View Single Post
Old 04-25-2005, 09:47 PM   #81 (permalink)
Strange Famous
follower of the child's crusade?
 
In cases of abuse, i think no one would disagree that the child should be removed from the absuive situation by the state.

However, in general what I am saying is that the male partner does not in my opinion have any moral rights over an unborn fetus. It is not a case of saying you want "equality" in rights - because the fetus is carried within the body of one person and not another.

Until the child is born, I believe the decision to seek abortion is entirely that of the women, although education and all available options should be there, it is ultimately her choice and no one else should have any input. It is the women who has to carry the fetus, who has to go through childbirth (which as I mentioned, would have killed my mother if she had been forced to go through with it in one occasion), and so on.

After the child is born, I would also agree that - as the natural relationship is between mother and child - the mother should have a automatic right to custody - unless unfit to care for the child. This is not about placing people in abusive situations, but if there are two fit parents, the mother always takes priority, because she is better able to care for the child than a man.

The male should provide some level of financial support for the child. and also should be entitled to some level of supervised time with the child. At the point where the child is able to make an informed decision, then they may decide if they want custody to be changed to the father.

In an ideal world, I probably would support something in line with the aholition of the family altogether, that children are raised in group homes and not in families - which causes many emotional and mental problems in my opinion... but if we are talking about the world and the way it is today, if my opinions were not clear, I will re-state them.

The mother is the sole person who has the right to make a decision on abortion. It is not correct for the potential father to either force an abortion on a woman who doesnt want one, or attempt to deny an abortion to a woman who does want one.

Care of a child will automatically be awarded to the woman, unless she is judged as unfit.

The man shall contribute financially to the upkeep of the child - this is fair, and when you have unprotected sex any adult should understand the potential consequence. However, in a real and moral sense, I believe the child "belongs" to the mother more than the father, that the mother has more right to custody of the child. While the father is asked only to contribute financially - to ensure the standard of living of the child, the woman is asked to contribuet time, love, dedication - therefore with right goes responsibility. The woman is asked to GIVE much more t the upbringing of the child, because her right and responsibiolity is greater,



Quote:
Originally Posted by analog
This made me laugh until my sides hurt and i wanted to abort my funny bone.

See, abortion can be funny. Next up, cancer.



Read the opening post. It has nothing to do with being able to physically cause an abortion, only the removal of responsibility.



I am a religious person, but that's bullshit. If she's got agendas or is hindered by an internal decision struggle, that's her fuckin' beef. She HAS the ability to opt-out. This whole argument is about what people CHOOSE to do, and that includes factoring in their personal bullshit.



Boo fucking hoo. I wonder what the founders of N.O.W. (National Organization of Women) would have said if they knew their pioneering spirit and hard work towards gender equality would actually have resulted in... equality?

Equality is 50/50. The same. The current ability for a women to opt-out, but not a man, directly contradicts all notions of equality. That is wrong. All the women in this thread need to stop their tubes from getting in a knot over the honesty of some of the males in here. You have the total, unwavering advantage. 100%. If you can say "no thanks" to a baby, then men should be able to as well. Men do not create babies, nor do women- it requires both together, and so should the laws reflect that fact.

My uncle spent years in the courtroom spending God knows how much money on lawyers, trying to get and keep the rights to his son, my cousin. Mother's rights FAR outweigh a father's. That bitch was an alcoholic, multiple alcohol-related offences, used hard drugs, also multiple offences including cocaine and LSD, AND... AND... AND... child endangerment, neglect, abuse. Also, she has never held a job. Ever.

Yeah. She'd leave him home alone, at one to two years of age, all day or all night, and leave out a bag of chips for food. My uncle was away when this happened. She locked him in a closet once for 3 days. No food, nothing. She just left him. She went and partied in atlantic city for a long weekend. He almost died.

Despite all this, he STILL had to fight to get custody, and then had to fight to lower her ability to see him. She used my cousin as leverage to get money from my uncle for child support on the kid HE was raising! And he had to fight to get THAT overturned.

As it stands, men's rights don't begin at conception- they never have any, at all, ever. Women can do whatever they please and the laws will protect their stupid asses, even should they be drug-using, alcoholic, child-neglecting, -abandoning, -abusing whores. There is no equality.
__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas
Strange Famous is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76