A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.support » Child Support
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Choices, choices, choices -- but only for women



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old December 19th 03, 11:03 AM
Mel Gamble
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Choices, choices, choices -- but only for women

Child Support is a man's "right"??????? Me has a few other goofy ideas
also.....

ME wrote:

I agree with the fact that the pill should not be released OTC,
it is too dangerous for that kind of availability.
I do also agree, however, that the OTC release of it would
lessen the number of abortions, unplanned pregnancies, teen
pregnancy, and other matters of the sort.

As for your point on men not having the choices...if we lived
in a perfect world all woman would discuss the matter with
the man first, but we don't. BUT...
As for your 'plan B' for men....if we lived in a perfect world
all men would actually pay their child support and be there
for their children through all of their life, but they don't.


For "all" to do so, you first have to give "all" the ability....

A girl I know gets pregnant a week before her 17th birthday.
Her boyfriend says the baby is not his and breaks it off with
her immediatley, but he does vow that if blood test reveal
he is the father he would support the child totally.
She goes through the pregnancy without him.
When the baby is 6 months old
Mom needs a car to get a job, since she has now graduated high
school. She works out a loan with her Aunt who tells her she
won't loan her the money unless she takes the baby's father
to court for child support. She does this. Dad requests blood tests.


Dad breaks it off "immediatley" and she waits until the baby is 6 months
old - sounds like dad has had at least a year to get on with his life
and assume he wasn't a part of this kid's life..., then BINGO "I want
money".

Dad tells the domestic relations hearing officer of all Mom's partners
at the time of conception....although he was the only one she was
with. Blood tests come back that he is indeed the daddy of the baby.
$45 a week is ordered, yippy. Years go by, no support. After 2 1/2
years she starts getting child support when Dad feels like paying it.
He sees the child, then doesnt, then does, then doesnt....


And ME, of course, wants us to assume that the "doesnt" is by dad's
choice - maybe, maybe not...but there's good evidence for "not" further
down...

Baby is now 5
years old. Dad still doesn't pay child support like he is court
ordered and Mom can't get any help from the courts. (Seems the
enforcing officers just have too much to do with all the other
cases....ya know the ones who owe more back support) Baby
starts to see psychiatrists, therapists and any other 'ist' you can imagine.
Baby is so emotionally disturbed he sees them 2-4 times a month
depending on behavior and emotional outbursts.


*MILLIONS* of children have been raised without fathers without ending
up emotionally disturbed before they're in school. Sensible people will
tell you that when a child is emotionally damaged to that extent, don't
look at the adults who aren't there - look at those with regular
contact.

Dad doesn't bother
to call, send a card, a letter, or send child support.


Sounds like mom has been working to totally alienate the dad ... same as
she's been doing to the child. By the way, when did mom start cashing
in on the $400 monthly fee for selling her child's soul to the "ist"s?

(By the way, Dad owns
his own business, and for the last 4 years sat in bars 6 days a week)


Looks like she's done a number on his life as well as the child's...

Baby spends a week in the inpatient child psychiatry unit at 6 years old
because he told Mom he wanted to kill himself. What came out
in therapy sessions? Dad did this, Dad did that, Dad didn't do this,
Dad didn't do that.


Now how would a 6-year-old know what Dad *DIDN'T* do unless somebody
else was pounding it into his head???

To make this story as short as possible


To make this story as short as possible, just take this poor kid away
from that abusive bitch and place him with a good parent.

because I could go on forever, your PLAN B is often ignored by
men also. Around here you have to give your arm and leg and possibly
both to get something done about violating court orders, getting child
support etc.
My point is this, although women may ignore the mans decisions in
using birth control, RU-486, abortion, adoption etc etc, men also
ignore the fatherly rights they have. (child support, even seeing the
child, providing clothes or moral support)


ME needs to learn the difference between a "right" and imposing "child
support" on a father.

Meanwhile mom struggles to survive because she chose LIFE and


Obviously, she chose *H*E*R* "LIFE" over everyone else's...

Mel Gamble

dad chose BAR, sports car etc etc etc.
Sure, make a law that the Dad has to sign permission for birth control,
RU-486, abortion, adoption, or life but then make a law that Dad also
has to live up to his responsibilities of being a Dad. This argument could
go on forever, and so could I. Women are in the wrong, men are in the
wrong.
Men shouldn't have to pay for the choices of women? Women pay
for the choices of men each and every single day.

"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...
In the interests of clarity, I should point out that this is not
RU-486. It is a product known as an "emergency contraceptive," and is
-- on my understanding -- a pepped-up dose of the ingredients of the
birth control pill. It is not an abortion-inducing product.

However, the basic point remains. This is yet another way of giving
reproductive choices to women. Meantime, no one considers ways of
giving post-conception reproductive choices to men. It would be very
simple to say that men should not have to pay for decisions made
unilaterally by women, and should be able to renounce their paternal
rights and responsibilities. However, this doesn't get done, very
largely because there is no special interest group representing
heterosexual men.

For men, "Plan B" consists of paying 18+ years of "child support" money
to women who decide that they don't want to make use of all the
post-conception choices U.S. law has given them.


Kathi Kelly wrote:

"Kenneth S." writes:

But there is a definite possibility that the FDA WILL accept this

proposal.
A minority of U.S. states (as well as several European countries)
ALREADY say that morning-after pills should be available to women on an
over-the-counter basis.

Kenneth, Bob and Mel all made good points about RU486.
However, another point remains. RU486 is not a safe procedure
for OTC release. There are and can be severe consequences.

IMO, the FDA should not even consider this proposal. An MD
should be supervising the use of RU486. To me, this is yet
another example of the vocal minority getting their way to the
detriment of society and health issues. It's just ridiculous.

The interested readers can peruse these pages.

http://pages.map.com/lroberge/ru486.htm

http://www.feminist.org/action/action120f.htm#_edn1

N.B., the FM states only the "positive" and makes no mention
of adverse side effects. The FM is working for their own
political agenda. Women be damned as far as they are concerned.

  #22  
Old December 19th 03, 11:13 AM
Mel Gamble
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Choices, choices, choices -- but only for women

Another point...

ME wrote:

I agree with the fact that the pill should not be released OTC,
it is too dangerous for that kind of availability.
I do also agree, however, that the OTC release of it would


************************************************** ************
lessen the number of abortions, unplanned pregnancies, teen
pregnancy, and other matters of the sort.

************************************************** ************

"Plan B" has been stated to be only a little over 80% effective - when
used correctly and on time. It's existence could result in young women
having more sex without using the current BC methods, relying on being
able to "undo an oops" with a quick trip to Rite-Aid. The increase in
unimpeded conception combined with the failure rate could actually
result in MORE pregnancies...AND STD's.

Mel Gamble

As for your point on men not having the choices...if we lived
in a perfect world all woman would discuss the matter with
the man first, but we don't. BUT...
As for your 'plan B' for men....if we lived in a perfect world
all men would actually pay their child support and be there
for their children through all of their life, but they don't.

A girl I know gets pregnant a week before her 17th birthday.
Her boyfriend says the baby is not his and breaks it off with
her immediatley, but he does vow that if blood test reveal
he is the father he would support the child totally.
She goes through the pregnancy without him.
When the baby is 6 months old
Mom needs a car to get a job, since she has now graduated high
school. She works out a loan with her Aunt who tells her she
won't loan her the money unless she takes the baby's father
to court for child support. She does this. Dad requests blood tests.
Dad tells the domestic relations hearing officer of all Mom's partners
at the time of conception....although he was the only one she was
with. Blood tests come back that he is indeed the daddy of the baby.
$45 a week is ordered, yippy. Years go by, no support. After 2 1/2
years she starts getting child support when Dad feels like paying it.
He sees the child, then doesnt, then does, then doesnt....Baby is now 5
years old. Dad still doesn't pay child support like he is court
ordered and Mom can't get any help from the courts. (Seems the
enforcing officers just have too much to do with all the other
cases....ya know the ones who owe more back support) Baby
starts to see psychiatrists, therapists and any other 'ist' you can imagine.
Baby is so emotionally disturbed he sees them 2-4 times a month
depending on behavior and emotional outbursts. Dad doesn't bother
to call, send a card, a letter, or send child support. (By the way, Dad owns
his own business, and for the last 4 years sat in bars 6 days a week)
Baby spends a week in the inpatient child psychiatry unit at 6 years old
because he told Mom he wanted to kill himself. What came out
in therapy sessions? Dad did this, Dad did that, Dad didn't do this,
Dad didn't do that. To make this story as short as possible
because I could go on forever, your PLAN B is often ignored by
men also. Around here you have to give your arm and leg and possibly
both to get something done about violating court orders, getting child
support etc.
My point is this, although women may ignore the mans decisions in
using birth control, RU-486, abortion, adoption etc etc, men also
ignore the fatherly rights they have. (child support, even seeing the
child, providing clothes or moral support)
Meanwhile mom struggles to survive because she chose LIFE and
dad chose BAR, sports car etc etc etc.
Sure, make a law that the Dad has to sign permission for birth control,
RU-486, abortion, adoption, or life but then make a law that Dad also
has to live up to his responsibilities of being a Dad. This argument could
go on forever, and so could I. Women are in the wrong, men are in the
wrong.
Men shouldn't have to pay for the choices of women? Women pay
for the choices of men each and every single day.

"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...
In the interests of clarity, I should point out that this is not
RU-486. It is a product known as an "emergency contraceptive," and is
-- on my understanding -- a pepped-up dose of the ingredients of the
birth control pill. It is not an abortion-inducing product.

However, the basic point remains. This is yet another way of giving
reproductive choices to women. Meantime, no one considers ways of
giving post-conception reproductive choices to men. It would be very
simple to say that men should not have to pay for decisions made
unilaterally by women, and should be able to renounce their paternal
rights and responsibilities. However, this doesn't get done, very
largely because there is no special interest group representing
heterosexual men.

For men, "Plan B" consists of paying 18+ years of "child support" money
to women who decide that they don't want to make use of all the
post-conception choices U.S. law has given them.


Kathi Kelly wrote:

"Kenneth S." writes:

But there is a definite possibility that the FDA WILL accept this

proposal.
A minority of U.S. states (as well as several European countries)
ALREADY say that morning-after pills should be available to women on an
over-the-counter basis.

Kenneth, Bob and Mel all made good points about RU486.
However, another point remains. RU486 is not a safe procedure
for OTC release. There are and can be severe consequences.

IMO, the FDA should not even consider this proposal. An MD
should be supervising the use of RU486. To me, this is yet
another example of the vocal minority getting their way to the
detriment of society and health issues. It's just ridiculous.

The interested readers can peruse these pages.

http://pages.map.com/lroberge/ru486.htm

http://www.feminist.org/action/action120f.htm#_edn1

N.B., the FM states only the "positive" and makes no mention
of adverse side effects. The FM is working for their own
political agenda. Women be damned as far as they are concerned.

  #23  
Old December 19th 03, 11:13 AM
Mel Gamble
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Choices, choices, choices -- but only for women

Another point...

ME wrote:

I agree with the fact that the pill should not be released OTC,
it is too dangerous for that kind of availability.
I do also agree, however, that the OTC release of it would


************************************************** ************
lessen the number of abortions, unplanned pregnancies, teen
pregnancy, and other matters of the sort.

************************************************** ************

"Plan B" has been stated to be only a little over 80% effective - when
used correctly and on time. It's existence could result in young women
having more sex without using the current BC methods, relying on being
able to "undo an oops" with a quick trip to Rite-Aid. The increase in
unimpeded conception combined with the failure rate could actually
result in MORE pregnancies...AND STD's.

Mel Gamble

As for your point on men not having the choices...if we lived
in a perfect world all woman would discuss the matter with
the man first, but we don't. BUT...
As for your 'plan B' for men....if we lived in a perfect world
all men would actually pay their child support and be there
for their children through all of their life, but they don't.

A girl I know gets pregnant a week before her 17th birthday.
Her boyfriend says the baby is not his and breaks it off with
her immediatley, but he does vow that if blood test reveal
he is the father he would support the child totally.
She goes through the pregnancy without him.
When the baby is 6 months old
Mom needs a car to get a job, since she has now graduated high
school. She works out a loan with her Aunt who tells her she
won't loan her the money unless she takes the baby's father
to court for child support. She does this. Dad requests blood tests.
Dad tells the domestic relations hearing officer of all Mom's partners
at the time of conception....although he was the only one she was
with. Blood tests come back that he is indeed the daddy of the baby.
$45 a week is ordered, yippy. Years go by, no support. After 2 1/2
years she starts getting child support when Dad feels like paying it.
He sees the child, then doesnt, then does, then doesnt....Baby is now 5
years old. Dad still doesn't pay child support like he is court
ordered and Mom can't get any help from the courts. (Seems the
enforcing officers just have too much to do with all the other
cases....ya know the ones who owe more back support) Baby
starts to see psychiatrists, therapists and any other 'ist' you can imagine.
Baby is so emotionally disturbed he sees them 2-4 times a month
depending on behavior and emotional outbursts. Dad doesn't bother
to call, send a card, a letter, or send child support. (By the way, Dad owns
his own business, and for the last 4 years sat in bars 6 days a week)
Baby spends a week in the inpatient child psychiatry unit at 6 years old
because he told Mom he wanted to kill himself. What came out
in therapy sessions? Dad did this, Dad did that, Dad didn't do this,
Dad didn't do that. To make this story as short as possible
because I could go on forever, your PLAN B is often ignored by
men also. Around here you have to give your arm and leg and possibly
both to get something done about violating court orders, getting child
support etc.
My point is this, although women may ignore the mans decisions in
using birth control, RU-486, abortion, adoption etc etc, men also
ignore the fatherly rights they have. (child support, even seeing the
child, providing clothes or moral support)
Meanwhile mom struggles to survive because she chose LIFE and
dad chose BAR, sports car etc etc etc.
Sure, make a law that the Dad has to sign permission for birth control,
RU-486, abortion, adoption, or life but then make a law that Dad also
has to live up to his responsibilities of being a Dad. This argument could
go on forever, and so could I. Women are in the wrong, men are in the
wrong.
Men shouldn't have to pay for the choices of women? Women pay
for the choices of men each and every single day.

"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...
In the interests of clarity, I should point out that this is not
RU-486. It is a product known as an "emergency contraceptive," and is
-- on my understanding -- a pepped-up dose of the ingredients of the
birth control pill. It is not an abortion-inducing product.

However, the basic point remains. This is yet another way of giving
reproductive choices to women. Meantime, no one considers ways of
giving post-conception reproductive choices to men. It would be very
simple to say that men should not have to pay for decisions made
unilaterally by women, and should be able to renounce their paternal
rights and responsibilities. However, this doesn't get done, very
largely because there is no special interest group representing
heterosexual men.

For men, "Plan B" consists of paying 18+ years of "child support" money
to women who decide that they don't want to make use of all the
post-conception choices U.S. law has given them.


Kathi Kelly wrote:

"Kenneth S." writes:

But there is a definite possibility that the FDA WILL accept this

proposal.
A minority of U.S. states (as well as several European countries)
ALREADY say that morning-after pills should be available to women on an
over-the-counter basis.

Kenneth, Bob and Mel all made good points about RU486.
However, another point remains. RU486 is not a safe procedure
for OTC release. There are and can be severe consequences.

IMO, the FDA should not even consider this proposal. An MD
should be supervising the use of RU486. To me, this is yet
another example of the vocal minority getting their way to the
detriment of society and health issues. It's just ridiculous.

The interested readers can peruse these pages.

http://pages.map.com/lroberge/ru486.htm

http://www.feminist.org/action/action120f.htm#_edn1

N.B., the FM states only the "positive" and makes no mention
of adverse side effects. The FM is working for their own
political agenda. Women be damned as far as they are concerned.

  #24  
Old December 19th 03, 02:33 PM
Kenneth S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Choices, choices, choices -- but only for women

Just to make sure we don't go off at a tangent, the morning-after pill
approved by this FDA panel for over-the-counter availability is not RU
486. It is a pepped-up contraceptive pill that in some way or other
prevents the pregnancy from beginning if the pill is taken soon enough
after intercourse.

However, as I said before, the basic point remains, which is that in
the U.S. endless attention is devoted to giving women reproductive
choices, but men get no parallel choices. Men's choice consists of
paying a great deal of "child support" money to support the woman's
choice. It's Hobson's choice.


TeacherMama wrote:

A young woman in my town died a few months ago of complications from
RU486. And she was under a doctor's caer.

(Kathi Kelly) wrote in message ...
"Kenneth S." writes:

But there is a definite possibility that the FDA WILL accept this proposal.
A minority of U.S. states (as well as several European countries)
ALREADY say that morning-after pills should be available to women on an
over-the-counter basis.


Kenneth, Bob and Mel all made good points about RU486.
However, another point remains. RU486 is not a safe procedure
for OTC release. There are and can be severe consequences.

IMO, the FDA should not even consider this proposal. An MD
should be supervising the use of RU486. To me, this is yet
another example of the vocal minority getting their way to the
detriment of society and health issues. It's just ridiculous.

The interested readers can peruse these pages.

http://pages.map.com/lroberge/ru486.htm

http://www.feminist.org/action/action120f.htm#_edn1

N.B., the FM states only the "positive" and makes no mention
of adverse side effects. The FM is working for their own
political agenda. Women be damned as far as they are concerned.

  #25  
Old December 19th 03, 02:33 PM
Kenneth S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Choices, choices, choices -- but only for women

Just to make sure we don't go off at a tangent, the morning-after pill
approved by this FDA panel for over-the-counter availability is not RU
486. It is a pepped-up contraceptive pill that in some way or other
prevents the pregnancy from beginning if the pill is taken soon enough
after intercourse.

However, as I said before, the basic point remains, which is that in
the U.S. endless attention is devoted to giving women reproductive
choices, but men get no parallel choices. Men's choice consists of
paying a great deal of "child support" money to support the woman's
choice. It's Hobson's choice.


TeacherMama wrote:

A young woman in my town died a few months ago of complications from
RU486. And she was under a doctor's caer.

(Kathi Kelly) wrote in message ...
"Kenneth S." writes:

But there is a definite possibility that the FDA WILL accept this proposal.
A minority of U.S. states (as well as several European countries)
ALREADY say that morning-after pills should be available to women on an
over-the-counter basis.


Kenneth, Bob and Mel all made good points about RU486.
However, another point remains. RU486 is not a safe procedure
for OTC release. There are and can be severe consequences.

IMO, the FDA should not even consider this proposal. An MD
should be supervising the use of RU486. To me, this is yet
another example of the vocal minority getting their way to the
detriment of society and health issues. It's just ridiculous.

The interested readers can peruse these pages.

http://pages.map.com/lroberge/ru486.htm

http://www.feminist.org/action/action120f.htm#_edn1

N.B., the FM states only the "positive" and makes no mention
of adverse side effects. The FM is working for their own
political agenda. Women be damned as far as they are concerned.

  #26  
Old December 19th 03, 02:50 PM
Kenneth S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Choices, choices, choices -- but only for women

ME:

Your long message below sidesteps the basic question. If so much
attention in the U.S. is given to ensuring that women have as many
post-conception choices as possible, why can't men have post-conception
choices (or in this case, post-intercourse choices)?

It would be perfectly possible for men to be allowed to make a legal
disclaimer of their paternal rights and responsibilities in situations
where they did not want to be forced into fatherhood by the unilateral
decision of the woman involved. That's not something that could be done
only in a perfect world.

To me, discussions about this issue often are characterized by two
factors:
(1) The determination of so many women to cling to the status of being
the victims of men, although in reality it is women who are making the
choices and imposing their choices on men.
(2) The disparity in the application of the principle that "life isn't
fair." That principle is supposed to be the end of the argument that
men should have equal rights. However, for decades, the drive towards
giving women more choices hasn't been held back by the consideration
that THEY mustn't expect life to be fair.

Your comments exemplify both of these factors.



ME wrote:

I agree with the fact that the pill should not be released OTC,
it is too dangerous for that kind of availability.
I do also agree, however, that the OTC release of it would
lessen the number of abortions, unplanned pregnancies, teen
pregnancy, and other matters of the sort.

As for your point on men not having the choices...if we lived
in a perfect world all woman would discuss the matter with
the man first, but we don't. BUT...
As for your 'plan B' for men....if we lived in a perfect world
all men would actually pay their child support and be there
for their children through all of their life, but they don't.

A girl I know gets pregnant a week before her 17th birthday.
Her boyfriend says the baby is not his and breaks it off with
her immediatley, but he does vow that if blood test reveal
he is the father he would support the child totally.
She goes through the pregnancy without him.
When the baby is 6 months old
Mom needs a car to get a job, since she has now graduated high
school. She works out a loan with her Aunt who tells her she
won't loan her the money unless she takes the baby's father
to court for child support. She does this. Dad requests blood tests.
Dad tells the domestic relations hearing officer of all Mom's partners
at the time of conception....although he was the only one she was
with. Blood tests come back that he is indeed the daddy of the baby.
$45 a week is ordered, yippy. Years go by, no support. After 2 1/2
years she starts getting child support when Dad feels like paying it.
He sees the child, then doesnt, then does, then doesnt....Baby is now 5
years old. Dad still doesn't pay child support like he is court
ordered and Mom can't get any help from the courts. (Seems the
enforcing officers just have too much to do with all the other
cases....ya know the ones who owe more back support) Baby
starts to see psychiatrists, therapists and any other 'ist' you can imagine.
Baby is so emotionally disturbed he sees them 2-4 times a month
depending on behavior and emotional outbursts. Dad doesn't bother
to call, send a card, a letter, or send child support. (By the way, Dad owns
his own business, and for the last 4 years sat in bars 6 days a week)
Baby spends a week in the inpatient child psychiatry unit at 6 years old
because he told Mom he wanted to kill himself. What came out
in therapy sessions? Dad did this, Dad did that, Dad didn't do this,
Dad didn't do that. To make this story as short as possible
because I could go on forever, your PLAN B is often ignored by
men also. Around here you have to give your arm and leg and possibly
both to get something done about violating court orders, getting child
support etc.
My point is this, although women may ignore the mans decisions in
using birth control, RU-486, abortion, adoption etc etc, men also
ignore the fatherly rights they have. (child support, even seeing the
child, providing clothes or moral support)
Meanwhile mom struggles to survive because she chose LIFE and
dad chose BAR, sports car etc etc etc.
Sure, make a law that the Dad has to sign permission for birth control,
RU-486, abortion, adoption, or life but then make a law that Dad also
has to live up to his responsibilities of being a Dad. This argument could
go on forever, and so could I. Women are in the wrong, men are in the
wrong.
Men shouldn't have to pay for the choices of women? Women pay
for the choices of men each and every single day.

"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...
In the interests of clarity, I should point out that this is not
RU-486. It is a product known as an "emergency contraceptive," and is
-- on my understanding -- a pepped-up dose of the ingredients of the
birth control pill. It is not an abortion-inducing product.

However, the basic point remains. This is yet another way of giving
reproductive choices to women. Meantime, no one considers ways of
giving post-conception reproductive choices to men. It would be very
simple to say that men should not have to pay for decisions made
unilaterally by women, and should be able to renounce their paternal
rights and responsibilities. However, this doesn't get done, very
largely because there is no special interest group representing
heterosexual men.

For men, "Plan B" consists of paying 18+ years of "child support" money
to women who decide that they don't want to make use of all the
post-conception choices U.S. law has given them.


Kathi Kelly wrote:

"Kenneth S." writes:

But there is a definite possibility that the FDA WILL accept this

proposal.
A minority of U.S. states (as well as several European countries)
ALREADY say that morning-after pills should be available to women on an
over-the-counter basis.

Kenneth, Bob and Mel all made good points about RU486.
However, another point remains. RU486 is not a safe procedure
for OTC release. There are and can be severe consequences.

IMO, the FDA should not even consider this proposal. An MD
should be supervising the use of RU486. To me, this is yet
another example of the vocal minority getting their way to the
detriment of society and health issues. It's just ridiculous.

The interested readers can peruse these pages.

http://pages.map.com/lroberge/ru486.htm

http://www.feminist.org/action/action120f.htm#_edn1

N.B., the FM states only the "positive" and makes no mention
of adverse side effects. The FM is working for their own
political agenda. Women be damned as far as they are concerned.

  #27  
Old December 19th 03, 02:50 PM
Kenneth S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Choices, choices, choices -- but only for women

ME:

Your long message below sidesteps the basic question. If so much
attention in the U.S. is given to ensuring that women have as many
post-conception choices as possible, why can't men have post-conception
choices (or in this case, post-intercourse choices)?

It would be perfectly possible for men to be allowed to make a legal
disclaimer of their paternal rights and responsibilities in situations
where they did not want to be forced into fatherhood by the unilateral
decision of the woman involved. That's not something that could be done
only in a perfect world.

To me, discussions about this issue often are characterized by two
factors:
(1) The determination of so many women to cling to the status of being
the victims of men, although in reality it is women who are making the
choices and imposing their choices on men.
(2) The disparity in the application of the principle that "life isn't
fair." That principle is supposed to be the end of the argument that
men should have equal rights. However, for decades, the drive towards
giving women more choices hasn't been held back by the consideration
that THEY mustn't expect life to be fair.

Your comments exemplify both of these factors.



ME wrote:

I agree with the fact that the pill should not be released OTC,
it is too dangerous for that kind of availability.
I do also agree, however, that the OTC release of it would
lessen the number of abortions, unplanned pregnancies, teen
pregnancy, and other matters of the sort.

As for your point on men not having the choices...if we lived
in a perfect world all woman would discuss the matter with
the man first, but we don't. BUT...
As for your 'plan B' for men....if we lived in a perfect world
all men would actually pay their child support and be there
for their children through all of their life, but they don't.

A girl I know gets pregnant a week before her 17th birthday.
Her boyfriend says the baby is not his and breaks it off with
her immediatley, but he does vow that if blood test reveal
he is the father he would support the child totally.
She goes through the pregnancy without him.
When the baby is 6 months old
Mom needs a car to get a job, since she has now graduated high
school. She works out a loan with her Aunt who tells her she
won't loan her the money unless she takes the baby's father
to court for child support. She does this. Dad requests blood tests.
Dad tells the domestic relations hearing officer of all Mom's partners
at the time of conception....although he was the only one she was
with. Blood tests come back that he is indeed the daddy of the baby.
$45 a week is ordered, yippy. Years go by, no support. After 2 1/2
years she starts getting child support when Dad feels like paying it.
He sees the child, then doesnt, then does, then doesnt....Baby is now 5
years old. Dad still doesn't pay child support like he is court
ordered and Mom can't get any help from the courts. (Seems the
enforcing officers just have too much to do with all the other
cases....ya know the ones who owe more back support) Baby
starts to see psychiatrists, therapists and any other 'ist' you can imagine.
Baby is so emotionally disturbed he sees them 2-4 times a month
depending on behavior and emotional outbursts. Dad doesn't bother
to call, send a card, a letter, or send child support. (By the way, Dad owns
his own business, and for the last 4 years sat in bars 6 days a week)
Baby spends a week in the inpatient child psychiatry unit at 6 years old
because he told Mom he wanted to kill himself. What came out
in therapy sessions? Dad did this, Dad did that, Dad didn't do this,
Dad didn't do that. To make this story as short as possible
because I could go on forever, your PLAN B is often ignored by
men also. Around here you have to give your arm and leg and possibly
both to get something done about violating court orders, getting child
support etc.
My point is this, although women may ignore the mans decisions in
using birth control, RU-486, abortion, adoption etc etc, men also
ignore the fatherly rights they have. (child support, even seeing the
child, providing clothes or moral support)
Meanwhile mom struggles to survive because she chose LIFE and
dad chose BAR, sports car etc etc etc.
Sure, make a law that the Dad has to sign permission for birth control,
RU-486, abortion, adoption, or life but then make a law that Dad also
has to live up to his responsibilities of being a Dad. This argument could
go on forever, and so could I. Women are in the wrong, men are in the
wrong.
Men shouldn't have to pay for the choices of women? Women pay
for the choices of men each and every single day.

"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...
In the interests of clarity, I should point out that this is not
RU-486. It is a product known as an "emergency contraceptive," and is
-- on my understanding -- a pepped-up dose of the ingredients of the
birth control pill. It is not an abortion-inducing product.

However, the basic point remains. This is yet another way of giving
reproductive choices to women. Meantime, no one considers ways of
giving post-conception reproductive choices to men. It would be very
simple to say that men should not have to pay for decisions made
unilaterally by women, and should be able to renounce their paternal
rights and responsibilities. However, this doesn't get done, very
largely because there is no special interest group representing
heterosexual men.

For men, "Plan B" consists of paying 18+ years of "child support" money
to women who decide that they don't want to make use of all the
post-conception choices U.S. law has given them.


Kathi Kelly wrote:

"Kenneth S." writes:

But there is a definite possibility that the FDA WILL accept this

proposal.
A minority of U.S. states (as well as several European countries)
ALREADY say that morning-after pills should be available to women on an
over-the-counter basis.

Kenneth, Bob and Mel all made good points about RU486.
However, another point remains. RU486 is not a safe procedure
for OTC release. There are and can be severe consequences.

IMO, the FDA should not even consider this proposal. An MD
should be supervising the use of RU486. To me, this is yet
another example of the vocal minority getting their way to the
detriment of society and health issues. It's just ridiculous.

The interested readers can peruse these pages.

http://pages.map.com/lroberge/ru486.htm

http://www.feminist.org/action/action120f.htm#_edn1

N.B., the FM states only the "positive" and makes no mention
of adverse side effects. The FM is working for their own
political agenda. Women be damned as far as they are concerned.

  #28  
Old December 19th 03, 02:51 PM
ME
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Choices, choices, choices -- but only for women


"Werebat" wrote in message ...
I find your story incredibly hard to believe, but it may just be because
I was recently imprisoned after dutifully paying my CS for well over two
years, ever since it was ordered. This guy owned a BUSINESS? Seems like
he'd be painfully easy to track down if you ask me!


Sure he is easy to track down, if the courts wanted to. But they don't want
to,
at least not around here. The courts around here do not see that when two
people take the responsibility to sleep together that they should both take
the responsibility of the consequences. If the payor (often women are paying
too, not just men--I know many men with custody of their children)
sends something, anything at all, they won't do or say much
of anything to him/her.

And the child wanted to KILL himself at 6 years old? This was not due to
absence of the father -- I'd look to see if Mommy Dearest was sexually
abusing him out of anger at the father and an inability to deal with the
real world.


Mom was not sexually abusing Baby, or abusing him in any way. I know
you will reply back saying, YEAH RIGHT, or something of the sort but
it's the truth.
- Ron ^*^



ME wrote:

I agree with the fact that the pill should not be released OTC,
it is too dangerous for that kind of availability.
I do also agree, however, that the OTC release of it would
lessen the number of abortions, unplanned pregnancies, teen
pregnancy, and other matters of the sort.

As for your point on men not having the choices...if we lived
in a perfect world all woman would discuss the matter with
the man first, but we don't. BUT...
As for your 'plan B' for men....if we lived in a perfect world
all men would actually pay their child support and be there
for their children through all of their life, but they don't.

A girl I know gets pregnant a week before her 17th birthday.
Her boyfriend says the baby is not his and breaks it off with
her immediatley, but he does vow that if blood test reveal
he is the father he would support the child totally.
She goes through the pregnancy without him.
When the baby is 6 months old
Mom needs a car to get a job, since she has now graduated high
school. She works out a loan with her Aunt who tells her she
won't loan her the money unless she takes the baby's father
to court for child support. She does this. Dad requests blood tests.
Dad tells the domestic relations hearing officer of all Mom's partners
at the time of conception....although he was the only one she was
with. Blood tests come back that he is indeed the daddy of the baby.
$45 a week is ordered, yippy. Years go by, no support. After 2 1/2
years she starts getting child support when Dad feels like paying it.
He sees the child, then doesnt, then does, then doesnt....Baby is now 5
years old. Dad still doesn't pay child support like he is court
ordered and Mom can't get any help from the courts. (Seems the
enforcing officers just have too much to do with all the other
cases....ya know the ones who owe more back support) Baby
starts to see psychiatrists, therapists and any other 'ist' you can

imagine.
Baby is so emotionally disturbed he sees them 2-4 times a month
depending on behavior and emotional outbursts. Dad doesn't bother
to call, send a card, a letter, or send child support. (By the way, Dad

owns
his own business, and for the last 4 years sat in bars 6 days a week)
Baby spends a week in the inpatient child psychiatry unit at 6 years old
because he told Mom he wanted to kill himself. What came out
in therapy sessions? Dad did this, Dad did that, Dad didn't do this,
Dad didn't do that. To make this story as short as possible
because I could go on forever, your PLAN B is often ignored by
men also. Around here you have to give your arm and leg and possibly
both to get something done about violating court orders, getting child
support etc.
My point is this, although women may ignore the mans decisions in
using birth control, RU-486, abortion, adoption etc etc, men also
ignore the fatherly rights they have. (child support, even seeing the
child, providing clothes or moral support)
Meanwhile mom struggles to survive because she chose LIFE and
dad chose BAR, sports car etc etc etc.
Sure, make a law that the Dad has to sign permission for birth control,
RU-486, abortion, adoption, or life but then make a law that Dad also
has to live up to his responsibilities of being a Dad. This argument

could
go on forever, and so could I. Women are in the wrong, men are in the
wrong.
Men shouldn't have to pay for the choices of women? Women pay
for the choices of men each and every single day.

"Kenneth S." wrote in message
..
In the interests of clarity, I should point out that this is not
RU-486. It is a product known as an "emergency contraceptive," and is
-- on my understanding -- a pepped-up dose of the ingredients of the
birth control pill. It is not an abortion-inducing product.

However, the basic point remains. This is yet another way of giving
reproductive choices to women. Meantime, no one considers ways of
giving post-conception reproductive choices to men. It would be very
simple to say that men should not have to pay for decisions made
unilaterally by women, and should be able to renounce their paternal
rights and responsibilities. However, this doesn't get done, very
largely because there is no special interest group representing
heterosexual men.

For men, "Plan B" consists of paying 18+ years of "child support"

money
to women who decide that they don't want to make use of all the
post-conception choices U.S. law has given them.


Kathi Kelly wrote:

"Kenneth S." writes:

But there is a definite possibility that the FDA WILL accept this

proposal.
A minority of U.S. states (as well as several European countries)
ALREADY say that morning-after pills should be available to women

on an
over-the-counter basis.

Kenneth, Bob and Mel all made good points about RU486.
However, another point remains. RU486 is not a safe procedure
for OTC release. There are and can be severe consequences.

IMO, the FDA should not even consider this proposal. An MD
should be supervising the use of RU486. To me, this is yet
another example of the vocal minority getting their way to the
detriment of society and health issues. It's just ridiculous.

The interested readers can peruse these pages.

http://pages.map.com/lroberge/ru486.htm

http://www.feminist.org/action/action120f.htm#_edn1

N.B., the FM states only the "positive" and makes no mention
of adverse side effects. The FM is working for their own
political agenda. Women be damned as far as they are concerned.



  #29  
Old December 19th 03, 02:51 PM
ME
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Choices, choices, choices -- but only for women


"Werebat" wrote in message ...
I find your story incredibly hard to believe, but it may just be because
I was recently imprisoned after dutifully paying my CS for well over two
years, ever since it was ordered. This guy owned a BUSINESS? Seems like
he'd be painfully easy to track down if you ask me!


Sure he is easy to track down, if the courts wanted to. But they don't want
to,
at least not around here. The courts around here do not see that when two
people take the responsibility to sleep together that they should both take
the responsibility of the consequences. If the payor (often women are paying
too, not just men--I know many men with custody of their children)
sends something, anything at all, they won't do or say much
of anything to him/her.

And the child wanted to KILL himself at 6 years old? This was not due to
absence of the father -- I'd look to see if Mommy Dearest was sexually
abusing him out of anger at the father and an inability to deal with the
real world.


Mom was not sexually abusing Baby, or abusing him in any way. I know
you will reply back saying, YEAH RIGHT, or something of the sort but
it's the truth.
- Ron ^*^



ME wrote:

I agree with the fact that the pill should not be released OTC,
it is too dangerous for that kind of availability.
I do also agree, however, that the OTC release of it would
lessen the number of abortions, unplanned pregnancies, teen
pregnancy, and other matters of the sort.

As for your point on men not having the choices...if we lived
in a perfect world all woman would discuss the matter with
the man first, but we don't. BUT...
As for your 'plan B' for men....if we lived in a perfect world
all men would actually pay their child support and be there
for their children through all of their life, but they don't.

A girl I know gets pregnant a week before her 17th birthday.
Her boyfriend says the baby is not his and breaks it off with
her immediatley, but he does vow that if blood test reveal
he is the father he would support the child totally.
She goes through the pregnancy without him.
When the baby is 6 months old
Mom needs a car to get a job, since she has now graduated high
school. She works out a loan with her Aunt who tells her she
won't loan her the money unless she takes the baby's father
to court for child support. She does this. Dad requests blood tests.
Dad tells the domestic relations hearing officer of all Mom's partners
at the time of conception....although he was the only one she was
with. Blood tests come back that he is indeed the daddy of the baby.
$45 a week is ordered, yippy. Years go by, no support. After 2 1/2
years she starts getting child support when Dad feels like paying it.
He sees the child, then doesnt, then does, then doesnt....Baby is now 5
years old. Dad still doesn't pay child support like he is court
ordered and Mom can't get any help from the courts. (Seems the
enforcing officers just have too much to do with all the other
cases....ya know the ones who owe more back support) Baby
starts to see psychiatrists, therapists and any other 'ist' you can

imagine.
Baby is so emotionally disturbed he sees them 2-4 times a month
depending on behavior and emotional outbursts. Dad doesn't bother
to call, send a card, a letter, or send child support. (By the way, Dad

owns
his own business, and for the last 4 years sat in bars 6 days a week)
Baby spends a week in the inpatient child psychiatry unit at 6 years old
because he told Mom he wanted to kill himself. What came out
in therapy sessions? Dad did this, Dad did that, Dad didn't do this,
Dad didn't do that. To make this story as short as possible
because I could go on forever, your PLAN B is often ignored by
men also. Around here you have to give your arm and leg and possibly
both to get something done about violating court orders, getting child
support etc.
My point is this, although women may ignore the mans decisions in
using birth control, RU-486, abortion, adoption etc etc, men also
ignore the fatherly rights they have. (child support, even seeing the
child, providing clothes or moral support)
Meanwhile mom struggles to survive because she chose LIFE and
dad chose BAR, sports car etc etc etc.
Sure, make a law that the Dad has to sign permission for birth control,
RU-486, abortion, adoption, or life but then make a law that Dad also
has to live up to his responsibilities of being a Dad. This argument

could
go on forever, and so could I. Women are in the wrong, men are in the
wrong.
Men shouldn't have to pay for the choices of women? Women pay
for the choices of men each and every single day.

"Kenneth S." wrote in message
..
In the interests of clarity, I should point out that this is not
RU-486. It is a product known as an "emergency contraceptive," and is
-- on my understanding -- a pepped-up dose of the ingredients of the
birth control pill. It is not an abortion-inducing product.

However, the basic point remains. This is yet another way of giving
reproductive choices to women. Meantime, no one considers ways of
giving post-conception reproductive choices to men. It would be very
simple to say that men should not have to pay for decisions made
unilaterally by women, and should be able to renounce their paternal
rights and responsibilities. However, this doesn't get done, very
largely because there is no special interest group representing
heterosexual men.

For men, "Plan B" consists of paying 18+ years of "child support"

money
to women who decide that they don't want to make use of all the
post-conception choices U.S. law has given them.


Kathi Kelly wrote:

"Kenneth S." writes:

But there is a definite possibility that the FDA WILL accept this

proposal.
A minority of U.S. states (as well as several European countries)
ALREADY say that morning-after pills should be available to women

on an
over-the-counter basis.

Kenneth, Bob and Mel all made good points about RU486.
However, another point remains. RU486 is not a safe procedure
for OTC release. There are and can be severe consequences.

IMO, the FDA should not even consider this proposal. An MD
should be supervising the use of RU486. To me, this is yet
another example of the vocal minority getting their way to the
detriment of society and health issues. It's just ridiculous.

The interested readers can peruse these pages.

http://pages.map.com/lroberge/ru486.htm

http://www.feminist.org/action/action120f.htm#_edn1

N.B., the FM states only the "positive" and makes no mention
of adverse side effects. The FM is working for their own
political agenda. Women be damned as far as they are concerned.



  #30  
Old December 19th 03, 03:08 PM
ME
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Choices, choices, choices -- but only for women


"AZ Astrea" wrote in message
...

"ME" wrote in message
...
I agree with the fact that the pill should not be released OTC,
it is too dangerous for that kind of availability.
I do also agree, however, that the OTC release of it would
lessen the number of abortions, unplanned pregnancies, teen
pregnancy, and other matters of the sort.

-----------------
This is NOT RU486! This is just a high dose birth control pill. It does
not induce an abortion.----

I never said it did induce abortion.........
----------------------------
As for your point on men not having the choices...if we lived
in a perfect world all woman would discuss the matter with
the man first, but we don't. BUT...
As for your 'plan B' for men....if we lived in a perfect world
all men would actually pay their child support and be there
for their children through all of their life, but they don't.

-----------
In a perfect world the courts would order 50 50 shared legal and physical
custody of the kids and no cs would be paid to mommy.

I agree 100%--That would be great. My ex husband had that for a while but
then his daughters mom moved to another school district so that didnt work
any longer. But it was nice while it lasted.
------------------
A girl I know gets pregnant a week before her 17th birthday.
Her boyfriend says the baby is not his and breaks it off with
her immediatley, but he does vow that if blood test reveal
he is the father he would support the child totally.
She goes through the pregnancy without him.
When the baby is 6 months old
Mom needs a car to get a job, since she has now graduated high
school. She works out a loan with her Aunt who tells her she
won't loan her the money unless she takes the baby's father
to court for child support. She does this. Dad requests blood tests.
Dad tells the domestic relations hearing officer of all Mom's partners
at the time of conception....although he was the only one she was
with. Blood tests come back that he is indeed the daddy of the baby.
$45 a week is ordered, yippy. Years go by, no support.

----------------------------
What, did she think that somehow a court order was going to turn this guy
into your version of a responsible parent? Get real, as soon as he
learned of her pregnancy he "says the baby is not his and breaks it off

with
her immediatley". Buy a clue. He may have said he would "support the

child
totally" maybe just to get her off his back but his actions speak, scream,
louder than words.


So Dad shouldn't be responsible for his actions? Let Dad off with nothing
because
he said it wasn't his from day 1?
--------------------------
After 2 1/2
years she starts getting child support when Dad feels like paying it.
He sees the child, then doesnt, then does, then doesnt

----------------------
Maybe when Dad feels like paying it is really when dad is ABLE to pay it.


Dad is ABLE to pay....at least in this case
---------------------
....Baby is now 5
years old. Dad still doesn't pay child support like he is court
ordered and Mom can't get any help from the courts. (Seems the
enforcing officers just have too much to do with all the other
cases....ya know the ones who owe more back support) Baby
starts to see psychiatrists, therapists and any other 'ist' you can

imagine.
Baby is so emotionally disturbed he sees them 2-4 times a month
depending on behavior and emotional outbursts.

-------------------
And this is the fault of a person who isn't even there? I think it's more
likely that it's the fault of the mother who IS there.


You miss the point that Dad was there....then wasn't....then was....he would
see Baby tell him see ya next weekend etc.then not call for 6 months, then
see him one day a week for the next 6 months then not call for another few
months....you don't think that would hurt a child? Especially one so young?
-------------------
Dad doesn't bother
to call, send a card, a letter, or send child support. (By the way, Dad

owns
his own business, and for the last 4 years sat in bars 6 days a week)

-----------------
Why, oh why do people think that owning your own business equates with
having lots of money?? It's generally closer to the truth that owning

your
own business equates to having lots of money problems.

I agree, but he does have money in this case...

And as far as his
sitting in bars maybe that was the only escape he could afford. Unless he
was sitting in them at some luxury resort.

Only escape he could afford? Sure everyone needs a break now and then, or
an escape...but $2 a beer (more on band nights plus $5 to get in) and he
does this
6 days a week? But yet he can't afford to send child support, or at the very
least
send a card on the babys birthday? You need to escape to beer? Sure we all
like to
once in a while. But for $20 (or less) you can get a 30-pack of beer, invite
a friend over
and drink for half the price of going to the bar 6 days a week.....
--------------------
Baby spends a week in the inpatient child psychiatry unit at 6 years old
because he told Mom he wanted to kill himself. What came out
in therapy sessions? Dad did this, Dad did that, Dad didn't do this,
Dad didn't do that.

-------------------
Puh-leeeze! the only thing that dad didn't do was pay mommy the money she
felt she deserved. Daddy was never around right?! So how could he have
done this and not do that, blah blah. More likely that mommy TOLD the

poor
kid a bunch of stuff to tweak his head.


When baby started asking why dad isnt around all Mom said was 'because'
She dialed the phone and let baby speak to Dad so HE could tell Baby why he
doesnt bother. Mom never told baby anything bad (or good) about Dad. She
thought it best to let baby make his own decision about Dad..
--------------------
To make this story as short as possible
because I could go on forever, your PLAN B is often ignored by
men also. Around here you have to give your arm and leg and possibly
both to get something done about violating court orders, getting child
support etc.

----------------
And everywhere you could give away everything and still never get anything
done about violating visitation orders and false abuse allegations.
-------------------
My point is this, although women may ignore the mans decisions in
using birth control, RU-486, abortion, adoption etc etc, men also
ignore the fatherly rights they have. (child support, even seeing the
child, providing clothes or moral support)
Meanwhile mom struggles to survive because she chose LIFE and
dad chose BAR, sports car etc etc etc.

--------------
She chose, she chose! That's EXACTLY the point! SHE makes all of the
choices. SHE can choose LIFE or ABORTION or ADOPTION or ABANDONMENT. All
men can do is sit by and wait to see what she will choose.


Men can choose to support their child, forget about child support payments.
Take the kid to the park on the weekend. Send a card on birthday's. Call
just to see how school went that day....All women can do is sit around and
wait
for dad to live up to his responsibilities as a father.
-------------------
Sure, make a law that the Dad has to sign permission for birth control,
RU-486, abortion, adoption, or life

-------------------------
No. Make a law giving men the SAME rights that women currently have. The
right to decide to be a parent or not. While a man can't force a women to
get an abortion he should be able to force her to live with her own

choices.
A man should be able to choose to 'sign off' from being a parent.


Here a man can sign his parental rights away. This case, Dad refuses to do
so.
BUT mom does have to agree to let dad do it also. Like I said in a perfect
world
it would be a choice made together in the event a women got pregnant, but we
don't live in a perfect world do we?
--------------------
but then make a law that Dad also
has to live up to his responsibilities of being a Dad.

---------------
What, the current set of laws requiring men to pay outrageous amounts of

cs
to women who have made the choice to become a parent aren't enough for

you?
Maybe they should have a national registry where all the men in the

country
who are working are required to be listed so that the courts can easily
garnish their paychecks and take their tax refunds. And maybe they should
bring back the 'debtors prisons' and lock up men who are unable to pay

their
cs. And then they could take away the drivers and professional licenses

of
any man who gets behind on their cs. Oh wait, they already DO those

things.

Outrageous amounts of child support? How much do you think it takes to raise
a
child? Sit and think about it. Not everyone pays outrageous amounts of child
support, and it is supposed to be based on the income of both parties. I
know a girl
who pays $15 a week, but I also know a guy who pays over $200 a week. $200
is outrageous but normally the amounts are not all that outrageous. $15 a
week? come on....
---------------------
This argument could
go on forever, and so could I. Women are in the wrong, men are in the
wrong.
Men shouldn't have to pay for the choices of women? Women pay
for the choices of men each and every single day.

-----------
No, men shouldn't have to pay for the choices of women. Men have no

choices
when it comes to having children so women don't pay for men's choices. And
they don't pay for their own. They don't have to.

~AZ~


"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...
In the interests of clarity, I should point out that this is not
RU-486. It is a product known as an "emergency contraceptive," and is
-- on my understanding -- a pepped-up dose of the ingredients of the
birth control pill. It is not an abortion-inducing product.

However, the basic point remains. This is yet another way of giving
reproductive choices to women. Meantime, no one considers ways of
giving post-conception reproductive choices to men. It would be very
simple to say that men should not have to pay for decisions made
unilaterally by women, and should be able to renounce their paternal
rights and responsibilities. However, this doesn't get done, very
largely because there is no special interest group representing
heterosexual men.

For men, "Plan B" consists of paying 18+ years of "child support"

money
to women who decide that they don't want to make use of all the
post-conception choices U.S. law has given them.


Kathi Kelly wrote:

"Kenneth S." writes:

But there is a definite possibility that the FDA WILL accept this

proposal.
A minority of U.S. states (as well as several European countries)
ALREADY say that morning-after pills should be available to women

on
an
over-the-counter basis.

Kenneth, Bob and Mel all made good points about RU486.
However, another point remains. RU486 is not a safe procedure
for OTC release. There are and can be severe consequences.

IMO, the FDA should not even consider this proposal. An MD
should be supervising the use of RU486. To me, this is yet
another example of the vocal minority getting their way to the
detriment of society and health issues. It's just ridiculous.

The interested readers can peruse these pages.

http://pages.map.com/lroberge/ru486.htm

http://www.feminist.org/action/action120f.htm#_edn1

N.B., the FM states only the "positive" and makes no mention
of adverse side effects. The FM is working for their own
political agenda. Women be damned as far as they are concerned.







 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.