1. #2481
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    A man makes the same decision. The woman is just the one who decides whether the kid lives or dies. That doesn't mean the man should be obligated to support her poor choice.
    no its not the same decision.
    It worked well in Roe vs Wade.
    so really you've just given up on the "fair treatment for actually wanting children" angle. thats fine i guess.

    keep wondering why your "movement" is a joke.

  2. #2482
    Titan PizzaSHARK's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    14,844
    Quote Originally Posted by Lolercaust View Post
    The context here is an opt-out for men during the early stages of pregnancy. So no, I am not disagreeing with child support.
    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?

    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    No. I'm disagreeing with the concept of child support insofar as the man didn't want the child in the first place.



    Considering there's such a thing as adoption? I think so. I think it remains the woman's choice to make poor decisions, however. Whatever poor decisions she makes, though, should not oblige a man to finance them.
    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.
    http://steamcommunity.com/id/PizzaSHARK
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan Cailan Ebonheart View Post
    I also do landscaping on weekends with some mexican kid that I "hired". He's real good because he's 100% obedient to me and does everything I say while never complaining. He knows that I am the man in the relationship and is completely submissive towards me as he should be.
    Quote Originally Posted by SUH View Post
    Crissi the goddess of MMO, if i may. ./bow

  3. #2483
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    No one is saying a fetus isn't alive Laize, that's just a weak ass strawman. What we're saying is that there is a fundamental difference between a fetus and a child. You keep ignoring that with your derpy little counter argument. Its not an "arbitrary line" its a real functional difference.
    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.

  4. #2484
    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?
    its already there.

  5. #2485
    Quote Originally Posted by PizzaSHARK View Post
    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.
    A woman shouldn't be allowed to unilaterally decide a man's financial future.

    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?
    Still not the same. The woman has an out. Man needs one too.

    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.
    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.

    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.

  6. #2486
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    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.
    you're not even pretending to maintain some semblance of consistency anymore. you just argue whatever you think will further justify fathers abandoning their children.

    "why are mens rights a joke?"

  7. #2487
    It's a very arbitrary line.
    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.

    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.

  8. #2488
    Quote Originally Posted by darenyon View Post
    you're not even pretending to maintain some semblance of consistency anymore. you just argue whatever you think will further justify fathers abandoning their children.

    "why are mens rights a joke?"
    What the hell are you talking about?

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-28 at 05:58 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    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.

    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.
    I'm sorry what? I really have no idea what you guys are talking about. I think there's been a miscommunication.

  9. #2489
    Quote Originally Posted by PizzaSHARK View Post
    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?
    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.

  10. #2490
    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

  11. #2491
    Quote Originally Posted by Lolercaust View Post
    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.
    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.
    the man is free to choose for himself whether or not he will be a father.
    Men are not devoid of options, you guys just don't seem to like them.
    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.
    She's only forcing him to do something he has a responsibility for anyway, his child.

  12. #2492
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    What the hell are you talking about?

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-28 at 05:58 AM ----------



    I'm sorry what? I really have no idea what you guys are talking about. I think there's been a miscommunication.
    i rest my case.

  13. #2493
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    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.



    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.

    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.
    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

  14. #2494
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    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.
    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.

    Men are not devoid of options, you guys just don't seem to like them.
    Back to the "snip snip" are we?

    She's only forcing him to do something he has a responsibility for anyway, his child.
    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.

  15. #2495
    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.
    until you can opt the child out of existence its not the same way at all.

  16. #2496
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Men are not devoid of options, you guys just don't seem to like them.
    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.

    She's only forcing him to do something he has a responsibility for anyway, his child.
    And pro-lifers say the woman has a responsibility to her child.

    I swear your arguments are perfectly interchangeable with pro-lifers.

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-28 at 06:40 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by darenyon View Post
    until you can opt the child out of existence its not the same way at all.
    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 ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by DuckieMage View Post
    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.
    So is the man in our hypothetical scenario.

  17. #2497
    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.
    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.
    Back to the "snip snip" are we?
    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.
    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.
    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.
    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.
    "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.
    I swear your arguments are perfectly interchangeable with pro-lifers.
    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.

  18. #2498
    Quote Originally Posted by darenyon View Post
    until you can opt the child out of existence its not the same way at all.
    Doesn't matter, they accomplish the same goal for each party. It ultimately comes down to the woman, as it always has, whether or not the child will live. She can make that decision just as well with or without the father's presence in the situation.

  19. #2499
    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?
    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.

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-27 at 10:47 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Lolercaust View Post
    Doesn't matter, they accomplish the same goal for each party. It ultimately comes down to the woman, as it always has, whether or not the child will live. She can make that decision just as well with or without the father's presence in the situation.
    it doesnt accomplish the same goal.

  20. #2500
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,198
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    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.
    I feel like this is where the argument should end. The law can't compensate for biological differences, and it shouldn't.

Posting Permissions

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