Something along those lines, yeah. There ought be a legit, legal way for the father to opt out, as there is for the mother. If there is a right to choose then men should have it too.
Perhaps make the bureaucratic hurdles that much higher each time to help deter serial impregnaters.
I don’t think he can just do that if she demands a paternity test, though. If he doesn’t want rights to the child to begin with, all he need do is refuse to sign the birth certificate, but provided the child is alive, I don’t think that does anything to eliminate his need to pay support.
The right to choose what? I’m really finding myself having to repeat that I am Pro-Choice in this thread a lot. I mainly disagreed with your use of the term, “Slave.” My point is not that abortion should be illegal, it is that if they make abortion illegal, then the only thing anyone is a slave to is not having sex if you REALLY are not prepared to get pregnant or get someone pregnant. I’ve been having sex for quite some time, but before I was married, I was prepared for the possibility that if I fucked up and got someone pregnant before I was ready to impregnate someone that I would have to get two jobs and take care of the situation financially.
If you’re interested in what I want for my daughter, I want my daughter not to have sex before she is married. I also want my son not to have sex before he is married. It will be made very clear to them that if they get pregnant or impregnate someone, (gender-dependent) that they will need to take responsiblity for their actions and will have to find their own place to live as soon as they turn eighteen…if they get pregnant/impregnate someone before that. If they are already eighteen, they will have sixty days to find a place to live for themselves. If they do not get pregnant/impregnate anyone, then they are responsible only to themselves and may live with me for as long as they like for a negligible amount of rent after they turn eighteen and are out of H.S., they will certainly have to be in college, have a job or be looking for a job, though. They will not have to pay anything at all if they are in college or between jobs.
I mean, you can’t have your kids living with you after they have kids, or it just completely creates a culture in the household that makes that acceptable and easy for them to do. Life’s not meant to be easy. If they fall on tough times like a job loss and it’s temporary, that’s fine, but there will be a contract specifying the maximum amount of time they (and their kid[s]) can live with me.
Illegalizing abortion is a far cry from illegalizing interracial marriage, there are any number of Civil Rights laws that prevent that from happening.
The rest of your post is too much of an extreme deviation of the actual subject, especially given that I have stated I am, actually, Pro-Choice for me to want to address. If you really have a huge problem with it, then move to a different State. That’s a boycott, of sorts. Federal funding on many things is population-based and they will also no longer get your tax dollars.
Well, it takes two to get pregnant. I think a guy should wear a condom and a woman who does not want to get pregnant should also use some form of birth control. Never trust the other person, in that regard.
Anyway, I think the suggestion is basically reasonable. She’ll have plenty of advance notice that she is on her own if she does not go through with the abortion as the guy has stated, legally, that he would prefer an abortion. We might get some dissenters on this one, UPF, but it seems pretty fundamentally fair to me.
Sorry, I still have the malware operating that underlines things or shows them in blue, but link to games.
That said, I still wonder why the thread has gone from its title to a discussion of unwanted pregnancies, the right to abort, and a father’s responsibilities.
If a man doesn’t want to impregnate a sexual partner, he should either abstain from sex or wear a condom. (Thanks, Anita, for trying to remind men of their equal responsibilities.) Why should a man expect a woman to have total responsibility in the matter? Guys, there’s an easy answer to unwanted pregnancies–Keep it zipped! Or donate money for research into, and development of, male contraceptives. Or both. Just who is totally responsible for sexual activity? Why expect women to do anything you’re not willing to do, as well.
In the State of WA., the divorced mother, if working, is required to provide for the children in the same proportion of her income as her divorced husband. Washington is an equal opportunity state! If a man is required to give 10% of his income to his child, the woman is required to give 10% of her income to the child, as well. I don’t know about paying college tuition plus living expenses to an unmarried mother, but I find that excessive and wonder why any state would do that, since States’ tax money is a large portion of human services. I suggest learning how Federal tax monies are allocated to the states before making any further comment. If any state provides welfare money for both living expenses and college tuition, just how much of it comes from Federal taxes and how much comes from State taxes. Either way, it’s up to the citizens of the State, through their representatives, to change the way the money is allocated.
What does being a woman have to do with leftist ‘liberalism’–nothing. Just as many women are right-wing conservatives.
Just another reminder, guys, keep it down and covered rather than bare and raised. Otherwise, you share the consequences.
I think the left overall makes more emotional appeals than the right, thus drawing women in (though both left and right are one and the same to me). The left has always been seen as the caring sharing side and the right the austere, stern father-type figure. I do wonder if more men are liberals these days too, what with feminism and such.
Pav, I use the word slave because the Government forces the woman to be what she is not, an incubator. And,and civil right laws can’t change??? Really??? Right and left are fighting to change those laws constantly.
I must not have realized that abortion is naturally occurring. Did the Government force both the male and female to have sex, too?
Oh, but the right makes emotional appeals to nostalgia, father figure worship, the idealized fatherland, fear of difference and a bunch of other archetypal images. As deontologists they have to appeal to emotion.
Pav, women can abort spontaneously. But that’s irrelevant,
Given the turn this thread has taken, I still ask how many men are willing to take on the restrictions to sexual freedom that they expect women to take on–including abstinence? That’s a pretty simple question, isn’t it?
Moreno, you’re correct when you say, “…but the right makes emotional appeals to nostalgia, father figure worship, the idealized fatherland, fear of difference and a bunch of other archetypal images.” That’s what, imm, makes the right extremely dangerous, because none of those emotional appeals have a whole heck of a lot of either validity or relevance in today’s world. At least the Left is trying to be realistic. Why shouldn’t insurance companies cover the cost of birth control? Insurance companies take our money and supposedly pool it to provide coverage to their insured. Are they also in the business of dictating rightist ‘morality?’ Are the insurance companies ‘father figures?’
You know what I meant.
I don’t expect anyone to do anything except be prepared to face the consequences of their actions, with sex or anything else. I also think that men, even those who do not want to be parents, should own up to the consequences. I’m Pro-Choice. I really don’t see anything extremely conservative about my position except my problems with the lengths to which the State goes to support some women.
In addition to that, I don’t think that men who are not abstinent really expect women to be abstinent. It would be quite difficult for men to not be abstinent if they were…
If we had control over our body fertility then you would be correct about accepting consequences, force them to be parents. Right?? I mean thats what we want is it not? Humans being parents to children they niether want nor love due to religious beliefs or government regulations. Oh boy that sounds just fun for the kids. Of course they can put all those unwanted kids up for adoption. Considering those mothers that did not want the child probably did not exactly injest healthy things for the kid while she was carrying it, we are looking at many, many kids that will really be screwed up… should we then force people that can adopt to adopt? Oops scratch that, we arrest the moms and keep them in a cage protecting the unborn. So there will be plenty of healthy kids to go around. I don’t know why but, my mind goes to the orphan trains. Pav I really do like you alot, you are a good guy. but on this, no man should decide or have a vote, you all just do not have the same position. I know you are pro choice but you really do lean towards prolife for all. We can’t be forced accept consequences when we have little to no control. Sure abstenance should be practiced I agree that is what we should teach first last and always. But really to ignore the body’s hormonal sex drive is just asking for unwanted kids. Girls do not get on birth control because they fear their parents will find out or they can’t afford it, boys don’t wear condoms because well, hell face it a boy thinks with the wrong brain and gets excited at the spur of the moment, all things intelligent rush out of their big brain. Young people are driven to be sexual critturs one way or another. Many cases they can’t even begin to be rational. Your kids maybe the exception but, counting on that could make things tougher on your kids. So how can we force consequences of parenting on to them? yet, that is what prolife right tolife people do. A totally conservative view based on religious ehtics by males predominantly. Women do tend to be Left on this view. Its the ones that side with the conservative view that are screwed up IMO
I don’t have a lot of time to respond this week, but there were a couple of things Kris mentioned that I’d like to briefly address.
Kris,
Society and the government don’t force women to be incubators, biology does. And although it’s not especially eloquent, that’s exactly what women are, incubators. Which is why, through the eons, women have always been more selective - we bear the greater burden of a sexual encounter and we have since the dawn of humanity. That is another one of those facts of life that we can’t change.
For just about all of us, neither society nor the government forces us to have unprotected sex.
You are usually one who argues vehemently for personal responsibility, it’s a little surprising that you’ve done a 180 where pregnancy is concerned.
I have to disagree. Men absolutely should have a voice here. They are not as invested the conception of a child, but they are invested. I don’t think a man is entitled to decide for a woman, but he should be part of the decision-making process and should have some input.
Are you really sure you want to take that position? We wouldn’t begin to accept that particular line of reasoning from a rapist.
Again, where’s the personal responsibility? (As I mentioned in an earlier post, I’m not, of course, speaking of those situations where a woman has zero access to birth control.) But for the vast majority of cases in the Western world, why can’t/shouldn’t we be held accountable for our actions where sex is concerned?
Pav, I will get to your excellent post re:MN specifics, I promise!
We do have control over our fertility, by not having sex at all. Furthermore, even if MS decides to illegalize abortion, then one of the consequences of pregnancy would be that you have to go to some neighboring State to get an abortion, that’s all. I’m not advocating Pro-Life, adoption, or forcing anyone to be a parent or to adopt. I think that life starts sometimes after conception, but before birth, I haven’t decided quite where. In any case, I’m Pro-Choice.
I like you too, but I disagree with you saying that I lean Pro-Life. I couldn’t be less Pro-Life. If you look at my positions on the issues, you’ll see that I am an Economist before I am anything else and it is obvious that someone relegating themselves (potentially, and often) to a lifetime of welfare does not benefit the economy in any way whatsoever. I would seek to have policies that most minimize the effects of unwanted pregnancy on the Economy, and abortion is one of those policies. I think when these girls go to the Health Department, or Doctor, or whatever, they should be presented with a list of nearby abortion clinics and gynecologists alike and make their own choice based off of that.
I disagree on condoms and that’s where personal responsiblity comes in. I wrapped my little friend up, so, if I got someone (prior to my wife) pregnant it would have been an accident but still my responsibility.
I don’t think they are, “Screwed up,” and I do think that the whole thing should be put to a vote of the populace of a State, or what have you. Social Conservatives, even if male, have the right to have opinions on the issues, though. As much as I would like to say, “Pffftttt,” to Religious Ideologies (particularly those that contrast with policies that would generate a strong Economy) you’re talking about generations of beliefs that have been passed down that culminate in the opinions that these people share. It matters to them, and in this country, people have the right to express their views on things that matter to them.
Again, so many ideas and so little time to respond completely.
I’ll start with the fact that I’m the mother of a child through the adoption process. She is our daughter in every way, except we didn’t ‘create’ her. Her birth mother took excellent care of herself and our daughter during the pregnancy. Her birth father tried to devise ways of taking care–taking on the responsibility–of both mother and baby. I know this because we’ve met and spent time with both of them. But the fact was, no matter how painful to admit–and it was painful–neither of them really wanted the baby at the time she was conceived. They didn’t love each other; but they both cared enough about the consequence of their ‘impassioned’ act to select what they thought was the best alternative. They gave us our daughter. To me, that shows the responsibility they were both willing to accept.
I also know of, or have family members, who are, or were, single mothers. Two have since married the fathers of their children. One couple is happily married and looking for a second child. With the other, Mom is happy with her children, but had her tubes tied. Her marriage revolves around her children.
Two of the girls are single moms. Neither have any expectations from the fathers and neither get any compensation from the fathers. As far as I know neither gets government support, although one relies on grandma and grandpa’s girlfriend for her ‘time away.’
I realize I’m not describing large numbers of welfare mothers, many of whom have been publicized as flouting the ‘system’ by continuing to have babies in order to maintain social services. But I wonder, really, exactly what that percentage is? It’s one thing if it’s 35% and quite another if it’s 3.5% How many welfare mothers actually use the system beneficially and eventually get off welfare? I have a suspicion it really isn’t that many who flout the system. I may be wrong–I’m only speaking from experience.
But we’re still down to the question of birth control responsibility. That can be broken down into several things. The first is tentative’s statement:
A second is from Kris, when she wrote:
The third is from upf:
I think these responses kind of run the gamut.
Which is the most true for men–boys–males? A lot of women believe all of them are true.
Female birth control, on the other hand, implies an anticipation of sexual activity–that’s kind of hard for an early teen (or a pre-teen) to admit, isn’t it, Kris?
I may be non-realistic, but I think it’s also hard for young women, in many cases, to go out into life, armed with her birth control pills, in anticipation of casual, or meaningful (?) sexual contact. Women are taught to expect casual sex–through media and electronics–because men expect casual sex.
So I ask, once again, are men as willing to be as precautionary with sexual activity as they expect women to be?
How many men, who don’t have the hormonal cycles leading to conception as does a woman, would be willing to take a daily spermicide ‘pill’ (if such a thing were available) in order to prevent pregnancy in their partners?
I think there is a male pill, but a condom should be enough consideration and should be demanded as a precaution from STD’s anyway.
Both partners should either take precautions or expect pregnancy to potentially occur.
Casual sex doesn’t exist in the sense that there is only sex, period. If people think they can have sex without protection as some kind of right, then nature will have something to say about that.
People should just be more moral, and shouldn’t be taught [culturally or by their families etc] that it is in some way acceptable to be flippant as concerns life. Someone has made a tremendous effort to bring them into the world and support them, thus it is their duty to do the same for people they bring into the world.
‘Accidents’ can be limited until there are only true accidents as opposed to laziness.
Sorry, dearheart, there’s no male contraceptive pill on the market. But that’s not the seminal (sorry about that) problem, which, it seems to me, is one of sexual expectations. Conservative Pav even admitted, in a post I’m sure he regrets, to prostituting a girl-friend for money. ‘I’ll give you the money you need if you give me the sex I want.’ To me, this is prostituting sex–it’s taking intimacy to the very low level of bartering.
Casual sex does exist in the sense that there is only sex, period. Casual sex has no commitment; it only has mutual pleasure–that moment of ecstatic release that comes from orgasm.
All I’m saying is that men who practice casual sex are equally responsible for the outcome. The outcome could result from a misunderstanding of what sex means to either partner, which could mean different things. This is damned difficult to try to explain because each woman is different, but I feel that, deep down in their heart of hearts, a woman wants and needs a lasting relationship. If prior relationships haven’t led to a lasting commitment, she may ‘give up’, take her pills, and look only for the pleasure of casual sex.
Men don’t seem to have the same psychological restrictions or expectations when it comes to sex. Men seem to think that putting on a condom spoils the spontaneity of sex–yet they expect women to take a pill every day in anticipation of spontaneous sex.
In a leftist society, are we trying to ‘take care’ of the mother, the father, or the child?
My apologies for the dis-jointedness of this post.
As I told Anita, I’d have lent her the money anyway and I am pretty sure that she would have had sex with me anyway. We continued to have a physical relationship thereafter with no money involved.
I don’t regret the post, and I’m not Conservative.
This may be shitty of me, but I can’t help but introduce politics into this. The current flap in congress over contraceptives just boggles my mind. We have senators… SENATORS - supposedly our top dog representatives of the people, attempting to ban contraceptives for women but supporting Viagra for men. So there you have it. Women are being governed by a collection of limp dicks trying to control the womb. The conservative extremists have jumped off the cliff. Do women lean toward the left? Duh…
liz
Many women go for money from men, where men often go for looks, surely you wouldn’t deny that? All those Beverly hills wives wouldn’t go out with an unemployed man, right? And they indeed seek men with wealth. Ever heard the saying; ‘all women are prostitutes’? seems like two people getting what they want to me. …but I agree its not moral, I wouldn’t do it, nor would I expect it of my daughter.
There is the knowledge that sex begets babies unless you take precautions, otherwise you are engaging in an act where you know the outcome is likely to produce children. Its only casual if you take precautions.
men who practice casual sex are indeed equally responsible for the outcome.
From personal observation I think women ‘usually’ think that if they give men what they want it may lead to more. Evolution would want secure partners for the duration of the upbringing of children, more mature men also recognise this imho.
I agree with them, condoms are utterly horrible and completely spoil the experience. Its not easy to keep it up if you cant feel much ~ depends on how sensitive a man is, but you wouldn’t want an over sensitive one lol.
All of them equally surely?
tentative
Tehe you guys need a revolution, oh wait, you had one then got into the same crap as the rest of us.
Usually liberals do not embrace and celebrate difference in all things. Business is one area liberals hate difference. They might like it in some things, but when it comes to money they believe in all sorts of affirmative action programs.