or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › My Body My Choice- For men too..
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

My Body My Choice- For men too.. - Page 5

post #161 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
Functionally, it is. It's as simple as the sentence itself. What else is there to explain?

How abandoning a living human being is the same as an abortion. They're not the same. Explain how they are.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #162 of 382
You're adding additional contexts to confuse the issue.

It's very simply. You opt-out within a specified grace period, you are severing further physical and legal responsibility of the baby. The remaining partner can reevaluate her own plans in response, or simply proceed with the birth soley under her own liability. Same thing as an abortion/adoption/consumation for the mother.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #163 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
How abandoning a living human being is the same as an abortion. They're not the same. Explain how they are.

Careful bunge, you're letting your pro-life tendencies show.

When it is unborn, it isn't a baby. It is a fetus. You can't abandon a fetus anymore than you can kill it or else abortion would be murder. The father is abandoning a lump of cells. What the mother chooses to do after that is her own business, including getting an abortion.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #164 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
It's very simply. You opt-out within a specified grace period, you are severing further physical and legal responsibility of the baby. The remaining partner can reevaluate her own plans in response, or simply proceed with the birth soley under her own liability. Same thing as an abortion/adoption/consumation for the mother.

You're proving my point. They're not equal.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #165 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
The father is abandoning a lump of cells.

That's not what you're arguing for. You're arguing for the right to opt-out of a child's life. If you want to argue that a man should be able to opt-out of a feteus' life, but is responsible again when the human child is born, go for it. I guess I can handle that one.

But what you're arguing for is opting out of responsibility of a human. That's different.

Opt-out of the responsibilities of a fetus is fine with me. But that's not what you mean or what you're saying. You are arguing for opting out of the fetus & human stages of life.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #166 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
That's not what you're arguing for. You're arguing for the right to opt-out of a child's life. If you want to argue that a man should be able to opt-out of a feteus' life, but is responsible again when the human child is born, go for it. I guess I can handle that one.

But what you're arguing for is opting out of responsibility of a human. That's different.

Opt-out of the responsibilities of a fetus is fine with me. But that's not what you mean or what you're saying. You are arguing for opting out of the fetus & human stages of life.

You are being hypocritical. We can only argue about what it is at the time and the decisions made then. If we were allowed to argue what it would become later, then abortion wouldn't be allowed. You claim that when he releases his rights, it is leaving a child. It is leaving a lump of cells. The fact that the mother decides to keep that lump of cells until it becomes an encumbering child is just that, HER CHOICE.

The fetus has no rights, the father deciding to abandon it harms no one. The fact that the mother decides to keep what later becomes a child is her decision and she would bare the responsibility for it.

Can you name for me a single other instance where we penalize someone today for what something could be in the future? That is the antithesis of justice.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #167 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
You claim that when he releases his rights, it is leaving a child. It is leaving a lump of cells.

No.

You're asking that a father be able to opt-out of his rights for the future child. That's what you're asking.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #168 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
No.

You're asking that a father be able to opt-out of his rights for the future child. That's what you're asking.

Again you want to have your cake and eat it too. If we consider what it would be in the future, then abortion would be illegal. Potential does not equal child.

Can you name for me a time when someone is encumbered in the future for actions today except for crimes or legal contracts?

Is a man having sex a crime now? Was he offered a legal contract? If a woman doesn't give consent for sex we call it a crime, rape. What if a man doesn't give consent to father. Why is the crime on him?

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #169 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Again you want to have your cake and eat it too. If we consider what it would be in the future, then abortion would be illegal. Potential does not equal child.

Can you name for me a time when someone is encumbered in the future for actions today except for crimes or legal contracts?

Is a man having sex a crime now? Was he offered a legal contract? If a woman doesn't give consent for sex we call it a crime, rape. What if a man doesn't give consent to father. Why is the crime on him?

Nick

You're not listening. YOU are asking that a father give up his responsibilities for a future entity. YOU are considering that it will be a human in the future and asking that a man be able to absolve himself of responsibility for that child.

I say let him absolve himself of the responsibilities of the fetus. Fine. If and when the child is born, the responsibility for the human being kicks in. That gives you the equality you want. OK, not what you want, because you don't want equality.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #170 of 382
This is silly. It's a coarse, but suitable analogy, but are you responsible for a car after you sell it to somebody, whether it ends up in a junkyard or it is sitting in that person's driveway needing new tires? Unless you promised them new tires in the deal, then no, the buyer assumes your responsibilities and liabilities for the car AS-IS.

If that is too far for your mind to reach, if one co-owner of a car sells his portion of the car to the remaining owner, then apply the same scenario...
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #171 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
It's a coarse, but suitable analogy...

I think courts probably don't view humans as used cars. Just my guess though.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #172 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
You're not listening. YOU are asking that a father give up his responsibilities for a future entity. YOU are considering that it will be a human in the future and asking that a man be able to absolve himself of responsibility for that child.

I say let him absolve himself of the responsibilities of the fetus. Fine. If and when the child is born, the responsibility for the human being kicks in. That gives you the equality you want. OK, not what you want, because you don't want equality.

No it is you who are not listening.(or rather reading )

What the entity will be in the future has no merit on today. When he absolves himself of responsiility, it is the mother that makes the choice to assume full responsibility for what will eventually become a child. If she does not wish to assume it alone, then she can abort. This burdensome lump of cells has no rights nor special significance. It can be recreated with another man who has given proper commitment via marriage or has declared he would like to be a parent when given the choice.

As I have said a commitment involves two parties in agreement. What we have now is one party coercing the other with the full assistance of the government. This ought not be.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #173 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
I think courts probably don't view humans as used cars. Just my guess though.

Like it or not, the analogy fits. These are transactions, there are recipients, end users, properties, liabilities, etc. If you are going to get caught up in the "human" aspect (so as to avoid facing the very basics here), then "opt-out" is the least of your worries. The notion of abortion is then altogether wrong and not an option at all. Thus you shouldn't even be participating in this discussion. You should start your own discussion on the age-old abortion topic. Starting one inside here would be clearly OT. See ya!

...and in a most ironic turn, the courts may not view humans as used cars, but they sure do view male humans as "work units" that supply money (in the form of unconditional, compulsory childcare), guilty until proven innocent, and utterly secondary in consideration as far as a "woman's needs". That's not really a far stretch at all to "being" a used car, IMO.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #174 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
I think courts probably don't view humans as used cars. Just my guess though.

There you go callin a fetus a human being again. Are you a closet pro-lifer?

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #175 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
What the entity will be in the future has no merit on today.

And the opt-out decision you want can effect what the blob of cells is today, but not the human it will be in the future.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #176 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
There you go callin a fetus a human being again.

I'm referring to the human that will grow from the blob. The effects the opt-out decision has on that blob.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #177 of 382
So essentially, you have an anti-abortion argument you wish to sideline this topic with? As mentioned earlier, take it somewhere else. This topic isn't about the legitimacy of abortion/anti-abortion.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #178 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
So essentially, you have an anti-abortion argument you wish to sideline this topic with? As mentioned earlier, take it somewhere else. This topic isn't about the legitimacy of abortion/anti-abortion.

Hmmm...I re-read my last two posts and noticed that I didn't mention abortion. Why are you derailing the thread?
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #179 of 382
Then what exactly is the significance of a "lump of cells"? If you are ultimately concerned that it has the potential to later become a fully birthed human being, then you are essentially rehashing the abortion legitimacy argument.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #180 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
Then what exactly is the significance of a "lump of cells"?

Nothing as far as I'm concerned. But why does trumptman keep asking for an opt-out clause for what that lump may become? I've already said that if a man wants to opt-out of any responsibility for that lump of goop, I'll agree with that. But that's not what trumptman is arguing for.

He's argueing that if the lump of cells becomes a human, a man shouldn't have to be responsible for that human because that's somehow equitable.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #181 of 382
If the man has opted-out for a lump of cells, that naturally means everything is opted-out thereafter. There is no default opt-in that needs to be re-opted-out at every notable stage of a growing human being. If the woman proceeds to develop that lump of cells into a living baby, despite the man having already opted-out, then the liability and responsibility should be soley her own. The man has long since stepped out of the picture. Done. Finito.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #182 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
If the man has opted-out for a lump of cells, that naturally means everything is opted-out thereafter.

I'm not disagreeing with that. What I'm saying is that this is not an equitable response to a woman's choice.

Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
If the woman proceeds to develop that lump of cells into a living baby, despite the man having already opted-out, then the liability and responsibility should be soley her own. The man has long since stepped out of the picture. Done. Finito.

Can a woman opt-out and leave a man with a human to raise? No.

This situation you so accurately describes proves my point. What trumptman is asking for has no equivalent for a woman. He's not asking for equality, he's asking for more.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #183 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
And the opt-out decision you want can effect what the blob of cells is today, but not the human it will be in the future.

So... abortion will affect it much worse and is perfectly legal.

Quote:
I'm referring to the human that will grow from the blob. The effects the opt-out decision has on that blob.

Again so...abortion will affect the human that will grow from the blob as well.

You keep speaking about it in future and human terms. Certainly no act can be worse than death. Even if the father is given the option of abandoning what will be a human, that is certainly no worse than killing it.

We allow abortion for any and all reasons. It is pure discretion, especially in the first trimester. So the child may or may not be poorer. We don't really know, that is an assumption. The mother might hit the lottery, might get married to a different guy who cares about her and the child. It doesn't really matter. We can't control the future of people and their decisions, nor should we attempt to do so via legislation.

You are about the last person in the world who should condone taking pre-emptive action. Now not only are you a pro-lifer, you should join the Bush cabinet.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #184 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Hmmm...I re-read my last two posts and noticed that I didn't mention abortion. Why are you derailing the thread?

Because when you call a lump of cells labeled a fetus a human, and attempt to forgo the rights of a fully born human to protect the rights of that lump of cells, that sounds... just like the abortion debate.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #185 of 382
trumptman, if you were a woman you'd make it to 42 weeks just talking about abort and thinking whether to do it or not.
How many problems have you modified or originated in the past 1 day?
Reply
How many problems have you modified or originated in the past 1 day?
Reply
post #186 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Can a woman opt-out and leave a man with a human to raise? No.

This situation you so accurately describes proves my point. What trumptman is asking for has no equivalent for a woman. He's not asking for equality, he's asking for more.

You are incorrect. As you stated yourself, if the woman were to bare the child, thus not having exercised her choice to abort (1st choice in the matter) she could terminate her parental rights and give full custody to the father. I have witnessed this happen myself with men who really wanted the child, begged the women not to abort, and the women followed their wishes. The birthed the child, signed away the rights, and gave the man the child.

It is entirely possible.

Likewise it is not more because a woman ALWAYS has a choice to abort, adopt or abandon. She does not have to take the child she is left with if she does not want to do so. The man signing away his parental rights early on would only make all these processes less complicated and easier to accomplish. It doesn't not make it harder for her to exercise her choices, it makes it easier since she no longer has to worry about timelines for the father's rights terminating.

The only thing it makes it harder for her to do is have a child and then petition a court for 33% of his take home pay for the next 18 years.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #187 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Again so...abortion will affect the human that will grow from the blob as well.

You keep speaking about it in future and human terms. Certainly no act can be worse than death. Even if the father is given the option of abandoning what will be a human, that is certainly no worse than killing it.

Your whole premise is based on 'future and human terms', I'm only responding.

Abortion is not the death of a human. You have to have human life first.

You're not asking to abandon 'what will be a human', you're asking to abandon both what will be a human and what is a blob of cells. I can only say it so many times, but if you change your language to include only a blob of cells, I could accept it.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #188 of 382
Circle, circle, circle.

Quote:
I'm not disagreeing with that. What I'm saying is that this is not an equitable response to a woman's choice.

Let's get something figured out here then. What would be the equitable response (for a man) to a woman's choice to abort a baby, in your opinion?
post #189 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Longhorn
Let's get something figured out here then. What would be the equitable response (for a man) to a woman's choice to abort a baby, in your opinion?

Nothing.

Why must it be assumed that men should have a right equitable to abortion? Only women can abort. Only women can terminate pregnancies. It's a woman's right. The right to choose is conferred to women because the bodies of women are at stake in pregnancy...always. The pattern here, of course, is women, not men. Why some men see this biological and subsequently legal inequality as something that must be made equal is beyond rational thought.
post #190 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Longhorn
Let's get something figured out here then. What would be the equitable response (for a man) to a woman's choice to abort a baby, in your opinion?

There may be nothing. But giving a man more rights doesn't make things better. There may be no equivalent to getting an abortion. Trumptman is just scared of this fact I guess.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #191 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
There may be nothing. But giving a man more rights doesn't make things better. There may be no equivalent to getting an abortion. Trumptman is just scared of this fact I guess.

Yes, I sleep periodically and thus don't reply, so I must be scared.

You have reframed the question. The real question is, what is an equivalent way for men to terminate their parental rights. Women do so via abortion, adoption and abandonment. Men should be allowed to do so via opting out, adoption or abandonment.

What you are scared of addressing is there would be no equivelent of criminalizing a man and suing for support for 18 years for a 15 minute act.

How many other "crimes" do we give 18 year sentences for? Maybe attempted murder?

You also sidetrack the question in that men do not have to have a medical procedure to terminate their parental rights. Big deal. Abortion is an outpatient procedure done at a clinic.

You should just admit that you would prefer men have no option but supporting someone for 18 years. You haven't even indicated what rights they should have as a non-elective parent. You've decried the lengthy court procedures and the denial of father's rights via them, but you have offered no alternatives. (Something you accused me of that happened to be wrong) Offer your alternatives and we will see if your brand of feminism offers equality or coddling.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #192 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Shawn
Nothing.

Why must it be assumed that men should have a right equitable to abortion? Only women can abort. Only women can terminate pregnancies. It's a woman's right. The right to choose is conferred to women because the bodies of women are at stake in pregnancy...always. The pattern here, of course, is women, not men. Why some men see this biological and subsequently legal inequality as something that must be made equal is beyond rational thought.

Why must a man have an equivelent right? Because their bodies are at stake in supporting an unwanted child for 18 years. That is much longer than the 40 weeks of pregnancy by which we give women the right to an abortion. If 40 weeks gives legal rights, what should 18 years give?

If a man, under threat of imprisonment,is required to support the child for 18 years, how is his body not at stake?

The thought associated with it is very rational and very equitable. It isn't to those like yourself who are self-loathing and accepting of this lack of equality.

Women and women's groups have made it clear. Sex is for pleasure, parenting is a choice. Abortion is available for those who had sex but don't wish to parent. The medical procedure involves their body, but the rational remains the same.

It should be the same for men as well.

Likewise to you Shawn, what are your alternatives? Men can not only be made to pay support, custody likewise defaults to the mother. There is no issue regarding her body with that. Would you support joint default legal and physical custody where the father is fiscally responsible for his 50% of the time and she for hers.

If you won't give him the right to opt out of parenting, would you at least support his right to parent equally? There is no woman, body, choice issue there. We will see if you are really about equality.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #193 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Your whole premise is based on 'future and human terms', I'm only responding.

Abortion is not the death of a human. You have to have human life first.

You're not asking to abandon 'what will be a human', you're asking to abandon both what will be a human and what is a blob of cells. I can only say it so many times, but if you change your language to include only a blob of cells, I could accept it.

You are repeating yourself. He abandons a blob of cells. What it becomes later is not his fault or concern. She has the right to abort if she chooses not to raise it alone when it becomes a child.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #194 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Yes, I sleep periodically and thus don't reply, so I must be scared.

Sorry, I wasn't referring to the fact that you hadn't responded. Just that you started the thread at all.

Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
You have reframed the question. The real question is, what is an equivalent way for men to terminate their parental rights. Women do so via abortion, adoption and abandonment. Men should be allowed to do so via opting out, adoption or abandonment.

Men can via adoption or abandonment. There is no equivalent to abortion.

Abortion /= opting out.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #195 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Sorry, I wasn't referring to the fact that you hadn't responded. Just that you started the thread at all.

Men can via adoption or abandonment. There is no equivalent to abortion.

Abortion /= opting out.

Men can via adoption or abandonment, if the mother consents. We have already discussed how the reverse is not true and the man's rights automatically time out. The reverse is not true for women.

Likewise I have explained how I think both people taking actions against a blob of cells is equal. How is it different to you? You mention the future ramifications, but women still have a choice to prevent that future via abortion.

And you did ignore the whole custody issue. Please let me know what you think there.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #196 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Men can via adoption or abandonment, if the mother consents. We have already discussed how the reverse is not true and the man's rights automatically time out. The reverse is not true for women.

I disagree that the reverse is not true. A woman can't put a child up for adoption or abandon it if the father does not consent.

Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Likewise I have explained how I think both people taking actions against a blob of cells is equal. How is it different to you? You mention the future ramifications, but women still have a choice to prevent that future via abortion.

No. Taking action against a blob of cells is fine. YOU are the one that wants the decision to hold once the blob of cells grows up. So YOU are the one that wants the action to have ramifications against a human being. I'm all for actions being targeted at cells and cells alone. You refuse to acknowledge this option.

Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
And you did ignore the whole custody issue. Please let me know what you think there.

What custody issue? Just trying to keep things clear so we're not arguing different points.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #197 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
I disagree that the reverse is not true. A woman can't put a child up for adoption or abandon it if the father does not consent.

I think with this one, we are just going to have to agree to disagree. If she moves, lies, won't say he is the father, etc. It is almost impossible for him to exercise his "rights."

Quote:
No. Taking action against a blob of cells is fine. YOU are the one that wants the decision to hold once the blob of cells grows up. So YOU are the one that wants the action to have ramifications against a human being. I'm all for actions being targeted at cells and cells alone. You refuse to acknowledge this option.

I fully acknowledged that the cells become a human being with needs. The mother must weigh that when she exercises her choice to be a single parent with an unsupported child or abort. As for the decision holding, of course I do. Why would I want a man or a woman to pay for the rest of their lives for 15 minutes of sex. Isn't that why abortion is a woman's choice? So she may continue her life as she wishes without the role of parenting holding her back?

Quote:
What custody issue? Just trying to keep things clear so we're not arguing different points.

This one..Men can not only be made to pay support, physical custody likewise often defaults to the mother. There is no issue regarding her body with that. Would you support joint default legal and physical custody where the father is fiscally responsible for his 50% of the time and she for hers.

If you won't give him the right to opt out of parenting, would you at least support his right to parent equally? There is no woman, body, choice issue there. This would pretty much end the support issues as well.

Likewise please understand that in all these instances we are talking about two uncommitted adults. I don't think anyone here has claimed that a father in a marriage shouldn't assume responsibility for his child or that support issues still couldn't arise from divorce decrees. However even with divorce decrees I believe the default judgement should be 50-50 with no child support. If she wishes to pursue alimony related to lost employment opportunities due to staying home, etc. then that is another issue. However if both parties have the children 50% of the time, one should not have to pay the other. This is currently not the case no matter what type of relationship the man and woman had.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #198 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
I think with this one, we are just going to have to agree to disagree. If she moves, lies, won't say he is the father, etc. It is almost impossible for him to exercise his "rights."

We can't protect men from women lying. It's just not possible. She has to be given the benefit of the doubt until proven guilty.

Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
I fully acknowledged that the cells become a human being with needs. The mother must weigh that when she exercises her choice to be a single parent with an unsupported child or abort.

See, you want to push all the blame on to the mother. You want extra rights for men, not equality. Certainly the system can be exploited, but it can only be done by a women willing to lie, cheat and steal. Any system can be exploited by people willing to do that. You want to codify that right for men and that's wrong.

Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
As for the decision holding, of course I do. Why would I want a man or a woman to pay for the rest of their lives for 15 minutes of sex. Isn't that why abortion is a woman's choice? So she may continue her life as she wishes without the role of parenting holding her back?

No. It's her choice because it's her body. Like getting a tattoo or a piercing.

Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
This one..Men can not only be made to pay support, physical custody likewise often defaults to the mother. There is no issue regarding her body with that. Would you support joint default legal and physical custody where the father is fiscally responsible for his 50% of the time and she for hers.

50-50 isn't 100% correct. I believe the decision has to go up in front of a judge and that's where the situation is decided. Going to a 50-50 system would create problems just as it fixes some. As I told you, I know of a case where the father was given custody. If it had gone 50-50 likely one of his children would be dead right now. The judge made the right choice.

Judges aren't always correct, but I trust them more than I do a blanket 50-50 situation.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #199 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
We can't protect men from women lying. It's just not possible.

So just leave in as many exploits in the system as possible? Sort of like keeping a Windows box secure? Hackers can get in anyway, so why bother any protection at all? Speaking of protection, sperm can get to the egg anyway, so why bother with any protection at all? This line of thought is pure bunk. You stop up as many holes as you can, and that will ward off most attempts at exploitation. A few may still get through in the end, but not w/o a considerable effort.

Quote:
She has to be given the benefit of the doubt until proven guilty.

Seems like "giving the benefit of the doubt" has worn away its welcome if women will readily lie to exploit the system. It's time to get back to "innocent until proven guilty" for both sexes.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #200 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
So just leave in as many exploits in the system as possible?

No, we have a paternity test to make things 100% sure in case a woman does lie. There's no better way than a test.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › My Body My Choice- For men too..