it is since he he decided to risk impregnating her.
it is since she made the decision to be impregnated and keep it.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.
again. parents have an inherent responsibility to their children. child support is a way to ensure at least some if it is being provided.
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'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.i think this sums up your viewpoint pretty well.
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.
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.
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.
its his decision to give her that decision. dont see whats so hard about accepting that men have a hand in creating children.
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."I'm sorry do you think women can't be at fault for anything?
they clearly didnt, because they didnt use a physician. all of them should have done the research. but no, its only the womens fault.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.
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.
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.
Diurdi doesnt understand that women cant "financially opt out". abortion does not leave a child that myst be financially supported.
Diurdi doesnt understand that the child shouldnt suffer for both its parents decisions.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.
darenyon doesnt want men to gain the ability to fuck over their children whenever they want to because they got cold feet.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.
---------- Post added 2013-01-18 at 08:02 AM ----------
which is part of their responsibility- to ensure its properly taken care of if not by them then by someone else.
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.
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.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."
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.
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.they clearly didnt, because they didnt use a physician. all of them should have done the research. but no, its only the womens fault.
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.
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.