[BurlyShirley]

Why don’t men have a say in the matter?

I think its pretty messed up, that a man doesn’t get to have a say when it comes to whether or not a girl he impregnated is going to have a child. She can abort it even if he objects, yet if she decides to have it, he still has to pay for it whether he wanted it or not. WTF kind of rule is that and what do you all think?

If its "her" choice because its in "her" body, than screw the child support i say.

 

[the law]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Why don’t men have a say in the matter?

I think its pretty messed up, that a man doesn’t get to have a say when it comes to whether or not a girl he impregnated is going to have a child. She can abort it even if he objects, yet if she decides to have it, he still has to pay for it whether he wanted it or not. WTF kind of rule is that and what do you all think?

If its "her" choice because its in "her" body, than screw the child support i say.

While I am somewhat sympathetic to that reasoning, the problem is simple. It is the child that has the right to child support and not the parent (only indirectly as guardian via the child). It makes sense that the child is entitled to support from both its parents, regardless of their parent's actions.

Edit: But yes, there are some fundamential inequalities here. However, I am not sure that changing the rules here would make the situation more equitable. However, the solution is generally simple If you don't want a kid, WEAR A HELMET!

 

[Silver]

Holy Sh!t, we agree.

If she decides to keep the baby, he either signs a statement saying he's willing to accept the legal role of father, or he doesn't and waives all his rights, but doesn't get child support.

If she wants to keep the baby, and he doesn't, he's still off the hook...

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by the law
While I am somehwat sympathetic to that reasoning, the problem is simple. It is the child that has the right to child support and not the parent (only indirectly as guardian via the child). It makes sense that the child is entitled to support from both its parents, regardless of their parent's actions.

Its not really the money that Im concerned with, its the double standard. If we can say that "both parents need the burden of responsibility" than i think BOTH parents should have the right to suggest whether a child will live or be aborted. I mean, if we want to be "equal and fair" and all that stuff.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by Silver
Holy Sh!t, we agree.

If she decides to keep the baby, he either signs a statement saying he's willing to accept the legal role of father, or he doesn't and waives all his rights, but doesn't get child support.

If she wants to keep the baby, and he doesn't, he's still off the hook...

totally.

i mean, since its not even a human in the eyes of some anyway at the level that a man is actually "involved" than how can those same people believe that he should be legally bound to nothing more than a "choice" made by the woman?

 

[bomberz1qr20]

Originally posted by Silver

If she wants to keep the baby, and he doesn't, he's still off the hook...

I disagree.

As soon as you put it in, you're on the hook. You are voluntarily saying "Let's have a kid"

Or AIDS.

Or buyer's remorse.



Pick your hooks wisely.

 

[Silver]

Originally posted by bomberz1qr20
I disagree.

As soon as you put it in, you're on the hook. You are voluntarily saying "Let's have a kid"

Or AIDS.

Or buyer's remorse.



Pick your hooks wisely.

If that is the case, an abortion should be contingent on the approval of the biological father...

 

[Spud]

Guys also are making choices when they go in without a rainjacket.....

Once you sow your seed in somebody else's body, you lose your say.... So to speak.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by Spud
Guys also are making choices when they go in without a rainjacket.....

Once you sow your seed in somebody else's body, you lose your say.... So to speak.

Condoms break and all that too....but that's not even the issue here.

If i have to bear half the responsibility, I should get half a say in the matter. It's half my kid, right? Why does she get "all" the choice?

 

[LordOpie]

I totally agree about her deciding to abort when the guy wants it... that's fvcked up.

While I'm pro-choice in general, I could not, would not want the woman I knocked up to abort. It's plain wrong.

I'd so freak if she aborted my child. And ya know what, it's on her too. Don't have sex with me if you aren't willing to have a child.

Two g/f's ago got her tubes tied because she absolutely didn't want to take the chance... good for her!

 

[Jr_Bullit]

Hehehe, you're actually right on this one BS Many times I have been so glad I was born a girl and not a white male in this day and age

But, to some extent, that's why you kinda wanna know the woman you knock up... Y'all keep saying how it's not fair you don't have a say, well if it's a decent woman, then she'll give you a say in the matter.

If you're dating a slut, or if you make it clear at some point you don't want kids and don't want the responsibility, then no complaining if she gets rid of it and never tells you.

A woman that comes after you for child support for a kid you didn't want however, well you should have made sure she wasn't going to get knocked up by wearing a helmet...but there are plenty of men out there who skip paying child support anyways, or get out of it for whatever reason. There are as many men get roped into CS as there are those who find a way out of it or refuse to pay.

And to say, well gosh, y'know I think the woman should have to be able to pay for herself and a kid and raise a kid...you've obviously never spent enough time around kids to know how much time they actually take, especially in their youngers, or how expensive they are.

 

[MMike]

Originally posted by BurlySurly


If its "her" choice because its in "her" body, than screw the child support i say.

And the "asshole comment of the year" award goes to....

<crinkle crinkle...tear, crinkle>

Damn dude...that's cold even for you.

So you're gonna punish the kid...the one who has EVEN less say in the matter?

YOu got your hand caught in the cookie jar. You gotta pay.

 

[bomberz1qr20]

Originally posted by Silver
If that is the case, an abortion should be contingent on the approval of the biological father...

Not really. Once you take the risk, you are in essence leaving the decision of how much/how little involvement you will have.

Men don't have the kids, we can skip off if we want to. Women can't escape a pregnancy once it starts with anything but an abortion. Men just need a fast car.

An abortion comes down to a mother's choice, as she is ultimately responsible for the kid.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by MMike


So you're gonna punish the kid...the one who has EVEN less say in the matter?

Hey, this is 2004.

Its not a child, it a choice, right

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by bomberz1qr20

An abortion comes down to a mother's choice, as she is ultimately responsible for the kid.

...and we're saying she shouldnt be. It is 'half mine' according to nature and all. And the law, only AFTER it's born.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by bomberz1qr20
An abortion comes down to a mother's choice, as she is ultimately responsible for the kid.

Fine, screw her, i'll take my kid.

Just cuz some (many?) men are @ssholes, doesn't mean we should punish the men who are responsible.

 

[MMike]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Hey, this is 2004.

Its not a child, it a choice, right

You're punishing your kid because you don't like what his/her mother did. That's not right.

 

[Jr_Bullit]

Coming back to the "responsible guy" I've yet to be in a situation of dating or consider being with a guy where the guy didn't verify that I was "protected" and still wore a helmet...In such situations should something still happen, the kid is the woman's responsibility ultimately, the guy can just jet....if the woman wants to tell the guy and have his input, then great....but I think it depends on their relationship as to whether or not she said anything to him.

Sometimes telling the guy, in a casual relationship, brings more hardship to the woman, the kid, and the final decision, then simply keeping quiet and doing what she feels is best.

 

[bomberz1qr20]

Originally posted by LordOpie


I'd so freak if she aborted my child. And ya know what, it's on her too. Don't have sex with me if you aren't willing to have a child.

Like I said, pick your hooks wisely...

 

[Jr_Bullit]

Originally posted by MMike
You're punishing your kid because you don't like what his/her mother did. That's not right.

Aaand let's say you wanted the kid, or wanted her to keep the kid, or don't want to pay child support unless the kid is in your custody. By participating like a good upstanding adult, you stand a chance at partial or even total custody...it's not like women always get to keep the kid if they're a bad parent. (Butcha gotta prove it)

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by bomberz1qr20
Like I said, pick your hooks wisely...

Oh I do, I do. Heck, I might actually be BurlySurly's dad

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by MMike
You're punishing your kid because you don't like what his/her mother did. That's not right.

Who is punishing the kid? If i could've decided not to have it, there'd be no punishment, it'd have been aborted...right? But I dont get the options that a woman does. Personally, Im more concerned about the fact that i cant stop a woman from aborting MY baby than about paying child support. That rule only goes to illustrate the double standard.

 

[Silver]

Originally posted by MMike
You're punishing your kid because you don't like what his/her mother did. That's not right.

If the system actually verified where child support money went, I'd agree with that. If mothers had to prove they were the best choice in a divorce, instead of proving that they are unfit to be a mother to lose the kids, I'd agree with you.

The system as set up doesn't care about the kids that much...

 

[bomberz1qr20]

Originally posted by LordOpie
Oh I do, I do. Heck, I might actually be BurlySurly's dad

Well, you obviously didn't beat him hard enough!

 

[LordOpie]

BOTTOMLINE: Should a man be allowed a legal voice when it comes to aborting his child? In otherwords, if she wants to abort, should a man be allowed to force her to have it (and he raises the kid)?

I say yes.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by Silver
If the system actually verified where child support money went, I'd agree with that. If mothers had to prove they were the best choice in a divorce, instead of proving that they are unfit to be a mother to lose the kids, I'd agree with you.

The system as set up doesn't care about the kids that much...

WORD!

Seems like its more about setting up the mom so she can go back and shake her snatch at the club while she leaves the kid with her grandma who smokes 4 packs a day and watches reruns of the price is right while the baby cries itself to sleep. I have a friend who makes 70K a year, owns a home, doesnt have a record or drink or smoke and he cant get his kids even though the mom lives in a trailer with NINE other people and works part time as a waitress. She lives off his child support and the kids are dirty when she drops them off on weekends:angry:

 

[bomberz1qr20]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Who is punishing the kid? If i could've decided not to have it, there'd be no punishment, it'd have been aborted...right? But I dont get the options that a woman does. Personally, Im more concerned about the fact that i cant stop a woman from aborting MY baby than about paying child support. That rule only goes to illustrate the double standard.

Well maybe if there was a legal paper that could be signed that IF you stopped the abortion, you are legally bound to support the kid 100%.

Have your lawyer draw it up and I'll take a look at it.

 

[bomberz1qr20]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
She lives off his child support and the kids are dirty when she drops them off on weekends:angry:

Then he needs to step up and get her ass back in court, NOW. They look DOWN on that sh*t!

I did everything I could, and I have full custody now. In fact, mom f*cked off somewhere, we haven't heard from her in a long time.

The system will look at what's best for the kid. If you show them that you're what's best, they'll go with it.

 

[BostonBullit]

I agree 100%....if you are the father of "the thing" then she should need your consent to get rid of "it". and most of the arguements being made to the contrary can be just as effectively used for a completely anti-abortion stance....

"Not really. Once you take the risk, you are in essence leaving the decision of how much/how little involvement you will have."

Yea, and once she decided to take the risk she is in essence making the decision as to whether to get pregnent or not.

"Coming back to the "responsible guy" I've yet to be in a situation of dating or consider being with a guy where the guy didn't verify that I was "protected" and still wore a helmet...In such situations should something still happen, the kid is the woman's responsibility ultimately, the guy can just jet"

So you're saying that if the guy chooses to take off then the law shouldn't go after him for support?

I don't know about other states, but here in MA the mother would have to get up and piss all over the judge in the middle of open court before they would even consider giving the father custody over the mother...

 

[MMike]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Who is punishing the kid? If i could've decided not to have it, there'd be no punishment, it'd have been aborted...right? But I dont get the options that a woman does. Personally, Im more concerned about the fact that i cant stop a woman from aborting MY baby than about paying child support. That rule only goes to illustrate the double standard.

You said earlier that if you have no say in the matter, then you should be absolved from paying child support. So you're angry with the mother, you will refuse to support the kid, even though it's yours. And therefore the kid will suffer a lower standard of living because mom will have to support said kid on her own.

Bad form.

 

[Jr_Bullit]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Who is punishing the kid? If i could've decided not to have it, there'd be no punishment, it'd have been aborted...right? But I dont get the options that a woman does. Personally, Im more concerned about the fact that i cant stop a woman from aborting MY baby than about paying child support. That rule only goes to illustrate the double standard.

Would you support an abortion if it was medically proven that forcing the woman to have "your baby" could kill or permanently damage the woman? Or would you still insist she have the child so you can take it and run away?

What would happen if she actually wanted to have the child, but simply didn't want you to have any influence in the child's upbringing (and don't argue that this never happens or that she shouldn't be allowed to say this...it happens every day in divorce proceedings where one parent doesn't want their kid raised by the other parent for whatever reason).

 

[bomberz1qr20]

Originally posted by Jr_Bullit


What would happen if she actually wanted to have the child, but simply didn't want you to have any influence in the child's upbringing

Tough, she should've kept her legs shut until she found a decent father.

Two-way street.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by MMike
You said earlier that if you have no say in the matter, then you should be absolved from paying child support. So you're angry with the mother, you will refuse to support the kid, even though it's yours. And therefore the kid will suffer a lower standard of living because mom will have to support said kid on her own.

Bad form.

No i said that i shouldnt be held accountable, that's not the same as refusing to pay. If i cant be accountable for keeping the kid alive during pregnancy, why should i be accountable at other times? The point is that the laws are stupid and geared toward helping women, not men or even the children. If women get the choice to have or abort the kid, than so should the men that are half parents of it.

 

[bomberz1qr20]

Originally posted by bomberz1qr20
Tough, she should've kept her legs shut until she found a decent father.

Two-way street.

Wait, who are we talking about?

Hypothetical threads get weird...

 

[Spud]

Guys are putting in our half of the say when Mr Johnson slides into home. Period. Face it - biologically we are trying to reproduce even with protection. Don’t like that idea, then abstain, toss off, or find another less fertile opening :devil:

She gets all the choice once all the fetus/child is in her body. Once we’ve chosen to plant our seed, we’ve implicitly made our choice, all we have left is a lucky spin on reproductive roulette.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by Jr_Bullit
Would you support an abortion if it was medically proven that forcing the woman to have "your baby" could kill or permanently damage the woman? Or would you still insist she have the child so you can take it and run away?

That's pretty gray. Id say my child's life is more important to me, but of course, with current laws on abortion, that'd never fly. So likely what I insisted wouldnt matter.

Also, if she doesnt want me to have any influence, than she shouldnt want ANY money either. If i cant raise it, why should i support it?

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by Jr_Bullit
Would you support an abortion if it was medically proven that forcing the woman to have "your baby" could kill or permanently damage the woman? Or would you still insist she have the child so you can take it and run away?

like other severe health issues, this would be relegated to expert opinion: a doctor.

Originally posted by Jr_Bullit
What would happen if she actually wanted to have the child, but simply didn't want you to have any influence in the child's upbringing (and don't argue that this never happens or that she shouldn't be allowed to say this...it happens every day in divorce proceedings where one parent doesn't want their kid raised by the other parent for whatever reason).

like the prev example, i'd assert this is pretty rare, but - yes - must be reviewed by a family law judge.

you know who's pretty kewl? wendy mcelroy

 

[bomberz1qr20]

Originally posted by Spud
Guys are putting in our half of the say when Mr Johnson slides into home. Period. Face it - biologically we are trying to reproduce even with protection. Don’t like that idea, then abstain, toss off, or find another less fertile opening :devil:

She gets all the choice once all the fetus/child is in her body. Once we’ve chosen to plant our seed, we’ve implicitly made our choice, all we have left is a lucky spin on reproductive roulette.

All this is understood, the question that the honorable Mr. Burly has put to the wind is, should this change?

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by Spud

She gets all the choice once all the fetus/child is in her body.

Yes Spud we've established that like 9 times now. The point is that we feel that it is wrong that she gets all the choice.

 

[Jr_Bullit]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Also, if she doesnt want me to have any influence, than she shouldnt want ANY money either. If i cant raise it, why should i support it?

This part of your statement is fair and reasoned...

(and no I am definitely not saying that most women are fair and reasoned, I've met plenty of the female species that I find to be humiliating examples of our kind...but then, same goes for males too).

I would say that if a woman doesn't want your influence and doesn't want you to know, she simply will stop all contact with you and disappear. but then again, I'm speaking in regards to what I would do, I can't say what another would do. I agree with your logic here.