A man's right to choose

http://www.nationalcenterformen.org/

A group that's taking a woman to court because she told a man she was incapable of getting pregnant before sex, insisted he not use a condom, then got pregnant and is now demanding that he pay child support. This organization's position is that if two people have sex, not looking to have children as a result of the sex, since a woman has the right to an abortion a man should have the reproductive freedom to say once he learns that she's pregnant "I wasn't looking to have a child, I think you should have an abortion because I'm not able to take care of this child" and then not have to pay child support if she decides to keep it.

Do you agree or disagree with this position?

LAWL. Tough shit. Nice try, though.

If there was any way to prove that he was told by her that she couldn't get pregnant, and also that he was going to wear a condom anyway but she asked him not to, then legally he should have grounds to make some claim against her that keeps him from at least being 100% financially liable (some states have certain percentages of income that are set as minimums and maximums for child support). That's my opinion. I'm also of the opinion that he should shut the fuck up and support his child.

He should get custody and teach it to hate its mother.

That's the route I took.

I think she admits she said she couldn't get pregnant and told him not to wear a condom, but then she magically got pregnant somehow and couldn't bear to have an abortion.

Another case this organization is taking on is on behalf of a guy that recently had a woman he had a one night stand with 19 years earlier show up at his front door demanding 17 and a half years of back-child support for a child he never knew she had($195,000).

The last thing we need is the other gender not taking responsibility for its actions the way the inferior one doesn't.

I think the government should outlaw childbirth because it's clear that we as a society are unable to deal with it responsibly. Just let the whole fucking race die out.

I'm all for pre-nuptual agreements that specifically outline child support rules so this debate would cease to exist. The damn things should be required in order to get a marriage license with how things are lately.

If the non-custody parent will not voluntarily fulfill his responsibilities to assist raising a child, yes, I think child support is usually in order. The current system sucks, because parents leach it off of eachother and use it in their little quests to make bitter fights and have miserable children. Say one parent does not have a degree or a job with a decent income (ie can raise a child off of it), then yes, the other parent should pitch in ASSUMING action is taken for the other parent to obtain a better job/education/etc. Mothers should not be forcing high child support checks of of ex-husbands/boyfriends just to spite them if they're capable of making ends meet.

Child support needs a bit of reform (as does Welfare for similar reasons). It gets abused way too much, but there would be a lot of really sad cases out there and inadequate care for young children without it. Lesson? Never procreate unless you're sure the person you're with isn't a dickhead/bitch.

Edit: Because this ties in with abortion, which I dislike arguing about because it's pointless, it's one of those questions that will never be answered. You can't pin 100% blame on one party alone, so it's stupid trying to make one decision that works for everyone. Reminds me of the debate over whether a not a father should have say in whether or not an abortion is carried out: if he wants to keep the child, can he override the woman wanting to abort it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

The last thing we need is the other gender not taking responsibility for its actions the way the inferior one doesn't.

---

GO DOUBLE NEGATIVES FORCE GO GO!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nomi

Never procreate unless you're sure the person you're with isn't a dickhead/bitch.

---

talk about setting limits. That is what? all of six people?

The moral is, always bag your shit up. That guy was an idiot.

I knew a guy once who was tricked into knocking a girl up in much the same manner. He married her and now longs for death.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IronPlant

talk about setting limits. That is what? all of six people?

---

That's a pretty high estimate. I think child support issues wouldn't be such a big deal if married couples waited a few more years before popping out their kids, though, and divorcing when the kid is a toddler. Teenage accidents account for a nice chunk of child support too, but it's less dramatic since the families also play a big part in it. The ones that piss me off are business families where the mother could very easily take care of her kid, and just wants the check to piss off the ex. That shit needs to stop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nomi

That's a pretty high estimate. I think child support issues wouldn't be such a big deal if married couples waited a few more years before popping out their kids, though, and divorcing when the kid is a toddler. Teenage accidents account for a nice chunk of child support too, but it's less dramatic since the families also play a big part in it. The ones that piss me off are business families where the mother could very easily take care of her kid, and just wants the check to piss off the ex. That shit needs to stop.

---

your logical idealism is probably the best thing about you.

Please never grow up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolemite

The moral is, always bag your shit up. That guy was an idiot.

I knew a guy once who was tricked into knocking a girl up in much the same manner. He married her and now longs for death.

---

Chicks being pathetic idiots that use their vag to gain power is nothing new.

When are scientist going to unite and build armitage like robots to break women's evil hold on mankind?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IronPlant

your logical idealism is probably the best thing about you.

---

Wait until somebody knocks her up.

I think there should be a document that a man can sign a month or whatever before the abortion can no longer be performed, stating that he does not want the child and would prefer she has an abortion. Obviously you can't force her to do it, but forcing a man to father a child he doesn't want is equally as evil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolemite

Wait until somebody knocks her up.

---

Oh I know its a matter of time. My sisters said stuff like that, but eventually they lost their minds too.

There are no ovaries in the mouth.

Or ass.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Schlep

Obviously you can't force her to do it, but forcing a man to father a child he doesn't want is equally as evil.

---

Oh give me a fucking break.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kidnemo

There are no ovaries in the mouth.

---

I'm sure a real bitch would find a way to get around that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Schlep

I think there should be a document that a man can sign a month or whatever before the abortion can no longer be performed, stating that he does not want the child and would prefer she has an abortion. Obviously you can't force her to do it, but forcing a man to father a child he doesn't want is equally as evil.

---

I agree. Why can one potential parent opt out of parenthood but not the other? Double standard.

Nomi is seriously one of the most intelligent, mature 18 year-olds I've "met". I don't throw compliments around often (I'm sure you hadn't noticed ;) ), but she deserves one. I need to find the 25ish year-old version...

Obviously, this is why I stick to knocking up married chicks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

Nomi is seriously one of the most intelligent, mature 18 year-olds I've "met". I don't throw compliments around often (I'm sure you hadn't noticed ;) )

---

No, no, you're a regular sweetheart of the internet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

Obviously, this is why I stick to knocking up married chicks.

---

Nothing beats getting another man to raise your child.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ironplant

I'm sure a real bitch would find a way to get around that.

---

I remember hearing on the radio a story about a guy who had anal sex with a woman to ensure that he wouldn't get her pregnant. However, the woman saved the condom and used it to get herself pregnant. Then she sued the guy for child support. Court ruled in her favor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cowdisease

Court ruled in her favor.

---

WHAT

THE

FUCK

!?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IronPlant

WHAT

THE

FUCK

!?!

---

Sex act = sex in court. Makes no difference.

YES IT DOES

IT MATTERS A LOT

Didn't there.

And thus proving that DNA should not automatically equal responsibility.

What if some chick gets artificially inseminated and through some glitch finds out the identity of the father, and sues for support? That man cannot prove he never had sex with the mother, so he loses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YellerDog

Sex act = sex in court. Makes no difference.

---

Where does it say a sex act is required? I could jerk my shit off on the floor, a chick can walk by and scoop it in, BAM I'm a dad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YellerDog

Didn't there.

---

oh come on. she got a dirty condom from her ass and stuck it in her vag.

COME ON

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

Where does it say a sex act is required? I could jerk my shit off on the floor, a chick can walk by and scoop it in, BAM I'm a dad.

---

I was addressing IP, there. He's hung up on the bum thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

Where does it say a sex act is required? I could jerk my shit off on the floor, a chick can walk by and scoop it in, BAM I'm a dad.

---

Don't jerk your shit on the floor.

I mean, really. Its not that hard to not get someone pregnant. There's a million forms of birth control and you shouldn't be having sex with someone that you can't trust.

Call me sexist but women are the ones who can control their fertility, so they should be primarily responsible for their pregnancy. Granted, in marriages or relationships it's a shared responsibility, but random casual sex is a reality of our society right now. If men are forced to live with the consequences of their actions on principle, women should be, too.

Women should be and usually are responsible for their pregnancy. However, the child is another thing entirely.

No woman in America is forced to unwillingly have a child.

Why should it be any different for men?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

No woman in America is forced to unwillingly have a child.

Why should it be any different for men?

---

Biology.

Spray your condoms with bleach when you're done and be like "Don't want you using my DNA you harlot."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YellerDog

Biology.

---

Your condescending short answers aren't as obvious or clever as they might seem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

No woman in America is forced to unwillingly have a child.

---

Well, some women are actually forced to have a child unwillingly, but I won't go into that.

I voted "the man should pay child support" before reading this thread. burgundy is changing my position. It really is a horrible double standard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

And thus proving that DNA should not automatically equal responsibility.

What if some chick gets artificially inseminated and through some glitch finds out the identity of the father, and sues for support? That man cannot prove he never had sex with the mother, so he loses.

---

That actually happened recvently. A guy donated sperm for a lesbian couple. They broke up, and the custodial mother sued the man for child support. She fucking won.

OK, some women have to cross the border to a different Dakota.

Whatever. If you're pro-life, then feel free holding men as responsible as women. If you're pro-choice, but only in the case of women, then you're a hypocrite.

Mortal Kombat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

Your condescending short answers aren't as obvious or clever as they might seem.

---

You'd prefer an equally correct long anwser?

I'm sorry, it sucks, but that's life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

If you're pro-choice, but only in the case of women, then you're a hypocrite.

---

Not really. It's a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body. That goes a looooong way to disregarding what a man wants to do with her body.

Another option is that prospective fathers (married or not) could have the right to block planned abortions.

There's no way you can say that nine months of pregnancy is the reason a woman can decide yay or nay on a lifetime of parenthood, but not a man. Nine months vs. the rest of your natural life.

Burg is right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

Mortal Kombat.

---

Diffx is right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scourge

Not really. It's a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body. That goes a looooong way to disregarding what a man wants to do with her body.

---

A woman can do what she likes with her body, but a man shouldn't have to pay for it. Last time I checked, single parenthood isn't against the law anywhere. There's no two-parent requirement for sperm bank withdrawals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YellerDog

You'd prefer an equally correct long anwser?

I'm sorry, it sucks, but that's life.

---

Long or short, they're equally correct in that they're both incorrect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scourge

Not really. It's a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body. That goes a looooong way to disregarding what a man wants to do with her body.

---

Not when the outcome affects the man's life forever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scourge

Not really. It's a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body. That goes a looooong way to disregarding what a man wants to do with her body.

---

Ageed. The woman already chose what to do with it when she had sex. The consequences of her choice are another story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

Long or short, they're equally correct in that they're both incorrect.

---

Don't hurt yourself, sport.

---

Fuck, you don't even have to draw a comparison to abortion! A mother can give her child up for adoption and get off scot-free in terms of support (can an interested unmarried father intervene here? I don't know) but if she keeps it, the uninterested father gets to pay for 18+ years? Where's the fucking equal protection?

I think a potential father should have the right to withdraw from his parental responsibilities for a month or so after he is promptly informed of the pregnancy, assuming he pays the mother enough $ to cover any potential abortion expenses. And if she doesn't tell him, she gets nothing.

If the mother is aware of who the father is she must have him sign a waver or something. If he wants to keep the child it is his right. Then the mother has to pay child support usually. This proccess is not always fair, and fathers usually get the reputation of deadbeat dad, but I know pleanty of deadbeat mothers and the courts don't prosecute them nearly as severly (which sucks).

This video pretty much sums up how I feel on the subject:

you are not the father

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

And thus proving that DNA should not automatically equal responsibility.

What if some chick gets artificially inseminated and through some glitch finds out the identity of the father, and sues for support? That man cannot prove he never had sex with the mother, so he loses.

---

Most release forms on the donor/recipiant part try to assure that never happening. Their identity is protected with a few legal-case exceptions, and most places enter into a lawful contract that would prohibit them from ever trying to get money off of the father. I'm sure plenty of places don't offer 100% protection, but I can't see that happening more than a few freak times.

This whole shit is based on the outdated notion that women don't/can't hold well=paying jobs, have decent education, etc. In a traditional sense where the women didn't attend college and hold a professional job, yeah, she would need help financially keeping a child fed sometimes. It's entirely possible for a woman to go to community college part time, night, whatever, and quickly (a few years) get into a job that would end the need for child support from a father. Women need to take responsibility, too. I know there are many circumstances in which the woman cannot further her education, has no supporting family, etc. and absolutely needs child support to keep the kid healthy, but that's the exception nowadays.

I'm tired of women being all 'oh I dropped out of college to have my kids, now I can't get a good job because of it' wah wah. You were stupid. Finish college, have available professional options, -then- start your family. I want to find out statistics on how child support is divided up between planned and unplanned child situations to see which side takes more claims. Planned pregnancies wouldn't result in child support (with a few exceptions) unless there was a severe lack of judgement involved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

I think the government should outlaw childbirth because it's clear that we as a society are unable to deal with it responsibly. Just let the whole fucking race die out.

---

I think the government needs to outlaw every pro-life activist from spawning any more of their kind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nomi

Lesson? Never procreate unless you're sure the person you're with isn't a dickhead/bitch.

---

Quoted for truth. You have to be 1000% sure.

What I despise is that double-dipping is allowed. If the custodial parent remarries- BAM! As it is, the said CP has money from the new spouse and the ex. One friend of mine is divorced and has to pay child support to his total bitch of an ex, even though said ex's new husband makes good money. That is so damn unfair.

Parents getting child support should have restrictions placed on how they spend it (clothes, food, etc). This money should go only toward the essential things. Let the custodial parent pay for luxuries (i.e. toys) out of their own pocket.

I didn't like the verbage of the first choice, but I picked it anyway. I don't think a man should be responsible for a child he cannot support (or doesn't want to have, whatever). However, I think in most cases it was just some dumbass having unprotected sex. Stupidity should hurt. But, should it hurt as much as your life being over to raise a child? BUT, who will raise the child? Parents are so shitty these days anyway, and I guess if you knock some bitch up you should at least man up and help her out. BUT THEN, why couldn't she get an abortion early on? Gah! Damn you, circular debate!

The guy in the example is a douche nozzle, though; first for believing the bitch and then for not wearing a condom. If some woman told me she couldn't have kids I would tip the fuck out because that means SHE ALREADY TRIED, regardless of whether or not she was successful. Don't screw bitches who want kids, moral of the story.

I don't think this fucker deserves anything, he violated the three BASIC rules:

1.) No matter what a woman says, don't trust it.

2.) Bag your shit. Why? See rule #1

3.) If you violate rules #1 and / or #2, cut your balls off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nomi

Women need to take responsibility, too. I know there are many circumstances in which the woman cannot further her education, has no supporting family, etc. and absolutely needs child support to keep the kid healthy, but that's the exception nowadays.

I'm tired of women being all 'oh I dropped out of college to have my kids, now I can't get a good job because of it' wah wah. You were stupid. Finish college, have available professional options, -then- start your family. I want to find out statistics on how child support is divided up between planned and unplanned child situations to see which side takes more claims. Planned pregnancies wouldn't result in child support (with a few exceptions) unless there was a severe lack of judgement involved.

---

I don't know about other states, but Mississippi will pay for any unmarried mother to go back to school.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

Nomi is seriously one of the most intelligent, mature 18 year-olds I've "met". I don't throw compliments around often (I'm sure you hadn't noticed ;) ), but she deserves one. I need to find the 25ish year-old version...

---

You're trolling for pussy on TNL and you question my having a g/f?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scourge

Not really. It's a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body. That goes a looooong way to disregarding what a man wants to do with her body.

---

A man's sperm is not a part of a woman's body. Half of the baby is made up of the father's genetic information, to say that it all belongs to the woman since it's now in her body is like saying I own the rights to all the music on my computer just because it's on my computer.

Men are getting raped in the system because women get all the benefits of backward laws that assume they're all undeducated and helpless, and at the same time enjoy all the benefits of a society where feminism is rampant and the sexes have equal opportunity.

If you don't think feminism has hijacked our culture just look at any daytime talk show. If someone says "women are smarter than men" they get a standing ovation. If they say "men are smarter than women" they get booed off Jerry Springer. Look at sitcoms. Every show is about a fat ugly dumb guy and his beautiful, smart, loyal and funny wife that tolerates his shit out of the goodness of her heart.

Hate to break it to you everyone, but having sex is a gamble. The only way to 100% eschew lying hobags and pregnancy is to become gay; You can all of the bitch-free, pregnancy-free sex that you want.



When there is a divorce/pregnancy, something that irks me is the whole "expected standard of living" of the child. I don't think that a dad who is successful should have to pay $30 grand a month to pay for his kid's expenses. The problem with the child support program is that it has to cater to the lowest common denominator. It has to make sure that Trailer Trash Jack makes sure that he doesn't spend all of his money on booze. It makes sure that the poorest kids have enough money to eat, but it gets out of control in the upper income brackets.

This isn't about the man so much as it is the kid, so I disagree and think he should have to pay. There should be exemptions, like showing up 18 years too late and demanding support retroactively, but all in all I don't want to see more excuses that favor dead beat dads.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpoDaddy

If you don't think feminism has hijacked our culture just look at any daytime talk show. If someone says "women are smarter than men" they get a standing ovation. If they say "men are smarter than women" they get booed off Jerry Springer. Look at sitcoms. Every show is about a fat ugly dumb guy and his beautiful, smart, loyal and funny wife that tolerates his shit out of the goodness of her heart.

---

What are you doing watching daytime talk shows? Killing time til' your "stories"?

I heard God was a deadbeat dad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpoDaddy

A man's sperm is not a part of a woman's body. Half of the baby is made up of the father's genetic information, to say that it all belongs to the woman since it's now in her body is like saying I own the rights to all the music on my computer just because it's on my computer.

---

You came in your computer?

Plug and play connectivity FTW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpoDaddy

Men are getting raped in the system because women get all the benefits of backward laws that assume they're all undeducated and helpless, and at the same time enjoy all the benefits of a society where feminism is rampant and the sexes have equal opportunity.

---

Holy fuck. I agree with SpoDaddy.

Here's the deal: if a man and a woman agree to have consentual sex and both agree prior to the arrangement that neither is ready to be a father/mother and if an unwanted pregnancy occurs that an abortion would be the solution. If the woman changes her mind, why should the man be responsible? Both are consenting adults that have an agreement before consequences of the action that they have both agreed to. Economic factors shouldn't be called into question at all if there's a prior understanding.

Sure, you can make the argument that the child is the one who ends up suffering the consequences and had nothing to do with the situation. You can equally argue that self responsibility in this country is at an all time low.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

This isn't about the man so much as it is the kid, so I disagree and think he should have to pay. There should be exemptions, like showing up 18 years too late and demanding support retroactively, but all in all I don't want to see more excuses that favor dead beat dads.

---

Abortions don't have dads.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haohmaru

You can equally argue that self responsibility in this country is at an all time low.

---

Exactly.

Oh, and another condom PROTIP: never, ever, ever discard of a used condom where the woman can access it later. Whenever I go to my girlfriends place to screw, I take a plastic bag with me for the used condom. I later discard of it in a dumpster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zerodash

I later discard of it in a dumpster.

---

Okay that's maybe going a little too far. I mean if you're going to go through that much trouble then just change gears during the act and make the bitch swallow it.

If you really have that much trust in your girlfriend, you need a new girlfriend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

If you really have that much trust in your girlfriend, you need a new girlfriend.

---

QFT - but, these days, who the fuck knows anymore.

I'm not saying he shouldn't fuck her...a guy's gotta do what he's gotta do.

But if he can't trust her not to fish a used condom out of the garbage and rub it in her twat, he probably shouldn't be sleeping in her presence.

Okay, okay..But at MOST flush it down the toilet. No need to treat it like an epsiode of 24.

poor poor Zerodash.

TRUST NO ONE!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

Abortions don't have dads.

---

What you're advocating is responsibility free sex. This is idiotic, and gives idiot males with no brains an even larger margin for ruining a childs life. I agree there should be limitations on what the kid needs, and what the father should be required to pay if the mother is educated and well employed, but in the end I don't want a bunch of idiot dads running around saying they don't have any obligation to pay for their sons new sneakers because they told someone they didn't want a baby. If you don't want a baby then guess what? Keep the snake in its cage. There's always a risk, even with condoms or the pill.

Women are all coniving, deceitful humans so they're a non-factor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

No need to treat it like an epsiode of 24.

---

It's funner that way.

Even that is fucking ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

What you're advocating is responsibility free sex. This is idiotic, and gives idiot males with no brains an even larger margin for ruining a childs life. I agree there should be limitations on what the kid needs, and what the father should be required to pay if the mother is educated and well employed, but in the end I don't want a bunch of idiot dads running around saying they don't have any obligation to pay for their sons new sneakers because they told someone they didn't want a baby. If you don't want a baby then guess what? Keep the snake in its cage. There's always a risk, even with condoms or the pill.

Women are all coniving, deceitful humans so they're a non-factor.

---

No, they are the factor. If there's an agreement in place and she decides at a later time that she changed her mind then she should bear the responsibility. Granted, the feasibility of running around with "No Dad Contracts" to be signed before consentual sex is about nil, but if it's clearly obvious that that was the case then the guy should get off the hook. Period.

I tend to agree with g0zen. The three basic rules are there. Follow them if you want to have sex before marriage. I follow the DTA rule. Don't Trust Anyone. Andrew is right to know for sure that she won't get pregnant and sue you for liability of the child ... keep the snake in the cage.

The premise of the argument is how things should be, not how they are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haohmaru

No, they are the factor. If there's an agreement in place and she decides at a later time that she changed her mind then she should bear the responsibility. Granted, the feasibility of running around with "No Dad Contracts" to be signed before consentual sex is about nil, but if it's clearly obvious that that was the case then the guy should get off the hook. Period.

---

You're trusting a woman to not change her mind? I think it's a pretty different deal to have something actually growing inside of you compared to not (when you're about to do it). If you honestly expect every girl you screw to be completely honest and not change their mind then this works. Of course, this is a dream land where some sort of crazy ass verbal agreement before sex will hold up. If you fuck her, and make her pregnant it's her choice to keep the baby because she's literally birthing it and has more to do in the birthing. Again, stop trusting women.

Women are a non-factor because you can't control them in the end (unless you're in to beating them). You can only control yourself and what you do.

Again, that's not the premise here. If you contractually agree to not have the kid, the guy should bear no responsibility.

(edit) See, to me, no human being should be allowed to have that kind of impact on another person's life because they "changed their mind". You should not have to suffer for 18 years (mainly by tolerating the mother, who you otherwise would've probably blown off after a few weeks) emotionally, financially, or other because someone else was irresponsible and deceitful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haohmaru

Again, that's not the premise here. If you contractually agree to not have the kid, the guy should bear no responsibility.

---

SNL did the sex contract skit already. It was funny because it was ridiculous. If you're a huge celebrity having a one night stand I can see this being viable, but no woman is going to want to sign a contract that keeps the responsibility of sex solely on them. It's ridiculous and unrealistic.

Again, if you fuck a woman there's a chance of her getting pregnant. If you're not willing to take responsibility for the risk then don't take the beaver out of its dam, keep the snake in its cage, keep the eggs in the nest, don't ruffle the bush, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haohmaru

(edit) See, to me, no human being should be allowed to have that kind of impact on another person's life because they "changed their mind".

---

Which is ironic because the father would be fucking the kid over somewhat in the end. Even that arguement doesn't hold up for the dad.

Quote:

---

You should not have to suffer for 18 years (mainly by tolerating the mother, who you otherwise would've probably blown off after a few weeks) emotionally, financially, or other because someone else was irresponsible and deceitful.

---

You were both irresponsible to have a kid. It happened, but that's the risk. The whole point is to come to grips and make right on your consequence. This is paying child support. I know you probably feel it's one-sided and maybe it is, but it's the way it has to be so dads aren't walking out and forgetting about kids they've seeded. A woman can't have a bunch of kids, they can only have their own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

SNL did the sex contract skit already. It was funny because it was ridiculous. If you're a huge celebrity having a one night stand I can see this being viable, but no woman is going to want to sign a contract that keeps the responsibility of sex solely on them. It's ridiculous and unrealistic.

---

It is unrealistic and unfeasible. I've already said so. Given that, if there were a way to have a prebinding agreement beforehand, the guy shouldn't be held accountable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

Again, if you fuck a woman there's a chance of her getting pregnant. If you're not willing to take responsibility for the risk then don't take the beaver out of its dam, keep the snake in its cage, keep the eggs in the nest, don't ruffle the bush, etc.

---

Yeah, I get it. Do you get that that isn't the argument here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

Which is ironic because the father would be fucking the kid over somewhat in the end. Even that arguement doesn't hold up for the dad.

---

There wouldn't be a kid if there weren't deception. Mom's fault.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

You were both irresponsible to have a kid. It happened, but that's the risk. The whole point is to come to grips and make right on your consequence. This is paying child support. I know you probably feel it's one-sided and maybe it is, but it's the way it has to be so dad aren't walking out and forgetting about kids they've seeded. A woman can't have a bunch of kids, they can only have their own.

---

No, the woman was irresponsible to break the agreement. There was no risk, there was an agreement beforehand. She should bear sole responsibility for her decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haohmaru

Given that, if there were a way to have a prebinding agreement beforehand, the guy shouldn't be held accountable.

---

I don't think so at all. If you don't want to catch a fish why bait a hook and put it in a lake? It's the same situation. If it's a binding contract then okay, but verbal isn't going to cut the cheese. Every dead beat will say that they agreed to not have the kid if the girl gets pregnant.

Quote:

---

There wouldn't be a kid if there weren't deception. Mom's fault.

---

It's not deception if it's honestly changing your mind. That's the gravity of the situation -- a girl won't know how she feels about a baby, and get this, until she's pregnant with one. It's not even being deceptive at this point, it's simply changing how you feel about something.

Quote:

---

No, the woman was irresponsible to break the agreement. There was no risk, there was an agreement beforehand. She should bear sole responsibility for her decision.

---

I don't advocate this because it makes the man less responsible for his actions than he already can be (not being stuck with something inside of you). It's a dumb idea all around. The woman isn't irresponsible for breaking the agreement, the man was irresponsible to try and force an agreement for something that he knew would probably change the way she felt in 8 months time. They were both irresponsible for having unprotected sex or simply just were unlucky with protection.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

I don't think so at all. If you don't want to catch a fish why bait a hook and put it in a lake? It's the same situation. If it's a binding contract then okay, but verbal isn't going to cut the cheese. Every dead beat will say that they agreed to not have the kid if the girl gets pregnant.

---

Yeah, I agree. I'm not advocating this as a means for escape for all of the shitheads out there who dodge it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

It's not deception if it's honestly changing your mind. That's the gravity of the situation -- a girl won't know how she feels about a baby, and get this, until she's pregnant with one. It's not even being deceptive at this point, it's simply changing how you feel about something.

---

Which is fine, if it doesn't impact the life of someone else for 18-21 years. Sorry, not a valid argument. You can't change your mind about shit like this and if you're the woman, keep yer hole closed until you ARE sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

I don't advocate this because it makes the man less responsible for his actions than he already can be (not being stuck with something inside of you). It's a dumb idea all around. The woman isn't irresponsible for breaking the agreement, the man was irresponsible to try and force an agreement for something that he knew would probably change the way she felt in 8 months time. They were both irresponsible for having unprotected sex or simply just were unlucky with protection.

---

Nah. The woman is irresponsible. If she's that unsure, then she is the one that should be abstaining. There's no excuse for saying something/agreeing to something and then changing your mind and screwing over some poor slob who just wanted to get laid and did the responsible thing by discussing potential problems beforehand. We're talking about a life changing event that is as simple as "Well, I changed my mind, you're going to be dad like it or not". Men should have more legal rights in that case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

What you're advocating is responsibility free sex.

---

Yup.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

You're trusting a woman to not change her mind? I think it's a pretty different deal to have something actually growing inside of you compared to not (when you're about to do it). If you honestly expect every girl you screw to be completely honest and not change their mind then this works. Of course, this is a dream land where some sort of crazy ass verbal agreement before sex will hold up. If you fuck her, and make her pregnant it's her choice to keep the baby because she's literally birthing it and has more to do in the birthing. Again, stop trusting women.

---

She can change her mind all she wants if she can afford it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haohmaru

Which is fine, if it doesn't impact the life of someone else for 18-21 years. Sorry, not a valid argument. You can't change your mind about shit like this and if you're the woman, keep yer hole closed until you ARE sure.

---

It's going to affect someone for 18 - 21 years either way, atleast this way the blow is way softer for the child in question because she'll be able to afford to go to college some day.

Quote:

---

Nah. The woman is irresponsible. If she's that unsure, then she is the one that should be abstaining. There's no excuse for saying something/agreeing to something and then changing your mind and screwing over some poor slob who just wanted to get laid and did the responsible thing by discussing potential problems beforehand. We're talking about a life changing event that is as simple as "Well, I changed my mind, you're going to be dad like it or not". Men should have more legal rights in that case.

---

They both should be abstaining, and it's not like guys don't pressure girls in to doing shit they regret doing later. The problem is you're looking at "just getting laid" like it doesn't have any grander consequence. It does, all sex does. It takes two people to make a baby, and two people need to support the child in the end. It also helps to keep dead beat dads from having 10 children. He'll be way more apprehensive to have 10 children if he has to shill out 5000 dollars a month to support them. If you don't trust the person you're with use a condom or don't do it. Once you dip your stick in the sauce it's fair game. You're responsible for what you sew.

That's the problem with agreeing you don't want to have kids. Sex makes kids, so having sex immediatly goes against that goal. Most guys love the idea of responsibility free sex, but it'll never happen. I don't agree with it simply because it lets dickface idiots off scott free for no real reason.

I agree that if you get a woman to sign a sex contract that specifically spells out and free's you from any liability from the act then you're off scott free. But that will never happen because, again, no woman is going to sign a contract that places the burden of sex solely on her.

You know, even if she is willing to let the man off the hook for helping raise/pay for the kid, that's not all there is to it. Personally, I think I'd be pretty upset if I knew I had a kid I didn't want running around out there, even if I didn't have to pay for/know him/her.

I said I'd pay for my half of the abortion.

Shit, I'll pay for the whole thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dolemite

You know, even if she is willing to let the man off the hook for helping raise/pay for the kid, that's not all there is to it. Personally, I think I'd be pretty upset if I knew I had a kid I didn't want running around out there, even if I didn't have to pay for/know him/her.

---

lol why?

Because that poor kid is going to be so sad when he finds out his dad really isn't Brendan Fraser.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

I said I'd pay for my half of the abortion.

Shit, I'll pay for the whole thing.

---

Fuck it, I'll even give her an extra $10 to get a burger and fries on the way home.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

lol why?

---

Hard to explain. I would just find it distressing. Any way you slice it, you helped create that life, and even if you want nothing to do with it, you are bound in some ways you'll never be able to sever.

You'd think most people would feel this way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

Because that poor kid is going to be so sad when he finds out his dad really isn't Brendan Fraser.

---

"Mommy, can we rent Monkeybone again so I can see daddy?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

I said I'd pay for my half of the abortion.

Shit, I'll pay for the whole thing.

---

I'd get a low-interest loan.

Gods, I hate how stupid people are about their own sexual functioning. Sperm + Vag = potential baby. Men if you don't want that shit, either a. abstain, or b. condom.

Women, if you don't want a kid, either, a. abstain, b. birth control/female condom/diaphram.

Even if you do want a kid, prenup that shit. People are raving irrational idiots, don't trust people on the basis of: "I love you."

But no one cares, everyone wants sex without consequences. Some men are evil, some women are evil, but just alot more are fucking dumb.

I like that post, especially the "fucking dumb" part.

Thank you, it took alot to go for the double meaning. Glad it paid off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarsKitten

Gods, I hate how stupid people are about their own sexual functioning. Sperm + Vag = potential baby. Men if you don't want that shit, either a. abstain, or b. condom.

---

Don't forget c. vasectomy.

Vasectomies/Tubes tied are bullshit, really, they only pay off in commited relationships. You cannot prove that someone has or has not had one just before hopping in bed.
Other than that you're still fucking random people with an STD risk.