Premier Rock Forum

numberthirty wrote:

Not exactly devastating, braintrust.

You are trying to make the case that a man should not be held legally responsible for support if the woman makes a descision on her own to carry a child to term.

This is stupid on a number of levels.

It is very simple for a man to make sure he doesn't wind up in the situation to start with. Check out the condom section at your local grocery/drug store.

Second, the call on what to do with a fetus is a woman's. Once a child is living, the economic resposibility is shared.

Makes perfect sense to me.

I know you're thinking "Bu...Wait" Shut it. Listen.

A father will have to pay support for maybe 'til a kid finishes college.

As Mandroid very clearly pointed out, a woman has to pay in ways that are not only economic and will affect her for the rest of her life.

That said, men need to really shut up about child support.

If a man does not think to use a condom when he knows he does not want children, he has given up any say over if the child should be carried to term.

You know they make birth control for women too right. Shouldn't both parties be responsible for the consequences of having sex. I would be the first to tell some idiot guy bitching about getting a girl pregnant that he should have worn a condom, but I'd do the same thing to a woman there are way more birth control options for women than men as far as I know. Also If you're letting someone put his penis inside you shouldn't you be vaguely aware of what is or is not attached to it and vice versa?

I do agree men definitely need to shut up about child care, my parents were already divorced by the time I was born but my dad was always there to provide support and I wound up living with him more than my mother. You have to take care of your responsibilities male and female.

So anyway, How about that Barack Obama He's got big ears.......

Mandroid2.0 wrote:

eva03 wrote:

Johnny 13 wrote:.

I would rather not be in, or have to pay for the results of a car crash, but life does not give us any take backs.

Ummm..... isn't that the whole point of having an abortion?

That is assuming that the woman wants an abortion.

What I think that Johnny13 is pointing out is that if the woman decides to keep the child, the father should be half-responsible for paying for it and raising it, since he was one of the parties that had willingly fucked in the first place and thus risked a pregnancy that may or may not be carried to term dependent upon the mother's decision, and that he should honour whatever that decision is.

btw, doesn't making the argument that a husband can disagree about his wife's decision to have an abortion also mean that he could force her to abort the fetus if she wanted to carry it?

I understood his point and agree I just think that abortion is one of those situations where you do get to have a take back unlike a car accident where unless you're drunk or reckless you probably didn't have any control over the situation, it's not like you can unwreck a car.

I think there is a difference between disagreeing and forcing something. I don't think a man has a right to force a woman to have a child because again I'm pro-choice. I think his example was just a way to point out an inconsistency or better yet a difficult problem(as if it wasn't problematic enough) about abortion. I really think he was just playing devil's advocate.

god fuck.

He's gonna get elected, just get off it

eva03 wrote:

numberthirty wrote:

Not exactly devastating, braintrust.

You are trying to make the case that a man should not be held legally responsible for support if the woman makes a descision on her own to carry a child to term.

This is stupid on a number of levels.

It is very simple for a man to make sure he doesn't wind up in the situation to start with. Check out the condom section at your local grocery/drug store.

Second, the call on what to do with a fetus is a woman's. Once a child is living, the economic resposibility is shared.

Makes perfect sense to me.

I know you're thinking "Bu...Wait" Shut it. Listen.

A father will have to pay support for maybe 'til a kid finishes college.

As Mandroid very clearly pointed out, a woman has to pay in ways that are not only economic and will affect her for the rest of her life.

That said, men need to really shut up about child support.

If a man does not think to use a condom when he knows he does not want children, he has given up any say over if the child should be carried to term.

You know they make birth control for women too right. Shouldn't both parties be responsible for the consequences of having sex. I would be the first to tell some idiot guy bitching about getting a girl pregnant that he should have worn a condom, but I'd do the same thing to a woman there are way more birth control options for women than men as far as I know. Also If you're letting someone put his penis inside you shouldn't you be vaguely aware of what is or is not attached to it and vice versa?

I do agree men definitely need to shut up about child care, my parents were already divorced by the time I was born but my dad was always there to provide support and I wound up living with him more than my mother. You have to take care of your responsibilities male and female.

So anyway, How about that Barack Obama He's got big ears.......

I do see what you're saying. However, what I was talking about was the woe-is-me boy, it's a straight bitch being a man scenario Rick has laid out.

He is saying a man who doesn't want to pay child support should be able to duck paying if a woman decides to carry a fetus to term. I'm saying guys(and clearly an idiot like Rick) need to see that putting the condom on the penis takes the call out of them silly womenfolks hands.

That's a raw deal for a man. Boo Fucking Hoo. Read the Mandroid's posts again. Think them over. Then reconsider just what a raw deal really is.

Rick Reuben wrote:

numberthirty wrote:He is saying a man who doesn't want to pay child support should be able to duck paying if a woman decides to carry a fetus to term.

That isn't what I said, lumpy. I said that if the mother says that the decision to carry or abort is 100% hers, then she just took full control over the kid, and by freezing the father out of the process, the child support is hers.

Way to not qoute the part where I pointed out how to avoid there being a fetus to start with, Braintrust. No kid, no woman stepping on poor man's right to a role in the decision process.

Pretty simple, really.

Rick Reuben wrote:

numberthirty wrote:the part where I pointed out how to avoid there being a fetus to start with

What is wrong with you? Birth control is meaningless in this discussion, and yet you keep bringing it up. If there is no conception, then there is no decision to make about abortion, meatball. This discussion is about what happens when there is conception- comprendez? This discussion is about a mother terminating a planned pregnancy without listening to input from the father.

Why would the mother terminate a planned pregnancy, apart from A) it being at risk of a being born with a disability B) her being completely insane, in which case do you really want her to have a child?

Rick Reuben wrote:

numberthirty wrote:the part where I pointed out how to avoid there being a fetus to start with

What is wrong with you? Birth control is meaningless in this discussion, and yet you keep bringing it up. If there is no conception, then there is no decision to make about abortion, meatball. This discussion is about what happens when there is conception- comprendez? This discussion is about a mother terminating a planned pregnancy without listening to input from the father.

Checked you devastating legal argument post again, Braintrust. Nothing about a planned pregnancy.

You really need to face that trying to change what you said because you're looking stupid is pretty lame.

I think you also may have issues with women.

Rick Reuben wrote:

Mandroid2.0 wrote:Why would the mother terminate a planned pregnancy, apart from A) it being at risk of a being born with a disability B) her being completely insane, in which case do you really want her to have a child?

That's a pretty limited range of possible reasons. She might just have second thoughts. At the time of fucking without birth control, it seemed like a great plan, but then reality about what a responsibility it is set in. In that case, I hope that a mother would sit down with the father and talk about her change of heart, rather than take the 'hands off my womb, I'll flush the baby if I want to' approach.

On second thought, I think you may hate women.

numberthirty wrote:

Rick Reuben wrote:

Mandroid2.0 wrote:Why would the mother terminate a planned pregnancy, apart from A) it being at risk of a being born with a disability B) her being completely insane, in which case do you really want her to have a child?

That's a pretty limited range of possible reasons. She might just have second thoughts. At the time of fucking without birth control, it seemed like a great plan, but then reality about what a responsibility it is set in. In that case, I hope that a mother would sit down with the father and talk about her change of heart, rather than take the 'hands off my womb, I'll flush the baby if I want to' approach.

On second thought, I think you may hate women.

Rick, I think that any reasonable, sane, mature woman has had plenty of time to think about whether or not she is ready to have a child before actually attempting to become pregnant in a manner that is considered "planned."

Do you honestly think that most women would enter into a planned pregnancy without considerable thought? As an adult?!? It's a pretty fucking huge thing to agree to.

"Yeah, sure. Inseminate me. I don't mind that my hips will expand, my tits will slouch, my belly will sag, my vagina will become cavernous and that I'll be responsible for this thing for at least the next 18-years. Sign me up! I hate being able to have a social life and spend money on having fun without worrying about a kid. Being a mom is going to be so bitchin'!"

Unless their first name is Paris and the last name is a hotel chain, I doubt that most women who plan pregnancies think that way, especially with the pregnancy scares that they almost certainly went through at some point prior to the planned event, wherein they freaked out and thought about being a mother.

numberthirty wrote:

Rick Reuben wrote:

Mandroid2.0 wrote:Why would the mother terminate a planned pregnancy, apart from A) it being at risk of a being born with a disability B) her being completely insane, in which case do you really want her to have a child?

That's a pretty limited range of possible reasons. She might just have second thoughts. At the time of fucking without birth control, it seemed like a great plan, but then reality about what a responsibility it is set in. In that case, I hope that a mother would sit down with the father and talk about her change of heart, rather than take the 'hands off my womb, I'll flush the baby if I want to' approach.

On second thought, I think you may hate women.