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.
1. Any pregnant person has the right to have an abortion.
2. Custodial parents should get child support from non-custodial parents.
3. Alimony has nothing to do with children.
All those things are true without regard to gender.
I don't agree with all of your premises here, and you are forgetting one very important thing:
We have a right not to be held responsible for the decisions of others. This holds true regardless of one's gender.
You are correct. Biology has determined that "to be or not to be" regarding pregnancy is solely a woman's decision. And, if the choice is "to be," the baby daddy has a responsibility to the ensuing child. And men do, indeed, have a choice: wear a condom or keep it in your pants.
Um, No. The law, rather than biology, has determined that "to remain or not to remain" regarding pregnancy is solely a woman's decision. In cases of legally consensual sex, biology has determined that "to be or not to be" regarding pregnancy is a mutual decision on both the man's and the woman's part.
Condoms are not 100% effective, and some males *do* get de jure raped. In addition, women also have a choice to use contraception, force men to use contraception before having sex with them, or keep their legs closed.
Men simply need to grow a set and stand up for and demand our 14th amendment right to equal protection under the law.
To grant women special rights that allow them to opt out of parenthood while forcing men to accept parenthood via child support orders creates what the u.s. Supreme court calls an "unlawful disparate impact" or "unlawful disparate treatment" towards those being denied the same rights.
In the u.s supreme court case, bond vs united states the decision was handed down that any law or court order that violates our constitutional rights is therefore a constitutionally invalid law or court order. They went on to say in this case that to disobey and constitutionally invalid law or court order is then "not a crime". They further point out that anyone incarcerated for disobeying a constitutionally invalid law or court order is then wrongfully incarcerated and must be released.
Men simply need to educate themselves on the constitution and their rights and then have the moral courage to stand up and fight collectively for equality under the law. Plain and simple.
Anyway.......... Men have a choice, engage or not in unprotected sex.
Yes, that's the standard liberal response.
However, if you say that women can always choose to keep their legs closed then you are a villain. When Foster Friess said this in the 2012 election he was excoriated as a misogynist.
So men and women are equals, but saying X about women is prejudice while saying X about men is giving them choices.
It's simple proof of the dishonesty of liberals.
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.
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.
