Who has the ultimate right to choose?

from whom do you hear that from?
young kids too immature to have kids to begin with?

I hear " we had such a good marriage until I was six months
pregnant" so very often. Then the spoiled brat husband starts looking
for another dumb ass ****.

On Apr 17, 7:12 pm, Robert wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 17:29:22 -0500, "Dusty Steenbock"
wrote:







"elizabeth" wrote in message
roups.com...
On Apr 16, 8:27 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
"Robert" wrote in message

...

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 23:45:27 GMT, (Paul Anderson)
wrote:

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:23:02 -0700, Robert
wrote:

....

You are twisting it, it's now possible to prove that a man is or is
not the father.

If you father a child, you should support that child.

Why? In every other case we are only responsible for those debts we
have agreed to. Why should a man support a woman and her child that
he did not agree to support? What contract obligates this debt?
(Marriage is such a contract, so please don't go off on how married
men will not have rights to their children.)

Her child??? Yeah right, sorry mother ****ers, I hope your next
victim is spreading AIDS.

Geesh, Robert! How disgusting! But you never did answer the question.
How
do you feel about women who bring into this world multiple children by
multiple fathers, with never a single intention of supporting any of
them?
How do you feel about the taxpayers supporting both her and the children
because she cannot remember exactly who fathered them? Is this ok with
you
, because it is a woman, and not a man? Are all 6 or 7 or 8 men evil
losers, but the poor little woman is just a victim? Don't you think that
the woman has some responsibility, too?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
Well, what about the men who are ****ing her?
Shouldn't they be neutered like dogs who won't stay on the porch?

You are either a lesbian or a man hater, and as such your opinions on any of
these matters being discussed hold little merit.

"Men" like you explain why some women hate men, and become lesbian.
If I were a woman I would be just like her.

(chortle) they never get it .. . they seem to think women who don't
like they must be dykes, but if all men were like that, we would be!

I just love how they think I must be crushed because they don't like
me, but if they did, I'd know something was seriously wrong with me.

I suppose it makes them feel less inadequate.

On Apr 17, 5:34 pm, "Dusty Steenbock" wrote:
"Robert" wrote in message

...



On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 17:29:22 -0500, "Dusty Steenbock"
wrote:

"elizabeth" wrote in message
groups.com...
On Apr 16, 8:27 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
"Robert" wrote in message

m...

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 23:45:27 GMT, (Paul
Anderson)
wrote:

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:23:02 -0700, Robert
wrote:

....

You are twisting it, it's now possible to prove that a man is or is
not the father.

If you father a child, you should support that child.

Why? In every other case we are only responsible for those debts we
have agreed to. Why should a man support a woman and her child that
he did not agree to support? What contract obligates this debt?
(Marriage is such a contract, so please don't go off on how married
men will not have rights to their children.)

Her child??? Yeah right, sorry mother ****ers, I hope your next
victim is spreading AIDS.

Geesh, Robert! How disgusting! But you never did answer the question.
How
do you feel about women who bring into this world multiple children by
multiple fathers, with never a single intention of supporting any of
them?
How do you feel about the taxpayers supporting both her and the
children
because she cannot remember exactly who fathered them? Is this ok with
you
, because it is a woman, and not a man? Are all 6 or 7 or 8 men evil
losers, but the poor little woman is just a victim? Don't you think
that
the woman has some responsibility, too?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
Well, what about the men who are ****ing her?
Shouldn't they be neutered like dogs who won't stay on the porch?

You are either a lesbian or a man hater, and as such your opinions on any
of
these matters being discussed hold little merit.

Oh, if I only was a lesbian! Then I would have far less reason to
"hate" men . . .. and since complaining about male abuse of women
makes me a hater, what does that make the men



"Men" like you explain why some women hate men, and become lesbian.
If I were a woman I would be just like her.

I don't abuse or beat women.

Well, bully for you! Mighty white of you, ain't it? But why do you
act like you do? Why take this so personally if you are so innocent?

I pay my child support every month although I
feel It should be a bit lower than what It Is

If you were a real man, you'd've stayed married. It's cheaper to run
one household than two, and thus, the child would have both parents
and more financial resources.
However, in time, you'll probably stop paying, like most men who brag
about paying their child support

.. I don't agree with women
having many birthing rights and men have none.

Honey, if there was some way you could get pregnant, we'd be more than
happy to give you the same rights women have about it.
They can do uterus transplants now, how about it?

The arguments of "If men
don't want the chance of having kids, don't have sex" don't hold any water.

Well, tell the teacher****moocow that . ... you know, tell women not
to have sex if they don't want kids, why shouldn't it apply to men as
well?
But fact is, you don't have kids, women do. You just ejaculate.
Hardly parity.

You might as well say If you don't want to ever get into a car accident,
don't drive. If you never want to get fired from a job, don't work. If you
never want to get mugged, never go anywhere. I could go on and on. You take
a small chance or risk doing almost anything. Most things you don't worry
about, because you have rights and protection, (insurance, police, etc) the
rights are uneven when It comes to having and raising kids, and it needs to
change.-

Well, dearie, if you don't like paying child support, too bad. You
made the choice to breed, you ****ed a woman who presumably you loved
and wanted kids with.
Isn't that the purpose of marriage, procreaton, and why gays can't
marry? That's what the familyvalues crowd says.

Contraception is very expensive, dangerous, and prone to failure in
women.
Vasectomies are very very safe, and the most effective method.
Condoms aren't as effective, but do work.
So either **** women willing to abort, get yourself snipped, or
abstain.

There were many years I had to abstain because I couldn't afford
contraception, and couldn't use most methods.

On Apr 17, 5:50 pm, (Paul Anderson) wrote:
On 17 Apr 2007 17:03:17 -0700, elizabeth wrote:

On Apr 17, 3:15 pm, (Paul Anderson) wrote:

....

If he was so ****ing self centered, that he fathered a child he is
unable or unwilling to support.

He had sex with a woman he was not married to and with whom he had not
traded vows of mutual support. This is not a crime. He was a
contributor to the woman becoming pregnant -- not the cause.

Uh, by definition, he was indeed a causal agent, to say the least, of
her pregnancy.

By *definition*, yes -- but not in fact. You can define a tail as a
leg but a dog still has just four legs.

BTW, financial obligations can occur without any crime being
committed.

Not without *agreeing* to those obligations.

However, neglecting and abusing one's children *is* a crime.

Circular logic. He didn't agree to having the children, why are they
his?

Again,
not a crime. It was the woman who decided to carry the pregnancy to
term and bear a child. She had not taken vows of mutual support with
the man and thus has no moral expectation of support.

But the man has a legal obligation to support his child.
Thats the law
Deal with it.

NYA NYA NYA -- "the law is on our side, **** morallity!"

Why is the child his? He did not agree to have the child, he did not
agree to support the woman or her child. She was the one and only
person who decided to have the child. What moral ground is there to
force a person to pay for something he does not want and did not agree
to?

Dearie, you have to take that up with the men who wrote and enforced
the laws.

So you would allow your own children to suffer?

People like you need to be neutered. YOu breed irresponsible, asocial
assholes like you.

The taxpayers didn't **** the broad, you did, so if anyone should pay
to support it, it should be you.
We already pay enough to support failed abortions.

Even "Dr" Laura gets it, that women are stupid to have children not
wanted by the father, but since women are taught to believe their only
value is in being a sex toy or a breeder, they will continue, to get
validation as a person. A book -the mommy person- described how women
who realize that they never will accomplish much tend to have
children, which is why women with no brains, no social skills, at the
bottom of the socio/economic ladder breed so young, and so often.

That doesn't alter the fact that you have bad judgement in women, and
are unwilling to acknowlege that you are responsible for your own
actions.

On Apr 17, 8:25 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
james g. keegan jr. wrote:

"Chris" wrote:
Last I checked, men lack the ability to make ANY choice regarding abortion.

really? name one pregnant man who was denied the choice of abortion.

All of them. Name one man who was allowed the choice of abortion

Name one who ever had a child.

On Apr 17, 8:30 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
elizabeth wrote:
On Apr 17, 3:15 pm, (Paul Anderson) wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 13:23:27 -0700, Robert
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 12:50:16 GMT, (Paul Anderson)
wrote:

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 19:14:45 -0700, Robert
wrote:

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 23:45:27 GMT, (Paul Anderson)
wrote:

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:23:02 -0700, Robert
wrote:

....

You are twisting it, it's now possible to prove that a man is or is
not the father.

If you father a child, you should support that child.

Why? In every other case we are only responsible for those debts we
have agreed to. Why should a man support a woman and her child that
he did not agree to support? What contract obligates this debt?
(Marriage is such a contract, so please don't go off on how married
men will not have rights to their children.)

Her child??? Yeah right, sorry mother ****ers, I hope your next
victim is spreading AIDS.

That really helps. I ask a simple honest question and I get hatred
spewed back. I take it then that you have no moral justification for
demanding that a man supports a child he did not agree to support.

If he was so ****ing self centered, that he fathered a child he is
unable or unwilling to support.

He had sex with a woman he was not married to and with whom he had not
traded vows of mutual support. This is not a crime. He was a
contributor to the woman becoming pregnant -- not the cause.

Uh, by definition, he was indeed a causal agent, to say the least, of
her pregnancy.

Pregnancies don't get child support. Children do.

Yup.

That's why men can and do collect child support, but can't be
pregnant.

You're living proof not enough abortions are performed.

On Apr 17, 9:25 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
"elizabeth" wrote in message

oups.com...





On Apr 16, 8:38 pm, "Bob Whiteside" wrote:
"teachrmama" wrote in message

...

"elizabeth" wrote in message
roups.com...
On Apr 15, 2:22 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
"Relayer" wrote in message

god, I hate you losers who got puked into this ng by crossposting
trollborts.

Teachersow, you sound like a dumb **** who married a deadbeat dad and
whines about how he's being "forced" to support his own children,
because that means he has less money to spend on you.

I'm sure you enjoy making up your little fairy tales, then living in
them.
You're wrong, of course, but do enjoy your little world, Dearie. It's
obvious that the real world is just too, too difficult for you to
handle.
(And do ask about increasing those meds. It really might help)

Her message seems to be - and I apologize if this offends anyone - is the
only remaining outlet for sexual desire amongst men and women is anal
sex.
Unless, of course, she is a lesbian. Then all her crap starts to make
sense.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, there you go, giving a demo of Fundamental Attribution Error.

As many a man can tell you, knowing he's forever safe from being a
daddy is quite exciting.

Iin your case . .. well, dearie, your man has very poor taste in
women, and he doesn't feel it's his job to support his children,
unless you get a part of the money.
He will do the same to you. He will tell the next **** the same
things about you that he says about her.

I didn't write that, you poor dried-up old thang.

It still applies, you daft ****.

Your poor judgement doesn't mean that a child should be deprived of
support.
I

"Robert" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 19:34:13 -0500, "Dusty Steenbock"
wrote:


"Robert" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 17:29:22 -0500, "Dusty Steenbock"
wrote:


"elizabeth" wrote in message
egroups.com...
On Apr 16, 8:27 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
"Robert" wrote in message

...





On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 23:45:27 GMT, (Paul
Anderson)
wrote:

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:23:02 -0700, Robert
wrote:

....

You are twisting it, it's now possible to prove that a man is or
is
not the father.

If you father a child, you should support that child.

Why? In every other case we are only responsible for those debts
we
have agreed to. Why should a man support a woman and her child
that
he did not agree to support? What contract obligates this debt?
(Marriage is such a contract, so please don't go off on how
married
men will not have rights to their children.)

Her child??? Yeah right, sorry mother ****ers, I hope your next
victim is spreading AIDS.

Geesh, Robert! How disgusting! But you never did answer the
question.
How
do you feel about women who bring into this world multiple children
by
multiple fathers, with never a single intention of supporting any of
them?
How do you feel about the taxpayers supporting both her and the
children
because she cannot remember exactly who fathered them? Is this ok
with
you
, because it is a woman, and not a man? Are all 6 or 7 or 8 men
evil
losers, but the poor little woman is just a victim? Don't you think
that
the woman has some responsibility, too?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
Well, what about the men who are ****ing her?
Shouldn't they be neutered like dogs who won't stay on the porch?


You are either a lesbian or a man hater, and as such your opinions on
any
of
these matters being discussed hold little merit.

Oh, if I only was a lesbian! Then I would have far less reason to
"hate" men . . .. and since complaining about male abuse of women
makes me a hater, what does that make the men


"Men" like you explain why some women hate men, and become lesbian.
If I were a woman I would be just like her.

I don't abuse or beat women. I pay my child support every month although
I
feel It should be a bit lower than what It Is. I don't agree with women
having many birthing rights and men have none. The arguments of "If men
don't want the chance of having kids, don't have sex" don't hold any
water.
You might as well say If you don't want to ever get into a car accident,
don't drive. If you never want to get fired from a job, don't work. If
you
never want to get mugged, never go anywhere. I could go on and on. You
take
a small chance or risk doing almost anything. Most things you don't worry
about, because you have rights and protection, (insurance, police, etc)
the
rights are uneven when It comes to having and raising kids, and it needs
to
change.

All people have rights and responsibility, a man has the right to
avoid getting any woman pregnant. And the responsibility to support
any child he fathers.

Why?

Just as driving and drinking is a crime, even if
no accident occurs, a responsible person doesn't drink and drive. But
having sex without birth control is not a crime, but if there is a
accident, resulting in a unwanted pregnancy, it's like driving
sober,and causing a accident, the driver is responsible. I believe a
man should be held responsible for the cost of abortion and lost
wages.

But not the woman.

Or prenatal care, cost of delivery , lost wages and child
support for any children he causes.

Only problem is he lacks the legal right to cause children.

If a male decides he doesn't want to be a daddy, he can get his
cords clipped.

And exactly how does that work post-conception?

If he gets a STD serves him right for not protecting
himself and the woman.

If he is supposed to protect the woman, is the woman also supposed to
protect him; or is this a double standard?

Men have the responsibility to protect himself
and sex partner from any STD.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Robert" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 00:50:51 GMT, (Paul Anderson)
wrote:

On 17 Apr 2007 17:03:17 -0700, elizabeth wrote:

On Apr 17, 3:15 pm, (Paul Anderson) wrote:
....

If he was so ****ing self centered, that he fathered a child he is
unable or unwilling to support.

He had sex with a woman he was not married to and with whom he had not
traded vows of mutual support. This is not a crime. He was a
contributor to the woman becoming pregnant -- not the cause.

Uh, by definition, he was indeed a causal agent, to say the least, of
her pregnancy.

By *definition*, yes -- but not in fact. You can define a tail as a
leg but a dog still has just four legs.

BTW, financial obligations can occur without any crime being
committed.

Not without *agreeing* to those obligations.

However, neglecting and abusing one's children *is* a crime.

Circular logic. He didn't agree to having the children, why are they
his?

By engaging in unprotected sex, he agreed to accept his obligation.
Similar to firing a gun into a crowd of people, so what he did not
intend to harm anyone.

Faulty analogy. The CORRECT analogy is: Holding the gunstore salesperson
responsible for the action of anyone using the firearm to commit murder.

Same difference any act that has a chance of
causing a problem, is at fault if harm happens.

Yup, and having sex does NOT cause children to be born.


Again,
not a crime. It was the woman who decided to carry the pregnancy to
term and bear a child. She had not taken vows of mutual support with
the man and thus has no moral expectation of support.

But the man has a legal obligation to support his child.
Thats the law
Deal with it.

NYA NYA NYA -- "the law is on our side, **** morallity!"

Why is the child his? He did not agree to have the child, he did not
agree to support the woman or her child. She was the one and only
person who decided to have the child. What moral ground is there to
force a person to pay for something he does not want and did not agree
to?

But I didn't intend to kill him when I fired a gun in his direction.
Think a jury would buy that? Pregnancy is a common result of
unprotected sex.

Strawman. The issue is NOT pregnancy, rather it is about a woman making the
SOLE choice to bring children into the world.

Use a condom with spermicide, or keep the old zipper
closed.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 09:47:31 -0700, "Chris" wrote:

Nope. Disgusted. Tried to be amused, but the world has gotten so
filthy because of overbreeding and mendacity, just glad I'm not one of
your children who will be forced to live in the mess you created.

Nice assumptions. About the only thing "filthy" is your mouth.

Chris based on your comments in your post, you are as filthy of a
scum bag that has ever lived. It's really sad that so many women will
have sex with worthless scum bags as your self.

What comment makes me a "filthy scum bag"?

Every freaking word in all your post, typical scum bag whining.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com