I think the idea of child support is outdated. Women now have the option to abort their children, and as such, whether or not a child comes into existence is their sole decision. Why, then, should a man have to pay for the result of a woman's choice? It seems that women want freedom yet not the responsibility that comes with it.
Is child support outdated in the abortion age?
- Thread starter ultra laser
- Start date
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
popcorn? check
lawnchair? check
profit? ????
/me shouts from lawnchair - I agree with your premise of "choice" in the current legal environment we have.
blackangst1
Lifer
- Feb 23, 2005
- 22,902
- 2,359
- 126
I agree 100%. Unfortunately we live in a country where (at least in WA state) you can be ordered by the court to pay child support for a kid you didnt even father. Its fucked up. There should be some legal way for a man to forgo any and all financial or emotional responsibility of a kid he didnt want to father. The women make the rules here unfortunately.
MovingTarget
Diamond Member
- Jun 22, 2003
- 9,002
- 115
- 106
I tend to say no, despite being pro-choice. Abortion is not a solely financial decision. When a child is born, it isn't his fault that his/her mother decided not to abort and his/her father refuses to support them. The current law is (in theory) supposed to look after the interests of the child, regardless of the parents themselves. This is the way it should be (in general...I'm sure there are specifics that we as a society need to work on).
/popcorn
/asbestos longjohns
/lawnchair
/popcorn
/asbestos longjohns
/lawnchair
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
Excuse me, no it will never be outdated to answer the post question. Its one thing to permit abortion, I am not going to go into that debate, but when you have the fact of a living breathing child coming into the world, courts should and do protect the child's rights and hold both parents responsible. And truth be told, most divorces occur long after the first child is born.
I can agree somewhat with blackaignst1, those errors occur, courts are reluctant to long after declare the child a bastard, and unless the man is proactive, its often you snooze you lose. Its not fair but that is how court reasoning works.
I can agree somewhat with blackaignst1, those errors occur, courts are reluctant to long after declare the child a bastard, and unless the man is proactive, its often you snooze you lose. Its not fair but that is how court reasoning works.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
The man had the choice also.
When the child is born, it is due to both the male and female.
They need to take the responsibilty of the child.
When the child is born, it is due to both the male and female.
They need to take the responsibilty of the child.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
This is really a pre-birth issue. The woman has "choice" and the male does not. The remedy posed for this is for the male to sign documentation that it's his "choice" to not participate.
umbrella39
Lifer
- Jun 11, 2004
- 13,816
- 1,126
- 126
You have the option of keeping your dick in your pants, too, or at the very least, always wearing a rubber. It seems that some men want freedom to have sex with impunity yet not the responsibility that comes with it.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
And women have those same options(keep legs closed/pants on and contraceptives) yet they have "choice" on top of it which means they have full control no matter what the wishes of the sperm provider. EVERYTHING is equal up to the point of conception as far as responsibility goes so please try again.
MovingTarget
Diamond Member
- Jun 22, 2003
- 9,002
- 115
- 106
Equality? Bah! You cannot pretend in any sense of the word that the same standards should apply to men and women after conception. That is just denying reality. Men and women are different. :shock; Yes, women do have those same choices prior, but afterwards the situation is dramatically different, hence the differing legal position of having extra "choice". This is how it will be regardless of what the law says.
That's kind of a silly premise. While both a man and a woman are involved in pregnancy, suggesting that their roles are identical and thus the man should get an equal amount of "choice" (which is exactly what you're doing) doesn't make a lot of sense. Abortion is a choice for women because THEY are ones who get pregnant. As for financial support after birth, at that point even pro-choice people aren't arguing that it's still a choice issue...the man shouldn't be allowed to not take responsibility after birth any more than the woman is.
Conflating abortion and financial support is comparing apples and oranges.
Right. Man has to be held accountable too. Also, some women are against abortion for religious reasons. Birth control is not 100% effective. Child support is not outdated - alimony is.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Again, this isn't about AFTER the birth - this is BEFORE the birth. You know... "pre-birth" like I stated and you didn't seem to read.
There are ZERO "choices" for a male after conception and there are atleast 2 for women - 1 pre-birth and one immediately post birth(adoption) both of which only the woman has a "choice". If there is supposed to be responsibility and equality - an option should be provided the male during the first trimester just like it is afforded the woman. I would still agree that the adoption "choice" should still remain for the woman immediately after birth since she did her time(being pregnant and actually doing the birthing). But again - it's ironic to see all these "choice" people trying to deny "choice"... it makes one wonder if their support of abortion as a "choice" really is about "choice"...
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
I have and this has been posed before so if one accepts the premise of "choice" it's quite clear that it's one sided right now.
So again - WHY do you think it's "ridiculous"?
umbrella39
Lifer
- Jun 11, 2004
- 13,816
- 1,126
- 126
If men were the ones carrying babies to term I am almost 100% certain the courts would give us the same ultimate decision making powers. Count me into the group of guys who aren't willing to endure monthly menstruation in order to gain this advantage
I have a hard time understanding why a guy who gets a girl pregnant (who wants to have the baby) like the OP is stating, should think he should be able to be recused from financial responsibility by "choice" just because the ultimate choice lies with her.
The remedy you mention is plausible, but would pretty much ensure that any woman with a brain would choose not to participate in the conception with the guy. However, I tend to think not all women have the aforementioned hardware to make such no-brainers
and this would still be an issue.
dahunan
Lifer
- Jan 10, 2002
- 18,191
- 3
- 0
WOW!! Use a condom or face the consequences.. how fucking hard is that
-----------------------------------------
Not directed solely at you.. but this world has become incredibly heartless and disgusting
What next... bomb a school.. murder a few children to target a militant and call it a good day?
I think that is an extreme and not helpful to the debate. I think they are rather going towards not having to have to pay child support if the woman chooses to have the child where the father would have chosen to abort the baby
I would imagine that it would be more along the lines of the condom broke or something like that. If you're too stupid to use protection then you deserve anything you get
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter