Is there a legit legal argument here?

[sakinago]

Is there an argument to be made for a man to not have to pay child support, if he can prove he encouraged the mother to get an abortion, and she went against his wishes?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No.

 

[Crepitus]

No.

 

[sakinago]

Why not?

 

[WillowTree]

Why not?

You cannot force an abortion on anyone! Remember a woman has the right to choose! Think about that before you impregnate someone!

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Is there an argument to be made for a man to not have to pay child support, if he can prove he encouraged the mother to get an abortion, and she went against his wishes?

No. Not gonna happen. The state would much prefer you pay for your child, rather than the taxpayers.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Why not?

It is called "personal responsibility"

 

[martybegan]

Is there an argument to be made for a man to not have to pay child support, if he can prove he encouraged the mother to get an abortion, and she went against his wishes?

There is an argument, but it is a tough one to make.

The basis is one of equal rights. If a woman has a right to terminate a pregnancy, and thus avoid parental responsibility, an absolutist viewpoint on equal rights requires men to have the same ability.

 

[martybegan]

Why not?

It is called "personal responsibility"

So only men are required to have said responsibility?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Why not?

It is called "personal responsibility"

So only men are required to have said responsibility?

how do you figure? Who do you think is raising the child while the man just sends cash?

 

[martybegan]

Why not?

It is called "personal responsibility"

So only men are required to have said responsibility?

how do you figure? Who do you think is raising the child while the man just sends cash?

If a woman doesn't want the kid, she has an "out". Men don't have that "out"

We are talking legally here, not biologically.

Please note that this is a theoretical discussion.

 

[sakinago]

Why not?

You cannot force an abortion on anyone! Remember a woman has the right to choose! Think about that before you impregnate someone!

Who said anything about enforcing aborting on someone? What? It is a woman’s choice alone, but if women have the choice between being responsible for a kid or not, why don’t men get the same choice?

Isn’t there some shared responsibility on the women to take precautions to avoid impregnating as well? And if she chooses to have the kid, then the man has no say in the matter, yet is responsible for what is her decision alone.

 

[sakinago]

Why not?

It is called "personal responsibility"

How can one responsibility for a decision that they had zero say in the matter?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Why not?

It is called "personal responsibility"

How can one responsibility for a decision that they had zero say in the matter?

Did the woman rape them? Did the woman make them have sex? I do not think so.

 

[there4eyeM]

Why not?

It is called "personal responsibility"

So only men are required to have said responsibility?

how do you figure? Who do you think is raising the child while the man just sends cash?

If a woman doesn't want the kid, she has an "out". Men don't have that "out"

We are talking legally here, not biologically.

Please note that this is a theoretical discussion.

They don't have that "out" because they went ahead and shoved "it" in.

 

[sakinago]

Why not?

It is called "personal responsibility"

So only men are required to have said responsibility?

how do you figure? Who do you think is raising the child while the man just sends cash?

If a woman doesn't want the kid, she has an "out". Men don't have that "out"

We are talking legally here, not biologically.

Please note that this is a theoretical discussion.

Yes it theoretical, I thought that was obvious. Though it’s more ethical than legal, although if someone chose to pursue this legally and somehow won...that would have some pretty big consequences.

 

[martybegan]

Why not?

It is called "personal responsibility"

So only men are required to have said responsibility?

how do you figure? Who do you think is raising the child while the man just sends cash?

If a woman doesn't want the kid, she has an "out". Men don't have that "out"

We are talking legally here, not biologically.

Please note that this is a theoretical discussion.

They don't have that "out" because they went ahead and shoved "it" in.

And the woman let it get shoved "in"

Isn't it the current thinking that legally men and women are supposed to be equal in every way?

Are you sticking to Victorian concepts of women? I.e. that they don't want or enjoy sex, and that men always have to be the "aggressor"?

 

[martybegan]

Why not?

It is called "personal responsibility"

So only men are required to have said responsibility?

how do you figure? Who do you think is raising the child while the man just sends cash?

If a woman doesn't want the kid, she has an "out". Men don't have that "out"

We are talking legally here, not biologically.

Please note that this is a theoretical discussion.

Yes it theoretical, I thought that was obvious. Though it’s more ethical than legal, although if someone chose to pursue this legally and somehow won...that would have some pretty big consequences.

The thing is that if you don't follow through, you are implying that women need additional protections above and beyond those needed by men.

 

[sakinago]

Why not?

It is called "personal responsibility"

How can one responsibility for a decision that they had zero say in the matter?

Did the woman rape them? Did the woman make them have sex? I do not think so.

That doesn’t change that fact that men are still held responsible without any say in the matter.

What if the women requested to go raw dog, or lied about being on BC? This hypos can go on all day, the issue at hand is still one party holds the sole decision making ability, and the other is held responsible for it.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Why not?

It is called "personal responsibility"

So only men are required to have said responsibility?

how do you figure? Who do you think is raising the child while the man just sends cash?

If a woman doesn't want the kid, she has an "out". Men don't have that "out"

We are talking legally here, not biologically.

Please note that this is a theoretical discussion.

Yes it theoretical, I thought that was obvious. Though it’s more ethical than legal, although if someone chose to pursue this legally and somehow won...that would have some pretty big consequences.

Ethically, the man should help pay to raise their child. I cannot think of many things lower than a man that lacks that basic morals to do that.