Page 43 of 57 FirstFirst ...
33
41
42
43
44
45
53
... LastLast
  1. #841
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    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.
    I think the people who like to overlook this fact tend to be the ones who also have the most critical things to say about single mothers. We see a lot of that sentiment around here, unfortunately. I wouldn't be completely surprised if they're also the types who claim that women have a 'biological predisposition' to be care givers and therefore, should take on a disproportionate amount of work related to child care, ironically enough. After a child is born, the one and only thing a woman can do that the man can't is to breastfeed. That's it. Your cultural vs. biological remark is spot on.

    I was trying to do a quick search to find recent statistics regarding sole vs joint custody in a divorce scenario (without much luck), so I'm hesitant to say that joint physical and legal custody is more common now. It may not be, mainly due to the reason already brought up, but its popularity is definitely growing and, study after study, shows it to be the best possible scenario for the child.
    "The clearest way into the Universe is through a forest wilderness."
    John Muir

  2. #842
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    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?
    Before the child is born, both parties need to sign a contract on what they want to do.

  3. #843
    Anung un Rama Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    58,693
    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    Before the child is born, both parties need to sign a contract on what they want to do.
    You can't force someone to sign a contract.

  4. #844
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You can't force someone to sign a contract.
    Ok so don't force them to sign anything. Give him the option to fill out a form absolving his responsibilities.

  5. #845
    Anung un Rama Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    58,693
    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    Ok so don't force them to sign anything. Give him the option to fill out a form absolving his responsibilities.
    That doesn't serve the welfare of the child, which is the basis of child support legislation. Women don't have that right, so there's no reason to give such a thing to men. And giving them both that "right" hurts children, for no real gain, and addressing only an entirely manufactured and imaginary sense of injustice.

  6. #846
    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.
    What's the problem with that again?
    If she has the right to get rid of it, even against the guy's wishes, the guy has the right to not want to support it, even against the woman's wishes.
    You can't have it both ways.

    Or should he just have kept his legs shut?

  7. #847
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    That doesn't serve the welfare of the child, which is the basis of child support legislation. Women don't have that right, so there's no reason to give such a thing to men. And giving them both that "right" hurts children, for no real gain, and addressing only an entirely manufactured and imaginary sense of injustice.
    They do have that right, it's called abortion.

    How can you even bring up the welfare of the child when you support abortions? That seems a little contradictory.

  8. #848
    "I'm pro life, I really hate the idea of helping a child have a good life though."

    You people really don't see how ridiculous you look to everyone?

  9. #849
    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    Before the child is born, both parties need to sign a contract on what they want to do.
    Fine, and she can have every right to say she doesn't want it,a nd he will take care of it, just like he can do to her.

    The only issue is that if they both don't want custody, it would become a state responsibility.

    It would also have to be completely voluntary by both. So, if he said he didn't want custody, and she said tough shit... then there's not much he could do about it, and vice versa.
    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.

  10. #850
    Bloodsail Admiral Nasuuna's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,211
    Quote Originally Posted by Stelio Kontos View Post
    I'm pro-life myself. I'm not necessarily saying abortion should be banned though. It's a complicated issue. And the only reason I'd say to keep it legal is because women who want to kill their unborn children will do so whether it's legal or not, so this way it can at least be somewhat safe (well, for the mother at least, not for the baby in any case). I, however, do believe abortion should be limited to the first trimester, except in the case of non-viable pregnancies or risk to the mother.

    A woman does have the right to do what she wants with her body, but I also would have my right to end a relationship or marriage with my wife/gf if she kills my unborn child for non-medical reasons as well. I wouldn't stay with a woman who'd do that.
    you aren't allowed to have nuance. this is the internet

  11. #851
    Quote Originally Posted by TakeThat View Post
    If a woman can choose whatever she wants with my piece of DNA then I should be able to choose whether or not to pay for child support :P
    You did choose what to do with your DNA when you had sex.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    Ok so don't force them to sign anything. Give him the option to fill out a form absolving his responsibilities.
    And if she doesn't, then he's not out of 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.

  12. #852
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    You did choose what to do with your DNA when you had sex.

    - - - Updated - - -



    And if she doesn't, then he's not out of it.
    Then so did the woman.

    I guess both of them will just have to keep their legs closed if they don't want a child. :^)

  13. #853
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    Fine, and she can have every right to say she doesn't want it,a nd he will take care of it, just like he can do to her.

    The only issue is that if they both don't want custody, it would become a state responsibility.

    It would also have to be completely voluntary by both. So, if he said he didn't want custody, and she said tough shit... then there's not much he could do about it, and vice versa.
    If she does't want it and neither does he, there's adoption or they can leave it at a fire station.

  14. #854
    Quote Originally Posted by Yarathir View Post
    Then so did the woman.

    I guess both of them will just have to keep their legs closed if they don't want a child. :^)
    Exactly, they both made a conscious decision, and if no other actions are taken, the result is a baby in 9 months. They are both equally responsible for the consequences.
    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.

  15. #855
    The Insane Granyala's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Arkon-III
    Posts
    18,096
    Pro-lifer argument: "what if your parents decided to abort you?!"
    Well, that surely would have saved me a lot of trouble and pain.

  16. #856
    Quote Originally Posted by TakeThat View Post
    What if I had contraception, that got "needled" by a woman? Or what if she lied to me she used hormones? Or what if i got raped by a woman?
    Well, if you can prove it in court, let me know.

    People are allowed to lie.

    If she raped you, then you are a victim of a crime, and she should go to prison.

    So, you have any other things you want to try and deflect with?
    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.

  17. #857
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    Exactly, they both made a conscious decision, and if no other actions are taken, the result is a baby in 9 months. They are both equally responsible for the consequences.
    Yes, so if she can choose to forfeit all responsibility and end said baby's life, he can choose to forfeit his responsibilities whenever she chooses to not end it, if he so wishes.

    Sounds good, doesn't it?

  18. #858
    I assume this is intended as a philosophical debate and - as with any hypothetical situation - the thread title presents an unanswerable question. We don't know what we would do (or what our parents would do) in an imagined circumstance because there are incalculable mitigating factors that play into actual decision-making. Your parents basically decide whether you live or die every day for the first several years of your existence so...
    "For years now I've found it to be a such a strange honor to be followed around the internet by expert interpreters, who take plain words in English and replace them with other, more loaded words in English." - Posted by Zarhym

  19. #859
    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    If she does't want it and neither does he, there's adoption or they can leave it at a fire station.
    It then becomes a ward of the state, so I hope you are also a huge fan of welfare and socialism.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Yarathir View Post
    Yes, so if she can choose to forfeit all responsibility and end said baby's life, he can choose to forfeit his responsibilities whenever she chooses to not end it, if he so wishes.

    Sounds good, doesn't it?
    Sure, so long as she can also dump the newborn baby on him, just like you want him to be able to do to her.

    In the end, you are either arguing against bodily autonomy, or in favor of men not being responsible for the consequences of their actions.
    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.

  20. #860
    Anung un Rama Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    58,693
    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    They do have that right, it's called abortion.

    How can you even bring up the welfare of the child when you support abortions? That seems a little contradictory.
    Abortion does not end parental obligations; there aren't any such obligations to end at that point. You're basically just lying about really basic shit, here.

    As for the second; a fetus is not a person.

Posting Permissions

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