Abortion is Wrong

You've got a lot snarkier this week. I approve.

At what point did I say women who choose to have kids out of wedlock should be given a chimney sweep?



On whether to have an abortion? I agree completely. On whether or not you force someone else into taking part? No.
 
If a man uses contraception, but the woman gets pregnant and decides to have the baby, can he really be held responsible and be forced to look after the child too? It seems wrong in my opinion.
 
It's a relatively common side-effect of having sex, so both parties should be ready for the possibility.

If the father doesn't help pay for it, and the woman can't support the child on her own, then the burden falls on tax payers, and they certainly didn't have any idea they might end up paying for that child.
 
So it's fine for strangers to have to pay for a child, but the father should get to choose if he wants to support it or not?
 
Through taxes? Yes. I support the idea of welfare, and citizens do not get a say on where their taxes are spent. Is it right I pay health bills for people I don't know or care about?
 
I don't really think being injured is the same as impregnating a woman.

I think if you have a child, whether you wanted it or not, you should man-up and help to support it however you can. It just seems like the decent thing to do.

What happens if that child finds you after a couple of decades? Could you hold your head up high and say "I wish you were never born, I want nothing to do with you"?
 
No, but your objection to taxes being used to support a single mother seems to be that people would be paying for a child they don't know and have no responsibility for. That applies to people who's health I contribute to helping. Plus this isn't a question of impregnating the woman but of helping the upkeep of the child, presumably to keep them in good health through food, clothing etc.



Whereas I think the decent thing to do is to not force someone into having a parenting role (I know paying money isn't parenting but I can't think of a better word) when they don't want one. Presumably if you plan to have a baby then there's various things you discuss with your partner before trying to have one, finances I would hope are one of the topics. If you've been told by whoever impregnated you that they have no interest in a child and you have it anyway then that is your own choice. You were aware of the situation long before you ended up there and had options to avoid it.



I don't see why not. Could easily use the same argument to get rid of adoption.
 
Men shouldnt have to be financially responsible for it if they never wanted a kid in the first place.

We get to have abortions, but to make it fair a male should be able to sign over any rights and have a financial abortion.
 
I don't object to taxes going toward the support of children, but why shouldn't the father have to pay a greater share?



I agree with this, but you can't presume people will act in a decent manner. No matter how wrong the mother is, it's not the child's fault.



Of course there are people who do say those things, I was asking whether you thought that was acceptable behaviour.
 
Sorry for assuming

The father shouldn't pay a greater share because, in my view, having sex with someone in this day and age doesn't equal wanting to have a child. Assuming birth control defects or whatever I don't believe a man should be forced into having a role in supporting a child he explicitly didn't want, in ther same way I support women having access to ways of not keeping a child they didn't want through accidental pregnancy. Obviously men refusing to help would come at the price of waiving all parental rights.

The obvious problem with that is people having irresponsible sex but I don't think there's a real solution to that, its one of those things that would have to be accepted as a compromise in the same way abortion is hopefully used by women who ended up pregnant through BC failures or something but there always also be a few who were just very silly.



No, but I can hope for the laws and government to act in a way that is decent. I can't expect averyone to agree with abortion, but I can try and get it at least far enough that its supported legally.



I kind of want to argue its the mother's fault for choosing to have a child she knew her partner wouldn't support. But either way the child is not being punished. If the bio father refuses to pay then the slack would be picked up by the state. Even if the father pays money into the mother's bank account the kid still doesn't have any knowledge of its dad. The kid loses the same ammount either way. Or gains depending how you look at it I suppose.




Telling a child after they find you years later that you didn't want them you mean? Its harsh, but I don't actually object to it as such. I mean its the truth after all. The alternative would be lying, having to come up with a decent reason why you weren't there which would also be a lie, then giving your child false hope that maybe their father still wants them. I would think its kinder to tell them one harsh truth that go through all that lying.
 
But the kid does lose out, because child support payments are discounted when calculating income-based benefits.




See, I'd rather do the right thing by my kid, and not have to worry about having that conversation one day.

Sometimes in life you have to swallow poop, it's just the way it is if you want to take responsibility for your actions.
 
Do I have to stop trying to defend my point when I admit I don't know what that meant?



Isn't the whole point that you don't want to take responsibility though? I suppose an option would be to not have the father recorded. The mother could still reveal who it was and with facebook and whatnot you could still face that problem, but then its a personal issue not a state wide supported one.
 
Uh... yes?



I suppose it just comes down to opinion. In the same way you are fine with the state paying for abortions (as am I), I feel fathers should pay for their children whether they wanted them or not, so I'm fine with the CSA.
 
I'm mostly confused over the word "discounted." Did you mean that child support payments aren't included in income based benefits? If so, then what stops that being changed when child support was made voluntary?




Everything always does My ideal world view basically boils down to letting people do what they want but with a strong state safety net to support them should they need it. This fits both of those by giving more autonomy choice to the dude while still providing the needed support to the lady. And when I'm God-Emperor it shall be so.
 
Back
Top