If a woman tricks you into having a kid and then wants to collect child support

[OutHouse]

I'm rather dumbfounded by the question. Which part do you not understand? Are you incapable of seeking out definitions for the constituent terms?

lol

yea DT4K don't be a simpleton by asking for a explanation of what the fuck this retard is talking about.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

you have your twisted view and i have my logical view about this.

Except that you've been repeatedly wrong with regard to the facts, in contrast to me.

you are not going to change my mind and im not going to change yours. You may see your views as "educated" but i call them perverse and uneducated. bottom line is you do not see a fetus of 1 hour away of being born as a person, in my opinion that is totally unethical and factually wrong.

You are entitled do your own opinions, but you are not entitled to you own facts. If you disagree with reality, it is your problem.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

lol

yea DT4K don't be a simpleton by asking for a explanation of what the fuck this retard is talking about.

Obviously, you are out of your depth.

 

[DT4K]

You are free to believe abortion is wrong. I'm not interested in changing your opinions about that. My only concern is that a woman's right to defend her freedom, despite how wrong you think it is, remains protected under the law.

Analogously, many people think that drinking alcohol is wrong. I'm not interested in changing their opinions about that, but I'm certainly concerned that the freedom to consume alcohol remains protected.

I'm not sure why you keep making assumptions about my beliefs. I'm also not sure why you bother quoting something I say, when your response has nothing to do with it.

You said that the only thing relevant was the law. But you still fail to see that this discussion goes beyond what is legal to the much more complex discussion of what should be legal.

It's like defending a law simply because it's a law, instead of defending it because of the content of the law and why it is right/wrong, makes sense, etc.

You're now back to the standard pro-choice talking points. "You can't impose your morals on anyone else". I'm not sure if this statement is an intentional attempt to avoid the real debate or it simply shows a lack of understanding of what the real issue is.
The real issue is not whether we can impose morals, it's whether an unborn child should have rights that are given to born people. Murder, robbery, rape, etc. are crimes because they impact another person and deprive that person of their rights. So the real point where people on either side disagree is whether an unborn child should have the right to not be negatively affected (as in killed) by another person's actions.

 

[DT4K]

It's a biological fact.

I wasn't clear about which portion I was asking about. I was asking why "Waivers to bodily rights must be explicit."

I would think that should be obvious.

Wow. Really? So every time I have sex with my wife, I need to get an "explicit waiver" to bodily rights? Does it have to be written or is verbal ok?

I'm rather dumbfounded by the question. Which part do you not understand? Are you incapable of seeking out definitions for the constituent terms?

Explicit waiver is a rather vague term. What's your definition?

 

[DT4K]

I am of the opinion that requested abortions in the third trimester should be reviewed and approved by a counsel of qualified medical professionals, due to the increased likelihood of fetal viability in the third trimester.

In principle, however, a woman's -- nay, any person's -- right to seek desistance of the invasion of one's body is inviolate.

This logic fails horribly. If the right is inviolate, why must the choice to abort be reviewed and approved? That makes no sense at all.

 

[OutHouse]

This logic fails horribly. If the right is inviolate, why must the choice to abort be reviewed and approved? That makes no sense at all.

i noticed this as well. so we went from a womans right to having a panel to make the decision. lol what a tool.

 

[DT4K]

If I attached myself to you without your consent such that my metabolism was wholly dependent upon foricibly taking from your body nutrients and oxygen, allthewhile regularly injecting hormones and waste back into your bloodstream, my "say" would be irrelevant, and you would be entirely justified to use any necessary force to separate yourself from such a circumstance.

I'm assuming that you are trying to use a "self-defense" argument here?
If so, you are completely incorrect as a pregnancy does not present any of the required elements for a self-defense justification.

If not, please explain what law would allow me to kill you in this situation.

 

[OutHouse]

Obviously, you are out of your depth.

congratulations you know how to make links. very impressive.

you never answered my question. how old are you and do you have kids. are you scared to answer?

 

[JulesMaximus]

if you can prove that she tricked you into having a kid, would the court deny her from collecting child support?

I don't think it's fair that she should get child support payments if she said she used birth control but didn't or poked holes in the condom.

Tricked you how? Did she tell you her vagina was a cock washing machine?

 

[OutHouse]

Tricked you how? Did she tell you her vagina was a cock washing machine?

lol, i need to remember that.

"honey my cock needs a wash"

 

[Merithynos]

Tricked you how? Did she tell you her vagina was a cock washing machine?

OP stated a few pages back:

she said she had some medical condition that made her get her ovaries removed. So I was an idiot and thought I would be safe hitting it raw. It was going good for 6 months until she said she was pregnant.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

I think we have a possible "ownage of the year" thread here

 

[JMapleton]

If I attached myself to you without your consent such that my metabolism was wholly dependent upon foricibly taking from your body nutrients and oxygen, allthewhile regularly injecting hormones and waste back into your bloodstream, my "say" would be irrelevant, and you would be entirely justified to use any necessary force to separate yourself from such a circumstance.

This foolish argument has been refuted numerous times, but you insist on reiterating it.

Fact: When you have sex willingly, you consent to a child being created within your womb (if you're a women).

Answer This: If you use your same logic, do you also think that a man should not have to pay child support if they accidentally cause a women to become pregnant?

By use of your logic, just as a woman can abort their baby, shouldn't a man also be able to opt out of child support? You insist the woman can opt out of responsibility for their actions, should the man be able to?