|
this was taken from another forum
i want to see what the opinions of Team Liquid are on this subject
if we accept that men and women are both people
if we accept the act of sex does not equate to consent to raise and support a child (see roe v. wade/adoption legality)
if we accept that men and women deserve equal protection under the law (see 14th amendment of your constitution)
then logically we must conclude that men deserve the right to have sex without it meaning consent is given to raise a child.
currently, that is obviously not the case. from the moment a man ejaculates in the same room as a woman (dont laugh, women have scraped semen off rags and shoved it inside themselves to get pregnant) he is potentially on the hook for 20 years of child support. this isnt the case for women. women have the right to have sex, then later decide they aren't ready or dont want to become a parent. even for those opposed to abortion, adoption exists. what we have here is an obvious case of gender discrimination.
what is TL's thoughts on the subject? do you think men deserve the right to have sex without consenting to paying for and raising a child for 20 years? if a man does not want the child, can he be freed from the financial obligations of child support?
|
Seems fair. Just be careful with ya spermies, bro. Double bag it if you're paranoid, imo.
|
The child is innocent in all of this, and he/she is who the payments are for. Use a condom or vasectomy. 
|
never confuse what is natural with man-made laws
u can whine all u want about same rights and whatnot but if nature begs to differ, well... tough luck!
|
I think imposing to a woman to abort is just monstrous. Not an option.
If a woman lies to get pregnant or anything like that, then maybe we can discuss whether it is the right to the father not to give a pension. But the abortion really is something that should be between the mother's hands, in my opinion.
Most cases you will have an unwanted child, a father who asks for abortion and a mother who refuses. And then, I think if it is not malicious from the mother, the guy just takes his responsibility.
|
Although those are fair points in theory, it's not as simple in practice imo. Women have the responsibility for their own bodies, just like you need to take responsibility for your own semen (don't laugh, you started it ). Wear a condom and dispose of it yourself, or take a risk and pay the price if she gets pregnant and decides to keep the baby.
|
If the woman wishes to keep the child, and the man doesn't, there shall be no child support paid to the woman out of the man's pocket, then we will see if she changes her mind.
Edit: In the event they both agree, and later the man and woman separate, child support is paid.
|
20 years of child support! oh no! It makes you wonder about all those single mothers who dont get child support and how just it is that their fathers escaped the discriminative sexist system that expects them to take responsibility for their offspring.
If your thoughts are that women should pay child support if the child stays with the father that makes perfect sense or that the current laws favour the mother in who keeps the children then that makes sense and is valid but saying that men should have the right to abort if they inseminate a woman is a bit far but debateable and saying that if the baby is born then it isnt their responsibility is probably too much. Use a rubber.
|
Lord_J
Kenya1085 Posts
I think it's a spurious argument.
Roe v. Wade was based on the Supreme Court's conception of a right to personal privacy -- the question of whether the act of sexual intercourse amounted to "consent" to raise or support a child was not discussed in the opinion. Furthermore, the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment is not a blanket prohibition against the law treating men and women differently; rather, laws which make gender-based classifications are subject to "intermediate scrutiny." Where--as here--men and women are differently-situated because of their widely differing biological roles in reproduction, a legal distinction based on gender is unlikely to be an abridgement of equal protection under the law.
Moreover, it's not clear to me that the law even does discriminate between genders in the alleged regard. A woman is no more permitted to leave a child she has in the father's care and then walk away, refusing to provide any financial support that might be required for the child's well-being than a man is to do likewise. It seems to me that the law treats men and women quite equally in that regard. Of course, women are less likely to find themselves in that position where they can simply opt to have an abortion if they do not want the child. It's true that men don't have that option -- however, it's not because the law has taken it away from them; rather, biology has. And, all things considered, I think we should be grateful for that. I don't know many men that would prefer that they were the ones who could become impregnated. To the extent that it has its downsides as well, I'd say men are still getting the better of the deal.
|
On September 18 2011 20:08 Ropid wrote:The child is innocent in all of this, and he/she is who the payments are for. Use a condom or vasectomy.
what about the child who is killed through a woman's choice to abort. if you are going to use the "child is innocent" argument to force men into financial obligation, shouldn't you first use the argument to stop women from killing innocent children?
i agree that forcing women to abort due to the father's wishes should not be considered, but what about the financial obligations?
|
Yes, on the outside it seems ridiculous that a single sexual encounter can force a man to pay two decades of child support whether he likes it or not, while women can always opt out of it VIA abortion/adoption, but there's more to this.
Even for many of those who are pro-abortion, the act is still considered terminating a life, and is a very difficult decision to make. While both parents may agree that there is no reason why they should raise a child together, I think it goes without saying that the majority of the guilt of aborting a child is absorbed by the woman, and she therefore has the right to choose not to despite the father's best wishes. She could always just throw her child into the adoption system and hope somebody picks it up, but that isn't exactly easy either.
Now, in the event that she chooses she wants to have and raise the child, why should she be forced to raise it alone because the father has the physical convenience of just walking away? This all goes without saying that being granted maternity leave is not always possible, and that children cost an exorbitant amount of money to raise. I agree with the system the way it is. Responsible sex has such an absurdly low pregnancy risk anyway that cases like these would be incredibly rare.
|
On September 18 2011 20:01 ChinaLifeXXL wrote:
Seems fair. Just be careful with ya spermies, bro. Double bag it if you're paranoid, imo.
Can't tell if you're kidding or not, but there's a name for people who like to double bag it: Fathers.
The friction between the two condoms increases the chance they rip or break.
|
On September 18 2011 20:19 Darkalbino wrote:
If the woman wishes to keep the child, and the man doesn't, there shall be no child support paid to the woman out of the man's pocket, then we will see if she changes her mind.
Edit: In the event they both agree, and later the man and woman separate, child support is paid.
Somewhat my opinion on the matter... But they only want equality if it benefits them... like staying at home for 15 years but the same payment once they begin to work (the man has 15 years more experience)...
|
I think he should be. Someone needs to fight for us!!!
|
Nope. Women and men are both equally obligated to raise the child.
|
Baltimore, USA22254 Posts
On September 18 2011 20:19 Darkalbino wrote:
If the woman wishes to keep the child, and the man doesn't, there shall be no child support paid to the woman out of the man's pocket, then we will see if she changes her mind.
Edit: In the event they both agree, and later the man and woman separate, child support is paid.
That was my initial, watered down thought when I read the question.
|
The obvious difference is that for a man choosing not to have a kid is as simple as saying "I choose not to financially support this child" and a woman choosing not to have a kid is not as simple... I think if you want equality then woman should be allowed to opt out of parenthood simply by stating their refusal to raise a child. But since that is physically impossible...
|
Enforced abortion makes no sense and is downright disgusting, but men shouldn't be held accountable in exceptional cases such as when one party actively deceives the other.
|
On September 18 2011 20:19 Darkalbino wrote:
If the woman wishes to keep the child, and the man doesn't, there shall be no child support paid to the woman out of the man's pocket, then we will see if she changes her mind.
Edit: In the event they both agree, and later the man and woman separate, child support is paid. Basically this. Having an accident and the man not wanting the child but the mother refuses to abort it is not a reason for the man having to pay child support for a very long time.
|
Seems kinda unfair tbh, opting out of child support before birth should be possible thinking about it.
Until then, doublebag, tie up and flush that shit if you have suspicions man 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
