The right to abandon your child (aka - Roe v. Wade for Men)

"Dusty" wrote in message
...
Then the state would send him right back to prison to teach him the error
of his ways for being in "contempt" of court - but they'd never toss him
(or anyone else) into jail for owing a debt... -THAT- is EXACTLY how the
Feds and states get around that pesky, little nasty bit of the
Constitution that they don't care for.

When did the Constitution matter in a divorce court.

"YooperBoyka" wrote in message
...

"Werebat" wrote in message
news:lI5Rf.87501$bF.39023@dukeread07...


You know, there is really nothing I can say here that can illustrate what
kind of a sad little person you are that will be more effective than the
response you just gave (including the notable absence of a rebuttal to
any of my points). Congratulations, I guess.


...and it took you *how* long to figure that out?

not every one is slow like you.

"YooperBoyka" wrote in message
...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
news:T4kRf.22777$_f4.6764@trnddc03...

"YooperBoyka" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
news:tghRf.571$5F1.555@fed1read08...

"Joy" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

Both of them took the risk of pregnancy. The default position is
that
a
baby results. The end result is that if a woman does get an
abortion,
then he's undeservedly off the hook.

Then you must feel that she, too, is undeservedly off the hook,
right?

Sure.

It follows that you are against abortion; unless you believe that one
ought
to be entitled to that which they do not deserve.

I think that the opinions expressed in this discussion may be convincing
many
men that the best options are celibacy or masturbation.
Might make life a little less satisfying for the women of the world.
Wouldn't *that* be a bite in the ass!



You don't think women can masturbate too??

Well,...if that's what you want out of life...
Have at it.

You are dumb as a door nail. You make an idiotic statement that says
nothing.

"Dusty" wrote in message
...
"SpiderHam77" wrote in message
oups.com...

marspamtin_ridspamdle wrote:

It's not 99%. Even when used PERFECTLY (rarely happens) I don't
believe
condoms are 99% effective.

But let's say it is 99%. A sexually active couple having sex, say,
three times a week, would have sex about 156 times a year. If 1 in
every 100 acts of sex results in a baby, the guy in this relationship
is
on the hook for one to two unplanned babies PER YEAR.

So much for the "he shoulda wrapped his rascal" argument.

Well then if that argument doesn't hold true, lets go back to the old
argument... if your not ready to father a child, then don't have sex.
I know Sex is alot fun, I rather enjoy it myself. However if I was
truely concerned about my partner becoming Pregnant and using my Sperm
without my permission, I would refrain from Sex all together.

SpiderHam77

Ummm, excuse me, but there's something that everyone's forgetting. One
very
important FACT in all this - SHE LIED.

She told him BEFORE all this bull **** happened... "Oh, darling, let's
have
sex. You want it. I want it. You know I want it. And you know I've
told
you a thousand times I can't get pregnant. It's impossible for me to
conceive a child. So lets do the Horizontal Bop all night long. And in
the
morning, let's have hot, sweaty monkey love, too. 'cuz there's no way you
could ever knock me up."

Bull ****, bull ****, bull ****, bull ****, bull ****, bull ****!!

What amazes me is that everyone here discussing it knows that SHE LIED.
They've read it in the newspapers. They've heard it on TV and radio.
They've read it here, on the groups (I know, I've been lurking and
watching
and reading all your posts! Hell, -I'm- the son-of-a-bitch who ****ing
posted it in the first place!!!). They've discussed it ad nauseam. They
almost know it by heart. It's been drummed into their thick, ****ing
skills
for weeks now - and they -STILL- don't get it!!!!!!

What part of - SHE LIED - is so ****ing hard for you ****ing people to
****ing understand?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

It makes me want to ****ing scream!!! ****!!!!!

Makes you wonder what her child will think of her knowing that her mother
both lied and used her own kid to make a buck.



















OK. I feel better now.




------------------------------
Hey, Spider.. it's nothing personal, it was just one to many "keep it in
your pants" replies that set me off. So don't take it that I'm PO'd with
you, I'm not.

--- see?

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:c_qRf.8628$z82.6655@fed1read07...

"Dusty" wrote in message
...
Then the state would send him right back to prison to teach him the error
of his ways for being in "contempt" of court - but they'd never toss him
(or anyone else) into jail for owing a debt... -THAT- is EXACTLY how the
Feds and states get around that pesky, little nasty bit of the
Constitution that they don't care for.

When did the Constitution matter in a divorce court.

Let me guess, you failed basic history in school, right?

On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 20:45:01 -0700, "John Smith"
wrote:


"Dusty" wrote in message
m...
Then the state would send him right back to prison to teach him the error
of his ways for being in "contempt" of court - but they'd never toss him
(or anyone else) into jail for owing a debt... -THAT- is EXACTLY how the
Feds and states get around that pesky, little nasty bit of the
Constitution that they don't care for.

When did the Constitution matter in a divorce court.


The Constitution of any country must ALWAYS APPLY. If it is not
applied in all cases, then the document is not worth the paper it is
printed on.

Trampling on peoples rights just to make it easy and conveinient to
force NCPs to "pay" is a total violation of an individuals rights.

You want justice? How about ENFORCING the orders??? You don't need
"new" laws and powers to do this, you just have to get off your ass
and do a little work. But the government does not want to get off its
ass and work. It wants problems to just "go away". And the easiest way
to do that is to sell your rights down the river and hand power to a
bunch of non-elected officials who can do whatever they want with
virtual impunity.

Your rights and freedoms have been on the slippery slope for decades
now. By the time the majority realizes it, it may be too late. Better
get used to living in a faacist state, 'cause you're pretty much there
now. "Deadbeat Dad's" are the new "Jews" in your facist state. Just
about any law that punishes a "Deadbeat Dad" can get passed, even ones
that outright violate the Constitution.

The question is, once the "Deadbeat Dads" have been vanquished, "Who's
next?". One by one, groups will be identified, and rights
systematically stripped. But it's ok as long as it is not happening to
you, right?

Like I said before, speak now or forever hold your peace.

SpiderHam77 wrote:
marspamtin_ridspamdle wrote:

It's not 99%. Even when used PERFECTLY (rarely happens) I don't believe
condoms are 99% effective.

But let's say it is 99%. A sexually active couple having sex, say,
three times a week, would have sex about 156 times a year. If 1 in
every 100 acts of sex results in a baby, the guy in this relationship is
on the hook for one to two unplanned babies PER YEAR.

So much for the "he shoulda wrapped his rascal" argument.


Well then if that argument doesn't hold true, lets go back to the old
argument...

LOL, so this is a shell game then? First argument fails to lets try
again with something else.

if your not ready to father a child, then don't have sex.
I know Sex is alot fun, I rather enjoy it myself. However if I was
truely concerned about my partner becoming Pregnant and using my Sperm
without my permission, I would refrain from Sex all together.

SpiderHam77


You'd refrain from sex? Will you also tell your dog to stop scratching
it's fleas?

Where did I say that?


So you want a government that control our every move?? You want to be told
what you can and can not do, beyond basic laws??

T

Hey, how about people just keep it in their pants? Think that would
work?

You really think that? Then why don't they just take the babies from the
moms at birth, and force both parents to pay child support until one or both
can work out a way to support the child together? Instead, they supplement
the mother while going after the father for every penny that is paid to mom
and child for welfare. If they really supported 2-parent families, they
wouldn't have made it so easy to divorce, and for dad to supplement mom for
years after.


teachrmama wrote:
"tonita" wrote in message
oups.com...
Each gender has a choice. People can choose to be more responsible,
but they don't so everyone wants laws and procedures in place to clean
up the mess.

Actually what would be nice would be if government would butt out of
family
affairs. But if they choose not to do that, there should be equal
choices
for both genders.


SpiderHam77 wrote:
I agree with R here. If the woman does have a choice.. then so
should the man. However the only large problem I can see here is that
ROE vs WADE was never ment to be used as the ability to force men in
CS.

R vs W was never meant to be anything more then declaring that women
have the right to choose for themselves if an operation can be
conducted on them. It has nothing to do with Parental rights... It
has
nothing to do deciding paternity ect.. all the way down the line.

So I applaud the efforts of such a case. However I don't think it
will honestly have much of an effect as the Courts will probably come
up with a ruling that will clarify such things. And that stuff like
CS
has be decided in the Legislature, not the courts.

To me the only way we can protect my fellow men from such an unfair
thing at this juncture in the game is education. Start teaching our
men from an early age. Drill it into them that these women are evil,
and want something from you. And we as men need to protect our sperm
like it's a rare comdity.

SpiderHam77

Well blame it on anyone but the two adults involved, of course.


Cotrarily, it is the government which is the CATALYST for such arrangement.



teachrmama wrote:
"tonita" wrote in message
oups.com...
Each gender has a choice. People can choose to be more responsible,
but they don't so everyone wants laws and procedures in place to clean
up the mess.

Actually what would be nice would be if government would butt out of
family
affairs. But if they choose not to do that, there should be equal
choices
for both genders.


SpiderHam77 wrote:
I agree with R here. If the woman does have a choice.. then so
should the man. However the only large problem I can see here is
that
ROE vs WADE was never ment to be used as the ability to force men in
CS.

R vs W was never meant to be anything more then declaring that
women
have the right to choose for themselves if an operation can be
conducted on them. It has nothing to do with Parental rights... It
has
nothing to do deciding paternity ect.. all the way down the line.

So I applaud the efforts of such a case. However I don't think it
will honestly have much of an effect as the Courts will probably come
up with a ruling that will clarify such things. And that stuff like
CS
has be decided in the Legislature, not the courts.

To me the only way we can protect my fellow men from such an unfair
thing at this juncture in the game is education. Start teaching our
men from an early age. Drill it into them that these women are evil,
and want something from you. And we as men need to protect our sperm
like it's a rare comdity.

SpiderHam77