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

[Skylar]

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.

A father being responsible for his own children is reasonable. Demanding that a father never be responsible for any child he fathers isn't reasonable.

I'd argue that most folks and 50 of 50 State legislatures would agree with me.

 

[dilloduck]

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.

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.

A father being responsible for his own children is reasonable. Demanding that a father never be responsible for any child he fathers isn't reasonable.

I'd argue that most folks and 50 of 50 State legislatures would agree with me.

Yet you conveniently ignore the fact that the man did NOT choose to be the father. The woman decided that for him. Women HATED have motherhood forced upon them. So much so that abortion was legalized. And now they are perfectly content to force fatherhood on men.

 

[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.

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.

A father being responsible for his own children is reasonable. Demanding that a father never be responsible for any child he fathers isn't reasonable.

I'd argue that most folks and 50 of 50 State legislatures would agree with me.

Yet you conveniently ignore the fact that the man did NOT choose to be the father.

A man's choice to be a father isn't the basis of his obligation. The child's existence is. Making your standard of 'a man's choice' irrelevant to his responsibility to any child he fathers.

If he wants to be a father, if he doesn't want to be a father.....his responsibilities are the same.

You believe otherwise. Even the most conservative states in the union disagree. As does every other State. 50 of 50 times. A father's obligation is to his child.

And that's completely reasonable.

 

[dilloduck]

The child only exists if the mother allows it to therefore a man's obligation is totally dependent on a woman's choice. Run that by any legislature that you wish. They will find it to be a fact.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

. Women HATED have motherhood forced upon them.

Rape is the only means that Motherhood is 'forced' on a woman. And NO ONE is demanding that a woman should be forced to bear a child forced upon her.

 

[Skylar]

The child only exists if the mother allows it to therefore a man's obligation is totally dependent on a woman's choice. Run that by any legislature that you wish. They will find it to be a fact.

Which is pristinely irrelevant to his obligation to support his own children. If he wants to be a father, if he doesn't want to be a father, nothing changes. His obligation still exists if the child exists.

As his obligation is to the child. Regardless of his feelings on the matter.

 

[Skylar]

. Women HATED have motherhood forced upon them.

Rape is the only means that Motherhood is 'forced' on a woman. And NO ONE is demanding that a woman should be forced to bear a child forced upon her.

Actually, quite a few republicans are demanding that woman who are impregnated due to rape be forced to carry the child to term.

In reality, the choice is hers regardless of the method of conception.

 

[dilloduck]

. Women HATED have motherhood forced upon them.

Rape is the only means that Motherhood is 'forced' on a woman. And NO ONE is demanding that a woman should be forced to bear a child forced upon her.

Actually, quite a few republicans are demanding that woman who are impregnated due to rape be forced to carry the child to term.

In reality, the choice is hers regardless of the method of conception.

Fatherhood should be a choice too. One that is made by the father.

 

[dilloduck]

The child only exists if the mother allows it to therefore a man's obligation is totally dependent on a woman's choice. Run that by any legislature that you wish. They will find it to be a fact.

Which is pristinely irrelevant to his obligation to support his own children. If he wants to be a father, if he doesn't want to be a father, nothing changes. His obligation still exists if the child exists.

As his obligation is to the child. Regardless of his feelings on the matter.

The existence of the child IS the obligation. Why do you continually ignore that ?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The child only exists if the mother allows it to therefore a man's obligation is totally dependent on a woman's choice. Run that by any legislature that you wish. They will find it to be a fact.

Absolutely correct... a child only exists if the mother CHOOSES to engage in sexual intercourse and because of that CHOICE... she conceives a child.

Now in moral terms, the male is just as responsible for the child as the female, whose CHOICE it was to JOIN WITH THE MAN... .

But in absolute terms, the female bears the entire burden of conception. Which is the basis for Marriage and the reason that a woman should NEVER CHOOSE to physically join with a man, until she had found a man who she can trust to be there to take his responsibility, which is a man who has MARRIED HER, as such is specifically how nature designed marriage.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Fatherhood should be a choice too. One that is made by the father.

Fatherhood is a choice. The moment a man enters a female's body, he has made the CHOICE.

Of course, there is one set of ideas which rejects the male's responsibility and that's the same one that rejects the female's responsibilities... for their CHOICES.

Which, as reason requires they must, they're also the same set of ideas that reject responsibilities for the pre-born human life they murder, as a result of having rejected the responsibilities common to sexual intercourse.

We call that set of ideas: Evil. Some also call it "The Ideological Left", others call it Progressivism and still others call it Liberalism. But it all boils down to Evil.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The existence of the child IS the obligation. Why do you continually ignore that ?

That's the whole "Evil" thing I was talkin' about.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

. Women HATED have motherhood forced upon them.

Rape is the only means that Motherhood is 'forced' on a woman. And NO ONE is demanding that a woman should be forced to bear a child forced upon her.

Actually, quite a few republicans are demanding that woman who are impregnated due to rape be forced to carry the child to term.

In reality, the choice is hers regardless of the method of conception.

Ya know... I keep hearing about those would-be Republicans. What I can't figure out if why I've never met any.

I'm a Southern Baptist and still... none can be found. Why is that Skylar?

Why don't you go find a few of those folks and bring'em back here?

 

[Valerie]

The child only exists if the mother allows it to therefore a man's obligation is totally dependent on a woman's choice.

Run that by any legislature that you wish. They will find it to be a fact.

yes that fact is universally acknowledged as self evident under the circumstance of pregnancy, yet it still does not effect any parental obligation for children once they are born. men who find themselves lamenting being in that position - 'dependent on a woman's choice' - have already failed their ultimate obligation to be responsible for where their sperm ends up in the first place.

men need to be dependent upon birth control or self control, not blaming women for their own offspring.

good luck convincing any legislature to let fathers off the hook once a child is born...

 

[Skylar]

. Women HATED have motherhood forced upon them.

Rape is the only means that Motherhood is 'forced' on a woman. And NO ONE is demanding that a woman should be forced to bear a child forced upon her.

Actually, quite a few republicans are demanding that woman who are impregnated due to rape be forced to carry the child to term.

In reality, the choice is hers regardless of the method of conception.

Fatherhood should be a choice too. One that is made by the father.

The father does have a choice...if he doesn't want to use his body to carry a fetus to term, he doesn't have to. Its his choice. But he doesn't make that choice for anyone but himself.

A woman only has that same authority. If she doesn't want to use her body to carry a fetus to term, she doesn't have to either. Their authority over the use of their own body is equal.

Their authority over the use of HER body isn't.

 

[Skylar]

The child only exists if the mother allows it to therefore a man's obligation is totally dependent on a woman's choice. Run that by any legislature that you wish. They will find it to be a fact.

Which is pristinely irrelevant to his obligation to support his own children. If he wants to be a father, if he doesn't want to be a father, nothing changes. His obligation still exists if the child exists.

As his obligation is to the child. Regardless of his feelings on the matter.

The existence of the child IS the obligation. Why do you continually ignore that ?

Then you acknowledge that if a child exists a father has an obligation to support it.

You just obliterated your own argument. And demonstrated mine. Yes, if a child exists, a father's obligation to support that child exists.

 

[dilloduck]

The child only exists if the mother allows it to therefore a man's obligation is totally dependent on a woman's choice.

Run that by any legislature that you wish. They will find it to be a fact.

yes that fact is universally acknowledged as self evident under the circumstance of pregnancy, yet it still does not effect any parental obligation for children once they are born. men who find themselves lamenting being in that position - 'dependent on a woman's choice' - have already failed their ultimate obligation to be responsible for where their sperm ends up in the first place.

men need to be dependent upon birth control or self control, not blaming women for their own offspring.

good luck convincing any legislature to let fathers off the hook once a child is born...

The man AND the woman have failed yet the woman somehow gets another chance. Why ?

 

[dilloduck]

The child only exists if the mother allows it to therefore a man's obligation is totally dependent on a woman's choice. Run that by any legislature that you wish. They will find it to be a fact.

Which is pristinely irrelevant to his obligation to support his own children. If he wants to be a father, if he doesn't want to be a father, nothing changes. His obligation still exists if the child exists.

As his obligation is to the child. Regardless of his feelings on the matter.

The existence of the child IS the obligation. Why do you continually ignore that ?

Then you acknowledge that if a child exists a father has an obligation to support it.

You just obliterated your own argument. And demonstrated mine. Yes, if a child exists, a father's obligation to support that child exists.

Wrong---I have demonstrated that in todays world, children ONLY exist if a woman chooses so. She can in fact opt to make a man a father when neither wanted to be a parent when they had sex.

 

[Valerie]

The child only exists if the mother allows it to therefore a man's obligation is totally dependent on a woman's choice.

Run that by any legislature that you wish. They will find it to be a fact.

yes that fact is universally acknowledged as self evident under the circumstance of pregnancy, yet it still does not effect any parental obligation for children once they are born. men who find themselves lamenting being in that position - 'dependent on a woman's choice' - have already failed their ultimate obligation to be responsible for where their sperm ends up in the first place.

men need to be dependent upon birth control or self control, not blaming women for their own offspring.

good luck convincing any legislature to let fathers off the hook once a child is born...

The man AND the woman have failed yet the woman somehow gets another chance. Why ?

another chance at what?

 

[Valerie]

"See the imbalance? Now you can say the imbalance is fair, but you can't deny it isn't there."


women have the womb, thus the ultimate control via that natural 'imbalance', so to speak...

^