|
|
|
|
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 11:02:10 AM | Rawwrr...I sure wish you were in the St. Louis parts of Missouri cause girl, after all this, I need a drink! And heck...you could come to the Crazy Eights party and we could find some unsuspecting men to burglarize their sperm...(I have the condoms, pre-poked holes and all!) and we could live happily ever after off of Missouri TANF!
Whoo Hoo! 
Edit to add: Abortion as dangerous as birth?! WTF?! An abortion is MORE dangerous than birth...Birth is a natural experience for women, our bodies were constructed for such...whereas Abortion was a man-made procedure that is very invasive! (And I am pro-choice...but really...silly comparison!) | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 11:03:53 AM | The scenario we are discussing is the decision to let the child be born at a time when abortion is still a viable option.
" We could repeal Roe v Wade, but that won’t really solve your problem either. You would then have no “out.” "
Granted, but might this not lead to being more careful in our choices.
As it stands now a woman still has more options than a man. Men are being forced into parenthood.
Also now an abortion is just as dangerous as giving birth.????????
What if the child has special needs? So many things to consider yet a man cannot contemplate anything other than I shouldnot have sex anymore. Rediculous.
@pepsi, you are looking at it from our standpoint in time. Your statements are based on the current status quo and not what could be.
It is beginning to happen that women are being affected by this and I guess until more women are having their liscences suspended or being charged criminally for abandonement or non payment of child support, our system won't change.
We need a way to stem this from continuing on because as you can see us guys are starting to make as much noise as you ladies did during the early days of feminism.
Man if only I had a bra to burn............... | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 11:15:44 AM | You argue like a ten year old kid. pdv Let's get past the sex part.
We are talking about the window of opportunity to end a pregnancy and who has control of that window.
A woman today can legally choose an abortion with absolutly no involvement from the bio father or legal ramifications of abandonement.
A woman can leave a child at a firehall without legal ramifications.
A woman can give up that child she so rightly brought into this world without any consultation with the bio dad.
And if a woman doesn't CHOOSE freely one of those options, she can turn around and keep the child and force a man to pay for 23 years.
So pdv let move on past the whole keeping it the pants thing eh?
Edit to add: Abortion as dangerous as birth?! WTF?! An abortion is MORE dangerous than birth...Birth is a natural experience for women, our bodies were constructed for such...whereas Abortion was a man-made procedure that is very invasive! (And I am pro-choice...but really...silly comparison!)
@harley so tell me what are the differences in the death rates when you compare abortion and full term pregnancy. I would think that more women are at risk giving birth. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 11:24:22 AM |
I feel that shared parenting should be the presumption as soon as the child is born. 50% with Dad, 50% with mom.
I completely agree with this!
Obsidian: While the opt in/opt out plan sounds great in theory, it is easily manipulated. What about the man who wants to have sex without a condom, promises he’ll be there to support the baby if they get pregnant, and then changes his mind when reality sinks in? I believe this would happen a lot more if men know they have the option of opting out afterward! I could be wrong, but I’m not a man. I believe the only reason men wear condoms is to prevent pregnancy and STD’s. I’ve had many men tell me they won’t wear a condom if the woman is on birth control, so my perception is it’s mostly to prevent pregnancy.
Or the woman who waits until after the opt out cut-off to “discover” she’s pregnant? Or the woman who truly doesn’t know she’s pregnant until after the opt out cut off?
Granted, but might this not lead to being more careful in our choices.
As it stands now a woman still has more options than a man. Men are being forced into parenthood.
So this really isn’t about getting more rights for men, it’s about taking some away from women? | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 11:24:24 AM | "The truth is most men dont want that. Not saying there arent men out there who would relish in spending 50% of their time with the child, but you just dont find that too often."
Your statement I feel is completely untrue. Men want to be an equal part in their children's lives. The only thing your truth serves is to perpetuate the myth that most men don't want to be active in their children's lives. With beliefs such as this no its no wonder men have such an uphill battle with regards to custody. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 11:31:47 AM | So this really isn’t about getting more rights for men, it’s about taking some away from women?
No, It is about giving men more say in the matter considering they none now.
There is no mention of removing any rights that you already have beyond forcing an unwilling participant to be a parent.
The discussion is about if a woman decides that she will keep the child on her own she is totally responsible for it given she has other options that man currently do not have.
You know pdv I've read transcripts from roe vs. wade and nowhere in either sides argument were the words keep it in your pants used.
Like I said sex will happen we all agree about that except you.
So unless you wish to repeat that for us one more time try to add a little something just a tad more mature. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 11:33:48 AM |
Welfare, TANF= semantics. If the Govt is paying you money for services undrendered it's a form of Welfare to me
Not to get too off topic but since this has been addressed I wasnted to put my 2 cents worth in. In Ohio TANF is just given to you for nothing. For $228 dollars a month the county you life in can require you to work for them from between 80-128 hours a month. Doing whatever job they can find for you until such a time as you get a job. Now if you figure the hourly wage out for that it is $2.80 per hour (and thats only if they require 80 hours from you) In know way are you getting a free ride or a free check. This requirement is waived however if you are pursuing your education fulll time. It is more worth your time to get a full time job working minimum wage than to collect the cash assistance with TANF | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 11:35:59 AM | Soccorsweep,
I made that statement solely on what I have experienced and from what I have seen.I am sure everyone here knows my story by now so I wont throw that in there, but I have seen friends go through this (men and women). One instance is of my friend who was married. Her husband treated her like shit, he treated the kids like shit. Now they are getting divorced and he is paying child support, he now wants the kids all the time, or better yet he wants full custody so she will have to pay support. In the state I live in, the noncustodial parent who pays child support automatically gets his/her child support reduced by how much he/she sees his child. I also have male friends who felt the women "trapped" them by getting pregnant and didnt want to be a father, didnt want to pay and felt that since she trapped them, he shouldnt have to pay. Been down that road enough to where I felt comfortable making the statement I did. I wasnt arguing the fact that there are fathers out there that want the child and want joint custody or even full custody, all I am saying you dont see or hear about that alot. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 11:40:33 AM | | That perception is based on ancient family roles where in the male was the breadwinner but that isn't the case today. More times than enough I have read that women are now making more than their exes did but generally that has something more to do with our shifting from a manufacturing based economy to a service based one. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 11:50:02 AM |
There is no mention of removing any rights that you already have beyond forcing an unwilling participant to be a parent.
The discussion is about if a woman decides that she will keep the child on her own she is totally responsible for it given she has other options that man currently do not have.
I think that’s where the disagreement comes in. No one is forcing someone to be a parent. It’s the consequence of a choice.
Yes, women have ONE more option than men when dealing with that consequence, as a result of biology, and how the law has decided to handle that biology, but as I’ve pointed out with Obsidian’s opt in/opt out plan, there are no simply solutions to changing that. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 11:51:24 AM | Obsidian: While the opt in/opt out plan sounds great in theory, it is easily manipulated. What about the man who wants to have sex without a condom, promises he’ll be there to support the baby if they get pregnant, and then changes his mind when reality sinks in? I believe this would happen a lot more if men know they have the option of opting out afterward! I could be wrong, but I’m not a man. I believe the only reason men wear condoms is to prevent pregnancy and STD’s. I’ve had many men tell me they won’t wear a condom if the woman is on birth control, so my perception is it’s mostly to prevent pregnancy.
.
Yes but a man opting out/in is far more definitive. I feel like it's a "shit or get off the pot" issue here. It's not even about the money for many it's about the control. Child Support for many men becomes punitive damages for the failed relationship. I don't view it as taking a right away from a woman because I feel that there is no right to attach my wages for a child I don't want. She doesn't have to legally accept the same..so neither should I.
P.S - It's not about being forced into parenthood but rather being forced to support financially the decision of the woman when that decision is unilaterally made. We broke from Brittain and the King because colonialist did not like paying the expenses of the crown without having any say.
O | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 11:56:01 AM |
K, if you want kids, but not now then when? When youre financially ready? Got news for ya, you will never be "financially" ready for a child. You either want kids or you dont. Plain and simple. If you do not ever want kids, then by all means get the procedure done. If you would like kids someday, then wait to have sex until you feel you are ready.
Reasons for not wanting a child right now, but down the road yes:
1... Financial. Maybe paying off loans, Student, car or whatever. 3 years from now. no payments, able to afford...
2... Wrong age to have kids... Kids having kids is not a good idea...
3... Upcoming events in one's life, ie military service overseas... upcoming jail time... upcoming major surgery...
4... Wrong partner. Sorry, but nowadays people do not just have sex with the person they are going to spend the rest of their life with...
5... Health reasons... injuries or ailments making it difficult to look after a child right now...
6... Current unemployment...
7... Current living accomodations... a one bedroom apartment or bachelor apt... getting a larger place down the road...
8... Currently under medication that may harm or injure progeny...
9... Career that requires a lot of travel right now...
10.. Any number of other reasons... | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 11:59:29 AM |
Rawwrr...I sure wish you were in the St. Louis parts of Missouri cause girl, after all this, I need a drink! And heck...you could come to the Crazy Eights party and we could find some unsuspecting men to burglarize their sperm...(I have the condoms, pre-poked holes and all!) and we could live happily ever after off of Missouri TANF!
And with our track record of multiples, we could surely screw a man over really, REALLY good!
Granted, but might this not lead to being more careful in our choices.
As it stands now a woman still has more options than a man. Men are being forced into parenthood.
No, it probably wouldn't lead to more careful choices. Obviously the risk of producing a child that you have to support isn't doing much in the way of making more careful choices. It WOULD lead to more women dying because abortions won't stop just because they are illegal.
PD does make a good point that you seem to be skating around. No one is forcing you to have sex which leads to children being born. No one is forcing you to actually BE a part of the child's life, but you must take some responsibility for your own actions. That means- pay for your own damn kid cause I shouldn't have to. This argument makes men sound like children themselves. "I'd rather have society pay for my "mistake" rather than take responsibility because that whore of a woman gets all the choices. I want one of my own, dammit!" Yeah, no.
Man if only I had a bra to burn...............
Envious maybe?  | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 12:00:15 PM |
again, be responsible for your penis. i will be responsible for my vagina.
So, based on the 'keep your d*ck in your pants' theory...
By willingly having sex with a man you are therefore agreeing to take on a pregnancy? | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 12:06:13 PM | What exactly "is" taking ownership? What do women hope to accomplish in the scenario where the male say succinctly "I have absolutely no desire to be in this child's life in any way shape or form"
What exactly is a woman expecting to get here?
O | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 12:07:05 PM |
Yes but a man opting out/in is far more definitive. I feel like it's a "shit or get off the pot" issue here. It's not even about the money for many it's about the control. Child Support for many men becomes punitive damages for the failed relationship. I don't view it as taking a right away from a woman because I feel that there is no right to attach my wages for a child I don't want. She doesn't have to legally accept the same..so neither should I.
This is where I think you are losing people. The way this is worded comes across as "her piece is bigger than mine" statement. Once a child is in existence, someone has to take responsibility for it! I see a lot of men viewing child support as punitive damages, but it isn’t! The reality is that child support rarely covers even a fraction of the cost of raising that child. I know that it’s difficult to see it that way, but when you add up the numbers it’s true. I think this happens because when you have primary custody of the child, you pay out little by little each month, where child support is one big lump sum. It feels bigger!
The decision is not unilaterally made, however! The consequence of the decision to have sex can be pregnancy. Two people made that choice, took that risk. As I’ve stated, yes, the women has ONE other option of dealing with that consequence. Allowing the man to opt in or out will only serve to create more problems, as I pointed out. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 12:11:18 PM | "So, based on the 'keep your d*ck in your pants' theory...
By willingly having sex with a man you are therefore agreeing to take on a pregnancy? "
And so are you.
What is there to misunderstand. Having sex may cause pregnancy. Take precautions if you dont want to stop having sex but dont want a kid right now. But on the off chance those precautions dont work, own up to your responsibility. Yes, if I have sex with a man I am agreeing to take on a pregnancy. And for that man agreeing to have sex with me he is also agreeing to take on pregnancy.
A baby is not something you can just throw away and wash your hands of. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 12:35:13 PM | | I have always prided myself on my ability to see both sides, to debate both sides, but I cant grasp this issue. I fully support and see a man's view when they want to keep a woman from aborting and I can support a man's desire to retain custody if its in the best interest of child or at least want joint custody. But for those, men and women, who want to have an abortion or who want to have sex without dealing with the risks involved, I just cant understand. 1) why sleep with someone you hardly know or even dont care about? Do you think about diseases? 2) why should any one have the right to "opt out" if they dont want to be a parent? The end result of pregnancy is a baby, not a mistake, not a piece of trash you can throw away. Why shouldnt we be accountable for our actions? | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/22/2008 12:36:31 PM |
The decision is not unilaterally made, however! The consequence of the decision to have sex can be pregnancy. Two people made that choice, took that risk. As I’ve stated, yes, the women has ONE other option of dealing with that consequence. Allowing the man to opt in or out will only serve to create more problems, as I pointed out.
Hell No. The biggest downfall of women IMO is putting up with shiftless men. Why you want to keep a deadbeat around is beyond me. If the tables where turned you ladies would be stunned at how quickly a man would cut bait.
If my son's mother were to vanish tomorrow it would be tough but I'd get'er done. If anything the constant reliance on external sources is keeping many women behind. You only get freedom and independence from doing as much as you can ..alone.
O | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 1:01:43 AM | You dont want to be a father:
Bag it. Double bag it if you want to make sure you dont become one.
Have the procedure so you dont.
Dont have sex.
Im sorry, did someone force you to have sex. Were you absent the day they discussed the birds and the bee's?
Did you miss the WIFE that ceased birth control and didn't tell her guy? Or the 14 y/o that purposely punctured her boyfriends condoms?
Hello, McFly....... so long as these women have the option to purposely entrap guys and circumvent reasonable and responsible precautions then men NEED the right to opt out completely.
Your prespective is narrow you because you have clearly stated the risk for a woman is irrelevant. If you looked at the big picture you would see the only way to give men more reproductive rights would be to take them from women, removing her basic right to protect her physical body.
Bulllllllllll. She can take what precautions she thinks is acceptable and so can he. She can choose not to be a parent so should he be able to. This does NOT prevent her from exercising her reproductive rights as she sees fit, it ONLY prevents her from trampling his reproductive rights for monetary gain or to suit her personal preference. This in no way infringes on her ability to choose to be or not be post conception. The only difference being his choice to not be a parent post-conception does not automatically result in an abortion. The tattoo on my johnson reads "strictly for recreational purposes"...... atleast until such time as I can have several pop-cicles frozen at ReproMed and a permanent snip with the option for future parenthood via artificial means. So ladies hand over that semen since you knew it was only a temporary loan not a gift.
Oh and Harley the renamed it here too it is no longer "welfare" but there isn't squat about it temporary. Last I checked my ex is still on it 6 years later and CS gets knocked off that dollar for dollar. But once again no pressure on her to pull her weight in supporting our kids. If welfare thought I lost a job "on purpose" I would quickly find myself in jail for non-payment. Yet she isn't required to do something while they are in school? Pfffft, there is a stigma for a reason. Abuse taints those with genuine need and a desire to get back on their own feet.
Now, I can tell you that you sure can make a woman pay child support if she takes off and leaves you with a kid. Child support laws exist to serve kids, and kids ought not to be shafted out of 50% of their support just because their selfish dads didn't feel included on the decision of whether or not to abort. This isn't elementary school. Life's not fair.
Yes they pay about 25% of the time they are ordered to, while men pay CS about 80% of the time, but we see "deadbeat dad" websites and stories in every crap newspaper editorial but not deadbeat moms....
VolGirl lose the keep your pants on rhetoric until such time as non-custodial moms start stepping upto the plate at a comparable rate as non-custodial dads, and when you have addressed how it is even remotely reasonable that a male victim of statutory rape should be liable for CS rather than being free to opt out of parenthood(which still leaves the abuser free to choice to still have the child if she wishes..... bad bad man aren't I asking for a percentage of the privilege you currently enjoy while not actually affecting the womans rights at all) | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 2:38:26 AM | Bulllllllllll. She can take what precautions she thinks is acceptable and so can he. She can choose not to be a parent so should he be able to. This does NOT prevent her from exercising her reproductive rights as she sees fit, it ONLY prevents her from trampling his reproductive rights for monetary gain or to suit her personal preference. This in no way infringes on her ability to choose to be or not be post conception. The only difference being his choice to not be a parent post-conception does not automatically result in an abortion. The tattoo on my johnson reads "strictly for recreational purposes"...... atleast until such time as I can have several pop-cicles frozen at ReproMed and a permanent snip with the option for future parenthood via artificial means. So ladies hand over that semen since you knew it was only a temporary loan not a gift.
Once again loony you don't read everything and trample all over a debate with your patriarchal assumptions. I could give to dirty twats about child support, this was about reproductive rights. Stating that the risk a woman takes is irrelevant is a narrow view. When a woman has sex she automatically has to assume a higher risk then a man because of physiology. Regardless of the choice she makes if she become pregnant, she is left with more risk, how can a person even equate money with a person's physical well being? Child support and reproductive rights are not the same! Men didn't give a flying fig about reproductive rights until parternal liability laws were introduced. | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 7:00:18 AM | People!! Get back on track. The question was about child support not about whether reproductive capabilities are unfair to men. You've run off on personal debates about other topics. And you've got a bit silly about it.
Nutt | |
|
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 8:13:53 AM |
This does NOT prevent her from exercising her reproductive rights as she sees fit, it ONLY prevents her from trampling his reproductive rights for monetary gain or to suit her personal preference.
This is the problem. Child support is not for monetary gain! It’s to support a child.
how it is even remotely reasonable that a male victim of statutory rape should be liable for CS rather than being free to opt out of parenthood(which still leaves the abuser free to choice to still have the child if she wishes
I know this was addressed to me, but I will tackle it. The situation that you described earlier in this thread was not statutory rape. One child can not legally rape another child. If legal statutory rape had occurred, the child victim would not be held accountable for child support.
There may soon be a solution to your problem. Seems a male birth control device will be available very soon. It’s a chip that is implanted, which controls the flow of sperm by a valve in the vas deferens. There is also a male birth control pill on the horizon that is apparently more effective than the female birth control pill and condoms. Early testing shows that it reduces the sperm count to zero. | |
|
| |
| Women's Choice=no support from fathers???
Posted: 7/23/2008 8:53:12 AM |
ps..I may be right, but im never wrong.
Didn't we just have this conversation yesterday? LOL 
O, I've been trying to beat her into submission on "that spam site" but it's only turning her on.
(Btw- I hated her when I first met her too. She's used to it. hehe)
People!! Get back on track. The question was about child support not about whether reproductive capabilities are unfair to men. You've run off on personal debates about other topics. And you've got a bit silly about it.
Nah, it pretty much all ties in together. Even if it didn't, I've never seen a debate on here stay on track throughout the entire thing.
 | |
|
|
| Page 12 of 43
|
3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 |
|
Home
login 
