"I don’t care what your religious beliefs are or anything. If you have a dick, you need to shut the f--- up on this one, seriously. This is theirs, the right to choose is their unequivocal right. Not only do I believe they have the right to choose, I believe that they shouldn’t have to consult anybody, except for a physician, about how they exercise that right."
If it’s true that men don’t have a right to talk about abortion, though, something else must be true. He explains:
"Gentlemen, that is fair. And ladies, to be fair to us, I also believe that if you decide to have the baby, a man should not have to pay. That’s fair. If you can kill this motherf---er, I can at least abandon them. It’s my money, my choice. And if I’m wrong, then perhaps we’re wrong. Think that shit out for yourselves."
I agree with Dave Chappelle
I disagree with Dave Chappelle
Select gender and age to cast your vote:
Please select your age
Do you agree with Dave Chappelle's stance on abortion?
What allowing abortion while eliminating child support fosters as an ethical and social matter is a culture of economic utilitarianism. The value of life being defined by fiscal convenience rather than any conception of inherent worth.
Indeed, the problem with the formulation is that it defines the problem entirely in terms of the interests of two people rather than three. In that the current law is inconsistent, and in that connection the proposed abortion/no child support arrangement has a sort of grim consistency.
The child is raw material. It's humanity is essentially negated in law by the fact of its abortion. If born, it becomes not the responsibility of the parents who gave the baby life, but rather left, as society indifferent shrugs, to take the consequences of its parent's choices. With no power to protect itself, the child's future is the convenience of its parent's economic preferences.
We shape our laws and our laws then shape us and it does not take much imagination to envision what a society that so defines life - arbitrary in its definition, mere object of convenience at its birth - would look like. Indeed, the society is part way there. The ethic that conduces to abortion on demand is the same ethic that has seen the growth in child abuse, child abandonment, child sex trafficking, child poverty - the young are the poorest demographic, the 65 and older set the wealthiest - and all the other pathologies plaguing society.
Once the definition of life became not an objective standard but an arbitrary point in time defined by the convenience of the individual with the power - but no corresponding ethical obligation - to define it, bad things were apt to follow. In that, those who argue the pro-choice case are kidding themselves when they argue that their viewpoint was more humane.
To the contrary, it is inherently de-humanizing. The ethic of pro-choice is that life has no value but only thinking makes it so. The abolition of child support would merely put the exclamation point on that anti-ethic. Men and women hold no responsibility for their actions because the life that they create is not, ipso facto a life.
The bottom line, the flaw in the abortion/child support dichotomy is that it is not an ethic at all. Rather it is the reverse of that. No obligations inhere in our actions, life has no inherent value and a baby is not something to be cherished, but is something to be tossed about according to mere economic convenience.
In that the proposal is not postulating a change in the moral presuppositions of the culture. It is, rather, the grim next step in the road down which the culture is already headed. If you like what you see in society, this is merely its logical consequence.
Maybe disagree or agree. I don't know. I don't think about these issues in terms of what is "fair" for both sexes. What I think about are unwanted pregnancies.
I suspect most people on all sides of the spectrum would agree that mitigating the sheer numbers of unwanted pregnancies each year should be the ultimate goal, however that is achieved. All this talk about abortion is kind of glossing over the fact that people who aren't ready to have children shouldn't be having at least unprotected sex in the first place.
So to me, it's ultimately about what sort of approaches are effective at dissuading people who aren't ready to have children from at least having unprotected sex and causing them to think more seriously about sleeping with someone else. Ideally, there are disincentives for both sexes as I see it, whatever they might be. Women already have quite a biological disincentive. Men might need something more.
I don't know. I only care about solutions that actually work to get unwanted and unintended pregnancies down. In the US, apparently around 45% of pregnancies are unintended, and 5% outright unwanted, and both figures are absurdly high.
To me focusing all the discussion on abortion policy is somewhat similar to focusing all discussion on how to treat type-2 diabetes when the ultimate goal should be to prevent type-2 diabetes. The bigger problem to me is not what to do with unwanted and unintended pregnancies but preventing them from occurring in the first place: people shouldn't be getting unintentionally pregnant at such alarming rates in the first place.
I agree with the practical application, with the provision that the father can only back out in the same window of time that it is still possible for the pregnant person to get an abortion. His decision is a factor in hers, so he shouldn’t be able to change it after it’s too late for her to do anything about it.
I also think that he should pay half of what the cost would be if she were to get an abortion. Regardless of what she chooses, there will be medical expenses. He was a part of making it happen, so he should have to at least pay half of the minimum. If she chooses to go through the pregnancy though, he doesn’t have to pay for the rest of it. But she can use the flat amount for pregnancy related medical expenses. Just like a woman has to pay to have an abortion, a man should pay a flat amount to back out.
Finally, and possibly most importantly, his decision should be documented, and he should have to sign away his custodial right to the child if he doesn’t wish to support it. That way the mother doesn’t need to get his permission to move with the kid or travel, and the two of them can just move on with their lives. Also, this prevents him from coming in years later and demanding to be a part of the child’s life, and putting the kid in an uncomfortable position where the court demands that they spend weekends with some man who is practically a stranger to them.
It’s not a bad thing to ask to be a part of the child’s life. But it should be done gradually, with attention to whether or not it’s a good time for the child. If the mother knows the kid best, and the father has never been a part of the kid’s life, even though he had the choice, he shouldn’t be able to suddenly put a stop to all their plans and demand that he see the kid for extended periods of time. If he backs out and she keeps the pregnancy, she shouldn’t have the looming threat of litigation and custodial battles, and should be able to have sole legal right to the child.
1
0 Reply
Anonymous
(18-24)
+1 y
But what if the man really wants to keep the child? I know people will disagree with me, but imagine yourself in this situation: You're a guy, you slept with your girlfriend but your anticonception method failed. She tells you she's pregnant, and you panic slightly at first, but eventually decide that you want the child, you've already registered them in your mind as your son/daughter and you start looking forward to their birth and life. You have prepared yourself emotionally and let yourself get excited, already starting to love your unborn child. When your girlfriend of many years comes up and says that she wants to get rid of the child. The moments you imagined with your future kid will never happen, because they'll be dead. Physical pains of pregnancy and labor will last 9 months, whilst emotional pain of losing a child you've already began loving will last a lifetime. I believe abortion should be a decision made by both the father and mother of the child, since it affects both of them greatly
I strongly disagree, more men walk out on a child compared to women having abortion. If that was really a option no man would be paying child support, they would all take that easy route. Compared to the small amount of women that acutally abort.
@Liam_Hayden because men dont have to carry the child in their bodies. This comes down to ruining a womens body and life. Where for men its just ruining their bank accounts
Were forgetting the fact that women CHOOSE these men. Don't want a guy walking out on you, learn to choose better men. Smh Women ruin their own lives, sorry not sorry.
if women cannot support their babies then perhaps they should just get abortions and don't expect the man to provide for them. i mean how irresponsible is that to bring a child into this world and expect others to pay for it. if you have the right to do whatever you want to the fetus then that's really your baby not the man's
I didn't say men are psychos wtf i said there a many men who are typically narcissist who will use their charm for their own benefit - there are also women like that too
well sucks to be women, it's your body, your opinion and your child. Your child is not entitled to a man's money unless he decides to be a father to the child.
@ThisGuyDucks a man has decided to be a father when he cummed in a women. Sperm is always fertile, men know the outcome of that. For females it's a bit different, women are only fertile a few days out of the month. It seems reasonable that a women could not know and get pregnant. Men always know there chances of getting someone pregnant.
@Prettyapathetic All the signs are there with these men. If you're looking for and are seduced by a "prince charming" well i think now we've found your problem.
@Apple1996 You're right, both genders do choose. But i can tell you from personal experience it doesn't matter who you choose if she doesn't choose you back. Lol So i re-iterate my first post " women choose these men. Don't want a guy walking out on you choose better men".
First of all your 22 how can you say " it worked out" check back with me in 10 years and we'll discuss if it worked out lol. Secondly you said he was a loser. What praytell made him a loser in your mind? In other words maybe he eas never a loser at all but your female brain just labeled him as one. And "if it would have came down to me picking a good guy it wouldn't have worked out". What goofy kind of mental gymnastics is that? Also what makes a guy a " good guy"?
@ChiTown33 it did work out, we are married and have two kids. And I only say he was a loser because he had no job or any way to provide for our child. Which obviously wasn't a big issue to me since I'm still with him.
@CLASSYMUTT well that hasn't happened yet and I'd be suprised if something like that ever does. It's more believable that abortion would be illegal then it would prevent the child support issue from ever happening
Well there's a million questions i could follow that up with. But i can kind of see why you say loser. But this is why you have to take into account someones character. And with some guys a wife and children straighten them out make rhem mature quickly. I don't know if i'd want to gamble all my chips on that particular scenario though. Either way i hope rhings continue to get better for you both and tour kids.
and a woman becomes a mother when a guy cums in her, hence no fucking abortion allowed. You don't get to cherry pick and completely fuck over men when it comes to children.
It's his money, he doesn't have to give any to you.
Seriously, shut up.
You want the right to kill a child and a man can't have a right to keep just money. Fuck off with your entitlement.
@OfDeath nah I wanted to say something ridiculous. Things should just stay the way that they currently are. Not that many women have abortion so to make a fair choice for a man would be stupid. If more women did it then definitely some type of compromise should happen that the man could back out of parenting
I pretty much agree with you. Men basically don't have a choice but they don't really need one. If a man is too poor they don't make him pay child support anyway.
Depends what you consider to be a lot by age 20 4.6% of women will have had an abortion. Think about it! That's almost 1 in 20. I think that is a lot when you consider it's murder. I mean you think gun violence is bad? Imagine if you heard on the news 1 in 20 women commit murder.
And Hitler thought he was doing the right thing to trying to exterminate an entire race. Murder doesn't stop being murder just because you to think of it as "not being murder".
Actually that's not true, out of all the men who are required to pay child support, 80% of them do. Meanwhile out of the significantly smaller margin of women who are expected to pay child support only about 30% actually do. Then you have women aborting the child, 638,169 abortions per year (meanwhile those men are paying for 18 years), about 15,000 babies given up for adoption (which can be done without the fathers consent), around 3,000 are abandoned (due to safe haven laws its legal to do so if its at a church or police or fire department). So no, that's incorrect. Further more that's a poor argument because your still stating that women should have all the options and men should have absolutely no options, that its her body her choice but his money and his body are also hers and she gets to say what he can do with it. That's just not a logically consistent argument.
@Prettyapathetic No, not really. However interestingly enough, women do this all the time. In fact their was a survey done that had over 40% of women admitting they would lie about being on birth control in order to get pregnant even if their partner didn't want the child. Also the fact that studies consistently show that women are far more manipulative and emotionally abusive then men (as well as physically abusive) on top of the fact that thanks to hermsman vs seyer women can force men to pay child support regardless of the circumstances of the pregnancy (in this case it was a 12 year old boy who was forced to pay child support to his babysitter who raped him), would suggest that women are at the very least as manipulative and psycho as men (and even more so).
@ChiTown33 Careful, your coming dangerously close to telling some one to take personal responsibility for their life decisions (that never ends well. Though I agree 100%).
@esotericstory I already said this but my husband at the time was not a good choice to be a father but I still had sex and got pregnant and he turned around. So I think their is any way of picking the right guy
Fatherhood and motherhood should be child's play. So that when children become adults they are prepared for their roles as parents. Just my idea. I know its politically incorrect and progressives are trying to separate fertility and childrearing from relationships as much as possible but in my opinion raising children should be incorporated in a fun way whilst raising your own children.
It absolutely is her fault, she chooses whom she has sex with, she chose to have sex with a man who would not support her that's no her. Also their are FAR more men who will stay and raise a child that are not (as my other comment pointed out (arguably more so then women)). So that is incorrect. You cannot say that men are the only ones responsible without also saying that women are not mentally capable of making the decision of whom they have sex with, its one or the other, either both men and women are equals and thus share equal responsibility or women are not equal to men in which case they do not have the capacity to make this decision and therefore right to do so, just like children. Which is it?
It takes two to tango. Meaning she should have birth control pills, he should have condom. If non of them options are there then no sex should have happened. So the second you did have sex then its both fault that the girl got pregnant. What happens next is up to the girl. If the man don't want the kid he don't have a saying, he is forsed to be a dad. Men should have the option to give it up just as woman should be allowed to abort. BUT only before the kid is born and with a contract. How ever this contract can be anulled if he changed his mind. But if he changed his mind then he is now legally binding to give child support. How do that sound?
So you believe that women should not be allowed to decide to have sex without some one elses permission? That women are that mentally defective that they cannot make decisions for themselves? That's not the argument that I would make but if that's what you think that's fine but how do you propose we stop women from having sex then since women keep demanding that they should have the right to make decisions but then turn around and demand that some one else has to take responsibility for those decisions?
@hellionthesagereborn men are women are not equal when parenting. Mom naturally take care of the baby more. It's natural that we do that's why the child comes out of our body. Obviously not every case is like this but most of the time yes
Just because the man did not have a condom don't mean the woman can't use birth control pills. And it takes TWO to agree to have sex with out birth control. But it don't take two to deside to keep it. Just as she have the right to keep it, the man should have the right to not be involved.
Oh, great! So we are in agreement that a woman does not have the right to choose as she is obligated to take care of the child. So why did you claim that a woman gets to have an abortion then? Also your reasoning is awful, she gets to decide because the baby comes from her body, fine but what does that have to do with forcing a man to take care of her and the baby? His money comes from his body (labor and time) so by your rational a man has no obligation to take care of her or the child any more then she does.
Women who support abortion and the whole "my body, my choice" thing should realize that this means men don't have the same amount of reproductive rights as they do. That perhaps men will have certain rights women don't while they will have certain rights men do not. In this case, is equality truly possible?
I agree with Dave Chappelle, and I'm pretty sure men can actually relinquish their parental rights as well which I imagine means they don't have to pay child support or take any sort of responsibility over their offspring. A lot of men don't know this.
Are you all fuckin' stupid? Women don't make kids by themselves! Just cuz men don't carry + deliver the kid don't mean they don't have as much of a stake in a new life. And just cuz a woman carries a child don't mean she won't be a shitty, negligent mother. Just being born with a vagina don't ensure that every woman is a shining goddess of purity + perfection. If so there wouldn't be the fucked up people in society that we have. Good women raise good kids, so how do the trash end up the way they are?
I believe it can't be the womens choice alone. That baby was also made by a sperm cell. If you just decide to abort it and the father wants it? It can also have an emotional turmoil on men too. We can't use that "my body my choice" excuse because then you want to fight biology which we can't. I think that if one of the potential parents wants to keep the child then the other one who does not want it should sign off all rights of the child and in the eyes of they law you use all parental rights.
Here is my stance on this. Personally, I would never get an abortion myself. I would rather give my kid up for adoption. However, in other cases: Women have the right to abort babies if they were raped or in case of incest. I also think that if the man wants to take care of the baby and says that he isxwilling to do so by himself without expecting her to come into the picture than I say let him if he is willing to help out throughout the pregnancy as well. It takes 2 to tango after all. In the case thst the man could care less about the baby, than the woman has fulll right on whether or not she wants to keep the baby. If its a married couple who are financially struggling they would have to communicate with each other and come to an agreement. If the couple are together she can communicate it to her partner but she makes the ultimate decision by herself.
Kids just shouldn’t be born unless both genetic parents agree. A non-invasive prenatal paternity test and abortion are both easy enough to do today. Regardless of financial responsibility, if a women has the child without the man’s consent she is still creating a situation he didn’t have equal say in that he will have to deal with for the rest of his life. Women already have the right to say no, but men don’t. It’s basically an institutionalized rape culture against men. Men are treated as property under the law.
No because many men (who do it now) get her pregnant and then abandon the child. What I think should happen is that men should be allowed to waive all parental rights to the child BEFORE conception. So if a woman is stupid enough to sleep with a man without an protection and she conceives, he doesn't have to pay or do anything with the child if she wants to keep it.
I'm told that it won't be considered in court because of the fact that the child must be cared for which is understandable. I still think it would settle this quite nicely (and the abundance of stupid men who don't do the contract would have to pay).
It would work as something they both would sign before they have sex (and for those reading, use common sense. Not RIGHT before sex. He should let her know). These are just my thoughts.
At least he's trying to be fair. If the woman can kill the thing without consulting the man, he should be able to abandon it without consulting her. Then again, it takes two to tango and, in the case of a man not wanting to be the father anymore, it creates a situation where many men would be liable to abandon their women to become single mothers, which is a further drain on the economy.
A much simpler thing to do would be to just accept the stone-hard fact that if you have sex, a baby is within the realm of possibility and regardless if you're a man or a woman, you have to be able to take that responsibility and give birth/be there for the baby. If not, don't have PIV sex, simple.
I strongly agree with that. If a man says no he doesn't want it, woman decides to keep it, that man shouldn't have to pay child support. The same as how a man may say he wants to keep the baby, and the woman can choose to go have an abortion without any input from the man. I strongly agree!
No, I don’t think it’s okay for a woman to go against her partner’s wishes and abort their unborn baby, and I don’t think it’s okay for a man to abandon his pregnant partner and refuse to care for their unborn baby that he helped create. I think that in MOST cases, i. e., when sexual intercourse resulting in pregnancy happens between two consenting adults, both participants should take full responsibility for their actions.
I think the whole point of the bit is to point out the absurdity of responsibility being one-sided In that scenario. The ideal is that both man and woman have a say in whether to abort, and both have a shared responsibility to make sure the child is not abandoned or neglected (assuming no abortion takes place ofc). The whole joke is to point out the hypocrisy of women saying "men have no say over our bodies and choices on abortion", whilst also demanding (yes, DEMANDING) that a man give her free money under pretext of "supporting the child". The double standard is totally unfair on men, coz we make up 50% of all (heterosexual) parents, and 100% financial responsibility to the child, and yet we have 0% say in whether or not that child should ever spawn into existence (from moment of conception onwards).
I’m not one of the women saying that, I don’t support abortion in the first place. So it’s not a double standard for me to say I think both parents should be obligated to take responsibility.
fair enough, I mean double standards coming from those who see it as I described. I respect your opinion of course, I just thought it was worth pointing out the context of the original quote. After all, Chapelle is a comedian, so I think he brought attention to a serious issue in a humorous way. Figuring out the issue itself will take more time and effort from both men and women.
I somewhat disagree. If the man is the father and is actively playing a part in her life the he absolutely has a say. There is no other answer here that makes sense. If someone believes anything else than that then they are simply wrong.
Women do have the final say though and if after deliberating with the father she decides she is going to get an abortion then and he is not okay with that then the man should ditch her. If he doesn't want the kid but she does then Dave Chappelle is correct, we the fathers had no say or choice in the matter therefore we should have the right to opt out since we weren't integral to the other decision.
I don't agree with abortion, but he does have a point. If a woman has a right to choose to not give life to the child, a man also had the right to choose to not raise the child. Then, it would be the same right being exercised.
when one is single it really does not matter what she does with her body; why I have to have a problem with it? but things get different when one is with someone; it really does not matter what laws says or not; when two people comes in together and decide they will their for their life ; they work together ; they live together; they share house together; they decide together ; they expect one to take care of other when one is hurt ; they influences their personal life decision ; then one can't just decide on own on anything including with abortion; it really does not matter what law says or society; she can't expect her man to take it lightly when she says that that's her body and she will do as she please with it ; just stay out of it; I don't care what a women have to say about it when one make a rule they will decide on everything together they can't just decide on alone in anything important. This will certainly make a crack in trust and relationship.
0
0 Reply
Anonymous
(36-45)
+1 y
God I wish abortion questions were not permitted on this page I am someone who can not fall pregnant due to an underlying medical condition I would give anything to be a mom but I will never get to experience being pregnant or giving birth yet you have these females who can fall pregnant and they selfishly murder their unborn child and some don't even care how much an abortion can actually hurt their partner who did want to be a father and wanted the baby it makes me angry why are these women blessed with being able to fall pregnant but they don't even want the baby yet you have hundreds of women and men out there who would love to be a parent but that right was taken from us
and please dont give me the whole I can adopt when I am very aware I can adopt adoption is not the same as psychically carrying the baby for 40 weeks and giving birth and having that bond with your biological child
I'm sure that not being able to have your own biological child is painful when it's all you want. But please, also understand that it can be equally painful to end up pregnant when you don't want a child. Women who get abortions don't just think of their own good, but also what kind of life they would (or wouldn't) be able to give the baby. Many women get an abortion because they feel like they wouldn't be able to afford a baby or give it the life it deserves. So please, don't direct your anger at these women. They are also in a very unfortunate position.
@lumos How does a woman end up pregnant when she doesn't want it? I mean their are dozens of ways to prevent it, some of which cost a dollar and are found at nearly every convience store gas station etc, they also have insanely high sucess rates (90% range) of preventing conception. So how does she get pregnant without actively trying to get pregnant by not using contraceptive (as rape is rare and if you take rape, incest, risk to the mother and combine them together you still get less then 1% of abortions being due to that and if we go by the most cited study (from 1987) contraceptive failure only accounts for about 15% of abortions)). The fact is they are not victims, you cannot be a victim if you are doing it to yourself (its kind of like claiming your not to blame for binge drinking, no one else is making you do it, so yes your the one responsible for it.). So the argument is poor to say the least, even ignoring abstinance you have dozens of options to prevent pregnancy that are highly reliable and yet the over whelming majority of pregnancies are caused by simple neglect of using said contraceptives.
@hellionthesagereborn in 2014, 51% of women getting an abortion reported that they had used a contraceptive method the month they got pregnant. Out of these cases, condoms fail more often (24%) than the pill (13%). www.guttmacher.org/.../about-half-us-abortion-patients-report-using-contraception-month-they-became Then we also have to take into account that a) nobody is perfect human error is human, b) some people still think having sex on "safe days" is safe, c) some people still think pulling out is safe, d) sex ed in many places is ridiculous and teens don't learn nor understand the importance of contraceptives and how to use them correctly because of that. Factor in all this misinformation and ignorance (that males also fall for and convince women of, mind you ("honey i don't like wearing a condom let's just pull out")) and I'm not surprised at all that many women end up with unwanted pregnancies.
@lumoswww.johnstonsarchive.net/.../abreasons.html according to this 16% where due to a failure of the contraceptive despite proper use. The other ones are most likely improper use of contraceptives i. e. irregularly taking birth control pills etc. So again, contraceptives have a pretty high success rate when used properly, and they are very common and saying well people are going to do it anyway so we should just let them kill their child if they don't want it isn't a very reasonable argument as by that rational we could justify literally any and all behavior. The contraceptives exist, when used properly they have a very high success rate so when you don't use them (which even by your estimates that's half of all abortions) that is absolutely 100% your choice to get pregnant. In fact we can actually show that this has absolutely nothing to do with contraceptives not working (which again, as the data shows, is incorrect, they absolutely work) and people just having such an insanely strong inclination to have sex that they literally cannot control themselves (yet for some reason if we apply that to any other behavior we scoff at it). Its very simple, do men get to opt out of having children? The answer is absolutely not, they have no say in whether or not a woman gets an abortion, they get no say in whether or not they abandon that child. So we know for an absolute fact that this has nothing to do with some one having the right to choose whether or not to be a parent because we don't give that option to men and we ignore the fact that in the overwhelming majority of situations pregnancy absolutely is a choice.
@lumos So again, what your saying is not accurate based upon the data (as I have pointed out) and even if it was your reasoning is itself flawed because neither you nor abortion advocates are advocating that men also get an out. So this is very simply an argument about whether or not people (and specifically women as I have pointed out we already demand this of men) take responsibility for their actions. You are advocating that people, again specifically women, should not have to take responsibility for their actions so much so that your willing to endorse the killing of ones own offspring in order to avoid such an "inconvience".
@hellionthesagereborn why are you assuming my stance on whether men should get to opt out or not when I haven't even mentioned it? For your information I do think men should get to opt out, I strongly agree with what @weasley8 had to say about the subject.
@hellionthesagereborn it's also not just an "inconvenience". Regular pregnancy checkups cost a lot of money, money these women might not even have. Being pregnant can do permanent damage to your body, such as incontinence, abdominal pain (due to c-section scar), pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes (and therefore higher risks of heart disease, stroke etc), postpartum depression (or just depression in general, seeing as the pregnancy is unwanted), varicose veins and hemorrhoids, etc. Not to mention all the issues a woman might suffer from during pregnancy, I know of a woman who threw up literally almost every single day of her pregnancy because she was just constantly nauseous. Portraying pregnancy to be some sort of cheap and easy walk in the park, especially when it's an unwanted pregnancy, is not only extremely disrespectful but also completely false. It's not an "inconvenience", it's a really difficult thing to go through that can have long-lasting or permanent negative effects on your body.
@lumos I am making that presumption based upon every single other interaction with women with this view all of which as far as I have found where against men having the chance to opt out. I'm sorry if I presumed your position but it was based upon the arguments presented. As for "inconvience" I didn't say it was an inconvience I stated women view the life they brought into this world as an inconvience and you are just proving that point. I find that to be a rather despicable attitude to have, do you discard your children when they start getting expensive? Do you just kill them and argue that its the best thing for them when it starts being "to much"? Seems like something a sociopath would do yet here you are arguing just that, that is you are arguing that its okay for a woman to kill the child SHE brought into this world if she doesn't want to deal with the consequences of her actions because the child is not more important then her and more specifically the life of a child is not nearly as important as a woman getting off. In your list of priorities, sexual gratification is first, convience is second and a distant third is the LIFE of a child. Again, that seem really sociopathic to me.
@lumos Not really. I think that both are equally responsible for the child and thus both should be responsible adults and take care of it. I'm merely pointing out that if one supports abortion then the only way to stay logically and intellectually and morally consistent is to also allow that option to men, even though I personally don't agree with it (but at the very least I would respect their consistency).
I will agree (mostly) with the first part of what Dave Chappelle said if, and ONLY IF, the second portion is also true.
Yes, the abortion is ultimately the decision of the mother, but I do NOT agree she should not consult the father. It is the father's child too, and it is barbaric that a man can conceive a child and the mother has no legal obligation to even tell him that he has conceived a child. Think about that for a moment. It is truly barbaric and just wrong. Anyone who disagrees with that is just a shitty excuse for a human being.
But again, the mother should have the final say about whether to keep or abort the child, but the father MUST also have the right to financially abort the child if she decides to keep it against the fathers wishes. That is the closest thing we can get to fairness in the issue of abortion. And again, anyone who disagrees with that is just a shitty person.
I agree with Dave. If women have to option to avoid having to be responsible for a child when they don't want to then it would be nice if men had that option too.
That being said, I doubt it will ever happen. The court doesn't even have a problem forcing men who are proven to not be the father to pay child support, they definitely aren't going to give men who are the father an option to opt out.
I agree, about this being the true human nature. Its upon the mom for the baby's survival even after givibg birth, and with animals too. She decides if she will make it survive or not, not the father, in any species. Like usual your life depends on the female, being the mother.
However, i would fight to get $$ whether he can leave or not.
When women stop killing male babies, then males won't have a say. Not that female babies don't deserve male support, but the defense of 'this doesn't affect males' is a straight up lie. It does.
As far as the child support argument, I think both men and women should step up and take responsibility for their offspring. But if we are going to have a world where women don't have to, then it's only fair that men should have the option to opt out as well. It's only fair.
I wish this idea was going to go somewhere, but certain people are making way too much money off of the current status quo.
We need to find out who is profiting from this system and assassinate them one by one. We need to make it clear that we won't let the law scare us into submission to a corrupt and morally bankrupt system that only recognizes the rights of women.
I agree. I fully support abortion and I believe that if a man is not going to support his child financially while the mom is the primary care giver, it should be mandatory that he signs his parental rights away permanently.
Most Helpful Opinions