If women can get abortions, men should be able to opt out of fatherhood

[Dreamy]

Can people quit making this about the child or about abortion. This is about equal rights for men and women. If you want to debate a different topic make a new thread.

Um...is this not the title you chose for your thread?


If women can get abortions, men should be able to opt out of fatherhood

 

[LibertyLemming]

If you don't want to pay for your kid, get a vasectomy. There - problem solved.

But wouldn't the same work for women? Don't want a baby, have your tubes tied??

Get the shots, get the implants, get on the pill, whatever works. The OP was about men and abortions/child support, so that's what I addressed.

The OP was about men's rights versus women's rights in regard to this specific issue.

 

[LibertyLemming]

Can people quit making this about the child or about abortion. This is about equal rights for men and women. If you want to debate a different topic make a new thread.

Um...is this not the title you chose for your thread?


If women can get abortions, men should be able to opt out of fatherhood

You can't tell from the title that the argument is about men's vs women's rights and not about if abortion should be legal?

 

[Dreamy]

Can people quit making this about the child or about abortion. This is about equal rights for men and women. If you want to debate a different topic make a new thread.

Um...is this not the title you chose for your thread?


If women can get abortions, men should be able to opt out of fatherhood

You can't tell from the title that the argument is about men's vs women's rights and not about if abortion should be legal?

I can tell this is about abortion and opting out of fatherhood.

 

[Noomi]

One has to bring abortion into the argument in order to make an argument, that's the thing.

 

[LibertyLemming]

At the very least men should be able to "opt-out" and only have to pay however much an abortion would have cost.

 

[LibertyLemming]

One has to bring abortion into the argument in order to make an argument, that's the thing.

I suppose. But the legality of abortion is not what I'm trying to discuss here...

 

[Noomi]

One has to bring abortion into the argument in order to make an argument, that's the thing.

I suppose. But the legality of abortion is not what I'm trying to discuss here...

I understand. But if someone says 'if women are allowed to have abortions, then men should be able to opt out of fatherhood' the words 'allowed to have abortions' discusses the legality of them, does it not?

 

[Political Junky]

I find it highly hypocritical that a woman can get an abortion, without notifying the man who impregnated her, and without even justifying it. Yet if a woman gets pregnant, keeps the baby, the male now has to pay child support. That is insane. Men should be able to opt out completely from being involved in raising the child and not have to pay a dime of child support since women can do the same thing via abortion.

Ask Joe Walsh about that, his congressional salary is being garnished to pay his back child support.

No it's not.

He has automatic deductions for his current support payments, as most men who pay child support chose to do.

Hack.

Rep. Joe Walsh: I had


Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.) says he hasn’t paid his court-ordered child support because he and his ex-wife reached a “verbal agreement” three years ago that he could stop paying her child support.

Laura Walsh says her ex-husband, elected to Congress last year as a leading voice of the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party, owed her $117,000 in child support and interest.

Using the kind of strong language he has become known for as a congressman, Walsh lashed out at his ex-wife Wednesday, accusing her and her attorney of breaking state law by “blatantly and knowingly submitting false information in her pleading.”

The thick nine-year-old divorce file in Cook County Circuit Court chronicles how every few years Laura Walsh has gone to court saying her ex-husband is not paying and asking a judge to order him to pay, sometimes garnishing his wages.

In her pleading three weeks after Walsh was elected to Congress, Laura Walsh said that from November 2005 to March, 2008, Walsh made only half-payments, failing to make required “second or third monthly $500 payments” on top of the $1,135 being deducted from his check.

Then he stopped making payments altogether in March of 2008, telling her he “had no income.”

 

[LibertyLemming]

One has to bring abortion into the argument in order to make an argument, that's the thing.

I suppose. But the legality of abortion is not what I'm trying to discuss here...

I understand. But if someone says 'if women are allowed to have abortions, then men should be able to opt out of fatherhood' the words 'allowed to have abortions' discusses the legality of them, does it not?

I guess. Abortions are legal right now and I was speaking of the current situation. But whatever, LET'S MOVE ON~!

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Can people quit making this about the child or about abortion. This is about equal rights for men and women. If you want to debate a different topic make a new thread.

good luck with that....even a husband has no rights to keep his own child if his wife chooses to abort the baby....and you want to challenge support payments?.....

what exactly is this "equal right" you are speaking of....?

 

[Si modo]

Ask Joe Walsh about that, his congressional salary is being garnished to pay his back child support.

No it's not.

He has automatic deductions for his current support payments, as most men who pay child support chose to do.

Hack.

Rep. Joe Walsh: I had


Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Ill.) says he hasn’t paid his court-ordered child support because he and his ex-wife reached a “verbal agreement” three years ago that he could stop paying her child support.

Laura Walsh says her ex-husband, elected to Congress last year as a leading voice of the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party, owed her $117,000 in child support and interest.

Using the kind of strong language he has become known for as a congressman, Walsh lashed out at his ex-wife Wednesday, accusing her and her attorney of breaking state law by “blatantly and knowingly submitting false information in her pleading.”

The thick nine-year-old divorce file in Cook County Circuit Court chronicles how every few years Laura Walsh has gone to court saying her ex-husband is not paying and asking a judge to order him to pay, sometimes garnishing his wages.

In her pleading three weeks after Walsh was elected to Congress, Laura Walsh said that from November 2005 to March, 2008, Walsh made only half-payments, failing to make required “second or third monthly $500 payments” on top of the $1,135 being deducted from his check.

Then he stopped making payments altogether in March of 2008, telling her he “had no income.”

Damn, you're stupid.

 

[Dreamy]

Can people quit making this about the child or about abortion. This is about equal rights for men and women. If you want to debate a different topic make a new thread.

good luck with that....even a husband has no rights to keep his own child if his wife chooses to abort the baby....and you want to challenge support payments?.....

what exactly is this "equal right" you are speaking of....?

True. I believe several "mens groups" have tried to challenge the status quo and legality and their rights in these situations to no avail.

 

[AmyNation]

If women were required to notify all potential fathers of a future child, before the woman hit 15 weeks, then both parties would be able to go forward on equal ground.

Either the man will accept responsibility or he can opt out, and the woman can either choose to terminate/adoption or prepare for being a single mother.

Again, and I don't know how many times I can drive this point home, but it's not about what is "fair" to the father and/or mother. It's about making sure the child is well cared for. It is only about the child.

What would happen in a nation with your proposed law if the mother failed to notify the father within 15 weeks of pregnancy or didn't even know she was pregnant until after that point (It does happen on occasion) and she decides to keep the baby, but isn't financially prepared to do so? We just say **** it so the kid can be raised on welfare and you and I pay for him? Yeah, there's some justice. Dad gets off the hook, but now I get to pay for Johnny.

I am aware that child support is about the welfare of the child. However, since the option to discuss future possible children exists, men should be able to avail themselves of it as well.

Of course there will be instances where some women find out too late or dont notify etc etc. In those instances the court can dertermine whats best.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

If women were required to notify all potential fathers of a future child, before the woman hit 15 weeks, then both parties would be able to go forward on equal ground.

Either the man will accept responsibility or he can opt out, and the woman can either choose to terminate/adoption or prepare for being a single mother.

Again, and I don't know how many times I can drive this point home, but it's not about what is "fair" to the father and/or mother. It's about making sure the child is well cared for. It is only about the child.

What would happen in a nation with your proposed law if the mother failed to notify the father within 15 weeks of pregnancy or didn't even know she was pregnant until after that point (It does happen on occasion) and she decides to keep the baby, but isn't financially prepared to do so? We just say **** it so the kid can be raised on welfare and you and I pay for him? Yeah, there's some justice. Dad gets off the hook, but now I get to pay for Johnny.

I am aware that child support is about the welfare of the child. However, since the option to discuss future possible children exists, men should be able to avail themselves of it as well.

Of course there will be instances where some women find out too late or dont notify etc etc. In those instances the court can dertermine whats best.

do you mean to 'discuss the possibility of having children' before sex.....? if that were only the real world....

in our current society of 'free sex' there are no guidelines for responsibility.....the closest thing out there today is the admonition to wear a condom....and even that is ignored....

i say 'follow the money'.....if society cut off welfare to single mothers and did not force unmarried men to support bastard children...you would see a sudden corresponding rise in the marriage rate with a resurgence of the family unit and much more responsible care of children and a more civil society.....this would increase even more if abortion was banned....

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

It's not a double standard, it's nature. If you don't like the way our biology is take it up with God. The child has to be cared for, period. That is the issue here and that is the purpose of child support. Whether or not you find that fair is completely irrelevant because it's not about you or men versus women, it's about the child. Don't get someone pregnant if you aren't ready to be a father and then you'll never have to deal with this situation. It's really quite a simple concept.

You are confusing biology with how an individual is treated under the law. They are not one in the same. The law says a woman can carry to term and keep the child or she can terminate the pregnancy, as it stands now the potential father has no choices under the law. If he wants the child he cannot compell her to carry to term, if doesn't want the child he cannot compell her to terminate. How would you say that legally squares with his 14th Amendment rights for equal protection under the law?

I haven't confused anything. Last I checked, men don't get pregnant, so like I said, if you have a problem with that take it up with your god. Mother Nature isn't fair and you can't legislate biology.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I assume you do not advocate legal abortion ?

Why would you assume that? I'm pro-choice. I don't get how, based on my opinion, you come to the conclusion that I think abortion should be outlawed.

What part of your statement does NOT apply o the woman TOO? Is she not equally responsible for birth control? Is she not equally responsible for the sex act? Is she not as responsible for the Pregnancy as the man? But you would forgive her all her responsibility.

Would I?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I assume you do not advocate legal abortion ?

Why would you assume that? I'm pro-choice. I don't get how, based on my opinion, you come to the conclusion that I think abortion should be outlawed.

Well you seem to want to make it about the child and not the parents yet you have no problem with the child being aborted and not even existing (perhaps because it would be too great a burden on the parents)? Just seems strange.

I never indicated one way or the other whether or not I have a "problem" with abortion. It's simply called minding my own damn business. It's not for me to decide what another person does with their body.

 

[Avatar4321]

Men have an easy way to opt out of fatherhood. It's called: DONT GET A WOMAN PREGNANT.

However, if you father a child, you can't opt out. The child is there. You are a father. Being a dead beat isnt going to change that. It's just going to screw over your child and make you miserable.

Your reasoning is poor anyway. Just because some women will do horrible things doesn't mean men should do them as well. In fact, I think we as men need to step up and do what needs to be done and stop running from our responsibilities. If we stop running from our responsibilities, more women will graciously accept theirs.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Well hence why we are saying it would be done before birth. The double standard is there you just don't seem to have an issue with it. Women can opt out, men cannot.

Your entire last comment could easily be directed at women having abortions.

It's not a double standard, it's nature. If you don't like the way our biology is take it up with God. The child has to be cared for, period. That is the issue here and that is the purpose of child support. Whether or not you find that fair is completely irrelevant because it's not about you or men versus women, it's about the child. Don't get someone pregnant if you aren't ready to be a father and then you'll never have to deal with this situation. It's really quite a simple concept.

I would agree about the above but then again could we not also say to women who get pregnant and choose to abort don't get pregnant if you are not ready to be a mother and you won't have to deal with abortion or pregnancy?

Duh! But since the woman is the one getting impregnated and it's her body going through the pregnancy the male is far more impacted by her decision than the other way around, so it would be prudent for a guy not to put the baby inside her in the first place if he doesn't want one.

Honest to God, I don't know why you people are having such a difficult time understanding the logic of this. It's not that hard.