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.
In many states there are "Deadbeat Dad" laws that can outright jail those men so that's really not true...<bold>
Many states... not all. And what if the dad refuses to get a job? Goes to jail. Great, but unless he's making a decent wage while incarcerated, he's not going to be sending much funds is he? This sounds more like a deterrent (and limited to the states that implement AND will enforce this law), which won't always work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj
My whole argument through this whole conversation is basically BOTH people are equally responsible for the production of a child. Given that both should have some say with the woman's holding more weight as she does carry the heavier burden throughout the whole ordeal. There should be the option of the father taking the baby directly after birth instead of the woman aborting if she doesn't want it barring a physical reason for abortion.
If the man doesn't want to take the child and the woman does instead of terminating the pregnancy then she becomes solely responsible for said outcome.
Both women and men should realize the possible consequences of their actions, each determined by their physical makeup.
Yes, a man can just "keep it in his pants" but just because a woman has more "physical skin in the game" just because of how her body is made doesn't absolve her from basic responsibility to also keep her legs closed if she doesn't want to become an accidental mother. Women KNOW the possible risks when they lay down with a man just as a man does.
When a woman can self reproduce then she becomes the only one with equitable rights to make all decisions. You give up some of that freedom when you allow another to enter your body under assumed risk...
What about rape? Men who are rapists (and please note this context, as if it wasn't you, then somebody else accused ALL men of being rapists with some broad brush) won't stick around to take responsibility. A court case will get dragged out until an abortion is too late.
I posed the question here.... //www.city-data.com/forum/50420158-post239.html
... if a woman wants you to have sex with her, the philosophical question is, can you have sex with her, impregnate her, and then solely put the blame back on her? It becomes a "he said, she said" type situation. If you don't want to deal with her getting pregnant and having an abortion with a fetus that's half you, then you, as the man, should decline to have sex with her.
It doesn't matter what you think. The law is the law. So you don't get to give women four choices.
If and when Trump appoints another justice to the court, and if and when Roe goes down in flames, the way it should have in 1973, will you still feel the same way about the law?
If and when Trump appoints another justice to the court, and if and when Roe goes down in flames, the way it should have in 1973, will you still feel the same way about the law?
Why in the world would we go backwards to back alley abortions again. There will always be abortions even if they make it illegal. Would that ease your mind if they did that.
If you vote yes, does that mean you feel it should be legal to have a purely elective abortion at the end of the third trimester?
I just need some clarification before I vote.
There are no 'elective abortions' at the end of the third trimester, that is called infanticide.
Again. I assume you know where babies come from. If you don't want the inconvenience of a baby, don't engage in activities that result in babies. There's your choice.
All I'm asking for is some consistency. You're all about "controlling your own bodies" when it comes to deciding to have an abortion, but all of the sudden it's the man's responsibility when you don't. Pick an argument and stick with it.
Hypocrisy seems to be a common theme when it comes to women's rights and equality. The same rules applied to everyone - regardless of gender - is equality. Special treatment for one gender or the other is hypocrisy. Witness sports. If you really want equality, why are there still men's and women's sports?
Let me fix that for you; consistency would imply that a man should not have sex if he doesn't want children, nor should he have sex with a woman who has not expressed a desire to have his baby. Maybe men should wait to have sex until they are married and have decided with their spouse that they both want a child.
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.
