Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Mom Confessions Mom Confessions

Abortion Adoption and Equal Rights

Posted by Anonymous   + Show Post

 

Poll

Question: Which seems more equal/fair to you?

Options:

pro choice. Men should have the ability to have an emotional/financial abortion within a time frame

pro choice. Men should be forced to live with the woman's decision and post cs is she chooses to have the baby

pro life. Men who would choose to put the child up for adoption should not have to pay cs if the woman keeps the child.

pro life. Men should pay cs if the woman keeps the child.

other. please explain


Only group members can vote in this poll.

Total Votes: 162

View Results

Posted by Anonymous on Feb. 16, 2013 at 2:45 PM
Replies (171-177):
Anonymous
by Anonymous 14 on Feb. 18, 2013 at 1:54 PM

Men have the option to "opt out" when they decide to sleep with a woman.  They know that pregnancy is always a possibility with sex and should take precautions.

That doesn't mean women shouldn't take precautions either, but men have less options than women (and they know this) so they should be taking a greater responsibility in taking precautions knowing that they have less options. 

Sorry but allowing men to "opt out" of child support would just give all the dead beats amunition for not paying their support.

Boo hoo it's not fair men don't get an opt out option. Yeah they do, don't have sex.  Women get more options for "opting out". Oh, damn well.  Life isn't fair. The idea of men opting out is ridiculous. 

cupcake_mom
by on Feb. 18, 2013 at 1:56 PM
I think that if the women chooses to keep the baby the man has every right to give up his parental rights therefor making no long finacially responsable for the child. but i also believe that if a women gets pregnant and she doesnt want the baby, the man should have say and should be able to force the women to have the baby if he wants to take care of it. why should we be the only one able to choose if out child lives or dies? why shouldnt a father who loves and wants to care for this child not allowed a chance?
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Anonymous
by Anonymous 15 on Feb. 18, 2013 at 2:45 PM
Quoting Anonymous:



In both cases I think the other should have to pay cs .
Once the child is born the man should have every right to raise the child and if the mom doesn't want to be involved then fine but pony up the cs for the child you helped create.
Traci_Momof2
by Gold Member on Feb. 18, 2013 at 3:00 PM
1 mom liked this

There are two time-frames in this issue.  1.  The time from conception to birth.  2. The time after the baby is born.  In #1, it's all about the woman because it's all about her body.  In #2, it's all about the child who now exists in the world and needs to be supported.  You can't compare the woman's choices in #1 to the man's choices (or lack thereof) in #2.  That's comparing apples to oranges.  Let's instead look at both the woman's choices and the man's choices in #2 alone.  Can either of them just walk away?  No.  If they don't want to be a parent, they have to arrange for an adoption of their child and if I'm not mistaken, in some states they both have to agree or else neither can walk away.  There you go.  Equal.

Now you are trying to say that a man should be able to walk away or get off scott free after birth because a woman has the option to abort before birth.  Let's clear up one point first.  Once a woman has conceived, she is not "walking away" or "getting off scott free" no matter what she decides.  Abortion is not scott free and neither is gestation/birth.  No. Matter. What. the woman will have to deal with consequences whether she decides to abort or gestate.  Those consequences could easily be lifelong.  How does your proposal of men signing off their rights still shoulder them with lifelong consequences?  If all a man ever has to do for that child the woman decided to have is to write a check every month - he is by far getting off the easiest.  That woman still has a lot more consequences than he will ever know.  And let's face it, under current circumstances, that is the only thing a man is ever forced to do is write a check.

You want this entire issue to be completely equal but it will never be completely equal because of the nature of our biological differences.  It's just the way it is.  We have our cross we bear for being born female.  They have their cross they bear for being born male.  Neither of us can ever escape those.  Don't get me wrong.  I get it.  I have two young boys and fear for what could happen to them because of a dishonest woman.  But that's why I am determined to teach them to protect themselves against those types of women in whatever way possible.  It begins with really knowing your partner and where they stand before you hop into bed with them.

Anonymous
by Anonymous 5 on Feb. 18, 2013 at 6:25 PM



Quoting Anonymous:

Obviously there would be a time constraint for him to walk away...just like a woman with an abortion.

Quoting Anonymous:




Quoting Anonymous:

There is no link at this time, as this is still in the draft stage. Within the next 5 years, you'll see it hit the media



Quoting Anonymous:





Quoting Anonymous:

Actually, in many states this is being addressed by law makers. Women wanted equality, guess they should get it...even when the equality results in things they don't want.





Nope, the man I know making that little is currently unemployed because the company closed down. He is actively seeking employment, but can't seem to find anything. McDonalds refused to hire him because he was over qualified, so he wouldn't stay long according to them. He's educated, had been in management with the same company for 13 years. He didn't want kids, but his gf choose to have the one that escaped his body even though he'd had a vasectomy.





Tax payers really don't have much choice when it comes to pa. Maybe we should force women who can't protect their bodies and lives from pregnancy with men who don't want kids to get bc or be sterilized?





Quoting Anonymous:






Quoting Anonymous:

Because its impossible for a woman to support herself and her children? Maybe she should take that into consideration while she's trying to make life decisions for someone else.







Cs often leaves a man unable to support himself, let alone children he actually wants. They can take up to half of what he makes, even if he only makes $500 a month. Know anyone who can live off $250 a month? Me either. If he says, put it up for adoption because I'm not going to be there emotionally and can't financially support it...why should kg have to live with anyone's decision?









If he only makes $500 a month-he isn't working full time is he-and maybe he needs to be wearing a condom?  And if the woman doesn't earn enough-she will turn to the taxpayers-and the taxpayers do not want that-so the laws will NEVER be changed regarding this-ever.




Link to the states who are changing these laws...Thanks.



Then I am going to call Bullshit.  It is in recent times that they required a Father to be named in order for you to collect ocial Services -I can't see them saying-Oh never mind....all a guy would have to do is say he didn't want the kid-and he is off the hook-NO MATTER WHAT. You can dream your little dream that congress will force woman to adopt or abort or carry a child. It's not happening in this country (except perhaps the forced to carry.)

No way to retroactively deny a child food and support. Not happening. In fact they have ordered SPERM DONORS with signed contracts to pay child support-people who never even HAD sex with the Mom.

The Government is not going to be on the hook for all of the kids who are NOT prevented.


It's not happening. EVER. When the govenment is going after sperm donors with signed agreements-they aren't letting off Carl can't wear a condom so easily!

KeishaJL
by Member on Feb. 18, 2013 at 6:34 PM

I'm pro choice but on a two way street level.  I mean if a woman get's pregnant it is absolutely her choice to give that baby up for adoption (or sadly abort if she can't carry to term and give up) but it is also her obligation to tell the bio dad and they both have to agree and sign off on it.

I know there are situations where this won't be the case.  A stepfather I had tried to commit suicide ever few weeks, he kicked me and my young sister in the back out of meanness around the age of 5 and mom locked him up every time.  He'd send someone over to break in and steal her things to sell at pawn shops to get his bail and he'd come banging and screaming on the door.  I learned years after the divorce that at the time they were about to sign the divorce papers she found out she was pregnant with his baby but had an abortion.  She couldn't bear having ties to the man that made our lives hell, nor to tell the baby what kind of father he/she had.  She was terrified raising two daughters on her own and another baby on the way...she couldn't handle it.  And what if the baby had violent tendancies like it's father.  She broke down and made the decision.  If he's still alive somewhere... he still doesn't know.  So I understand sometimes it IS solely up to the woman to decide but in most cases the father deserves to know.

If the father chooses not to have rights and the mother does, sign over all rights of paternity and take no responsibility.  It's a loser way out but then you won't see them owing thousands on back CS.

Anonymous
by Anonymous 1 - Original Poster on Feb. 18, 2013 at 11:38 PM
Enjoy thinking that. We'll see

Quoting Anonymous:




Quoting Anonymous:

Obviously there would be a time constraint for him to walk away...just like a woman with an abortion.



Quoting Anonymous:





Quoting Anonymous:

There is no link at this time, as this is still in the draft stage. Within the next 5 years, you'll see it hit the media





Quoting Anonymous:






Quoting Anonymous:

Actually, in many states this is being addressed by law makers. Women wanted equality, guess they should get it...even when the equality results in things they don't want.







Nope, the man I know making that little is currently unemployed because the company closed down. He is actively seeking employment, but can't seem to find anything. McDonalds refused to hire him because he was over qualified, so he wouldn't stay long according to them. He's educated, had been in management with the same company for 13 years. He didn't want kids, but his gf choose to have the one that escaped his body even though he'd had a vasectomy.







Tax payers really don't have much choice when it comes to pa. Maybe we should force women who can't protect their bodies and lives from pregnancy with men who don't want kids to get bc or be sterilized?







Quoting Anonymous:







Quoting Anonymous:

Because its impossible for a woman to support herself and her children? Maybe she should take that into consideration while she's trying to make life decisions for someone else.









Cs often leaves a man unable to support himself, let alone children he actually wants. They can take up to half of what he makes, even if he only makes $500 a month. Know anyone who can live off $250 a month? Me either. If he says, put it up for adoption because I'm not going to be there emotionally and can't financially support it...why should kg have to live with anyone's decision?











If he only makes $500 a month-he isn't working full time is he-and maybe he needs to be wearing a condom?  And if the woman doesn't earn enough-she will turn to the taxpayers-and the taxpayers do not want that-so the laws will NEVER be changed regarding this-ever.





Link to the states who are changing these laws...Thanks.




Then I am going to call Bullshit.  It is in recent times that they required a Father to be named in order for you to collect ocial Services -I can't see them saying-Oh never mind....all a guy would have to do is say he didn't want the kid-and he is off the hook-NO MATTER WHAT. You can dream your little dream that congress will force woman to adopt or abort or carry a child. It's not happening in this country (except perhaps the forced to carry.)

No way to retroactively deny a child food and support. Not happening. In fact they have ordered SPERM DONORS with signed contracts to pay child support-people who never even HAD sex with the Mom.

The Government is not going to be on the hook for all of the kids who are NOT prevented.



It's not happening. EVER. When the govenment is going after sperm donors with signed agreements-they aren't letting off Carl can't wear a condom so easily!

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)