This financial abortion for men thing...?

[Anonymous]

You do realize this would only cause more dead beats right? I hear people comparing it to an abortion for men, but in reality it's nothing an abortion. An abortion takes place before the child is born, therefore it requires no food, money, or time to make sure it survives. A financial abortion is nothing of the sort. In this case the child is born and needs support. It isn't about the man's or the woman's rights anymore. It's about making sure the child has the necessary things it needs to have a prosperous life. Financial abortions would only bring more havoc to the world.

[WonderingNomad]

There is a big difference between a person's body and a person's pocketbook. I don't think it should be called an "abortion" at all, because it is far from an equitable situation. I think relating it to "adoption" would be more appropriate. That being said, I DO empathize with men in these situations in that after the "deed is done" they have virtually no say in whether or not they become a father (legally, at least). And even if a "financial abortion" were possible, the men still have a biological child with their DNA somewhere out in the world whether they wanted it or not. However, I in no way think that having to pay for their biological offspring is the same as enduring a potentially life-threatening medical condition (even low-risk pregnancies are considered medical conditions, and even low-risk pregnancies can result in maternal death and/or lasting health conditions such as heart and/or blood pressure problems, diabetes, deep vein thrombosis, osteoporosis, painful varicose veins, etc.) In my opinion, at least, what I consider the "woman's right to choose" has not so much to do with her not being ready for the after-effects of pregnancy (i.e. being a mother) and everything to do with the pregnancy itself. While I understand that many people find abortion quite objectionable, I personally feel that we as a society don't have the right to DEMAND that a woman endures a potentially life-threatening and, if nothing else, often horribly unpleasant medical condition (yes, I have been pregnant, and for me it was by far the most miserable I've ever felt) with often life-long consequences. So, at least according to my beliefs on maintaining a woman's right to have an abortion, so-called "financial abortions" are not the male equivalent, and I cannot consider them a "right" in the same sense that I consider a woman's "right" to maintain the integrity of her body.

Perhaps there might be some sort of adoption option we could introduce to give the men who don't want to be fathers an "out," but it would be difficult without another party willing to pick up the slack. I don't, in any case, consider it fair to leave the entire financial burden of the baby on the mother unless that is her desire. It is not an easy issue though, either way.

[JohNfromKolob]

this is the hypocrisy I find with abortion "rights"...a woman can choose not to be a mother...a man can't choose not to be a father...heres my issue...if man has ZERO say over abortion...if a woman can kill his child while he's kicking and screaming for his child to live...that means that a womans has 100% ownership of the child for 9 months AND THEREFORE...u can argue its solely her resposnbility for the child existing at all...all the guy did was supply sperm BUT...

[JohNfromKolob]

I believe that the child exists beforehand tho...so that both aprties created it and they both are parents of that child...

[WonderingNomad]

Legally speaking, abortion isn't about becoming or not becoming a parent. It's about the pregnancy. It's about a woman having a choice over what her body goes through. Like I said, I do empathize with men that they don't have the "final say" as to whether a child will actually be born. And while you may have rights to your offspring, you do not have the rights to a woman's uterus. If there is anything at all that we are entitled to in this world, it is our own bodies. It is not hypocrisy to

[WonderingNomad]

point out the profound distinction between a violation of on one's physical well-being and paying a monthly bill. It's not that the child belongs more to the mother than the father (despite custody trends-though that's another story); it's that the uterus is 100% hers, and she can decide what does or does not grow in it. Now, the moment we devise a way to grow zygotes outside the womb,it'll be a different story.

[Riah92]

this is not about the mother or the father here, and what's best for them. just because you don't want a kid, you want to bail and just say f*** it, whatever I don't care? It's YOUR problem, BOTH of yours, so you BOTH need to just suck it up, get over what ever bugs you have in your asses, and take care of the god damn kid you BOTH helped to create. I don't agree with abortion, especially if it's used by teenagers who didn't bother taking birth control, or use condoms. you're killing an innocent child because you two f***ed up. a financial abortion is completely different than an actual abortion. they aren't the same thing, so they can't be compared as such. an abortion kills the child. end of story. a financial abortion screws the kid over, because it won't be properly cared for. what if they get sick, and their mother can't afford to get them medical attention? you're the father, you need to grow up and take responsibility for your kid. its not about you anymore. it's about the CHILD. why can't people seem to understand that? are you guys really so heartless where you can just knowingly abandon your own flesh and blood?

now I understand where you guys are coming from. you don't want the kid, so why should you have to pay for it? I get that. it doesn't seem fair to you. to me, that's a boys reaction. a real man would own up, and pay for their child, because it's the right thing to do for the child. I don't care if you don't want to pay for the child. the child is yours, and you should help take care of it, because that is what is best for the baby. the baby is not some inanimate object here. it lives and breaths, and needs to be cared for. it isn't their fault that their parents didn't have safe sex, so why are you going to let them suffer for your mistakes?

and, this whole scenario is easily prevented by using a condom, and having the girl go on birth control. having a kid when you aren't ready to have one sucks. if either of you do not wish to have a child, then you both should be proactive in preventing pregnancy. this means the guy wears a condom, and the girl goes on birth control. And it is as simple as that. it all comes down to whether the couple is mature enough to make sure they handle sex responsibly

[JohNfromKolob]

ok but its also not fair that if I got a firl prego and I wanted the baby..she could just suck it out through a vaccuma nd destroy while I'm kicking and and screaming for her to let it live...the law should eb consistent...no dads getting otu of fatherhood...no moms getting out of motherhood...once your prego...u have no more reproductive choices ...u already reproduced and the baby is alive and real.

[Riah92]

I agree with you, I think that guys should be able to stop a woman from having abortion, so long as the father really wanted to keep the child. I have known men who wanted to keep and raise their babies, but the mother wanted an abortion.

[JohNfromKolob]

yea that breaks my heart...

[emmee]

I would just like to say first that, while I do not have much background on this issue, I most certainly do not support it.

And in response to all of you idiotic, self-centered assholes, YOU are not, and will never be, a woman. Until you understand what it's like to go through with a pregnancy, you should keep your judgement about abortions to yourselves. Unless you have personally had a child inside of your body for nine months, felt constantly unattractive, nauseous, tired and sick, until you have had to gain weight and throw up every morning, until you have had to push that child out of you during HOURS of painful labor and contractions, you, in my mind, have no conceivable RIGHT to tell me, or any other woman what we can and cannot do with OUR bodies.

[human_condition]

One of the best answers I have ever read :)

[Josht]

Ya, YOUR BODIES YOUR PROBLEM

[taster]

Cannot agree...I am Pro Choice...and I loathe this answer

[lericah]

50/50 That's what I say The man deserves and the man must be 50% of the childs life. It's what's healthiest for the child and that's that. I must address though that this is not a question but rather ranting with little to no background or explanation

[Mr_Solo_Dolo]

I'm Pro-Life but I just wanted to say that we as guys didn't have a choice of whether or not we wanted to carry the baby around for nine months,that was God's choice. I'm also sure that if we guys did have a choice most of us would choose to carry around the baby just for the woman's sake of not going to labor pains or at least that's what I would choose. Therefore since we guys didn't have a choice I feel that the guys do have an input and choice on whether or not the woman should keep the baby

[IgottaQuestion2]

So if the woman doesn't want to pay for the child they can have an abortion or give it up for adoption. This makes sense, for a variety of reasons. But why should men also be allowed to give up his rights as a father? As long as he does it before a certain time is reached. Would a child at a young age not make his life more difficult as well? He can't decide when the child is past the age of abortion obviously, but before then I think it should be allowed. If the woman still wants to have the baby, then she is solely responsible. I mean it's her body right?

[IgottaQuestion2]

Women are allowed a couple ways to not be held financially responsible for a child. 1) They can have an abortion 2) They can give the child up for adoption after it is born. With 0 responsibility. Men are not allowed any options, they are at the woman's mercy. They both engaged in sexual activity, they both knew "the risks" yet it is only men that are not allowed a way "out".

I think that there should be a period of time, after the pregnancy, where a man is allowed a "financial out". Saying I don't want this child, if you want to keep it, that's on you. He gives up any legal right to the child. If the woman decides to keep the child, she is solely responsible. Seems fair to me. I'm open to you changing my mind though. I would also say that if the man signs something before they have sex saying he will not be responsible should a baby be born, then that should hold up as well.

Did you know that even if the child is not biologically his, and he is on the birth certificate (the woman lied to him), he is financially responsible until that child is 18 or adopted by another man?

I realize the argument behind not allowing this, but I think it is the fair thing to do, whether or not it results in more single mothers or not. This would also probably stop women from tricking men into pregnancy to get money out of them, especially if they are rich.

[Erik_Andersson]

When a woman tricks a man to impregnate her in a one-night-stand, when she says she is on the pill but isn't, the law should be that the man gets custody of the child half the time, and if the woman wants full custody, she has to pay for the child herself. If that would be the law, this kind of financial exploitation would diminish drastically.

There are MANY cases of women lying to men and saying they are on the pill when they are not. Then she comes back nine months later and tells the guy she had a baby, and now he has to pay child support for eighteen years. And he only gets to see the child two weekends every month, or even less.

Trust me, there are MANY such cases. Especially when the woman is over thirty. (Guys, NEVER sleep with a woman over thirty without a condom.) She tricks the man, then exploits him financially, to pay for HER child, a child he almost never gets to see. The law favors the women heavily in this, just like in divorces.

I know of two such cases personally, and have read about many more. The guy who is exploited this way loses a lot of his income to a manipulating, lying woman - and it ruins a lot for him. When he marries and has children, he has to have one child less than he wants to, because he is forced to pay for the other woman's child. It affects his whole life.

[Asker]

By the other women's child you mean his child as well. And if men used their upstairs brains they wouldn't be having sex with a girl without a condom. There are things far worse you can get from sex than a baby.

[Erik_Andersson]

"you mean his child as well" - Oh I'm sorry, is that what it is, when he gets to see the child never or almost never? These women TRICK men by saying they are on the pill, so they can get a kid and force a man to pay for their kid. Something you conveniently leave out of your crusade here. Apparently it doesn't fit your agenda.

[Asker]

you can't trick someone into having sex. pregnancy is always a possible outcome. if men want to play safe wear a condom.

[Maia24]

You do realize that birth control is not 100% effective, right? Even with birth control there is a possibility for pregnancy. But all women are conniving and evil, right? Please! Enough with your jaded views and ignorance.

[emmee]

I don't think you understand what you're saying. Why would a woman "trick" a guy into having sex? So she can gain weight and put incredible stress on her body, only to have to raise a child and support them for the rest of her life? It would be a hell of a lot less expensive to not have the kid, and not make the guy pay child support. And they are right, sex is a mutual act, and one cannot "trick" the other into it.

[AnUnquietMind]

Is there a question in this, or just ranting?

[Motorcycle_Girl]

Its a complicated issue, due to simple biology that men can't get pregnant. Once a woman is pregnant, she has complete control. She can have an abortion, have the baby and force the man to pay for it, or put it up for adoption.

It is actually the last option that infuriates most men. Most won't argue that women should have the choice of whether or not to have the child as it is her body. Women can make a decision even long after the child is born that they made a mistake and are not financially or emotionally ready, and choose to put the child up for adoption. Why should women be able to do this and not men? If a man thinks he is not ready... well, too bad, it's not up to you. In fact up until very recently, a woman could put her child up for adoption WITHOUT consent of the father. The issue came to light in a recent 9 YEAR LONG legal battle where a father wanted custody of a child of his that was put up for adoption without his knowledge. Sure he finally won, but a 9 year old child was ripped from the arms of her adoptive parents. Was it worth it?

I understand the other side of things too, for example what if a man decides he is fed up with his wife and 8 children and decides he wants out. Unless the 'financial abortion' idea is very well planned out, he could abuse the system to leave this poor woman to care for 8 children.

I have a fiancee with 2 children from previous relationships. He is a completely dedicated and loving father, but the courts treat him like he is living crap. Their only concern is money, as if it is only money that can raise a healthy and happy child. It disgusts me and I could write a book on the rights and wrongs that have happened but I'll just leave it as that. The system is broken, but there doesn't seem to be an easy way to fix it.

[IgottaQuestion2]

I would say that it should only be allowed, until the child has reached an age to where abortion/adoption is not an option any longer. After that the man should be on the hook, unless tricked or deceived in some way.

[SenselessNoise]

Sorry ladies, but biologically, a baby is 50% us. As such, we should have a 50% say in the matter. Granted, this makes a lot of women angry, but look at it from our perspective - if we're taking the necessary precautions (specifically condoms) to prevent pregnancy, and it breaks or it's been compromised (I knew a girl that poked holes in condoms in an attempt to get pregnant to make money off the guys for an abortion, it was disgusting), we no longer have any say in the matter. That's ridiculously unfair. If we can't support a child, and in good faith and effort did everything we could to prevent the pregnancy (short of abstinence), we shouldn't be on the hook for 18 years just because the woman doesn't want an abortion, or to give it up for adoption.

[Asker]

the govt says different. why should taxpayers foot the bill because you didn't get a vasectomy?

[Josht]

well why didn't you get your ovaries tied

[Asker]

b/c if I ever get pregnant I'll do what's right and take care of the baby. not whine like a little bitch

[lericah]

Anonymous I don't think you read the reply he made and Senseless I think you should pay attention and avoid a girl if she does that sh*t. We overlook how serious sex is and just look at the enjoyment it brings but that orgasm is just like nectar on a flower it only serves as a incentive

[Asker]

i read it. and of course it was that bullsh*t. you can't make something equally that biologically is not equal. if men could get pregnant, if men had to go through abortions, if men had to go through labor, if men had to spend 9 months bonding with a child then give it up, and go through depression, then it would be equal until then they need to shut the hell up and man up

[jenn_a_adams]

I could literary write a book on this it makes me so angry! So what we are saying to men is...Go ahead, have sex with whom ever, when ever, no need to be careful you will have no consequences. I would venture to guess the short term problem if this were the law would be many fatherless children, more children in poverty, the government supporting these children in a one income household and many women being FORCED into abortion or adoption. The long term problems...I think that many scared, selfish immature men that would choose to bow out would eventually grow up into mature men that regret their decision and seek out contact with the child they abandoned...Then what? Mom does all the work and Non-Dad gets to waltz back in? Too messy, too many problems associated with this proposal...It will NEVER happen and for VERY good reason. Just that someone would think this up sickens me.

[Shaun]

That's pretty much what we say to women. Don't get me wrong, I'm pro-choice AND I understand that there is nothing easy about choosing or getting an abortion. But it isn't a lifetime sentence that it is for men.

[jenn_a_adams]

It is a lifetime scentence. It can never be undone, the memory and the trauma will never go away. Women die from abortions, women become steril from having abortions, women commit suicide after having abortions, many women have to get psyciatric help after having abortions. If men were made to see the ultra sound of their baby minutes before destroying it I think they would not take abortions so lightly. I am glad it is a choice but it should not be a choice a woman gets forced into.

[jenn_a_adams]

Just as men, women havfe choices but none of them come without consequinces. Women can choose abortion and then have to endure the proceedure and mental anguish. Women can choose adoption and then have to carry that baby for nine months and give it away, going against every primal instinct she has to nurture it. Women can choose to have the baby and sacrifice money, time and most all aspects of herself to raise it. Our choices are not easy and both men and women pay dearly for unplanned pregnanc

[Shaun]

Okay, so a woman's bad feelings is exactly the same as making a man pay for a child he doesn't love for 18+ years? Gotcha.

[jenn_a_adams]

Glad you get it. It would suck if you were still under the impression that your fincial loss were so must greater than the women mental anguish.

[JohNfromKolob]

U are aware many women have zero remorse for killing their children...i don't care how much you think about or "its not an easy choice"...sorry, your still a murderer in my book and you have blood on your hands.

[jenn_a_adams]

Then I am sure you are against this proposal because there would be MANY more abortions if it were the law.

[IgottaQuestion2]

Can't women do that? Have sex with whoever, whenever, and have no consequences? Why is it ok for her, but not for him?

[toosexualcat]

wth is financial abortion? Is that when the guy goes OK you keep the kid and I get away scott free to make even more kids? OH f*ck that! That's jacked up! If it's not bad already, it'll get even worse! Where is this thing taking place?

[giggle22]

no that's not what it is at all, go read the info you can google it easy enough.

[Erik_Andersson]

I am reminded of an Ace of Base song, "All That She Wants" (you probably haven't heard it, from the 90s, it's on YouTube):

So if you are in sight and the day is right

She’s the hunter, you’re the fox

The gentle voice that talks to you

Won’t talk forever

It’s a night for passion

But the morning means goodbye

Beware of what is flashing in her eyes

She’s going to get you

All that she wants is another baby

She's gone tomorrow, boy

All that she wants is another baby

All that she wants is another baby

She's gone tomorrow, boy

All that she wants is another baby

[Asker]

You do know that song was about having another guy for sex right. Not a baby.

[Erik_Andersson]

The song is about getting a baby by having sex with the guy. Hence the "all that she wants is another baby," not "all that she wants is another booty." Also, that's what Ace of Base said at the time, which I know because I read it in an interview in a Stockholm-based magazine.

[Asker]

false. the song was about getting a man. watch the video

[jacquesvol]

"She's gone tomorrow, boy"

[Maia24]

I remember when that song came out. By "baby" they meant it as a guy for sex. People use names like baby, babe, honey, etc all the time in reference to another person.

[Riah92]

PEOPLE! IF YOU GUYS DON'T WANT A KID AND DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR IT, THEN KEEP YOUR DICK IN YOUR PANTS, OR PUT ON A DAMN CONDOM. This entire problem is easily preventable. You people know the risks involving unprotected sex. If you have sex with a girl, knowing full well that you could get her pregnant, that's your deal. You were the idiot who decided not to attempt to prevent the pregnancy in the first place, therefore you shouldn't just be able to get out of it. You don't want a kid? Then wear a condom. Simple as that.

[Prayerwood]

Sounds like someone who has never experienced the effects of testosterone.

[Riah92]

dude. wear a condom. not that hard. I get that you want to have sex, really I do. but if you don't want a screaming kid to pay for, then be proactive in preventing it. that way, you can't complain about your situation.

[IgottaQuestion2]

The woman also knows "the risks". Why is she not expected to keep it in her pants? She has options. If she gets pregnant she can 1. Keep it 2. abort it 3. give it up for adoption. Only one require financial responsibility. Men are completely at the mercy of the woman. Does that seem right to you? If the woman has sex with a man she doesn't know well enough to know if he will stick around, then she should have also kept it in her pants. You seem to have sympathy for the woman, but not for the man. Which I find interesting.

[sinful1620]

So women should have complete rights to their body, but all the responsibility should fall on the man?

If a guy can't or doesn't want to support a child, he deserves the right to opt out. If a woman has a right to her body, she also has the responsibility for it. If you can't raise a baby on your own, abort it, or give it up for adoption. Don't blame men because you're too selfish to see that you're forcing your responsibilities onto others.

[vmw2008]

"Don't blame men because you're too selfish to see that you're forcing your responsibilities onto others." Actually it seems as if you're the one being too selfish to see you're forcing half of your responsibilities onto others. Last I checked it takes two to create a baby.

[juice1]

@vmw2008 yeah it takes two to create a baby, but if the guy doesn't want the kid with all the options open to not have it, then the mother still has the kid, it should be on her. that was her choice to have, keep, etc, the kid. not the fathers. he shouldn't be forced to pay for something he didn't want in the first place

[Felynn]

if a guy doesn't want a baby, maybe HE should wear a condom. Instead he rather let his girl take full responsability for the consequences of their sex, let her take crap hormones, all for his own increased pleasure. And if she forgets to take her pill one time, he can always back out completely, no horm done. I only have two word for this: selfish coward.

[vmw2008]

I just think that the "unfair" risks between the sexes balance each other out. A woman may have a choice, but the majority of the weight will be on her shoulders, whether she decides to keep it or not. An abortion may seem like a quick fix, but it's expensive, painful, and often emotionally damaging. There's a lot more involved since it's happening to the woman's body. All of this happens to her no matter what, even if it's "something she didn't want in the first place." As for guys, you have

[vmw2008]

the sucky end when it comes to the choice. You don't really get one whether you want the baby or not. However, the weight/burden isn't nearly as heavy on you no matter the choice. You share equal financial responsibility with the woman, and that's it. You can opt out of taking care of the baby, raising the baby, and you certainly don't have to carry/deliver the baby. You also won't deal with the negative consequences of aborting the baby either. All in all, I think the pros/cons balance.

[vmw2008]

I agree Felynn. Both parties have a responsibility to the consequences of sex. Women are just as responsible for not getting pregnant as guys are. The difference I see though, is that when an accident happens, women simply want SHARED responsibility. Both her and him helping. She's not planning on dropping the baby on his doorstep and bolting for sex they BOTH had. The guy however usually wants NO responsibility. They want to bolt and say it's "her body her fault"That's where it becomes unfair.

[hALLDAY]

If I may add in, the reason why most guys want no responsibility is because we will not be granted fair custody rights (whether you want to admit it or not, favors women). The pros vs cons do not balance out completely. Thus, sharing the same financial responsibility but not sharing the equivalent time with the child seems unfair to me.

[vmw2008]

Most guys don't want shared time. If they don't want the baby, they don't want to pay for it or spend time with it. Watch teen mom sometime. None of them planned on having a baby, but look who does the majority of the work the majority of the time. The female. It's not a matter of unfair custody, the guy just doesn't want to and refuses to step up to the plate if he's not legally forced to.

[vmw2008]

My own cousin had a baby he didn't plan/nor want. He has shared custody with the mother, but when it's his turn to watch the baby, he gives her to his mom. He sees the baby when he drives her to and from the mom's house. That's his choice and it seems to be the choice of most young men who don't want to be fathers. The girls will step up even if it's something they didn't want, but most guys only do the bare minimum if that.

[Asker]

bitch this isn't about the man or the woman it's about what's best for the existing child that you BOTH created!

[Asker]

and how the f*** is it selfish for a woman to want a man who got her pregnant to pay child support? if anything it's selfless since she is the one devoting most of her time in the child. Why are you stupid?

[vmw2008]

Did you just call me a bitch for supporting your view?

[Asker]

not you, sinful1620

[sinful1620]

It's selfish for you to force a baby on someone who doesn't want it and has no decent options for birth control. If male birth control that doesn't ruin the feeling was available, I might be inclined to agree with you regarding child support, but right now ALL birth control is designed with the woman in mind. That means that women control pregnancy and hold the men responsible for it, which is incredibly selfish on the woman's part.

[Asker]

sex results in pregnancy! that's what sex is for..PROCREATION! Their are condoms for a reason, if you don't like to wear them that's your problem, don't get bitchy when you get a girl pregnant. You both made the stupid decision to not use birth control. Now own up to it. Since abortion isn't an easy procedure and hormonally she will be inclined to want to raise the baby. She will most likely want to keep it. And since it is half your DNA you should help support it. It's not about you anymore.

[sinful1620]

If you refuse to get on the pill, or the shot, or the ring, or whatever other forms of various birth control for women are out there that don't ruin sex for you and say "JUST WEAR A CONDOM!", you're being EXTREMELY selfish.

[Asker]

condoms don't ruin sex. if you can't use condoms don't have sex. also condoms prevent STD's the female birth control doesn't. so you might wanna wrap it up.

[sinful1620]

"Condoms don't ruin sex"... FOR THE GIRL. For a guy, it's like putting on a heavy coat prior to getting a back massage. Again, you're being completely selfish and egocentric, only being able to see this situation from the woman's point of view.

[Asker]

You're the one being selfish! I don't wanna wear a condom it ruins sex,blah blah. If you don't want a baby don't have sex. Or better get a vasectomy. Their reversible. So when you do want kids you can have one.

[jrose]

Sorry, men are equally responsible because as far as I know (outside of artificial insemination) women don't get pregnant without men, you had sex, you contributed to bringing the life into the world, and now you have to deal with it. Actions have consequences, deal with it.

[sinful1620]

to recap: Women have all choice when it comes to pregnancy, abortion, and adoption. If a woman gets pregnant, she can choose to be a stay at home mom and force a dad to work 60 hours a week to support her. It is wrong for the guy to ever have any rights in this entire process, but right to have him ultimately responsible.

[Asker]

You just hate women. It's not our fault.It's nature. There's no way to make it equal because in one case the child ends up losing on support and the woman ends up being forced to raise a kid by herself, that she didn't make alone. While guys get the advantage all the time. You think the girl is just sitting there on her ass while the guy does all the work. Try the reverse. It women who do most of the work and child rearing. You're just a delusional idiot who has no clue about the real world.

[sinful1620]

That's the standard response from feminists that I get. When I point out the ways in which men are blatantly disenfranchised in our culture to the point of not even having rights, girls like you fall back on calling me sexist because it works. Women are in such a position of power when it comes to these issues that saying someone hates women is all that needs to be done to discredit someone.

[DaveMicharl69]

FORCING HER RESPONSIBILITIES? ARE YOU KIDDING? SHE DIDN'T GET PREGNANT BY HERSELF! You're being selfish, N if a man doesn't want to risk supporting a child he created, he needs to use protection or zip his pants. N I know no protection is 100%, so therefore you're still gambling N if you lose You have to pay the price...

[Asker]

@sinful1620 Why are you dumb? I'm trying to point how much your logic fails and you can't see it. I guess you're just dumb.

[sinful1620]

You know ad hominem, such as simply saying I hate women rather than discussing any of my points, is a logical fallacy and thus not an argument, right?

[juice1]

Why does a man decision on what to do with an unborn child have no merit, but his wallet does after its born?

[Asker]

A man can't obviously get pregnant, and he can't tell a woman what to do with her body. Since it's hers and said child isn't even born yet, so legally he has no rights to it. And a man can't even prove he's the father till he gets a DNA, which happens after the baby is born. Either way once the kids born they have to do what's best for the baby. It's not hard to understand. America's education is obviously failing. No wonder the government is run by dumb f***s.

[Alpha5]

Dumbest post ever lol. Sex is for the purpose of reproduction. That's like touching a hot iron and being mad because you were burned. If you don't want babies keep it in your pants! Don't blame women because you don't understand that sex makes babies. I think you need to watch Animal planet or something. =-/

[sinful1620]

The issue isn't that sex makes babies. If a girl gets pregnant, both the parents need to be responsible for it. However, saying that both people are responsible means that the woman gets to be a stay at home mom while the dad has to go work 40-60 hours a week isn't okay, and saying that both parents are responsible but only the woman has any rights or power to choose what happens isn't okay either.

[Asker]

actually most single mothers aren't stay at home moms and actually do most of the work

[sinful1620]

hence the "deadbeat dad" situation at the top. If someone came to you and said that your actions caused them to be a cripple, thus you were now legally responsible to take care of them, would you actually take care of them, or just send them a check each month? Not to mention that I know two fathers who wanted custody of their kids, but the default was to give the mother sole custody and have the father give child support. My friend just fought a two year legal battle just to have joint custody

[Asker]

as long as the child is financially taken care of, there's no problem.

[Riah92]

i agree with the QA here. why should the child suffer? it's a human being, and its not their fault that their parents weren't careful enough. if you're a guy, you knock a chick up, you grow some balls and you support your child. it's what a father does. he provides for his children. a single mother raising a baby has a hard enough time, so the child support helps the baby get what it needs in order to be healthy. stop being selfish and only thinking about it in terms of "me me me"

[sinful1620]

In this situation, you can have your morals and beliefs about what's right, but regardless of any excuses people have made about saying the guy should "man up" or saying the single mom would have a hard time, the father has zero rights and has at least half of the responsibility for caring for the child. You're all right: it takes two people to get a woman pregnant. However, you're absolving the woman of any responsibility while giving her all the rights.

[peace-love-couture]

It takes 2 to make a baby, 2 to prevent a pregnancy. If you're gonna have sex, then you nee to own up to the consequences and that goes for guys too. It's pretty pathetic how guys try to get out of being adults and parents. American men are beyond pathetic and sad

[jenn_a_adams]

You rights and responsibility, you give those up when you fail to wear a condom...the second you release those swimmers it is out of your hands. She has the right and resposibility for it alright while she is pregnant...after that...that little contribution you made during sex...now you get to share in the "rights and responsibility" if you don't like it bag it up.

[sinful1620]

Do you also believe a woman gives up her rights and responsibilities when she has unprotected sex, and thus abortion should be illegal?

[MrReal]

let's reverse the situation. The Man wants the baby but the Woman wants an abortion ? Should the woman pay the man because she wanted an abortion? The man had as much to do with the pregnancy as the woman had? Shouldn't he have a say? That seems unfair that the other person doesn't want the responsibility and you should live with it... Don't you think?

[StringofFate]

I think maybe they'd be feasible if it weren't a want-it-or-not choice, and if they had to sit down in court and give some legitimate reasons why they should not be financially responsible for that baby.

[DaveMicharl69]

SO WELL PUT! THANK YOU! SOMEBODY had to say it...

[moaterboat]

When your dealing with rights, the consequences of the decision must take a backseat to the actual rights of the individuals involved. The question here, and really it is the ONLY question, is should we support equality, or have different rights for men and women. Only AFTER we answer that can we move on to specifics. As long as women have the right to avoid all obligations that come with having a child, men MUST have that right as well. It is very clearly spelled out in the 14th amendment. If women have a right, men MUST have that right as well.

Now to answer your question, yes this would increase the number of deadbeat dads. The point of this argument isn't so much about men supporting child support, but rather a tool to turn the tables on women who casually, and legally, kill a mans child for her own convenience. It is basically a method for the pro-life community to tell the pro-abortion community "If you really want to go down this road, we are gonna end up in a place NOBODY likes." It is obvious that financial abortion is unsustainable, as it would be detrimental to women, and society in general. Were the courts to actually READ the constitution instead of legislating from the bench, if they would actually make decisions with their MINDS instead of their BLEEDING HEARTS, financial abortion would be a a no-brainer ("Let's should we rule in favor of equal rights or gender discrimination?")

The fallout of this would FORCE a review of all abortion policy, not by stuffy, out of touch judges, but by congress, which would then carry out the will of the people. In the end, it wouldn't bring havoc into the world, it would help stop the worlds largest genocide.

[jacquesvol]

Thank you for revealing the true reason behind this dirty little campaign: another attack on woman's right to her OWN body.

[moaterboat]

Oh Jacque, I know we have butted heads on this issue before, and you STILL have yet to explain why you don't care about the baby's right to its own body.

[gummybear888]

health, livelihood and happiness can't be bought with a stack of bills.

it baffles me to no end the countless 'men' claim some form of intelligence in regards to a woman's health and livelihood.

sometimes getting to know how some of these 'men' think make me increase the length of my 20 ft pole I have between myself and another member of the opposite gender.

you guys don't know a piece of sh*t about what it takes to be pregnant and to go through that sh*t for 9 months. my friend had her baby with her ex who left her...and an abortion.

what does it do? get some books out and read on it and even if you do learn it, you can't even imagine what it takes to be pregnant for 9 months.

this suggestion of a financial abortion, pretty much makes me barf. it makes me think why do we even need men?

empathy-knowledge-compassion-these are things that are missing in our society. which retard came up with this idea anyways?

[IgottaQuestion2]

You seem to have compassion for women that don't want to be mothers, but not men that don't want to be fathers... Why is that?

[KarKingJack]

Well, if you just up and leave the old fashioned way, that's the way it works. You don't pay child support where I'm from to my knowledge. You can, but that's just money in hand, that's just like 'Take this for the child, my woman, while I go off to man the canons, for it was the way it was before the war', or whatever.

[JohNfromKolob]

im against abortion for either gender...except for health reasons...but it is hypocritical for women to be agianst that but pro-choice...A man who gets a woman pregnant but refuses to be a dad is a scumbag deadbeat dad...a woman who is pregnant and refuses to be a mother...shes "pro-choice"

[JohNfromKolob]

I don't think women should be able to abort their childrne excpet for a few circumstances

-when child is product of rape

-when her life or well being is threatened (I say well being because its not always life v death...my aunt for example..diagnosed with cancer...5 months pregnant...told her if she didn't abort and start chemo her chances of sruvivng would be severly lower...she actually chose to finish the pregnancy and began chemo later...but she died 2 years later...she gave her life for her daughter...and I respect that so much...but I would never tell someone they MUST do that)

But, I think as long as america allows women not to be mothers...men should be able to get out of atherhood to be fair...but like I said...if I was king...women would not be able to get out of motherhood and dads would not be able ditch their kids either.

[MrReal]

I believe a woman should still keep the child even when the case of rape, a rape baby is the same as an accidental baby and a planned baby it's disheartening for such an innocent thing to come out from such a tragic act and being half yours and half from such an evil person.

[WonderingNomad]

+1 because even though I don't totally agree with you, I really like how thoughtful your post seemed. I like that you distinguish between well being and certain death. So many people who have never seen anyone in the position of your aunt say things like "only if it's proven that she will die without it" and fail to take into account the inherent ambiguity in medicine. Again, though I don't agree with much of your opinion, it seems like it comes from a good place :-)

[JohNfromKolob]

well thanks for that...this whole question is just another way in yet mother nature makes life unfair...only one sex gets to become pregnant and house the baby...im just terrified of the thought of a woman having absolute control over my child (u may disagree but I believe life begins if not at conception...long before actual birth) so I worry some girl will get to kill my child and there's nothing I could do to stop it. Of course I just have to be careful and make sure I only have sexual..

[JohNfromKolob]

relationships with pro-life girls...of course they could always backstab me...but then again they could stab me in their sleep too...i mean no one is immune from betrayal...but id feel mroe comfortable knowing that if she did shed go to jail...or owe me money or something...i feel like it should only be on the other side...women should be able to kill childrne that men want unless they face health issues...i don't think men should be able to walk out on children tho..i never would I just...

[JohNfromKolob]

dont like the idea that a woman could kill my child and get away with it scott free.

[jacquesvol]

"I think as long as america allows women not to be mothers...men should be able to get out of atherhood to be fair...but like I said...if I was king...women would not be able to get out of motherhood and dads would not be able ditch their kids either." And where would 'financial abortion' leave women who chose not to abort?

[jacquesvol]

through 'financial abortion' you would be pushing poor women to get an abortion by any means: is that your ideal?

[Riah92]

i think its fine that you are pro-life. you don't believe in abortions, which is your opinon. but that doesn't give you the right to force your beliefs on other people. which is why abortion will most likely never be made illegal. at least with a choice, a woman can choose to keep the baby, which she most likely will. with no choice, she may be stuck with a child that she'll grow to hate. however that being said, I only believe in abortions in cases of rape, or in order to save the mothers life

[Riah92]

i don't agree with the fact that most people can have unprotected sex, and when they get pregnant, just go ahead and terminate the pregnancy because they don't want to deal with the responsibility. but you can't outlaw abortions entirely, because there are millions of different circumstances to think of.

[Riah92]

Also, if you believe outlawing abortions will solve the murder of unborn children, you're wrong. back in the 19th century, there was no such thing as an abortion. but women were still getting them performed, and dieing from them. in that case, id rather lose one life, than two. id rather have it legal and know hundreds of women aren't dieing, than the reverse

[JohNfromKolob]

hun, we all "force" our belief on eachother...for example should I be allowed to use my body to rape or assult women? why not? is it only because a majority of people think its wrong and think it should be illegal? on what basis do you say its wrong? Its all a matter of opinion and nothing more. And no, outlwaing abortion will not solve the problem of killing kids..but it will condemn the practice...rape laws don't keep rape from happenieng but it punishes those who do it and makes

[JohNfromKolob]

the statement by scoiety as a whole that its WRONG...Btw do you know how many women died of botched bsack alley aboritons pre-roe v wade? 38! menawhile millions of aborted babies...but even if thosuands of women died...i have no sympathy...they did something that they knew was illegal and set out to kill their child and they died themselves...i call that karma and cosmic justice if anything...infact I think its prett awesome. too bad it'd didn't happen more often.

[harland1980]

Well maybe it will help decrease teen pregnancy.

[Asker]

doubt it. it most likely will lead to more poverty.

[jacquesvol]

Indeed.

[Blobb]

lol financial abortion hahaahhaha who the f*** thought of that one! So wrong lol

[hALLDAY]

Abortions do require money for the initial process.

I find it quite hypocritical that women are pushing so hard for all these equal rights but just shun the negatives or things that wouldn't benefit them. A man should have the right to terminate his legal and financial obligations to the child before it has been born. After all, the court process is so biased towards giving the woman custody that there is not point in men trying unless the woman has drug/mental problems.

In reality, men don't have a choice. If you want the full custody rights to the child, so be it. But if that's the case, then provide financial security yourself since you don't want him apart of your son/daughters life in the first place. Our court system is set up to pamper women. By forcing a man to pay child support while he doesn't have a say in the matter at all is just creating dead beat women who think a man will always be around to pay her bills.

[Felynn]

For men, aborting a baby may be a rational and easy decision, but for a pregnant women an abortion can be a traumatic experience. The pregnancy is also not her choice and a consequence of two people having sex.I undertand your point of view, but if a guy doesn't want a baby, he should take responsability for that during sex and wear a condom.

[hALLDAY]

That's true but sometimes it's not always as black and white as just "wear a condom".

[Asker]

why do you keep going off topic? this about what's best for the child, not custody arrangements. you pay for something you created. it's as simple as that.

[hALLDAY]

Because if you use basic logic, custody rights have everything to do with the child's life and future. Hence, it directly correlates with what is best for the child. Furthermore, if you don't get to see or spend time with the thing you created, you shouldn't pay for it. Would you pay Canadian taxes if your American just because you visit one day a year?

[Asker]

if you pay child support legally you can see your child whenever you want, however, most of the time men go see them when it's convenient. It's funny when guys bitch about how hard their lives are when in reality their getting a good deal. The girl has to give birth, go through the nausea and morning sickness, cramps, aches, and pains. Then practically raise the child on her own and put her life on hold and pay for most of what the child needs. Yet men say it 's not fair. Bullsh*t!

[hALLDAY]

No, in most cases you cannot drive over to the mothers house and simply take your child for a few days. You are specifically granted such days to do so agreed by the court of law. Child support is paying for more than what the child needs and women still complain and bring the man back to court to get an advancement on it. Especially when they find out he gets a raise... milk him for all he's worth, way to go girls! What you go through during pregnancy is irrelevant and off topic.

[Asker]

usually parents work out which days are best for them. if the father doesn't like the days maybe he should renegotiate. Most women have no problem with a father spending time with his kids.

[lucyloo]

As a woman I agree with you hallday. But apparently I'm dumb and stupid for thinking that. and to the girl below, I do know about the world, I do know how adoption works, and actually if the woman doesn't know who the father is, how can she possibly have him sign the papers. What if that father has died...he can't sign papers, but that woman has still given up her child and removed her from being responsible for it.

[Asker]

Yes you're dumb. The pregnancy wasn't her choice. Both partook in that. Doing a procedure that could all likelihood ruin her chances of ever having children was. However, since both partook in creating the child BOTH should take care of it. That's sounds fair to me.

[Asker]

In that regard if the woman doesn't know who the father is and gives up her rights to the child, she is giving to someone who can take care of it. In other words she's giving the child to someone who can raise the child and give it the necessities it needs in life. If fathers aren't required to pay child support then this wouldn't be best for the child cause it would most likely not have enough money to provide it with all it's needs. This is all about what's best for the EXISTING child

[Maia24]

I think a guy should be able to give up financial obligations to the child before it's born... but with that, they give up all legal rights they have to that child. A guy can't give up financial obligations but then still expect to be allowed to be part of the child's life. There are plenty of guys who don't pay child support because they wanted no part of the child's life. There are also women who do the same. Also, if a guy pays child support, he DOES have a legal say in regards to the child

[dx021]

bullsh*t. if a woman gets a right to choose, then why can't a man? a man should have a right to choose who his resources go to, and if he doesn't want to invest in an offspring that he doesn't want to claim as legitimate, he shouldn't have to

financial abortions would be a beautiful thing for this world

[Asker]

not really. they'd actually be the most disastrous. economically it would likely bring more poverty to single mothers, and more tax dollars would be needed to support, because they likely would be more on welfare.

[dx021]

then they should cut welfare. let natural selection take its course.

[Asker]

so let children live in poverty? this will only cause more crime and more deaths. how is that any good.

[dx021]

how is supporting low quality people good? let high quality people keep their wealth and resources and let low quality kids die out. meh

[Asker]

that's the point! god you're an idiot. if you have financial abortions that means more higher class people will have to support lower class people. instead of forcing people who haven't anything to do with the child be forced to pay for it, the father should, because he was too dumb to keep it in his pants.

[dx021]

you are the one who can't seem to grasp what I am saying. how about no one supports the mother. if her and the child stare, oh well its women who can get pregnant and in our NSA world, it should be on them to not get pregnant or pay for it if they do

[Asker]

lol..you're a nutcase. america is fat already and you're saying we should let women and children starve? lol..i'm done talking to you, you're an idiot

[dx021]

bahaha whatever you say trick

[Asker]

lol..you're pathetic. you're probably still a vrigin, cause I don't know any woman in her right mind who would sleep with you

[Jager66]

until men have a say in keeping, aborting or adopting the child then they should not have to bare the financial burden. if you don't like this then go bitch at mother nature not men that's the sad reality to bad.

I also find it funny that a man who had no say in having a child, who has little to no parental rights, and is forced into indentured servitude over this is a "dead beat" because he can't afford to pay the women boat loads of money every month and you get no say in how its spent or how the child is raised.

women don't even have to tell the father they are having their child. men have all the responsility and none of the rights, until men get a fair share of the rights we should have none of the responsibility.

[Asker]

you do have rights. if you pay child support you legally can see your child whenever you want. it's just most men don't want to or don't have the time. When did you hear that? And the man does have the right to adopt the baby if the mom doesn't want it.

[Jager66]

well you missed what I was trying to convey, If I DO NOT want a child and some woman I'm with gets pregnant I am comited to a life of indentured servitude or constant legal harassment and societal labels such as dead beat, loss of my drivers licence etc.. Men sould have the right to not acknoldge a child much like women can kill it and through it in the garbage before its born, or put it up for addoption without ever telling the father. all I want is equality nothing more nothing less.

[Asker]

you act like she got pregnant by herself. some women I'm with gets pregnant. Some women YOU got pregnant. So now yes, you have responsibility. Should've wrapped it up.

[Jager66]

thats a tiered old excuse and not even a very valid one considering the plethora of contraception available to women that is far more convenient then what is available to men. if it was a non serious relatiohship then expecting him to want a child you decide to keep is unreasonable, if it was long term and was decided before hand you didn't want children then also he sould not be on the hook. like I said I want only equality nothing more nothing less I don't understand why you don't like equality.

[Asker]

because it isn't equal. the women bears most of the responsibility either way.

[Jager66]

it sounds like your just upset with the way nature works. what kind of mother would want any association with a man who has nothing but disregard and/or disdain for her children anyway? it might help me to understand your point of view if you could explain why you feel it is right to force such a man into your childrens lives? how will this benefit their psych. emotional development? it will ease your purse strings but ultimatly harm your children.

[jenn_a_adams]

"thats a tiered old excuse and not even a very valid one considering the plethora of contraception available to women that is far more convenient then what is available to men." Most contraception available to women are biochemical (pills, depo, norplant) or invasive (IUD, Norplant) Women have access to ONLY one non envasive contraceptive choice just as men do...the female condom. You call altering your hormal balance and inserting foriegn objects into your body convenient? If this option

[jenn_a_adams]

actually came to be a reality we would have so many more fatherless children. Women would feel forced into abortion. The reason it is the womans choice is because it is the Womans body. I think it is you that upset with the way nature works.

[jacquesvol]

Men have a say in not having sex, they have a say in using condoms. They have a say in vasectomies.

[Jager66]

i notice no one will answers my questions in their responces... if you take the time to read the proposed idea it suggests that men will have as little as 1 week and as much as 1 month to decide if they want to be a a father or to sever all financial and legal rights/responcibilities this is not something you can do down the road its immediate or not at all, it also makes a few very valid and proven points how it benefits women wich I don't have room to post here and its not my job to educate you

[Jager66]

the father must also be able to prove he made resonable efforts to prevent pregnancy on his part and that it was made clear between both parties that he was not interested in being a father, if both these criteria are not met he would not qualify to apply for the financial abortion. under these circumstances it very much is a matter of equal rights.