Support NeoGAF

[AbortedWalrusFetus]

But, on the law side of things. I do believe it should be mandatory and illegal for a court to deny a father a DNA test.

That is the least of the changes that need to be made on the legal side of things. For instance, if a man divorces his wife, and she moves in with another man, and the father finds out the other man is actually the father of the child, the man has two options. He can continue to see the child and pay the child support, or he can discontinue all contact with the child. Either way the actual father is absolved of all negative impact of fathering the child, and still gets the benefit of seeing the child. There are tons of laws like that, most of which are a large part of the reason why I think men should also be given a choice.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Some people will always be horrible and stupid I guess, and I don't know what you can do to combat rare cases like that.

Rare? This shit happens all the time. Look at Tiger, and he didn't even knock up any of those women. Groupies gonna group.

I admit that yes, it does skew the results in a way that leads to less unwanted and poor children. Which I feel will benefit us all.

So you admit that you're warping the idea of "choice". Right now a woman's choices are

A) have a potentially dangerous, invasive, traumatizing, and (for some) questionably moral operation
B) go through with 9 months of pregnancy, a major lifestyle change that will effect her employment, body shape and self-image, followed by minimum 18 years of child-rearing with or without the male being present
C) same as above, only giving the kid up for adoption or to be raised by relatives

and a man's choices are

A) help pay for abortion
B) raise child
C) help put child up for adoption
D) bail out, pay child support for 18 years

You're 100% behind giving the man the choice to do E) nothing, just go on living your life bro? How is that fair? Contrary to what many guys think, having an abortion isn't an easy choice, even for women who aren't religious.

I think that many feel that single parenthood is an acceptable lifestyle choice because they know they'll be supported financially. If we hand out free birth control and abortions then I think the number of "baby mamas" will decrease.

Simply giving people the means to prevent pregnancy is worthless without education. There are people who would honestly "Plan B-it" every night if they could. It has become an acceptable lifestyle choice because boys and girls raised without fathers see nothing wrong with having babies at 16 (the girls) or abandoning said babies to go chase more tail (the boys). Their uneducated parents and "hands-tied" schools do a poor job of preparing them for the realities of a sexual world.

Yes, that's kinda what I'm proposing, You will with your tax money financially fund abortions and birth control to reduce the number of children born to poor mothers and couples in ghettos - which will lead to a reduced number of criminals that your tax money pays for in prisons. My reasoning is based on the plummeting of crime rates which happened after abortion was legalized in the US. And I think that handing out free birth control and abortions will help have a similar effect - removing potential criminals before they are even born.

And with this, you've crossed the moral event horizon my friend.

Your resolution for the epidemic of broken families in this country is basically genocide instead of demanding higher standards from each other. I'm pro-choice but I'm not about to promote abortion as a catch-all solution, it should be used as a last resort in almost all cases.

 

[Jamesearlcash]

It is pretty shitty. The way i see it is that men get the shitty end of the stick anyways.

-Women get to stay of with the kids when they are born and get paid
-Women nearly always keep the kids when partners split

My mate is with a girl he hates, but he loves his son too much to leave her, i bet there are so many dads like that, that's the opposite side of the spectrum. Ok men always have the choice to use protection etc, but it doesn't make it right for a woman to see a nice guy, be nice to him, get pregnant and live off him and have a great dad for her kids.

 

[Gaborn]

It is pretty shitty. The way i see it is that men get the shitty end of the stick anyways.

-Women get to stay of with the kids when they are born and get paid
-Women nearly always keep the kids when partners split

My mate is with a girl he hates, but he loves his son too much to leave her, i bet there are so many dads like that, that's the opposite side of the spectrum. Ok men always have the choice to use protection etc, but it doesn't make it right for a woman to see a nice guy, be nice to him, get pregnant and live off him and have a great dad for her kids.

Unless you're a seahorse I really don't think that's a fair statement.

 

[xelios]

Either you act like a real man and take that responsibility or you act like a child and don't. As simple as that.

Same can be said for the woman. You either act like a real woman and take responsibility or you act like a child and don't. Both know what they're doing when they fuck but only one gets treated like shit for dumping off the responsibility, get real.

I'm all for a woman's right to have an abortion/adoption, but it's avoiding responsibility for your actions either way.

 

[Shanadeus]

It's fairly simple for myself. I chose to engage in a very adult act. If something unfavorable comes from that action I have to act like an actual adult and discuss/support the womans decision whichever way that may be.

If others don't agree that it isn't the womans decision or that I don't have an obligation to be there for her/the child then you are dead wrong. That is a life you created and there is no bones about it. Either you act like a real man and take that responsibility or you act like a child and don't. As simple as that.

I don't know how many times this has been said now but...

And when a woman gets an abortion, is she acting like a child?
Men are supposed to man up and take full responsibility for a fetus which the woman choses to bring to birth, yet women can abort them as much as they want?
To quote AbortedWalrusFetus:

Actually, when abortion was made legal it did two things. It separated parenthood from being a consequence of sex, and gave the woman the ultimate choice on whether or not to be a parent.

Becoming a parent is a choice for the woman, I just think that it should also be a choice for the guy to become a father.

I'm not suggesting that a dad should throw up his arms in the air when their six year old is crying and say that he's absolving himself of all responsibilities.

I'm not saying that you as a guy should just run away today, just that we need an overhaul of the law.

 

[AbortedWalrusFetus]

So you admit that you're warping the idea of "choice". Right now a woman's choices are

A) have a potentially dangerous, invasive, traumatizing, and (for some) questionably moral operation
B) go through with 9 months of pregnancy, a major lifestyle change that will effect her employment, body shape and self-image, followed by minimum 18 years of child-rearing with or without the male being present
C) same as above, only giving the kid up for adoption or to be raised by relatives

and a man's choices are

A) help pay for abortion
B) raise child
C) help put child up for adoption
D) bail out, pay child support for 18 years

You're 100% behind giving the man the choice to do E) nothing, just go on living your life bro? How is that fair? Contrary to what many guys think, having an abortion isn't an easy choice, even for women who aren't religious.

That's just flatout bullshit to be honest. Option A is rarely dangerous if done in a proper time frame, which is easy to do, less invasive than most types of surgery that people don't bat an eyelash at, and potentially equally traumatizing and morally specious to both parties. Option B is equal between both parties aside from the physical effects, but studies have shown that expecting fathers have their own set of hormonal and psychological changes, INCLUDING post-partum depression. The only option a man has that a woman does not is bailing out, but there have even been cases of women doing just that in the past and leaving the child with the man.

Option E was entirely made up by you. Shanadeus clearly said that a man would be legally mandated to pay for the abortion. He should also be mandated to pay child support if he doesn't pay for the abortion. Option E doesn't exist.

 

[oneHeero]

It's fairly simple for myself. I chose to engage in a very adult act. If something unfavorable comes from that action I have to act like an actual adult and discuss/support the womans decision whichever way that may be.

If others don't agree that it isn't the womans decision or that I don't have an obligation to be there for her/the child then you are dead wrong. That is a life you created and there is no bones about it. Either you act like a real man and take that responsibility or you act like a child and don't. As simple as that.

O great, another poster who didnt bother reading the numerous comments regarding this already.

 

[Mystic Theurge]

Or they can just be waived away since it can be aborted without its own consent.
I of course support abortions and my reasoning presumes that abortions are legal and acceptable - which I believe they are.

At the point where abortion is possible the child does not yet exist so there's no need for the woman to obtain anyone's consent.

 

[Maklershed]

The man should not eat raw celery.

 

[Count Dookkake]

There should be abortion contracts.

If a woman says she will terminate any pregnancies, but does not, then the man should not have to be financially responible for the child.

 

[Shanadeus]

Rare? This shit happens all the time. Look at Tiger, and he didn't even knock up any of those women. Groupies gonna group.

The rare thing being that the groupies actually get pregnant and proceed with the pregnancy. I honestly think that's a rare thing.

So you admit that you're warping the idea of "choice". Right now a woman's choices are

A) have a potentially dangerous, invasive, traumatizing, and (for some) questionably moral operation
B) go through with 9 months of pregnancy, a major lifestyle change that will effect her employment, body shape and self-image, followed by minimum 18 years of child-rearing with or without the male being present
C) same as above, only giving the kid up for adoption or to be raised by relatives

and a man's choices are

A) help pay for abortion
B) raise child
C) help put child up for adoption
D) bail out, pay child support for 18 years

You're 100% behind giving the man the choice to do E) nothing, just go on living your life bro? How is that fair? Contrary to what many guys think, having an abortion isn't an easy choice, even for women who aren't religious.

Even a good pregnancy is whole lot worse than a late term abortion, and that's just physically speaking. I know women who don't mind abortions at all, and don't experience any emotional traumas, because they have grown up in a country that accepts abortions and don't have a messy debate that leads to women fearing it. An abortion is very, very safe and easy on the woman if done properly and early on. And if more people accept them then I think that it'd be less emotionally traumatic than a pregnancy (post-partum pregnancies can be a bitch, I would try everything to avoid one)

And Walrus made a good response for the rest of your post:

That's just flatout bullshit to be honest. Option A is rarely dangerous if done in a proper time frame, which is easy to do, less invasive than most types of surgery that people don't bat an eyelash at, and potentially equally traumatizing and morally specious to both parties. Option B is equal between both parties aside from the physical effects, but studies have shown that expecting fathers have their own set of hormonal and psychological changes, INCLUDING post-partum depression. The only option a man has that a woman does not is bailing out, but there have even been cases of women doing just that in the past and leaving the child with the man.

Option E was entirely made up by you. Shanadeus clearly said that a man would be legally mandated to pay for the abortion. He should also be mandated to pay child support if he doesn't pay for the abortion. Option E doesn't exist.

Simply giving people the means to prevent pregnancy is worthless without education. There are people who would honestly "Plan B-it" every night if they could. It has become an acceptable lifestyle choice because boys and girls raised without fathers see nothing wrong with having babies at 16 (the girls) or abandoning said babies to go chase more tail (the boys). Their uneducated parents and "hands-tied" schools do a poor job of preparing them for the realities of a sexual world.

And you're better off with teenage girls doing abortions over and over again until they become fertile, it's much better then prohibiting or discouraging abortions and pressuring them into becoming teenage mothers. And I know the sex ed in the US is a clusterfuck, and I dunno what to do about it aside from changing the entire educational system in addition to spending more on it instead of pointless wars.

And with this, you've crossed the moral event horizon my friend.

Your resolution for the epidemic of broken families in this country is basically genocide instead of demanding higher standards from each other. I'm pro-choice but I'm not about to promote abortion as a catch-all solution, it should be used as a last resort in almost all cases.

I know that some people see abortions as a silent genocide of black people, as the percentage of abortions in black-dominated ghettos increased when it was made legal. Something which one belives also had the added sideeffect of reducing the crimerates (as there were less people born to poor and single mothers)

Knowing that, would you want the womans right to her body removed and make abortions illegal?

At the point where abortion is possible the child does not yet exist so there's no need for the woman to obtain anyone's consent.

And at the point where abortion is possible is the only point a man should be able to opt out of fatherhood.

Do you object to that?

There should be abortion contracts.

If a woman says she will terminate any pregnancies, but does not, then the man should not have to be financially responible for the child.

That's a step in the right direction, and I don't think anyone(most people) would object to this.

 

[noah111]

Stupid question tbh, it seems like the easy routes (abortion) have brought up this mentality that it's no big deal, just abort.

It's pretty fucking disgusting, how about using a condom? Or birth control? Either way, this is responsibility we're talking about, and either way you need to take full awareness to the consequences of your actions.

Only this here is if the father isn't really the father, then he's free no shit. Any other case, he's a douche for leaving if it's his baby and she's not aborting. Just man the fuck up.

 

[wenis]

O great, another poster who didnt bother reading the numerous comments regarding this already.

Pretty much. I'm merely stating my opinion because I've been through this situation two times now.

The first time I discussed with my then girlfriend what she wanted. She said that she could see being with me as something she'd want and having a child at that moment while very inopportune she couldn't live with the idea that she just killed her child. Her parents ended up taking her to so cal to live with her grandparents and they made her abort the kid.

The second time I knew that it would be tough, but it was the girls decision in the end to keep it because of the same reason. Except she had gone through an abortion before and it mentally and emotionally broke her. So we decided to keep the child. A month into it we lose the baby.

I've seen the situation. I've had everyone tell me their opinion and past experiences. I'm stating the way I perceive the correct action to be. I'm sorry that I do believe both parties need to take responsibility. If one of my girlfriends chose to abort the baby I'd stand beside her and take it from there. As they chose to keep the baby, I knew the right thing in my heart was to stay with that life that I helped create.Sorry it doesn't mesh with a lot of peoples opinions, but thats what I know.

 

[oneHeero]

There should be abortion contracts.

If a woman says she will terminate any pregnancies, but does not, then the man should not have to be financially responible for the child.

This is our discussion when people read the thread correctly.

Stupid question tbh, it seems like the easy routes (abortion) have brought up this mentality that it's no big deal, just abort.

It's pretty fucking disgusting, how about using a condom? Or birth control? Either way, this is responsibility we're talking about, and either way you need to take full awareness to the consequences of your actions.

Only this here is if the father isn't really the father, then he's free no shit. Any other case, he's a douche for leaving if it's his baby and she's not aborting. Just man the fuck up.

This is not what this thread is about, another one who decided to post before read numerous responses to this kinda reply.

 

[Shanadeus]

Stupid question tbh, it seems like the easy routes (abortion) have brought up this mentality that it's no big deal, just abort.

It's pretty fucking disgusting, how about using a condom? Or birth control? Either way, this is responsibility we're talking about, and either way you need to take full awareness to the consequences of your actions.

Only this here is if the father isn't really the father, then he's free no shit. Any other case, he's a douche for leaving if it's his baby and she's not aborting. Just man the fuck up.

If you're a woman you take responsibility by aborting it if you're not interested in becoming a mother. I wish to give men the same responsibility.

That's pretty much it.

 

[Mystic Theurge]

And at the point where abortion is possible is the only point a man should be able to opt out of fatherhood.

Do you object to that?

You don't understand.

A mother's and a father's obligations are tied to the child. They can not be waived without the consent of the child or, and this should go without mentioning, if the child doesn't exist.

If the child exist than the father can not at any time opt out of his obligations.

 

[oneHeero]

Pretty much. I'm merely stating my opinion because I've been through this situation two times now.

The first time I discussed with my then girlfriend what she wanted. She said that she could see being with me as something she'd want and having a child at that moment while very inopportune she couldn't live with the idea that she just killed her child. Her parents ended up taking her to so cal to live with her grandparents and they made her abort the kid.

The second time I knew that it would be tough, but it was the girls decision in the end to keep it because of the same reason. Except she had gone through an abortion before and it mentally and emotionally broke her. So we decided to keep the child. A month into it we lose the baby.

I've seen the situation. I've had everyone tell me their opinion and past experiences. I'm stating the way I perceive the correct action to be. I'm sorry that I do believe both parties need to take responsibility. If one of my girlfriends chose to abort the baby I'd stand beside her and take it from there. As they chose to keep the baby, I knew the right thing in my heart was to stay with that life that I helped create.Sorry it doesn't mesh with a lot of peoples opinions, but thats what I know.

No dont apologize, your opinion matters. But our thread isnt about manning up. Its about decisions being made prior to pregnancies. If both agree no kid and she gets pregnant and changes her mind, than guy shouldnt be responsible. If neither have the conversation about a kid, dont use birth control and she gets pregnant, than man up. That was the point of my comment.

I apologize in regards to your experience. It has to be tough for everyone. We are stating these people should have abortions, but if the women first states no kids and than changes her mind after she finds out shes pregnant, and wantsd to keep the kid, than she should take on the full responsiblity alone. If not, than abort.

 

[Shanadeus]

You don't understand.

A mother's and a father's obligations are tied to the child. They can not be waived without the consent of the child or, and this should go without mentioning, if the child doesn't exist.

If the child exist than the father can not at any time opt out of his obligations.

I'm saying, what if the father opt out of his obligations before any child exist?
It then becomes the choice of the woman to get a child as a single mother or just abort it

Do you object to that?

 

[Tim the Wiz]

Use a condom.

And choose mentally stable sexual partners you know and trust.

 

[oneHeero]

You don't understand.

A mother's and a father's obligations are tied to the child. They can not be waived without the consent of the child or, and this should go without mentioning, if the child doesn't exist.

If the child exist than the father can not at any time opt out of his obligations.

Technically I believe thats wrong. Someone mentioned a situation where the guy gave up any rights to his kid and he didnt have any requirements to continue supporting the kid.

Although, I agree that if the kid is alive, the man needs to step up, both parents. But this isnt a topic about after a child is born. Its a topic regarding everything before the female is pregnant and how she can change her mind and the guy has no say in the decision.

 

[Count Dookkake]

This is our discussion when people read the thread correctly.

Huh?

To be clear I have only read the OP. This has always been my position. I like responsibility and fairness.

 

[Green Biker Dude]

even if men suddenly got this right you want, the women interested in the money could still go away after the sex, wait for the child to be born and then demand the child support. if the guy isn't warned, he can't say no. i guess the lack of communication would then have to be blamed on either parent depending on the situation and whoever did it would lose rights. i dunno

either way, i agree that these are rights from a different time and need to be reviewed

edit: also, half the people in this thread can't read

 

[Panda1]

I guess that sums up everything I said so far, and I agree with you.


With condoms and other birth controlls in additon to the one thing the embryo can't beat, abortion, I don't see how that's not the case.

Please enlighten me.


They force the man to become a father if they also do not get an abortion.
And while it's 100% up to her whether or not to get one, it should also be up to the man if he wants to shoulder the burden and responsibilities fatherhood entails.

There should of course be communication, so that the woman is aware of the man leaving in case she gets pregnant and decides to keep it way before she gets pregnant - so that she can be extra cautious if she feels that an abortion is wrong but at the same time doesn't want to be a single mother.

abortions are serious operations and not something that is taken lighty
how about if she aborts he should lose one nut? They both have to have an op and after two the man will not be able to do that shit again
the alternative is for a guy to put his sperm in a bank and get a vastectomy

 

[Green Biker Dude]

how about if she aborts he should lose one nut?

haha oh wow

what is this, gamefaqs?

 

[Big Baybee]

abortions are serious operations and not something that is taken lighty
how about if she aborts he should lose one nut? They both have to have an op and after two the man will not be able to do that shit again
the alternative is for a guy to put his sperm in a bank and get a vastectomy

:-/

 

[oneHeero]

Huh?

To be clear I have only read the OP. This has always been my position. I like responsibility and fairness.

I agree with your initial response. We have people who read the OP and jump to the conclusion that we want t ogive guys a way out of responsiblity. That's not the case, you read the OP and understood the thread, I simply commented on that. I agree 100% about you stated.

 

[Mystic Theurge]

I'm saying, what if the father opt out of his obligations before any child exist?
It then becomes the choice of the woman to get a child as a single mother or just abort it

Do you object to that?

Yes, did you read what I wrote?

For whatever reason if a child exist the father has an obligation to it that cannot be waived.

Technically I believe thats wrong. Someone mentioned a situation where the guy gave up any rights to his kid and he didnt have any requirements to continue supporting the kid.

Maybe it was a unique situation? I would have to know more.

 

[noah111]

If you're a woman you take responsibility by aborting it if you're not interested in becoming a mother. I wish to give men the same responsibility.

That's pretty much it.

What? How does this even make sense. It is her body, thus she has control over whether she wants to proceed with having a baby (which afaic he gave her) or abort. He has no final say in whether the baby happens or not, and if the mother decides not to abort then he needs to stick around one way or another. You don't seem to fully understand things here..

 

[oneHeero]

Yes, did you read what I wrote?

For whatever reason if a child exist the father has an obligation to it that cannot be waived.


Maybe it was a unique situation? I would have to know more.

That's not the point of the thread.

I'm saying, what if the father opt out of his obligations before any child exist?
It then becomes the choice of the woman to get a child as a single mother or just abort it

Do you object to that?

That is. We are talking about responsibilities before any pregnancy happens. If both parties agree to safe sex and neither wants a kid than the understanding is no kid. If she happens to get pregnant and decides she wants it, the guy should have an option to not be responsible, the girl gets that options(abortion). If the girl chooses to keep the child, she changed her mind, therefor she should take full responsibility, alone.

 

[oneHeero]

What? How does this even make sense. It is her body, thus she has control over whether she wants to proceed with having a baby (which afaic he gave her) or abort. He has no final say in whether the baby happens or not, and if the mother decides not to abort then he needs to stick around one way or another. You don't seem to fully understand things here..

No, its actually you who doesnt understand things here. Read the actual thread. Not once has anyone denied the fact that its her choice. Matter of fact, the person you quoted has stated numerous times that its her choice.

Maybe you should read the thread instead of wasting time going in circles.

 

[Jamesfrom818]

While I believe the current set up is unfair to men, I think its the least unfair option available until everyone starts using artificial wombs for reproduction.

 

[Mystic Theurge]

That's not the point of the thread.



That is. We are talking about responsibilities before any pregnancy happens. If both parties agree to safe sex and neither wants a kid than the understanding is no kid. If she happens to get pregnant and decides she wants it, the guy should have an option to not be responsible, the girl gets that options(abortion). If the girl chooses to keep the child, she changed her mind, therefor she should take full responsibility, alone.

No, he shouldn't. I've been saying this.

If the child exists than the father has a responsibility to it. Why is this so hard to understand?

 

[Shanadeus]

What? How does this even make sense. It is her body, thus she has control over whether she wants to proceed with having a baby (which afaic he gave her) or abort. He has no final say in whether the baby happens or not, and if the mother decides not to abort then he needs to stick around one way or another. You don't seem to fully understand things here..

He should be able to absolve himself of any father responsibilities, just like the mother can absolve herself of any mother responsibilities. If he has informed his pregnant partner in due time, that he is not interested in being a father, and the female goes on and ignores his wishes then she is implicitly agreeing to being a single mother and letting the guy just go on with no legal obligations to the child the woman have - just as if she had an abortion.

Yes, did you read what I wrote?

For whatever reason if a child exist the father has an obligation to it that cannot be waived.

I agree with you, unless these obligations have been waived before the child can be said to exist. If you do not agree with that then we have to agree to disagree.

 

[Vanillalite]

This, a man should be able to essentially 'abort' himself financially from the child if he so wishes with the conditions that he must make the decision early in the pregnancy just as a woman must decided early on and that he must never see the child or interact with the child. If he does become a part of the childs life then support must be iniated from that point forward as well as retroactive support.

What these posts really point out is that men really need their own form of birth control pill. I know as a married man I would have used it even while my wife was on the pill. Out of the two of us I was definately more paranoid about her being sure to take them.

The last part bolded for the truth. BOLD I SAY!

 

[Willectro]

but what if the condom breaks?

Should have used 2.

 

[oneHeero]

No, he shouldn't. I've been saying this.

If the child exists than the father has a responsibility to it. Why is this so hard to understand?

Are you referring to the child being born already? I dont consider a 1-3mo into the pregnancy a child.

Obviously at this time, if a child is born, than the guy has the responsibility regardless. We are talking about future changes. So I dont see how your statement is relevant.

 

[Escape Goat]

what if the condom breaks? you accept that risk when you use it. but you should also discuss with the girl to be on the pill. but what if the girl lied? That was the risk you accepted when you decided to sleep with her.


Calculated risk --> Action --> Consequence/No Consequence

 

[Jamesfrom818]

Should have used 2.

That would make both more likely to fail

 

[OnkelC]

Use a condom.

.

 

[RSLAEV]

Don't have sex unless your prepared to have a child with your partner.

There, I saved everyone mass amounts of drama with a little common sense and arrogance.

Phhhbt thanks for that great advice Father Mokahee. Any other nuggets of wisdom you want to drop on us?

 

[Vanillalite]

I'm telling you GAFers Dorrin had it right. What this thread REALLY shows is just the need for a real deal form of male birth control with rates equivalent of something like an IUD.

 

[Shanadeus]

what if the condom breaks? you accept that risk when you use it. but you should also discuss with the girl to be on the pill. but what if the girl lied? That was the risk you accepted when you decided to sleep with her.


Calculated risk --> Action --> Consequence/No Consequence

I guess we just differ on what the consequence really is. I maintain that having a child is a choice, as women can always chose not to have one with the help of abortions. I feel that men should have an equivalent way of choosing not to have a child.

Legally absolving them of all father related responsibilities would give the guy the same effect as if the girl had an abortion, no kid, so that's the way I think we should go to make things fairer and more equal.

 

[oneHeero]

what if the condom breaks? you accept that risk when you use it. but you should also discuss with the girl to be on the pill. but what if the girl lied? That was the risk you accepted when you decided to sleep with her.

Calculated risk --> Action --> Consequence/No Consequence

The same can be applied to a number of things. Any situation can have exceptions.

Girl wears sexy outfit - girl accepts the fact that guys will be more interested. girl walks down dark street - girl accepts possible chance of being rape. Therefor she has to have the baby. Wait, no she can have a abortion.

See how my analogy sucks? But its the same thing, shes taking the risk by wearing something sexy.

I get what you mean tho, but it doesnt match up to the actual discussion taking place here. I wish you guys could read a thread instead of skimming it and picking replies to reply to.

 

[stewy]

That is. We are talking about responsibilities before any pregnancy happens. If both parties agree to safe sex and neither wants a kid than the understanding is no kid. If she happens to get pregnant and decides she wants it, the guy should have an option to not be responsible, the girl gets that options(abortion). If the girl chooses to keep the child, she changed her mind, therefor she should take full responsibility, alone.

This reasoning seems to imply that the man is only a passenger after the two people have decided they don't want children but are going to have sex anyway.

If you both decide you don't want children, don't have sex. If you don't want children and then decide you're going to have sex...well, you live with the consequences. That's the risk no matter how many understandings and precautions you take. Is it fair? Maybe not. But as a man, that's really the only choice you get. C'est la vie.

 

[Jamesfrom818]

If there was a new chemical birth control for men, Id probably freeze some sperm before taking it. Never know what might happen.

 

[Mystic Theurge]

Are you referring to the child being born already? I dont consider a 1-3mo into the pregnancy a child.

Obviously at this time, if a child is born, than the guy has the responsibility regardless. We are talking about future changes. So I dont see how your statement is relevant.

I don't know why you can't understand what I'm writing. Let me say in a different way.

If a man and a woman are using contraceptives and agree to have no kids, but the woman gets pregnant and decides to keep the child then the father has to take responsibility because the child exists, and as such the father has obligations to it.

 

[stewy]

I guess we just differ on what the consequence really is. I maintain that having a child is a choice, as women can always chose not to have one with the help of abortions. I feel that men should have an equivalent way of choosing not to have a child.

Legally absolving them of all father related responsibilities would give the guy the same effect as if the girl had an abortion, no kid, so that's the way I think we should go to make things fairer and more equal.

The man does have a choice. It's made the moment he decides to have sex. There's your choice.

 

[Vanillalite]

If there was a new chemical birth control for men, Id probably freeze some sperm before taking it. Never know what might happen.

I can see why you'd think this. I do think this would be a HUGE step forward if we ever get the quote "Male Birth Control" and it would be a game changer.

I'm not sure I'd want to be in on the testing phase though for reasons like you stated! :lol :lol

 

[Like the hat?]

If someone creates a child they should be responsible for said child. If you don't want a kid, don't have sex.