Originally posted by: przero
Are you saying it is HER child?
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I answered, there is no child as you imagine it and no ownership of what isn't what you imagine.
As we say in California, "Never send a Texan to sample the Chardonet. He'll wind up screwing the cow"
Originally posted by: Corn
Women are also legally required to not neglect their children.
Of course they are, but didn't they choose to have them, and therefore be responsible for them, even if in spite of the sperm donor's wish not to have children?
You say you don't want women to be punished for being sexual, but then why punish men for the same thing? Both are just a (ir)responsible as the other for getting pregnant in the first place. I understand (but don't agree with) your position that the physical risks of pregnancy is reason for giving a woman the choice to decide whether or not to carry the unborn child to term, but that is not a valid excuse for enslaving the sperm donor for 18 years (but I would go along with having the sperm donor contribute equally to the costs of pregnancy).
Originally posted by: Corn
I think you misunderstand my point GB. I'm all for having a "parent" who walks away from a family (such as in divorce, etc) take fiscal responsibility for any children he's leaving behind. My argument is that if you are going to give women the "choice" whether or not they want to be enslaved to the care of a child for 18 years, why not give that choice to the man before the baby comes along?
Originally posted by: GeekbabeAbortion dopesn't just benefit "selfish women" men have benefitted from the right to choice as well
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
It's tough titty Bober. If a woman has no choice then a man has no choice too. And if a woman does have choice the man can't have a choice either. Someone having choice is the more just state because half of us are freed. To have a choice is a woman?s right. A child is the responsibility of the parents. If you don't like the rules, don't play the game.
Originally posted by: HJD1
It gotta be that the woman has the choice because it is her body... it is not the fetus' nor the mans. Her egg, her sustinance, her life.... until viability. At that point no one owns it it is itself... until birth... then the man and women are parents... a legal term...
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: HJD1
It gotta be that the woman has the choice because it is her body... it is not the fetus' nor the mans. Her egg, her sustinance, her life.... until viability. At that point no one owns it it is itself... until birth... then the man and women are parents... a legal term...
Jeez HJD1, must you suck Moonbeam off every time he posts something? You sound like a yes man.
And while biologically men have no choice simply because that's nature works, it's that "legal term" which can be changed. If a woman can choose to avoid the LEGAL title of parent by simply aborting the fetus early, a man should be able to choose to avoid the LEGAL title of parent by signing a waiver.