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 7

post #241 of 382
Thread Starter 
I asked you to address these...

If a man has made no commitment to a woman, either legally or financially, why should he be responsible for an "accident" that obliges his body via work for over 18 years when the law will not force a woman to do something she does not wish with her body for 40 weeks.

Second, address head on why a man should be forced to parent against his will. You keep using association arguments, but you don't make a case. A woman currently would consider a man's ability to provide in deciding whether to abort or not. The fact that he has a choice does not change the considerations a woman makes when considering abortion. You have not addressed this. You must show, aside from normal considerations the woman would make regarding whether or not to have an abortion, why a man should be denied his rights.


I'm looking...looking... no he ignores them and repeats himself again. Oh the agony!! I guess it's on to your assertions again...

Quote:
Originally posted by Shawn
Legally forced single parent child raising is what "opting-out" creates. A man opts out of his parental responsibilities to his child or to his children; therefore, he creates a single-parent family situation for his children. Granted, a woman can then abscond her own parental rights to her children through adoption, or later become a two-parent family again through marriage (or...ahem..civil unions). But what opting out directly creates is a single parent family. That point is so impossibly ridiculous to deny that tortured reasoning is only on the part of those who cannot see anything bad from giving men the right to "opt-out." Despite the existence of a capable man, a woman is legally forced to become a single parent trying to make up for the lost child-support payments that would assist her child.

How is she LEGALLY FORCED to become a single parent, when she is legally allowed not to become a parent at all? You confuse the right to do with her body, with the right to live in a certain lifestyle. We guarantee (for now) one of those, but not the other.

The right to abortion is allowed under the right of privacy to with her body as she wishes. How do you read in there "right to have someone else's body provide for her body for the next 18 years?" Two parent families and financial support have nothing to do with her private right to an abortion.

You find for me in the Constitution where she has a right to a man, his money, a husband, or anything of that nature.

Likewise find for me in the Constitution where a child is even guaranteed two parents or even one.

Quote:
Let's be honest here, trumptman, for a change.

Tell me what you consider the major negative aspects of "opting-out."

Every plan has to have flaws or disadvantages, and it seems like advocates have disregarded them all in the race to "equivalent rights." Remember, the burden of proof is on the proponents while the burden of refutation is on the opponents. And you cannot prove something without addressing a plan's disadvantages.

To me, both the welfare of "opted-out" children and the weakening of the sovereignty of a woman's right to choose present major, untenable disadvantages.

Honest for a change? Do you spend the majority of your time being dishonest Shawn?

I'll gladly go into the negatives. It is called the slippery slope and it is dragged out just about everytime a right is granted. So we will likely have some fathers believe they should be able to opt out during divorces, if a mother moves away with the children, if they are married and do not want the child, etc.

However just because one right is given in one instance doesn't guarantee it in others. That is why it is called a slippery slope. I have no doubt that some will try to press this though and I would consider it a flaw of the plan.

And again the sovereignty of a woman's right to choose concerns her body and her parenting choice. It does not concern having a man provide anything for her, nor does it even guarantee a certain level of comfort regarding parenting. It is a right to privacy to do with her body what she wishes to exercise her choice to parent. That is as far as it reaches. No appeal to the fact a right may be used more often is going to cause anyone to grant additional rights.

Quote:
Regardless, the power of the paycheck of either a two-parent or child-support paying parent family is crucial for the support and success of children. Such families significantly raise the the income and the economic condition of the family. A father figure is not necessary, but a portion of his income is necessary to ensure the well-being of his child or children

That is perhaps the saddest, most sexist thing I have ever read in my life. It is beyond misguided and shows how little you care about men, children, or even really women.

Illegitimacy is the single clearest factor that is likely to predict dropping out, drug abuse, prison, etc. It is precisely because of the misguided notion that someone can parent by proxy or paycheck that we have the problems and issues we do now. If I suggested to you that a child would be psychologically okay without the love and care of a mother because we gave her a few hundred dollars a month, you would find that callousness cruel and harmful. The reverse is true as well.

As a father I can tell you that boys and girls need fathers. The boys need fathers to learn how to use strength without using violence, to temper the physical power they often possess with care and compassion for others. Girls need fathers to see how a man truly treats a woman when he cares for her. Here's a hint it isn't by sending a check. When a girls want to marry a man like dear old dad, it should conjure notions of caring, dependibleness, of love exibited through action. Not of a check arriving in the mail.

As for it again, presenting a harmful effect to the woman's right to choose.. (repeat after me) they are not the same issue. This is why I said you are using association (not appeal to authority) You constantly associate the after birth care with abortion. You claim the after birth care causes the woman not to be able to get an abortion (or limits her right to choose against abortion). That is guilt by association, which is what you have done. She has the right to an abortion, not to a certain lifestyle of parenting is chosen. The (repeat again) fact that she or we cannot guarantee a certain lifestyle after parenting is taken on is why she has the right not to do it and have an abortion.

Quote:
The statistics on children living in single-parent homes already compare them to children living in poverty. A right to "opt-out" would only magnify the problem.

So has no-fault divorce, illegitimacy, WIC and other welfare assistance to single mothers, free day care, etc. On ecould even argue that abortion has contributed to that as well since illegitimacy has exploded since it was legallized. I suppose you would like that gone as well.

I suppose that we should end all those because each time we have offered something to someone who has a child out of wedlock or is a single mom, we seem to get more of them. Perhaps we should stop rewarding someone for going it alone. Then they will choose (via abortion) to stop doing so.

Quote:
Questions regarding a family's ability to support a child will always figure into a woman's reproductive decision. Gradations within a two-parent or child support paying parent family will occur (a janitor will make less than a lawyer), and the job status of both biological parents would ordinarily figure into a woman's choice.

It may figure into her choice, but we don't have to guarantee certain variables in order to assure that if she chooses parenting. She has the right to choose to parent or not. Society and the Constitution does not guarntee that her choose will be a good one, an easy one, a fulfilling one, etc. It just gives her the choice. How it pans out is up to her. Otherwise with what you claim we could justify a police state and likewise your reasoning falls very close to eugenics. (very scary) The Constitution does not guarantee a man for every woman. It guarantees that she can get an abortion if she chooses.


Quote:
However, the existence of a man's right to abdicate personal responsibility upon his child's or children's birth would severely jeopardize the sovereignty of a woman's right to choose (in addition to the child or the children who are most directly affected). If enacted, her decision would now depend on whether the biological father will accept legal responsibility for his child. This isn't like other factors a woman must consider. This is specifically in spite of a woman's own right to choose. A man could punish a woman for choosing to give birth to a child by "opting-out" of his parental responsibility his child. Men hold the upper hand now. In no other context could it be considered as anything but a punishment for a woman's right to choose. A man is neither entitled to a woman's body nor entitled to a choice beyond conception simply because he has no choice to make. Those are the terms.

Do we see the repetition yet?!? The same logical fallacy. (I'm telling you guilt by association) You repeatedly claim that harder parenting = harmed right to abortion. That is the guilt by association. Parenting hardships has nothing to do with whether you can get an abortion. It is a pure and simple fallacy. Opting out make a woman less likely to choose to parenting, therefore opting out is wrong because it limits a woman's abortion rights.

Only abortion is the right to choose NOT to parent.

Quote:
In the name of "equal rights" and "fairness," advocates would agree to this further limiting of a woman's right to choose.

I don't.

It doesn't.

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 #242 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by james808
Naturally, I completely disagree with that statement

Sex creates, possibly, a zygote. A child is something that comes much farther along the process. The whole point of this thread is to discuss the rights of opting out BEFORE the zygote has become a child. If you believe the zygote is already a child with a full set of rights, you are pro-life, and obviously are going to disagree with virtually everything in this thread.

Not being overly familiar with the ins and outs of the 'pro-life' / 'anti-life'? debate in the US (we simply don't have the debate here) I would rather not commit myself to one side or the other as I do not know the whole of what that would entail.

I do however believe that a zygote is simply a stage in the life of a human - and if you want to consider everything before adulthood to be childhood, then yes, a child too.

I don't neccessarily disagree with everything in the thread; I just find that the whole topic is actually generated because of the arbitrary decision that has been made to delay the start point of 'Duty of Care' for the mother until some point after conception, while not making the same change for a male. Some would suggest I suppose that the males 'Duty of Care' begins at birth but I think the argument for that is somewhat weak.

The other premise that this argument is made on is that equality is a human right or a democratic right. For a start, this premise perpetuates the case where to right something that is wrong, make something else wrong. Even assuming that the premise is accepted, in this case, where equality is demonstrably impossible (strangely enough males and female are physically different) the argument seems to assume that equivalency is a good substitute. The problem with this is that equivalency is based on perceived value. Perceptions of value change over time and between different people (as can be seen amongst the comments in this group), leading to a situation where it impossible for all to agree that equivalency has been achieved.

I do not think that because women have the right to absolve themselves of their 'Duty of Care' to their child (or, if you prefer, to the human who will become their child) before some arbitrary point, that this justifies in any way that men should be given the same right.
post #243 of 382
Quote:
Quote:
In the name of "equal rights" and "fairness," advocates would agree to this further limiting of a woman's right to choose. I don't.

It doesn't.

I think part of the issue here is that there are factors other than simply 'legal right' acting to influence a persons 'choice'.

I think, that to make this more 'equivalent'*, that the women should also be given the right to 'opt-out' in the same fashion as the man - not requiring an abortion.

On the birth of the child, the responsiblity for the child would then lie wholly with the father. This is the situation being proposed for women, so it should transfer 'equivalently' to men.

*For the sake of argument, lets assume equivalence has some value.
post #244 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge


You keep ignoring the fact that an abortion is a woman's right over a fetus and opting out would be a man's right over a human being. Quit ignoring this fact please.

You keep ignoring the fact that at the time the man can optout in this discussion, it is a fetus not a child. By your line of reasoning, given that death is the biological outcome of all life, all of us on this bulletin board are dead.
post #245 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Stecs
On the birth of the child, the responsiblity for the child would then lie wholly with the father. This is the situation being proposed for women, so it should transfer 'equivalently' to men.

[/B]

In this case, and assuming the father has opted out as well, we have adoption. I don't see the problem with this, or how it affects the discussion of giving men the right to opt out.
post #246 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
However they can have a right not to choose to parent which is what abortion is about.

It's more than that.

Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Incorrect. I am comparing a fetus to a fetus. You've already had this explained to you. What it becomes later is of no concern.

Sorry, but I have to say this louder than usual since I'm repeating myself. YOU ARE THE ONE THAT WANTS THE OPT-OUT STATUS TO EXTEND FROM THE FETUS STAGE INTO THE HUMAN STAGE. STOP ASKING FOR THIS AND YOU'LL STOP GETTING A DISAGREEMENT. UNTIL THEN YOU ARE COMPARING AN ABORTION TO SOMETHING THAT'S NOT EQUIVALENT TO AN ABORTION.

Sorry to everyone for yelling.

Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
A woman does have 100% control in case you hadn't noticed. She alone will determine if the child will live, be born and become human with rights.

That's because it's her body, not someone else. No one else should have any control at this point.

Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Likewise her parental rights are automatically granted while that is not the case for the father. You are correct that it is not right, but that is the way it is both from biology and from the law. If you care to suggest an alternative that also gives the father some say, I am more than happy to listen to alternatives.

The father has some say but you're just worried because a woman has to name the father if there's no paternity test. You've got the test though, and with that the power.

Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
As for the second part, as I mentioned earlier, the Constitution does not guarantee a baby two caring, loving parents nor even a certain level of financial support provided by a man.

Are you saying that because a strict reading of the Constitution doesn't allow abortion, it should be abolished?

Or are you saying that because a strict reading of the Constitution doesn't give a man any control of a kid, a father shouldn't get any?
"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 #247 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by james808
You keep ignoring the fact that at the time the man can optout in this discussion, it is a fetus not a child.

No, no, no.

A man is not opting out of the care of the fetus. I've asked trumptman to change his argument to this many times and he won't consider it.

The argument is for the opt-out of the care of a human. That's the whole argument. If a woman could abort an infant, then the opt-out of care of a human would be a more compelling argument.
"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 #248 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
No, no, no.

A man is not opting out of the care of the fetus. I've asked trumptman to change his argument to this many times and he won't consider it.

The argument is for the opt-out of the care of a human. That's the whole argument. If a woman could abort an infant, then the opt-out of care of a human would be a more compelling argument.

This kind of opting out should only be available to men while women can opt-out of the care of the same human by aborting it before it becomes one.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #249 of 382
Quote:
This kind of opting out should only be available to men while women can opt-out of the care of the same human by aborting it before it becomes one.

Which has been the argument all along from what I've read. Bunge is just playing stupid word games and trying to be dense.
post #250 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
It's more than that.

Sorry, but I have to say this louder than usual since I'm repeating myself. YOU ARE THE ONE THAT WANTS THE OPT-OUT STATUS TO EXTEND FROM THE FETUS STAGE INTO THE HUMAN STAGE. STOP ASKING FOR THIS AND YOU'LL STOP GETTING A DISAGREEMENT. UNTIL THEN YOU ARE COMPARING AN ABORTION TO SOMETHING THAT'S NOT EQUIVALENT TO AN ABORTION.

Sorry to everyone for yelling.

(Covering ears) As others have mentioned there is just some word play here. The fact that it becomes a human child later is of no, repeat NO (look I'm yelling too ) consequence. A human child is not guaranteed a father by the Constitution. If a woman wants a guarantee of a legal partner with whom to parent, then she can wait until she is married, abort in the meantime, or hope he commits to the fetus when he hasn't even committed to her.

Quote:
That's because it's her body, not someone else. No one else should have any control at this point.

Likewise her control shoulddn't extend BEYOND her body to his in committing him to parenting. You haven't ever addressed why a man should be forced to parent against his will.

Quote:
The father has some say but you're just worried because a woman has to name the father if there's no paternity test. You've got the test though, and with that the power.

Only if you can pay for the test. (And they are pretty expensive from what I hear, several hundred dollars) She has the full power of the state behind her. He has whatever is in his wallet. (including lint)


Quote:
Are you saying that because a strict reading of the Constitution doesn't allow abortion, it should be abolished?

Or are you saying that because a strict reading of the Constitution doesn't give a man any control of a kid, a father shouldn't get any?

No I am sayin the right to privacy does not guarantee a newborn child a certain type of family. It does not guarantee that he will have two loving, involved, caring parents nor even one. It doesn't give that child a certain amount of financial funding or anything else.

None of those are rights that are articulated in the Constitution. I mention them because people have found the right to privacy in the Constitution and used it to justify abortion.

That is fine, but they then slippery-slope it into parental care and financial support. Those aren't included in the right to privacy. They have nothing to do with each other. When it is a human child, born into the world. We must consider the rights it has. As I mentioned the Constitution has not guaranteed it any sort of rights with regard to two parents, financial status or things of that nature. However the right to privacy and abortion is not the right to two parents and a certain lifestyle. That is why people have been chastizing you about the word play. One is guaranteed, the other is not.

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 #251 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Longhorn
Which has been the argument all along from what I've read. Bunge is just playing stupid word games and trying to be dense.

No, it's not word games. I think it's just you guys that are being dense. You want something badly enough to ignore logic. I have no urge to save planned parenthood or whatever else.

Are you guys willing to give a mother the option to opt-out after birthing the kid and stick the father with a child? No. That's not abortion either.
"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 #252 of 382
Quote:
Are you guys willing to give a mother the option to opt-out after birthing the kid and stick the father with a child? No.

Adoption.

And for the last time, this is BEFORE birth. While she's pregnant. NOT AFTER BIRTH. This is the tenth time this has been explained. Catch up.

Before birth she has abortion as an option as well. Again, not stuck with child unless she wants to be.
post #253 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Longhorn
Adoption.

And for the last time, this is BEFORE birth. While she's pregnant. NOT AFTER BIRTH. This is the tenth time this has been explained. Catch up.

No, it's not BEFORE BIRTH. You're asking for a father to be able to opt-out of his post birth responsibilities, are you not? When it's granted isn't what I'm arguing against. What's granted is what I'm arguing against.

Are you guys willing to give a mother the option to opt-out after birthing the kid and stick the father with a child?
"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 #254 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Are you guys willing to give a mother the option to opt-out after birthing the kid and stick the father with a child? No. That's not abortion either.

The point is this opt out period goes on during the time when BOTH PARTIES can do so. If you don't think that abortion is a method of opting out for caring for a child, you are a <expletive deleted>. Second, a male opting out during the time when a woman can abort still does not mean she is forced to have an abortion. It is just one option of many which are available to the woman. There still is adoption and abandonment.

The point is that the official papers must be signed three weeks before the latest date possible to abort the child in the second trimester. This gives the woman plenty of time to evaluate her options.

Of course, the woman doesn't even have to tell the man she is pregnant, wait seven years, then tell the courts and the man has to pay back-child support. Yes, you heard me correctly. This kind of shit goes on every day.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #255 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Are you guys willing to give a mother the option to opt-out after birthing the kid and stick the father with a child?

Why did she take the birth to completion, if she didn't want the child in the first place?
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #256 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
Why did she take the birth to completion, if she didn't want the child in the first place?

Some do so as a career choice. She gets a steady paycheck for 18 years.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #257 of 382
Ahhhh, career opportunities! Freakin' entrepeneurs!

Actually, my post wasn't aimed at your post, BR. I put the proper quote in there after I discovered you had posted ahead of me and after Bunge.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #258 of 382
I don't think bunge is listening.

post #259 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
No, it's not BEFORE BIRTH. You're asking for a father to be able to opt-out of his post birth responsibilities, are you not? When it's granted isn't what I'm arguing against. What's granted is what I'm arguing against.

Are you guys willing to give a mother the option to opt-out after birthing the kid and stick the father with a child?

I don't think you are reading all the posts. Someone clearly said that as long as the father could choose to put it up for adoption, uncontested, as the mother could then sure.

I didn't hear anyone speak up again this option. It is assumed that the reverse is true as well. That if a father gave up his parental rights, that the mother could, uncontested, give the child up for adoption.

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 #260 of 382
Awww, don't pout, lil bunge.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #261 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
Awww, don't pout, lil bunge.

What on earth are you talking about?
"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 #262 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by BR
The point is this opt out period goes on during the time when BOTH PARTIES can do so.

Incorrect. A woman doesn't have and wouldn't have an opt-out choice like trumptman is asking for men.

Quote:
Originally posted by BR
If you don't think that abortion is a method of opting out for caring for a child, you are a <expletive deleted>.

If you think the sole reason for an abortion is a method of opting out for caring for a child, you are less intelligent and more <expletive> than a <expletive deleted>.

Quote:
Originally posted by BR
Second, a male opting out during the time when a woman can abort still does not mean she is forced to have an abortion.

Don't attribute this line of reasoning to me.

Quote:
Originally posted by BR
It is just one option of many which are available to the woman. There still is adoption and abandonment.

Adoption and abandonment are available to men as well so this argument is false.

Quote:
Originally posted by BR
The point is that the official papers must be signed three weeks before the latest date possible to abort the child in the second trimester. This gives the woman plenty of time to evaluate her options.

This doesn't interest me in the least. It's not relevant to the discussion. Is an opt-out, whenever it's given, equivalent to an abortion? No.

Quote:
Originally posted by BR
Of course, the woman doesn't even have to tell the man she is pregnant, wait seven years, then tell the courts and the man has to pay back-child support. Yes, you heard me correctly. This kind of shit goes on every day.

Yeah, it's a big old scary world out there. Sorry. Keep track of your sperm and you don't need to worry.
"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 #263 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
Why did she take the birth to completion, if she didn't want the child in the first place?

Ask trumptman. He's brought up examples of men who have asked a women to do this instead of an abortion. Go ahead, ask him, even if it confuses the argument you are trying to make.
"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 #264 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Someone clearly said that as long as the father could choose to put it up for adoption, uncontested, as the mother could then sure.

Anyone besides 'someone' willing to chime in?
"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 #265 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Anyone besides 'someone' willing to chime in?

Bunge, you appear to have serious comprehension problems with both logic and the concept of time. This thread was interesting, but it does become boring reading your same questions over and over ... that have already been answered by several people.

Have fun "keeping track of your sperm", I'm going back to reading rumors.
post #266 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by james808
Bunge, you appear to have serious comprehension problems with both logic and the concept of time. This thread was interesting, but it does become boring reading your same questions over and over ... that have already been answered by several people.

Give this opt-out right to both sexes. That's not what this thread wants though. No one is willing to change the argument to reflect this equality. As it stands you want to create a law based on gender that gives males a right that a woman doesn't have. Abortion is biological, not gender based. Opt-out is gender based. Give both genders the same right. No one, other than 'someone', is willing to do it though.

This law is not equal. It could be, but that's not what trumptman wants. Come on trumptman, do YOU promote true equality? Not someone, but YOU? No, you don't.

P.S. Quit brining up the 'concept of time' thing, it only makes several of you look ignorant. I've never brought it up, someone else did. You're attributing someone else's argument to me because you think it's a flaw in the argument. It's not a flaw in my argument because it's not the basis of my argument so don't bother bringing it up with me unless you wish to continue to look like you have reading comprehension problems.
"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 #267 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Give this opt-out right to both sexes. That's not what this thread wants though. No one is willing to change the argument to reflect this equality. As it stands you want to create a law based on gender that gives males a right that a woman doesn't have. Abortion is biological, not gender based. Opt-out is gender based. Give both genders the same right. No one, other than 'someone', is willing to do it though.

This law is not equal. It could be, but that's not what trumptman wants. Come on trumptman, do YOU promote true equality? Not someone, but YOU? No, you don't.

P.S. Quit brining up the 'concept of time' thing, it only makes several of you look ignorant. I've never brought it up, someone else did. You're attributing someone else's argument to me because you think it's a flaw in the argument. It's not a flaw in my argument because it's not the basis of my argument so don't bother bringing it up with me unless you wish to continue to look like you have reading comprehension problems.

I mentioned the someone just to show that I am not the only supporting this idea nor the only one contributing data or ideas.

If it wasn't clear I will make it so. I support exactly what "someone" proposed. If a woman wanted to carry the child to term and while opting out of parental rights she may do so. Likewise the man should be able to keep the child on his own, or be free to give it up for adoption, just as the woman would do.

I really don't see what would be so terrible about this. I imagine it would be a rather rare scenario because as "others" have mentioned, most women who don't want to parent wouldn't carry the child to term.

The only thing I would add, and I could see this being a bit controversial, is that we have spoken often of a timeline regarding the man and opting out of his parental rights. The most common time frame mentioned was one month after learning of his impending fatherhood.

I would hold the woman to this same timeline and make it irrevocable just as with the man. Since a woman is carrying the child she could obviously still opt out via abortion after that timeframe, but if for some odd reason she wishes to opt out of her responsibility, yet carry the child to term, she should have to indicate this within one month after being told she is pregnant.

So with regard to your definition of true equality. Yes I do. I just don't like to repeat what others have already said. Some folks find it demeaning and boring. Sorry if you took it as a avoidance and I hope I answered your questions/assertions.

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 #268 of 382
Quote:
Opt-out is gender based.

What would you call adoption?
post #269 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
So with regard to your definition of true equality. Yes I do. I just don't like to repeat what others have already said. Some folks find it demeaning and boring. Sorry if you took it as a avoidance and I hope I answered your questions/assertions.

Well if you're going to come out and mention that someone else supports it, you as the thread starter probably should make your claim as well.

If we're giving opt-out rights to both parents, then we're giving equal rights. I'm sure we would have to decide the right timeframe, first two tri-mesters might not be enough. We also have to determine a paternity test, or at least the ability to reserve the right to opt-out until after a paternity test could be given. Other details come into play I'm sure.

Do I think it's a good idea? No, but equal bad is better than inequitable bad.
"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 #270 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Longhorn
What would you call adoption?

Did you mean abortion?
"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 #271 of 382
No, I mean adoption. Isn't that an opt-out for a woman who doesn't want to take care of/raise a kid?
post #272 of 382
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Well if you're going to come out and mention that someone else supports it, you as the thread starter probably should make your claim as well.

If we're giving opt-out rights to both parents, then we're giving equal rights. I'm sure we would have to decide the right timeframe, first two tri-mesters might not be enough. We also have to determine a paternity test, or at least the ability to reserve the right to opt-out until after a paternity test could be given. Other details come into play I'm sure.

Do I think it's a good idea? No, but equal bad is better than inequitable bad.

You are welcome to propose what you believe to be equitable good.

Just don't be surprised if I refer to you as "someone."

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 #273 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Longhorn
No, I mean adoption. Isn't that an opt-out for a woman who doesn't want to take care of/raise a kid?

Just jumping back in the thread, so I missed some of the arguments, but your question provoked another in my mind.

First, answering only for myself, I maintain that since a women has the right to choose, she cannot impose the responsibilities of her decision onto the father without his consent (implied under the marriage contract and defaulted in cases of rape, of course). As for adoption, obviously the women can decide to give the child up for adoption.

The interesting question is whether the biological father should be allowed to adopt the child if he did not first agree to pay child support or make arrangements with the mother to adopt.

--
"Evolution is not random. Mutation is random, but natural selection is entirely non-random. Evolution doesn't predict that all the complexity of life just came together randomly. "

Reply

--
"Evolution is not random. Mutation is random, but natural selection is entirely non-random. Evolution doesn't predict that all the complexity of life just came together randomly. "

Reply
post #274 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Longhorn
No, I mean adoption. Isn't that an opt-out for a woman who doesn't want to take care of/raise a kid?

Not if the father wants the child. A mother can only put a child up for adoption if the father agrees.
"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 #275 of 382
Unless of course she doesn't inform the father.

Also, even if the father wants to keep the child, there's still abortion, which is another opt-out of the responsibilities of raising a child.
post #276 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by Longhorn
Unless of course she doesn't inform the father.

Also, even if the father wants to keep the child, there's still abortion, which is another opt-out of the responsibilities of raising a child.

This stuff has already been discussed.

If the mother doesn't inform the father, there's nothing anyone can do. If she doesn't know or doesn't say, and he doesn't know, then maybe you get screwed. That's why I say keep track of your sperm because the courts can't do it for you. An opt-out doesn't help you in this instance anyway. More evidence that the one sided opt-out request is really just vengeance.

You're dragging the discussion back to abortion. Abortion and opt-out aren't equivalent. They're not similar enough to discuss together. And above all, an abortion is not 'another opt-out of the responsibilities of raising a child', it's a hell of a lot more than that. I think you have to be ignorant of the subject to dilute it to such a degree.
"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 #277 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
This stuff has already been discussed.

If the mother doesn't inform the father, there's nothing anyone can do. If she doesn't know or doesn't say, and he doesn't know, then maybe you get screwed. That's why I say keep track of your sperm because the courts can't do it for you. An opt-out doesn't help you in this instance anyway. More evidence that the one sided opt-out request is really just vengeance.

You're dragging the discussion back to abortion. Abortion and opt-out aren't equivalent. They're not similar enough to discuss together. And above all, an abortion is not 'another opt-out of the responsibilities of raising a child', it's a hell of a lot more than that. I think you have to be ignorant of the subject to dilute it to such a degree.

chugga chugga chugga chugga CHOO CHOO!!!!
chugga chugga chugga chugga CHOO CHOO!!!!

ALL ABOARD THE LOGIC TRAIN MAKING IT'S FINAL STOP IN THIS THREAD!

Abortion is the choice of the woman.
Abortion kills the fetus.
No fetus means no eventual baby to raise.
Another word for choice is option.
Hence a woman can OPT OUT OF RAISING A CHILD via ABORTION.

*train pulls out of the station and you see it disappear slowly over the horizon*

I sure hope you didn't miss it this last time.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #278 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by BR
Abortion is the choice of the woman.
Abortion kills the fetus.
No fetus means no eventual baby to raise.
Another word for choice is option.
Hence a woman can OPT OUT OF RAISING A CHILD via ABORTION.

She's aborting a fetus, nothing more. A man is opting out of raising the child that would come from the fetus. I'm surprised you can't see the difference.

Are you suggesting that you would equally support the ability for a woman to follow through with a birth only to abondon the child to the father making him 100% responsible while not giving the same option to the man?
"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 #279 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
She's aborting a fetus, nothing more. A man is opting out of raising the child that would come from the fetus. I'm surprised you can't see the difference.

Yes. She's aborting a fetus. By aborting a fetus what does the woman avoid?

Audience?

RAISING A CHILD!

*DING DING DING*

Quote:
Are you suggesting that you would equally support the ability for a woman to follow through with a birth only to abondon the child to the father making him 100% responsible while not giving the same option to the man?

*attempts to unravel this super knot tied with illogic rope*
*fails*

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #280 of 382
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
She's aborting a fetus, nothing more. A man is opting out of raising the child that would come from the fetus. I'm surprised you can't see the difference.

I told myself I wasn't going to bother, but I can't resist; you have perfectly illustrated your problem with time:

When the women is making a decision about her fetus, you say her decision is about her fetus. "She's aborting a fetus, nothing more."

When the man is making a decision AT THE SAME POINT IN TIME (the opt out), then all of a sudden it is not a fetus anymore (the present), but already a child (from the future), according to your argument. "A man is opting out of raising the child that would come from the fetus."

Do you see how this is a problem?

And thank you for your concern, but my reading comprehension skills are more than adequate.

Someone
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..