As in the man just walks, no strings attached? Yeah, fuck that. If she chooses to have the kid and keep it, you got a responsibility to that kid, whether you stick around or not.
That said, I'm keen on the idea of the reverse being applied - that the woman can choose to walk after having the baby (leaving it in the care of the dad) and pay child support. Equality, right?
Adoption isn't free, either, is it? Considering there wouldn't be a pregnancy if the guy wasn't too stupid to not use a rubber or rush her to the 24 hour pharmacy for a Plan B if all else fails, I think he should have equal responsibility... and equal say.
It's a very arbitrary line. It's legal to kill a human from the time it's a single cell to the time just before it comes screaming out of a vagina despite being viable for almost half its time in there. You can choose what point you want to kill it. It's all the same to me.
And FYI it wasn't a strawman. It was explaining my point of view. From my point of view killing a zygote is no different than a fetus is no different than an infant. Like I said, we're all nothing more than chromosomal blueprints and enzymes. Some of us are just further along.
its already there.That said, I'm keen on the idea of the reverse being applied - that the woman can choose to walk after having the baby (leaving it in the care of the dad) and pay child support. Equality, right?
A woman shouldn't be allowed to unilaterally decide a man's financial future.
Still not the same. The woman has an out. Man needs one too.That said, I'm keen on the idea of the reverse being applied - that the woman can choose to walk after having the baby (leaving it in the care of the dad) and pay child support. Equality, right?
Yes of course. The guy is the one who's too stupid to use birth control. Rethink that statement or you lose any credibility in a thread about equality.Adoption isn't free, either, is it? Considering there wouldn't be a pregnancy if the guy wasn't too stupid to not use a rubber or rush her to the 24 hour pharmacy for a Plan B if all else fails, I think he should have equal responsibility... and equal say.
Second, adoption is free. Safe Haven laws exist for that reason. You can also get paid for adoption. Tons of families who can't conceive kids of their own will pay your medical expenses and then some.
Lastly, to say a man needs to be responsible when a woman can throw that responsibility out the window is stupid.
No its not. One is biologically dependent on being inside another human being. The other is not. One is self aware. The other isn't.It's a very arbitrary line.
Its interesting you don't think that you think a man's respectability starts at birth but see birth as an arbitrary distinction when it runs counter to your desires.
Dismiss the idea with "fuck that" if you'd like, doesn't change the inequity here. If a pregnancy results from a night of sex, the man is entirely at the mercy of the woman with all regard to the fetus. That is not equitable, that is not right. With the change we are suggesting, the man is free to choose for himself whether or not he will be a father. The mother can still do likewise for herself. The only thing the mother loses is the option to have the child and force the man into supporting the child, which is wrong to begin with.
In the end, if men could get pregnant, abortion would be perfectly acceptable and it would be praised because the man was 'being responsible and not bringing a child isn't the world they can't support or don't want.'
I don't care what your opinion is, your opinions doesn't super-cede any others right to do what they wish with their body.
If you are against abortion and consider it killing, then don't have an abortion.
However, you don't have a right to tell someone else that they can't do whatever they want with their body.
Friends: Will help you move.
Best Friends: Will help you move the Bodies
Or you could acknowledge that not all situations should be equitable. Women and men have different burdens when it comes to pregnancy. That and every proposed "solution" gives men more power than women under the guise of equality.
Men are not devoid of options, you guys just don't seem to like them.the man is free to choose for himself whether or not he will be a father.
She's only forcing him to do something he has a responsibility for anyway, his child.The only thing the mother loses is the option to have the child and force the man into supporting the child, which is wrong to begin with.
Responsibility should lie on both of those who participate in sex. It's the man's AND the woman's fault. They are BOTH responsible for any pregnancy that occurs.
A WOMAN IS NOT 'THROWING AWAY RESPONSIBILITY' WHEN SHE GETS AN ABORTION. SHE IS SIMPLY ACKNOWLEDGING THAT SHE IS NOT READY TO TAKE CARE OF A CHILD AND DOES NOT WANT TO HAVE A CHILD AT THIS POINT IN HER LIFE, IF NOT EVER.
Friends: Will help you move.
Best Friends: Will help you move the Bodies
I'd stop at "gives men more power."
Besides, the considerable burden women have to bear by carrying a child is irrelevant to whether or not a man should be able to withdraw responsibility. The way you guys are phrasing it, it sounds like another guilt trip.
Back to the "snip snip" are we?Men are not devoid of options, you guys just don't seem to like them.
And we're asking that an opt-out be allowed from that responsibility for a father who isn't ready to be a father, the same way a mother chooses to abort if she isn't ready to be a mother.She's only forcing him to do something he has a responsibility for anyway, his child.
until you can opt the child out of existence its not the same way at all.And we're asking that an opt-out be allowed from that responsibility for a father who isn't ready to be a father, the same way a mother chooses to abort if she isn't ready to be a mother.
Because the only options you offer are either preventative and/or force you to place too much trust in the other party. There's no self-determination after an accident.
And pro-lifers say the woman has a responsibility to her child.She's only forcing him to do something he has a responsibility for anyway, his child.
I swear your arguments are perfectly interchangeable with pro-lifers.
---------- Post added 2012-11-28 at 06:40 AM ----------
Sure it is. It's her choice to bring the kid to term. Why shouldn't she bear the total responsibility if he's not ready? Can you provide one reason that doesn't involve the child's quality of life (Since she could have opted to nullify its life altogether)?
---------- Post added 2012-11-28 at 06:41 AM ----------
So is the man in our hypothetical scenario.
You're misunderstanding. The only power a woman has that a man doesn't, whether to carry, is a power only a woman could have. And her share of the burden is greater than the man's. Its perfectly natural she'd have an option he doesn't.Besides, the considerable burden women have to bear by carrying a child is irrelevant to whether or not a man should be able to withdraw responsibility. The way you guys are phrasing it, it sounds like another guilt trip.
There are all kinds of ways for a guy to avoid getting a kid. IUDs are statistically perfect for instance. Just sleep with a woman who has one.Back to the "snip snip" are we?
A mother gets to choose to abort because its her body. No one is saying a man has to actually be a father in an meaningful way, but the child's need to be supported supersedes his desire not to have to pay for the result of his decisions.And we're asking that an opt-out be allowed from that responsibility for a father who isn't ready to be a father, the same way a mother chooses to abort if she isn't ready to be a mother.
"Too much trust" is pretty thoroughly informed by your crippling stance on women tbh. And I don't see why someone should be guaranteed a reactive way to avoid responsibility for the results of their decisions.Because the only options you offer are either preventative and/or force you to place too much trust in the other party. There's no self-determination after an accident.
Probably because you're still pretending there's no difference between a clump of cells and a child. Which is pretty stupid so I'm just going to let you keep doing it and ignore it when you do.I swear your arguments are perfectly interchangeable with pro-lifers.
her choice not to doesnt place a burden on him. im not sure why its been so tough to grasp that its not " the same way as" placing the full burden on another.Sure it is. It's her choice to bring the kid to term. Why shouldn't she bear the total responsibility if he's not ready?
---------- Post added 2012-11-27 at 10:47 PM ----------
it doesnt accomplish the same goal.