Page 42 of 57 FirstFirst ...
32
40
41
42
43
44
52
... LastLast
  1. #821
    Anung un Rama Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    58,723
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    Women are also forced to pay child support against their will. The same can be said for taxes and fines.
    There is one single reason for discrepancy in child support payments, really.

    That one reason is that women are far more statistically likely to want to retain custody. Men are far more likely to want out and feel they should be able to abandon their kid. This isn't biological, it's cultural.

    In cases where men fight for custody rights, they have similar outcomes as women do, overall. Where they share child support, it's equally split according to their incomes (and if you've got an issue with women, on average, getting paid less than men, well, that's a different issue and most of the people bitching about this stuff would probably burst a gasket if we get into that topic).

    Men and women have the exact same obligations and duties when a child is born. There is no discrepancy under the law.

  2. #822
    Uh I wouldn't exist? And I wouldn't know I had a chance to exist, because I didn't have any conscious thought.

    So it wouldn't matter, in the least.

  3. #823
    Anung un Rama Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    58,723
    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    Where did I say women should be shafted? All I'm asking for is an equal opportunity to opt out of being a father if a mistake happens.
    Women don't have that option.

    That's the thing people keep pointing out to you, and which you keep ignoring.

    Edit: At least, other than adoption, which requires equal consent from all known guardians with custody rights.

  4. #824
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    There is one single reason for discrepancy in child support payments, really.

    That one reason is that women are far more statistically likely to want to retain custody. Men are far more likely to want out and feel they should be able to abandon their kid. This isn't biological, it's cultural.

    In cases where men fight for custody rights, they have similar outcomes as women do, overall. Where they share child support, it's equally split according to their incomes (and if you've got an issue with women, on average, getting paid less than men, well, that's a different issue and most of the people bitching about this stuff would probably burst a gasket if we get into that topic).

    Men and women have the exact same obligations and duties when a child is born. There is no discrepancy under the law.
    I think there are cases and jurisdictions where men are not given equal chance at custody, and that's a problem. They should have every bit as much of a chance to have custody as the mother. But, I agree, there is a much stronger culture in this country of men wanting to distance themselves from their children, than women.
    Quote Originally Posted by Destroyer of Leftism View Post
    While I certainly support more sex for more people and don't think the old norms are viable, it's also become pretty obvious that leftists only support sexual freedom because they think it will spread STDs more, damage the family and damage society. Their intentions are not to spread more freedom, they just want people sick, hopefully dependent on their healthcare too.
    Yes, someone actually said that.

  5. #825
    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    Where did I say women should be shafted? All I'm asking for is an equal opportunity to opt out of being a father if a mistake happens.
    The problem with that is that it effectively removes the woman's choice. By refusing to help support the child that a woman might want to keep, the man is potentially forcing her into an abortion or adoption.

  6. #826
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    But, that can also be turned around, because the situation can be reversed.

    So, they both make a willing decision to have sex, a voluntary action. If that action leads to a pregnancy, and no other actions are taken, a baby will result. Therefore, they are both equally responsible for the consequence of that action.

    I like the analogy of two people choosing to detonate a bomb. One person sets the timer, and the other puts the bomb in place. Once they have both done it, then they are both responsible for it exploding.
    Your scenario has nothing to do with abortion in any sense, man or woman.

    But you're right, sometimes women are forced to pay child support because of whatever reason the court decided. Again, this has nothing to do with abortion.

    Maybe I'm not explaining it that well? Let me try and be more clear.

    Woman doesn't want to keep the baby but the man does. She should be allowed to abort it without his approval.
    Woman wants to keep it but he doesn't. She should be allow to give birth but he should have the option to be financially responsible or not.

  7. #827
    Anung un Rama Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    58,723
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    I think there are cases and jurisdictions where men are not given equal chance at custody, and that's a problem. They should have every bit as much of a chance to have custody as the mother. But, I agree, there is a much stronger culture in this country of men wanting to distance themselves from their children, than women.
    If there's a specific jurisdiction where they're treated unfairly, or a specific case that was unjustly ruled, sure. Those can happen, because the courts aren't perfect.

    But that's an issue of implementation, not of the law itself. I just meant that people often point to how often women have sole custody, compared to men, and ignore that in the majority of those instances, the men either don't know they're a father (generally because it was a one-time thing and they didn't keep in touch with the mother) or they've specifically tried to avoid being one and gave up custody rights. The latter isn't an argument for unfair treatment, and the former isn't a legal injustice, it's pretty much just down to women being the ones giving birth so establishing who's the mother isn't generally a question in the first place. I fully support men pursuing their parental rights, and I'm not making an argument that they deserve less-than-fair treatment in that respect.

  8. #828
    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post
    The problem with that is that it effectively removes the woman's choice. By refusing to help support the child that a woman might want to keep, the man is potentially forcing her into an abortion or adoption.
    She still has the choice to keep it or not. He's not forcing her to do anything.

  9. #829
    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    Woman doesn't want to keep the baby but the man does. She should be allowed to abort it without his approval.
    Woman wants to keep it but he doesn't. She should be allow to give birth but he should have the option to be financially responsible or not.
    This... actually kind of makes sense to me assuming the father provides in writing he doesn't want it prior to the typical 20ish week abortion cut off. And I still think there should be government assistance for single parents in such instances. Has nothing to do with a woman's right to abortion though.

  10. #830
    Legendary! Flurryfang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Empire of Man
    Posts
    6,121
    Quote Originally Posted by Video Games View Post
    Then they at least tried. I dont have sympathy for people that shrug it off.
    I don't have much either for people, who deliberately take the risk. But i do know a couple or 2, who have used birth control and forgot the pill during a stressful period of their life or because the birth control they used did not work correctly.

    Mistakes can happen to grown ups and having a kid seems like hard punishment. Going through pregnancy is hard, so even just putting it up for adoption is still not an easy task.
    May the lore be great and the stories interesting. A game without a story, is a game without a soul. Value the lore and it will reward you with fun!

  11. #831
    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    Your scenario has nothing to do with abortion in any sense, man or woman.

    But you're right, sometimes women are forced to pay child support because of whatever reason the court decided. Again, this has nothing to do with abortion.

    Maybe I'm not explaining it that well? Let me try and be more clear.

    Woman doesn't want to keep the baby but the man does. She should be allowed to abort it without his approval.
    Woman wants to keep it but he doesn't. She should be allow to give birth but he should have the option to be financially responsible or not.
    If that's the case, then the woman should be able to have the kid, and have the option of being financially responsible, or not. That would mean she could deliver the baby, and turn to the doctors and say, "Nope, it's not mine... it's all his."

    In the end, you are either arguing that women should not have bodily autonomy, or men (and possibly women), should not be responsible for the consequences of their actions. It would appear you are arguing for the latter.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    If there's a specific jurisdiction where they're treated unfairly, or a specific case that was unjustly ruled, sure. Those can happen, because the courts aren't perfect.

    But that's an issue of implementation, not of the law itself. I just meant that people often point to how often women have sole custody, compared to men, and ignore that in the majority of those instances, the men either don't know they're a father (generally because it was a one-time thing and they didn't keep in touch with the mother) or they've specifically tried to avoid being one and gave up custody rights. The latter isn't an argument for unfair treatment, and the former isn't a legal injustice, it's pretty much just down to women being the ones giving birth so establishing who's the mother isn't generally a question in the first place. I fully support men pursuing their parental rights, and I'm not making an argument that they deserve less-than-fair treatment in that respect.
    I agree, it's not the laws themselves, but merely how they are often applied, which has been problematic in the past, and is still an issue.
    Quote Originally Posted by Destroyer of Leftism View Post
    While I certainly support more sex for more people and don't think the old norms are viable, it's also become pretty obvious that leftists only support sexual freedom because they think it will spread STDs more, damage the family and damage society. Their intentions are not to spread more freedom, they just want people sick, hopefully dependent on their healthcare too.
    Yes, someone actually said that.

  12. #832
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurasu View Post
    This... actually kind of makes sense to me assuming the father provides in writing he doesn't want it prior to the typical 20ish week abortion cut off. And I still think there should be government assistance for single parents in such instances. Has nothing to do with a woman's right to abortion though.
    Thank you! Yes he needs to give up the rights well before the child is born. It doesn't have anything to do with her right but they are closely related. Bringing it up during these conversation is the only way to shed light on the idea.

  13. #833
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    If that's the case, then the woman should be able to have the kid, and have the option of being financially responsible, or not. That would mean she could deliver the baby, and turn to the doctors and say, "Nope, it's not mine... it's all his."

    In the end, you are either arguing that women should not have bodily autonomy, or men (and possibly women), should not be responsible for the consequences of their actions. It would appear you are arguing for the latter.

    - - - Updated - - -



    I agree, it's not the laws themselves, but merely how they are often applied, which has been problematic in the past, and is still an issue.
    Well, I think he is saying the woman has the choice to abort or not to abort. If there's a baby at the end, that's the woman's choice; the man has no choice after penetration, and any choice given to him by society would have to be purely financial (lest we infringe on the woman's rights).

    Ultimately, I think it's far more important that women have that choice than not, and lastly I should thank god every day that I'm gay.
    Last edited by Nurasu; 2019-05-31 at 08:30 PM.

  14. #834
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    If that's the case, then the woman should be able to have the kid, and have the option of being financially responsible, or not. That would mean she could deliver the baby, and turn to the doctors and say, "Nope, it's not mine... it's all his."

    In the end, you are either arguing that women should not have bodily autonomy, or men (and possibly women), should not be responsible for the consequences of their actions. It would appear you are arguing for the latter.
    The latter also applies to women who abort the baby. Also what do you think adoption is? Not being responsible for the consequences for your actions. Not sure what your point is. No where did I even come close to your first point about body autonomy.

  15. #835
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurasu View Post
    Well, I think he is saying the woman has the choice to abort or not to abort. If there's a baby at the end, that's the woman's choice; the man has no choice after penetration.

    Ultimately, I think it's far more important that women have that choice than not, and lastly I should thank god every day that I'm gay.
    And yes, that is covered under the 14th Amendment, which also protects men. If he says a man can simply opt out, then a woman should be able to do the same, and dump a baby in a guy's lap and just take off.

    The man does have a choice, a willful decision during sexual intercourse. the woman has that same choice, and they take the action together. They are both equally responsible for her getting pregnant, and that baby being born 9 months later. And I want to be clear, if no other actions are taken, that is the result. So, if one wants to argue that a man can give up custody quite easily, then the woman should also be able to do the same. Of course, that's arguing that people shouldn't be responsible for the consequences of their actions, which is quite the slippery slope when applied to other things.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    The latter also applies to women who abort the baby. Also what do you think adoption is? Not being responsible for the consequences for your actions. Not sure what your point is. No where did I even come close to your first point about body autonomy.
    I want to make sure you are clear, should a woman be able to say she doesn't want to have custody of a baby, and push all custody onto the man, just like he can do to her in your scenario?
    Quote Originally Posted by Destroyer of Leftism View Post
    While I certainly support more sex for more people and don't think the old norms are viable, it's also become pretty obvious that leftists only support sexual freedom because they think it will spread STDs more, damage the family and damage society. Their intentions are not to spread more freedom, they just want people sick, hopefully dependent on their healthcare too.
    Yes, someone actually said that.

  16. #836
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    And yes, that is covered under the 14th Amendment, which also protects men. If he says a man can simply opt out, then a woman should be able to do the same, and dump a baby in a guy's lap and just take off.

    The man does have a choice, a willful decision during sexual intercourse. the woman has that same choice, and they take the action together. They are both equally responsible for her getting pregnant, and that baby being born 9 months later. And I want to be clear, if no other actions are taken, that is the result. So, if one wants to argue that a man can give up custody quite easily, then the woman should also be able to do the same. Of course, that's arguing that people shouldn't be responsible for the consequences of their actions, which is quite the slippery slope when applied to other things.

    - - - Updated - - -



    I want to make sure you are clear, should a woman be able to say she doesn't want to have custody of a baby, and push all custody onto the man, just like he can do to her in your scenario?
    She can give it up, it's called aborting the child LOL. Why would you carry a baby to term and give it up right away without adoption in mind. I think you're just trying to play devils advocate and doing a bad job at it.
    Last edited by crewskater; 2019-05-31 at 08:34 PM. Reason: typo

  17. #837
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    I want to make sure you are clear, should a woman be able to say she doesn't want to have custody of a baby, and push all custody onto the man, just like he can do to her in your scenario?
    Ideally, I think it would be more of a legal contract before the child is born, assuming only one party wants the baby and the woman is even willing to carry it to term in the first place.

  18. #838
    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    She can give it up, it's called aborting the child LOL. Why would you carry a baby to term and give it up right away without adoption in mind. I think you're just trying to play devils advocate and doing a bad job at it.
    That's the thing, you are pushing a double standard, something you claim to want to fight. if you want the same standard, then she should be allowed to absolve herself of custody, and dump it in his lap 10 seconds after it's born. I'm pointing out that she would be literally doing the same thing as he would.

    Having a baby requires only one willful action between two people. Period. If no other action is taken, that baby is an inevitability. So, i you think he should be able to avoid responsibility for the baby by giving her custody, then she should be allowed to do exactly the same, right?

    That's why it always ends up in one of two issues. Either people want to take bodily autonomy away from women, or they want men to not have to be responsible for the consequences of their actions.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Nurasu View Post
    Ideally, I think it would be more of a legal contract before the child is born, assuming only one party wants the baby and the woman is even willing to carry it to term in the first place.
    I agree, it should be done before conception even happens. If they want to sign a contract, great, they both sign it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Destroyer of Leftism View Post
    While I certainly support more sex for more people and don't think the old norms are viable, it's also become pretty obvious that leftists only support sexual freedom because they think it will spread STDs more, damage the family and damage society. Their intentions are not to spread more freedom, they just want people sick, hopefully dependent on their healthcare too.
    Yes, someone actually said that.

  19. #839
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    That's the thing, you are pushing a double standard, something you claim to want to fight. if you want the same standard, then she should be allowed to absolve herself of custody, and dump it in his lap 10 seconds after it's born. I'm pointing out that she would be literally doing the same thing as he would.

    Having a baby requires only one willful action between two people. Period. If no other action is taken, that baby is an inevitability. So, i you think he should be able to avoid responsibility for the baby by giving her custody, then she should be allowed to do exactly the same, right?

    That's why it always ends up in one of two issues. Either people want to take bodily autonomy away from women, or they want men to not have to be responsible for the consequences of their actions.

    - - - Updated - - -



    I agree, it should be done before conception even happens. If they want to sign a contract, great, they both sign it.
    As Nurasu said, these are generally done before the child is even born. So she would be breaking the contract after birth. Sorry I should have clarified that earlier.

  20. #840
    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    As Nurasu said, these are generally done before the child is even born. So she would be breaking the contract after birth. Sorry I should have clarified that earlier.
    How would she be breaking it, let her do it early. If the man can unilaterally walk away, and have her raise it all on her own, then she can do the same to him. You want equality, right?
    Quote Originally Posted by Destroyer of Leftism View Post
    While I certainly support more sex for more people and don't think the old norms are viable, it's also become pretty obvious that leftists only support sexual freedom because they think it will spread STDs more, damage the family and damage society. Their intentions are not to spread more freedom, they just want people sick, hopefully dependent on their healthcare too.
    Yes, someone actually said that.

Posting Permissions

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