Lovelyish

Because in most cases men aren’t affected by having a child like a mom is, especially if they are not married or living together. It’s very easy to want to have a baby when your raising the kid is limited to seeing him on weekends and an occasional child support check. Every effing sperm-donor out there, especially young ones into partying, ALWAYS say “Uuh yeah I’ll help you with a kid” and then… pull a Houdini and vanish. Isn’t this the story of “Teen Mom”? “Yeah dude Imma so proud to be a daddy yo I promise Imma be there and be a dad”… and then think they’re great parents because they play with the kid every few days or weeks.

The ONLY time in which I think a man should be entitled to deciding if I spit out a unit is if he’s married to me or living with me.  But random DB that girls date? No, because in most situations, it’s the woman who’s stuck doing the hard work. 

And frankly, IMO, fetuses aren’t human… to be human is to think, to not have the ability to think, makes you non-human, therefore, not bad to kill you. 

And it’s my opinion so ya’ll don’t argue with me, because I won’t bitch about yours And don’t give me that “You don’t know because you’re not a mom” crap because I actually am unable to have children and would do nearly anything to have one, I just don’t go around shoving my morals in the government.

“Why shouldn’t a man be able to deny a woman her so-called “right” to an abortion when it is HIS child in her womb? Why should a woman be able to decide that a child they made together shouldn’t be born if the father wants it to be born?”

I’m not extreme on either side for the abortion issue, but in my philosophy class we have been discussing abortion for quite some time now.
My opinion: You can’t deny that a woman has at least a majority of the rights to her body regarding her unborn child. Not because it’s her body, but because pregnancy is a BURDEN. Physically speaking, I mean. (I’m sure emotionally as well, but I’m not too familiar with that.) It’s not just something you have to go and buy new pants for. It’s for 9 straight months, every day. Some women may have to be bedridden, some may develop gestational diabetes, some women may just be in pain a lot, some may get sick, and the list goes on and on…In some cases that fetus is using/being in her her body against her will (rape, etc.).
That’s just some arguments that I’ve heard/discussed so far.

I don’t understand why you’re ignoring the “Her body her choice argument”. Does the guy have to go through morning sickness, calcium deficit, hair loss, random hair growth, and not to mention carrying around for 9 months, and eventually pushing a 8 pound baby out? I think not! 

This is why you should wait to have sex until you’re madly in love with someone and have the capability to make decisions together. If I got pregnant right now, I would want my boyfriend to be in on the decision about the baby or not. Yes, the father is responsible in my opinion. It takes two to make a baby. He has to worry about finances supporting the child and having a part in raising the child. I know my boyfriend would support me through everything and make sure we’d make the right decision for us because we’re IN LOVE 

When I’m pregnant, I know my boyfriend will be there through my horrible mood swings and cravings and holding my hair while I’m puking. If something was wrong with my baby or I developed gestational diabetes or needed to be on bed rest, he’d make sure I was comfortable and well taken care of. 

I don’t give a crap if he doesn’t carry the baby or not, or has to push it out or not…it’ll be OUR baby. Something that’s both of us and both of ours.

@andysigdelt@xanga and @ohhmademoiselle@xanga totally agree with those sentiments! Even if the pregnancy wasn’t hard on a woman’s body, the man isn’t experiencing it. He isn’t the one who becomes emotionally involved in the same way that a woman does, even if he legitimately wants the child. Perhaps one day they will figure out how to grow babies outside of an already-pregnant woman’s body (so removing the egg or the fetus, whatever, not making a baby outside of a woman’s body and then inserting it in her body), which would work well for such an argument. I understand how it would be hard for a man who wants the child and the woman doesn’t and then she gets it aborted. If the woman didn’t have to carry that child, it might make allowing the child to develop and then allowing the father full rights a preferable choice. And for sure on the sex after love thing. If I’m having sex with someone it’s going to be because I am not worried about potential pregnancy in terms of whether I’ll be supported through it by someone I’m in love with and who wants the child.

Would you support paternal rights so fully if the roles were reversed? If the mother wanted to keep the baby, and the father didn’t? Would you argue that he should have the right to compel the woman to have an abortion? In such a case I feel you would roundly accuse the father of being an irresponsible douchebag, while the mother’s choice to have her child would be celebrated. But how is the situation any different, no matter which parent does not want the child? A reluctant mother suffers through a 9-month pregnancy; a reluctant father pays child support for the duration of the child’s life. This “paternal rights” argument just seems to be a hypocritical attempt to make pro-choice proponents seem selfish. Frankly, the issue at hand here should not be what one should do with an unwanted baby, but rather what one can do to make sure that there is no such thing as an unwanted baby in the first place.

I love how everyone keeps throwing in the “hardships of pregnancy.” I’ve had three kids; I don’t think that’s a valid argument for my point. Everyone CONSTANTLY talks about the “inequality” women have in reproductive rights. “Oh, if women can’t have abortions, that’s not fair. It’s so easy for men to get out of having children.” Well, women CAN have abortions, and it’s SO EASY for them to avoid unwanted pregnancy too. There are all kinds of birth control options–condoms, spermicide, IUDs, pills, the morning after pill…the list goes on and on and on. So…if someone (or, in my opinion, two someones) slip up and have an unwanted pregnancy, why is it that the mother gets the only voice? How is that right? Oh, but poor, poor her for the fact that she (and her partner too, but let’s be honest, she has a lot more options for birth control) was not careful enough to avoid the pregnancy…

OBVIOUSLY rape, incest, a child getting pregnant, etc at all severe cases in which the mother and (in some of those cases) her family should have the only say in the matter.

How can you possibly argue that the woman shoulders more blame than the man in an accidental pregnancy, when you are apparently trying to argue for equality in the choice that comes after? Women have methods of protection, men have methods of protection. It only takes one party to be careful, and it doesn’t matter how many ways there are to do it. If she’d taken pills, they’d be safer. If he’d stuck a rubber on it, they’d be safer. It is no more her fault than it is his, and just as women can forget to take their pill at 11 and think everything will be fine, men can pressure their girlfriends into unprotected sex because condoms “don’t feel as good.”

Until our society stops laying the primary responsibilities of parenthood upon the woman, she should have the last say in her pregnancies. You may be able to speak to the equality of unions because you and your husband have a great, equitable marriage, and bully for you! What about for the thousands of other girls/women whose boys/men are so eager to be “fathers,” but feed, clean, and care for the child while the dad sometimes stops in to say hi and play baseball? A person who does not share equal responsibility in childcare should not have an equal say in childbirth.

It’s not just about the result of the pregnancy, the baby that is, but also the pregnancy itself. I think it’s always her choice, because in the end she’s the one who has to go through the pregnancy. 

The man doesn’t have to carry the child, go through any pregnancy complications, or labor.  Plus the cost of doctor’s visits (since you didn’t say the father would assume responsibility for those).  Women aren’t just baby factories.  If we take away a woman’s choice whether or not to go through a pregnancy it will have grave implications.  I personally feel it would be one of the greatest set backs of civil rights ever.

Also, the number of back-alley abortions would probably skyrocket, putting women’s health in danger. 

I personally also think that the “father” of a fetus doesn’t have parental rights yet. It’s a cluster of cells. You can’t be a parent to a cluster of cells.

@yourkbear@xanga - How is it not a valid argument?  Pregnancy is HARD.  When I was pregnant I was nauseous 24/7, puked 10+ times a day, couldn’t sleep at all, and lost 20lbs.  There’s no way in hell I would go through that just because a man wanted the clump of cells growing in MY body.  And by the way, when I got pregnant I was on the pill…never missed one, took it at the same time everyday.  But I guess I’m just an irresponsible little whore to you, right?  I listened to my fiance’s opinions on my pregnancy but ultimately it was my choice to have an abortion (he agreed with me anyway).  

@soulfuric - I share your opinions on the matter whole-heartedly, and it comforts me to know that there are people who truly believe in what you and I believe in.

Ultimately, if I got pregnant, I would talk about it with my boyfriend and we would decide what to do.  But honestly, if he wanted the baby and I didn’t, we wouldn’t have the baby.  Same with if I wanted the baby and he didn’t.  If one of us isn’t ready, then it simply isn’t the right time and I will NOT place an unnecessary strain on our relationship by having a baby that at least one of us is not completely ready for.  Now, if I were to get pregnant, you could never blame lack of birth control because I’m on the pill and he wears condoms (we use both for the sole purpose of not getting pregnant….), but accidents happen occasionally and sometimes, the pill could fail or the condom could break.  But that doesn’t mean that we’re going to have a baby simply because one of us wants it.  We know we will have children eventually, but we have a lot more to do before we can get to that point.
So my point is, If one of us is not ready, we will not have the baby.  Even if you ignore a woman’s right to do whatever she wants with her body (which I am ignoring for your sake, since you seem to be “tired” of hearing it, god knows why), if the woman is still in a relationship with the man, can’t you imagine coming to some sort of agreement on the matter?  If they are in a relationship and she has the baby, she still will be in that baby’s life.  Even if she isn’t, and she just hands it over to the father, she still has to go through the guilt of not being there for her child.  
Honestly, I think we need to get our fat noses out of everyone else’s business on the matter.  Let the couple decide what to do with their own unborn child.  If the couple decides to have the baby and the mother wants to give it up to the father, fine.  If the couple decides to not have the baby so as to stay together and wait for the right time, then so be it.  I hope it makes you feel better that at least one man (my boyfriend) would definitely have a say about the unborn child.  However, I know he cares enough about me to come to some agreement with me, whether that be to keep or not keep the fetus.

@yourkbear@xanga - Except that it isn’t the case everywhere. There are plenty of places where abortions are difficult to come by, and I’m sure it’s illegal in places. And even for some demographics, even if it’s legal in the area the family may force the mother to keep the child. While having safe sex (or not having sex at all) clearly helps significantly reduce the chance of unwanted pregnancy, it’s never fool-proof. So what happens then? Sometimes a woman wants a child but then circumstances change to the point where having a child at that time would just leave her far too emotionally unstable, but of course sometimes a child just happens. This can be the case in marriages, perhaps the mother goes through something horrific and soon finds out that she is pregnant but cannot fathom the idea of keeping the child or even going through nine months of carrying the child in order for it to be cared by someone else.

With unwanted pregnancy, the mother is allowed to discuss the situation with the father. But would it be fair if the father said “well I know you do not at all want this child, but I do, so you must submit to nine months of carrying this child. I don’t care if it has emotional, physical, and/or mental repercussions, I want that baby”? Ultimately, she is the one going through the transformation. She is the one who will have to provide home and safety for a child for nine months, and putting herself in potential danger for something she doesn’t want at that time. And it can very easily affect her life in a more social sense, such as being unable to work and finding it difficult to maintain the same group of friends or the same level of social activity if it has quite a deep impact on her psyche. 

If children could be carried by either sex, then I’m sure that more people would opt to simply switch who carries the child. But this isn’t going to happen. Is it necessarily fair that men aren’t always given as strong of a voice in the matter? Maybe not. But ultimately it’s a situation that is unique to one gender alone, and in some cases a woman feels that does not want or need to discuss the matter with the father if she even knows who he is. 

I find your argument to be moderately troll-ish. Being a mother, I would have assumed that you’d not victim-blame a woman for getting pregnant when she wasn’t planning on it. Just because there are more birth control options formulated for women doesn’t mean that the responsibility lies completely on a woman as your comment pretty much implies. Unwanted pregnancy can occur when both parties are playing it safe. To be honest, I wouldn’t have guessed that you were a mother based on how you are presenting yourself with these arguments. 

And many of what has been stated before this comment by others are excellent points, especially about the increase in back-alley abortions. Fact of the matter is that there really isn’t an equivalent for males with pregnancy. So it may no always seem fair that the brunt of the choices regarding the life of the child remains in the hands of the mother carrying that child, it’s a unique experience to our gender. I’m sure that if men were to experience something of this magnitude that involved both sexes but that only the men were able to experience, there’d maybe be more understanding. Not all women are going to ignore the father’s opinions. I know that if I was with a man whom I loved but was not at all ready for a child, I’d talk to him about it. But if I didn’t want that child, I’d not want to go through nine months of pregnancy just so he could raise it on his own. Ultimately this is something that should be discussed before the possibility of accidental children even occurs so that both parties understand each others’ opinions and beliefs on the subject. I don’t quite appreciate the black and white portrayal and generalizations being made about women here – it’s never black and white, it’s always an extremely difficult decision whether the man is involved or not.

Because pregnancy has a bigger impact on women? I don’t see why this is a debate. >_>

And I agree with soulfuric. You’re talking about when the woman wants to abort and the man wants to keep it. You say the man has an equal (or greater) say in the matter, and can force the woman to carry the child. What if the woman wants to keep it and the man wants to abort? Can he also drag the woman, kicking and screaming, to the abortion clinic? Of course, we’re not talking about whether abortion is a moral choice here; we’re talking about who has rights to decide abortion. So if you condone the first scenario, you have to condone the second.
Also, it shouldn’t matter “how” careless someone was about birth control. You’re saying abortion shouldn’t be allowed for careless people, right? Because an embryo/fetus is a person and abortion is murder? But then you say “hey, if the father raped the mother, it’s okay to murder the infant.” Technically the pro-choice and pro-life stances both are reasonably logical, but the most illogical stance to take is the “abortion is only okay in ______ circumstances.”

By the way, it’s very easy to put your opinion out there and railroad other people’s opinions (like I see you doing already) but what takes a real intelligent person is to write a post about a controversial topic and then welcome all opposing responses as a way to learn more and gain a more broad, integrative perspective on the matter.  If you had to change your username three times because of all the haters, then maybe it’s time to analyze why you get so much hate in the first place.  I’m pretty sure it’s not because you have extreme opinions (because honestly, I bet a lot of people share your view on a man’s role in the decision).  If you didn’t approach the subject with such an air of pretension and condescension toward anyone with a different view, you might not see such animosity.  Just saying.

@GagaMonster@datingish - I agree. Optimally, the parents would come to an agreement and talk about what they would do BEFORE it could happen.

But for me personally, being pregnant while in college would bring so much shame, embarrassment, and derision from my parents and my community, if my boyfriend wanted to keep the baby, I would still abort it and risk breaking up our relationship. I would literally kill myself if I couldn’t get an abortion, so there’s really no point in debating.

@ashleynicole - Wow I absolutely love the way you argue! Props!

@LightBlue21@xanga - Ha thanks! I’ve known a lot of people who’ve had kids at a young age, mostly accidental. Seeing how things turn out in those cases definitely affects my views on such a subject. One girl I knew in high school had a kid, and I don’t know if her boyfriend really wanted the child or not. But she made the choice to keep it. And I don’t think that her boyfriend would have had the right to bring her to an abortion clinic just because he didn’t want a kid like you mentioned. He’s no longer her boyfriend, and I don’t think he’s even significantly involved in the parenting process. 

Strong opinions are one thing, but rigid opinions are another. I think that the most logical opinions on a subject are ones that are subject to being moulded by the environment and by others’ opinions.

@Gorrific@xanga - I puked my brains out for the entire nine months TWO PREGNANCIES IN A ROW. I think I know how hard morning sickness is. I also think I know a little bit about labor. I also know about the back pain, the insomnia, the exhaustion (oh, I even had mono while I was pregnant, so yeah…). I still think a man deserves the say in the life of his BABY. The heartbeat can be detected (via ultrasound) as early as 3 weeks, and brainwaves are detectable at 6 weeks. Yes, I think that makes it a baby by, oh, about the time a woman knows she pregnant.

Why should the man have a say? Meh, because usually if a women is getting an abortion, it’s because she’s young & not able to take care of the baby on her own. Most of the guys would walk out if the had a young girlfriend or hook up buddy who is pregnant.

@GagaMonster@datingish - Haha. I changed my name once. Once. And I don’t see my argument (or myself) as “pretentious.” I simply said that I want more than “It’s her body, so it should be her choice.” Tell me why it shouldn’t be PARTLY the man’s choice (legally) thinking about the baby (or clump of cells that may someday be a baby, in some people’s opinion).

@ashleynicole - I didn’t say the burden of sexual responsibility lies solely on the mother. I simply said that if someone doesn’t want to get pregnant, then be cautious. Have a doubt about the birth control? Double up. Oh, and since some people have argued about pressure from the guy, don’t give in. If she doesn’t want a baby, protect herself. Just like if a man doesn’t want a baby, he needs to protect himself. It’s common sense.

@yourkbear@xanga - Oh boy. Brainwaves. Your comment just proved this post not to be a discussion of a man’s involvement in an unplanned pregnancy, but a thinly veiled “IT HAS FINGERS AND TOES!” plea.

@soulfuric - No, it’s not. Have all the abortions you want. She said, “It’s just a clump of cells” in response to my question: “Why shouldn’t a man have some say in the life of his baby.” So…I’m defending my point that he has every right to see it as HIS BABY. I’d have to say the women saying, “It’s a clump of cells” are the ones turning it into pro-choice vs. pro-life. I’m just asking why a man can’t have a say in having a baby.

@yourkbear@xanga - It affects the woman more, so the woman has MORE of a say in the matter. I don’t see you getting all up in arms over cases where the woman wants the baby and the man wants to force her to get an abortion. If they had equal say in it, you could just toss a coin and if the woman loses, she’s dragged to the abortion clinic.

@Cho_0705@xanga - Not to mention the other various problems that could go wrong in pregnancy.

I will never say a man doesnt have rights to his children but it does fall under “her body, her choice” comment because it’s the woman affected the most physically by the pregnancy. Why doesnt anyone go after the man who says they stick around but dont then when you go after him legally, they tell the woman she should have had an abortion or she just did it to trap him. Marriage doesnt mean anything in this case either. If a man doesnt want the baby, he’ll just up & leave anyway regardless.

Most of the men I’ve seen claim they have a right to not be a father if they dont want to but have sex. So, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If you as a male dont want kids, dont have sex or get a vasectomy. It’s not fair to tell women to “keep their legs closed” & not have sex if they dont want kids but a man can bedhop as he pleases.

@LightBlue21@xanga - A man can’t force a woman to have an abortion, but a woman can have one without the man’s agreement. Please, show me a case where a man really forced a woman to have one. “Oh, he pressured me. Boo hoo.” Well, stand up for yourself.

For me personally I don’t have to worry much so far considering any guy I’ve been serious enough with didn’t have a problem with the possibility of abortion.

I honestly think it depends on the situation and how involved the father is going to be. If he is known for being indecisive and not being able to commit to much of anything I don’t see why he would have a huge say in what happens. It’s too easy for the person who isn’t carrying the child to say “Ill do this and that” and never mean a word of it by the time it all becomes a reality. This isn’t about fairness, it’s about what is logical.

@Gorrific@xanga - Anyone who thinks you are irresponsible for making such a tough decision doesn’t have a clue what they’re talking about. Screw the haters. As long as you feel you made the right decision for yourself and your partner, that’s all that matters.

@Shinbi_Belldandy@xanga - I never said a woman shouldn’t have sex. She should feel free to have all the sex she wants, but there are plenty of ways to protect herself from unwanted pregnancy; if she has the slightest doubts about her birth control she can double or even triple up. A woman can protect herself from unwanted pregnancy a lot better than a man can, and I’m not being sexist here. A woman has tons of options when a man has abstinence, a condom, and vasectomy (which is permanent, or as close as it gets for men).

@lilblucherrygrl@xanga - Because there’s no such thing as a deadbeat mother…

@yourkbear@xanga - Sorry, I didnt mean to imply that you said a woman shouldnt have sex, but that’s the “solution” others have given & I was stating that. My apologies but yeah it’s true a woman has a ton of options but only abstinence is 100%.

If I ever became pregnant, I would discuss it with my boyfriend, but in the end HE feels that it’s my choice. We also use birth control and are very careful. Although, I wouldn’t have sex with someone without first discussing how they feel about pregnancy, children, abortion, etc. and what would happen if I did get pregnant. I also wouldn’t have sex with someone who didn’t share the same views about potential outcomes if I became pregnant. If people would talk about these things BEFORE they have sex like consenting adults, maybe this wouldn’t really be so much of a problem. If you can’t talk about the potential outcomes of sex then you probably shouldn’t be having sex. Period.

Frankly, the man’s opinion in the matter doesn’t count because IT’S NOT HIS BODY. Reproductive choice gives the womn the choice to decide what happens to her body and, therefore to her life. If the man wants to be the one to make the decision, he can also be the one to sacrifice his body to incubation & childbirth. What’s that you say? That’s not possible? Then it’s not his decision. Go knock up someone else.

@yourkbear@xanga - Many people do “double up” and still wind up with kids. The only fool-proof (at least from my understanding) ways of preventing pregnancy are 1) abstinence, 2) homosexual relationships, 3) undergoing a vasectomy or the female version of the operation (can’t remember the name), 4) having sperm- or egg-related complications that prevent you from having kids.

So by that reasoning, if two people in a committed relationship who are in love and do one day want kids accidentally get pregnant when she (or he, or both) isn’t at all ready for a child, despite using all possible precautionary methods, is because they didn’t actually use any precautionary methods? Pregnancy and sex isn’t a black and white situation.

In your argument about why men don’t have any legal rights over this, well it’s because they are not the ones carrying the child. You keep wanting to avoid that valid response to the argument, but it’s a valid response. If both men and women were able to bear children, then maybe there’d be more equality among the sexes as to the fate of the child because if one parent doesn’t want it but the other does then they can switch who carries the child if they so wish. This is not possible. If a woman wants the child but the father doesn’t, would it be fair for the mother to abort the child because he decided to pursue legal action in the matter? Considering the work put into creating that child is not at all equal among both sexes, I don’t think that the legal matters towards an unborn child should be entirely equal. Women should get the veto on the choice. Once the child is born, and assuming the parents put in equal work into raising that child, then equal legal responsibilities and choices is just fine. 

the man in the situation isn’t the one to go through the physical aspect of having a child. men’s feeling should be taken into consideration, but that doesn’t mean their feelings should be the determining factor. a woman’s health is always at risk during pregnancy, therefore the decision is her own to make.
bodily autonomy comes before a person’s feelings.

@yourkbear@xanga - Of course but you’re talking about the man in this situation. Talking about all possible situations would take forever.

@yourkbear@xanga - “A woman can protect herself from unwanted pregnancy a lot better than a man can, and I’m not being sexist here. A woman has tons of options when a man has abstinence, a condom, and vasectomy (which is permanent, or as close as it gets for men).”

A woman’s choices (in terms of what goes in or on her body): her preferred birth control medication, tubal ligation, abstinence
A man’s choices (in terms of what goes in or on his body): his preferred brand of condom, vasectomy, abstinence.

Am I missing something? As far as I can tell, the types of birth control for men and women aren’t that different. Men have plenty of options for condoms, women have plenty of options for BC medication, both can not have sex, and both can have operations. And both can also have similar issues with their reproductive organs that lead them to be infertile, but that’s not necessarily a choice so I’ll not include it. Are there any other birth control methods out there that are not very well known? Because those are the only ones I’ve heard/learned about. Other than of course morning-after pill, which is not birth control, it’s “clean up.”

@ashleynicole - What you lump into “medicine” includes two-hormone pills and one-hormone pills (TONS of options for which pill too), IUD, shot, and patch. There’s also a female condom, a diaphragm, and spermicide. 

@lilblucherrygrl@xanga - But you said men shouldn’t have a say because it’s too easy for them to lie or change their minds about wanting the baby. So make them sign something saying, “Hey, the mother doesn’t want it, but I do. I take full legal responsibility for parenting.”

@ashleynicole - tubal ligation?

@yourkbear@xanga - …And I never said I was against such a contract. You’re assuming. I also never said men in general will do this. I am talking about those that will. 

@lilblucherrygrl@xanga - I didn’t say you did, and I wasn’t assuming. I was just offering a solution to the problem you pointed out.

Just because the pregnancy happens in MY BODY, doesn’t mean HE shouldn’t get a choice over what happens to HIS BABY!

I mean, really?

“Oh yeah, pregnancy is so hard… so he shouldn’t have a say, cause it’s not his body dealing with it”.

Uh, IT’S STILL HIS FREAKING BABY.  

I’ve been pregnant and know all too well the complications. Hyperemesis, anyone? I didn’t even have the energy to take a freaking shower. But, it was OUR baby. It shouldn’t have been about MY BODY and blah, blah, blah, BUT OUR BABY! He should have a say, too.

Geez oh pete.

The guy should have some sort of say BUT it’s almost impossible to find an answer to this issue because of the variety of situations and relationships in which abortion may be considered. 

If a husband and wife with steady income were debating the termination of a pregnancy, I’d say that the man’s opinion matters a whole lot more than if a teenage couple dating for a few months was considering abortion. It’s not just about the potential fetus being the “man’s baby too!” nor is it only about “the women’s body, so it’s the women’s choice.” The situation into which the baby would be born into, the preparedness of the parents, and a multitude of other factors contribute to how much say each parent has in the birth of their child.
If the girl is a teenager whose schooling would be disrupted, who would probably be stigmatized, and who will (let’s be honest here) most likely end up doing much of the parenting? Her opinion holds 10 times more weight than the guy’s, since she would have more to lose in this situation. Frankly, even in this day and age, unplanned pregnancies hold a lot more negative aspects for women than they do men, at least in certain situations such as the one mentioned above. 
Basically, until both partners contribute equally to the relationship as a whole (not just contributing equally to the conception of a child), the decision to abort will never be an equal debate between the partners.

@yourkbear@xanga - most abortions (about half)are women who USED contraception that failed.
that argument is clearly invalid.
and you’re also ignoring the lack of sex education in america, which means most women DON’T know their options.
not to mention, men often and easily are the ones manipulating birth control (“condoms are uncomfortable.” “i can’t feel it with them” “i’m allergic”) when women’s birth control is usually hormonal and can, in a lot of cases, be harmful to women.
so, yes, reproductive rights are skewed in favor of men.

@yourkbear@xanga - …..you’re missing my point by a long shot.  I’m not saying you don’t know that pregnancy is hard, but that because you know you should know why it’s a valid argument.  I think you’re argumentative, and trying to lean this into an abortion debate (should’ve known that from the original post, my bad), as I said nothing about personhood.  I could tout off about that all day long but I thought this was about a man’s rights in regards to abortion.  Anyway, since you are missing my points, leaning this a different direction for who knows what reason and imo a little dense, good day to you ma’am.

@yourkbear@xanga - ok once, whatever. and your argument isn’t pretentious, your attitude is. And of course it should be partially the man’s choice.  He should definitely have an opinion and the right to express that opinion.  But I can’t disagree with the fact that it’s ultimately the woman’s burden for 9 months and therefore she gets the last word.  If she wants to carry the baby for 9 months and hand it over, okay, fine.  Her decision.  But she still has to make the decision to carry it.  If she really can’t do it because it would be too emotionally or physically traumatic, then she should never be forced to.  I do understand your view that a man should have a say, but I think the woman should have the last word.

@Gorrific@xanga - “ There’s no way in hell I would go through that just because a man wanted the

clump of cells

growing in MY body.” So, no I’m not “a little dense.” You don’t have to get defensive and mean. In my post (and then in my comment), I said “baby” because a man who wants it would feel that it IS/WAS a BABY. I am just explaining why people (namely, the father who wants the baby) would call it a baby. Whatever you think it is isn’t the point here. The point is that, in our hypothetical situation, the man wants the damned thing. I’m not trying to turn it into a pro-choice/pro-life debate. I’m trying to get people thinking about gender inequality in the sex/reproductive arena in more open-minded ways. Everyone complains about how it’s unfair to women, and I’m just pointing out that it is just as unfair to men, if not more. A woman can take preventative actions without her partner knowing. A woman can say she’s on birth control when she isn’t. For men, using a condom is kind of obvious. Men never have to have a say at all about whether or not they have a baby. Especially when, if an accidental pregnancy should occur, it’s completely up to the woman whether or not to abort. NO, I don’t think a man should be able to force a woman to have an abortion, but I also don’t think a woman should be able to deprive a man of a child/potential child. (Gee, I’d better cover my bases and make sure I don’t offend anyone by accidentally being biased. God forbid if someone thing I’m accusing of them of being “an irresponsible little whore”–your words.)

@RealistFantasies@xanga - Really? Lack of education makes rights skewed? I think that would be…reproductive knowledge being skewed. Also, “about half” isn’t “most.” “Most” would have to be, at least, more than half. I’d say that “most” would have to be significantly more than half. In addition, not knowing how to use birth control, or just not being careful with it (like, missing pills) doesn’t qualify as the birth control failing. It falls under human error (or stupidity depending on the situation). Also, I don’t know about your doctor’s office, but in mine, there’s a big old sign in most (maybe even all) of the exam rooms that shows different birth control options and their rate of success/effectiveness. Just ask, “Hey, about birth control…” and you’d get a 20 minute speech. Finally, if a couple is worried about the effectiveness of their birth control message because, say, a pill was missed, there are plenty of options that can be doubled up with the pill–condom and spermicide for example. Once the baby (or clump of cells, whatever) is there, then the woman and the man (yep, both of them) should be able to reconsider their original decision to not have a baby.

@yourkbear@xanga - actually, YES, lack of knowledge DOES skew reproductive rights. women don’t have the same information readily available.
signs say how effective birth control is when used properly, but no one tells them HOW to use it properly.
that makes a massive difference.
and yes, it does count as birth control failing when you are ON birth control and it doesn’t work FOR ANY REASON.
as i said in my own original comment, men’s feelings should be considered, but their feelings are not a deciding factor.

@Gorrific@xanga - thank you, that’s what i was thinking too.  there isn’t a method of birth control (except abstinence) that’s 100% effective, so pregnancy is ALWAYS a possibility, no matter how careful you are.

@ashleynicole - exactly.  in the us states aren’t legally allowed to make abortion illegal, but some states try to make it as difficult as possible to get them. (http://civilliberty.about.com/od/abortion/f/every_state.htm)

Psh, if the man wants the baby so bad, he can have the embryo transferred then to surrogate and pay for all the costs involved. I’m sorry, but forcing a woman to remain pregnant is kinda fucked up to me. But let’s go ahead with your view. The man would have to step up to EVERYTHING and anything someone using a surrogate or planning to adopt the child of a pregnant woman would. I have a hard time seeing this happen in most cases.

Every pregnancy, the woman could be risking her health or life. You never know what could happen months into it. THAT is why a woman has more say.

I will say though, I could see an argument in it if the mother and father were married and she had no medical reason for it. But then again, I don’t think it’s exactly “right” to sterilize yourself without your spouse’s consent.

Maybe because the woman’s the one carrying the baby for nine months? And it puts her life on hold? I don’t know why you’re saying to ignore the whole “her body, her choice” argument, because it’s a completely valid argument. Once the baby’s born then that becomes a whole other issue, but while it’s in her body it IS her choice.

@Digital_Angel21@xanga - And I doubt many doctors would like such an idea. “hey, I got her pregnant but she doesn’t want the baby and I do. Can you transfer the embryo into someone else for me? Cool, thanks!”

@yourkbear@xanga -  ”A man can’t force a woman to have an abortion, but a woman can have one without the man’s agreement. Please, show me a case where a man really forced a woman to have one. “Oh, he pressured me. Boo hoo.” Well, stand up for yourself.”

And the counterargument can easily be made for a man forcing a woman to keep a child because he wants it. “oh, he pressured me to keep it, boo hoo.” Well, stand up for yourself, say no, and demonstrate that as a woman you have the right to make life decisions for yourself that do not require permission from your SO.

Your arguments in general do not really work together. You claim that a man should never be able to force a woman into anything, and yet if he is the one who wants the child that the woman should not be allowed to basically have the final choice in the matter. So if the woman doesn’t want the child and the man does, are you saying that she should just decide to be nice and carry a baby for 9 months and then give him full custody? If she is the one who wants the baby and he doesn’t, the man can just leave, easy as that, or they can choose to abort the child and remain together. If the woman doesn’t want the baby, how is it fair to ask her to carry that child for almost a year just to then give it up? Her mind may change during that time, but in many cases women choose to abort a child because of the situation they are in – no job, in school, are not committed to their SO enough to want to raise children together, or even something as drastic as drugs being in the mix. As many have already pointed out, if the two people are involved, there will be discussions made, but ultimately it’s completely unfair to make a woman “do all the work” for almost a year just because the man doesn’t want the child aborted. Scenario: you and your husband lose your jobs and can barely afford to support yourselves let alone your children. Perhaps you or your husband also becomes depressed, which would be even more stressful over the whole situation. You are about to lose your house, your kids are barely keeping up with school. You make sure to be safe as much as possible while having sex, but bam, unexpected pregnancy. You don’t want the child, but your husband does. Are you simply going to sit down, talk about it, and say “well since you want this child despite the fact that it may very well result in us becoming homeless, I’ll carry it for you”? Yes, you will discuss it, but ultimately you have the final say because it has the most impact on yourself. The situation is not equally shared between you and your partner, so if he an understanding man he should recognize that the choice is ultimately yours and that pushing you to change your mind is not fair when he does not have to carry that child. 

As for the different birth control types for medications, you can also say the same for condoms. Just because there are different delivery methods for a birth control medication doesn’t mean that you can take multiples to “double up” the protection, much like a man cannot wear two condoms. There is a variety of choices for one type of protection. Spermicide is also not preventative, it’s again “clean up.” So in reality women may have 1-2 extra birth control methods. Which in the long run really doesn’t add up to much, because a woman and a man can employ every single method of birth control while still having sex and wind up with a baby. Like I’ve said, it’s not a black and white matter, and to me (and I think probably for others here) it seems like that’s what you are trying to make it out to be. It’s not simply a case of “women have more methods of birth control and thus should be smarter with their sexual habits if they know they don’t want a baby.” Overall I find that your tone (not yours alone, but you have mostly been instigating the exchanges) to be fairly accusatory to those of us demonstrating opposing ideas. You can share your opinion without trying to make others look bad or without looking down on them. I for one do not think highly of how you are presenting yourself and your argument here, but I’m not actively trying to one-up you, and I feel like that’s what you are trying to do with a lot of us here. I think the fact that you are also choosing to ignore a very valid argument to the debate isn’t helping this matter. There are plenty of women who would go the total opposite and deny an abortion even if the man did not at all want there to be a pregnancy and would completely ignore his say. So it’s not simply when a woman wants an abortion. 

“But you said men shouldn’t have a say because it’s too easy for them to lie or change their minds about wanting the baby. So make them sign something saying, “Hey, the mother doesn’t want it, but I do. I take full legal responsibility for parenting.”" – Okay, cool. Is he also going to take full responsibility by carrying said child for 9 months?

@Megabyyte@xanga - Most of us are using the body complications as one example. In the end, it’s about both parties deciding whether they want the child or not, and if one party doesn’t then why is it fair to keep the child? If the mother doesn’t want the child, then it’s really up to her because she will be the one who is caring and responsible for the child up until the father takes it away. Many mothers who give up children for adoption end up regretting it emotionally even though they understand that it would have been best for the child, such as being too young or too poor to care for a child. And if the father doesn’t want the child but the mother does, is it fair to say “okay, well see ya then”? Over time he may grow into a father role, but this doesn’t always happen. I know that if I was pregnant and someone I loved did not want a child at that specific time, I’d be very reluctant to keep it because I’d be wanting to take HIS feelings into account, not just mine. So in the end, his choice will influence mine, but because it’s all happening inside my body, it’s my final say, so I’d very likely get that abortion. 
@Saridactyl@xanga - Google tells me that tubal ligation is the female version of a vasectomy! Or did I type it wrong?

@MoonFaeEyryan@xanga - So..the mentally retarded, or people in a coma, or the mentally disabled without independence or ability for complex/abstract thought aren’t human?

@yourkbear@xanga - Okay, that..didn’t really make sense? o_0

You just said that if a man’s trying to force you to have an abortion, you should stand up for yourself. But then if a man’s trying to force you to complete the pregnancy and not abort, you…shouldn’t stand up for yourself? Because…?  …?????
[throws hands up in air]

@yourkbear@xanga - You place all blame and responsibility for pregnancy on the woman (she has more options???) and yet you wish the bottom line to be the decision of the father?  I don’t think that’s very logical.  If men want a say in pregnancy issues, they can exercise better control in who they choose to sleep with.  

@yourkbear@xanga - Plenty of men have beaten a child out of women.  It happens a lot.  In the past, men had all kinds of control over women and their bodies.  I don’t doubt there is a large number of situations in the past where men took women against their will for backwoods abortions.  Don’t be silly, don’t forget history lest we repeat it.

@LightBlue21@xanga - Has she made ANY sense yet? lol  

Well. The answer is actually pretty simple. People are selfish. It would take a lot of courage, strength and selflessness to soley carry anything for anyone else (in this case a baby for 9 months.) It’s much easier to give up and only think about yourself. ”So what if it’ll break his (the father’s) heart? I’M the one who will be throwing up. I’M the one who will have pelvic pain, who will have to give birth. Me. Me. Me.”

It would take a lot of caring about someone else to carry a baby for 9 months just to make them happy. Not many people would put their own feelings aside in this case for someone else. I think if I ever met a woman who carried a child for the father, I’d find her amazing. I already find women who give their children to an adoptive family amazing. It takes guts most of us don’t have.

Bottom line, abortion should only be legal because each person decides what happens to their own body.  Nobody has the right to take that away from anyone in America.  That’s the only reason why a man cannot make a woman give birth to his child.  

@yourkbear@xanga - See, no. I’m basically infertile, but it’s because my hormones are screwed up. I take BC pills, but in some extremely strange chance that my hormones screw up even worse than normal, my BC pills might not work so much. It’s just not as easy as people think. But frankly IMO this isn’t about being pregnant… it’s about raising a child. And since men have it so easy in terms of vanishing from a kid’s life, I don’t think their say is equal.

@Jenny_Wren@xanga - Mentally retarded people are different, because they can think somewhat. Same for autistics and so on who are unable to function by themselves but still respond and think and can create. If you’re in a coma… you’ve lost your humanity.

@MoonFaeEyryan@xanga - So..a person in a coma loses their rights because they are in a coma?  That would mean that personhood is connected solely to physical circumstance–right?

I think that if the man is going to foot the bill for the woman to go to the doctor and have the baby and then take care of it all by himself, then his paternal rights shouldn’t be denied. I get that it’s a woman’s body, but she didn’t make that baby alone. I’m pro-life though, that colors my opinion a bit.

@Jenny_Wren@xanga - It’s connected the ability to use your mind, however big or small it might be.

And I’m not trying to piss you off, I’m just a believer that the essence of humanity is conscience and the ability to think… 

i asked you once if you would support a man’s desire to force a woman to abort.  you said no.

so really, you don’t care about men’s rights at all.  you’re just a pro-lifer who wants to make access to abortion services as difficult as possible.  and, on behalf of men everywhere, i find it kind of disgusting that you’re pretending to support their paternal rights for your own agenda.  

I’d encourage you to read Jenessa1889′s “Parental rights gender and abortion” post which very well responds to this subject.

@DrummingMediocrity@xanga - That is a good post. I like her point that while it might be unfair to not let a man have an equal say in an unwanted pregnancy, it is even more unfair to expect a woman to endure an unwanted pregnancy.

I believe in a woman’s right to choose. It’s her body, and therefore it is her choice. The man should have no say in what happens to her body (I’m a guy, and I’m saying this). Period, end of story. 

That said, I also believe in a man’s right to choose, so to speak. If the man doesn’t want anything to do with the child whatsoever, but the woman does want to keep it, I feel there should be a route in which the man can be absolved of any and all financial and parental obligations to the child. This includes child support. It’s kind of unfair to the guy to have to give up part of his paycheck every month to a child he wants absolutely nothing to do with and has indicated this. If women can get out without any sort of financial obligation to the child via abortion, the men should have an equivalent option should the woman want to keep the child. As it is, they do not. This needs to be fixed. 

I’m sure glad I got a vasectomy and won’t have to worry about this, though. 

@StatelessPilot@revelife - they do. Men can sign over their parental rights.

I’m actually more interested in the consequences of this discussion after the child is born.

A woman (in most westernised countries) who does not want a child can walk into an abortion clinic, have an abortion without the consent of the man involved, and face virtually no legal ramifications whatsoever. A man who does not want a child cannot force a woman to have an abortion, and, if he decides to merely walk away, can face the law stepping in to force him to pay for a child he never wanted to begin with.

I think if you’re going to argue that women have all the say in whether or not an abortion is what is best for them, they also have to live with the responsibility of being the sole voice in that decision. If a woman can choose to have an abortion all on her own, then she can also choose to carry a baby all on her own. Making the choice to carry the child shouldn’t mean you automatically have the courts on your side to make someone else pay (literally) for your choice.

As much as it pains me to admit this, I actually agree with what the pilot has said above. That would be as equal as this debate is going to get, I believe.

@StatelessPilot@revelife - I wish I had a woman vasectomy too.
My gut reaction was to say “NO HE SHOULD PAY CHILD SUPPORT” but now that I’m thinking about it, what you said makes sense.
Of course if the man refuses to give financial assistance, he should have absolutely no right to EVER have any contact with the child.
I also think that if he doesn’t want the child and neither does she, he should definitely help her foot the bill of an abortion by half.
But yeah, if he doesn’t want it and she does… well it is what it is. That baby is hers and only hers.

@daydreams_nightmares@xanga - That still doesn’t absolve them from paying child support, however. That’s the point. He should be able to get out of that if he doesn’t want anything to do with the child. That’s the point. I mean ANY AND ALL financial obligations should be dismissed and the mother shouldn’t be allowed to go after him for child support or anything. 

I’d hate to have to give up a certain percentage of my income to a child I don’t want anything to do with, when I could be using that money for so many better things. 

@daydreams_nightmares@xanga - Signing over parental rights does not automatically stop child support. That decision rests with the judge. Often, the only time child support is stopped with signing over parental rights occurs when the mother is remarrying, so the step-dad-to-be can adopt the child.

Long story short, you can still be financially responsible for a child for whom you’ve signed the rights over.

@DrummingMediocrity@xanga - I’d pay for the entire abortion. I’d also drive her to and from the clinic and make sure she was healing alright. A few thousand dollars for an abortion vs. tens to hundreds of thousands in child support over the years and/or having to deal with a growing kid? I’ll gladly foot the entire abortion bill myself. 

@Grtt@xanga - Well said, agreed

@StatelessPilot@revelife - You are every woman’s one-night-stand dream man.

@DrummingMediocrity@xanga - Not that said situation would ever happen. Vasectomy FTW!

@StatelessPilot@revelife - @Grtt@xanga - Ah, I wasn’t aware of that, my bad.

@Grtt@xanga - The problem here isn’t so much that a woman has the right to force child support on the father as the child has the right to have financial support from both its parents.  It’s bad enough men can play then walk away without parenting, should society then foot the bill for his child too?  I don’t think so.  While abortion is an option, it is also not something every women needs to consider an option.  Once the child is born, both his parents should be responsible for their care.  Otherwise, it’s my problem, it’s your problem, it’s everybody’s problem but the father’s?  Heck no, if the father doesn’t want a child, he should be forced into the same equation illegal abortions would force women into… and that’s paying for the care of the child he created.  Abortion isn’t legal so that women can have control over reproduction, but so women have their rights to privacy and what happens to their own body.

@StatelessPilot@revelife - Men have been trying for eons to get out of raising child.  They have been trying to eons to place the consequences of sex only on women.  Your solution only furthers the unfair belief that only women should have to “deal” with children.  While I agree a mother isn’t entitled to her “baby daddy’s” money, that child is.  

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - It’s not fair, however, if she wants the child and he doesn’t. If she doesn’t want the child and he does, she aborts it. The legal system in that way is biased against men. Men don’t get any choice at all (and while I think the choice to abort should be up to the woman, the man should not be required to pay that money, and the child is not entitled to his/her father’s money either). 

If I was put into that situation, I would go to measures so extreme to get out of paying child support that they would likely wind me up on death row. A death sentence would be preferable to paying child support and giving up money I worked hard to earn. 

@StatelessPilot@revelife - After the child is born, it’s not about who wants or wanted the child.  Both played the game, so both have to pay for their child.  It’s not only a woman’s issue once the child is born.  It’s about people taking care of the children that are born to them. 

If like you, a man doesn’t want to care for any children, vasectomy is an option.  He should either go that route or keep his penis in his pants.  It’s not the child’s fault they are here, but it is the parents’ (both of them) responsibility to care for them.  A child cannot financially support themselves and only the two people responsible for them should be required to support them, not the rest of society. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - I say leave the little bugger out to die, if that’s the case. My money is for MY use only. Period, end of story. NOBODY is entitled to my money but ME. Fuck that kid. I don’t want it, it’s not getting any of my money. Period, end of story. 

This is something I’ve been wrestling internally for awhile now. I mean yes, the developing embryo has TWO parents but the mother does have to carry it, and deliver it. Child birth is one of the most stressful things a woman will go through ever (physically, in a natural situation. I mean kidnaps and torture cases are different) and I think that due to that a woman should have more of a say in an abortion. The only way I would allow a child that I personally don’t want to be born into this world was if there was a legally binding contract that the father had to sign saying that when that child is born, it is his. I waive my parental rights to it, I don’t need to pay child support, I have NOTHING to do with that child, and he has to take care of it. I think he should have to undergo a psychiatric evaluation to see if he’s competent to be a father and if he truly has thought it out, and continue to undergo that every week. He would have to be employed, and have job security and a place for the child before the second trimester. If he cannot adequately provide these things then I will abort it.

I just think that since a woman has to go through the pain and the hormonal chaos of child birth and pregnancy that she should get more say in the life of the embryo.
I’m still debating this in my head though.

@StatelessPilot@revelife - With men paying child support, I’ve never looked at it from that angle. Hearing this from a guy, I can definitely see where you’re coming from. But I think it should be looked at differently for different cases, since I’m sure there are instances where it would be more than fair for child support to be paid and others where it’s completely unnecessary. I would rather the father be emotionally involved when he’s ready than just stay financially involved without any actual investment being put into the child other than what’s mandatory. 

I’m not completely familiar with the proceedings for all of this though. Do you have to file for child support? Does it have to go through courts and be accepted or denied? Or is it kind of like you send in a form and will automatically have the guy paying child support just because you wanted him to? 

@ashleynicole - In the US (I don’t know about MX where I live now, but in the US) it’s automatic. The non-custodial parent pays child support BY DEFAULT. No application, no court approval, no NOTHING. It’s default. Since 99% of the time the custodial parent is the mother, the guy gets screwed. 

@Grtt@xanga - I like your view on this issue. I don’t think I’d want to force the father to pay money every month in lieu of his emotional involvement with the child. Is that really going to make raising the child significantly easier in the end? Maybe a bit financially, but I don’t want his money if that will be the extent of his involvement. 

If a woman chooses to go through with a pregnancy but then gives the baby up to the father and doesn’t remain involved in any way afterwards, is SHE obligated by law to pay the father child support? Or is this only the case for the man? If it’s only the case for the man, then that is definitely something that should be changed. 

@StatelessPilot@revelife - So if the custodial parent ends up being the father the mother pays child support? At least it’s somewhat equal if you look at the fine details. 

I have no idea what it’s like here in Canada, but I doubt it’s significantly different. I don’t think that child support should be automatic in all circumstances. It should be looked at for every situation. What if the mother is significantly better off financially and the father is barely able to pay rent? I mean, the mother may resent the father, but it’s not at all fair to force him to be financially involved if he doesn’t want to and can’t even afford to be.

@ashleynicole - Yes, but the father is the custodial parent in like 1-2% of all cases. The US justice system is biased in that way. 

Right now, as a Citation X Captain for a flight department in a large corporation, I’m making almost $75K CAD this year. As such, if I had a child and MX had any sort of system similar to the US, I’d be keeping about $55K CAD of my income every year. That’s how screwed up the system is, and it’s especially screwed up when I want absolutely NOTHING to do with that child (I can’t stand children). 

That’s why I say if the father (or the mother, for that matter) wants nothing to do with the child, they should be able to legally absolve themselves from any sort of financial responsibility, in exchange for surrendering visitation rights or any other contact with the child. It’s only fair. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga -  “The problem here isn’t so much that a woman
has the right to force child support on the father as the child has the
right to have financial support from both its parents.”

That’s the problem with wanting the sole responsibility for the choice of an abortion to be given to women. If you want the sole responsibility for abortions, you also have the sole responsibility for choosing to carry a child to term. You don’t get to have your cake and eat it too. (Well, women do, actually, in this regard, but that is not even close to “equality.”)

Should a man very clearly not want that child from the very first mention that you are pregnant, you, as a woman, have the choice to either a) have an abortion or b) have the child knowing its father doesn’t want anything to do it. That is your choice and your choice alone, as has been made very clear by the comments here. The very choice women have been demanding for years. As I’m sure you know, most pregnancies actually end in a baby. You made the choice, you live with its consequences.

You’re going back and forth between this being solely a woman’s right and a “both played the game” scenario. Sure, both played the game, but the woman gets the only say as to what the outcome of the game will be.

If I used “if a woman doesn’t want to care for any children, she should keep her legs closed,” as a viable solution to reducing abortions, people would readily consider me sexist, or slut shamer or some other term that hasn’t been coined yet. Yet you just used it against a man, and only men. What happened to both playing the game?

A woman who doesn’t want to care for her child and has an abortion is merely exercising her right to do with her body as she pleases, but a man who doesn’t want to care for his child and didn’t since the very first mention of a “clump of cells?” Deadbeat dad. How do you not consider that control over reproduction?

@StatelessPilot@revelife - I think that if one of the parents doesn’t want any association, then that would be fine and that child support shouldn’t be forced. But I’d think it would be nice if that parent was still allowed to be involved in some way, only not mandatory. So if the mother kept the child and at some point in raising the child she becomes financially strained, she should have the right to request that the father provide some assistance. Request, not demand. So if he says no, he says no and that’s that, she can go about other ways of requesting financial assistance from other sources (welfare, family members, second job, etc). This would obviously go for the man raising a child solo as well. It should definitely be an amount discussed with the parents and legal supervisors, not just “sign here to fork over X amount of your salary for the next 4 months!” you know? Like if she’s having a hard time buying groceries, then he can help pay for the groceries for a few months. And allow the man to choose how long he’d like to help her out once it reaches the one month mark.

@ashleynicole - That I could easily get behind. No problem whatsoever. I think it should go both ways. 

I think in most abortion cases, the men don’t really want any part in the child’s life, which is why some women think abortion is a better route. I mean, if i became pregnant right now with my fiance both of us would be okay with that so an abortion wouldn’t even cross my mind, but if you were with just a boyfriend or a one night stand and they wanted no part in it and you didn’t feel that you were ready or financially able to support it, I could see why you would want an abortion. I don’t really feel like this is an issue that would come up a lot.

@Grtt@xanga - All this really is about is men regaining the “power” they’ve lost to control women.  When a woman is pregnant there is more to the situation than simply having a child.  She is giving up her body to carry and give birth to the child.  Once the child is born, raising and caring the child should be the responsibility of both parents.  A man cannot tell a woman that she must be pregnant.  That’s what you are suggesting here. 

If the law allowed men to walk away from their born children, all this will do is put full responsibility of child bearing on only women.  People aren’t so noble except when the law makes them accountable.  If pro-life people are so insistent on making it equal, all they are really doing is shifting all the responsibility on born children back onto women.  Men will be walking away from their children in droves, and abortions will increase, not decrease. 

Abortion is not simply about not wanting to care for the child, it’s also about not wanting to be pregnant.  That’s what adoption is about… not wanting to raise the child.  Abortion, bottom line, is about a woman not wanting to go through a pregnancy or else she’d probably choose adoption.  After the child is born, the living child has the right to receive proper care from both parents.  It is no longer about what rights the woman or man has, it’s about the rights a child has.  Isn’t that what concerns the pro-life people?  The rights of the child?  Or the rights of men? 

@ashleynicole - Yes, if a woman gives up her child to the father to raise on his own, she is responsible for child support if he asks for it.  And she should be.  

@StatelessPilot@revelife - Definitely. The fact of the matter is that pregnancy and child rearing is never a black and white issue. A lot of discussion needs to go into it. That’s the best way to go around it for a healthy outcome. Not forcing something onto another being to satisfy your rights or wants and needs. There is always more cooperation from people when decisions are made together, even if someone does get the final say, as opposed to forcing a decision on someone else without at all consulting them. I’m sure that many fathers (and mothers) who remain outside of the child’s life would not want it to suffer, so if help was asked they’d likely do what they could when they could. And that would be all I’d want from my child’s father if we were not together. If he wanted to provide money on a regular basis to help raise the child, then he can, but if the child is going to be MY child and the father decides that he wants to renounce his physical and emotional parental involvement, then I don’t see why I need to force him into maintaining the financial parental involvement. Hell, if he just wanted to be a part of the child’s life emotionally and physically without sending me a cheque every month, I’d be okay with that because it would give the child an opportunity to be with the father. 

@ashleynicole - I don’t put this out there much but I’ll go ahead and tell you so you can understand where I’m coming from. My biological father was 100% uninvolved in my life. I’ve met him one time in my life and only talked to him a couple of times. I don’t know how he did it, but he didn’t want me and my father did. He had his brother (a bigtime attorney) draw up a legal document stating that he gave up all parental rights in exchange for no child support. My mother agreed and signed it, so he never paid a dime of child support. I don’t fault him for it, nor do I have anything against the man. He decided again in my adult life that he wanted to stay out of my life (along with my half-sister born to him and my step-mother), which I respect. I don’t hate him or anything, and I fully understand why he did what he did. 

When my step-father came along he “adopted” me. He was a shithead. I hated that man until the day he died and I’m very glad he’s dead now. There’s a reason I changed my last name to my mother’s maiden name after the divorce between them was finalized. Point being, I hate my step-father who was part of my life, but I don’t hate my biological father who didn’t pay a penny of child support nor tried to be part of my life. And you know what? My mother holds nothing against him either. We both look at it the same way. 

@StatelessPilot@revelife - I’m glad I’ve never experienced such a situation. It’s definitely not something you can understand or know how you’d feel unless you’ve been through it. I’m sure that there are many variables that would change how you feel towards the biological parent and towards the adoptive parent. It sounds like you and your mother had a good attitude and perspective on the situation which I’m sure was a big contributing factor to not resenting him for his decision. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - I have not once suggested a man tell a woman anything, lol. I have no idea where you’re getting that. This has nothing to do with “power,” though it does end up with women having all of it. It has everything to do with equality and choices.

“When a woman is pregnant there is more to the
situation than simply having a child.  She is giving up her body to
carry and give birth to the child.”

Not necessarily. Is that not where abortion comes in? She does not have to give up anything other than recovery time post-abortion and paying for the voluntary procedure.

“Once the child is born, raising and caring the child should be the responsibility of both parents.”

Why? Women can chose as early as they find out they’re pregnant that they don’t want a child and legally go rid themselves of that child and face absolutely no consequences. There is no reason that a man should pay for a choice a woman made on her own if he expressly made it known when she found out she was pregnant that he wanted nothing to do with the child. A baby doesn’t just pop out of nowhere overnight. In most cases a woman knows she’s pregnant pretty early on and have plenty of say in what the ultimate outcome is, e.g. baby/no baby based on her own situation and the opinion of her baby’s father, if she even consults him.

“If the law allowed men to walk away from
their born children, all this will do is put full responsibility of
child bearing on only women.”

The law allows women to walk away from their children. That’s what abortion does. It negates any potential responsibility they would have had. Women wanting the absolute only say in whether or not she can get an abortion puts full responsibility on child-bearing on women. That is called consequence of being the sole decision maker. You wanted the decision to be yours. You got it. Live with it.

I don’t know what pro-life people believe, as I’m not pro-life. I’m pro-choice. For everyone, though, not just women. Apparently, that’s where you and I differ. Our discussion thus far hasn’t even addressed abortion, as it seems we both agree it should be legal. I’m fine with women negating whatever responsibility they may have for a child by ending its life before it begins; I’m only suggesting men should have the same choice. Not in terms of abortion, but in terms of responsibility. And you apparently don’t like it. As it stands, it seems you don’t really want everyone to have choices. It seems you want to have choices, and force everyone to agree or pay for them. That is not equality, not matter how you try to spin it. If you want entitlements for women, you could at least advocate it as such, instead of under the guise of equality between sexes.  

@ashleynicole - I believe if choice is being advocated, it should be advocated for everyone. Not just certain people. 

@StatelessPilot@revelife - <3

@DrummingMediocrity@xanga - I <3 you too!

It’s a great idea…until some asshole ex boyfriend that doesn’t plan to be in the childs life decides his ex girlfriend can’t have an abortion just to be a dick.

@yourkbear@xanga - On what happy-go-lucky planet do you live? I know a couple “deadbeat” mothers, my own ex-aunt being one of those. Never say never.

@Grtt@xanga - Well, I guess we simply disagree about after the child is born.  I believe both parents are equally responsible for the child’s well being, financial care and physical/emotional care.  Whether the woman or the man walks away, they both still should pay unless they both give up rights.  Women who don’t want the child can put the child up for adoption against the father’s wishes (unless he agrees to raise it) and all too often the woman can walk away without paying child support.  That is where the inequality exists if you want to complain, not in the pregnancy stages where the woman is deciding whether to be pregnant or not.  That is where the inequality does exist because I have seen where women want to give the child up for adoption and the man says no, she goes all wishy-washy and to save his child from adoption the man then allows her to give up parental rights or simply not pay child support.  That’s the inequality, not the pregnancy itself. 

And yes, you are advocating a man tell a woman what she can do when it comes to abortion.  If the father can walk away from a pregnancy and then not have to pay child support, do you realize how much abortions would increase?  You are tying the hands of only the woman here.  You are leaving the decision in the hands of men, who historically abandon children more often than women do. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - No, I’m not. Feel free to stop putting words in my mouth at any time. I’m advocating choice for both parties involved. You’re advocating choice for only one. A woman does not have to have an abortion if the man walks away. It’s entirely her decision. She can choose to raise a child on her own, should she desire. She does not need anyone’s approval or permission to get an abortion, or to not get an abortion. Should she want to raise a child, she can. Should she want to abort the pregnancy she can. That is not tying anyone’s hands. And hey, if she doesn’t want to be put in that position at all, she could …oh, I don’t know, keep her pants on. Wasn’t that similar to the way you said men should avoid unwanted children? 

@Grtt@xanga - In your scenario men would be fathering babies all over the place and giving up their parental rights just so they never, ever have to pay.  How you don’t see that would increase abortions and put child bearing only into the hands of women is beyond me. 

My response of men should pay to play too was in response to the opinion that women shouldn’t have abortions because they are being “punished” for being sexually active and can’t take away a man’s rights to be a father.  The notion that a woman opens her legs for a man means she accepts all possible consequences alone.  I’m sympathetic to men in this situation, it cannot be easy to sit there while a woman decides to abort your child, but bottom line it is her right.  Women constantly risk the guy running off and leaving her to raise children even ones that the man wanted.  Men face the burden of not being to force a woman to carry his child.  Both men and women face burdens here. 

Allowing men to walk away from children before they are born would also increase the likelihood that mothers wouldn’t tell fathers until after the children were born.  So, in this case 1) abortions would increase 2) women wouldn’t tell men they are pregnant 3) women could or could not have abortions unless the father signs paperwork giving up parental rights before paternal can be established?  4) Paternity would have to be “called” before birth?  How would that work?  All potential fathers have to sign paper work? 

Really how would your plan work?

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - This may come as a shock, but not all men are dogs. Some actually do want children. Also may be shocking, but there are women in the world that use abortion as a way to avoid ever having to pay the consequences for an oops.

I have not mentioned once that a father should have to sign paperwork for an abortion. In fact, the whole basis of this discussion is that a woman does not need any kind of approval from the father of the baby at all. That is to say, it is entirely their decision. They have the only say in whether or not they have an abortion. And that is not going to change. I’m not even proposing it should.

However, that should not negate the fact that if a woman conceives a child that is unwanted by the father, that he should have an option too. And that option does not impose on the rights of the woman to her own body at all. I believe if a man does not want a child, they should be able to “rid” themselves of that responsibility, just as abortion does for a woman. At that point, the woman has a choice. She can abort the pregnancy or carry the child to term knowing she won’t have the power of the court to demand a man who clearly indicated he did not want a child to pay for it.

How would it work? Like any other legal contract we use. We have these people elected by the public to make these things we call “laws.” Then these other people we like to call “lawyers” draft a contract that is signed by both parties in accordance with those laws.

@Grtt@xanga - Your scenario makes no logical sense.  It’s not about the woman deserving the right to child support, it is about the child’s right to financial support from both parents.  A lot more men would voluntarily give up their rights because a lot of men (no, not all) are cheap bastards.  You cannot deny looking at statistics men more than women aren’t taking care of their children.  It’s not about the right to not be a parent here.  Abortion is about the right to decide what your body goes through.  It’s not simply a parenting issue, it’s going through pregnancy, labor and birth.  The end result is a child, but the journey is nine months of pregnancy.

Such a legal option would most certainly increase abortions and force women into them.  How do you not see that?  You’re suggesting we purposely make it legally easy for men to subjugate women further by making only women completely responsible for children.  A lot of women now have abortions because the fathers already refuse to be responsible.  It’s not helping women or children, it’s only giving men an extreme advantage.  Not only that, but society’s problems would be even worse and we’d all be paying a hell of a lot more taxes to provide welfare because children most often need financial support from both parents. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - Your scenario makes no sense either. You haven’t provided much of a logical basis for any claim of what will happen. At best, your guessing and handing me what you presume to be worst case scenario.

I can’t see that because there’s no force there. Believe it or not, just because you keep saying it, it doesn’t magically become true. It’s a woman’s choice. Has been for quite some time. Letting a man have a choice does not negate her choice. This is the burden of choice. There’s a whole other steaming pile that comes with it and you don’t just get to cover your nose and pretend you don’t smell it.

Yep, some men are bastards. (I’d question why you would sleep with someone you thought to be a bastard, but eh.) And some women use children as a snare. Point? People suck. Welcome to the human race. Doesn’t mean every man and woman should be punished for all of eternity.

Abortion is just as much about parenting than the actual pregnancy. To pretend otherwise is laughable.

As far as increasing abortions, so? If you found them morally reprehensible, you wouldn’t be advocating they be legal. If you have no issue with their morality, then the number of them really shouldn’t bother you.

And no, not suggesting women be responsible for all children. Just the ones they want to carry to term despite the father not wanting it and don’t want to give up for adoption. If by “extreme advantage” you mean men actually get a say in what happens for the next 18 years of their lives? Then sure, call it what you will. I call it an equal say.

Abortions and the number of children on welfare is going to go up concurrently? Wow. All men must be pretty shitty, or there are a lot of women out there who didn’t make very good choices when they had the chance.

@yourkbear@xanga - What if someone has a weak uterus or a weak cervix? Would you consider that to be a hardship of pregnancy?

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - “You cannot deny looking at statistics men more than women aren’t taking care of their children. “

What percent of those men had their rights taken away from them because of false abuse claims or default rulings by judges? Are you going to tell me that every single case where the mother gained custody is because the men were cheap bastards?

“ it is about the child’s right to financial support from both parents.”
The child is not, under the law, entitled to support from both or either parent. This is demonstrated by the current laws that allow women to drop off children at police stations, etc, without legal repercussions. 

“You’re suggesting we purposely make it legally easy for men to subjugate women further by making only women completely responsible for children. “

Women have the option of abortion, or giving their children up for adoption. I’d hardly call that “subjugation”. With what grtt is proposing though, maybe women will be more careful about spreading their legs open to just any guy, ya know? And besides, isn’t that what you approve of anyways? 
If the child’s welfare is the issue, why bring up the woman’s pregnancy? Is she supposed to be compensated for 9 months of work and risk, in a society that allows her to abort? If we had bans on abortion, I’d agree that it would be only reasonable for the man to take responsibility, since we’re forcing the women to take responsibility too. But in this case, she CHOOSES to take on the risk of having a child, irrespective of what the man wants. It’s the equivalent of a peanut-allergic person suing the Mars company for injuries incurred by eating peanut m&m’s. Is the peanut allergy the company’s problem, or the person’s problem?

Believe it or not, there are unscrupulous women out there. A lot of them will puncture condoms, fake using BC, or even take used condoms from the trash and deposit them into their hoohah’s just to get the man trapped with a kid. Your speculation is mere speculation. I can speculate too; if such laws were enacted, more women would be more responsible when it came to having sex. 

@Grtt@xanga - Here’s the thing abortion is an option women can legally choose.  Abortion is not an option for every woman, nor should it be.  Yes, it’s true people need to make better choices in who they sleep with, I agree.  But legally we cannot legislate that people not be stupid.  A woman doesn’t have to include abortion on her list of options just because it is legal. 

Now, once the child is born either parent should have equal rights to the child.  So, if the woman wants to put the child up for adoption but man doesn’t, then the woman should pay the man child support.  That’s where the inequality lies.  Not in creating a scenario where men can opt out of parenthood during pregnancy, because sorry it is too late then.  Abortion is legal because each person has the right to privacy and decide what their body goes through.  If men could get pregnant, then women too would have to pay for children they didn’t want. 

You are dictating that an abortion must be an option for every woman (it is not an option every woman will choose, nor should it be) and the way you phrase it makes it seem like it’s a punishment for daring to seek the right to our own bodies.  (Forgive me if you are not the one who said about abortion, “you asked for it”.) 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - ”Not in creating a scenario where men can opt out of parenthood during pregnancy, because sorry it is too late then.”

This is exactly what this whole discussion about.

Abortion being a legal option for all women provides a scenario where any woman, and only a woman, can opt out of parenthood during pregnancy. Why is that okay for a woman but not for a man? Why is not “too late” for her, but it is for him?

What I’ve proposed to you is a scenario that allows either parent an equal opportunity to “opt out” of parenthood during pregnancy. Somehow providing that equal opportunity is sexist and subjugating women, although at no point has it impinged on a woman’s ability to choose what happens to their own body. Sorry, but I’m not buying there’s sexism involved and it is the most fair solution to parental rights I can fathom without anyone’s rights to their own body or lives being trampled on.

@QuantumStorm@xanga - ”What percent of those men had their rights
taken away from them because of false abuse claims or default rulings by
judges? Are you going to tell me that every single case where the
mother gained custody is because the men were cheap bastards?”

That’s a whole other ball of wax.  People lose custody of their children on false pretenses all the time.  My father is a single parent and I know all too well that men are not the only dead beat parents. 

“The child is not, under the law, entitled to
support from both or either parent. This is demonstrated by the current
laws that allow women to drop off children at police stations, etc,
without legal repercussions.”

Wrong… this is why child neglect is illegal.  And legally either parent can drop off a child at police stations etc., it is not just women.  Haven’t you heard of the case in Nebraska where a man dropped off like nine of his kids?  Either parent can do it, though I reckon the language is often written for newborn infants so of course since the child just came out of the woman it would be mothers in that state.  Though nothing prevents the fathers from taking the child soon after birth and dumping it too.

“Women have the option of abortion, or giving
their children up for adoption. I’d hardly call that “subjugation”. With
what grtt is proposing though, maybe women will be more careful about
spreading their legs open to just any guy, ya know? And besides, isn’t
that what you approve of anyways?”

Women have the right to choose abortion.  Abortion is not legally an option every woman MUST consider.  And as for only women being able to give their child up without paternal consent, I agree with you there.  Women should not be able to do so.  The father should agree or be given a chance to raise the child and with child support from the mother.  (I believe sex is best in the context of marriage for me, I do not insist it for others.)

“But in this case, she CHOOSES to take on the
risk of having a child, irrespective of what the man wants. It’s the
equivalent of a peanut-allergic person suing the Mars company for
injuries incurred by eating peanut m&m’s. Is the peanut allergy the
company’s problem, or the person’s problem?” 

You are confusing the right to choose an abortion with the fact that abortion must not be an option every woman considers.  Because it is a legal option does not make it an option for every woman.  You are throwing the right to decide in a woman’s face when you suggest it must be one option she weighs.  It does not have to be on her list of options!

“Believe it or not, there are unscrupulous
women out there. A lot of them will puncture condoms, fake using BC, or
even take used condoms from the trash and deposit them into their
hoohah’s just to get the man trapped with a kid. Your speculation is
mere speculation. I can speculate too; if such laws were enacted, more
women would be more responsible when it came to having sex.”

Oh, I have no problems believing it since I have a half sister who was conceived that way.  Yes, I know women trap men.  In fact, it happens a lot more than it should.  That’s always going to be wrong, but that doesn’t mean we punish children by denying them all the financial support they are going to need.  Both men and women should behave better.  But creating an opt-out option during pregnancy is only going to result in more abortions and more children in poverty.

@Grtt@xanga - Your scenario insists that abortion be considered an option by every woman.  No, it should not be an option every woman weighs.  If she chooses abortion, it’s not simply a matter of not wanting to be a parent, she’s also saying she doesn’t want to be pregnant.  Trust me, I know women who have given their babies up for adoption.  It was because they didn’t want to be a parent.  Women I know who had abortions, didn’t want to be pregnant.  I even know a few who wished they could put the baby on “hold”, it wasn’t about simply not wanting to raise a child but also about not wanting to be pregnant at that time.  Don’t disregard how difficult pregnancy can be.  It’s not so easy being pregnant.

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - The woman can apply for state assistance if needed. Or, she can give the child up for adoption. There are options available that allow the child to be cared for. 

“Wrong… this is why child neglect is illegal.”
It’s illegal only if the parents in question do not provide for the child. But the parents can drop off those kids for adoption, and thus write off that requirement. So yes, children are not entitled to parental support, otherwise that rule would not be in the books. 
“You are throwing the right to decide in a woman’s face when you suggest it must be one option she weighs.  It does not have to be on her list of options!”
If she chooses to have that child, she cannot hold the man responsible for HER unilateral choice! Her choice to raise that child tramples on that man’s right to retain his money. A man dropping parental responsibilities won’t trample on her choice to raise that child, nor will it prevent that child from getting the support it needs, since, as you well know, there are lots of women who CHOOSE to be single mothers, too. 

A child, no matter how innocent, is still an individual. If a woman has the option to abandon the responsibilities of motherhood, then the man cannot have his rights superseded by her unilateral choice. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - “Don’t disregard how difficult pregnancy can be.  It’s not so easy being pregnant.”

In a society that GIVES women the CHOICE to abort, why should SHE be compensated? You may say it’s “not a choice”, but there is no law that puts a gun to a woman’s head and demands that she have that child. Even religious women don’t always act consistently with their principles and I’m sure both you and I have heard of seemingly pro-life women still aborting their kids. 
It seems you’re less concerned about the child’s rights than you are about the woman’s compensation for her 9 months of work. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - I’m not disregarding how difficult pregnancy can be, nor motherhood, nor fatherhood. Don’t disregard how hard it can be to know you got someone pregnant, either. And that, ultimately, the life that you helped create could be gone without so much as a fuck given for your feelings about the matter.

Abortion, by essence of being legal, is an option for every woman. Whether or not they decide to consider it is irrelevant. It’s there should they want to consider it as a legal, viable option.

You don’t get to decide what “should” be an option people consider. That would be, again, like trying to legislate people not to be stupid. We can’t do that. It’s impossible and likely wouldn’t take too well anyway. We, through our elected officials, have put the option of abortion on the table for any pregnant woman. Whether they consider it or not, is up to them.

Likewise, though you don’t seem to know too many good men, there are those who would never consider leaving their child. That doesn’t mean the option shouldn’t be there for others, just like it is for women.

@QuantumStorm@xanga - ”The woman can apply for state assistance if
needed. Or, she can give the child up for adoption. There are options
available that allow the child to be cared for. “ 

Why should society pay for some dead beat’s kid? 

Children are entitled to be taken care of by their parents until both parents give up legal rights to them.  I know this because in cases of adoption, both parents must sign.  Until then, both parents are responsible.  I don’t know what happens in cases where the mother doesn’t name a father though because every case I’ve seen the father was more than happy to sign over his rights.   

It’s not simply her unilateral choice. The only choice she’s making for sure in an abortion is that she doesn’t want to be pregnant.  That’s only a choice she can make.  It’s not about the issue of parenthood at this point, it’s about deciding what happens to her own body.

 If I got pregnant this year through consensual sex, abortion would not be on my list of options.  My options would be either keeping the baby or giving the baby up for adoption.  You cannot dictate to me that abortion has to be one of my options.  In order for me to give that baby up, the father would have to agree.  True, laws right now (I think) would allow me to put the child up for adoption if I didn’t name the father, but that wouldn’t be right of me so it wouldn’t be an option.  But you cannot stand here and say, “But abortion must be one of your options.”  Umm, not it must not!

@QuantumStorm@xanga – Why should she be compensated??  What?  How is a woman compensated for being pregnant?  Nobody gave me a cash prize for all three times I had babies. 

@Grtt@xanga - Sorry, but an option being legal doesn’t mean it’s an option for everyone.  Otherwise I could just say (since it’s an option) the fact that a man didn’t have a vasectomy shows he is willing to have babies and is responsible for them since he could have just had the vasectomy and had it reversed if he decided to have babies, because it’s an option after all!

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - “Why should society pay for some dead beat’s kid? “

We could extend that argument to a variety of cases, like welfare, social security, etc. I’d argue that an innocent child deserves society’s support moreso than some of the welfare recipients out there. 
“I know this because in cases of adoption, both parents must sign.  Until then, both parents are responsible.  I don’t know what happens in cases where the mother doesn’t name a father though because every case I’ve seen the father was more than happy to sign over his rights.   “
Not with safe haven laws. In those cases, the woman (or man) can drop them off, no questions asked. 
“It’s not simply her unilateral choice. The only choice she’s making for sure in an abortion is that she doesn’t want to be pregnant.  That’s only a choice she can make.  It’s not about the issue of parenthood at this point, it’s about deciding what happens to her own body.”
It IS her unilateral choice, though, and that is something you refuse to acknowledge. Are there laws in place that require a man’s input to legally take precedence on the matter? No. So, it is HER unilateral choice. It doesn’t matter what you think SHOULD be the case or what I think SHOULD be the case. 
“You cannot dictate to me that abortion has to be one of my options. “
Actually, you HAVE that option whether you like it or not. I’m not dictating anything to you by giving you that choice. You’re talking about what SHOULD be the case, but you HAVE that legal option, even if it is MORALLY abhorrent to you. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - In exchange for 9 months, a woman gets 18 years of “child support”, a payment that is not transparent. Sounds like compensation to me. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - “ Sorry, but an option being legal doesn’t mean it’s an option for everyone.  ”

And what we’re arguing that just because it would be an option for men to drop parental responsibilities, doesn’t mean all men will consider it as a valid option. Get it?

Do you understand how inconsistent it is to argue that a woman should have that choice, but you personally wouldn’t do it, and then say that if men had that choice, they’d ALL engage in it? That’s stupid thinking at best. 

@QuantumStorm@xanga - I legally can choose abortion, that doesn’t make it an option for me.  That doesn’t mean the law can create other laws based on it being an option.  It’s an option a woman can choose, it’s not an option a woman MUST consider. 

Legally you cannot say: Women can choose abortion so men don’t have to be parents anymore if they so choose. 

If that’s the case… then I could say… since I didn’t choose abortion and MyBabyDaddy could have chosen a vasectomy I get the ultimate decision in deciding parenting and men have no rights at all since I didn’t choose abortion, I get all the rights of every child I birth because if a man gets to choose to not be a parent, I too get to choose to be a single parent because being a single parent is my option too.  So, I can force the guy to give up his rights so I can choose to be a single parent.  (The insanity would ensue if men had the option to opt out of parenting.)

@QuantumStorm@xanga - No, child support is for the child.  It’s not for the custodial parent.  Except for rich people, I don’t know one custodial parent who receives a child support payment equivalent to half of what they pay for their child’s care.  (Yes, I agree parents should not spend that money on themselves.)

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - ”Sorry, but an option being legal doesn’t mean it’s an option for everyone.” Uh, what? That’s exactly what an option being legal means. It means it’s there for anyone who wants it, i.e., an option, with no legal ramifications. I’m pretty sure no amount of word-smithing is going to make that sentence make an iota of sense.

@Grtt@xanga - Just because abortion is a legal right, doesn’t mean it has to be an option that I consider for myself.  Otherwise, you just appear to want to punish women for having the right to have an abortion.  Damn it, stupid woman, you asked for abortions so now it’s an option you must consider! 

Uh, nope…

@QuantumStorm@xanga - What?  Just because I wouldn’t choose an abortion doesn’t mean I feel every woman must choose as I do.  That’s silly.  Every women gets to decide what happens to her body. 

And no, I’m well aware that not all men would abandon their children if given the option to do so.  But the last thing we need to do is make it easier for Dead Beat parents to be Dead Beat parents.  I believe once a child is born (get that once it is alive and breathing on its own) both parents are responsible for it.  Although I know dead beat moms myself, more men are dead beat dads.

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - “I legally can choose abortion, that doesn’t make it an option for me.  That doesn’t mean the law can create other laws based on it being an option.  It’s an option a woman can choose, it’s not an option a woman MUST consider. “

Likewise, the same can be done with dropping paternal responsibility. 
“If that’s the case… then I could say… since I didn’t choose abortion and MyBabyDaddy could have chosen a vasectomy I get the ultimate decision in deciding parenting and men have no rights at all since I didn’t choose abortion, I get all the rights of every child I birth because if a man gets to choose to not be a parent, I too get to choose to be a single parent because being a single parent is my option too.  So, I can force the guy to give up his rights so I can choose to be a single parent.  (The insanity would ensue if men had the option to opt out of parenting.)”
Uhhhh what? What are you babbling about here?
“ No, child support is for the child.  It’s not for the custodial parent.”
Yes, but there is NO transparency with regards to child support. Again, you are confusing what SHOULD be the case with what IS the case. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - “Every women gets to decide what happens to her body. “

And if a man decides not to take on that responsibility, that choice does not impede on a woman’s rights to her body in ANY way whatsoever. 
“I believe once a child is born (get that once it is alive and breathing on its own) both parents are responsible for it.”
And currently, the mother can abandon that responsibility with no legal repercussions, be it abortion, or adoption. If a father was given that choice, that would not impede on her rights, nor would that impede on the child’s rights either. If a mother abandons her parental rights via abortion/adoption, would it be proper to argue that the child is still entitled to her support? No. So why is it different for the men? 

@QuantumStorm@xanga - My babbling was the point I was making.  Once you start messing with creating laws by deciding what choices each person must make it all gets confusing and rather ridiculous.

If a man doesn’t want to have children, he should have had a vasectomy.  After all, that is his choice.  It’s his option and they can be reversed if he changes his mind.  So… since the man did not have a vasectomy that means he wanted to get women pregnant so he doesn’t get to sign away his parental rights before the child is born.  Right???  Because it was his choice to not get fixed.

Just as there will be cases of women misusing child support payments there are probably more cases of men hiding income so they don’t have to pay child support.  Unless the non-custodial parent can prove the custodial parent isn’t providing for the child’s necessities there is no proof if that parent used child support to get a manicure or not. 

Now, granted I do know of a woman who makes a living of off her two kids as she had kids with two different rich guys.  However, one father wanted her to stay home full time with the kid so she did take advantage of that.  I’m not saying that is cool.  She should pay for all the child’s expenses and either give the rest back or save it for his college, I don’t know.  I don’t know about cases where the child support exceeds what any one child needs.  But typically, that is not the case.  My father got very little child support for one child and absolutely none for the other.  They based it off of his and her income despite him being the custodial parent, and that doesn’t seem fair at all though he agreed with it. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - “Once you start messing with creating laws by deciding what choices each person must make it all gets confusing and rather ridiculous.”

You didn’t actually make a point with your babbling, though. Hence why it was babbling.
“If a man doesn’t want to have children, he should have had a vasectomy.”
Again, SHOULD vs. IS. 
“It’s his option and they can be reversed if he changes his mind.”
And if a woman chooses not to have kids, she can have her tubes tied.
“Unless the non-custodial parent can prove the custodial parent isn’t providing for the child’s necessities there is no proof if that parent used child support to get a manicure or not. “
As long as the system itself doesn’t inherently require transparency, then misuse will exist. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - Didn’t we already go through the fact we can’t legislate not to be stupid? Likewise, we can’t legislate that everyone believe a certain way. Personally, I believe that someone who doesn’t consider all their options, even if it’s just to dismiss it right away, before making such a life-changing decision is pretty dumb. Sorry. Just the thought processing of going “Oh, no! I don’t want to even think about that!” has briefly considered it. Even if you write it off immediately, good for you, but it’s still there, still viable, and still not going anywhere for all other women out there. Like it or not, increasingly more women are considering it as one of their main options than not.

Like @QuantumStorm@xanga said, I’m not suggesting it be the go-to for all potential fathers, and many, like yourself, wouldn’t even consider it. Just that it be there.

@QuantumStorm@xanga - ”And if a man decides not to take on that
responsibility, that choice does not impede on a woman’s rights to her
body in ANY way whatsoever.”

No, but it impedes on the child’s right to be properly taken care of.  I don’t believe it is society’s responsibility to care for other people’s children (unless they choose to). 

“And currently, the mother can abandon that
responsibility with no legal repercussions, be it abortion, or adoption.
If a father was given that choice, that would not impede on her rights,
nor would that impede on the child’s rights either. If a mother
abandons her parental rights via abortion/adoption, would it be proper
to argue that the child is still entitled to her support? No. So why is
it different for the men? “

Actually, I believe that if both parents give up rights and adoption occurs then neither (obviously) owe child support because the adoption creates a (usually) two-parent family.  Unless, both parents give up the child adoption, both parents are responsible for the care of the child.  See, I agree that it isn’t fair that women can hand the baby over to the father and she isn’t made to pay child support.  She should!  This is where I would agree that your argument would work.  If he wants the born child, she should pay him child support.  Not for him, but for the child. 

@QuantumStorm@xanga - My point was you cannot make laws by insisting what people’s options are.  So, if you want to insist that a man can give up his parental rights if a woman doesn’t choose abortion.  I’m going to say, if he didn’t want kids he should have chosen a vasectomy.

You cannot say a man is agreeing to be a father just because he didn’t have a vasectomy anymore than you can say a woman must be the sole parent responsible for the child because abortion was an option for her but she didn’t choose it. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - No one is saying she MUST be the sole parent responsible, since that is assuming that the father would automatically take the option to abandon paternal responsibility. But he should have that option just as much as she does. 

You harp on the vasectomy point – I could contend that if a woman didn’t want to have kids, she can go for a tubal ligation. So that’s a moot issue. 

@QuantumStorm@xanga - Nobody has parental responsibilities until the child is born.  Before birth, it’s not about parental responsibilities, it is about the woman’s body.  Once the child is born, either both parents give up their rights or both parents pay equally.  That is fair. 

The vasectomy thing is a rebuttal to the point you guys have made that abortion is an option for the woman and if she doesn’t choose abortion she risks raising the child on her own without financial support from the father if he decides he wants to give up his rights like she “had the option” to do with abortion. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - The mother can give up those responsibilities when the child is born via adoption. Likewise, the father. What may be fair to you or me is not the same as what is legally allowed. As long as there is at least one entity (mother, father or state) caring for that child, that child is sufficiently being cared for under the law. 

My reference to the tubal ligation only makes the vasectomy issue moot – if a man is forced to be responsible in your situation, then the mother, not the state, should be forced to be responsible. 

@QuantumStorm@xanga - I think the woman can always give up her rights after the child is born.  I don’t think the father can unless she allows him to.  That is the part that isn’t fair.  And that part has nothing to do with abortion. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - So are you agreeing, then, that the father should have the right to drop paternal responsibility if he so desires? 

@QuantumStorm@xanga - No, I’m agreeing that a woman shouldn’t be allowed to hand the child over to the father without paying child support herself.  That’s where it is unfair.  If both parents agree to adoption, then fine.  Or even if the woman has a step-father willing to adopt the child then yes, the father should be able to give up his rights. 

I firmly believe children have the right to have two parents, and ideally the biological parents should be those ones.  The end result of all this will actually be messed up kids, if we allow one parent to just walk away.

To all: don’t bother arguing with the middle-aged redhead. She’s a man-hating bitch who needs to be hanged, drawn, and quartered. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - Then are you against the safe haven option, too? 

As for abortion, I’d argue that that DOES have something to do with it, because if you haven’t noticed, there’s a causal link between having an abortion and… er… not being a mother. Or a father. Of said child. 

@QuantumStorm@xanga - Actually I am not a fan of safe haven laws.  I know people believe they save newborn lives, but I’m not convinced.

Nobody is a parent until the child is born alive. 

@StatelessPilot@revelife - You’re just jealous I’m not your mommy cuz I would have let you keep your foreskin.  Haha my boys have theirs.  

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - There’s a lot more to life than that. You’re just fucking man-hating SCUM. Yeah, you read that right: you’re SCUM! This world would have been better off if you (and your disgusting children) were never born! You’re a worthless piece of shit who thinks a man owes you everything (including dinner)! 

Sounds to me like you’re nothing but a gold digger, actually. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - Oh, and by the way, if my mother had her way that would have been the case. As it is, my father’s decision won out. The bastard. 

@StatelessPilot@revelife - There’s medication you forgot to take, no?

My sons aren’t circumcised because I believe born people have the right to decide what happens to their body, so I wouldn’t have allowed their father to let them be circumcised.  And had the hospital done it anyway, (they go to the mother for consent), I would have sued them.  Sorry your mommy didn’t fight for your foreskin or for you to have rights to your own body.

@StatelessPilot@revelife - ”You’re just fucking man-hating SCUM.”

I don’t sleep with anyone who hates men.  hahaha

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - I don’t hold her responsible for anything. Both my father and the attending physician insisted on it, so they plotted a sneaky plan and went to him for consent while my mother was asleep. The form was signed and the deed was done while my mother was out of it. Like I said, I don’t hold her responsible, in fact, I love my mother to pieces. I actually brought her down here to live with me to get her away from a terrible situation with the extended family. Yeah, don’t you go spewing shit about my mother when you have no idea. People who talk shit of my mother in my presence get a one-way trip to the emergency room, so consider yourself lucky you’re thousands of miles away, because I do NOT tolerate that bullshit. 

Further, my mother isn’t like you. She doesn’t believe that women are entitled to free meals from their dates. She doesn’t believe that single parents are by default entitled to child support (read previous comment about that). She’s not a fucking gold digger like you! Truth be told, I’m virtually a male version of her. If you want to know what my mother is like, just look at me. We’re virtually identical. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - You mean you can’t read the difference between using a word in an adjective form and a verb form? Give me a break. You’re even stupider than I initially thought. 

@StatelessPilot@revelife - I am not the one who is more stupid.  lol

It is very natural in many cases to not tell the father of the situation.  And abortion is not an easy way out.  It’s a way out, yes, but easy, no.  If you are wracked with feelings of doubt about the father’s ability to parent the child, but think he’ll take it anyway, that’s another ball of wax.  I think the most beautiful and natural thing a mother could do if she doesn’t want to deal with the man’s family is place the baby for adoption.  Give the baby two parents instead of one.  And then, go back to school, do what she needs to to get on with her life.  It can get sticky if she’s got serious health issues and takes a boat load of meds that would severely handicap the child.  In the faith of my youth these children were called “special spirits.”  No disrespect to the value of life, but I used to wonder how special they actually felt, since many of them couldn’t voice their discomfort or dissatisfaction.  As for a man having a say in having his baby, don’t you think the mother knows whether he’s got the finances to pay for the birthing bill, all the doctor’s visits through out child hood, all the clothing and food needs, day care costs, shall we go on?

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - What you’re not understanding is that abortion directly impacts parenthood. It’s linked with that option. When a woman aborts, or chooses not to abort, it has a direct impact on the father’s rights. What you are arguing is akin to saying that a mosque has the right to prohibit fire services from helping schoolgirls trapped in a fire because the schoolgirls’ faces are exposed, and then arguing that the schoolgirls died because of their own fault. 

This is one of those cases where someone’s rights directly impact the rights of others. Asking for men to have the option of dropping paternal responsibility, however, does NOT impede on her rights, and even if you and I would DESIRE that children be raised in a dual-parent household (I do have issues with safe haven laws myself), like grtt said, we can’t legislate against stupidity in this way. 

The man could always adopt a child or have a seregate mom if he wanted a baby that bad.

Besides would it not be better to take care of someone already here than one that might be? There would be less unfortunate people.

Am I the only person who is highly offended by the “sure there’s always the easy way out…….”

Nothing about finding out your pregnant OR deciding what choice to make that will affect the rest of your and the child’s life..is EASY.And “my body, my rights” isn’t even allowed to be an argument? Well then, I believe there is no argument at all.
To answer your question, maybe you should ask my friend who was seriously considering an abortion when her boyfriend of 5 years begged her not to and said his dream was finally coming true. He would take care of her the way he had always promised and the baby. 3 months before giving birth, he left her for another girl. Goes to show even after 5 years of being with someone, you don’t REALLY know them. Think he ever sees the kid? Nope. Though she offers to let him all the time. She loves her child very much, but how good is ANYONE’s word? 

@hilary_shinn - No, I’m completely offended by the same things.  

@QuantumStorm@xanga - I am three times more understanding that abortion impacts parenthood, I have three kids.  But what you are failing to grasp is that nobody has any legal parental rights until the child is born.  Paternity cannot be established (unless there are now prenatal paternal tests) before birth.  Each person has a right to their own body.  Abortion gives that option to women who would consider it.  It doesn’t mean abortion must be an option for each woman to consider.  So, to say that since women (those damn uppity women, going around demanding rights to their own body) have the legal option to abortion that then men should be able to denounce paternity (hey, it’s only fair since every women decides between abortion, adoption, or keeping the baby [no, she doesn't]), is simply bull shit.  Not every woman decides between abortion and pregnancy.  Some women don’t consider either abortion or adoption, so they don’t deserve to be “punished” by allowing men to legally be given an out for child support. 

Child support is for the care of the child, whether the custodial parent misuses the funds or not.  The child, not the mother, is entitled to financial support from both parents.  It’s crappy enough parents ditch their kids to one or no parents (all without adoption) as it is, we do not need to give men a further and easier path to ditch their responsibilities to their born children.  It’s about children at this point, not the mother.  A woman, simply because she is a woman, should not be so completely and solely left in charge of the raising of American children.  And that’s what you are actually promoting… keep the woman in the kitchen barefoot because they have all these special rights to not be parents.  Women and men both have the right to decide what happens to their body (except in the case of infant circumcision) and that is what abortion is about.  Yes, the end result is that two people won’t be parents of that unborn child.  But legally, abortion isn’t about parenting.  It’s about a woman’s body. 

Yes, it is sad and horrible that men have no say in a woman choosing or not choosing abortion, but let’s not punish children by a failing attempt at “gender equality” by allowing one parent to walk out on his born children.  You only need to look up the stats of single parents to see why this would fail the children, not the women.  Believe it or not, people are not falling over themselves to adopt unwanted babies and children.  And women who would not choose abortion or adoption, would be stuck far too many times with being single parents.  Look at the stats, it would only get worse for children. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - Child support is not transparent and in a lot of cases can be abused as a means to support a woman’s habits instead of the child’s needs. 

“A woman, simply because she is a woman, should not be so completely and solely left in charge of the raising of American children.”
If it becomes a problem for her, she can give the child up for adoption. She can already do that with existing safe haven laws. 
“And that’s what you are actually promoting… keep the woman in the kitchen barefoot because they have all these special rights to not be parents. “
Actually, what I’m promoting is the support of individual rights under the current system. Not sure what you’re promoting. 
“But legally, abortion isn’t about parenting.  It’s about a woman’s body. “
But that choice affects paternity, though. Sure, paternal rights aren’t established until the child is born – but the paternal rights are CAUSALLY linked to the woman’s individual right, which should NOT be the case in a society where we advocate the protection of individual rights. That was the point I was making about my analogy. There is a double-standard at play when it comes to individual rights versus child responsibilities. 
“Yes, it is sad and horrible that men have no say in a woman choosing or not choosing abortion, but let’s not punish children by a failing attempt at “gender equality” by allowing one parent to walk out on his born children.”
Speculation. I could just as well argue that with such a paternal law in place, women would be more careful about having sex. Maybe they’d pursue contractually binding constructs prior to engaging in sexual intercourse to ensure that the man stays around. But the current system has a double-standard that inherently violates the individual rights of men while condoning unscrupulous behavior on the part of women (eg: women rummaging for condoms, female-on-male rape, female-on-male statutory rape, etc). 

You may argue, “but think about the children!” and yeah, I think you and I are on the same page when it comes to what is BENEFICIAL for a child. But what is beneficial is different from what is legally required. If we were to take the “think of the children!” route, we would ban safe haven laws… we would ban women from working after childbirth for the formative years of a child’s life… and the argument just gets more and more slippery after that. 

@QuantumStorm@xanga - We can’t base laws on the fact that some parents may abuse child support.  The only thing we can do is be sure the child is taken care of properly.  Besides it is usually that child support doesn’t actually take care of half the costs of care.  I only know of one single parent (she had the rich guys’ kids) who receives more money in child support than she actually needs. 

It is rather difficult to decide which rights supercede other rights.  1) Each person has a right to their own body.  2) Each person has a right to life.  3)  Each person has a right to be a parent to their child.  There is no way to really justify one right is more important than another.  Do you not agree with that?  So, unfortunately we need to leave it up to the person whose body it is.  Sadly, that means a person dies (I refuse to say an embryo is not a person) and a father has no say… because unfortunately that person is growing not in the father’s body, but in the mother’s.  It’s horrible, but so is forcing a woman to be pregnant against her will. 

True, that women can work that system.  But then for the first time ever, men need to be more judicious in who they sleep with.  For thousands of years, women have been left holding the bag for pregnancies and children.  Check the historical records, I don’t think we need to go back to those times.  We must learn from history, not repeat it.  I know women trick men into pregnancy, but that’s still not the issue of the child’s.  The child still have the right to be taken care of by both parents. 

Actually, I would never vote in favor of Safe Haven laws.  I don’t think they are fair, right, nor do I believe they actually save lives.  I think people who would kill a newborn so to not get caught, will still do so.  And people with enough sense to leave their baby (there is often some identification system so the person can come back if they change their mind) aren’t going to kill their baby anyway.  And none of this protects the other parent.  Technically, a father could run off with the newborn and do the same thing. 

See now, I am even more convinced this is a matter of punishing women for demanding rights, than before… You say… “we would ban women from working after childbirth”… but you don’t say we would ban one parent from working.  Really what is your agenda?  Women do not actually have more legal rights in this country.  Although, if you cited infant circumcision as a reason why women do, I would begin to believe you. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - “We can’t base laws on the fact that some parents may abuse child support.”

The problem is that the current system condones and enforces that abuse. And not only that, your argument AGAINST my position is that it could be potentially abused. So you can’t say, “yes this law is okay even though abuse occurs” and then say “no this law won’t work because abuse will occur”. That’s inconsistent at best. 

“1) Each person has a right to their own body.  2) Each person has a right to life.  3)  Each person has a right to be a parent to their child.”
Is there a fourth, like “Each person has a right to someone else’s support”?
“It’s horrible, but so is forcing a woman to be pregnant against her will. “
Again, no one here is arguing that the woman should be pregnant against her will. What we’re arguing is AGAINST the notion that men should be fathers against their will.
“ I know women trick men into pregnancy, but that’s still not the issue of the child’s.  The child still have the right to be taken care of by both parents. “
Again, you’re arguing a slippery slope with what is beneficial vs. what is legal. If the child has a right to support, does that right supersede the individual rights of a human being? If so, then at what point do we define as valid “support”?

“See now, I am even more convinced this is a matter of punishing women for demanding rights, than before… You say… “we would ban women from working after childbirth”… but you don’t say we would ban one parent from working.  Really what is your agenda?”

Your argument allegedly centers around what is beneficial for the children, but more specifically, that it should be legislated. Do you mean to tell me that you DON’T think it’s beneficial for a woman to be around her children during their formative years? Because what you’re suggesting is opening up a can of worms when we define what is “beneficial” and then legislate that into place. Okay, sure, we could argue that one parent has to stay at home. Which is more “Beneficial” for the child – that the father, or the mother, stay home? Or how about if it’s a lesbian family – or a gay family – who stays home then? And then how long? What sort of schooling should be legislated that is “beneficial” for a child? The meal menus? Etc.?

And if certain things are beneficial for children, what about adults? For example, if it’s beneficial to get a regular massage, should I mandate that the government pay for massages because they’re “beneficial” to me?

This is the point that grtt kept trying to make – and what you keep failing – or refusing – to grasp. You can set baseline rules that protect the rights of people but you can’t legislate your idea of perfect parenting. The current system enforces a double-standard when it comes to the individual rights of men vs. women, because a woman’s individual right to her body also impacts a man’s right to his autonomy. 

Hell, even the former president of NOW made this point: 

“if a woman makes a unilateral decision to bring pregnancy to term, and the biological father does not, and cannot, share in this decision, he should not be liable for 21 years of support…autonomous women making independent decisions about their lives should not expect men to finance their choice.”

http://www.salon.com/2000/10/19/mens_choice/

“Women do not actually have more legal rights in this country.”
If a man is raped by a female, and the female gets pregnant, he is still required to pay child support. If it is a case of statutory female-on-male rape, he is still required to pay. 
Men can’t opt out of the military draft on the basis of gender. 
I guess those issues are irrelevant in your book. After all, they are men’s issues, and why would you care about what happens to men anyways, right?
I’m sorry that arguing for the protection of individual rights is such a problem for you. But I’m guessing in your opinion, the only rights that matter are those of the women, right? 

The fundamental point is that you seem to be okay with overriding men’s individual rights by using “think of the children!” as a paltry veil if it means the women get what they want. After all, if women have been systematically suppressed for thousands of years, it makes it okay to enforce a legal double-standard, even if that scoops up innocent men in the process. Right? 

@QuantumStorm@xanga - How do you really figure the current laws allow abuse in child support??  Have you been through a divorce and/or child custody case?  Or even seen the way it works?  In California, there are formulas they use.  I’d explain them, but I don’t quite understand them.  They take into account both people’s incomes.  I agree that the person with the most income usually either pays more to the other parent or gets less from the other parent.  For example, one guy got sole custody of one child and paid $600 in alimony but received only $200 in child support.  Did $200 pay half of the care of one child in California?  Hell, no!  Another case, a mother of two children gets about $500 a month in child support, but her ex is dragging her to court to demand alimony.  She pays $1200 a month in day care alone, so that $500 is not half of the children’s care.  On and on, this is the case the majority of the time.  It’s an urban legend that seems to spread like wildfire that women spend the child support on bon-bons, dark chocolate and fake nails.  But really what’s happening in most cases, the child support is not covering half the expenses at all.  Snopes.com should investigate and prove to the world so people can stop complaining about something a small portion of mothers are probably actually doing.  

@QuantumStorm@xanga - I’m not a feminist and I don’t agree with NOW’s positions or agenda, so don’t throw that on me just because I’m a woman. 

If, as you suggest, men get to walk away from children you aren’t harming just women.  It is no longer a gender rights issue, it’s about the rights of born children.  Stop making this about simply abortion.  It’s not fair to suggest to women that they must consider abortion an option since men could then have the legal right to walk away.  That’s what that is doing.  Giving men the right to walk away takes away the rights of children and dictates a woman’s choices.  I’m sorry women have to go through monthly periods, pregnancy, labor, delivery, and menopause and men don’t have to go through shit… what’s fair about that?  When it is your body and your uterus, you get to decide what grows in it.  Bottom line.  And when you are a pregnant woman there is no options you MUST consider.  And using abortion as a failed way to demand fake equal rights is simply misogynist. 

We, can’t legislate that one parent stays home and that was never my point.  You said that it should be the mother.  And my point is that your agenda isn’t really male rights.  Your agenda is take back full control (or as much control as you can) over women!  Because obviously you view women as nothing but baby factories who are now usurping men’s so-called rights to decide what happens to a woman’s body and re-establish a system where men aren’t held responsible for the children they create. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - Lol… you’re citing individual cases as though that would somehow justify the fundamental double-standard at play here. That’s like arguing that if, under Jim Crow laws, some of the colored establishments actually fared decently, it’s proof that the Jim Crow laws are okay. 

Even if the support is shitty, it’s still support. It’s still going in favor of the child. But the key is that in many cases, it’s in violation of another person’s individual rights. Should children get all the help they need? Absolutely. I think you and I agree there. But again, you CANNOT legislate perfect parenting. All you can do is legislate a protection of rights – and a man opting out of paying support does NOT violate a child’s rights. You can argue that parental rights don’t come into play until the child is born – but what I and others are saying is that a woman’s right to choose abortion is DIRECTLY LINKED with parental rights. And since that choice is unilateral, that effectively allows for one individual to impose her will upon another individual. That is what the current legal system condones. If you can’t see that, then I think we’re at an impasse. 

“You said that it should be the mother. “
It’s not just me who’s saying that; the courts legislate that way by default, too. If you have a problem with that argument, take it up with them. And even then, I pointed out other situations where it wouldn’t have to be the mother. 
“Because obviously you view women as nothing but baby factories who are now usurping men’s so-called rights to decide what happens to a woman’s body and re-establish a system where men aren’t held responsible for the children they create. “
Right. Keep dreaming. Whatever makes it easier to evade the arguments. 

“ Stop making this about simply abortion. “
But abortion is linked to this issue! You can’t just WISH it away. The fact is, a woman’s right to an abortion DIRECTLY IMPACTS a man’s paternal responsibilities, and no amount of foot-stamping on your part is going to change that reality.
“ Giving men the right to walk away takes away the rights of children and dictates a woman’s choices.”
No, it doesn’t. There are women who intentionally keep men out of the child’s life (even going so far as to not pursuing child support) if it means the man doesn’t get a chance at custody. There’s one person here who gives women less credit for thinking independently and I have a feeling it’s not me. 
“ I’m sorry women have to go through monthly periods, pregnancy, labor, delivery, and menopause and men don’t have to go through shit… what’s fair about that?”
We don’t pay for your periods or menopause. But pregnancy, labor, delivery… those are entirely in YOUR hands as women. 
“When it is your body and your uterus, you get to decide what grows in it.  Bottom line.”
Again, if you want access to abortion, then you have to give men access to parental responsibility denial. Bottom line. Because your unilateral choice impedes on their individual rights. If a man chooses to drop those rights under such a change, it does not legally FORCE a woman to do anything. 

Again, it looks like we’ve reached an impasse. Maybe when you’re done blustering you can focus on the point that grtt, myself and others have been making about individual rights. It looks less like you’re here to discuss things intelligently and more like you’re just here to bolster your own misandry. 

@QuantumStorm@xanga - Cite me an actual case where a mother spent child support on herself and her child went without.  Do it?  Can you?  Because I can show you cases where a child went without because the father didn’t pay way more.  Actual cases too.

No, you cannot legislate perfect parenting which is why there are no laws on the books that say each parent must spend X amount of time actually physically caring for the child all by themself.  That’s legislating something we can’t, although I sure wish we could because probably even more children suffer from lack of parental involvement than lack of financial support.  As a society, we sure as hell do get to dictate that parents take financial care of their children.  We dictate all kinds of things like that.  If I crash into your car, does the court infringe on my rights by making me pay you for the damage I caused?  No… they are making me financially responsible for my actions.  And once a child is born, both parents are responsible.  (Don’t go back to abortion, because no woman has to choose abortion or adoption.)

You keep harping on abortion being an option as if giving women that option comes with punishment.  Whatever legal options a woman has, it does not mean they have to be an option for her.  Do you not get that?  Just because I have the right to choose abortion does not mean it is an option for me.  So, while I do not wish to make some rape victim stand before a judge and beg to end her pregnancy, does not mean that I should have to raise children on my own.  Because that is what you’d be doing to a lot of women, forcing them to raise children alone.  Some women will not choose abortion or adoption because they don’t believe in it. So, you can’t shove “equal rights” onto them when really what it means is that they will be forced to raise a child on their own and that child will be deprived of the financial support of one parent.  And for the woman teetering on abortion or not, you’re forcing her hand into an abortion if she knows she can’t financially handle a baby on her own or even handle the expenses of having a baby.  You will be a part in increasing the death of more babies and throwing more children into poverty. 

I’m not pro-choice (I don’t think abortion should be legal for any reason beyond a certain point) and I’m not pro-life (I don’t believe rape victims should go to court to prove they were raped in order to abort their rapist’s child).  But I sure am pro-children (after they are born) and if it makes me wrong to put their rights ahead of men’s supposed rights, so be it.  I’m just evil.

@QuantumStorm@xanga - I have two sons.  There’s absolutely no way it is possible for me to hate men.  I prefer the company of men to women by far.  I am far more comfortable in a group of men, than I am in a group of women.  That’s part of why I enjoyed my time in the Navy.  And since I actually don’t hate men and aren’t a lesbian, it’s just sad that anyone would continue to suggest that. 

In issues of raising children, men have failed for eons on this.  Check your history, you will see that.  If you want to discuss issues where women horrifically terrify men, bring it up.  Hell, I’ll give you one.  If a woman does force herself onto a man and he believes he is raped… nobody believes him.  Everyone will make fun of him and come up with a thousand reasons why he wasn’t raped but is just trying to either not get made fun of if she wasn’t hot or some other crazy reason.  I will not suggest that women are perfect at all, but traditionally women didn’t have the right to what happens to their own body and they had no recourse in issues of child custody and child support.  In fact, women getting custody over men is something fairly recent and new in the 20th Century. 

@TiredSoVeryTired@xanga - Like I said before, we’re at an impasse until you consider the legal issues at heart, not what you would ideally want or what I would ideally want or what you or I would THINK would happen. Again, we both seem to agree with what should be done for the children, but what SHOULD happen doesn’t address the fundamental legal issue here of a violation of individual rights. 

Also, when you accused me of viewing women as baby-making factories, you reminded me of a Bizarre Foods episode I saw the other night where Andrew Zimmern ate cooked chicken’s uterus. Don’t know why that popped up. I should stop doing “Bizarre Food” marathons.

Anyways, feel free to have the last word. 

I say, if we want to be truly equal here, the man should have the right to choose to take care of the child when it is born. However, I think he should also take some classes, because he won’t really have the natural, mothering instincts that a woman does… But that’s beside the point here. I believe that if the man wants to solely raise the child completely on his own, he should be given the chance. “It takes two to tango,” yes. My belief is that is also takes two to parent. But whereas the man can sign over his rights as a parent (which I believe is retarded. Grow up, humanity!), I believe the female should also be able to handle the situation the same, in the case where the man may want to keep the baby. It would simply make sense. I have seen cases like this, where the man wants to be a father and keep the baby, but the woman wants to part of it. I understand that he isn’t the one carrying it around for nine months. But again, in the case of consensual sex, common sense tells us that there will always be a possibility for pregnancy anytime a man enters a woman. Common, people. Common sense here. Anywho. So, it’s not like she didn’t know she could end up pregnant. There is no proven method, besides abstinence. Anywho. So, it’s her responsibility as a woman to carry it around since she made that choice to risk the possibility by doing the deed that naturally results in pregnancy under normal circumstances. And since it takes two to make a child, I believe he should have the choice to keep his child. Wisen up people. If you don’t want to run the risk of pregnancy, close your legs. Sorry to put it bluntly, but really? I have so many friends coming up to me afraid they may be pregnant. I don’t feel sorry for them. I love them and treat them as such, but they knew the risk they were running with. While I love them and hate that they didn’t plan it out, so to speak, I don’t feel sorry for them. It’s odd. But anywho. Back to the point of the post; yes, I believe the father should have the right to keep the baby if he wants. HE himself. I don’t believe he should be able to force the woman to co-parent, like we aren’t allowed to force them. However, I believe he should have the choice to choose to father his own child. I wish we lived in a better world. :/