Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-14-2011, 08:22 AM
 
2,028 posts, read 1,881,858 times
Reputation: 1001

Advertisements

Thanks to Choclot for bringing sense to this thread.

It's amazing how many people completely spun her opinion and assigned viewpoints to her that she doesn't even hold.

This makes me wonder if some folks are being dishonest on purpose or simply don't read the entire posts.

Her clear view is not to put the kids on taxpayers, she said multiple times that she would not want to give government assistance to single mothers who CHOSE to go through with the pregnancy. Remember, she could have had an abortion, dropped the newborn at a safe haven or given the child up for adoption. There's also family and friends as a resource. Choice plays a role here, it's not "single mother = welfare".

For those "it's her body" debaters, it's been said multiple times that no one is trying to change the woman's right to her own body! It has been said over and over that nothing changes for the woman, she can still have 100% choice to either abort, drop the baby off to a safe haven, or give the child up for adoption, or keep the baby. That's 4 choices that she has available with no one forcing her to do anything to her body. To ignore this is also being dishonest.

What's also sad is how many women don't believe in other women. How is it that a woman is automatically a poor single mother on welfare if the man decides to opt out during the abortion period? I guess we believe in women's ability to be independent, educated and successful more than they do. More women than men are graduating from college these days, so they have an equal if not better shot to be successful as men do.

I wonder how many women (and the few men) here would support companies in firing women if they got pregnant but don't fire men when they get sick, since they seem to take the "life isn't fair" or "men can't get pregnant" excuse when their double standards pin them in a corner.

Last edited by Freedom123; 06-14-2011 at 08:38 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-14-2011, 08:37 AM
 
Location: bold new city of the south
5,821 posts, read 5,283,482 times
Reputation: 7118
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares View Post


Could be all the baby daddies already out there not paying CS. Many cases of these irresponsible men have children with multiple women, even up to 20 different women.

"Desmond Hachett is only 29, but he told WVLT, a Knoxville, Tenn., CBS affiliate, that he's impregnated at least 11 women. Twice he's fathered four children in the same year, he said.

Hachett's story came to light when his name appeared 11 times on the docket of Knox County Juvenile Child Support Court. The cases represent 15 of his kids.

Hatchett is supposed to pay between $25 and $309 a month to each mother. But the state can only garnish 50 percent of his wages, to split among all the moms, and he only makes minimum wage. Some of the mothers get as little as $1.98."

Castration. He is not a man, he is a sperm donor. And he dates stupid women.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-14-2011, 08:41 AM
 
499 posts, read 403,683 times
Reputation: 87
Law, I guess.

And the fact that the woman has to carry the baby to term and all the inconvenience that goes along with that.
One would hope that in a partnership the male does have an input though. (beyond the obvious pun )
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-14-2011, 10:05 AM
 
Location: Somewhere gray and damp, close to the West Coast
20,955 posts, read 5,509,739 times
Reputation: 8559
"So why do the males get no say?"

They get plenty of say. They can say "Gee, I might not want to face any of the consequences of sticking my d!ck into this woman, so maybe I should keep my zipper up".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-14-2011, 10:08 AM
 
2,028 posts, read 1,881,858 times
Reputation: 1001
Quote:
Originally Posted by vkhmini View Post
"So why do the males get no say?"

They get plenty of say. They can say "Gee, I might not want to face any of the consequences of sticking my d!ck into this woman, so maybe I should keep my zipper up".
Good morning,

This statement has already been made and rebutted in this thread multiple times.

If you are pro-life, your view is intellectually consistent by default since it has equal consequences for both sexes. This thread is not really meant for your point of view.

However, if you are pro-choice, then you are supporting an unequal and hypocritical viewpoint since you aren't telling women to do the same. The purpose of this thread is to equalize choices after conception in a pro-choice America.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-14-2011, 10:21 AM
 
Location: St Thomas, US Virgin Islands
24,665 posts, read 69,448,978 times
Reputation: 26726
With all due respect, I've actually read this whole thread.

The 19 year old college kid who started it has never had a relationship in his short life thus far, apart from a crush which (I believe it was a 5th grade kiddie "thing") was not in any way, shape or form anything remotely sexual. He has never had sexual intercourse, has never had an adult relationship.

At the age of 19 he has decided to remain celibate for the rest of his life because he firmly believes that not only does he "hate" children but that people of his age who have children, whether they be single or married simply don't understand that their decisions are reprehensible. Oh, and lest we not forget, once he graduates and if and when he gets a job, he sees no reason whatsoever at any point to even contemplate children in his future because the money he earns will only be designated towards him living the solo lifestyle without the baggage of children and their support.

He doesn't believe that either vasectomies or birth control methods work, he has a plethora of strong opinions which he posits as truth about the judicial system as it's related to child support and so many other opinions which simply are mind boggling in their utter stupidity and lack of basic knowledge.

In my opinion he's one very mixed up child whose knowledge about relationships, dating, children and so much else is severely lacking. Many posters have kindly suggested he go for counseling and provided links in his area to professionals but it all apparently falls upon deaf ears. Too bad and too sad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-14-2011, 11:08 AM
 
6,041 posts, read 11,436,130 times
Reputation: 2385
Some good points have already been made on this thread since I last posted.

1. A lot of women on this thread are making the assumption that if a woman gets pregnant, she needs the man's money to raise the baby. But why make that assumption? Who's to say the woman will be poor? Why do you assume the woman is poor? As another poster said, that just shows that some people don't think very highly of a woman's ability to make money. The same people that say women should be independent and make their own decisions (as well as make decisions for men) are also claiming that said women don't make enough money to support a baby.

2. Do away with welfare and child support for single mothers. This goes along with the point another poster made that not all single mothers are poor. If women knew there would be no safety net, they would be more careful when it comes to sex/having babies. And they would be more careful if they knew they don't have the male to fall back on. And people can't complain that it costs the taxpayers money, because it doesn't. In fact, the taxpayers would save money if we did away with child support and welfare for single mothers.

Basically, people are discounting a woman's ability to be independent and make her own money when they assume the single mother will be poor, yet these same people are saying women should make their own decisions and make decisions for the man. When you assume a woman will be dependent upon a man for money, you're contradicting your argument that women should have all the say. Because honestly, what does that say about her if she needs a man's money to afford a baby?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-14-2011, 11:15 AM
 
6,041 posts, read 11,436,130 times
Reputation: 2385
Oh, and another good point that was made is how the woman might change her mind. A certain poster said "Only have sex with women that share your views on babies and abortion."

But she might change her mind. What should the male do then?

As for the people saying abortions take a toll on women...

Some pro-lifers went around my campus with chalk and wrote "Do you regret your abortion?"

And a girl that got an abortion responded by writing "Nope"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-14-2011, 11:18 AM
 
Location: bold new city of the south
5,821 posts, read 5,283,482 times
Reputation: 7118
cd91, do you have any idea how much it takes to raise a child until he/she is 18 or 22-3 and finishing college? Food, clothing, medical expenses, school, extra curricular activities, gas mileage, room and board, and a host of other costs add up.

This link says 214, 000+.

It's now costing pounds 210,848 to raise a child, and the price keeps growing; FINANCIAL PRESSURES END RELATIONSHIPS, SAYS EXPERT.(News) - Western Mail (Cardiff, Wales) | HighBeam Research
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-14-2011, 11:18 AM
 
6,041 posts, read 11,436,130 times
Reputation: 2385
And for the poster(s) that think it would be unfair to the women if a law was passed where a male could opt-out...

1. That law would be fair. It would level the playing field.
2. But even if the law was unfair, maybe that would get women to see the male's point of view. The male is on the unfair side of the fence under the current law, so maybe if some women found the proposed law unfair it would put them in the man's shoes and see how the men felt all these years.

Women, think of how you would feel if you were on the unfair side of the fence. Then realize you're on the fair side of the fence and count your blessings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top