Page 39 of 114 FirstFirst ...
29
37
38
39
40
41
49
89
... LastLast
  1. #761
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    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?
    no, in a world of abortions theres still a risk someone would decide not to.

  2. #762
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Stir View Post
    then dump the child with him (since he was the one who wanted it, and not she), then the child is not her responsibility.
    Euh. Depends on what you mean with that. It's not like women can do just about anything while pregnant without any risk for the baby.

    e: nvm, ignore me. I read it totally wrong.

  3. #763
    I am Murloc!
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark, Europe
    Posts
    5,077
    Quote Originally Posted by Rukentuts View Post
    Legal documentation is still required for traceability. I cannot just fill a petri-dish and give it to a random on the street without repercussions.
    Actually you probably can. You cannot be forced to pay if no one knows who you are.

    In addition, clinics are beneficial as they screen donors for diseases or other abnormalities that donations from randoms may contain.
    But are they not also expensive?

  4. #764
    Quote Originally Posted by Xarkan View Post
    But are they not also expensive?
    In some cases, they will actually pay the donor if he meets certain qualifications.

  5. #765
    Quote Originally Posted by Stir View Post
    Actually... If she can decide to terminate the pregnancy, and he doesn't want the child, and she doesn't agree to terminating the pregnancy, then it is not his responsibility. Considering she could have it terminated, but didn't.
    it is since he he decided to risk impregnating her.
    Conversely, he wanted the child, she wouldn't want the child, but she chose to carry it regardless for his sake, then dump the child with him (since he was the one who wanted it, and not she), then the child is not her responsibility.
    it is since she made the decision to be impregnated and keep it.


    again. parents have an inherent responsibility to their children. child support is a way to ensure at least some if it is being provided.

  6. #766
    I am Murloc!
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark, Europe
    Posts
    5,077
    Quote Originally Posted by Rukentuts View Post
    In some cases, they will actually pay the donor if he meets certain qualifications.
    Heh i meant for the recipients. There was a reason they advertised in some place to get a donor instead of a clinic. I am guessing the reason is cost?

  7. #767
    Quote Originally Posted by Xarkan View Post
    Heh i meant for the recipients. There was a reason they advertised in some place to get a donor instead of a clinic. I am guessing the reason is cost?
    But at least you know the sperm is "high quality" or whatnot, and tested for defects. I think many people would consider it worth the expense.

  8. #768
    Quote Originally Posted by darenyon View Post
    it was his decision to support her in the event of her keeping the baby, by having sex. she is also responsible for her decision to keep it, and must care for it.
    That's where you're totally, flat-out, couldn't-be-more-fucking wrong. It's not his decision to support her. It's her decision to force him to do so. It should not be.

    i think this sums up your viewpoint pretty well.
    I'm sorry do you think women can't be at fault for anything? They clearly went through "improper channels". That aside, both parties had no reasonable expectation as much would be necessary. There was a signed document.

    The fact that you think this man should be held liable for child support is nothing short of reprehensible, and I think you're a terrible human being for it. You're as bad as anyone in the House GOP.

  9. #769
    Deleted
    This discussion is just going in circles.

    Darenyon doesn't want the options about financial responsibility that are available to the mother to be available to the father. Darenyon thinks it's fair that the man should never have an option to opt out financially, while the woman should always have.

    Darenyon doesn't understand that if a mother decides to bring a child into this world, contrary to the wishes of the father, then its her fault that the child is in a situation with only one parent - NOT THE FATHERS.

    Essentially all Darenyon wants is to let women have the ability to fuck over a man's life whenever they want to. Because that's the only thing that would be lost to women if the law was changed.

  10. #770
    I am Murloc!
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark, Europe
    Posts
    5,077
    Quote Originally Posted by Rukentuts View Post
    But at least you know the sperm is "high quality" or whatnot, and tested for defects. I think many people would consider it worth the expense.
    When i was a kid i was told B&O was quality design. Now i do not really agree, i think most they do is ugly sheite and an insult to my danish heritage and their designers should be forcibly evicted from my country and loose their citizenship but ignoring that. If i agreed and wanted to buy a tv and a Samsung was functionally viable and i could not afford a B&O should i then not buy a Samsung.

  11. #771
    Quote Originally Posted by Xarkan View Post
    When i was a kid i was told B&O was quality design. Now i do not really agree, i think most they do is ugly sheite and an insult to my danish heritage and their designers should be forcibly evicted from my country and loose their citizenship but ignoring that. If i agreed and wanted to buy a tv and a Samsung was functionally viable and i could not afford a B&O should i then not buy a Samsung.
    Yeah, I'm talking "genius sperm" and the like. Basically people want genetic material from donors with exceedingly desirable qualities.

  12. #772
    Quote Originally Posted by Laize View Post
    That's where you're totally, flat-out, couldn't-be-more-fucking wrong. It's not his decision to support her. It's her decision to force him to do so. It should not be.
    its his decision to give her that decision. dont see whats so hard about accepting that men have a hand in creating children.
    I'm sorry do you think women can't be at fault for anything?
    of course not. im not the one who constantly harps about evil members of the opposite gender out to get me and how i have no personal responsibility for the decision to have sex. "well you see i made a stupid decision and so its not my fault cause someone else could have fixed it for me but they didnt."
    They clearly went through "improper channels". That aside, both parties had no reasonable expectation as much would be necessary. There was a signed document.

    The fact that you think this man should be held liable for child support is nothing short of reprehensible, and I think you're a terrible human being for it. You're as bad as anyone in the House GOP.
    they clearly didnt, because they didnt use a physician. all of them should have done the research. but no, its only the womens fault.

  13. #773
    I am Murloc!
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark, Europe
    Posts
    5,077
    Quote Originally Posted by Rukentuts View Post
    Yeah, I'm talking "genius sperm" and the like. Basically people want genetic material from donors with exceedingly desirable qualities.
    I know but if you cannot get the (probably not) genius sperm you could still get a perfectly viable nice child with average IQ and good social skills.. why should you not? Well assuming you wanted a child and was a woman and had the option of such a sperm donor

  14. #774
    Quote Originally Posted by darenyon View Post
    it is since he he decided to risk impregnating her.

    it is since she made the decision to be impregnated and keep it.


    again. parents have an inherent responsibility to their children. child support is a way to ensure at least some if it is being provided.
    Absolutely not. If neither of you wants the child but you are unable to abort the pregnancy, then what you do is give it up for adoption.
    A child is always better off with a parent that wants it, and should never have to live with a parent that doesn't. No child should ever be unwanted.

  15. #775
    Deleted
    so if i jizz into a street corner some crazy bitch takes it, gets pregnant.

    I will be paying alimony according to the logic in this thread.

    I just hope noone will ever steal my tubesocks.

  16. #776
    Quote Originally Posted by Xarkan View Post
    I know but if you cannot get the (probably not) genius sperm you could still get a perfectly viable nice child with average IQ and good social skills.. why should you not? Well assuming you wanted a child and was a woman and had the option of such a sperm donor
    Yeah, but now they can test it for all sorts of genetic birth defects / terminal conditions.

  17. #777
    I am Murloc!
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark, Europe
    Posts
    5,077
    Quote Originally Posted by darenyon View Post
    they clearly didnt, because they didnt use a physician. all of them should have done the research. but no, its only the womens fault.
    The two lesbian women did not, as i recall, want the donor to pay. It is the state that does

  18. #778
    Quote Originally Posted by Diurdi View Post
    This discussion is just going in circles.

    Darenyon doesn't want the options about financial responsibility that are available to the mother to be available to the father. Darenyon thinks it's fair that the man should never have an option to opt out financially, while the woman should always have.
    Diurdi doesnt understand that women cant "financially opt out". abortion does not leave a child that myst be financially supported.
    Darenyon doesn't understand that if a mother decides to bring a child into this world, contrary to the wishes of the father, then its her fault that the child is in a situation with only one parent - NOT THE FATHERS.
    Diurdi doesnt understand that the child shouldnt suffer for both its parents decisions.
    Essentially all Darenyon wants is to let women have the ability to fuck over a man's life whenever they want to. Because that's the only thing that would be lost to women if the law was changed.
    darenyon doesnt want men to gain the ability to fuck over their children whenever they want to because they got cold feet.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-18 at 08:02 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Stir View Post
    Absolutely not. If neither of you wants the child but you are unable to abort the pregnancy, then what you do is give it up for adoption.
    A child is always better off with a parent that wants it, and should never have to live with a parent that doesn't. No child should ever be unwanted.
    which is part of their responsibility- to ensure its properly taken care of if not by them then by someone else.

  19. #779
    Quote Originally Posted by darenyon View Post
    its his decision to give her that decision. dont see whats so hard about accepting that men have a hand in creating children.
    I truly believe you don't read my posts or, if you do, have some learning disability that prevents you from comprehending them. That's not what I'm saying at all.

    of course not. im not the one who constantly harps about evil members of the opposite gender out to get me and how i have no personal responsibility for the decision to have sex. "well you see i made a stupid decision and so its not my fault cause someone else could have fixed it for me but they didnt."
    Why shouldn't we harp about evil members of the opposite sex? Do I criticize women for complaining about rapists and wife beaters? Of course not.

    As Diurdi said, if a woman brings a pregnancy to term against the father's wishes then she is the only one at fault for that child having only one parent. You're fabricating an obligation on the part of a man who wanted no part of that kid's life. It's her decision to bring it to term and, if that decision conflicts with the father's, the burden should lie only with her.

    they clearly didnt, because they didnt use a physician. all of them should have done the research. but no, its only the womens fault.
    I'm through trying to reason with you. You seem to receive data that conflicts with your worldview and, instead of accepting that it may be true, you simply throw it out.

    You are, quite in fact, beyond hope if you continue like this.

    Received infraction.

    ~Badpaladin
    Last edited by Badpaladin; 2013-01-18 at 04:52 PM.

  20. #780
    Quote Originally Posted by Jackmoves View Post
    It can be percieved as a forced decision, raising a child on your own with no financial support is not that easy. If she is well off then sure, no problem but if she will struggle then she might feel like the only option is abortion, something that she(in my example) really don't want to do.

    Thats not a real reason to make this system sexist and gender biased. Chances are, if this mother would only keep the baby is she knew she would have money support from another, then she might not actually care about the real child that much huh? Again, thats her decision, and taking away someone elses choice, just because it has influence over someone elses choice is wrong, and terrible.

Posting Permissions

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