Mr. Shaman
Senior Member
- May 4, 2010
- 23,892
- 822
- 48
Well if a woman has the final voice in raising the child or ending its life should the man responsible for the pregnancy be allowed to "walk away" from fiscal responsibilities if she chooses to have the child?
Keep in mind I've already raised my children so this is all water under the bridge for me. But it seems the laws are all tilted in the woman's favor. Simply put if she can kill it he should be able to ditch his responsibilities if she has it. (his abortion financially)
The man assumes potential responsiblity when he chooses to have sex with the woman.
And does she not assume a lifetime of potential responsibilities?
She can shirk hers so why can't he?
Even for a self-centered prick, like yourself, what you're suggesting makes no sense.
You're saying.....because she's got a choice (on whether-or-not to carry-to-term), he's also got the choice to bail, on her, at any-given-time??
Now, let's hear your (typically, "conservative") screed on how everyone (else) needs to....
Accept responsibility for their own actions.
(....Or, doesn't that apply to White-dudes?)
You're saying.....because she's got a choice (on whether-or-not to carry-to-term), he's also got the choice to bail, on her, at any-given-time??
Now, let's hear your (typically, "conservative") screed on how everyone (else) needs to....
Accept responsibility for their own actions.
(....Or, doesn't that apply to White-dudes?)