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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Choice for Men Position Paper
P O S I T I O N P A P E R O N L E G A L I Z I N G " C H O I C E " F O R M E N We want to improve the law to protect men's family planning. Men should be given relief, a recourse or a remedy when tricked or trapped into parenthood. It's beyond question that unplanned parenthood can completely disrupt a man's life. It disrupts his education(0), it disrupts his mental health, and it often disrupts his entire family life(1). We feel that, because of the impact to the man in this matter of such basic concern, inasmuch as there are any rights which are fundamental, that he should be given some relief, a recourse or remedy from being tricked or trapped into parenthood. There is also the distress associated with the unwanted child. The continuing stigma of unwed fatherhood may be involved. Men are the victims. The government cannot deny the detrimental effect that the current paternity laws have on men. Certainly there are problems regarding even the use of contraception. Regardless of the circumstances of conception, whether he is a victim of statutory rape(2) or whether it is because of contraceptive fraud(3) he currently has no relief. In a Constitution for a free people, there can be no doubt that the meaning of "liberty" must be broad indeed. The Constitution nowhere mentions a specific right of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life, but the "liberty" protected by the Fourteenth Amendment covers more than those freedoms explicitly named in the Bill of Rights. Certainly we cannot say that there is in the Constitution, so stated, the right to relief, recourse or remedy from being tricked or trapped into parenthood. But neither is there stated the right to travel or some of the other very basic rights. There is a long body of precedent where the Supreme Court has held that it is the right of the individual to determine the course of their own life in family matters; for whom they will marry - the Loving case; that the state may not interfere with the individual's choice regarding birth control - the Griswold case. Roe v. Wade is the main case, holding that a woman's right to privacy includes the right to abortion. Women's right to control their reproductive lives was upheld in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. So there is a long body of Supreme Court cases in the areas of marriage, sex, contraception and procreation, which says that there are certain things that are so much a part of the individual's concern that they should be left to the determination of the individual. One of the purposes of the U.S. Constitution was to guarantee to the individual, the right to determine the course of their own lives. The ability of men to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation would be facilitated by our ability to control our reproductive lives. It is our position that men should have some relief, a recourse or remedy when this right is infringed. While over a million U.S. women abort each year(4), many thousands of men have their "paternities established" in U.S. courts(5) and preliminary data indicates that 33% of U.S. births may be unintended by fathers(6). Men have been treated as an under class without reproductive rights since Roe v. Wade in 1973, despite the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection", and we seek to emancipate men from this hypocrisy. Forcing only men into parenthood is demeaning and offensive to the basic principles of human dignity. Where fundamental rights such as procreation are involved, limiting these rights may be justified only by a compelling state interest, and merely saving the state money doesn't rise to that standard(7). Certainly, burdening a child with a bitter parent doesn't rise to that standard either. The potential child's right to child support and to share in the man's standard of living is not absolute, as is demonstrated by single parent adoptions, which are legal and looked upon favorably by the various social service agencies. Biology isn't destiny. If done properly, legalizing choice for men may reduce our taxes. It would eliminate a subsidy for unwanted children who are more vulnerable to drug abuse, dropping out of high school, crime and prison. Discouraging these social ills would also be in children's best interests. We aren't taking a position on abortion. We don't argue that the man's right to relief, recourse or remedy is absolute. What we do advocate, is that men should have some relief, a recourse or remedy when tricked or trapped into parenthood. References 0.) The high school drop-out rate among young fathers is over twice as high as the average. "Adolescent Fathers in the United States: Their Initial Living Arrangements, Marital Experience and Educational Outcomes", Family Planning Perspectives, Volume 19, Number 6, November/December 1987 by William Marsiglio. 1.) Nock, S.L., The consequences of premarital fatherhood, American Sociological Review, 1998, 63(2):250-263 2.) State ex re. Hermesmann v. Seyer & parents, Kans. Supr. Ct. No. 67,978 (1993) 3.) L. Pamela P. v Frank S., Court of Appeals of New York: 462 N.Y.S.2d 819 (Ct.App. 1983) 4.) Alan Guttmacher Institute, (212) 248-1111 5.) Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement, Congressional Report 6.) Unintended Births: Women's Attitudes vis-a-vis their Male Partners' Attitudes: 1982-1990, Joyce C. Abma and Linda J. Piccinino, NCHS, 6525 Belcrest Road, Hyattsville, MD 20782, (301) 436-8731 7.) See generally Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254, 265-6, 90 S.Ct. 1011, 1019, 25 L.Ed.2d 287, 1970. Protect Planned Fatherhood www.choiceformen.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Choice for Men Position Paper
On Apr 22, 5:02 am, Kingsley G. Morse Jr. (Delete the D)
wrote: P O S I T I O N P A P E R O N L E G A L I Z I N G " C H O I C E " F O R M E N We want to improve the law to protect men's family planning. Men should be given relief, a recourse or a remedy when tricked or trapped into parenthood. It's beyond question that unplanned parenthood can completely disrupt a man's life. It disrupts his education(0), it disrupts his mental health, and it often disrupts his entire family life(1). We feel that, because of the impact to the man in this matter of such basic concern, inasmuch as there are any rights which are fundamental, that he should be given some relief, a recourse or remedy from being tricked or trapped into parenthood. There is also the distress associated with the unwanted child. The continuing stigma of unwed fatherhood may be involved. Men are the victims. The government cannot deny the detrimental effect that the current paternity laws have on men. Certainly there are problems regarding even the use of contraception. Regardless of the circumstances of conception, whether he is a victim of statutory rape(2) or whether it is because of contraceptive fraud(3) he currently has no relief. In a Constitution for a free people, there can be no doubt that the meaning of "liberty" must be broad indeed. The Constitution nowhere mentions a specific right of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life, but the "liberty" protected by the Fourteenth Amendment covers more than those freedoms explicitly named in the Bill of Rights. Certainly we cannot say that there is in the Constitution, so stated, the right to relief, recourse or remedy from being tricked or trapped into parenthood. But neither is there stated the right to travel or some of the other very basic rights. There is a long body of precedent where the Supreme Court has held that it is the right of the individual to determine the course of their own life in family matters; for whom they will marry - the Loving case; that the state may not interfere with the individual's choice regarding birth control - the Griswold case. Roe v. Wade is the main case, holding that a woman's right to privacy includes the right to abortion. Women's right to control their reproductive lives was upheld in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. So there is a long body of Supreme Court cases in the areas of marriage, sex, contraception and procreation, which says that there are certain things that are so much a part of the individual's concern that they should be left to the determination of the individual. One of the purposes of the U.S. Constitution was to guarantee to the individual, the right to determine the course of their own lives. The ability of men to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation would be facilitated by our ability to control our reproductive lives. It is our position that men should have some relief, a recourse or remedy when this right is infringed. While over a million U.S. women abort each year(4), many thousands of men have their "paternities established" in U.S. courts(5) and preliminary data indicates that 33% of U.S. births may be unintended by fathers(6). Men have been treated as an under class without reproductive rights since Roe v. Wade in 1973, despite the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection", and we seek to emancipate men from this hypocrisy. Forcing only men into parenthood is demeaning and offensive to the basic principles of human dignity. Where fundamental rights such as procreation are involved, limiting these rights may be justified only by a compelling state interest, and merely saving the state money doesn't rise to that standard(7). Certainly, burdening a child with a bitter parent doesn't rise to that standard either. The potential child's right to child support and to share in the man's standard of living is not absolute, as is demonstrated by single parent adoptions, which are legal and looked upon favorably by the various social service agencies. Biology isn't destiny. If done properly, legalizing choice for men may reduce our taxes. It would eliminate a subsidy for unwanted children who are more vulnerable to drug abuse, dropping out of high school, crime and prison. Discouraging these social ills would also be in children's best interests. We aren't taking a position on abortion. We don't argue that the man's right to relief, recourse or remedy is absolute. What we do advocate, is that men should have some relief, a recourse or remedy when tricked or trapped into parenthood. References 0.) The high school drop-out rate among young fathers is over twice as high as the average. "Adolescent Fathers in the United States: Their Initial Living Arrangements, Marital Experience and Educational Outcomes", Family Planning Perspectives, Volume 19, Number 6, November/December 1987 by William Marsiglio. 1.) Nock, S.L., The consequences of premarital fatherhood, American Sociological Review, 1998, 63(2):250-263 2.) State ex re. Hermesmann v. Seyer & parents, Kans. Supr. Ct. No. 67,978 (1993) 3.) L. Pamela P. v Frank S., Court of Appeals of New York: 462 N.Y.S.2d 819 (Ct.App. 1983) 4.) Alan Guttmacher Institute, (212) 248-1111 5.) Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement, Congressional Report 6.) Unintended Births: Women's Attitudes vis-a-vis their Male Partners' Attitudes: 1982-1990, Joyce C. Abma and Linda J. Piccinino, NCHS, 6525 Belcrest Road, Hyattsville, MD 20782, (301) 436-8731 7.) See generally Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254, 265-6, 90 S.Ct. 1011, 1019, 25 L.Ed.2d 287, 1970. Protect Planned Fatherhood www.choiceformen.com I am all for mens rights. There ARE some bad women out there. The men need to bring their own contreceptives and cover their asses, you never know if she's telling the truth or not, no matter how long your together. That goes for both genders sometimes. Because in the end men are just as responcible for the child as the woman. If a man is that worried he should just not take any chances, trust me my bf has had some personal experience in the issue. He dated a woman for three years claiming she couldn't have kids, she up and got pregnant and took off with the kid. Now she is sitting back collecting support from multiple men. Can you say gold digger. Men can also be present when bc pills are taken to reassure they won't have one. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Choice for Men Position Paper
CC ) writes:
On Apr 22, 5:02 am, Kingsley G. Morse Jr. (Delete the D) wrote: P O S I T I O N P A P E R O N L E G A L I Z I N G " C H O I C E " F O R M E N We want to improve the law to protect men's family planning. Men should be given relief, a recourse or a remedy when tricked or trapped into parenthood. It's beyond question that unplanned parenthood can completely disrupt a man's life. It disrupts his education(0), it disrupts his mental health, and it often disrupts his entire family life(1). We feel that, because of the impact to the man in this matter of such basic concern, inasmuch as there are any rights which are fundamental, that he should be given some relief, a recourse or remedy from being tricked or trapped into parenthood. There is also the distress associated with the unwanted child. The continuing stigma of unwed fatherhood may be involved. Men are the victims. The government cannot deny the detrimental effect that the current paternity laws have on men. Certainly there are problems regarding even the use of contraception. Regardless of the circumstances of conception, whether he is a victim of statutory rape(2) or whether it is because of contraceptive fraud(3) he currently has no relief. In a Constitution for a free people, there can be no doubt that the meaning of "liberty" must be broad indeed. The Constitution nowhere mentions a specific right of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life, but the "liberty" protected by the Fourteenth Amendment covers more than those freedoms explicitly named in the Bill of Rights. Certainly we cannot say that there is in the Constitution, so stated, the right to relief, recourse or remedy from being tricked or trapped into parenthood. But neither is there stated the right to travel or some of the other very basic rights. There is a long body of precedent where the Supreme Court has held that it is the right of the individual to determine the course of their own life in family matters; for whom they will marry - the Loving case; that the state may not interfere with the individual's choice regarding birth control - the Griswold case. Roe v. Wade is the main case, holding that a woman's right to privacy includes the right to abortion. Women's right to control their reproductive lives was upheld in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. So there is a long body of Supreme Court cases in the areas of marriage, sex, contraception and procreation, which says that there are certain things that are so much a part of the individual's concern that they should be left to the determination of the individual. One of the purposes of the U.S. Constitution was to guarantee to the individual, the right to determine the course of their own lives. The ability of men to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation would be facilitated by our ability to control our reproductive lives. It is our position that men should have some relief, a recourse or remedy when this right is infringed. While over a million U.S. women abort each year(4), many thousands of men have their "paternities established" in U.S. courts(5) and preliminary data indicates that 33% of U.S. births may be unintended by fathers(6). Men have been treated as an under class without reproductive rights since Roe v. Wade in 1973, despite the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection", and we seek to emancipate men from this hypocrisy. Forcing only men into parenthood is demeaning and offensive to the basic principles of human dignity. Where fundamental rights such as procreation are involved, limiting these rights may be justified only by a compelling state interest, and merely saving the state money doesn't rise to that standard(7). Certainly, burdening a child with a bitter parent doesn't rise to that standard either. The potential child's right to child support and to share in the man's standard of living is not absolute, as is demonstrated by single parent adoptions, which are legal and looked upon favorably by the various social service agencies. Biology isn't destiny. If done properly, legalizing choice for men may reduce our taxes. It would eliminate a subsidy for unwanted children who are more vulnerable to drug abuse, dropping out of high school, crime and prison. Discouraging these social ills would also be in children's best interests. We aren't taking a position on abortion. We don't argue that the man's right to relief, recourse or remedy is absolute. What we do advocate, is that men should have some relief, a recourse or remedy when tricked or trapped into parenthood. References 0.) The high school drop-out rate among young fathers is over twice as high as the average. "Adolescent Fathers in the United States: Their Initial Living Arrangements, Marital Experience and Educational Outcomes", Family Planning Perspectives, Volume 19, Number 6, November/December 1987 by William Marsiglio. 1.) Nock, S.L., The consequences of premarital fatherhood, American Sociological Review, 1998, 63(2):250-263 2.) State ex re. Hermesmann v. Seyer & parents, Kans. Supr. Ct. No. 67,978 (1993) 3.) L. Pamela P. v Frank S., Court of Appeals of New York: 462 N.Y.S.2d 819 (Ct.App. 1983) 4.) Alan Guttmacher Institute, (212) 248-1111 5.) Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement, Congressional Report 6.) Unintended Births: Women's Attitudes vis-a-vis their Male Partners' Attitudes: 1982-1990, Joyce C. Abma and Linda J. Piccinino, NCHS, 6525 Belcrest Road, Hyattsville, MD 20782, (301) 436-8731 7.) See generally Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254, 265-6, 90 S.Ct. 1011, 1019, 25 L.Ed.2d 287, 1970. Protect Planned Fatherhood www.choiceformen.com I am all for mens rights. There ARE some bad women out there. The men need to bring their own contreceptives and cover their asses, you never know if she's telling the truth or not, no matter how long your together. OK, already, you have missed the point. Which is that WOMEN are allowed MANY means, some of which are NON medical and NON biological, to POST coitally, change their decisions and their consequences, including past the time of birth. To start with more old " bring lots of condoms, guys ", is to fail to grasp the wider issue here, that women get MANY *legal rights* that are denied to men, purely based on sex. That goes for both genders sometimes. Because in the end men are just as responcible for the child as the woman. Wrong. After the time of sex, SHE can do many things that will result in their being NO child. Ergo, HE cnanot be responsible for what SHE *later does or does NOT do*. If a man is that worried he should just not take any chances, Let us know when you are ready to say the same exact thing to women, and to DENY them any choice past that point... trust me my bf has had some personal experience in the issue. Ah, you are a girl, no wonder the idea of men have EQUAL rights strikes you as odd. He dated a woman for three years claiming she couldn't have kids, she up and got pregnant and took off with the kid. Now she is sitting back collecting support from multiple men. Can you say gold digger. Indeed. Men can also be present when bc pills are taken to reassure they won't have one. ONLY if the women allows it. So, you want men to have ONLY as many rights as a woman will *allow*. You'd scream bloody murder is a man suggested that you, as a WOMAN, should only have as many legal rights as a MAN would allow. " Her, body, her choice... HER *responsibility*. " Andre |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Choice for Men Position Paper | Kingsley G. Morse Jr. (Delete the D) | Child Support | 0 | January 22nd 07 10:02 AM |
Choice for Men Position Paper | Kingsley G. Morse Jr. (Delete the D) | Child Support | 0 | July 22nd 06 10:01 AM |
Choice for Men Position Paper | Delete the D | Child Support | 0 | July 22nd 04 10:55 AM |
Choice for Men Position Paper | Delete the D | Child Support | 0 | June 22nd 04 10:55 AM |
Choice for Men Position Paper | Delete the D | Child Support | 0 | November 22nd 03 10:55 AM |