1. #1981
    Quote Originally Posted by prwraith View Post
    No we want to waive our rights to an unborn unformed fetus. I want to sign a piece of paper before I even have sex that says I absolute do not want a kid or any responsibilities associated with said kid. When I am ready to have them I'll shred it.

    I want to state this far in advance and tell every girl I'm intimate with that this is the situation so it won't come as a surprise down the road.

    I'm hardly trying to trick anyone or cop out I'm just covering my ass.
    You can waive your rights regarding the fetus. You are welcome to have absolutely nothing to do with the pregnancy if you so choose. You cannot however waive your responsibilities regarding the rights of an actual living child. A child is not a fetus. Once born they have their own rights, and those supersede the rights of *both* parents where there's conflict. This issue is about your rights vs the rights of the child.

  2. #1982
    Deleted
    they should certainly be allowed to choose before birth whether to support it or not, why is it only the women's choice whether to spend years paying for something ?

  3. #1983
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Windfury View Post
    You can waive your rights regarding the fetus. You are welcome to have absolutely nothing to do with the pregnancy if you so choose. You cannot however waive your responsibilities regarding the rights of an actual living child.
    Legal abortion fine as long as its a fetus lol
    Absolutely hypocracy how can you not see it you know its a fetus first and then becomes a child.

  4. #1984
    Quote Originally Posted by Lemonpartyfan View Post
    No, the laws are unfair. Its not special if the female would get the same treatment.
    They do get the same treatment now. Women can pay child support. Women can also *not* opt out of supporting their child once it's born (excepting adoption etc, but that requires consent from both parents). What you want is a unilateral one person opting out of their legal responsibilities regarding a child. That is special treatment. Special treatment which shouldn't be ok for either parent tbh (again assuming the child is kept).

  5. #1985
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Windfury View Post
    Women can also *not* opt out of supporting their child once it's born (excepting adoption etc, but that requires consent from both parents).
    Thats the point woman can just not name the father.

    The law would even the playing field. It would be gender neutral just benefiting man more because the heinous act of woman who lie knowingly about it are untracable.

  6. #1986
    Quote Originally Posted by Davillage View Post
    Legal abortion fine as long as its a fetus lol
    Absolutely hypocracy how can you not see it you know its a fetus first and then becomes a child.
    Because they're legally and ethically not the same thing? Once birth has occurred the fetus becomes a child and a legal individual in their own right.

  7. #1987
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Windfury View Post
    Once birth has occurred the fetus becomes a child and a legal individual in their own right.
    Waving all responsibility away for cell goo is how morally bad? The same arguments it doesnt matter just stop it and it even starts at that point.

    The law would be gender neutral just that it would be highly unfavorable for woman because they can currently get the same effect by a simple lie.

    Equality yes but unfavorable equality for woman dont want that.

  8. #1988
    Quote Originally Posted by Davillage View Post
    Thats the point woman can just not name the father.

    The law would even the playing field. It would be gender neutral just benefiting man more because the heinous act of woman who lie knowingly about it are untracable.
    Only if the father lets them.

    And no, it's not a question of an even playing field. The playing field is uneven because biology. There's nothing the law can do about that. Writing a law in gender neutral terms than in action benefits men isn't equal.

    That aside the law shouldn't be written to allow *either* parent to just waive their responsibilities. It is not in the best interests of the child to do so, and it is the child that comes first here.

  9. #1989
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Windfury View Post
    And no, it's not a question of an even playing field. The playing field is uneven because biology.
    Nah its uneven not because of biology but because of armed police forces that enable to enforce responsibility for things that are entirely out of your control.

    Said law would not discriminate based on gender.

    Quote Originally Posted by Windfury View Post
    That aside the law shouldn't be written to allow *either* parent to just waive their responsibilities. It is not in the best interests of the child to do so, and it is the child that comes first here.
    Woman can achieve it simple and have 100% control post conception.

    The current situation is unfavorable for children because it enables woman to behave irresponsible.
    Last edited by mmocd79acbf389; 2014-01-05 at 11:25 AM.

  10. #1990
    Quote Originally Posted by Windfury View Post
    Well given that a lot of this boils down to 'it's unfair that she gets to decide whether the carry the fetus or not because she has a womb' it seems like many are arguing that a fundamental biological difference needs to be corrected with special treatment.
    Not at all. It's just arguing for rightful, full choice to also incur the burden of full responsibility.

    Quote Originally Posted by Windfury View Post
    Let's face it, the vast majority of posts here from people on the MRA side of the spectrum aren't even looking at the real issue (rights of father vs rights of child), they're all just bitching and moaning about women's choices.
    What? The child's rights have been addressed many times, and bringing it up at this point is just distracting from the main point here. Women's choices also have nothing to do with this. They don't want an equivalent to abortion, they want not to be shackled by a choice someone else makes, because that is what the situation is to them. The opposite, where if a pregnant woman told a man she'd carry his child to term, but wanted nothing to do with it after birth, should also be acceptable. The "abortion equivalent" is a straw-man, and the 'MRA' indictments are irrelevant and unnecessary ad-hominems.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flutterguy View Post
    In fact, I quite like it and I would consider it an abuse to inflict my child with a foreskin.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalis View Post
    You don't appear to understand how it works...they don't stick it on when the baby is born.

  11. #1991
    Quote Originally Posted by Windfury View Post
    They do get the same treatment now. Women can pay child support. Women can also *not* opt out of supporting their child once it's born (excepting adoption etc, but that requires consent from both parents). What you want is a unilateral one person opting out of their legal responsibilities regarding a child. That is special treatment. Special treatment which shouldn't be ok for either parent tbh (again assuming the child is kept).
    How would it be special treatment, if both parents get the same treatment? 2/2 people get the same choices?

  12. #1992
    Quote Originally Posted by Davillage View Post
    Nah its uneven not because of biology but because of armed police forces that enable to enforce responsibility for things that are entirely out of your control.
    I was referring to the fact that the uneven playing field is a result of one gender having a womb. Last I checked mine isn't full of armed police.

    And again lol @ entirely out of your control. So we're only talking about the tiny minority of cases in which the male was raped then?

  13. #1993
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Windfury View Post
    And again lol @ entirely out of your control. So we're only talking about the tiny minority of cases in which the male was raped then?
    So don't wear skimpy clothes getting raped is not entirely out of your control either.

    The one with the final say is responsible nearly everywhere. I cant even come up with an example without going to Saudi Arabia.
    Last edited by mmocd79acbf389; 2014-01-05 at 11:32 AM.

  14. #1994
    Quote Originally Posted by Lemonpartyfan View Post
    How would it be special treatment, if both parents get the same treatment? 2/2 people get the same choices?
    It is special treatment because one party would be opting out of their legal responsibilities regarding the child, leaving it to the other party. They *both* have responsibilities now, you're arguing for a change in which men could just opt out of their responsibilities to a child i.e. to be treated differently.

    Anyway, I was on my way to the gym, and this is bogging me down. bbl!

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Davillage View Post
    So don't wear skimpy clothes getting raped is not entirely out of your control either.

    The one with the final say is responsible nearly everywhere. I cant even come up with an example without going to saudi arabia.
    And I've finally found my new sig!

  15. #1995
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Windfury View Post
    Anyway, I was on my way to the gym, and this is bogging me down. bbl!
    Cognitive dissonance is stressfull I understand that. You have to align reality with what you think is right stating the truth is much more easy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Windfury View Post
    And I've finally found my new sig!
    Its still your reflection even if you don't like what you see in the mirror.

  16. #1996
    This "biological inequality" non-sequitur is a fallacy. If anything, it is precisely because of this that the woman should be burdened even more.

    Men don't want to have an advantage they can't enjoy because of their biology as opposed to someone else's. Men don't want to be disadvantaged because of someone else's biology, because that is exactly what the situation currently is. There is a huge difference, and to hop between each one is to constantly change the reality of the situation.
    Last edited by Velaniz; 2014-01-05 at 11:27 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Flutterguy View Post
    In fact, I quite like it and I would consider it an abuse to inflict my child with a foreskin.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalis View Post
    You don't appear to understand how it works...they don't stick it on when the baby is born.

  17. #1997
    Quote Originally Posted by cuafpr View Post
    why not? he helped create life, why should she be the sole decider if its allowed to live or die? They both knew the risk with sex, both are equally responsible. regardless of rather or not its a "life" it will become one. I'm not pro life or pro abortion but in this case this is not equal in anyway shape or form. The woman has 100% control when it took both people.
    He isn't the one pregnant for 9 months, so he also has no say in it because it's her bodily autonomy, not his.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Davillage View Post
    Nah its uneven not because of biology but because of armed police forces that enable to enforce responsibility for things that are entirely out of your control.

    Said law would not discriminate based on gender.


    Woman can achieve it simple and have 100% control post conception.

    The current situation is unfavorable for children because it enables woman to behave irresponsible.
    ...and men don't act irresponsibly ever? Like the guy in the OP? I don't even...

  18. #1998
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Halyon View Post
    He isn't the one pregnant for 9 months, so he also has no say in it because it's her bodily autonomy, not his.
    You have no say in it but are responsible.
    Where do I see this kind of flawed reasoning concerning responsibility, body autonomy and the ability to influence only the start situation of something you don't want... right it was fundamentalist muslims.

    Well you did feel in a rapey mood when you've chosen to dress like a skank.

    "Let's face it, if Pippa were a Turk, some people would feel free to say that a hitchhiking woman deserves to be raped."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pippa_Bacca

    Quote Originally Posted by Halyon View Post
    ...and men don't act irresponsibly ever? Like the guy in the OP? I don't even...
    Thats not the point. Its being responsible just for doing something that might've an outcome that you don't like and said process being entirely out of your control.

    The rapist has the final say he has 100% responsibility.
    He might've misintrepreted the body language? She dressed provocative? The 13 year old boy touched her leg first?
    it doesnt matter he/she is 100% responsible.
    Last edited by mmocd79acbf389; 2014-01-05 at 11:47 AM.

  19. #1999
    Quote Originally Posted by Windfury View Post
    It is special treatment because one party would be opting out of their legal responsibilities regarding the child, leaving it to the other party. They *both* have responsibilities now, you're arguing for a change in which men could just opt out of their responsibilities to a child i.e. to be treated differently.

    Anyway, I was on my way to the gym, and this is bogging me down. bbl!

    - - - Updated - - -



    And I've finally found my new sig!
    No, I am arguing that BOTH genders have that option.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Halyon View Post
    He isn't the one pregnant for 9 months, so he also has no say in it because it's her bodily autonomy, not his.
    Pregnancy isn't mandatory.

  20. #2000
    Quote Originally Posted by Davillage View Post
    You have no say in it but are responsible.
    Where do I see this kind of flawed reasoning concerning responsibility, body autonomy and the ability to influence only the start situation of something you don't want... right it was fundamentalist muslims.

    Well you did feel in a rapey mood when you've chosen to dress like a skank.

    "Let's face it, if Pippa were a Turk, some people would feel free to say that a hitchhiking woman deserves to be raped."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pippa_Bacca


    Thats not the point. Its being responsible just for doing something that might've an outcome that you don't like and said process being entirely out of your control.
    No, he's respomsible for the child, along with the woman, not the fetus during pregnancy. Both of them had part in the event that caused the pregnancy, so that is equaly both of their responsibility to also care for it after birth were it's again equally under both parent's right.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •