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 03-17-2016, 07:23 PM
 
Location: SoCal
5,899 posts, read 5,791,449 times
Reputation: 1930

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by shellymdnv View Post
A man's choice in the matter ends when he chooses to have sex. If he doesn't want to have a child then the only 100% options he has is abstinence. He could have a vasectomy but even that isn't a 100% guarantee. Pregnancy is a possible outcome of having sex and if you don't want to deal with the consequences then don't have sex, this goes for both men and women.
So, are you okay with pro-lifers telling cis-women that they should either abstain from penis-in-vagina sex with all fertile and potentially fertile cis-men for their entire lives or surgically remove their ovaries if they never want to risk being forced to carry an unplanned pregnancy to term?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-17-2016, 07:24 PM
 
Location: SoCal
5,899 posts, read 5,791,449 times
Reputation: 1930
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
If a man does not want to take responsibility for raising a child he helped create then DO NOT CREATE ONE! Even kids know how to do this so ignorance is no excuse. Keep it in your pants or use condoms etc. If you do help create one you are going to pay a lot for the privilege or the carelessness.
Causing a child to exist certainly isn't a harm and having consensual sex is neither negligent nor illegal, though.

Thus, why exactly should one be forced to pay child support in cases where the child's custodial parent never goes on welfare?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 07:25 PM
 
Location: SoCal
5,899 posts, read 5,791,449 times
Reputation: 1930
Quote:
Originally Posted by charolastra00 View Post
How do you feel about increasing your taxes for welfare for noncustodial parents who refuse to take responsibility?
Actually, there might be an extremely easy way to avoid this: By creating a sufficiently large unconditional basic income for every person.

After all, this will very likely ensure that no additional taxpayer money is spent on taking care of unwanted children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 07:27 PM
 
Location: SoCal
5,899 posts, read 5,791,449 times
Reputation: 1930
Quote:
Originally Posted by charolastra00 View Post
so the focus is on the child that otherwise society would have to support.
Unconditional basic income. There--problem solved!

Also, though, what about cases where a child's non-custodial parent has enough money to take care of unwanted children on her own?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 07:29 PM
 
Location: SoCal
5,899 posts, read 5,791,449 times
Reputation: 1930
Quote:
Originally Posted by charolastra00 View Post
Sort of like how a man can have sex once and leave a woman with the physical reminder for the rest of her life if she gets pregnant.
Exactly what physical reminder of this would there be if this woman will get an abortion afterwards, though?

Also, for the record, I myself will certainly have a physical reminder for the rest of my life of what exactly I went through in order to ensure that I will never cause any unplanned pregnancies to occur. After all, (literal) eunuchs certainly have an empty scrottum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 07:31 PM
 
Location: SoCal
5,899 posts, read 5,791,449 times
Reputation: 1930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spottednikes View Post
Condoms and spermacide used together are very effective. So are vasectomies. If you don't want a kid or want to pay child support use condoms and spermacide or get a vas.
Even 2+ forms of birth control can simultaneously fail, though.

Also, though, in regards to vasectomies, the fact that vasectomy doctors themselves certainly don't have (full) confidence in their own surgeries certainly speaks volumes about the effectiveness of vasectomies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 07:34 PM
 
Location: SoCal
5,899 posts, read 5,791,449 times
Reputation: 1930
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNC4Me View Post
Both a man and a woman take an equal chance of an unexpected pregnancy when they engage in consensual sex. Both need to accept the responsibility equally if a child is born. If one or both don't want the responsibility, get clipped and then you don't have to worry. If you fail to do that consequences are yours to bear.
Re-canalization.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 07:35 PM
 
Location: SoCal
5,899 posts, read 5,791,449 times
Reputation: 1930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
Solution. Keep your sperm. Once you give it away you no longer have a say in what happens to it because you gave it away. Just keep it. Problem solved.

Once there is a child it is no longer about the adults involved. It's about the child. Period. The child needs to be cared for and the bill goes to the people who donated the sperm and ovum to make said child unless someone else comes along who wants the job. That does happen. If you're lucky she'll meet someone later who wants to adopt the child but until then you're on the hook if you gave your sperm away and it resulted in a child.
Causing a child to exist certainly isn't a harm and having consensual sex is neither negligent nor illegal, though.

Thus, why exactly should one be forced to pay child support in cases where the child's custodial parent never goes on welfare?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 07:36 PM
 
Location: SoCal
5,899 posts, read 5,791,449 times
Reputation: 1930
Quote:
Originally Posted by shellymdnv View Post
Your first sentence is the main point. Once you decide to have sex you have to be prepared for the consequence. When I said that abstinence is an option, I mean that it is the only way for either party to ensure that a baby isn't created. You can't choose to have sex and then lament that you now have a baby to take care up as if you had no choice in the matter. I don't believe in teaching abstinence only when it comes to sex education, I fully believe that contraception needs to be taught and made available to everyone.

Biology dictates that the man options is only limited to moment of conception and a woman has months to make hers, there is nothing that can be done to change that. The idea that it's inherently unfair for men because the woman is the one that chooses to carry to term or abort, is just bs.
Causing a child to exist certainly isn't a harm and having consensual sex is neither negligent nor illegal, though.

Thus, why exactly should one be forced to pay child support in cases where the child's custodial parent never goes on welfare?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 07:42 PM
 
Location: SoCal
5,899 posts, read 5,791,449 times
Reputation: 1930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53 View Post
What is wrong with it?


I'll tell you......why should taxpayers have to pick up the tab when they were not involved in the conception of the child?


If not for the father, there would be no child, HIS actions helped cause the child, therefore, his responsibility comes before that of the taxpayers.


The mother and father are equally responsible for financially caring for their offspring, they should be forced to support the child before innocent taxpayers are dragged into it.


As a taxpayer, how do YOU feel about being forced to support some other man's child just because he doesn't want to?


Don't the men who make this argument realize they are asking for higher taxes to pay for other men's children?
Unconditional basic income. There--problem solved!

Also, though, force vasectomy doctors to pay all of their patients' child support for 18+ years if these vasectomy doctors didn't offer to do more during these vasectomies and if their patients are willing to give up all of their parental rights to these children of theirs.
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. The time now is 10:20 AM.

© 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