If it is your body & your choice why the he'll do I have to pay for the next 18 years?

[dilloduck]

Why should a male be responsible for a decision made entirely by a woman ? A living baby is not the result of sex. It is the result of a woman's decision. How about you making car payments on the car I decide to buy ?

A man is responsible for any child born that he fathered. What about this do you find so unfair?

And your analogy is crap. The car you're asking Sy to make payments on isn't his car. While any child you father is yours. So to follow your analogy, you're making payments on your OWN car.

Which brings us back to my original question: what about this do you find so unfair?

I can't figure out whether they want to be able to force a woman to have an abortion- or just say- if she doesn't have an abortion when the man demands it, he doesn't have to pay child support.

How about giving the man the same option as that the woman? The choice to opt out of parental responsibility.

Here's the problem: there's never any scenario where a woman's parental responsibility is greater or less than a man's. A woman is responsible for every child she bears. And if she aborts, then neither the father nor she have any financial responsibility.

Their obligation is always equal. Either both are responsible. Or neither are. And always to the child. If the child exists, the obligation exists.

You're demanding that a woman be responsible for every child she bears, but a man never has to take responsibility for any child he fathers. That's not equality. But vast inequality. Not simply in terms of the parents. But in the child's right to support for both parents.

Your demand to be able to 'choose' is utterly outweighted by the child's right to support from both parents. Nor is 'choice' the basis of your obligation to support your own children. The child's existence is.

A woman can chose to not bear a "accidental" pregnancy. A man does not share that right.

 

[Skylar]

Why should a male be responsible for a decision made entirely by a woman ? A living baby is not the result of sex. It is the result of a woman's decision. How about you making car payments on the car I decide to buy ?

A man is responsible for any child born that he fathered. What about this do you find so unfair?

And your analogy is crap. The car you're asking Sy to make payments on isn't his car. While any child you father is yours. So to follow your analogy, you're making payments on your OWN car.

Which brings us back to my original question: what about this do you find so unfair?

I can't figure out whether they want to be able to force a woman to have an abortion- or just say- if she doesn't have an abortion when the man demands it, he doesn't have to pay child support.

How about giving the man the same option as that the woman? The choice to opt out of parental responsibility.

Here's the problem: there's never any scenario where a woman's parental responsibility is greater or less than a man's. A woman is responsible for every child she bears. And if she aborts, then neither the father nor she have any financial responsibility.

Their obligation is always equal. Either both are responsible. Or neither are. And always to the child. If the child exists, the obligation exists.

You're demanding that a woman be responsible for every child she bears, but a man never has to take responsibility for any child he fathers. That's not equality. But vast inequality. Not simply in terms of the parents. But in the child's right to support for both parents.

Your demand to be able to 'choose' is utterly outweighted by the child's right to support from both parents. Nor is 'choice' the basis of your obligation to support your own children. The child's existence is.

A woman can chose to not bear a "accidental" pregnancy. A man does not share that right.

She can control the use of her own body. A right a man has regarding his own.

She can never create unequal obligation. While unequal obligation is exactly what you're demanding.

No. The child's right to support from both parents wins. If the child is born, you're obligated to support it.

 

[dilloduck]

Why is a woman not obligated to bear the child and can opt to kill it ? A man does not have the option of tossing aside a mistake.

 

[Skylar]

Why is a woman not obligated to bear the child and can opt to kill it ?

Because its her body. If you want to choose if your body is going to be used to carry a child to term, make sure to get pregnant. Then you make that call.

A man does not have the option of tossing aside a mistake.

A man's ability to 'toss away his mistake' isn't the basis of his obligation. The child's existence is. If the kid is born, the obligation comes with it. As his obligation is to the child. Not the mother.

And being responsible for your own kids is completely reasonable.

 

[dilloduck]

Giving birth to your own kid instead of killing them is also quite reasonable. Natural even. But we are now more concerned that women can enjoy sex without those nasty little consequences.

 

[Skylar]

Giving birth to your own kid instead of killing them is also quite reasonable. Natural even.

That's a choice a woman makes her herself. Just as the use of your body for carrying a child is a choice that you make.

Your control over your own body is always equal. Just as your obligation to any child born is always equal.

But we are now more concerned that women can enjoy sex without those nasty little consequences.

Which is irrelevant to your argument.

 

[dilloduck]

Giving birth to your own kid instead of killing them is also quite reasonable. Natural even.

That's a choice a woman makes her herself. Just as the use of your body for carrying a child is a choice that you make.

Your control over your own body is always equal. Just as your obligation to any child born is always equal.

But we are now more concerned that women can enjoy sex without those nasty little consequences.

Which is irrelevant to your argument.

and many argue that it is an irresponsible choice bordering on murder. Pro choice------if a woman get's pregnant she can chose to either keep it or abort it.
Her decision in this matter directly affects the man who was responsible for creating this child in the first place. If the pregnancy was NOT the intention of either party yet the women CHOOSES using her own free will to KEEP the child instead of killing it why should a man be subservient to that CHOICE ?

 

[Skylar]

Giving birth to your own kid instead of killing them is also quite reasonable. Natural even.

That's a choice a woman makes her herself. Just as the use of your body for carrying a child is a choice that you make.

Your control over your own body is always equal. Just as your obligation to any child born is always equal.

But we are now more concerned that women can enjoy sex without those nasty little consequences.

Which is irrelevant to your argument.

and many argue that it is an irresponsible choice bordering on murder. Pro choice------if a woman get's pregnant she can chose to either keep it or abort it.

Your abandoning your original argument and angling for an anti-abortion argument.

Can I take it that your previous argument wasn't working out so well? Or that you're actual motivation is anti-abortion beliefs. As one or the other seem likely with this sharp switching of goal posts.

Her decision in this matter directly affects the man who was responsible for creating this child in the first place. If the pregnancy was NOT the intention of either party yet the women CHOOSES using her own free will to KEEP the child instead of killing it why should a man be subservient to that CHOICE ?

Because he's responsible for any child he fathers.

Your basis of obligation is off. You're arguing his obligation should be based on his ability to choose. When in reality, his child's right to support from both parents is the basis of his obligation.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Thread has run it's course peeps. Let it die

 

[dilloduck]

Wrong-------Listen closely. According to pro choicers a man has not fathered anything until the child is born. And that's when the decision by the woman is made------BEFORE the man is a father. According to the law right now a woman can kill this whatever and there will be NO---ZERO-- NADA . parental obligations. If the women chooses all by herself to create parental responsibilty why should the man be responsible for HER CHOICE ?

 

[Skylar]

Wrong-------Listen closely. According to pro choicers a man has not fathered anything until the child is born. And that's when the decision by the woman is made------BEFORE the man is a father. According to the law right now a woman can kill this whatever and there will be NO---ZERO-- NADA . Parental obligations.

And? So far we haven't disagreed about anything.

 

[dilloduck]

Yes we have------you believe that a woman who NEVER intended to be the mother of this mans child should be perfectly free to force fatherhood on him AND if he refuses he will be a criminal.

 

[Skylar]

Yes we have------you believe that a woman who NEVER intended to be the mother of this mans child should be perfectly free to force fatherhood on him AND if he refuses he will be a criminal.

My position is simple: the obligation of a mother and father are always equal. If a child is born, they're equally responsible for it. If no child is born, neither is. And both mother and father have equal control over their own bodies.

What about that is unreasonable?

 

[dilloduck]

You don't get it-----one person is making the decision for at least one and possibly two other people. How is it reasonable to make decisions that so drastically affect SOMEONE ELSE ?

 

[sartre play]

You want complete control over the entire situation (pregnancy, life & death) then you should foot the entire bill.

Period

Abort your baby or I will not pay child support....got it

Or keep the baby, but I don't want it.

This


Why can a woman KILL the baby but the man is FORCED to abide by whatever decision she makes.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating fathers to drop out of their child's life. I am advocating that the responsible parties have equally say so in the outcomes of their own futures.

And my children are fully grown so leave the personal bullshit out of the thread.

 

[Skylar]

You don't get it-----one person is making the decision for at least one and possibly two other people.

One person is making a decision about the use of her own body. A power that a man also has over his own body.

How is it reasonable to make decisions that so drastically affect SOMEONE ELSE ?

If you want the right to choose if your body will be used to carry a child to term, make sure to get pregnant. Then you can make that call.

But what you seem to be angling for isn't reasonable at all. Where a man will have full control over his body AND full control of hers. While she controls neither her own body nor his.

That's not equality. That's not reasonable.

 

[Skylar]

Why can a woman KILL the baby but the man is FORCED to abide by whatever decision she makes.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating fathers to drop out of their child's life. I am advocating that the responsible parties have equally say so in the outcomes of their own futures.

So man has control over his own body and control over a woman's body. But she has neither control over her own body, nor control over his.

That's not reasonable.

The woman has control over her body and a man has control over his. If you don't want to use your body to carry a child to term, you don't have to either. But you don't get to make that decision for anyone else.

 

[sartre play]

Who said any thing about it being fair.

 

[dilloduck]

John and Mary liked sex but neither wanted to have a baby. That was wonderful until Mary got pregnant and made a different choice which forced John into years of something that he did want to do with HIS body.

 

[Skylar]

Who said any thing about it being fair.

Shrugs. Then you don't really have much of a basis of argument.