Article: Shouldn't Men have a choice too?

[RaWBLooD]

Wyldfire is right man, let it be.

 

[Mischka]

Of course it is stupid of a man not to use a condom. I have no problem to let him pay for his errors.

But how much should he pay?

In many countries people face death penalty for ridiculous "crimes". Most of them KNEW they commited a "crime". So it is all right and just, isn't it, Wyldfire? Well, let's cut hands of thieves and decapitate women cheating on their husbands. Well, they knew it, didn't they? And sure, people would steal and cheat less.

But we don't want to live in a country like that. Of course we want to punish a thief, but we want adequate punishment and justice.

In our case the man might pay 200k$ in the next 20 years, based on an arbitrary decision of another human being.

I know it is difficult, I know it is about a child and it isn't a small case. I think, no woman must be forced into abortion. I think the woman must have the final decision about giving birth.

But let's say the woman gives birth to a child against the will of the father. Let him pay child support for 2 years or something, then the matter is closed, she doesn't get money, he may not visit etc.

 

[Wyldfire]

What about the child's right Mishka? The child had NO choice in being born. The man had a choice NOT to have sex with that woman.

Two years? Can a 2 year old child support themselves? No, they can't.

They base child support on both parent's income. In order for the mother to work to support the child she has to pay child care. The least a person is going to pay for one child is about $200 a week. You find so many single mothers where the father doesn't pay child support on welfare because she can't afford to work due to the cost of child care. It's NOT the tax payers' responsibility to support the children of irresponsible men who don't want to man up. Supporting a child is not cheap. Nor is it the sole responsibility of the mother.

Sex makes babies. Babies cost money. Sex can cost you 18-22 years worth of child support. Every man KNOWS that before he sticks his penis inside a woman. If he throws a fit over an unwanted pregnancy and won't be a man then he's not mature enough to be having sex in the first place.

As for harsh punishment for crime...I'm all for it. I support the death penalty for some crimes. If you want to behead women who cheat you'll have to behad the men who cheat too.

Sex might mean years and years of child support. It doesn't matter if you don't want to pay it. There is a child you made who didn't ask or have a choice in the matter. Both the man and the woman are responsible for the child they made together.

Period...

 

[RaWBLooD]

Wyldfire is right, there is no arguement, she is right!

 

[Mischka]

Oh, now I see. Wyldfire is right, ok. What a mess in my brain I had.

 

[RaWBLooD]

Originally posted by Mischka
Oh, now I see. Wyldfire is right, ok. What a mess in my brain I had.

exactly.

 

[penkitten]

Originally posted by Mischka


Let him pay child support for 2 years or something, then the matter is closed, she doesn't get money, he may not visit etc.

actually mischka, my attorney during my divorce said that child support and visitation are seperate matters and that if my ex husband didnt pay the support, i would have to file a motion in court about it. if i didnt let him have his visitation, he would have to file a motion in court about it.
then the attorney said it was illegal to say "no you cant see the kids because you didnt pay your money."

thats why i say, if you dont want to be a part of their lives and see them and love them and you dont wanna pay the money,if having a child is not what you want, sign over your rights if possible. let the other parent just have all the rights as opposed to taking you to court and letting the system foreclose on you!

 

[( . )( . )]

Originally posted by penkitten

thats why i say, if you dont want to be a part of their lives and see them and love them and you dont wanna pay the money,if having a child is not what you want, sign over your rights if possible. let the other parent just have all the rights as opposed to taking you to court and letting the system foreclose on you!

Huh? so the next time I get a b!tch pregnant I can just "sign over my rights"?? Even if I have well paying job and she lives in the poor house, shes not going to laugh in my face and tell me "Yeah RIGHT money bags"?.

 

[penkitten]

Originally posted by ( . )( . )
Huh? so the next time I get a b!tch pregnant I can just "sign over my rights"?? Even if I have well paying job and she lives in the poor house, shes not going to laugh in my face and tell me "Yeah RIGHT money bags"?.

well its not that simple, however if you dont want her or the child she will end up dating someone else. if she starts talking marriage , start talking about letting her new husband adopt and you are willing to sign your rights over.

we have 3 types of mothers in this world.
1. wants only the real father to be involved, at any cost , sometimes for the kid sometimes for still loving the father.
she will sue your ass off.
2. wants the real father no where near involved and wants you to sign your rights over. sometimes for fear her kid will turn out f'ed up and sometimes just cause shes still mad at the father.
3. just wants the best for her child.

so it just depends on the mother and the situation , and to the state you live in on how easy it can be.

personally, i would rather someone sign over their rights and let me and my child move on with our lives rather than never come around to know my child and hide out from the state to not pay support.

 

[( . )( . )]

Originally posted by penkitten

personally, i would rather someone sign over their rights and let me and my child move on with our lives rather than never come around to know my child and hide out from the state to not pay support.

Well unfortunately real life shows us most women are NOT like you, and that option is very rarely given to men, so it kind of makes your option a moot point.

But hats off for at least giving something remotely constructive here and trying.

 

[Wyldfire]

Men who shirk their responsibilities to a child they helped make should be summarily sterilized so they won't be a burden on society and the tax payers who end up supporting their kids.

 

[Wyldfire]

Originally posted by Giovanni Casanova
That explains it...

No it doesn't...I'm just big on people taking responsibility for their choices in life. I have no use for people who think they should be able to make babies and not support them.

I'll feel some compassion for a person who at least uses birth control, but realistically...everyone KNOWS birth control isn't 100% effective and they're still taking a risk everytime they have sex, protected or unprotected. People who don't use protection have NO BUSINESS whining if they end up having a kid. People who do use protection have a reason to whine a little bit...but when push comes to shove...they knew the risks involved and took them willingly. That kid is their responsibility. Too many men run away from that responsibility, and they DO burden society and the tax payers. Grown men don't run away from their responsibilities. You almost never saw men run away back when men acted like men and not women. It's disgusting and a major factor in what is wrong with society.

Ironically...the same men who piss and moan about how feminism has destroyed society are typically the same ones who refuse to step up and act like men did back when men and women were more "traditional". Since these same guys CLAIM this is what they want society to be like again they sure do put a lot of effort into avoiding THEIR traditional roles. Go freaking figure...pvssies.

 

[Paradox]

This thread is just rehashing the same back and forth argument. I'm not convinced that it is benefiting anyone at this point.

I don't want this thread to be a place for people to brawl over. It's gone on for 12 pages now.

I'll leave it open but I have my good eye on it.

 

[familyguyfan]

I didn't read the thread but here is my solution on ridding the country of fucked up kids because their deadbeat parents can't care for them.

SOLUTION:

At the age of 14, give EVERY single girl Norplant. For those of you who don't know what Norplant is, it's an implant that goes under the woman's skin. It is a birth control that is 99.9% effective and lasts for either 4 or 5 years (I can't remember which). There. Other than a few rare cases, no more teenage pregnancies. Sure, this would be an expensive endeavor, as the Norplant procedure costs about $900, but I think in the long run it would be a better investment. It probably would be cheaper than housing half of those kids in jails later on. Fewer thugs, disease-ridden hookers, and criminals.

Now, there is still the issue over the girls that are over 18, but still haven't really gotten their life together (still in school, haven't gotten a job yet, whatever). I haven't come up with a great idea yet as to what to do when their first implant is expired, but there are a few options. One could be that every girl gets another one, and those that want a kid in the next 4-5 years could apply to have their implant removed. Or maybe we wouldn't give girls another Norplant at all after they turned 18. I don't know. I just know that girls should definitely have it in their teens. Nothing good comes from teenage pregnancies.


So who's with me?

 

[penkitten]

Originally posted by familyguyfan
I didn't read the thread but here is my solution on ridding the country of fucked up kids because their deadbeat parents can't care for them.

SOLUTION:

At the age of 14, give EVERY single girl Norplant. For those of you who don't know what Norplant is, it's an implant that goes under the woman's skin. It is a birth control that is 99.9% effective and lasts for either 4 or 5 years (I can't remember which). There. Other than a few rare cases, no more teenage pregnancies. Sure, this would be an expensive endeavor, as the Norplant procedure costs about $900, but I think in the long run it would be a better investment. It probably would be cheaper than housing half of those kids in jails later on. Fewer thugs, disease-ridden hookers, and criminals.

Now, there is still the issue over the girls that are over 18, but still haven't really gotten their life together (still in school, haven't gotten a job yet, whatever). I haven't come up with a great idea yet as to what to do when their first implant is expired, but there are a few options. One could be that every girl gets another one, and those that want a kid in the next 4-5 years could apply to have their implant removed. Or maybe we wouldn't give girls another Norplant at all after they turned 18. I don't know. I just know that girls should definitely have it in their teens. Nothing good comes from teenage pregnancies.


So who's with me?

very good idea, however those norplants are dangerous and have been known to cause health problems .
i say its chastity belts like back in the old days.

 

[Wyldfire]

Originally posted by penkitten
very good idea, however those norplants are dangerous and have been known to cause health problems .
i say its chastity belts like back in the old days.

Chastity Belts for BOTH males and females until marriage. I'm all for it 100%.

 

[familyguyfan]

Originally posted by penkitten
very good idea, however those norplants are dangerous and have been known to cause health problems .
i say its chastity belts like back in the old days.

What are chastity belts?

 

[Wyldfire]

Originally posted by familyguyfan
What are chastity belts?

Restrictive undies that lock so nothing can get in or out of 'em.

 

[penkitten]

Originally posted by Wyldfire
Restrictive undies that lock so nothing can get in or out of 'em.

everyone will be on ebay trying to purchase crow bars....
economy goes back up...
its a win win situation!

 

[familyguyfan]

Originally posted by Wyldfire
Restrictive undies that lock so nothing can get in or out of 'em.

Oh. Well that's dumb. I hope you were kidding when you said you supported them 100% until marriage.