoint and I'm certainly not comfortable with the law strongarming women into having an abortion against their morals (which is exactly what would happen).

Some people want to deny the human element even exists in this discussion. Just because something is LEGAL doesn't mean that it should be forced (or at least strongly favored) by the government when it's something that a lot of people have serious moral objections to. I would liken it to denying someone financial assistance as a lazy freeloader because there was a job available in a porno and they refused to take it (which actually happened in Germany a few years ago).

at first I though what a good thoughtful post, I may not agree but I to also respect others opinions

BUT THEN

I got to the bolded part which is pure nonsense and more dishonesty
 
this was brought up already and addressed.
In reality the child isnt effected by forced "child support" so that debate is pointless

Says who? How is it that the child is not effected by his parents neglect?

the other argument about men getting an abortion if a doctor will do it is just dishonest and nonsense.

It is not. The op argued that abortion gave some right to women that was not enjoyed by men. That is not true. Men enjoy the same right to control their own body. A man's control over his reproductive acts and his part in human reproduction ends when he plants his seed. A woman's clearly does not end at that point. You cant change a fact of biology via the law.

Also just to be clear I dont think anybody in the thread wants the man to be able to FORCE the women to give birth, not saying you said that just making that clear.

Human beings have a long childhood and require a large amount of care in childhood. The state has some duty to ensure that their welfare is protected but the burden of care can only justly fall on the parents. Fathers should not be allowed to deny their responsibility to help care for the child.
 
Says who? How is it that the child is not effected by his parents neglect?

says me and dont play word games with me and appeal to emotion it wont work LMAO
neglect? really because some dad beat dad giving his $200 dollars a month, when he actually does it, but never does anything else is the opposite of neglect???

give me a break, like I said this is about REALITY and TRYING to force a person to pay money every month that has no want to be a parent does just about NOTHING for the kid. Thats the reality. and thats why you point is moot because it doesnt have and substantial effect.



It is not. The op argued that abortion gave some right to women that was not enjoyed by men. That is not true. Men enjoy the same right to control their own body. A man's control over his reproductive acts and his part in human reproduction ends when he plants his seed. A woman's clearly does not end at that point. You cant change a fact of biology via the law.

yes it is nonsense and dishonesty, its just like the morons that say gays have the same rights as straight because they too can merry whoever they want if its the opposite sex, its stupid and dishonest.

Nobody is trying to change biology the objective people are just trying to use reality.
Nobody wants to fore women to give birth but the fact remains they can get abortions with or without the guys say (THE WAY IT SHOULD BE) but the laws dont reflect that and make it fair and equal.

So yes saying a guy is free to get an abortion if a doctor will do it is in reality, nonsense. lol





Human beings have a long childhood and require a large amount of care in childhood. The state has some duty to ensure that their welfare is protected but the burden of care can only justly fall on the parents. Fathers should not be allowed to deny their responsibility to help care for the child.

1. BOTH PARENTS CAN ALREADY DO THIS by adoption or god forbid just barely care for the kid or worse abuse it

2. ON PARENT can avoid this by getting an abortion but if she choices not to it FORCES the guy. Her CHOICE, FORCES the guy and thats the issue. Meanwhile his choices dont matter.

this is the hear of the debate and why it needs fixed.


TRYING to force a person to give child support that doesnt want to be a parent fixes little to nothing LOL

the rights of the man and women must be as close to equal as possible, currently they are not, the are bias, unfair and discriminative.

If the law is changed that the man can agree to give up all rights to the kid in the same time frame as the women must decide if she wants to abort that would be more fair and just. And the welfare of the child would be impacted just about NIL for obvious reasons.

The opposite option should also exist but Im sure would be much more unlikely. The women could also agree not to abort if she chooses but give up the child to the man.
 
I'm pro-choice, but I don't agree that abortion should be a substitute for paternal responsibility.
That's because as a man, you're ready to subvert yourself to women. Equal rights mean equal rights, not a reversal of perceived roles. You want to get punked on the question of procreation, please make that choice for yourself. I was born with the right to procreate, and no govt has the right to take that away. And if they give that control to women, then women need to pay the price for it.

Harsh yes, for what I consider unconstitutional transfer of rights.
 
Last edited:
2. ONE PARENT can avoid this by getting an abortion but if she choices not to it FORCES the guy. Her CHOICE, FORCES the guy and thats the issue. Meanwhile his choices dont matter.

The opposite option should also exist but Im sure would be much more unlikely. The women could also agree not to abort if she chooses but give up the child to the man.

What if the woman forces the man to have sex with her? Then, can he choose abortion over her will?

I find it interesting that many of the supporters for the woman's choice in the discussion feel like the man made his decision and took the responsibility when he chose to have sex. I agree (use a condom, dummy). But, what is it that makes people think the man should be accountable for his actions/decision in taking care of the conceived child, but not the woman? Why shouldn't the woman be equally responsible for her decision to have sex (use the pill/diaphragm, dummy) in taking care of the conceived child. Why does she get to say "kill it" but he doesn't get equal say?

If the right to choose is going to be legal, I think either party should have the right to defend the life of the child if they want to keep it and the other party should pay to support it, too. If one of them wants to kill it, I go back to "too bad", you should have thought of that earlier. Killing for convenience doesn't make any sense.
 
I'm pro-choice, but I don't agree that abortion should be a substitute for paternal responsibility.

Nor do I, but the woman has that legal right and the man doesn't... and that is the problem.
 
Last edited:
Are you really suggesting that if a woman can't afford a child without the father's financial support, she should have an abortion or give her baby up for adoption?

Those are options, of course. She can also opt to have the child and seek other avenues of support or just see if she can make it herself. But, those options are far more fair than creating sexist laws forcing a man to pay for her choice though...
 
Says who? How is it that the child is not effected by his parents neglect?



It is not. The op argued that abortion gave some right to women that was not enjoyed by men. That is not true. Men enjoy the same right to control their own body. A man's control over his reproductive acts and his part in human reproduction ends when he plants his seed. A woman's clearly does not end at that point. You cant change a fact of biology via the law.



Human beings have a long childhood and require a large amount of care in childhood. The state has some duty to ensure that their welfare is protected but the burden of care can only justly fall on the parents. Fathers should not be allowed to deny their responsibility to help care for the child.

These are old and refuted talking points... read the thread.
 
This question starts from the wrong place.

Child support is not about a battle of the sexes. It's not about seeing that justice is done to the mother or the father. It's about the child.

Further, who pays child support is not determined by gender.

Likewise, abortion is not a gender issue. All men that want to have an abortion and can find a doctor that is willing to perform the procedure should be free to "abort" too.

Abortion affects women differently than men due to biological differences, not political ones.

No, the question is about her choice, not child support. I called the thread child support to get people's attention.
 
It is one responsible refused to take it (which actually happened in Germany a few years ago).

I guess that you gave up since you finally realized your error... not an honest route, just ignoring... but I understand. :lol:
 
These are old and refuted talking points... read the thread.

No. I am not going to search the thread for where you think you refuted these points. You have not. If a parent abandons their child it will effect the child. There is no disputing that.
 
No. I am not going to search the thread for where you think you refuted these points. You have not. If a parent abandons their child it will effect the child. There is no disputing that.

Everything effects everything... that is no argument. Sorry...
 
I guess that you gave up since you finally realized your error... not an honest route, just ignoring... but I understand. :lol:

At a certain point it's just a waste of time to continue trying to reason with idiots who just ignore any points. It's like wrestling with a pig: You both get dirty, and the pig enjoys it.
 
Last edited:
If a woman chooses to keep her pregnancy and have a child against the man's wishes and she chooses to not use her legal option of birth control and have an abortion, should the man have to pay child suport for her choice.Should the man have to pay Child Support if he does not want the child and the woman decides to not opt to have an abortion as a means of contraception?I think that he should not be legally liable if he does not want the child. The woman has all the choice and can not only keep the baby and make him pay, but she can keep the baby, not tell him about the baby and then hit him up 18 years later for back Child Support.This thread is not about a woman's right to choose. That is legal and fine and all that. This thread is about a woman's choice subjegating a man to the role of a wallet for 18 years due to the whim of a woman's choice to keep a child against his wishes. Before we hear the whole, he shoulda kept it in his pants and now he has no choice in the matter. That is understood. That is the law. The issue is, is the law fair? As far as I am aware, there is no case law that deals with him being forced due to her choice. There is law about her having a choice, but none about why he should have to pay for her choice. That being said, this thread is not about the law, but about what is right. This is also not about exceptions: ie, she found out 5 months into her pregnancy due to irregular cycles, etc. This is about the woman that gets pregnant when the man wants to leave the marriage, or the woman that pricks the condom when having sex with a guy that she just met so that she gets pregnant and wants nothing to do with him or the times that a one-nighter turns into an 18 year nightmare simply because she wanted the child more and the state backs her decision out of sexism.Are women not responsible? Can she not be held liable for her own decisions?If she wants the baby, that is fine. She should have the baby and the man should be able to be out of the picture, should he so choose. If she doesn not want to raise the child on her own with no support, then she should abort. Easy as that. That is her right. That is the law. Hopefull I have explained all of this well enough. Yes, this is about abortion and threads like this exist in the Abortion Forum, but this is also a poll. I would like to know what people think outside the abortion debating crowd.Be nice please and just stick to the poll. If tangents occur please make a thread in the Abortion Forum as would be appropriate.Thanks...

Bodhisattva, seriously... why do you keep asking this question over and over again?

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/107690-child-support-payments.html

You posted it twice the same day. Did you forget to attach the poll or something?
 
Back
Top Bottom