Should a man be able to get a "financial abortion" or something like it?

[Skylar]

I actually think that if we could not force men to take care of there child then women would be more selective in who they mate with. Will they choose dude x who has no job or dude y who is financially stable and morally responsible.

The only thing that approach would accomplish is to increase the welfare rolls...and society at large becomes financially responsible instead of the father.

There are plenty of people who are single parents who are not in welfare.

Your scenario creates unequal obligation. With a mother responsible for every child she bears while a man is never responsible for any child he fathers.

That's not equality.

Or your scenario creates unequal rights. Where a man has control of his own body. But a woman doesn't have control over hers.

That's not equality.

And of course, the obligation is to the child. If the child exists, the obligation exists. And that obligation is always equal.

There's your equality.

 

[Sherry]

I actually think that if we could not force men to take care of there child then women would be more selective in who they mate with. Will they choose dude x who has no job or dude y who is financially stable and morally responsible.

The only thing that approach would accomplish is to increase the welfare rolls...and society at large becomes financially responsible instead of the father.

There are plenty of people who are single parents who are not in welfare.

So what?? That doesn't negate the fact that welfare rolls would still increase under your proposal. Don't be daft.

Single moms are all deadbeats? That is bullshit!

Stop using absolutes in attempts to support your stance...it has a negative impact on your credibility.

 

[Skylar]

The idea is that if he fills out certain paperwork before X date in the pregnancy (just like abortion) he is clear of all financial obligations with regard to that child.
This debate hinges on one concept - fairness is more important than responsibility. And I think that's a dangerous one.
Thoughts?

Thoughts?

If you father a child- you have the obligation to support the child.

Yes, but why can't we apply the same logic to women. If you get pregnant you have an obligation to take care of the child which means you can't abort the child.

Easy. Because a woman has the same right to control her own body that a man possesses.

You're again proposing unequal rights. Where a man can control his own body. But a woman can't control hers.

That's not equality.

Huh?

Mandating that a woman can't abort robs her of control of her own body. While a man retains control over his own.

Your scenario mandates unequal rights.

 

[Skylar]

Its a pretty simple matter. Its a choice between a father's 'right' not to support his own children. Or a child's right to support from both its parents.

The child wins. In every state without exception. Red, blue or purple. Democrat or conservative.

 

[Teddy Pollins]

This is my biggest criticism of the pro-choice crowd to which I belong. I think there is a real double standard here. A man should be allowed to completely avoid paying child support if a women chooses to have the child. Am I right as usual