Twelvepole
|
posted on October 4, 2004 06:00:22 PM new
If a woman gets pregnant in a relationship, before she can abort the child, the father would have to give his permission...
I think that is only fair seeing as if she decided not to abort he would be liable for child support...
|
fenix03
|
posted on October 4, 2004 06:10:54 PM new
He did have a say. He could have worn a condom.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by fenix03 on Oct 4, 2004 06:11 PM ]
|
crowfarm
|
posted on October 4, 2004 06:12:37 PM new
Ha! fenix....ZING BOOM!
|
twig125silver
|
posted on October 4, 2004 06:18:23 PM new
Condoms don't always work. (I think they should wear two!)
I agree though that a father's feelings should, at the very least, be considered.
terryann
|
Twelvepole
|
posted on October 4, 2004 06:27:56 PM new
So what you are saying fenix is that women are natural born liars and their word can't be trusted... I see.
AIN'T LIFE GRAND... 
Re-Elect President Bush... the only true choice.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on October 4, 2004 06:34:22 PM new
I agree Dad's should have a legal right to claim their child if the mother doesn't want it for whatever reason.
I also agree Dad's should have more legal rights when it comes to visitations with their children. Some mutual arrangement they work out or 50/50. Because a marriage may fail, I don't think the Dad should be put in a situation where he hardly see's his child anymore. I think it would be more health to have both parents...with equal time with the child.
Same thing with moving more than 50 miles away from where they were living at the time of divorce. There should be permission required by the non-custodial parent for that to occur.
|
fenix03
|
posted on October 4, 2004 06:55:21 PM new
So what you are saying Telve is that you are illiterate, lack basic reading comprehension skills, and prefer purple wool socks.....
What the hell does one thing have to do with another? Grow up. I know you hate women but please do not attempt project your opinions on me. Otherwise I could start asserting that your desire to have a say in abortion since you have to pay child support in the cse of a full term pregnancy would be an endorsement of abortion in order to shirk financial responsibility.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
|
Twelvepole
|
posted on October 4, 2004 07:04:09 PM new
You are the one who wised ass the condom issue... a woman tells a man that she is on birth control/can't get pregnant that is her word... you do understand the meaning of giving your word don't you? How many abortions do you think occur for just that reason fenix?
A birth or abortion should be consenual between both parties...
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
Re-Elect President Bush... the only true choice.
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on October 4, 2004 07:43:53 PM new
So this has nothing to do with abortion. It's (again) about women who lie and try to trap men like yourself. Same old song...
|
logansdad
|
posted on October 4, 2004 07:47:31 PM new
I guess twelve's father had a say before his mother tried to abort him.
DICK CHENEY SUPPORTS MY RELATIONSHIP: People ought to be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE BULLSH** WITH OUT BUSH.
------------------------------
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on October 4, 2004 08:13:43 PM new
Logan, you're still thinking Twelve's from Earth.
Twelve, who's gonna pay for junior if the dad decides he wants mom to keep the child? We all know how you hate women leeches, so what do you suggest if he doesn't contribute?
|
yeager
|
posted on October 4, 2004 08:17:54 PM new
logan,
It's probably the night both of his parents wish his dad slept on the couch, or the mother had a headache.
Here in Michigan the male has strict responsibility, meaning that under no circumstance, will he be released from the responsibility of paying for the child. So, if she says something like, I've had my tubes tied, or I am on the pill, and she still gets pregnant the father is still responsible.
I can see both sides of this issue, but ultimately, it's the woman that has to go through the birthing process.
Bigots are miserable people.  Prevent Bigotry through Education.
Work to keep Church and State separate! http://www.au.org/site/PageServer
President Bush... the only true choice for more failed policies.
This long time republican is voting for John Kerry!
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on October 4, 2004 08:51:46 PM new
The father might want to keep the child but not have the means to support it. What then?
|
bigpeepa
|
posted on October 4, 2004 09:09:03 PM new
twelvetoes, Gee twelve it looks like you got stuffed again. Thinking about your post. I don't see you personally have a thing to worry about. I don't know of a woman that would have sex with a guy with you attitude anyway.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on October 4, 2004 09:24:27 PM new
The father might want to keep the child but not have the means to support it. What then?
Plenty of people, women included, have children they can't afford. What do they do? Get government aid...welfare. Why do you think that would be any different for a father to do vs a mother? Aid To Dependant children can't discriminate between the sexes. The aid is going for the benefit of the children.
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on October 4, 2004 10:27:00 PM new
"Plenty of people, women included, have children they can't afford."
Then how would a father's consent make any difference?
|
Twelvepole
|
posted on October 5, 2004 05:02:24 AM new
I knew the moron group would miss the point and have nothing to say about the topic, just the poster...
The point is that if a woman decides to have an abortion, the father has no say... if she decides to have the child the father has no say... that is wrong.
Now back to our usual morons...
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
Re-Elect President Bush... the only true choice.
|
yeager
|
posted on October 5, 2004 05:48:43 AM new
bigpeepa,
"I don't know of a woman that would have sex with a guy with you attitude anyway."
I think that if he was lucky enough to get a piece from woman, she would turn instantly lesbian.
Also, he doesn't have to worry about this situation anyway. He indicated in another thread that he is not a true man, that is, he can't father children. Maybe it's mother natures way of protecting the human race.
Bigots are miserable people. Prevent Bigotry through Education.
Work to keep Church and State separate! http://www.au.org/site/PageServer
President Bush... the only true choice for more failed policies.
This long time republican is voting for John Kerry!
|
bigpeepa
|
posted on October 5, 2004 06:14:55 AM new
YEAGER, Like you say "Bigots are miserable people". Twelvetoes is the Prince of slime. A vast majority of his comments and posts are insignificant and unintelligent. I can see why twelvetoes is a Bush supporter their mentality level is about the same.
BUSH SUPPORTERS LIKE TWELVETOES IS ANOTHER REASON TO VOTE FOR JOHN KERRY AND A BETTER AMERICA.
|
fiset
|
posted on October 5, 2004 06:36:16 AM new
The father does have a say. He chooses whether or not to sleep with a woman. Birth control is not 100% effective so a potential consequence of having sex is pregnancy. If a man is concerned about what choices a potential lover might make should she become pregnant, then he might want to find out her views on the subject before hopping in the sack. If she changes her mind on the issue once she becomes pregnant, then he can certainly argue his case (one way or the other) but in the end its ridiculous to think that I, as a man, am somehow given veto authority over the decision my partner makes.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on October 5, 2004 06:55:01 AM new
I disagree fiset - they are equally responsible for any pregnancy that occurs. Why should one be given more rights than another IF the woman makes the choice she doesn't want the child and the father does?
------------
KD - If a woman gets pregnant in a relationship, before she can abort the child, the father would have to give his permission...
was the premise this was set on.
I think it's VERY reasonable that if one party [either father or mother] doesn't want a child that rather than taking a life...the parent who wants the child should have the right to keep their own offspring alive. Just as I don't believe it would be right for a father to be able to force a woman to have an abortion because he didn't want to pay support for.
They both 'played' so they both should have decision making rights.
|
fiset
|
posted on October 5, 2004 07:10:03 AM new
Why should one be given more rights than another IF the woman makes the choice she doesn't want the child and the father does?
The answer, in my opinion, is clear. The woman carries the child so she inherently has more say (or "rights" ) in terms of the pregnancy. I cannot forsee legislation that forces a woman to continue a pregnancy that she decides (for whatever reason) she does not want. Conversely, I cannot forsee legislation that forces a woman to have an abortion when she decides (for whatever reason) to have the child.
If you (the general "you" not anyone specific) want to argue that child support laws should be changed or that equal rights between men and women should be better applied to child custody arrangements, then I think thats a different issue and one that could stand some further debate. But the initial post here about a woman needing "permission" one way or the other from the man, in terms of the pregnancy, I think is not realistic or even a good idea.
[ edited by fiset on Oct 5, 2004 07:10 AM ]
|
Helenjw
|
posted on October 5, 2004 07:14:11 AM new
"I disagree fiset - they are equally responsible for any pregnancy that occurs. Why should one be given more rights than another IF the woman makes the choice she doesn't want the child and the father does?"
------------
So they are being given equal rights? One wants a pregnancy the other does not..50/50. So who makes the decision?
Helen
[ edited by Helenjw on Oct 5, 2004 07:38 AM ]
|
Helenjw
|
posted on October 5, 2004 07:18:08 AM new
linda, Your thinking will lead to a court ordered forced decision that the woman has no right to abort and she will be forced to have a child.
|
wgm
|
posted on October 5, 2004 07:25:08 AM new
Even though I only post once in a blue moon, I still read the boards every day....
and the more I read, the less Republican I feel. Especially THIS thread. 
edited - left out a "c"
__________________________________
"The more I want to get something done, the less I call it work." - Richard Bach
[ edited by wgm on Oct 5, 2004 07:25 AM ]
|
Linda_K
|
posted on October 5, 2004 08:58:54 AM new
Good to see you again, wgm. But these are personal opinions...not at all the Republican platform.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on October 5, 2004 09:02:26 AM new
Yes, helen, kind of like it was before abortions became legal. Women where much more thoughtful before engaging in sex as to the possible consequences. They still should be and if they're not...if they don't realize that they have always been the ones to suffer MORE consequence of getting pregnant...that still, in my mind, doesn't give substancial reason for a wanted [by the father] child to be aborted.
|
Helenjw
|
posted on October 5, 2004 09:11:10 AM new
Huh???
linda, I know that you don't generally know what you are talking about but that comment makes no sense whatsoever.
You believe that women should "suffer" more?
The year is 2004, linda.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on October 5, 2004 09:18:32 AM new
Just can't keep the sarcasim out of it, can you helen?
I'm saying that women, pre-legal abortions, have always been the ones who have had the major responsibility when she gets pregnant, when she didn't want to. That's why women who didn't want to become pregnant weren't so quick to hop in bed with every Tom, Dick and Harry...because they'd carry the 'brunt' of the consequences, so they made different decisions. They still carry the major consequences of their actions because they are the ones that go through an abortion...not the man.
|
fiset
|
posted on October 5, 2004 09:38:55 AM new
Ok, I just want to make sure I'm following the discussion here. If I understand correctly, Linda, you are saying that fathers should have a say (equal say?) in the dissposition of the pregnancy. Is that right? If so, I just don't see how to make that possible. I certainly agree that it takes two to tango and I also think men have a "say" (at least in terms of the ability to voice their opinions) but I just don't see how its posible to legislate some kind of 50/50 decision regarding a pregnancy. The main problem being, who breaks the tie? And even if a tie-breaking system was put in place (like a court-appointed referree or something), the process itself creates the possibility (probability?) that women would be forced by an outside party to follow a course that had very real and direct physical consequences to her body. Also, if she could be forced to endure a pregnancy, logic implies that the opposite would also be true - she could be forced to have an abortion. Its hard for me to imagine either as realistic.
|
