Well I'm not one to gossip and you didn't hear it from me but he hasn't been playing/practicing and he's had a lot of free time... let's just say he's gotten to know Portland... in the Biblical sense.
Since it does take 2 to get pregnant and obviously a man cannot force a woman to have an abortion, do you think it would be fair that the man have the option of petitioning a court or something, saying that he does not want the pregnancy- will not be part of the child's life- and no be forced to pay child support. Then the woman can make an informed decision about if she should continue the pregnancy on her own? I know this would never happen but it does seem to be fair, and gives both parties a say about if they are ready to have a child. I fully support a woman's right to get an abortion, but I really don't see how you can deny a double standard when they both made, or didn't make, a decision that resulted in a pregnancy but the decision and consequences that come with it are 100% up to the mother.
Wow, not really sure where all this came from. Was this intended to be a response to me or simply making more pro-choice arguments? Aside from the first paragraph, none of this had anything to do with my comments. I said nothing about murder or imprisonment for women who have had abortions. I suppose I did discuss consequences, but not in that regard. I'm more interested in the mores of the issue. You seem to be making this into a man versus women issue or a religious vs. non religious issue, when this is a human kind issue. I'm a practicing Christian male. I have nothing against birth control or sexual education. In fact, I'm completely for both of those things, but I have a big problem with abortion being used as birth control to the tune of 1 in 3 American women!!! Assuming you're stats are correct and 1 in 3 American women have abortions, how can that figure not be very disturbing to everyone, regardless of what side of the argument you're on?!? You're either killing a life on one side or you're using abortion as a form of birth control on the other, which means you're lacking in some area (be it education or whatever). I don't buy the argument that they're left with no other choice. Owning up to the responsibility is a choice, adoption is a choice. Before this even becomes an issue, and despite what the majority of society thinks, abstinence IS a viable choice. Millions of people practice abstinence until marriage (my wife and I did) and careful family planning after marriage to avoid unwanted pregnancies. To say men and women are incapable of such self control is selling everyone short, and, frankly, pathetic. And to say people should be able to have sex whenever they want, well, that's a choice then too, isn't it, and there are consequences to our choices. All of this is just people wanting to have their cake and eat it too. I understand there are situations where people are going to have sex even if it was still the norm for couples to wait until they're in a mature and stable relationship, and even where couples in mature and stable relationships may not be able to provide for a child. There should be and are solutions for those situations, but I firmly believe, as a society, sex without ownership of the consequences and abortion as a form of birth control speaks very poorly of our society. Again, I'm not addressing legal repercussions of having an abortion. I'm addressing what I believe the cause of the abortion problem. And, yes, it is a problem.
What is the court forcing in that scenario? WarriorFan didn't say the court was forcing the woman to have an abortion as a result of ruling in favor of the father. The only thing S/he said was that the woman would have the knowledge that she would have to provide for the child without the father's assistance. Courts shouldn't force women to have or not have abortions, but it's ok for courts to force men to allow their baby mommas to abort their wanted child or alternatively force them to provide for an unwanted child?
The reasoning behind child support is so the child doesn't starve. It's not an issue of fairness to either the man or woman involved.
Uhh, yeah. Which is why I asked if her comment, which was directed to me, was intended to address my comments, or if she was just bringing up other unrelated pro-choice arguments. I can't see how they related. If they weren't intended to, that's fine.
FWIW, 18% of child support is paid by working women to custodial dads. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-moms-less-likely-than-dads-to-pay-child-support/
Teen prostitution is how they deal with it in a lot of places in India.....impoverished people don't have all these intellectual choices...often rape is involved..sometimes disease....it's not as simple as assuming there's money to provide for that child...especially for kids in say....high school..I think education is where it starts. Sometimes teen pregnancy is a culture that makes welfare a career instead of a temporary stop gap....I don't think we'd have so much teen pregnancy in some cases if you had to work 40 hours a week for a welfare check.....I paid child support for 25 years after getting divorced...never complained..love my kids...what I didn't like was not being granted joint physical custody .....with legal custody you get a bill, not an opportunity sometimes to parent within your ways and means. I've never gotten a woman pregnant by mistake. I've never had a woman get pregnant by deception....I have traveled the world and seen many unwanted, impoverished children. Folks who want to protect these kids should adopt them
