Boy... this makes me really eager to stop advocating mens rights...

[Xarkan]

Do you support the court's position that he should pay child support because the lesbian couple didn't go through the proper channels to have IVF done?

Did the court actually make that ruling or was it just the states position? I thought it was just the state in question taking that position

[Tiili]

How can i get in through your skull? It's like you making and investment with moderate risk and your financial partner screwing you over behind your back. You need to be able to defend yourself from fraud/entrapment.

Tbh, the child support in Sweden is nowhere close to that of America. Just about anyone can manage the child support in Sweden. Average is about 180€ for child support I believe.

[darenyon]

Whut..?
Point one: If a man pokes holes in his condom to impregnate a woman against her wish, then HE is responsible and should take care of the child and pay for the damages he caused. Actually, she could probably get a case of rape through; even though the intercourse itself was not involuntary, the conditions of the intercourse were demonstrably involuntary.
The same goes the other way round.

The one doing the deceiving is at fault, and as such is responsible. And yes, I do consider it rape since the conditions of intercourse were involuntary, and had the partner been aware of these conditions, then the partner would have rejected intercourse. Which is... Rape.

i dont think its fair to call it rape. maybe some kind of fraud.

As for point two: They had an official document in which both parties agreed that the male would be nothing more than a sperm donor. Who cares if they save some money by not using a test-tube?

well it seems a bit silly but if theres procedures in place they must be followed.

[Laize]

Considering I have been propositioned without protection, and I turned down said encounter due to such circumstances, I'd say yes responsible men do think about pregnancy.

I imagine if you're propositioned you'll think about it. Would you have the same thought process while making out?

[Stir]

i dont think its fair to call it rape. maybe some kind of fraud.

well it seems a bit silly but if theres procedures in place they must be followed.

Point one: Scamming someone into sexual intercourse under false pretenses is probably generally accepted to be rape, right?
Point two: What exactly are the reasons for the test-tube procedure to be absolutely mandatory? Are they even absolutely mandatory? And... Wha..? If I remember correctly, the man in this situation demanded time with the child as he considered himself the father. This being unreasonable in itself, the couple then pretty much determined that, as a father, the donor doesn't just have benefits, but also obligations. Which makes perfect sense. You can't demand a child and then not take care of it.

[Laize]

Did the court actually make that ruling or was it just the states position? I thought it was just the state in question taking that position

I believe it was just the state. Pardon my misstatement.

---------- Post added 2013-01-18 at 03:07 PM ----------

i dont think its fair to call it rape. maybe some kind of fraud.

well it seems a bit silly but if theres procedures in place they must be followed.

The procedures in place were followed by the man. The women were the ones who fucked up.

[Jackmoves]

You can't prove that. What you can do is give men rights in court to defend themselves. Make it clear to women that if they could bear the whole burden of the child and it will discourage them from trying.

The problem is that now they are above the law. This gives them the power to manipulate and rob their partners blind.

Well, if we could come up with a way to make it easy to tell when someone has decieved you, I would be all for civil law suites being made against a woman. It's honestly similiar to someone who knows they got AIDS but knowlingly lies about it and still have unprotected sex, an awful thing to do and it is at least here illegal.

What I don't agree with though is that we men should just be able to say "I don't want any part of this" if an accident happens. We know an accident can occur and we should therefor take our responsibility if it happens. Just like the woman does.

[darenyon]

Wow... if you think that's the thought that goes through anyone's head before they have sex I have to wonder if you've actually had sex.

yes... i wasnt going to cry about how "unfair" it was if something happened. and i took steps to make sure it didnt.

While it's true that I advocate personal responsibility, it's just that. I advocate personal responsibility. I do NOT advocate having obligations you've made clear you don't want thrust upon you.

When a woman keeps a pregnancy and the father does not want it, there is no sound reason he should be held liable for her decision.

it was his decision to create the situation in the first place. its his liability, if you will.

Do you support the court's position that he should pay child support because the lesbian couple didn't go through the proper channels to have IVF done?

not exactly, but its entirely the people involveds' fault.

[Hyve]

No-one, including you, has any rights! Deal with it.

We've given ourselves rights, and I see no reason why I should feel like I need to follow any of your rights. If you have rights, I have the right to ignore your rights!

[Rukentuts]

I imagine if you're propositioned you'll think about it. Would you have the same thought process while making out?

That's actually the situation I was getting at.

[darenyon]

Point one: Scamming someone into sexual intercourse under false pretenses is probably generally accepted to be rape, right?

that would be the intercourse itself, not pregnancy.

Point two: What exactly are the reasons for the test-tube procedure to be absolutely mandatory? Are they even absolutely mandatory? And... Wha..? If I remember correctly, the man in this situation demanded time with the child as he considered himself the father. This being unreasonable in itself, the couple then pretty much determined that, as a father, the donor doesn't just have benefits, but also obligations. Which makes perfect sense. You can't demand a child and then not take care of it.

i imagine it being done by a physician ensures that theres a way to prove beyond a doubt it was purely a donation.

---------- Post added 2013-01-18 at 07:14 AM ----------

I believe it was just the state. Pardon my misstatement.

The procedures in place were followed by the man. The women were the ones who fucked up.

no, they all should have done it at a clinic.

[Grizzly Willy]

No-one, including you, has any rights! Deal with it.

We've given ourselves rights, and I see no reason why I should feel like I need to follow any of your rights. If you have rights, I have the right to ignore your rights!

Cool. So murder is perfectly justified.

[Jackmoves]

How can i get in through your skull? It's like you making an investment with moderate risk and your financial partner screwing you over behind your back. You need to be able to defend yourself from fraud/entrapment.

Men as it is have no rights in court, this empowers women to abuse their power and ruin lives. Laws cause the problem and they should fix it.

You make a risk assesment, you willingly take the risk and then you cry faul when shit goes wrong. You presume every case is a fraud, when it's very likely that it is far more common with accidential pregnencies, and in those cases both the man and the woman have a responsibility.

[Cybran]

What I don't agree with though is that we men should just be able to say "I don't want any part of this" if an accident happens. We know an accident can occur and we should therefor take our responsibility if it happens. Just like the woman does.

Of course this exists, because too many scumbags flee responsibility. The problem with that is they still flee responsibility while the normal guys get abused.

[Mayhem]

its not fair that women must carry children in their bodies? i agree, we should start working on a system to allow men to so that it can be their choice. or violate womens bodily autonomy.

it doesnt matter who agreed to be responsible, both are. because in the end they both agreed when they had sex in the first place.

did you read what i wrote or are you just writing meaningless stuff quoting my post for no reason?

well if they agreed both why can one decide then? if both are responsible, why can only one have a say? and i don´t know if you know this but having sex doesn´t automaticaly mean you want to have a baby, that´s why mankind invented kondoms and stuff

[darenyon]

did you read what i wrote or are you just writing meaningless stuff quoting my post for no reason?

well if they agreed both why can one decide then? if both are responsible, why can only one have a say? and i don´t know if you know this but having sex doesn´t automaticaly mean you want to have a baby, that´s why mankind invented kondoms and stuff

you talked about how sexist it was that women get a say whether or not to carry children. thats only because they have uteruses. having sex means you decided to take the risk of having a baby.

[Laize]

it was his decision to create the situation in the first place. its his liability, if you will.

No, it was THEIR decision to have sex. It was HER decision to keep the baby. It should not be her decision to force him to pay for that.

not exactly, but its entirely the people involveds' fault.

No, it's the women's fault.

[Mayhem]

hardly. raising a child is a huge burden not only financially but physically, emotionally, and a good chunk of time that could be spent in other areas. he pays a fee in return for doubling every other burden.

let me get this straight, she wanted the child, he didn´t and still her burden is bigger than his? i get it that he has rather few love for the child but shouldnt her love for the wanted child be way greater than the burden??

[Laize]

no, they all should have done it at a clinic.

And you should probably read aloud to yourself what you write before you hit "reply".

Where you get a sperm donation is immaterial to where it's done.

In fact, there's no sound reason it should be a requirement to have the procedure done in a clinic since it's obviously not necessary for successful conception.

There's literally no sound reason this man should be held liable for child support when an agreement was signed that he would not be.

He has no presence in this kid's life, no rights to the kid... no nothing to the kid.

[Mayhem]

you talked about how sexist it was that women get a say whether or not to carry children. thats only because they have uteruses. having sex means you decided to take the risk of having a baby.

only in a world were there is no such things as abortions and adoptions... at least i don´t live in that world, do you?