Who's right to choose, a womans right to choose.

[selfactivated]

They could get off the playstation and go to work.

*sigh* Uh huh

 

[Ariadne]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kreskin
They could get off the playstation and go to work.

*sigh* Uh huh

Actually, let them stay on the playstation. Maybe their thumbs will become flattened like flippers and they can devolve into a lower species. They can think that they are rock starts when they plug a plastic thing in the shape of a guitar into a machine, frantically pushing buttons in response to images on a screen ... that's the idea ... take these creeps off the street and plug them into machines so they can relieve themselves of their emo twitches through technology and leave real women alone.

Let's buy all the single dads playstations and furthermore, next time a guy wants to drop his pants for a smile and a glance, lets just buy him a playstation too. Oh, and for all those stingy dads ... don't worry, women can be very financially successful even after they have children, so don't worry about your child support going towards keeping other pathetic "but I don't want to pay for my child" dads off the street - not even your children can survive on your contribution.

I really don't have a lot of patience for the dads that are so badly treated by the women they knocked up ... really. Maybe they should just get out and "just have fun" sex with another stranger. At least they'll have something to whine about for the next 20 years too - and maybe a playstation. Cheers.

 

[Ariadne]

That term "knocked up" is rather telling, actually. It's the phrase used to describe women that accidentally get pregnant with a guy they thought they were close to. When they told the guy about the pregnancy, there was a problem. The girl that had the problem was called "knocked up." What was the guy called again? He wasn't called loose or that S word. He was in fact, more often than not, the poor guy that had to think about his future a little sooner than expected. That's how it works. When the girl tells the boy that she is pregnant, she's knocked up and the boy has to respond. Based on that response, the girl has a number of decisions to make. The boy has his first choices: marriage, abortion, abandonment and the girl gets to deal with the big picture situation based on his response.

So what is the problem. Some guy had sex with a girl that had the child and he is resentful about the child support because he didn't want the child in the first place and shouldn't be out of pocket because some "fun leg spread" turned psycho and had the kid?

Do I understand this situation correctly? I have so many questions! Did he like the girl? How long had they been dating? What was his response to the pregnancy? Why did she decide to have the child - what was their relationship? When he understood that she would complete the pregnancy, what was their relationship? When was his first contact with the child? Does he want contact with the child? How old is the child? Why doesn't this man celebrate life? Why doesn't this man want his child to have every opportunity in life? After she gave him with the drug story, did he go for custody or just get jerked around? Since no reasonable parent is refused visitation, is he at least getting to know his child? Most men feel more comfortable getting to know the 5 or 8 year old than the baby. Is he okay with it yet? If he is able to have a normal relationship with his child, is he yet contributing to that lifestyle? When he's on his deathbed, wouldn't he be happy to know that at least one person might stop by and change the TV channel? When that child is 20, will dad still be so angry with mom for giving him that child.

 

[CDNBear]

I'm holding my hand up like a good student? Why is it always the females fault that she gets pregnant? Bear a man only has to follow the belief no glove no love, I've never met a female that objected to a condom but can the same be said of a man? NO.

Adoption seems to be the forgotten choice in this issue, and sadly many of us who can't have children would love to adopt but the process is slow and bogged down with red tape and by the time a light is seen at the end of the tunnel we are "Deemed" to old to adopt. Children are a gift, regardless of how it happened and it angers me to talk about them like they are grain or soy products.

Couldn't agree more. That would solve a lot of this issue, but it is not always fool proof.

The child has the right to expect financial support from both parents and if the parents have university education, the child has a right to financial support from both parents for that as well. It's definitely unfortunate that the man participated in the birth of a child if he is that reluctant to celebrate his child's life, but that's something he had to debate before he chose to have sex with a woman. C'est la vie.

Are you kidding? Debate the out come before having sex. That is one of the most unrealistic thing I have ever read.

Talk about crude: "If you have the right to spread'em and have some fun". Men often have the mistaken opinion that funds they provide for the upbringing of their child are actually a second income for women. Maybe more men should try providing a home for children so they could see how the cost of providing for one more than doubles when providing for one plus a child. Don't think for a moment that woman are not contributing financially to the costs of raising a child. The contribution from the dad may allow the child to buy new clothes rather than second hand, participate in team sports rather than kick the soccer ball around the field with a friend, enjoy snow boarding rather than tobogganing. Don't short change children simply because you don't understand the costs of raising children. Everything, from indoor shoes to music lessons and outdoor school, costs something and the dad has a percentage financial responsibility. Single mothers are not getting rich on child support ... don't kid yourself.

Umm, excuse me? I had the things you just negated as I grew up, and well look how I turned out. I'm a father of two boys, I own my own business and I spend as much time with them as possible. Mostly when they aren't out kicking a soccer ball around with their friends or each other in a field.

And dispite some of the lavish gifts I have bestowed on them, ie dirt bikes, snowmobiles, they both wear hand me downs, and love tobogganning. It makes them better people to belive clothes and activities are just clothes and activities, not label looking fashionistas or dependent on mom and dad to drive them to every fun activity. Although, I do take them to Lacrosse games and Cadets.

They could get off the playstation and go to work.

I could not agree with you more.

If they were both "just havin' fun", why is there a baby to discuss. Methinks maybe someone was more serious about the sex than the other. Maybe men should stop thinking that women have sex "just havin' fun". Men like sex for fun, but women often think they're in love. You wouldn't believe how many women I know that had a one night stand and then pine away for a few weeks wondering why the guy isn't calling. Someone was "just havin' fun" while someone else was thinking a relationship was in the making.

I think we're starting to see the view from where your platform was created. The anti man sence I get from your posts, is becomimg more clear now.

Let me get this right,,,Man likes sex and goes out to get it, women like love and are willing to use their body to get it? Because they realy don't like sex? Woman is hurt when the guy she met Friday night in the bar does not call her back, because she gave it up Friday night? That some how makes the man bad, because she's a sl*t, and he's a sl*t?

I'm begining to get the sense, you were screwed over by a man, so now we're all a$$holes in your eyes. Unless we're willing to bow to your will.

A woman's three choices are:
1. she can raise the child alone
2. she can have an abortion
3. she can get married

A man has choices
1. he can marry the mom
2. he can walk away and deny it's his child
3. he can encourage the woman to have an abortion
4. he can let the woman have the child and choose whether he participates in it's upbringing

Seems to me that men have plenty of choices.

Your losing me here. You would have two people marry each other after one chance encounter?
He can't walk away, he'l have his credit and his lisnce shot down.
HAHAHA, ya that what you just finished telling us he has no right to do. Funny how you work.
He has no choice, the courts will take the money off his cheque.

I was in court one day and mom needed child support. Dad had quit his job to go back to school. The judge did not reduce the child support but instead pointed out that dad had responsibilities so although he could quit his job, that didn't reduce his responsibilities.

Like I said, screwed over. The poor guy can not even better himself. That is the finest example of how these are biased laws. If the woman wanted to go back to school. The support would go up, due to greater day care costs.

See now...that statement bothers me. I know it happens but it's an extreme example and there are equally extreme examples of men who have such naive expectations around pregnancy - such as thinking he has no responsibility to ensure a pregnancy doesn't happen by wearing a condom with a woman he hardly knows, even if she's assured him she's on the pill.

But it happens Zan. That is the fact. Those poor guys, got tricked and lied to, now they are at the mercy of a womans rights.

The same could be said about him..he doesn't want to give his kid a better life because he wants to spend his money at the bar playing pool and texas holdem. And because he wants to go on being irresponsible she should abort or adopt out if she doesn't like it.

Adoption is an amazing thing. More people should, but it would have to be the most difficult decision in ones life. Giving up your own flesh and blood would take far more guts than any mission in Afghanistan, yet the goodtime Charlies don't see it that way. The same with an abortion. Just because abortion is legal doesn't mean it is wanted. Why in hell would we want to have women having abortions simply because bozos won't support their children?

Can you tell I get worked up over this? :read2:

That is an unfair and telling statement of how you see men. Not all men that do not want children, do not want them so they can continue being children themselves. Although many of them are just kids. Some haven't begun their lives, finished school, got a good job yet.

Abortion is but an option. I think using it as birth control is dispiccable. But lets not forget, that is a womans option, not a mans.

loll Kreskin... ya, I can tell. And I totally respect where you're coming from. Adoption is a wonderful option, but like you said, one that takes alot of courage. And I also agree that abortion is a worst case solution... and not one that's usually entered into lightly. I believe there are long term emotional consequences to women who choose this option also... the whole issue of unplanned pregnancy is just so fraught with unfairness.

So why propogate teh unfairness by entrapping men with Draconian laws that do nothing more then subjugate woman and remove their responsiblity for their bodies and actions?

Exactly. I'm sure the average young guy sees it more important to buy his next Sony PlayStation than coming to terms with the above.

Great another one that thinks all young men are just vidiots. I think if some of you thought about young professionals that are in this situation, you might at least stop man bashing for a bit.

Very true about the costs. There are always incidental costs that come up ... birthday gifts, ski trips, all sorts of extra-curricular activities, bikes get stolen, shoes get stolen ... and more. It all has to be looked after and although there are guidelines stipulating how much each parent will contribute to those extra costs, it really is up to the day to day parent to track down the other parent for a contribution. Many times, it's just not worth it. The moms, however, often would rather forego the car repair or night out so the child can replace the stolen items.

I hardly see ski trips as an essential part of growing up, much like your post, that I replied to above. Sounds more like you and your kids need to keep up with the Jones's.

Daddys don't have to spend any time with their children if they don't feel like it. It's a privilege and a right of a child to know both parents, but it is not a responsibility of a parent to give the child that right. For example, if a mom wants to move away from the dad, the dad can prevent this because the child has a right to know the dad. If the dad wants to skip town, the child has no rights to prevent it.

And how many cases of mom leaving town with or without the courts consent have crushed the hearts of men? It stagering, I've seen it effects on friends. One ended up in an institution, becuase he felt he had nothing to live for. Your bias is shining clear as day now.

He doesn't have to hear a thing from Daddy. Daddy can mail in his cheque and have sufficient funds on deposit to cover half of the costs of clothing, daycare, food, activities, education etc..thus when Daddy is mentioned it can be said that he was man enough to care about his kid. If he wants to participate in visitation and activities, all the better.

Or perhaps the woman can throw a clenched fist in the air and say "GIRL POWER! I raised you on my own, I didn't need the help of a man to look after my responsiblities".

If the guy thinks sex is "just havin' fun" and the woman thinks that she's met a man that wants a relationship with her, then there's bound to be trouble. If she gets pregnant, then she has the right to have the child. If the child is born, the child has a right to financial support from the father. The mother cannot collect cheques from a man for having sex, she can collect cheques on behalf of the child to pay for accommodation, food, clothes, education, haircuts, toys and extra-curricular activities. The woman is not collecting the cheque, she is managing the funds for the child. It is a parent's responsibility to provide for the child so if one parent reneges, the other parent has no choice but to seek the assistance of the courts.

If she has the right to give birth, she should have the right to shoulder the burden. Not force someone she doesn't know to pay for her choices.

Ya, right. I can't count how mant times I have watched that cheque for the child go to vacations, the new beau's snowmobile payment, gas for the boat, her visa bill(because she can't stop shopping). Please, lets all come back to reality.

 

[Curiosity]

Thanks for the read folks....

This is an issue which bears discussion but seems to have very few resolutions which will satisfy everyone...

I have to say something (don't I always?)....

The child of the union no matter what circumstances s/he is born into....will bear pain and suffering for the rest of his/her life .... and imagine this ... the only positive upon which s/he can consider is that s/he was not aborted.

These children are damaged upon entering their world. Not that anyone intends to damage them - but our society is slow to change old traditions... mom/pop/kids....and society dictates to that child ever more that is how "normal" and "real families" live.

Our entertainment, literature, examples of successful family life.... much of it has two-parent guidelines... perhaps we could ease some of the pain by demonstrating successful childhood survival skils to those children "not of the norm". There are some brutal bullies out there these days in "kidland".

And finally (will she ever shut up).... women who opt for abortion rarely escape the stigma - it becomes a lifelong circular replaying movie in their minds....they might as well have the big red X on their forehead ....and the injury done to those women by judgmental others in society, and by those women to themselves thereafter.... is tragic.

All for a horizontal romp? Lasting less than a commercial break? Let's face it - the "courting" leading up to the event is actually more tantalizing than the event itself. Score - 0 for both teams.

I don't have any answers but talking about the negatives might "stick" in our minds somewhere along the line....and cause us to be more wise in future....or not.

 

[Kreskin]

Great another one that thinks all young men are just vidiots. I think if some of you thought about young professionals that are in this situation, you might at least stop man bashing for a bit.

If he's a young professional and refuses to help his kid he has a lot of growing up to do.

BTW Nice work on wrapping all those posts/quotes together for rebuttal.

 

[CDNBear]

If he's a young professional and refuses to help his kid he has a lot of growing up to do.

BTW Nice work on wrapping all those posts/quotes together for rebuttal.

Why does he have to grow up?

If the woman feels she is not "grown up enough" she can and many do, chose to abort or give it up.

But the man does not have that option. How is that fair?

That is my point.

If you were being serious about my wrap up, thanx. I didn't want to post a dozen replies.

Not directed at anyone in particular...

Also, in case anyone has missed it. I do not necessarily support the arguement in its entirety, that I am putting forth here. I am only questioning it, and playing devils advocate. So please keep that in mind when the word "you" gets typed in. My oldest boy was a "surprise". A surprise I was more then willing to commit to. I do not believe abortion should be a form of birth control, I believe many men think it should be, as well as women, that is wrong. I do and have supported many women in the quest for support and have directed many female friends to two of the best divorce lawyers I know, Dunsmuir & Dunsmuir. Yes that is a cheap shout out for two brothers that know how to get a woman what she is due. the cases I have sent them, are families that fell apart, largely due to the man, which in some cases, was my friend, not the wife. But their actions as men, made me angryand ashamed, friendships be damned. If you choose to father a child, you will live up to your obligations. I just wanted to clarify that I am not some troglidite, that thinks throwing his sperm to the wind is a right or honour, quite the contrary. There is a world of difference between being a father and a dad. I know that well and meter it out daily.

 

[Outta here]

But it happens Zan. That is the fact. Those poor guys, got tricked and lied to, now they are at the mercy of a womans rights.

Awwwww pooor muffins! Clearly I was missing the point. It's all about the guys rights... I get it now.

 

[Outta here]

But their actions as men, made me angryand ashamed, friendships be damned. If you choose to father a child, you will live up to your obligations. I just wanted to clarify that I am not some troglidite, that thinks throwing his sperm to the wind is a right or honour, quite the contrary. There is a world of difference between being a father and a dad. I know that well and meter it out daily.

ok well that is good to know, I posted my above post without seeing this side of your opinion on the matter. I don't necessarily agree that choosing to be a parent is the only time a man is personally accountable for where he puts his sperm, but I do appreciate that you see a difference, and I can respect your opinion from that stand point.

 

[Kreskin]

If the woman feels she is not "grown up enough" she can and many do, chose to abort or give it up.

But the man does not have that option. How is that fair?

There you go again Bear. Having an abortion is not a desirable option in the slightest. Why is it you equate that decision to a walk in the park? I see that you're stuck on jealousy here. You've compared one stack of marbles to another and therefore think it's ok for a kid to grow up without support because Daddy's stack of marbles appear undersized. Snap out of it. This about the child, not Daddy's tiff.

 

[CDNBear]

ok well that is good to know, I posted my above post without seeing this side of your opinion on the matter. I don't necessarily agree that choosing to be a parent is the only time a man is personally accountable for where he puts his sperm, but I do appreciate that you see a difference, and I can respect your opinion from that stand point.

The whole jist of my arguement is that woman have the option to "opt" out without prejudice.

As it stands the only way a man can "opt" out now, is by taking illegal actions, such as working under the table, dissappearing all together. In other words, run.

The woman, knowing herself and in such, know she can care for the child is withinher rights to keep and raise it. But if the child was the result of a casual encounter, how can she expect the man to bear responsiblity for her choices, with out infringing on his rights?

Further more, in light of recent actions regarding being to drunk to form criminal intent, I'm wondering if that, may be applied to these types of cases.

 

[Kreskin]

The whole jist of my arguement is that woman have the option to "opt" out without prejudice.

As it stands the only way a man can "opt" out now, is by taking illegal actions, such as working under the table, dissappearing all together. In other words, run.

The woman, knowing herself and in such, know she can care for the child is withinher rights to keep and raise it. But if the child was the result of a casual encounter, how can she expect the man to bear responsiblity for her choices, with out infringing on his rights?

Further more, in light of recent actions regarding being to drunk to form criminal intent, I'm wondering if that, may be applied to these types of cases.

Once the child is born the rest of the previous options mean jack squat. Once born you either cut n run or act like an adult. Those are your choices.

 

[CDNBear]

There you go again Bear. Having an abortion is not a desirable option in the slightest. Why is it you equate that decision to a walk in the park? I see that you're stuck on jealousy here. You've compared one stack of marbles to another and therefore think it's ok for a kid to grow up without support because Daddy's stack of marbles appear undersized. Snap out of it. This about the child, not Daddy's tiff.

I beleive you're wrong, it is not jealousy, it is inequality. It is typical government knee jerk reacting. Someones rights have been trampled for too long, now we will right the wrong, but as usual we go to far in our attempt to correct and end up trampling the rights of others.

I do not think an abortion is a walk in the park, and never equated it as such. I have stated many times i think it is over used, and in my case, despite the fact that my wife could not carry to full term, with a tubular pregnancy, it was crushing to terminate that pregnancy, to both of us.

My point again is. She can chose to have sex, she can chose to use protection or not, she can chose to give up the child or abort. He can only chose what she will allow. I understand that it is her body, her choice, but does she not bear some modicome of responsiblity for her actions?

The man, if willing to take on the burden of fatherhood, can not force her to go full term.

The father can not coerce her to abort.

The father has no rights to that child before birth, nor after if he does not PAY.

This is not about jealousy, this is about legal imbalance and the rights of one out weighing the others.

Abortion plays but a small role in this equation. I'm not stuck on it, I'm not sure why you are.

 

[Outta here]

ah Bear, I can see where you're coming from, but unfortunately, I'm not sure you're getting my point. Which is simply this: None of it's fair. If a man and women enter into a casual thang and she gets pregnant, it's not fair to her either. Obviously, neither party was thinking about the potential consequences if they find themselves in this situation. THIS is why we try try try to instill a sense of responsibiltiy into our youth and teach them about the possible consequences of irresponsible sex. Because there ARE natural consequences and everybody involved pays a price... NOT JUST THE MAN! I'm not sure why you're so fixated on pointing out only the consequences he pays. If you find it difficult to see the whole picture, it still doesn't negate the fact that there IS a bigger picture. And at the end of the day, the resulting child's rights to a decent upbringing AND knowing both his parents should never be outweighted by a father's 'rights' to deny all culpability or accountability in the situation. If it's unfair that all he wanted was a good romp and got dinged for it, then it's also unfair to the woman if she gets dinged... and of course, the highest price is paid by the child... it's unfair all the way around... you seem to want to make this all about how unfair it is to just the guy... I cannot for the life of me follow this kind of logic.

 

[CDNBear]

Once the child is born the rest of the previous options mean jack squat. Once born you either cut n run or act like an adult. Those are your choices.

I'm not sure how to get my point across here.

I'm not sure why you have grasp but only two point, abortion or running.

Neither option is the basis of my arguement. It is the legal requirement of the man to pay for an action that he did not partake alone, nor did he commit with the express purposes of procreation.

If he feels he is not at that point, but she does. He's screwed.

If she feels she is not at that point, but he does. He's screwed.

This is fair to you? yes or no?

 

[Outta here]

He can only chose what she will allow. I understand that it is her body, her choice, but does she not bear some modicome of responsiblity for her actions?

I disagree. He can choose to be responsible by wearing a condom. Refusing or forgetting to do so subjects him to consequences for that choice. Period.

Now, if he DID wear a condom and make every reasonable attempt to ensure a pregnancy didn't occur, he might have a leg to stand on.

 

[CDNBear]

ah Bear, I can see where you're coming from, but unfortunately, I'm not sure you're getting my point. Which is simply this: None of it's fair. If a man and women enter into a casual thang and she gets pregnant, it's not fair to her either. Obviously, neither party was thinking about the potential consequences if they find themselves in this situation. THIS is why we try try try to instill a sense of responsibiltiy into our youth and teach them about the possible consequences of irresponsible sex. Because there ARE natural consequences and everybody involved pays a price... NOT JUST THE MAN! I'm not sure why you're so fixated on pointing out only the consequences he pays. If you find it difficult to see the whole picture, it still doesn't negate the fact that there IS a bigger picture. And at the end of the day, the resulting child's rights to a decent upbringing AND knowing both his parents should never be outweighted by a father's 'rights' to deny all culpability or accountability in the situation. If it's unfair that all he wanted was a good romp and got dinged for it, then it's also unfair to the woman if she gets dinged... and of course, the highest price is paid by the child... it's unfair all the way around... you seem to want to make this all about how unfair it is to just the guy... I cannot for the life of me follow this kind of logic.

Yes at the end of the line is a child. But do I realy need to go out and research all the important or famous peole that have contributed to society, despite being abandoned by a parent?

I was abandoned by both. I seemed to do just fine, in fact, I have an excellent relationship with my Dad, my Mom, not so much, I didn't liev up to her standards. I don't wear a suit to work, now had she not dumped me on my Paternal Grand Parents door step, and played a more pivotal roll in my up bringing, I might cut her some slack, but that's not likely to happen any time soon. Hell she hates being a Grandmother. She's to young.

I understand that not all life is fair, I understand that the choices left to the woman are not easy, but at least she has choices.

 

[Kreskin]

I'm not sure how to get my point across here.

I'm not sure why you have grasp but only two point, abortion or running.

Neither option is the basis of my arguement. It is the legal requirement of the man to pay for an action that he did not partake alone, nor did he commit with the express purposes of procreation.

If he feels he is not at that point, but she does. He's screwed.

If she feels she is not at that point, but he does. He's screwed.

This is fair to you? yes or no?

He pretty much partook during the act of procreation. The fact she didn't cut out parts of her body or give away her baby is neither here nor there. None of it matters once a baby is born. All the whining and crying about rights and freedoms is over. The baby he helped create is here. The time for whining is over. If the kid needs his support he should try to help.

 

[CDNBear]

I disagree. He can choose to be responsible by wearing a condom. Refusing or forgetting to do so subjects him to consequences for that choice. Period.

Now, if he DID wear a condom and make every reasonable attempt to ensure a pregnancy didn't occur, he might have a leg to stand on.

Ok, lets start there, because that is where I am. Take that senerio, and run with it. All precautions were taken, but "OH CRAP", something went astray, now what. He's not ready, she is? She's not ready, he is?

What say you?

 

[CDNBear]

He pretty much partook during the act of procreation. The fact she didn't cut out parts of her body or give away her baby is neither here nor there. None of it matters once a baby is born. All the whining and crying about rights and freedoms is over. The baby he helped create is here. The time for whining is over. If the kid needs his support he should try to help.

But as Ad, pointed out, once that support starts, his life, if he is not well off is over. No going back to school, no vacations, nothing. HE CAN NOT EVEN GET THE CHANCE TO BETTER HIMSELF. How does that happen under the charter of rights and freedoms. How do the life of one over ride the rights of anyone else. Child or not, I'm not talking about neglect here, I'm talking about turning someone into a bank machine and holding him there indefinetly. With little hope of seeing sun for 20 plus years.

I under stand the costs, I under stand the needs of children and their rights. But the woman CHOSE to bring that child in to the world, how is that the fault of the man?