• 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.
Bodhisattva said:
Again... this was addressed in the OP. If you are unable to understand what a Straw Man is please ask a first year Logic student. :)
Click to expand...

You mean that nonsensical view on something called "post conception opt out"? You know when it is already to late to opt out due to there being a pregnancy? :roll:

There are no post conception choices for opting out for men. That is the issue I have with your fantasy concept. You know, things that do not exist and you want us to discuss?

Hell no, my choice is no existence of post conception opt outs, impossible, never going to happen because it is total nonsense to allow a man to get away with no consequences of his impregnating a girl/woman.

And this is not just about child support but about the right for a child to know who his/her father is and all the legal rights that come with being a child, because that is how things work, no opt-outs should be allowed.
 
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...

golly darnit he had his choice when he came

stop trying to screw over kids and women both parents should pay for the kid if they are keeping it women should be free to end pregnancy if they feel like it because its their body and their choice not because the other parent is going to abandon all responsibility

likewise a mother should not be able to hand off a child to the father and then walk away without offering any support
 
Peter King said:
But the mother does not get to opt out of motherhood if the birth control fails and neither can a father. It may be a really unlucky thing that they have gotten themselves into but opting out is a non issue, is not logical, reasonable or acceptable.
Click to expand...

Of course a mother can opt-out of motherhood if birth control fails. She can either abort or give the baby up.

The man needs that same option -- within a specific time frame, obviously.

The law should require the woman to notify the father as soon as she knows conception has taken place, and he should have the choice to opt-out of being a dad (emotionally and financially) within the time period allowable by law for the woman to abort -- or -- in a specified time from the date he learns of the pregnancy. That way, the woman can abort (let the man pay for the abortion), or let her give the baby up for adoption. Her choice. If the man opts-out, he should never be allowed to reinstate his rights to the child. Opting-out should mean forever.

We're not talking about children of divorce, we're talking ONLY about unwanted pregnancies. No person, male or female, should be forced to be a parent. It's a bad situation for all involved.
 
blarg said:
golly darnit he had his choice when he came

stop trying to screw over kids and women both parents should pay for the kid if they are keeping it women should be free to end pregnancy if they feel like it because its their body and their choice not because the other parent is going to abandon all responsibility

likewise a mother should not be able to hand off a child to the father and then walk away without offering any support
Click to expand...

There's you problem right there -- if "they are keeping it," it insinuates that both parties have made the decision to have the baby.

That's not the issue we're discussing here. We're talking about either party (within a short period of time) being able to opt-out. The female already has that option. The male does not. Currently, he is at the whim of the female, and that's what we need to equalize. That doesn't mean he can opt out after a child is born -- but he should have a similar time frame to choose to walk away. That gives the woman more incentive to abort, and, if she still chooses to continue the pregnancy, it would be her choice and she would be responsible for the child.

More females, knowing that, would very likely abort or give up their babies.
 
HowardBThiname said:
Of course a mother can opt-out of motherhood if birth control fails. She can either abort or give the baby up.

The man needs that same option -- within a specific time frame, obviously.

The law should require the woman to notify the father as soon as she knows conception has taken place, and he should have the choice to opt-out of being a dad (emotionally and financially) within the time period allowable by law for the woman to abort -- or -- in a specified time from the date he learns of the pregnancy. That way, the woman can abort (let the man pay for the abortion), or let her give the baby up for adoption. Her choice. If the man opts-out, he should never be allowed to reinstate his rights to the child. Opting-out should mean forever.

We're not talking about children of divorce, we're talking ONLY about unwanted pregnancies. No person, male or female, should be forced to be a parent. It's a bad situation for all involved.
Click to expand...

Nope, the man cannot have that same option because they do not have an option. Sorry, sad for them but that is how the cookie crumbles. You cannot say to a woman who does not want to abort, sorry for you but I am an asshole and I could not care less about the future of my child I fathered. Because that is what the opt-crowd thinks fathers should be able to do. Well I say, sucks to be men then if they accidentally made a woman pregnant.

How stupid would it be that men can give a woman the middle finger when it comes to taking his responsibility.
 
Unfortunately our system is heavily weighted in favor of the mother, against the father. This can be detrimental to the male if the female is vindictive and cruel. It is important but impossible for the man to "Know" who he is dealing with before kids are involved in any way....women however, can be very fickle and deceitful so good freakin' luck.
 
HowardBThiname said:
There's you problem right there -- if "they are keeping it," it insinuates that both parties have made the decision to have the baby.

That's not the issue we're discussing here. We're talking about either party (within a short period of time) being able to opt-out. The female already has that option. The male does not. Currently, he is at the whim of the female, and that's what we need to equalize. That doesn't mean he can opt out after a child is born -- but he should have a similar time frame to choose to walk away. That gives the woman more incentive to abort, and, if she still chooses to continue the pregnancy, it would be her choice and she would be responsible for the child.

More females, knowing that, would very likely abort or give up their babies.
Click to expand...

no men should not have simaler time frame to walk away its not their body or choice

abortion should not be coerced and men should not be free to walk away form kids and the parents raising them neither should women
 
Peter King said:
Nope, the man cannot have that same option because they do not have an option. Sorry, sad for them but that is how the cookie crumbles. You cannot say to a woman who does not want to abort, sorry for you but I am an asshole and I could not care less about the future of my child I fathered. Because that is what the opt-crowd thinks fathers should be able to do. Well I say, sucks to be men then if they accidentally made a woman pregnant.
Click to expand...

Of course, that's what this thread is all about -- men GETTING that option. We all know they don't have that option yet. Not legally, at any rate. And, it's getting closer to being a reality. More people are seeing the benefit of the man have equal, after-conception, opt-out rights. By law.


How stupid would it be that men can give a woman the middle finger when it comes to taking his responsibility.
Click to expand...

But you see, at that stage (early in a pregnancy), it's not yet a "responsibility" for the woman, it's still a choice. If the man wants the child and she chooses to abort -- too bad for him. No baby. That's her right because that's her body. That's the only thing an opt-out male measure would do -- allow the man to also opt-out at that point.

And, because the world has enough unwanted babies, there's no good reason to oppose that. Once a man opts out, the woman is likely to opt out as well - and, everyone wins.

At any rate, it's likely to happen at some point, so you might want to steel yourself for the inevitable.
 
blarg said:
no men should not have simaler time frame to walk away its not their body or choice

abortion should not be coerced and men should not be free to walk away form kids and the parents raising them neither should women
Click to expand...

No one is trying to coerce the woman into abortion, but, she would very likely take better precautions to keep from becoming pregnant if she knew she'd be raising a baby alone, and she'd be more likely, if an accident happened, to abort or give the baby up.

The optimal solution, of course, is for her not to get pregnant in the first place, and I support making widespread male hormonal birth control available free of charge, female hormonal contraceptives as well, to do just that. But, if the unthinkable happens, both parties deserve a time in which they can opt-out.
 
Still say the opt out should be before penetration.

That way the woman knows if she does get pregnant, she will be in it alone . Where the inequalities REALLY start are when the woman becomes pregnant. She is the one that endures the effects of pregnancy.

Because of this, the only realistic "opt out" would be before penetration. For a woman that accepts sex with an opt outer - she likely will be more responsible with birth control.
 
HowardBThiname said:
No one is trying to coerce the woman into abortion, but, she would very likely take better precautions to keep from becoming pregnant if she knew she'd be raising a baby alone, and she'd be more likely, if an accident happened, to abort or give the baby up.

The optimal solution, of course, is for her not to get pregnant in the first place, and I support making widespread male hormonal birth control available free of charge, female hormonal contraceptives as well, to do just that. But, if the unthinkable happens, both parties deserve a time in which they can opt-out.
Click to expand...

so yes your coercing abortion or giving up the child thats ****ing sick ( if she knew she'd be raising a baby alone, and she'd be more likely, if an accident happened, to abort or give the baby up. ) mend dont deserve more then they have now women get more because they have to carry the fetus take hormones or abort

this is unfair to women and children and places more strain on the rest of us

in what scenario do the men get stuck with the kid alone here? what procedure must they go thought in case of pregnancy what hormones do they have to take after a conception ?
 
blarg said:
so yes your coercing abortion or giving up the child thats ****ing sick ( if she knew she'd be raising a baby alone, and she'd be more likely, if an accident happened, to abort or give the baby up. ) mend dont deserve more then they have now women get more because they have to carry the fetus take hormones or abort

this is unfair to women and children and places more strain on the rest of us

in what scenario do the men get stuck with the kid alone here? what procedure must they go thought in case of pregnancy what hormones do they have to take after a conception ?
Click to expand...

If the father would like to raise the child, and the mother is happy to give birth and allow him to take custody, that's fine. It's just that the choice belongs to her -- not him.

No, it isn't fair that women are the ones to have to get pregnant, but I know many women who badly want to -- and who enjoy that time in their lives. That's just a biological difference that men can't share.

Both, however, should be able to opt-out (within a reasonable time) and that means men, too.

You better get ready for it -- because it's going to happen.
 
year2late said:
Still say the opt out should be before penetration.

That way the woman knows if she does get pregnant, she will be in it alone . Where the inequalities REALLY start are when the woman becomes pregnant. She is the one that endures the effects of pregnancy.

Because of this, the only realistic "opt out" would be before penetration. For a woman that accepts sex with an opt outer - she likely will be more responsible with birth control.
Click to expand...

The woman can opt out before and after sex. So should the man
 
year2late said:
Still say the opt out should be before penetration.

That way the woman knows if she does get pregnant, she will be in it alone . Where the inequalities REALLY start are when the woman becomes pregnant. She is the one that endures the effects of pregnancy.

Because of this, the only realistic "opt out" would be before penetration. For a woman that accepts sex with an opt outer - she likely will be more responsible with birth control.
Click to expand...

This doesn't make sense at all since the man cant be pregnant.
if you are saying nature in regard to pregnancy isnt fair, of course I agree with you but the discussion is about things that can actually be made equal or fair.

at no time should penetration/sex be equal to consent to being a dad just like penetration/sex is not consent to giving birth and being a mother.

Im saying im sure you agree consent to sex is not consent to giving birth and being a mother so consent to sex for a man should not be consent to being a father
 
Peter King said:
You mean that nonsensical view on something called "post conception opt out"? You know when it is already to late to opt out due to there being a pregnancy? :roll:

There are no post conception choices for opting out for men. That is the issue I have with your fantasy concept. You know, things that do not exist and you want us to discuss?

Hell no, my choice is no existence of post conception opt outs, impossible, never going to happen because it is total nonsense to allow a man to get away with no consequences of his impregnating a girl/woman.

And this is not just about child support but about the right for a child to know who his/her father is and all the legal rights that come with being a child, because that is how things work, no opt-outs should be allowed.
Click to expand...

There are already post conception ppre birth opt outs for men...
 
blarg said:
golly darnit he had his choice when he came

stop trying to screw over kids and women both parents should pay for the kid if they are keeping it women should be free to end pregnancy if they feel like it because its their body and their choice not because the other parent is going to abandon all responsibility

likewise a mother should not be able to hand off a child to the father and then walk away without offering any support
Click to expand...

Post conception

PRE-birth

There is no kid if she aborts
 
Peter King said:
But the mother does not get to opt out of motherhood if the birth control fails and neither can a father. It may be a really unlucky thing that they have gotten themselves into but opting out is a non issue, is not logical, reasonable or acceptable.
Click to expand...

Was this post intended to be a lie?

She has an opt out. It is abortion.
 
HowardBThiname said:
Of course a mother can opt-out of motherhood if birth control fails. She can either abort or give the baby up.

The man needs that same option -- within a specific time frame, obviously.

The law should require the woman to notify the father as soon as she knows conception has taken place, and he should have the choice to opt-out of being a dad (emotionally and financially) within the time period allowable by law for the woman to abort -- or -- in a specified time from the date he learns of the pregnancy. That way, the woman can abort (let the man pay for the abortion), or let her give the baby up for adoption. Her choice. If the man opts-out, he should never be allowed to reinstate his rights to the child. Opting-out should mean forever.

We're not talking about children of divorce, we're talking ONLY about unwanted pregnancies. No person, male or female, should be forced to be a parent. It's a bad situation for all involved.
Click to expand...

The highlighted above isn’t going to happen. Forcing that disclosure is a constitutional violation.
 
Removable Mind said:
The highlighted above isn’t going to happen. Forcing that disclosure is a constitutional violation.
Click to expand...

That's fine, as long as the woman knows that by failing to notify the father, he would still have the option of opting-out when (or if) he ever discovers the pregnancy. If she feels threatened or something, she should not be forced to inform him. No one wants to put anyone in danger, or anything.

Also, some women are fine raising a child on their own without ever notifying the father, and that's okay too. She has a lot of choices and no one wants to take those away. The only choice she should not have is to have the baby and expect the biological father to financially support it if he opts out.
 
HowardBThiname said:
That's fine, as long as the woman knows that by failing to notify the father, he would still have the option of opting-out when (or if) he ever discovers the pregnancy. If she feels threatened or something, she should not be forced to inform him. No one wants to put anyone in danger, or anything.

Also, some women are fine raising a child on their own without ever notifying the father, and that's okay too. She has a lot of choices and no one wants to take those away. The only choice she should not have is to have the baby and expect the biological father to financially support it if he opts out.
Click to expand...

How will that be legally enforced?
 
Removable Mind said:
How will that be legally enforced?
Click to expand...

Easily. Once the father is notified, he would have a limited amount of time to opt-out -- say a couple of months, or at least one month. That would give the woman time to make a decision whether she wants to continue the pregnancy or terminate, taking the father's choice into consideration.

win-win
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom