you said "since birth control exists, parental obligation is an archaic concept" yes?Holy straw man, Batman. That isn't even remotely similar to anything I've described.
yeah, when they are unable to provide for their children or are deemed unsuitable. its not lightly done.Also, are you not aware that you CAN give up parental responsibility altogether? That's basically what adoption and legal abandonment entail, you know.
There are plenty of laws in Western nations that allow parents to abandon their children in a neutral environment, legally. This is already the case.
The woman gets pregnant by accident/on purpose she decides to keep it and the man asks her to abort it. She abuses her biological advantage, gives birth to the child and uses her leverage in court to extort the man for the rest of his life.
If you refuse to see how Biased and Unfair this is I can't help you.
not meant at this quote but at something equally ridiculous that you said -
Men are asking to abandon the fetus, not the child. It's the womans choice AFTER WITH THAT KNOWLEDGE whether to make it a child or not. It's directly comparable to abortion for financial reasons.
You consider wanting a child "abusing a biological advantage." What a lovely turn of phrase for being willing to give birth and become a mother despite a dismissive and unsupportive partner.
How can you "abuse" your own rights to yourself? An ugly tattoo? Self-harm?bodily autonomy can be abused =/= bodily autonomy is abuse. But please strawman more.
In fact as far as I'm aware the UK is the only european nation that outright bans guns for civilians.This is why people ban guns. Gun supporters don't know what guns are.Shotguns I'll give you (provided you're allowed 12 and larger gauges... because I mean... come on...) but not .22s.
No. I didn't. Which is why you aren't quoting me directly.
I said, to paraphrase, that parental obligation should only exist for those who choose to bring a child into the world, as women are completely able to avoid doing so if they wish to, with current medical techniques.
You're deliberately misinterpreting, which is why I called it out as a straw man.
False. There's no measures used to determine whether a mother can abandon a child at these locations. She can abandon the infant even if she's a successful lawyer.yeah, when they are unable to provide for their children or are deemed unsuitable. its not lightly done.
In some parts of Europe, it's literally a drop-box; http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...-hospital.html
Many US states have similar arrangements, here's Illinois', for example; http://www.saveabandonedbabies.org/r...law/index.html
The baby is abandoned anonymously. There are no measures to see if the parents qualify for it.
Last edited by Cybran; 2013-02-27 at 06:51 PM. Reason: he
So what you're saying is I can take a child with no consequence if it is currently being born because it isn't yet claimed?
I will do my best to refrain from insults but that is akin to condoning slavery, "claim"? It's your child! What on earth do you think it is? Out to the highest bidder?
and thus, only women are capable of it since only they have the choice. the father is rendered irrelevant.
im bringing it to its logical conclusion.You're deliberately misinterpreting, which is why I called it out as a straw man.
because, as you said, the alternative is the dumpster. thats the definition of unsuitable.False. There's no measures used to determine whether a mother can abandon a child at these locations. She can abandon the infant even if she's a successful lawyer.
In some parts of Europe, it's literally a drop-box; http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...-hospital.html
Many US states have similar arrangements, here's Illinois', for example; http://www.saveabandonedbabies.org/r...law/index.html
The baby is abandoned anonymously. There are no measures to see if the parents qualify for it.
Again. No. There is NO requirement that they be "unable to provide for it properly". You think it cries at a pitch that's a half note off and don't want a baby that doesn't cry perfectly? You're a millionaire heiress with nothing but free time? Doesn't matter, you can still drop the infant off and abandon it, no questions asked.
Seriously, educate yourself as to the laws on this.
And the entire point was that if the suddenly-pregnant woman decides that she can't support herself and a child without the father's support, she can get an abortion. There's no child, yet. There's still plenty of time to cancel the pregnancy. If she chooses to go forward, knowing the father won't be providing support, she's accepting sole responsibility.
Because, y'know, women do that all the freaking time already. Being a single mother isn't all puppies and rainbows, but many women manage it just fine without any support from the father. I'm not going to claim I can make that decision for them, but I absolutely do say they're capable of making that decision for themselves.