Reply With Quote
Your wife, past girlfriends...whomever, have consistantly pointed a gun at your head and made you come inside them?
Damn.Christy. You crack me up sometimes.
Your wife, past girlfriends...whomever, have consistantly pointed a gun at your head and made you come inside them?
Damn.
I don't have kids with anybody but my wife, but you know there is a thing called the PILL
A condom can break, if you don't want to take full responsibilty by yourself, then I'll suggest you'll protect yourself too, don't just expect the man too everytime. You can do it!
Your wife, past girlfriends...whomever, have consistantly pointed a gun at your head and made you come inside them?
Damn.
Spurminator - it depends on the when of the abortion and the details of birth. But generally, I concede the point. However, repeated abortions, because of the scarring by the D&C, can seriously impact future fertility, and that would be where I would see this ending up.
Well, I wouldn't have a whole lot of pity on a woman who had four or five abortions done and then decided she wanted to have kids only to find out she was infertile. In the whole scheme of things, anyway.
....you're lucky you only got cracked up... I just made myself horny as all ...I'm glad it's time to go home.
Last edited by SpursWoman; 03-10-2006 at 07:03 AM. Reason: I'm turning into mouse
jcrod, not every woman can take the pill, you know. I can't. And other forms of birth control for women are MUCH less effective than a condom. Condom failure rate (method, not user) is 2-3%. Method failure rate for a diaphragm with spermicidal jelly is 15% +, but goes way up if they are not fitted at their most fertile point in the month, because of the way that the cervix lengthens and changes shape from an infertile period to a fertile window. Sponges for women who have children (which contain spermicides) have a method failure rate of 20% +. BTW, the pill and other forms of hormonal bc are rated very high in method failure, but the user failure is higher than that, because many women are not fully educated about the way the horomones work. If the pill is not taken at the same time everyday, that can impact it's effectiveness. If a 'light' pill is prescribed for a woman over 150 lbs, it may not have enough hormones present. If a single pill is missed, it can seriously disturb the hormonal cycle. That doesn't mean it always will, but it CAN. There are a lot of women who don't know that.
Outside of sterilization and hormonal bc (pill, patch, nuvaring, depo-prevara), the condom is by far the best method of birth control. Also of STD prevention.
The whole point is that BOTH partners should be taking measures for prevention if they don't want kids. I'm really surprised that there isn't more talk of double birth control. Maybe it's just that all my friends are Type A, but almost everyone I know uses at least two, and sometimes three different types of birth control.
Birth control could fail at either end, which is why BOTH partners should use it.
And I still don't get why the guy doesn't have to pay for the abortion, or why I have to pay for the kid if they guy doesn't want to.
(Sidenote, child support payment DOES go toward food and shelter, not just clothing. If a parent feels the child support is not being spent on the child, they can pe ion the court to demand an account from the primary spouse to ensure that the money is being used appropriately, and if not, the court can cease payments).
I don't have kids with anybody but my wife, but you know there is a thing called the PILL
A condom can break, if you don't want to take full responsibilty by yourself, then I'll suggest you'll protect yourself too, don't just expect the man too everytime. You can do it!
I take 100% responsibility for myself ... But I could be lying.
But it's not me I'm talking about ... it's the guys out there ing anything that walks, relying on what she says she's using for birth control ... I'm sure there are girls out there that lie about it. Don't you think everyone would be better off if he took a little responsibility for himself, too? I don't think that's too much to ask...because the Pill doesn't protect against other creepy-crawlies that might getcha during the act anyway.
I don't have kids with anybody but my wife, but you know there is a thing called the PILL
A condom can break, if you don't want to take full responsibilty by yourself, then I'll suggest you'll protect yourself too, don't just expect the man too everytime. You can do it!
and the pill can fail.
I've been pregnant twice on the pill. and yes i took it every friggin day. unfortunatly they were miscarriages - but you see my point.
no matter how well either party has protected themselves they shouldn;t be screwing around unless they are prepared to clean up the mess.
of course I'm prob. the only person in this thread who doesn't believe in sex before marriage.
Your wife, past girlfriends...whomever, have consistantly pointed a gun at your head and made you come inside them?
Damn.
now thats hott. :p
Hey getting Oprah in here...
That was my point. I kept seeing the guy just needs to put a condom, where there are plenty of options for women also.
If an abortion is their option, then it should be 50/50, or the guy should pay it. I don't think it should lay with just the women, unless he doesn't want the abortion.And I still don't get why the guy doesn't have to pay for the abortion, or why I have to pay for the kid if they guy doesn't want to.
I think the money should "just" go for food and for clothing, not housing. You fought to keep the kid, you pay for housing. Believe me all the money they receive does not go to the kid, trust me I know. And the courts will always favor the mother, that crap will not work 9 times out of 10.(Sidenote, child support payment DOES go toward food and shelter, not just clothing. If a parent feels the child support is not being spent on the child, they can pe ion the court to demand an account from the primary spouse to ensure that the money is being used appropriately, and if not, the court can cease payments).
But Obi, it's not just about sex before marriage. There are married couples that don't want kids but get pregnant. There are couples that have abortions and couples where one partner wants kids and the other doesn't. They are not exempt from this discussion.
Example - my friend Stephanie. Badgered relentlessly by her husband to have a baby. He wanted a son to carry on the family name. Stephanie told by docs she couldn't have kids, due to the number and size of the cysts on her ovaries (later resulting in ovarian cancer and removal of her ovaries). Some miracle happens and she gets pregnant. Her husband decided when she was three months pregnant that he didn't want kids after all, and walked out on her, leaving her with the greatest kids ever (twins).
But he was the one who wanted them and then he left her. Incidentally, he then later changed his mind and tried to kidnap them, but that's a different story. His rights have been severed.
But it's not me I'm talking about ... it's the guys out there ing anything that walks, relying on what she says she's using for birth control ... I'm sure there are girls out there that lie about it. Don't you think everyone would be better off if he took a little responsibility for himself, too? I don't think that's too much to ask...because the Pill doesn't protect against other creepy-crawlies that might getcha during the act anyway.
Those aren't the guys I'm talking about and my point was there's more than just a condom.
Where do the rights end? First trimester of pregnancy? Second? Third? After the kid is born and the 'father' realizes how his life will change? What provisions are there for men who have sex knowing it might result in a child (by which I mean, unprotected sex, not condom failure or medical miracle)? What provisions if the man initially decides he will acknowledge and support the child and enters into an agreement (verbal) and then changes his mind?
By implying or making into law that there are rights which can be terminated, you are also stating that fathers have rights over an unborn infact which can be enforced. How does that work with equal protection under the law, given that it then forces the woman to have a child by legal measures, which is a governmental invasion of privacy prevented directly by Roe v Wade.
Why does the taxpayer have to assume the burden for these children when their parent is given a free ride on responsibility?
When these concerns are answered in a satisfactory way, then sure, bring it all in.
It's not a simple matter of man doesn't want baby. If not, sever rights. The degree of difficulty in doing so and what obligations exist before/after severance vary by state. In some, it's really easy, in others it is not. But that option is always available.
Another alternative, but one which requires forethought is a legally binding contract, signed by both partners stating that the man reliquinshes all claim and responsibility for any child accidentally produced of the union, if the woman should become pregnant and choose to carry the child to term and raise it herself. Then both partners know what they are getting into, and the situation is neatly and legally resolved.
But then that might mean knowing your partner well enough, and that's not generally the type of situation we are really speaking of, is it?
So JCrod... you are willing to pay housing for your kids as long as you are married. But if you got a divorce, you no longer want to pay for housing?!
It has been mentioned before, but the pill is NOT 100%. You can get pregnant on the pill, whilst using condoms. Although it is very hard, it can and DOES happen. Two of my female friends have had this happen to them, one kept the child, and the other did not. The one who kept the child, is now VERY happy with their child, but is a single mother. The one who aborted the child, is now VERY UNhappy that they lost their child, and is also single. Who made the right choice? Myself, i think the single mother did (but i would never tell them that). Its unbelievably hard to be a parent, but the joy they bring is worth every dollar that they cost.
Also, while we are talking about the pill - there is NO 'cooling off' period when the woman takes the pill. As soon as you stop taking that little thing, you CAN get pregnant. My wife and I decided we wanted to get pregnant - in about 9 months - which is how long the pill supposedly takes to wear off... Well, we had a kid in 10 months instead!
On a similar note to the woman in the topic, who had a child when told she couldnt - my wife was told by a doctor she would not be able to bear children to full term - yet we have 2 children. Now, if she wasnt a smart lady, she might of been having unprotected sex and of had a child, all due to wrong information from a doctor... theoretically, they could maybe sue the doctor for the child support!
My personal belief is that abortion is NOT a choice, and it never has been. Too many young kids thing sex is consequence free, and a fun way to pass the time. There are consequences - and a lot of them. If your willing to do it, then you better be willing to support the partner. Not to mention, you shouldnt really be sleeping with someone for the of it! Its not supposed to be about that.
NOTE: Thats my opinions, not ones i would force on anyone else. Everyone is en led to their own opinion, and i wouldnt condemn them for it.
Oh, I know ... I'm going to finish making dinner and try to figure out where Chris hid my shotgun.
You know, I was getting too wrapped up in that too. I'm not sure what I said earlier in this thread, but perhaps I was wrong. We're getting wrapped in whether or not it's fair or not that women have some choices we don't. It doesn't really matter because in the end, that child needs to eat, needs clothes and so on. The child support isn't punishment fopr not using a condom or consolation to a woman for taking the risks of childbirth, it's for teh food that that child needs.That was my point. I kept seeing the guy just needs to put a condom, where there are plenty of options for women also.
I was sitting at my mom's earlier today and my nephew was there. I started thinking of how furious I'd be if his father stopped sending child support because he just didn't feel like being a part of that child's life anymore. Should that child have to eat like Ramen and bologna sandwiches every day for the next 14 years because his father just felt like he didn't want to send money anymore.
It's just one of those things we have to deal with. It's re ed that women use the "You should have taken some responsibility" excuse, because that obviously works both way. Getting pregnant isn't some new concept to females and they know the risk involved with having sex. But in the end none of that really matters because that child needs food in his mouth. Like I said, he shouldn't have a ty life because the male wants to spend his money on other things.
I wasn't trying to be a hypocrite by any stretch of the imagination ... of course a woman should be responsible and accept the consequences of her actions. But if a man chooses not to wear a condom (like the guy in the article) regardless of whatever she tells him, he's taking a risk that he shouldn't be able to back out of just because he doesn't want to deal with it.It's just one of those things we have to deal with. It's re ed that women use the "You should have taken some responsibility" excuse, because that obviously works both way. Getting pregnant isn't some new concept to females and they know the risk involved with having sex. But in the end none of that really matters because that child needs food in his mouth. Like I said, he shouldn't have a ty life because the male wants to spend his money on other things.
Last edited by SpursWoman; 03-10-2006 at 07:05 AM.
iI'd go with somethign smaller for this one. A piecethat you can easily hide under your pillow or behind you back.. then once things get going pull out the "surprise" :pOh, I know ... I'm going to finish making dinner and try to figure out where Chris hid my shotgun.
man... i know what i'll be "discussing" on the phone tonight!
ing 4 whole mother ing weeks!
Oh, it wasn't a shot at you or anything, so I apologize if it came across that way. I haven't even read the majority of this thread to be honest. I garee though, once that baby is born, whether a guy wanted to wear a condom or not doesn't matter anymore. It happened, and now that baby needs to eat.
Why aren't they? They are a good part of the population that are making these situations happen.
Of course there is more than just the pill....but I guess if you're laying all of the responsibility on the woman to take care of birth control, it would naturally follow that all the responsibility of a pregnancy should fall on her too.
I mean ... all you want to do is have an orgasm, why should you care what the consequences may be?
This lawsuit will never fly because I think all states have an "in the best interest of the child" clause written in, and I think the father declining to provide support is not in the best interest of the child. And anyone who thinks a lousy $300 or $400 a month is keeping the ex's nails and hair done, and her driving a Porsche and dressed to the nines, has been dropped on their heads once too many times. Child care alone will eat that up!
That being said, we are living in a dying, desperate world--and it is becoming more and more so with each passing day. It's pretty damn disgusting--not just what this guy is trying to do, but stuff you read about and see every day. It's amazing, albeit sickening, to see the depths we humans manage to sink to. God help us all.
*steps down off soapbox and finds a quiet corner of my house to pray in*
Then why put out?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
