If a wife is raped and gets pregnant from the rapist, is it ok for the husband...

[pateuvasiliu]

In your scenario, why would the man even use contraception if he had no responsibility?

Because condoms do more than contraception?

[Slant]

He's free to divorce her, but he doesn't get a say in what she does with her body.

That's fine. As long as nobody forces him to pay for the kid. Alas, we can be pretty sure once he files for divorce, he'll pay for the kid until its adulthood.

[Bodakane]

Because condoms do more than contraception?

Are you aware what contraception means? Are you also aware there other forms of contraception besides condoms?

[pateuvasiliu]

Are you aware what contraception means? Are you also aware there other forms of contraception besides condoms?

I tell you condoms do more than contraception and you ask me if I am aware that there are other forms of contraception.

The logic.

The point was that they protect you from STDs.

[Bodakane]

I tell you condoms do more than contraception and you ask me if I am aware that there are other forms of contraception.

The logic.

The point was that they protect you from STDs.

Sigh.

Start with the word contraception (which is the word I used), what does it mean?

[Peppered]

Well anyone can WANT anything lol xD.

your friend's situation is sad. i'd say its in his best interests to leave the relationship it wouldnt even be a question for me.

[zorkuus]

I tell you condoms do more than contraception

What the actual fuck?

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

He is pretty boned no matter what. No good option for him at all.

[pateuvasiliu]

Sigh.

Start with the word contraception (which is the word I used), what does it mean?

We both know what it means. What's your point? Condoms do what pills do and then some. Hence why they're better.

[Henx]

Though situation. I myself can't really understand why you would like to keep the child if you got pregnant via rape but it's a known fact that people see differently on abortion. Read through the first 8 pages of the thread and there were some solid arguments for both staying and leaving. The husband should stay to support his wife but then again you can't blame him for not wanting to raise the child that would be his wife's and a rapist's, the latter owner making it even worse.

I don't know if it's mentioned in the posts but I was quite surprised that I didn't see any posts about how the child's life would be affected by the fact that it is in fact a consequense of rape. No matter how good its life turns out to be and how good the two parents do I believe that the child will take damage from that fact unless they keep the child from knowing. Considering what horrible things people can do I wouldn't be surprised if the child would get bullied because of it which is completely wrong but people have a tendency to do these kind of things.

To sum it up I think having the kid would damage all the partners involved but maybe the could get through it but it would be though.

[Adam Jensen]

No. No man should have control over a woman's body.

[Bodakane]

We both know what it means. What's your point? Condoms do what pills do and then some. Hence why they're better.

What's my point?

Seriously?

[Slant]

No. No man should have control over a woman's body.

Yeah, this argument bites as soon as he has control over his wallet. Before that, I can see why he'd have a right to have a say in it.

[Spectral]

You are absolutely right, it is just that Nixx doesn't believe in equality.

I can't speak for Nixx, but I'd say that the obsession with legally enforced equality of the sexes is absolutely pathological. The sexes are not equal and I do not think there is any good justification for trying to shoehorn obviously unequal situations (of which pregnancy is a great example) into a framework of nominal equality.

[Aeula]

He can want all he wants, but it's her decision in the end, he wasn't involved in the conception and he doesn't have to pay for the kid. If he has an issue he should bail, kid ain't his responsibility so he doesn't need to pay child support so long as his name isn't on the birth certificate as far as I'm aware, though if he wants to bail later on there could be issues in that area.

[Adam Jensen]

Yeah, this argument bites as soon as he has control over his wallet. Before that, I can see why he'd have a right to have a say in it.

I can see an argument where he shouldn't have to pay support for the child.

But it's not his decision whether she carries the child to term or not.

[pateuvasiliu]

What's my point?

Seriously?

My bad, I misread the exchange.

I didn't realise you were talking about that scenario, but rather why in a situation in which both partners are equally responsible for contraception a man would use a condom.

To which I stated that a condom also offers STD protection, making it superior to other contraception methods.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

I can see an argument where he shouldn't have to pay support for the child.

But it's not his decision whether she carries the child to term or not.

Thats the scary part here for me. He is sorta fucked no matter what. Not that I'd ever agree that a man should be able to force an abortion on a woman.

[pateuvasiliu]

I can't speak for Nixx, but I'd say that the obsession with legally enforced equality of the sexes is absolutely pathological. The sexes are not equal and I do not think there is any good justification for trying to shoehorn obviously unequal situations (of which pregnancy is a great example) into a framework of nominal equality.

It's really simple. A man should not be held responsible for the birth of a child, which takes 9 months, when his only contribution was some DNA for conception. The woman has many months in which to decide if she wants the kid. The responsibility for the kid should be hers by default.

If men don't have a say in abortions because pregnancy is solely on the woman, why should a man have a responsibility in a kid? It's the same thing.

[Deleted]

I can't speak for Nixx, but I'd say that the obsession with legally enforced equality of the sexes is absolutely pathological. The sexes are not equal and I do not think there is any good justification for trying to shoehorn obviously unequal situations (of which pregnancy is a great example) into a framework of nominal equality.

I think that having children is a big part of anyone's life, and i firmly believe that no one should be forced into becoming a parent.
This not trying to shoehorn anything, there might be differences between the sexes, but we as a society try to minimize the differences through affirmative action. Giving males the choice as to with whom they want to start a family will not change the rights of females in any way what so ever. The only thing that changes is that females will have to be responsible for their own actions and wants. If they want to have children without the support of a partner that is all up to them, a random guy she fucked should not be held responsible for her wanting children.