Isn't it about time the Mens' Rights Movement stopped being treated like a joke?

[Laize]

Is that all you've got? The Safe Haven law??? Cause that isn't meant to infringe on father's rights but to save babies (actually fully human born babies) lives by providing safe places to take an unwanted child too. Wouldn't the anti-choice crowd just fall all over themselves over a law like this? I mean they care about the lives of babies right? Are you telling me if a father found out the mother did this and fought for his child that the law would prohibit him from doing so?

That's exactly what I'm saying.

The anonymity of the law means no questions are asked regarding the parentage of the child.

In many cases I'd wager the father didn't even know the kid had been given up for days or weeks.

[stumpy]

There's nothing productive about further debate with this with you, you're AB not C, and I'm ABC and that's just the way we are.

Except for the part where you still haven't found a male equivalent for abortion.

[Rukentuts]

I'm talking about the victims and the issues with public perception that may keep them from coming forward. Unless you're implying that a significant percentage of women are closeted husband-beaters.

And public perception has shown that men should not be victims of domestic violence since women are "weaker".

[starlord]

Right, and they want to waive their potential rights to it should it be born.

he can, after its born. you must have the rights first to give them up though.

[Rukentuts]

Except for the part where you still haven't found a male equivalent for abortion.

Biologically it's a futile task. Legally it has already been discussed.

---------- Post added 2012-11-26 at 10:49 PM ----------

he can, after its born. you must have the rights first to give them up though.

Except waiving those rights doesn't stop any obligations.

[stumpy]

And public perception has shown that men should not be victims of domestic violence since women are "weaker".

Once again. What are you hoping to accomplish here? Who, exactly, are you complaining to about how unfair it is that there are far more resources for abused women than men, and what do you expect to get done?

Biologically it's a futile task. Legally it has already been discussed.

You haven't addressed the part where the man gets to walk away while the now-single mother has the "option" of paying for an abortion or losing at least a couple of months' pay due to maternity if she now judges herself unable to care for a child on her own.

[Laize]

Oh bullshit. Man walks and mom has all responsibility or is forced to abort. Or mom aborts and no one gets stuck with anything. Its not an equal decision.

---------- Post added 2012-11-27 at 04:45 AM ----------


because their situations aren't equal. The man isn't carrying the child, the woman is, so she gets an extra option, that is to abort.

Let's list the 4 currently possible scenarios.

1) Man and woman both want child. Everyone's happy

2) Neither man or woman want child. Abortion. Everyone's happy

3) Man wants child. Woman doesn't. Abortion. Man's not happy.

4) Man doesn't want child. Woman does. Carried to term. Man's not happy.

So if a child is conceived, there's a 100% chance of the woman getting the outcome she wants and a 50% chance for the man.

Let's revise this to be more equitable.

1) Man and woman both want child. Everyone's happy

2) Neither man or woman want child. Abortion. Everyone's happy

3) Man wants child, woman doesn't. Abortion. Man not happy.

4) Man doesn't want child, woman does. Carried to term. Man disowns child. Man's happy. Woman can either get an abortion or carry it to term.

So now the man can be happy with 3/4 decisions and the woman can be happy in 3/4 decisions as well as learning to be okay with the 4th.

It's never going to be perfect but this scenario is much better for everyone.

[starlord]

Biologically it's a futile task. Legally it has already been discussed.

---------- Post added 2012-11-26 at 10:49 PM ----------

Except waiving those rights doesn't stop any obligations.

and neither does it for women.

[Nanotech]

Studies have shown that women abusers are far more likely to use weapons in their attacks. Strength won't keep you unscathed if she's beating you with a hot iron.

You must've missed the part where my post specifically DIDN'T focus on the disparity in physical strength between men and women and instead focused on other things. Why you chose to single that tidbit I mentioned in passing is confusing.

[Rukentuts]

and neither does it for women.

Actually, it does. Look up "Safe Haven" laws.

[starlord]

Actually, it does. Look up "Safe Haven" laws.

which in most states arent exclusive to mothers.

[Nanotech]

Let's list the 4 currently possible scenarios.

1) Man and woman both want child. Everyone's happy

2) Neither man or woman want child. Abortion. Everyone's happy

3) Man wants child. Woman doesn't. Abortion. Man's not happy.

4) Man doesn't want child. Woman does. Carried to term. Man's not happy.

So if a child is conceived, there's a 100% chance of the woman getting the outcome she wants and a 50% chance for the man.

Let's revise this to be more equitable.

1) Man and woman both want child. Everyone's happy

2) Neither man or woman want child. Abortion. Everyone's happy

3) Man wants child, woman doesn't. Abortion. Man not happy.

4) Man doesn't want child, woman does. Carried to term. Man disowns child. Man's happy. Woman can either get an abortion or carry it to term.

So now the man can be happy with 3/4 decisions and the woman can be happy in 3/4 decisions as well as learning to be okay with the 4th.

It's never going to be perfect but this scenario is much better for everyone.

While I am pro-choice, it is also incredibly daft to pretend like abortion isn't a serious invasive procedure that can result in serious health complications (like internal bleeding, in some cases fatal) and sometimes sterility afterwards even IF performed in appropriate clinical conditions (and often it is not, especially in backwards places where legal safe clinics do not exist thanks to pressure from the religious). To say that in the case of abortion it's a happy end for everyone in the same way is not fair. Edit: what I'm trying to say is that the woman is inherently at a disadvantage thanks to biology, since she is the one who will either be carrying the child, giving birth (which is by the way another relatively dangerous thing) and feeding it for some time after birth OR getting an invasive procedure done to terminate the pregnancy. Of course, we cannot change biology, we cannot have the man take these risks on himself even if he was willing, but let's not pretend the genders have the exact same burden in all this.

[Destruktion]

because their situations aren't equal. The man isn't carrying the child, the woman is, so she gets an extra option, that is to abort.

Once the child is born, the situations are equal except that the man had no say in his.

Man walks and mom has all responsibility or is forced to abort.

Looks fair to me.

[stumpy]

Looks fair to me.

You can pay for half of the abortion.

[Aalyy]

That's exactly what I'm saying.

The anonymity of the law means no questions are asked regarding the parentage of the child.

In many cases I'd wager the father didn't even know the kid had been given up for days or weeks.

Safe Haven laws are necessary and they save baby's lives. That should be the most important thing here. I agree there should be provisions in the law to allow for fathers to take custody of a child turned over by its mother....without penalizing the mother. Maybe a DNA database or something. But don't pretend this is a law intended specifically to strip fathers of their rights. This is to save lives and it does that every single day.

So some part of a law accidentally may not be fair to a man?? Really? Welcome to being a woman. Or a minority. Or any other demographic other than a white male in America. So work to change it, don't stomp your feet and hang an entire "father's right's" or "men are so discriminated against" campaign on a law that is primarily meant to save the life of babies.

[Rukentuts]

You can pay for half of the abortion.

I still think most men would find that preferable to the current situation.

[Aalyy]

Let's list the 4 currently possible scenarios.

1) Man and woman both want child. Everyone's happy

2) Neither man or woman want child. Abortion. Everyone's happy

3) Man wants child. Woman doesn't. Abortion. Man's not happy.

4) Man doesn't want child. Woman does. Carried to term. Man's not happy.

So if a child is conceived, there's a 100% chance of the woman getting the outcome she wants and a 50% chance for the man.

Let's revise this to be more equitable.

1) Man and woman both want child. Everyone's happy

2) Neither man or woman want child. Abortion. Everyone's happy

3) Man wants child, woman doesn't. Abortion. Man not happy.

4) Man doesn't want child, woman does. Carried to term. Man disowns child. Man's happy. Woman can either get an abortion or carry it to term.

So now the man can be happy with 3/4 decisions and the woman can be happy in 3/4 decisions as well as learning to be okay with the 4th.

It's never going to be perfect but this scenario is much better for everyone.

You cannot believe that life is as simplistic or black and white as this posts makes it out to be! Seeing as how you never have had and never will ever even have to entertain the idea of having an abortion you cannot know whether or not its a "happy" thing for a woman to go through and that the consequences of that decision won't be with her for the rest of her life.

[Destruktion]

You can pay for half of the abortion.

I'll pay for the entire thing if it means no unending child support payments.

[stumpy]

I still think most men would find that preferable.

Actually, men should probably pay more than half, considering that the woman's hand is being somewhat forced by the (unilateral) withdrawal of responsibility.

This situation is still inherently inequal, and if our not-perfect-but-still-better system is also going to be inequal, it's going to have to favor the mother. Sorry.

[Wells]

All of it comes down to a bunch of guys who don't want to live with the consequences of the decisions they make.