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

"YooperBoyka" wrote

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!
==
I think that's an inevitable conclusion if the system continues its rampant
attack on men
and men's rights (so to speak).
==

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:uq7Rf.8544$z82.3049@fed1read07...
"Chris" wrote in message
news:Hf7Rf.554$5F1.90@fed1read08...
How is this for your laws lady, I immigrated here 3 years ago to find
out
that I owe $52,000 in CS arrearages and face a possible 4 years in
State
prison.

Either the government people are going to rip YOU off, or they are
going
to
rip-off the TAXPAYERS by paying for your room & board. Makes sense to
me!

The government is going to spend $400,000 ($100K per year for the prison
internment cost) of taxpayers money so that DB doesn't have to pay
$52,000. Yeah, that math makes a lot of sense.

Oh, no, no, no. You've got it all wrong. He would still be expected to
pay
the 52K plus interest when he gets out of prison.

And if he doesn't?

"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...

"Joy" wrote in message
news

"Ken Chaddock" wrote in message
news:152Rf.24417$dg.13566@clgrps13...
Joy wrote:

"NewMan" wrote in message
...

Well perhaps with the advent of the birth control pill for men things
will change too! If men have the option to take "the pill", and no
women could "trick him" and get pregnant. Further, if a woman DID get
pregnant while he was on the pill, he would immediately challenge the
paternity of the child!


I know several children who were conceived while their mothers were on
the pill. Think about it - first of all, the pill isn't 100%
effective,
even when used absolutely correctly. Second, there are medications
that
interfere with the pill - for instance, some antibiotics can render it
ineffective or less effective. Third, the mother could get sick - get
a
bout of the stomach/intestinal flu, for instance - if she can't digest
it, it is much the same as if she hadn't taken it - a few days of the
flu at the wrong time could leave you fertile.

All things that most women *know* and should take into account if they
decide to have sex don't you think ? I know this may seem like I'm
trying
to put the onus for contraception onto the woman, but realistically,
she's the one who knows her personal situation, whether she's taking
medication that interferes with the pill or whether she's been sick and
how that might effect her birth control efforts...if she doesn't take
these issues into account, can you reasonably and credibly assert that
any man who has been assured by her that she's "on the pill" could
possibly be "culpable" in an unwanted pregnancy under such
circumstances
?

I think you missed my point. My point is, *nobody* can know for sure -
so
it behooves *everybody* to grasp that, in the absence of a physical
cause
for absolute infertility (like a hysterectomy, for example), ALL sexual
encounters bring some risk of pregnancy. Using birth control minimizes
the risk, it does not eliminate the risk. Therefore "an assurance that
she's on the pill" shouldn't give *either* party a sense of
invulnerability. Both parties should understand that every sexual
encounter does carry a risk of pregnancy, even with the pill. Even if
the
pill is taken 100% correctly. For many people this brings the risk down
to
a level they find acceptable - but the fact that there was a known,
albeit
small, risk means that IMO both parties are equally culpable.

So are you saying that if the guy is too ignorant to know that even if
she's on the pill there is some risk of pregnancy then he shouldn't be
"culpable"? I'd disagree, because every sexually active adult really
should know that birth control isn't 100% reliable and you are accepting
that risk when you choose to have sex. The safest bet is to only have
sex
with somebody who you know well enough to know they would handle a
surprise pregnancy the same way you would.

Sex with "somebody?" And how exactly does a man get to decide how to
handle a pregnancy?
He's at the mercy of the woman, who in the U.S. has been given the ability
to make all the post-pregnancy choices. So far as men are concerned, the
progress has been in the opposite direction. The law has been changing in
the direction of finding more and more ways of denying men the choice
given
to them by Mother Nature -- that of walking away from unwanted
pregnancies.

If we're talking about "safe bets," we're talking about the way things
ARE, as distinct from the way things OUGHT TO BE. There's a very sharp
distinction between these two ways of talking about situations. Years ago,
in the days of the Jim Crow laws, the "safest bet" for blacks was to stay
in
their own neighborhoods, away from whites. By doing that they could
reduce
the risks of being lynched. I don't remember that any respectable body of
opinion urged blacks to adopt the "safest bet" principle when deciding
what
they should do.

Funny, but sadly true.

For what it's worth, this topic is all over the news as well as talk radio.
Perhpas this might be the irreversible tide that will wash away such
injustice which is LONG overdue!

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

"Chris" wrote in message
news:NTmRf.589$5F1.339@fed1read08...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:uq7Rf.8544$z82.3049@fed1read07...
"Chris" wrote in message
news:Hf7Rf.554$5F1.90@fed1read08...
How is this for your laws lady, I immigrated here 3 years ago to find
out
that I owe $52,000 in CS arrearages and face a possible 4 years in
State
prison.

Either the government people are going to rip YOU off, or they are
going
to
rip-off the TAXPAYERS by paying for your room & board. Makes sense to
me!

The government is going to spend $400,000 ($100K per year for the
prison
internment cost) of taxpayers money so that DB doesn't have to pay
$52,000. Yeah, that math makes a lot of sense.

Oh, no, no, no. You've got it all wrong. He would still be expected to
pay
the 52K plus interest when he gets out of prison.

And if he doesn't?

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.

"Chris" wrote in message
news:OTmRf.590$5F1.485@fed1read08...


[snip]


For what it's worth, this topic is all over the news as well as talk
radio.
Perhpas this might be the irreversible tide that will wash away such
injustice which is LONG overdue!

I can only hope it does. God, that would be so nice, to wake up in the
morning and know that I'm not a criminal any longer...

Hey, let me know when the Flight of the Swine takes off, will ya? I wanna
watch.

Lol Spider-Ham---good point!!

My contention has and always will be, that
whatever the government forces down our
throats through legislation is always a bad
idea when it comes to OUR money!! Women
should be held equally accountable for their
choice to conceive and rear children and not
count on "Big Brother" to provide a solution
for their actions!!

"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!!! ****!!!!!


















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?

The only sure thing is abstinence.


It is stated in this case that the man was told the women he was banging
couldn't get pregnant. So he made a choice to have sex with someone he
couldn't get knocked up. A pretty good choice, to bad it back fired.