Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
Roe v. Wade for Men
- Thread starter velvett
- Start date
I don't think that anybody, male or female, should be forced to bear the responsibility of a child they never wanted. The worst feeling on earth is knowing your parent doesn't give two shits about you.
Is a male Roe v. Wade the answer??? Maybe Ender is right, mass sterilization and pietry dishes for a select few that pass the intelligence, emotional, physical and genetic testing ...
Frankly I've always thought you should have to pass an I.Q. test in order to breed anyway ...
Is a male Roe v. Wade the answer??? Maybe Ender is right, mass sterilization and pietry dishes for a select few that pass the intelligence, emotional, physical and genetic testing ...
Frankly I've always thought you should have to pass an I.Q. test in order to breed anyway ...
musclemom said:
I agree, nobody should be forced to take on the parenting duties of raising a child, but they should be required to face the financial responsibilities for that child. It might make them think twice, or at least it will remind them every time they write that check.
ben hart
New member
If a man doesnt want to have a child and the woman does, than the man BETTER have put a condom on when they did it! Its not fair to the woman if she gets pregnant and then the man doesnt want to have it. He had a choice BEFORE he had sex. After the fact, its the womans choice. IMO.
EnderJE said:Given the amount of babies at adoption centers and third world countries, I think that we should all be sterilized <sp> as soon as possible. Then, we're all free to slut it up.
I won't mention the hypocrisy implied in sterilizing those who can care for children while letting the world's poorest keep breeding unchecked.
This isn't a thinking thread anyway
AristotleBC
New member
velvett said:
That argument does not reconcile for someone who supports abortion.
If a woman doesn't want a kid, she shouldn't let guys stick their dicks in her vagina.
If, based upon the argument that "It's her body," a woman gets to decide whether or not to have the child, than a man should be given the same
option.
9 months of pregnancy is nothing compared to 50% of 18 years of your physical and mental labor. Especially when the woman's spending habits are dubious.
(Although I can't imagine personally just ignoring the kid.)
AristotleBC said:
I'm pro choice.
Go figure.
Your statement in theory goes both ways - if a woman doesn't want a child she should not have sex with a man and similarly a man should not have sex with a woman if he does want to have a child.
I find the argument that Mel Feit presents to be flawed - to choose whether of not you want the burden of childbirth does not equate with financial burden. In addition, child support is not the same as full financial burden; the woman has the responsibility of being the incubator, the care giver and the bank roll while the man just has to throw some money at "his problem".
To suggest that the only burden a man, a father has to a child is solely financial is detrimental to put into place as a tangible concept. It just supports the idea that women should only be good for breeding and child rearing and that the man's sole role in parenting is to be the bread winner.
Now had this idea been presented in a different manner and Feit's organization had found a more suitable plaintiff with a better case, a case that does not suggest a disgruntled 20 something that didn’t have the sense to use birth control and found himself as a financially responsible as a daddy I could see where this case would be worthy of listening to. I can only assume that his ex-girlfriend did not have any documented medical history to support her claim of being unable to reproduce, otherwise, I don’t understand the direction of this case. If she lied and she truly did not have the condition she stated nor any medical documentation to support it she did then knowingly or unknowingly entrap this man and by that action I agree that it is not fair to propose such financial burden upon him but we don’t need a “man’s Roe vs. Wade” to come to that conclusion.
As personal belief I think people should be responsible for their own bodies and as a female faced with making a conscience decision where sex is involved and since I’ve not wanted children I would do everything in my power not to get pregnant. The irony is that 2 or so years ago my GYN said that it would be most unlikely that I would conceive a child which was fine by me after I got used to the idea of making a choice had been taken away. Even with that knowledge I still do everything in my power to guarantee that there are no accidents, why, because you just don't know what can happen.
Last edited:
Similar threads
