Poll: Male reproductive rights

[RachaelIsaacHill]

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)?

Yes, I agree. Contempt is far worse to be raised around than simply absence. Honestly kids don't need that old nuclear family to be raised well, it's been proven time and time again that single-parent families and homosexual families, and every shade of purple in between, all can raise great kids provided there is love involved.

 

[Littlee300]

since when (and where) is abortion free?
.

UK I think? I mean, all other health stuff is free here...

(Not joining in on argument, just saying.)

By 'free' you mean tax payers pay for it, eh? I wouldn't want my tax money paying for other peoples mistakes. Not abortions anyway.

$400 dollars is not a big deal in contrast to something life changing like having a baby. There are stories of people murdering infants because they can't get abortions.

 

[Warped_Ghost]

See the problem here is that we gave the men the vote.

 

[Pinkamena]

I agree on some parts, but not all. I do think that getting a child should be something both parents agree on, otherwise the child could get a bad life.

 

[Brandon237]

Bit of a huge and strange step, but the man should not always be seen as guilty from the start of the trial, shite happens, and woman can be manipulative and lie too, if neither side wants a child, Both should use some form of contraceptive. Especially for one night-stands and th like where legal issues can really screw someone up.

Common sense and education over new laws that cause controversy, any day.

 

[RachaelIsaacHill]

EDIT: It's sad that so far over 85 people think this is a good idea. Just don't have sex in a way that can lead to pregnancy if you don't want to deal with the chance of having to be a responsible adult.Think about it. Be creative. The internet is full of ideas in this regard.

Think about it this way. Do you really want someone stupid enough to knock up a girl and realize he doesn't want to a kid to spread his genes?

Oh yeah, sure... think about it this way... lets just kill the people we think are stupid. Stop them before they cause problems. We can set up a test at age 16, if the fail it, they die!

Great ideas!

/sarcasm

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.

I'm only half joking. God I hate stupid people so much.

Eugenics, you know who else in history supported that too, right?

There's actually a logical fallacy involved when things eventually devolve down to comparing to Hitler. And this isn't eugenics. Eugenics suggests that some people are genetically superior to others. Hitler didn't give jews a system by which to prove how jew-ey or non-jewey they were. (Well, he kind of did, but it had nothing to do with the actions of the person, only their genetics). I'm saying, we have jails for people to go to when they've done enough bad stuff. I'm not suggesting we kill all the people who have proved to be too dumb to live (forgive the saying), but perhaps revoking the right to procreate after you've proven you will be terrible at it might not be a bad idea.

 

[Seives-Sliver]

The most I can say on this matter really is that everyone needs to be more responsible with whoever they sleep with, though I am behind on a law that caps the amount of children two people are allowed to have, seriously, I live in a state where there would be one woman with like, seven kids trailing behind her...

 

[lucaf]

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.

completely agree with this. if a woman can opt out of having a child, so should men. it would still be biased against men because they can't keep the child without the mothers consent, but that is unavoidable

 

[Singularly Datarific]

Contrary to what Christians would have you believe, people have sex for pleasure, and only rarely set out with the intention of creating a child.

WE KNOW. (Sorry, I just hate being stuck in a stereotype. Maybe it's just those in the bible-belt, but the people I know aren't stupid or bigoted.)
Personally, I'd argue a little more care taken about the whole sex business. Whether or not it's for pleasure, natural selection makes sure it damn well works at making kids. My (PERSONAL, not religious) beliefs about sex before marriage have to do with this- having a kid means either an abortion, a broken family for the kid, or a hastened decision about who you have to spend the rest of your life with, which could land you with the wrong person. To me, the term "casual sex" sounds about the same as "casual eye surgery". It's something that should be treated with a little more respect, because the consequences otherwise can be very sucky.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

This is just awful I don't even...

Having an abortion isn't like going to get an ingrowing toenail removed. It's traumatic and has mental implications. To force someone to have an abortion just becuase the father doesn't want it is just horrific. I don't even have the words...The reason why it is a double standard is becuase its the womans body. Why should you be forced to do anything you don't want to?

There is NO SHAME in being a single mother, I might actually have a child on my own eventually if I never meet anyone.

An adult accepts responsibility for thier actions. It's this responsibilty you want to circumvent and leave men a way to run away from thier 'mistakes' completely which is what children do.

There is a horrible trend of people acting like pregnant women are a different class of people it needs to stop.

, a guy I knew put tobasco sauce in used condoms,

If his sperm looked like tobasco sauce there was probably never any danger there anyway

 

[Epona]

EDIT: It's sad that so far over 85 people think this is a good idea. Just don't have sex in a way that can lead to pregnancy if you don't want to deal with the chance of having to be a responsible adult.Think about it. Be creative. The internet is full of ideas in this regard.

Think about it this way. Do you really want someone stupid enough to knock up a girl and realize he doesn't want to a kid to spread his genes?

Oh yeah, sure... think about it this way... lets just kill the people we think are stupid. Stop them before they cause problems. We can set up a test at age 16, if the fail it, they die!

Great ideas!

/sarcasm

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.

I'm only half joking. God I hate stupid people so much.

Eugenics, you know who else in history supported that too, right?

There's actually a logical fallacy involved when things eventually devolve down to comparing to Hitler. And this isn't eugenics. Eugenics suggests that some people are genetically superior to others. Hitler didn't give jews a system by which to prove how jew-ey or non-jewey they were. (Well, he kind of did, but it had nothing to do with the actions of the person, only their genetics). I'm saying, we have jails for people to go to when they've done enough bad stuff. I'm not suggesting we kill all the people who have proved to be too dumb to live (forgive the saying), but perhaps revoking the right to procreate after you've proven you will be terrible at it might not be a bad idea.

Here ya go:

eu·gen·ics
   [yoo-jen-iks] Show IPA
?noun ( used with a singular verb )
the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/eugenics

Murder is not a requirement of eugenics. In fact, by definition, eugenics is just as YOU have described your ideas. To deny procreation of those whom you think are "stupid".

 

[RachaelIsaacHill]

If she refuses to take a birth control pill, then either wear a rubber or don't stick it in at all. It's not difficult.

I hate birth control with a fiery passion. It makes me feel sick and be unable to eat stuff a lot of times. We've yet to find one for me that actually works and doesn't throw my entire body chemistry off into cukoo-bananna land. But dammit, I will deal with that as long as it means no babies.

 

[Alex Gray]

Two things:

1. I think all the people advocating anything to do with contracts or other legal remedies, including the OP, would do well to step back and consider the actual trustworthiness of the government, including legislatures, judiciary and law enforcement. In ANY country.

2. The people advocating abstinence on this thread, especially the women, must not know any hormonally ordinary men below retirement age very well. Especially in modern industrial societies where sexual imagery is everywhere, the level of frustrated sexual desire the average male (yes, married men too - in fact, DOUBLE for married men, talk to one sometime after he's had a few drinks) can be literal torture. In the vain pursuit of relief, men can be manipulated into doing just about anything: part with large sums of money (see the ads on this site, for example :-3 ), unwisely sign legal documents, have sex with any woman who seems remotely amenable regardless of her actual amenability or her degree of trustworthiness... I'd be amazed if there have been any objective studies on this but I feel pretty confident that only a tiny minority of women, those with certain psychiatric or hormone problems, ever experience what most men experience for decades.

Especially considering my first point, obviously no coercive solution is indicated here. The solution: a safe, over-the-counter, reversible chemical castration drug for the men who wish their desire for sex would just go away. That, or a change in society where women become MUCH more willing to assist in the safer-sexual relief of men of their acquaintance. Frankly, I think the sci-fi wonder drug is a lot more likely to happen. I would peg this as a higher medical research priority than all but the most serious current outstanding health problems - it doesn't DIRECTLY kill anyone (though it's a prime factor in an awful lot of suicides and homicides), but the positive benefits to society would be unimaginable.

(And to pre-empt a couple of other possibilities: masturbation is barely even a band-aid on LONG-TERM sexual frustration, and many men, such as myself, are simply physically repulsed by other men's bodies no matter how okay we are with other men enjoying each other's bodies.)

---------------

But then, taken together, 1 and 2 suggest that, even this far into our development, humanity is failing in the most complete way imaginable at managing 2 very important and pressing things, their natural tendency to harm and exploit each other and the endless waste-heat vent that is the male libido. Maybe we've just run our course as a species.

 

[Raesvelg]

An adult accepts responsibility for thier actions. It's this responsibilty you want to circumvent and leave men a way to run away from thier 'mistakes' completely which is what children do.

An adult, like, say... A woman with an unwanted pregnancy?

Isn't she trying to run away from her "mistake" by aborting the fetus?

Bear in mind that I'm pro-choice here, but you have to see the inherent hypocrisy in what you're saying.

 

[RachaelIsaacHill]

EDIT: It's sad that so far over 85 people think this is a good idea. Just don't have sex in a way that can lead to pregnancy if you don't want to deal with the chance of having to be a responsible adult.Think about it. Be creative. The internet is full of ideas in this regard.

Think about it this way. Do you really want someone stupid enough to knock up a girl and realize he doesn't want to a kid to spread his genes?

Oh yeah, sure... think about it this way... lets just kill the people we think are stupid. Stop them before they cause problems. We can set up a test at age 16, if the fail it, they die!

Great ideas!

/sarcasm

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.

I'm only half joking. God I hate stupid people so much.

Eugenics, you know who else in history supported that too, right?

There's actually a logical fallacy involved when things eventually devolve down to comparing to Hitler. And this isn't eugenics. Eugenics suggests that some people are genetically superior to others. Hitler didn't give jews a system by which to prove how jew-ey or non-jewey they were. (Well, he kind of did, but it had nothing to do with the actions of the person, only their genetics). I'm saying, we have jails for people to go to when they've done enough bad stuff. I'm not suggesting we kill all the people who have proved to be too dumb to live (forgive the saying), but perhaps revoking the right to procreate after you've proven you will be terrible at it might not be a bad idea.

Here ya go:

eu·gen·ics
   [yoo-jen-iks] Show IPA
?noun ( used with a singular verb )
the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/eugenics

Murder is not a requirement of eugenics. In fact, by definition, eugenics is just as YOU have described your ideas. To deny procreation of those whom you think are "stupid".

I have been corrected. I stand here before you as a fan of eugenics.

I know you all think I'm a terrible person because of this, but let me make myself clear. People with mental disabilities are not 'stupid'. People who grew up in a bad area without proper education and without a means to better themselves are not 'stupid'. We are all at the mercy of the circumstances of our birth.

However, people that should know better and don't. People that drink and drive, thinking 'it won't happen to me'. People that have unprotected sex because they would rather take that risk than be inconvenienced in any way. People that take advantage of their government, friends, or situation as an excuse to be lazy or otherwise worthless to society. These are the stupid people of the world.

We test for competence in many areas. We ask that certain requirements such as age and proof of intelligence be met for many things in society such as drinking, driving, renting cars and houses, and working. Is it such a stretch, or even a bad thing, to require this of procreation as well?

 

[Pontus Hashis]

If the woman chooses to keep the child, then it's her responsebilety.