Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Single Parents  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 8soldierfalcon8
Joined: 2/16/2009
Msg: 629
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or ParenthoodPage 6 of 49    (1, 2, 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)
I don't have a child.

I have escaped entrapment by not being an idiot, only dating trustworthy women who I am on the same page with, and being careful.

Well, all that and a lot of luck :)
 NotElvisJunior
Joined: 6/8/2008
Msg: 630
view profile
History
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/2/2009 10:49:10 PM
itsallinthesoul postulated:


It is impossible for anyone to really KNOW how they feel about a situation until they land in it and to expect that they SHOULD and then call them a LIAR or DECEITFUL because what they thought they could do in the hypothetical and what they can do are different when actually IN the scenario.

I'm curious - do you mean that in the context of a woman who's never had an abortion before? That is, is this applicable only to first-timers, or also applicable to a woman has gotten pregnant and had an abortion one (or more) times prior, says that she'll get one if she gets pregnant, then subsequently decides that she can't/won't?


Also, I can't speak for other guys, but one woman I'd been with (oddly, I turned out to be HER one night stand rather than the other way around), well, I wasn't going to go farther because I didn't have a condom (didn't expect it to go that far that night). She'd said that I shouldn't worry, she'd take the morning after pill, though now I can't remember if she meant she already had one, or would go get one.

I balked - so she somehow managed to find a condom and we used it. Needless to say, as far as I was concerned, no condom meant no sex.


As to the marriage issue: much harder to answer, as it's subject to all sorts of interpretations - first off the "...'til death do you part" is generally part of a Christian marriage ceremony and is generally traditional/formulaic rather than literal. It wouldn't apply to a couple who, say, just got a marriage license and end of story.

That said, there was an all-faith minister, and we did do the formality. So, did I lie? Did she change to the point that she was no longer the person I made those vows to? Did she lie? Did I change to the point... etc., or did she actually intentionally do so because she' d seen me as a means to an end?

Now, I'll have to say that a LOT of what I'm about to say involves pure speculation on my part - granted, it SEEMS that the hints here and there reveal it and make it seem like my guesses are right, but I'm hardly a neutral, outside observer (and tend toward snarky adjective use).

1) I didn't lie - she broke the contract first when she decided that I should become a doormat.
2) She didn't lie - she figured she could change me into a doormat easily
3) She did lie - knew I had a house and a good job, and figured I was a means to an end.


itsallinthesoul wrote:


If only you could get over the "she lied" and could accept that perhaps she did but quite possibly she didn't....at that time, in that moment, she believed she could but when actually faced with it....she couldn't (abortion)


I guess I can't get past that only because I ask why is abortion the exception? Where does the line get drawn? Maybe it's because my ex used the exact same reasoning to justify numerous lies. I guess I don't see abortion as having some sort of, for lack of a better term, "special dispensation" for this kind of thing.

I mean, if it's legitimate to make that argument for abortion, then, in your opinion is it legitimate to make that argument for:

1) The promise to, even without a prenup, give me the money from selling my parents' house off the top before splitting the rest in the event of a divorce?
2) The promise to pay back whatever money at divorce settlement that was spent during the separation that was NOT for our son - as I was paying ALL the bills?
3) The promise to pay back at divorce settlement 50% of what was spent on private mediation.
4) (and this just happened between yesterday and today) The promise to agree to an extension of the time period for the decision as to whether to buy her out or put the house on the market, in exchange for offering her a currently nonexistent buyout option, and offering to offload some of the driving responsibility from her during the month of June?

etc etc. All of these were either "I changed my mind" or "I thought I could when I said that but things are *different* now," and, yes, she's used at various times BOTH of those arguments for EACH of the four occurrences I listed above. Probably more, but those are the four that immediately come to mind.

Now I suppose you probably disagree with my ex using that reasoning for the four items I mention above. But, if abortion is allowed to use that reasoning, then what else should be allowed for that?

I suppose what I don't understand is where the line is drawn for that. Or if there should be one at all or not.
 NotElvisJunior
Joined: 6/8/2008
Msg: 633
view profile
History
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/3/2009 9:52:06 AM
itsallinthesoul,


In general, what I do see though is a lot of sour grapes when people face diversity in their lives


Wait, what? Or, did you mean "adversity"?


Grieving? No, she actually did make it remarkably easy to get over her. Not intentionally, of course, but that's how it turned out.

Bitter? No. I'm just cataloging, for lack of a better term. You're not the only one who has read that into what I've written here (or when I've spoken it when asked), and I find it truly puzzling. I really don't understand why when I describe something that is related to my marriage or my ex-wife (ex as of St. Patty's day this year), regardless of wording, regardless of tone of voice, it's always assumed that I'm bitter, resentful, or "still stuck on her" (that last of which I would find absolutely laughable if it wasn't so delusional on the part of whomever said it). Why is willingness to talk about it automatically assumed to mean that there's a "problem" and that only by not talking about it at all do people think there's no problem?

Angry? Well, yeah, of course, at the times the particular events happen, I certainly was. But if I'm expected not to be angry whenever she tries to pull some other kind of trick, well, that's expecting me to be super-human. I'm not Mother Theresa, Ghandi, or the Dali Lama you know.

How well did I know her? I'd met her 3-1/2 years before the marriage, and we were living together for 2 of those years. It's my guess that she presented to me precisely what she thought I wanted to see. AFTER we got married, there might've been little hints here and there in retrospect that maybe I turned a blind eye to, or gave the benefit of the doubt on, but previous to it, nothing that I can really see, even in hindsight.

So, I thought I knew her perfectly well - that nothing was hidden. It turns out that I didn't, but again, it was one of those situations where she liked everything I liked, was interested in things I was interested in, and liked my sense of humor, quirks, etc. Even when we were married, it still seemed to be about 80-90% there (at the time I thought even moreso, but in hindsight, maybe 80-90%), and only after about 3 months after our son was born did it suddenly come to light that the rules were changing, and I had no say - including that now the aspects of my personality she liked were no longer acceptable, what I seemed to enjoy she wanted nothing to do with, etc. That, unfortunately, was literally like someone flipped a light-switch.

Yes, for those who might bring this up, I did actually research post-partum depression. No, that's not what she had - the timing was completely wrong for that, and certainly doesn't explain why it's been 2-1/2 years of that kind of thing.


However, do you really believe all four of those things that I listed in fact do NOT constitute lying? All four of them were just a case of "not knowing herself" even including the last one that changed from Monday to Tuesday? You're going way too far out on a way too slender limb here. This, once again, is starting to sound like rationalization. How can anyone interpret the four things I listed as anything but deliberate deception?

I mean, just to use the first one as an example, she specifically said that I would not need a prenup because she would never go after a specific chunk of money. Therefore, I did not get a prenup, based on her assurances, and based on the fact that I trusted her completely.

That was just a case of "not knowing herself"? Where does it end? Why can't that justification be used for EVERYTHING? Why can't it be used in court if one commits perjury? And if it can't be used for everything, but can be used for abortion AND the four items I listed above, what else can it be used for? Why not for anything and everything where one subsequently decides they don't want to be bound by what they promised before?

I mean, if you have sex with a guy, and he promises that if you get pregnant that he'll do the right thing, is willing to be a father, etc., and then he doesn't, demands you get an abortion, refuses to be a father, whatever, how is THAT not lying? Or can he fall back to the "not knowing himself" reasoning and thus he was actually not deceptive?


It just seems absurd to the point of absolute, no-holds-barred anarchy.
 8soldierfalcon8
Joined: 2/16/2009
Msg: 644
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/3/2009 5:39:19 PM
v.a.s.e.c.t.o.m.y.

They should be govt. funded. Paying for 1 vasectomy is a lot cheaper for the state than funding a single mother for 18+ years.
 NotElvisJunior
Joined: 6/8/2008
Msg: 657
view profile
History
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/3/2009 11:28:54 PM
futureshock said:


So men should assume all women are liars then?



turquoise pixie replied:


No, and where the hell did you get that in my post


Uh, actually, I can't speak for futureshock, but I get it from:
turquoise pixie wrote:


If you are sleeping with someone who you don't want to be a parent of your child, then you better use double protection or else you are screwing yourself up and blaming it on others.


So, wait, again, if a man trusts a woman about willingness to get an abortion, use the morning after pill, or about the fact that she's on the pill, and she lied, it's still a man screwing himself and blaming others? If the woman lied about it, the man is NOT justified in blaming her?

Gotcha..... woman's right to a baby above all else, even her own honesty and integrity, and even the trust the man had for her. Got it. Glad I know where you stand.

Seriously, what DO you think then? I outlined three specific scenarios in post #623, that I was specifically asking lizbeth2 if those were accurate reflections of her beliefs (and which she doesn't seem to have answered, but rather evaded) - they all start with "If a man and a woman have sex..."

Further, even though my questions weren't answered, I offered my views on who is to blame in those three scenarios, in post #648

So, turquoise pixie, what are YOUR thoughts on those three specific scenarios?
 NotElvisJunior
Joined: 6/8/2008
Msg: 662
view profile
History
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/4/2009 3:49:28 PM
turquoise - my initial statements were not my opinions, but my asking whether they accurately reflected lizbeth's opinions.

The later ones that had the colon preceeding the "conclusion" were the ones where I stated my own opinion.

That said...




I said:
(in the scenario where both use no protection and know it, which I think makes them both stupid and both equally responsible)
Additionally, do you think he should have no input into the woman's subsequent decision to abort or not?

and you replied:
Not. Too late.

Since you agree that they are both equally responsible, having been equally stupid, why do you think they should have UNEQUAL say in whether to have an abortion?






I said:
- If a man and woman have sex, the woman claims to be on the pill, but actually lied about it, and she gets pregnant...
: My opinion is that this is entirely on the woman, the pregnancy and subsequent childbirth is all based on deception. Why else would she lie about being on the pill, other than some sort of ulterior motive, no matter how badly thought out of a motive it is?

and you replied:
Then she has certainly done a despicable thing. But you cannot legally prove this, it's his word against hers.

The question was not whether it could be proven or not. The question was specifically in the scenario where this ACTUALLY happened, and is not merely BELIEVED to have happened. I am not talking about legal proofs, I am talking about this is known - or say the woman even admitted it.

you then followed up by saying:


I cannot judge others unless I walked in their shoes, but refer to what i have already said about inner voice of warning, sensing things are off, taking time before jumping into bed without condom and taking someone's word for such important things. If this was your long term partner and you knew her for at least 6 motnhs and she always acted with integrity and truthfulness, before you had unprotected sex and took her word for this, then man, you have been very unlucky. Look, you dont have to prove anything to anyone here, but question yourself - can you say an honest and immediate yes to all these questions?

Inner voice? Sensing things are off? How does one do this accurately? If people could do this, we could tell when someone was lying to us. If you're saying it's just "intuition" that can guide you, well, that's really no better than relying on guesswork, or the flip of a coin.

Now, this doesn't apply to everyone, but since you ask, my own particular case was my partner of, at the time, slightly over 4 years, to whom I had been married for a year and a half. So, in my particular case, yes, I *can* in fact answer yes to all those questions. Ergo, your reasoning/methodology doesn't work, or is too fallible.

and then:


Yes, you are definitely right that she deceived you, but can't you see any way you could have prevented it?

By assuming my wife lied to me all the time? Or, for anyone else, assuming their partner lies to them all the time? Is that a reasonable course of action to take? It certainly seems to be what you're implying in this post, as well as your previous ones.








I said:
- If a man and a woman have sex, with the woman stating that, in the event of a pregnancy, she will take plan B, get an abortion, or whatever, then refuses to do so when that scenario arises....
: My view is that the woman has no right whatsoever to refuse to do what she promised in this scenario. If she doesn't, she has lied, engaged in deception, and the same answer as I gave to the previous scenario with regard to lying about being on the pill applies.

and you replied:
In my view this is different to pills. This is not safe sex, it's pure irresponsibility and if someone would utter this to me I would not date them if they can see things this way. As for giving up your control over this situation in this way, man honestly, what the hell did you expect? Planned abortion? My word...
No right whatsoever to refuse abortion - well you are free to see it that way, but gosh this whole situation is so whacky from the very start before the sex even occurred. The best you can do is try your best to see that and stop complaining.

If someone would utter what to you? If you were in this scenario, then this is a case where you're promising a guy that you will take Plan B, or you will get an abortion, before he agrees to have sex with you. Presumably, given what I can tell from your posts, you wouldn't say that.

And I am curious - do you think a woman who has made such a promise does in fact, from a moral/ethical point of view, subsequently have the right to refuse? Why is this situation so wacky? Women in the past HAVE said this to me - that they'd take the morning after, get an abortion, or whatever. No consequences ever occurred, but what makes the scenario "whacky" when it's apparently not uncommon?

Try your best to see and stop complaining? ie: rely on "intuition" again? Granted, in my own case, when it was someone I've only seen once or twice before, I personally will insist on condom use, no ifs, ands or buts. Maybe some people are more trusting, maybe not. But the implication here, once again, is "assume the woman is lying to you."


I just find it odd that this "assume she's lying or stop complaining" attitude is so prevalent among women, even if they refuse to word it that way.

Doesn't that strike you as a strange attitude to take?
 NotElvisJunior
Joined: 6/8/2008
Msg: 667
view profile
History
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/4/2009 10:32:16 PM
itsallinthesoul wrote:


We ALL agree that once the life is created.....only one person gets a say in whether or not a child is born so I refer you back to my points above.


We don't all agree on this. Granted, to the best of my knowledge, the man who delivered the sperm that helped fertilize the egg has no say - but I've heard rather a large number of cases where, when the girl is young, either:
1) The parents force her to have an abortion against her will
or
2) The girl is terrified to get an abortion because of fear of her parents, or is forced by her parents to carry the child.


I'll also disagree, quite vehemently, on the aspect that, if a man is going to have any responsibility for the child, he should have an EQUAL say in the decision to continue the pregnancy or not.

Granted, this creates the conundrum of "How is equal say resolved if one says continue the pregnancy and the other says terminate the pregnancy," but that's a separate issue.
 Tealwood
Joined: 12/16/2008
Msg: 670
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/5/2009 4:55:20 AM
Lizzie should be required reading for all men who would ever consider unprotected sex.


^^^^^Well I feel like my job is done....my purpose on this earth is now fullfilled....FYI....I have heard peas are good for the swelling.....lemme know when you want me to throw a few cans of them at ya....I'll make sure they are sweet peas...promise!!
 NotElvisJunior
Joined: 6/8/2008
Msg: 679
view profile
History
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/5/2009 10:33:06 AM




Most people feel differently about their own children than they do about step-children. It's perfectly natural, and it doesn't mean there is anything wrong with a man who does not want to get involved with raising another man's offspring.

Yes, most people do.....I'm wondering how loving you are towards your step-child and what he/she thinks of you.....love is love though. Nope, nothing wrong with the man who does not want to get involved with raising another man's offspring at all....lol.....except maybe that he thinks of them as another man's offspring and not HER children.....


Interesting digression - there's a female friend of mine with two grown kids. First one was from the first marriage, second one from the second marriage (now divorced). When she married her second husband, he adopted her first son.

After the second child, she found out she couldn't have any more children. At one point, she'd considered adopting since she couldn't get pregnant. Her husband stated some objections, claiming that he couldn't be comfortable raising a child that wasn't his.

She stopped, stared, and said "Well, what about Michael?" (her first son from the previous marriage).

Her husband got flustered, stopped, started, stopped again, then said "Well, he's different."

I thought it was kind of touching. He had apparently so fully accepted her first child that he quite literally forgot that Michael wasn't his biological son.
 NotElvisJunior
Joined: 6/8/2008
Msg: 680
view profile
History
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/5/2009 10:36:29 AM
turquoise pixie wrote:


I am failing to see how what I say translates into "assume she is lying to you".

And I, apparently, am failing to see how it can translate into anything BUT that.

turquoise pixie wrote:


I don't know you or your ex wife. I suggest that you go over your relationship in your head and ask yourself honestly if this is a someone who has displayed and proven to be trustworthy, truthful and having integrity. Over the course of 4 years you had a chance to get to know loads about her. And you dont have to report it here.

I'd have no problem with reporting it - but there's really nothing to report; in fact, if anything, it seemed that we had far fewer disagreements than the average couple. If that's a reason to be suspicious, well, what can I say?

turquoise pixie wrote:


Intuition is a priceless tool to me, shame you dont see its benefits. Milliards of people use it and it serves them well. Sometimes its not even about sensing things, but about pure common sense, little things you notice that when added together, tell quite a lot.

If intuition were that accurate and reliable, why would there ever be pregnancies with an unwilling parent? Why would any deception ever succeed in any sort of scenario, not even involving pregnancy at all?
 8soldierfalcon8
Joined: 2/16/2009
Msg: 703
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/6/2009 4:51:04 AM
I'm still researching vasectomies....

I thought of a few ironic situations. If a man (especially a very well off man) got a vasectomy and did not tell the women he was dating (as it's a reversible procedure and he could get it reversed if he wanted chidren). ...

A. One day a gf who was supposedly on birth control says, "I'm pregnant! Something must have happened with my birth control yadda yadda." So the man discreetly makes sure his sperm count is still 0, and just as descreetly leaves. Tells her to make the biological father pay child support.

B. After being with a girl for some time, the man finds out that the woman stopped taking her birth control (without consulting him) and was becoming frustrated that she was not pregnant yet. He confronts her about this and she has the gall (upon being told) to be upset that she didn't know he had a vasectomy! OH the irony! That man could walk away with his head held high and say, "Thanks for the sex. Sorry you won't be getting a child support check from me."

So men... perhaps (since the gist of this thread is that all men should assume women can and will lie about bc and we cannot trust them) more men should get vasectomies. :) Then it'd be an even playing field... when women have to wonder if we even CAN get them pregnant contrary to what we said before. In fact, we could use really evasive wording like, "I would really like to have a family one day." :) What do you all think?

Lizbeth has opened my eyes. Never again will I believe in a basic decency in women. Men, women, it's all the same. People are f**ked up! Even in regards to having responsiblity and control over another little life.... people can be irredeemably selfish.

Yay for vasectomy!
 8soldierfalcon8
Joined: 2/16/2009
Msg: 705
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/6/2009 6:10:37 AM
A vasectomy would take all of the guesswork out of the equation.

I have -nightmares- about getting a woman pregnant.

I don't think it's because women are evil, or out to get me.

I feel this way because I have known people (both male and female) to go crazy and morph into different people. I also tend to attract A LOT of female attention and I have been told to my face by many girls that they wanted my genes and wanted me to be their baby daddy. Several girls have tried to oops me. Fortunately for me, I have always been smarter than they, and never EVER just taken a girl's word for it that she is on BC.

I am frightened. I don't accept strange drinks in clubs... and I am very careful who I hang out with one on one.

Something truly traumatizing happened to me in college that opened my eyes on this issue. I dodged a bullet, and learned first hand out -EVIL- women can be.

I am aware that a vasectomy cannot always be reversed.

But there is always adoption. And I would rather NEVER have children than ever be a baby daddy. I would rather die an ignoble, painful death than ever be a baby daddy. I would rather be tortured to death by Osama himself than ever be a baby daddy.

The idea of fathering a child with a woman I am not married to repulses me to the point where I feel sick to my stomach.


Want to know why I don't have kids? Yes, I do choose wisely... but I don't trust women with the fate of something so important to me. Even if I am told a girl is on birth control, I take steps. Even if I see her take it, I take steps.

Having a child out of wedlock right now would ruin my life. All my dreams, all my aspirations would come crashing down.

And if they didn't, my child support payments would just go up. Some woman would just get paid more for spreading her legs for me. Perpetuating her prostitution for 18 years. Child support is an expensive form of prostitution in my book. A woman who forces a man to pay child support is whoring herself out and using her kid(s) as a weapon for financial leverage.

Any child I have while not in a marriage is NOT my kid. It's my liability. I am not a bad man. I take responsiblity for my actions. I am a gentleman. I was raised that if I get a girl pregnant, it is my responsibility to marry her - or at least offer to. I never want to put myself in that position. I never want to have to worry about paternity... or be unable to move because of child support or visitation rights.

If I have children, I want a family. Not spawn. If I have a child, I want that child to be proud of his/her parents and not grow up with baby daddy drama or hear terrible things about his/her father when that is half his or her genetics.

Any woman I have ever dated had understood where I stand on this - and have been on the same page. Children are special. Every child should be loved AND planned. Having babies with multiple partners is what animals do. Even penguins can figure out how to mate for life. There is a reason why intelligent people can somehow figure out how to use birth control, and the dumbest, most inbred people breed at 14.

Socio economic class matters. Welfare queens actually get paid to have more children! You can't even get most social assistance these days unless you have kids.

300 years ago, only the wealthy could afford copious amounts of children. Now, poor people are rewarded financially for breeding more.

We are breeding ourselves stupid.

I want to be a penguin in relation to kids. Not a rat. If I have children, that child will be special. I refuse to have litters with willing sows.

My future, and the futures of any potential offspring of mine is/are far to special to ever be reduced to the selfish desires of some stupid girl who wants a pet she can dress in cute clothes.

I've been told by peers that I take this issue way too seriously... but they can never aspire to be anything more than living paycheck to paycheck. If I have kids, I want them to have a LEGACY - not just a life.

Life is cheap. Even crackheads have kids.

A legacy... a legacy takes hard work, determination, and planning. I want my kids to have MORE than I did growing up. More opportunities in life - more love.

I was almost aborted. I want any child of mine to know they were conceived in love and had a baby room waiting for them before their gametes even combined.

That's how I feel. It's purely my opinion, and it's a strong one. But this is why I WILL NOT EVER date an unwed single mother. I find the whole institution to be a perversion.
 8soldierfalcon8
Joined: 2/16/2009
Msg: 707
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/6/2009 6:53:38 AM
I tried. It lasted 21 years.

I have way, way, way too much testosterone for that....

The other reasons are as follows.

1. Once one has sex (especially copious amounts of it) one cannot go back to abstinance.

2. I have a lot of self control - but women consistantly throw themselves at me. If you like a girl or have a lot of chemistry, it's hard - sometimes impossible to say no.

3. I do believe now that one should go into a marriage with eyes open. My x wife was a virgin before I met her. I was her first kiss. She SUCKED! I was very sad when my marriage ended and I did everything I could to save it, but that is the past. Now that I am single again, I will not make the same mistake twice. If I get married again, she HAS to be on the same page as me sexually.

4. The kind of girls I am attracted to (energetic, fun, athletic, pretty chicks) LIKE sex. They would be about as interested in not having sex before marriage as I would. Sexual tension sucks.

So anyway, those are just 4 reasons. Basically, hypocritical or not, I see sex now as part of the game, and an unavoidable part of an adult relationship. Plus, I can go without sex about as well as I can go without eating. It's a physical need. It's not a desire. It's not like.... watching movies. I get -cranky- if I am not getting laid.

Do you think my friends want to be around a Josh who is constantly on a man-period? Don't think Josh PMS is fun? Well, you're right.

So basically - I feel strongly about this issue - but I am evidence of the fact that sex does not have to lead to children... and I hate condoms.

I think using condoms to bang random chicks is just ITCHING for a break and having a child with a random girl. Screw that. I keep myself accountable to try to know my partners well enough to ascertain whether they are A. Clean B. Not a breeder and C. Trustworthy.

I hope that helps you visualize my mind. It's a scary place in here... but it's known to make some sense from time to time.
 8soldierfalcon8
Joined: 2/16/2009
Msg: 721
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/6/2009 5:17:48 PM

I was going to congratulate you on your sensible and responsible approach to BC, soldier, but this is offensive and wrong unless you mean it in a very specific situation where the woman tricked the man:


"Child support is an expensive form of prostitution in my book."

-----------------------------------------------------------------

That's exactly what I meant. Obviously there's no rule set in stone, and there are always exceptions to every law.

I am talking specifically about women who "oops" a man on purpose and then try to take him for all he has in child support. It's like prostitution and piracy all mixed into one.
 NotElvisJunior
Joined: 6/8/2008
Msg: 722
view profile
History
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/6/2009 8:00:58 PM
itsallinthesoul wrote:


What YOU are not getting is that ABORTION is not an option for all women. Once a woman is pregnant and she will not have an abortion because she views it an immoral thing to do........the woman doesn't have a say either.


This I take issue with. It's a logic trap. It is a choice, only because viewing abortion as wrong is the result of choosing to selectively interpret religious texts, or selectively accept someone else's specific interpretation of religious texts, and very deliberately ignoring the biological science behind it, which is the only part that's backed with any sort of evidence.
 freetime2bme
Joined: 1/16/2006
Msg: 729
view profile
History
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/7/2009 4:59:46 AM
[God has a plan for each life, established at conception.
Abortion is the direct interference with that plan and, thus, a direct defiance of God's will. ]

Please, leave your god out of this, because there is no god or gods, just men and women who us the idea of a god to push there ideas. Abortion is not the same as a drunk beating a pregnant women, if you don't get that you don't get how laws work. Abortion has been given the okay by the highest court in the USA and unlike your god the court is real.
 8soldierfalcon8
Joined: 2/16/2009
Msg: 730
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/7/2009 6:30:53 AM

[God has a plan for each life, established at conception.
Abortion is the direct interference with that plan and, thus, a direct defiance of God's will. ]

Please, leave your god out of this, because there is no god or gods, just men and women who us the idea of a god to push there ideas. Abortion is not the same as a drunk beating a pregnant women, if you don't get that you don't get how laws work. Abortion has been given the okay by the highest court in the USA and unlike your god the court is real.


Please posters - don't feed this troll.

The subject at hand is touchy enough without some re-re religion bashing.

Anyhoo....

I think abortion is murder... butI'm pro-choice.

Chew on that.

Yay for Vasectomies! And yay for Libertarianism!
 freetime2bme
Joined: 1/16/2006
Msg: 731
view profile
History
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/7/2009 6:35:56 AM
I did not bring religon into this argument, but not going to sit back and let someone post BS about a plan of a none existing god, like it is real. If the forum subjects are to touchy for you, stay out of them.
 8soldierfalcon8
Joined: 2/16/2009
Msg: 733
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/7/2009 6:45:50 AM

I did not bring religon into this argument

No, but by slamming and mocking others' religion, you MADE that the argument. Durr


BS about a plan of a none existing god, like it is real


... for example.


If the forum subjects are to touchy for you, stay out of them.


You are not on topic, and you are a newcomer to this debate which I was involved in around 700 posts ago.

How does it feel to get pwned in the face 8SF8 style?

I win - you lose. We're now both retarded for arguing on the internet.

Next!
 freetime2bme
Joined: 1/16/2006
Msg: 734
view profile
History
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/7/2009 6:56:19 AM
"We're now both retarded for arguing on the internet."

Your half right, your half that is. I don't think you would like any way I tell someone there is no god, but if they bring god into an argument that is what I am going to do! They do not have to like it. Again how the forums work.

"you are a newcomer to this debate " Again this is how the forums work, they are open to everyone. Not just the first three posters.

"How does it feel to get pwned in the face 8SF8 style? "

Kind of borring.
 freetime2bme
Joined: 1/16/2006
Msg: 736
view profile
History
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/7/2009 7:10:59 AM
Well popcorn will be good for me. Maybe some possum or raccoon BBQ for my friend from West Virginia. But he might like popcorn too, just let him know it is air in the dried corn that makes it pop, not god.
 8soldierfalcon8
Joined: 2/16/2009
Msg: 738
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/7/2009 7:18:35 AM
I'm from Washington State.

Enough said.

I "win" again.

:)

I was not arguing with you to argue with you, but because you were making yourself look like an azzhat.

Which you still are.

Thank you.

Pwned again... -sigh-.... this is too easy. I'm sorry that you're bored by the pwning you're getting... but since you no doubt have almost 50 years of people consistantly pointing out your azzhat-ry, I am sure you'd be used to it by now.

Just stare at the ceiling and make the correct noises, I guess. Sometimes that's all you can do.
 NotElvisJunior
Joined: 6/8/2008
Msg: 743
view profile
History
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/7/2009 11:58:45 AM
itsallinthesoul wrote:


but find me another woman on any thread who takes abortion so lightly as that one......you will see that most women, religious or not do have issues with having an abortion.

Most? Religious or not? So, you're saying that most religious women have issues with having an abortion, and most non-religious women also have issues?
Aside with maybe health-plan coverage, and the fact that it's a medical procedure and ALL medical procedures carry risk, I'd like to see something that backs this statement.

itsallinthesoul wrote:


Some will still have an abortion for many reasons but they will pay a heavy emotional price for that choice.

We've already debunked the claim that a woman who gets an abortion will pay a heavy emotional price for that choice. Some small number will, but it's such a statistically insignificant number that it belies the existence of post-abortion-emotional-trauma syndrome, or whatever term is used to describe that.

itsallinthesoul wrote:


Being pregnant and having an abortion is not something that I believe any man can really "get" anymore than a non-alcholic would ever be truly able to grasp what being addicted to alcohol is like...we might be able to imagine it, but we cannot really "know" unless we are also addicted to alcohol. Deep down inside we will still believe they can stop if they wanted to...

Got it - men can never understand, ergo their arguments will never carry the same weight. How about women who make the same arguments, who have gone through it, who have been pregnant, etc.

The only difference between getting an early abortion due to pregnancy, and just being in early pregnancy is knowing because a doctor told you. There's no difference in feeling, otherwise you wouldn't have so many reports of women who were pregnant and didn't realize it for a while. It's only because you've been told that you're pregnant - now suddenly there's this emotional attachment, this "feeling" that didn't exist 2 minutes ago?

itsallinthesoul wrote:


Science does not even factor into it....you can tell me until you are blue in the face that having an abortion is not terminating a life and I will never agree with you. I can tell you that allowing a surgeon to operate on your "manhood" carries a small risk that you will not be able to get it up following surgery because the scientific evidence proves the risk is small....you will still be nervous about having that surgery. Perhaps a bad analogy but the best I can come up with at 1:15 am when I'm tired.

(I empathize with the 1:15am thing, I've started writing way too many times at too late an hour)

Bunk. Science does not even factor into it? Yes, being nervous about a medical procedure because of the risks, no matter how small, is natural. It doesn't matter if the risk is small, if it's not ZERO, it's still risk. Granted, I'm far less nervous about a procedure that has, say a 1/50th of one percent or whatever chance of myself not being able to get an erection ever again versus one that has a 20% chance of killing me. However, even those numbers are backed by science.

I am also not debating that it is terminating a life of some form. Clearly an embryo is alive, though equating it with a full blown newborn is absurd in the extreme. "Terminating a life" - yes, "terminating a human life" - no, unless you only mean insofar as it carries a full set of human DNA.

"Terminating a life" is not the same thing as murder, it's playing semantics by equating the two phrases. Yes, I'm sorry, I can figure out what you meant, but maybe it's my anal-retentive former English major coming out - it absolutely irks me when people start using language imprecisely, because, unfortunately, 4 times out of 5, people are using it to deliberately confuse the issue (and then people start accepting the equivalencies - much like how the creationists are intentionally trying to confuse the vernacular "theory" with "scientific theory")

And if you have committed murder, as you state in an earlier post, then do you think you should be punished in the same way a murderer is punished? ie: an armed robber who kills their victim? If so, then why haven't you voluntarily taken on such punishment, and if not, why not? (yeah, I hated those "if so, why? if not, why not" essay questions back in school)


itsallinthesoul wrote:


One of the biggest differences I've detected between most men and most women is the way we think. Most men I know are logical creatures . Most women I know are by nature emotional thinkers in that when we encounter a problem, we try to use our feelings to find a solution. Men don't generally attack a problem the same way. Now I realize that is a huge generalization but it seems to be evidenced in the way men and women have different views on pretty much any issue on this board. Is that not one of the biggest complaints men voice about women.....we are too emotional, we always want to talk about our feelings, etc... It is the argument used frequency to discount what a woman has to say on a topic because her argument is not logical...you did it yourself.

Exactly. Also, I am right for doing so and you are wrong for objecting to it. The emotional approach is used as an excuse to ignore facts. An emotional argument that disregards actual facts has no merit, aside from confirming "I feel this way" - if "I feel this way" is what you're trying to prove, then that's all well and good - but if trying to use that to dispute facts, it's nonsense. No matter how strongly I feel about it, I cannot dispute that adding 2 and 2 yields 4.


itsallinthesoul wrote:


Now if you were to tell me that women are conditioned to be mothers moreso than men are conditioned to be fathers by nature and/or nurture and perhaps that is why women are resistent to having an abortion, I might agree with you.....

Yeah, actually, we're probably in agreement on this. I find it more nurture than nature, though. I'm also something of a cynic on it. Unfortunately, it seems that some cultures literally carry it to a brainwashing level - must bear as many children as possible. Contraception is a sin against God. A woman is never fulfilled in her life unless she has children. Or, as I've heard it and read it in Latino culture - a woman who cannot bear children is worthless, only good to be a servant in her family's home (yes, this actually happens, still, to this day - barren women are treated as something worse than second class citizens).


HopeulGal wrote:


At 7 weeks 6 days, I went in for my first ultrasound. There was a teeny tiny little figure on the screen who's arms and legs were wiggling, a perfectly rounded head and an umbilical cord. Best of all, a heartbeat that was going at a rate of 168 per minute.

I was considered high risk due to hormone imbalances and was able to have an ultrasound every two weeks. Each and every time I saw a beautiful child who would, if I was blessed, be in my arms and nestled close to my heart.

It never occured to me to call this innocent perfect being a fetus. Something that can be so easily disposed of in a waste bin.

While I agree that there are some people who are terrible hosts of the gifts they've been given, the gift doesn't deserve to be destroyed out of selfishness, fear or for the sake of convenience.

While I understand that it was emotional for you, and appreciate the attempt, unfortunately, you let emotion overwhelm logic in your post.

At that point, the fetus was a half-inch long.

Each time you saw a beautiful child? At that early in the pregnancy, you do realize that, aside from knowing that this is part of normal human development, it doesn't even remotely resemble something that would be called human, if you're just going by visual cues.

You're right, though, it shouldn't have been called a fetus then. Maybe a week or two later, though, it should. Fetus is the precise term at that point, before that it was an embryo.

But, you then proceed to use almost stereotypical "pro-life" rhetoric, such as "something that can so easily be disposed of in a waste bin" or "destroyed out of selfishness, fear, or for the sake of convenience."


Again, I'm going to take it at face value that this is the result of how difficult it was for you to conceive, and how much you wanted a child - but if that's the case, don't fall into using the whole anti-abortion-brigade's catch phrases.


ispindiana wrote:


Hitler made abortion illegal in his reign of power.

And he also co-founded Volkswagen with Ferdinand Porsche. What's your point? What's the relevance? Unless you're just trying to say that, in theory, nobody is all bad, not even Hilter, which, frankly, is irrelevant to this thread.

ispindiana wrote:


God has a plan for each life, established at conception.
Abortion is the direct interference with that plan and, thus, a direct defiance of God's will.

Prove it.


lizbeth2 wrote:


Some of you guys should seek some form of accidental/liability insurance before you have sex....hey now ....there's an idea

That, actually, is quite a fantastic idea. I don't know how practical a business model it would be, but that's something that's seriously worth entertaining. Either that or some sort of pre-written form that a woman must sign acknowledging that the man doesn't want to be a father and thus will not support a child, or whatever.

Come to think of it, I think there was some group promoting something like this about a decade or so ago - a sex contract, which, if I recall, was meant to both handle the issues of unintended (at least by the man) pregnancy, as well as confirming that the woman wasn't pulling a "I didn't want to have sex, he forced himself on me" type of scenario. Essentially, sign this, or no sex.

And yes, there are women who, shockingly, want sex as much, if not moreso, than the man, at the moment of passion.


itsallinthesoul wrote:


If a woman chooses to go it alone , she is no different than the couple adopting a child. She is doing so willingly and after a year, if she hasn't filed for a change in the situation (ie child support and access) and he hasn't either, the agreement is forever final, just as in adoption.

Here, I'll say, I'm nearly in total agreement with you - the change I'd make to that is a woman who misleads a guy as to her intent with contraception and/or birth control (and let me reiterate, speaking precisely, abortion is birth control but is not contraception), she's doing so willingly and shouldn't be able to change her mind at any point after that. (which at this point DOES beg the question of how do you prove that intent)?

In a case where one or both parties are responsible, and no real intent can be discerned, I'd then agree with you except that the woman cannot file a change in situation, nor can the man, at any point beyond where the pregnancy can be legally and relatively safely terminated. Why give her the extra year after the child is born?

On the other hand, I find myself speculating as to what happens if about 2 or 3 months in, the man wants the child and the woman doesn't? How would such an arrangement work? Who files what? Whose decision gets more weight? etc etc etc


torquoise pixie wrote:


What you have not experience you cannot understand.

I refer you back to the same argument I gave itsallinthesoul on this. Granted, I'm sure there are SOME things that might fit what you say, but you're making a blanket statement. Further, didn't we already establish what futureshock has experienced? How, therefore, can you make this statement?
 8soldierfalcon8
Joined: 2/16/2009
Msg: 744
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/7/2009 11:59:09 AM
I am going to write a haiku for this thread.


Fly above danger
Just a small cut, a weekend
a vasectomy


Thank you.
 NotElvisJunior
Joined: 6/8/2008
Msg: 745
view profile
History
Unplanned Pregnancy Doesn'Have to Lead to Birth or Parenthood
Posted: 6/7/2009 12:05:49 PM
A warrior AND a poet - that's beautiful, man!
Show ALL Forums  > Single Parents  >