2010-01-18, 01:37 AM
Eosian Wrote:What about the women who choose to abort when the father wants the baby? This issue works both ways - the man has no rights in either direction.
The girl could've just as easily been on birth control, or abstained from sex, or insisted on him using protection, or taking it anally for that matter, so "getting her pregnant" isn't the man's fault, it's an equally culpable action.
Saying it's the mans responsibility to not get you pregnant sets women's lib back decades.
only post i see worth noting. sorry.
the woman shouldnt be able to ask of the man anything if he is not ready to be a father/parent. unless she takes him to court he has no responsibility towards that child. 'course i speak from personal experience, but i digress.
IMO there comes a line when equality meets absurdity. this is it. men can already opt to use a condom, women can use contraceptive. men can opt for an outpatient vasectomy, women can have their tubes tied, which is more invasive, and neither are perfect forms of birth control as my mother had her tubes tied, and, well, 8 years ago my sister was born. i like that a man can go to a court and say he wants to have no part in the childs life, but that is taking the stance that the woman wants to have the kid. either he convince the girl to abort, run and sever the ties to the girl, grow a pair and be a father, or just pay child support. there are ways to circumvent that anyways, b/c that money is supposed to be used to go towards the child for food and clothing, yet how many mothers neglect their children and use the money for their own ends?
sure the idea sounds great, and i kinda do like it, but conversely i dont because theres already existing methods of it instead of going up to a judge and whining about having sex and getting a girl pregnant. unless he was raped, then i see no applicable use of this idea.