UK I think? I mean, all other health stuff is free here...Sober Thal said:
(Not joining in on argument, just saying.)
Poll: Male reproductive rights
- Thread starter wolas3214
- Start date
Recommended Videos
(Not joining in on argument, just saying.)
1) Then in those places a legal abortion for men would not be needed. In places where abortion is legal, then men deserve an equal right in that regard and the only fair way to do it would be a legal opt out.trooper6 said:
2) No, they are being told be the government how much they must give to the mother every month and she can do with that money as she sees fit. Indeed, child support is enforced by the government but visitation rights are not. If she refuses to let him see the child the cops will not help him, he will have to pay a lawyer and take it to court where the court will simply issue an order that again, that cops won't honor. For child support though, the cops are very much involved and will even go so far as to publicly shame fathers who don't pay. Yes, it's wage slavery and if you refuse to pay, it's off to jail for you, debtors prison.
Did you know that several states supreme courts have determined child support to be unconstitutional? Look it up and learn something.
3) That depends on how much you make but a typical father has to pay for two families if he decides not live alone for those 18 years.
well you cannot force a woman to have an abortion. it is often an emotionally traumatic experience at the best of times, let alone if she actually wants the baby but the father is making her get rid of it.
however, if the dad doesn't want the child, he should be under no obligation to support its upbringing. if a woman doesn't want her child it is fairly socially acceptable for her to abort it or adopt, but men are under social pressure (and possibly legal pressure, although I don't know specifics) to help care for the baby if she chooses to keep it, with a strong stigma against them leaving the woman to fend for herself. how is that fair? women can choose to get rid of a child, but men can't?
however, if the dad doesn't want the child, he should be under no obligation to support its upbringing. if a woman doesn't want her child it is fairly socially acceptable for her to abort it or adopt, but men are under social pressure (and possibly legal pressure, although I don't know specifics) to help care for the baby if she chooses to keep it, with a strong stigma against them leaving the woman to fend for herself. how is that fair? women can choose to get rid of a child, but men can't?
You're only half right. Ultimately, the decision should fall to BOTH the man and the woman.
You also touched on another far more important issue, church and state. Or rather, church interfering with state matters. In this case the control of our reproductive organs. Instead of weighing the good and the bad, we still have a lot of people deeply rooted in superstitious nonsense consulting a book thousands of years old. Or worse, changing the laws in order to remove the right to have control over your own body. And it always turns out the same, "No that's a sin, because that's murder." This in turn leads to increased poverty.
You also touched on another far more important issue, church and state. Or rather, church interfering with state matters. In this case the control of our reproductive organs. Instead of weighing the good and the bad, we still have a lot of people deeply rooted in superstitious nonsense consulting a book thousands of years old. Or worse, changing the laws in order to remove the right to have control over your own body. And it always turns out the same, "No that's a sin, because that's murder." This in turn leads to increased poverty.
I guess the 'man up and use protection, dammit' argument works the same as the 'man up and keep it in your pants, dammit' argument, huh.Codot Hawke said:
I still go back to my opinion that intelligent people will be the ones to use protection, and in the end will raise better children when they do decide it's time. So again dumb people are ruining things for everyone.
I should really feel worse about how dumb-racist I am. But I don't.
The furthest I would go in changing Parental Rights Law would be to allow Parents (of any gender) to relinquish their financial/legal responsibilities if they so chose, with no need for the other party (or the court system) to consent to said waiver.
I know it sounds like this would 'hurt the poor children' but what would you rather have...a Non-Parent who is absent because they do not want to be there (resulting in single parent financial hardship) or a Parent that may slowly become nothing but a Paycheck, who comes to resent their own children (resulting in neglect and possibly even abuse)?
I know it sounds like this would 'hurt the poor children' but what would you rather have...a Non-Parent who is absent because they do not want to be there (resulting in single parent financial hardship) or a Parent that may slowly become nothing but a Paycheck, who comes to resent their own children (resulting in neglect and possibly even abuse)?
Nah, it'd be a point system. Too many stupid points means you are a detriment to the human race. Things like driving drunk and having unprotected sex for the lols would give you points.Sober Thal said:
I'm only half joking. God I hate stupid people so much.
....What?Sober Thal said:
Edit: So I don't get banned. Who brought in murder? I am not sure what you are talking about.
It's a difficult issue to deal with.
Right now, the system, such as it is, is weighted to favor women.
Woman doesn't want a child? Abortion.
Man doesn't want a child? Tough shit deadbeat, you're on the hook for 18 years.
Now, you can say "Men should just keep it in their pants if they don't want to have kids!"
And I can say "Women should just keep their pants on if they don't want to have kids!"
You can say "Sometimes it's not a woman's choice to get pregnant!"
And I can say "Sometimes it's not a man's choice for a woman to get pregnant!"
There is a quick and easy rebuttal to every point against granting equal reproductive rights to men as are currently enjoyed by women.
The fact of the matter is that it takes TWO PEOPLE TO HAVE SEX.
Frankly, if a woman can opt to terminate an unwanted pregnancy with or without the consent of the father, a man should be able to opt out of raising an unwanted child, with or without the consent of the mother.
Right now, the system, such as it is, is weighted to favor women.
Woman doesn't want a child? Abortion.
Man doesn't want a child? Tough shit deadbeat, you're on the hook for 18 years.
Now, you can say "Men should just keep it in their pants if they don't want to have kids!"
And I can say "Women should just keep their pants on if they don't want to have kids!"
You can say "Sometimes it's not a woman's choice to get pregnant!"
And I can say "Sometimes it's not a man's choice for a woman to get pregnant!"
There is a quick and easy rebuttal to every point against granting equal reproductive rights to men as are currently enjoyed by women.
The fact of the matter is that it takes TWO PEOPLE TO HAVE SEX.
Frankly, if a woman can opt to terminate an unwanted pregnancy with or without the consent of the father, a man should be able to opt out of raising an unwanted child, with or without the consent of the mother.