Quote :

" US men fight child support laws Father with baby (generic) Fathers are legally obliged to pay for bringing up their children Men's rights activists in the US are to argue in court that fathers do not have an obligation to pay money towards raising a child they did not want. The National Center for Men is fighting the case on a behalf of a man who says his ex-girlfriend had his child after telling him she could not get pregnant. Activists say men should have the same rights as women in dealing with the consequences of unintended pregnancy. Women's and children's groups have criticised the planned legal challenge. Leslie Sorkhe, of the Association for Children for Enforcement of Support, said a child "needs the emotional and financial support of both parents". "The child is entitled to his or her equal protection under the law," the website of The Detroit News quotes her as saying. I'm trying to find a way for a man also to have some say over decisions that affect his life profoundly Mel Feit National Center for Men Matt Dubay, the man at the centre of the case, said he did not expect the court to rule in his favour. "What I expect to hear is that the way things are is not really fair, but that's the way it is," he told the Associated Press news agency. "Just to create awareness would be enough to at least get a debate started." 'Roe v Wade for men' Mr Dubay says that his former girlfriend became pregnant with his child after assuring him she had a physical condition that prevented her from conceiving. He says she went on have the baby, despite knowing that he did not want to have a child with her. Matt Dubay Mr Dubay says his constitutional rights are being violated He now wants the court to free him from his obligation to pay $500 (£287) in child support every month. The National Center for Men is filing a case on behalf of Mr Dubay at a court in the US city of Detroit. The centre's director, Mel Feit, told the Associated Press news agency: "There's such a spectrum of choice that women have - it's her body, her pregnancy and she has the ultimate right to make decisions. "I'm trying to find a way for a man also to have some say over decisions that affect his life profoundly," he said. The centre has dubbed the case "Roe v Wade for men" - after the landmark US Supreme Court ruling that gave women the right to have abortions. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4789090.stm

hell yes i have been saying this for years

i may still be a sexist bastard in the eyes of many, but at least i'm not alone

3/9/2006 10:57:57 AM

there is somthing about that argument that

oh, i don't know

just makes sense

you know

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 10:59 AM. Reason : .]

3/9/2006 10:59:02 AM

I support the males right of choice.

3/9/2006 11:02:32 AM

I don't know, guys. What's so hard about using condoms?

CONDOMS: A DECISION YOU CAN MAKE THAT CAN AFFECT YOUR LIFE PROFOUNDLY.

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 11:07 AM. Reason : sss]

3/9/2006 11:06:54 AM

whats so hard about not having a dick in your vag 24/7

3/9/2006 11:07:37 AM

^^

yeah, cause you know

that's the only way to stop pregnancy

...

and you know, in your heart of hearts, that putting child support on the line with respect to a guy wanting a kid or not, has a certain ring of fairness to it

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 11:08 AM. Reason : .]

3/9/2006 11:08:18 AM

nastoute, condoms are the only way for the MAN to stop pregnancy. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MEN'S RIGHTS HERE, RIGHT?

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 11:10 AM. Reason : vasectomy]

3/9/2006 11:09:54 AM

^brij, you know how much i hate to disagree with you
but in this article
the woman told the father that she could not get pregnant
so its not like he would have needed to wrap it up for the K I D factor
now, its his foolishness for not worrying about an S T D
but well, you don't have to send $100 a week to your herpes

Quote :

"said a child "needs the emotional and financial support of both parents"."

funny

i seem to recall that we only call them deadbeat dads if they stop paying child support

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 11:11 AM. Reason : `]

3/9/2006 11:09:58 AM

^^ how about the butt?

3/9/2006 11:12:01 AM

lots of women only get ansy when it's their rights on the line

when real world fairness gets into the issue, alot clam right up

3/9/2006 11:12:44 AM

the point is to what to do when the pregnacy comes around

you can use "the man should of worn a condom" arguement to rule abortion right out

but since we're not talking about that, let's stick with the issue at hand

3/9/2006 11:14:44 AM

Quote :

"I don't know, guys. What's so hard about using condoms? CONDOMS: A DECISION YOU CAN MAKE THAT CAN AFFECT YOUR LIFE PROFOUNDLY."

exactly. so i guess it would be ok to outlaw abortion, because, after all, what's so hard about wearing a diaphragm/condom/whatever

3/9/2006 11:15:38 AM

outlaw vaginal sex.

only buttsex and oral from now on.

problem soooooooolved. Im going to start a club.

3/9/2006 11:15:43 AM

Quote :

"but well, you don't have to send $100 a week to your herpes"

lol that made me spit up my drink!

3/9/2006 11:18:57 AM

I was just about to post this story, just trying to find a better source than WRAL

I completely agree with this idea, hopefully the court will agree too. But I'm not holding my breath.

http://forums.ibsys.com/viewmessages.cfm?sitekey=ral&Forum=79&Topic=13443

judging from the postings on there, most people seems to say "screw men, they need to just keep it in their pants if they don't want to support a child"

Quote :

"I don't know, guys. What's so hard about using condoms? CONDOMS: A DECISION YOU CAN MAKE THAT CAN AFFECT YOUR LIFE PROFOUNDLY."

But that isn't the argument. We all already know that. The inevitable fact is that the only 100% for sure thing is to not have sex. But most people aren't gonna not have sex and hence accidents do happen. When those accidents happen, essentially only the woman has any say in a matter that effects her, the man, and the unborn child.

The decision for abortion ultimately lies with the woman since it is her body. So if the woman has the choice to be "unresponsible" and get an abortion or to wipe her hands of the child and give it up for adoption, they why can't a man have the same kind of choice? If the woman decides that she wants to keep the child, the man is held accountable by the gov't.



But at the same time I can see how this would be bad because there would be a lot of the type of people that you see on Jerry Springer going around and getting women pregnant and then taking zero responsibility. I'm not sure how you could fairly regulate something like this.

3/9/2006 11:21:49 AM

so no one likes the butt sex idea?

3/9/2006 11:23:32 AM

Quote :

"judging from the postings on there, most people seems to say "screw men, they need to just keep it in their pants if they don't want to support a child""

no, in fact, it appears to be just the opposite

READ

3/9/2006 11:23:45 AM

Quote :

"no, in fact, it appears to be just the opposite READ "

Sorry, I haven't looked at it in a couple hours. When I was reading it back around 9, the opinions that I read were mostly all against it.

3/9/2006 11:25:25 AM

Quote :

"But at the same time I can see how this would be bad because there would be a lot of the type of people that you see on Jerry Springer going around and getting women pregnant and then taking zero responsibility. I'm not sure how you could fairly regulate something like this."

Don't be a fool. That is already happening. Thousands of women are raising children without the help of the father or his money. You guys act like any woman can go into court and get tons of money out of her lover. It doesn't always work that way. If the guy isn't making much cash in the first place, you're not gonna take him to court so the judge can order him to pay out 75 dollars a month. That's just a waste of everybody's time.

3/9/2006 11:25:34 AM

^ thats what you think. Women are triffelin and want our money b/c of the glass above their heads.

3/9/2006 11:27:59 AM

Quote :

"Sorry, I haven't looked at it in a couple hours. When I was reading it back around 9, the opinions that I read were mostly all against it."

1st post

Quote :

"3/9/2006 10:57:57 AM"

what is the world coming to?

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 11:29 AM. Reason : .]

3/9/2006 11:28:57 AM

Quote :

"Don't be a fool. That is already happening. Thousands of women are raising children without the help of the father or his money. You guys act like any woman can go into court and get tons of money out of her lover. It doesn't always work that way. If the guy isn't making much cash in the first place, you're not gonna take him to court so the judge can order him to pay out 75 dollars a month. That's just a waste of everybody's time."

yes, i realize that there are already lots of deadbeat dads out there. my argument was that the law is on the side of the woman. The court will rule in favor of the woman and order the man to pay child support. But that doesn't mean that the guy will pay it. And if he doesn't, then it is generally up to the woman to force the issue with the courts to get the man to pay in some way or other, or get him arrested or whatever. I was saying that it would create more of them since there would be even less responsibility associated with possible pregnancy. There wouldn't be that risk of being force to pay.

3/9/2006 11:31:54 AM

it takes two to have sex

it takes two to ensure protection

it takes two to have a child

if a woman cant keep her legs closed, she can get an abortion or give it up for adoption

if a man can't keep his pants on, he is stuck paying child support for the next 18 yrs, or worse, if he wants the child and she doesnt...

3/9/2006 11:35:14 AM

Quote :

"Quote : "Sorry, I haven't looked at it in a couple hours. When I was reading it back around 9, the opinions that I read were mostly all against it." 1st post Quote : "3/9/2006 10:57:57 AM" what is the world coming to?"

The article was posted on WRAL at 7:46AM

Go look at that discussion board. There was about 7 pages of replies before 9AM

3/9/2006 11:35:19 AM

oh i forgot that it says WRAL on my webpage

3/9/2006 11:38:20 AM

So are they pushing the idea that a man should be able to 'focre' a woman to have an abortion because he doesn't want the responsibility or are they saying that the man's "right to chose" should get him out of paying child support for an unwanted child?

The first notion is just crazy (and it sounds like they aren't taking that position). If they are pushing for the second one then you can pretty much say goodbye to child support altogether.

"The court hereby orders you to pay $500 in child supp...". "Wait you honor, ummmm... I didn't want the child."

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 11:40 AM. Reason : -]

3/9/2006 11:39:11 AM

they are saying B

but why shouldnt a man be able to say that? a woman can.

how about this, if the man doesnt want the child he should be able to offer the money for an abortion and if she doesnt accept than he is exempt from support

3/9/2006 11:41:29 AM

I was suggesting manditory abortions

3/9/2006 11:42:09 AM

Quote :

"if a woman cant keep her legs closed, she can get an abortion or give it up for adoption if a man can't keep his pants on, he is stuck paying child support for the next 18 yrs, or worse, if he wants the child and she doesnt... "

The reason why women can get abortions and give their children up for adoption is that men refused to take responsibility for so long. Now the courts are stepping in and forcing men to take responsibility. And let's say the courts successfuly forced men to pay child support all the time. Well, with every man taking responsibilty and paying child support, it sounds like we've got an argument against the availability abortion, not an argument against having to pay child support.

3/9/2006 11:43:01 AM

If abortion is going to be legal, it does make sense. We have had a double standard for too long.

Quote :

"or worse, if he wants the child and she doesnt..."

If I was a guy, this would absolutely kill me. I can't imagine knowing your baby is going to be killed and be powerless to stop it. Men really do have no rights in the situation and it isn't fair. It's sort of like taxation without representation. Obviously, being pro-life, I would prefer that they both step up to their responsibility, but while abortion is legal giving the woman an opt-out, the man should have the same right.

3/9/2006 11:45:52 AM

^^i'd agree with the second half of that statement


but men have been paying child support as long as women have been getting legal abortions

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 11:47 AM. Reason : a]

3/9/2006 11:46:27 AM

Quote :

"I was suggesting manditory abortions"

Well with any pregnancy the only thing you can be 100% sure of is who the mother is. You can't really be 100% positive on who the father is. You might have a situation where the wrong father is calling the shots.

3/9/2006 11:47:00 AM

i was joking

3/9/2006 11:48:10 AM

you can be 99% sure

which is basically the same thing as 100% in this case

3/9/2006 11:48:16 AM

you could get rid of abortion and there would still be an argument for this. The woman can have the child and then give it up for adoption and still have no responsiblity associated with raising and supporting the child.

3/9/2006 11:48:25 AM

"ABORTIONS FOR EVERYONE"

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!


"ABORTIONS FOR NOONE"


BOOOOOOO!!!

3/9/2006 11:48:55 AM

As a male, I disagree with this roe v. wade for me. I've always thought that we were the highest order of mammal with some canine species actually scoring better than the female homo sapiens. We should take the higher road. Yes, it's unequal. Oh well. We can handle it.

[/sarcasm]

3/9/2006 11:51:49 AM

nicolle, they do have rights. THE RIGHT TO NOT HAVE SEX. THE RIGHT TO WEAR A CONDOM. THE RIGHT TO PICK PARTNERS WHO WON'T TRICK THEM INTO PREGNANCY.

My views on this topic have shifted considerably towards the side of personal responsibility. The only reason why I STILL support abortion is that women get raped, and I beileve you should be able to terminate such a pregnancy without having to say "I was raped," which leaves the door open for women who were not raped to get abortions. And I'm okay with that reality because I'd never ask a woman to say she was raped or prove she was raped because that's ridiculous.

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 11:54 AM. Reason : sss]

3/9/2006 11:52:56 AM

so the child dies because of a viscious lie. I'm ok with that too. Yea. We're all ok with that.

Actually, I think that's really fucking brutal.

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 11:54 AM. Reason : .]

3/9/2006 11:54:34 AM

^You wanna be the rape police, checking up on women to see if they are telling the truth about a rape? Hmmmm?

3/9/2006 11:55:44 AM

well, if you want to talk legal rights for would-be fathers, then you probably need a written agreement. As in, if you are having a long term relationship with someone, you should have in writing what you would do if there was a pregnancy, what precautions are being taken for there not to be one, and each persons beliefs on abortion. This would probably never happen, but it is the only way that a man would be able to have sufficient say in the rights of his child in ym view. After the fact, anyone can say anything about how they thought the other person felt about it, but if it is in writing, what is there to argue? Plus, this would probably help unwanted pregnancies because women who wouldn't want to abort wouldn't agree to sex with someone who would abort in some cases, and vice versa.

3/9/2006 11:59:11 AM

Its not like different standards in the law are anything new…

Men can be sexually assaulted, but women can be raped. It seems like a double standard that makes men look tougher, but have less legal options.

Men have to register for the draft, again looking tougher, but with less life options.

And then there’s all this abortion stuff, but still it seems like every salary analysis report I hear seems to say men are getting more than women…

So weighing the pros and cons, I think I picked the right sex.

3/9/2006 12:02:04 PM

^^LOL. My mom has been advocating that for ages. And, shit, even if you can't get it in writing, talking about what you would do is always a good thing. People don't even talk about their views on the matter before they get to it.

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 12:03 PM. Reason : sss]

3/9/2006 12:02:28 PM

Quote :

"^^LOL. My mom has been advocating that for ages. And, shit, even if you can't get it in writing, talking about what you would do is always a good thing. People don't even talk about their views on the matter before they get to it."

you really expect people to talk about shit like that before they have sex when sometimes they don't even know each others names the next day?

3/9/2006 12:05:31 PM

Quote :

"And I'm okay with that reality because I'd never ask a woman to say she was raped or prove she was raped because that's ridiculous."

This is particularly horrific.

You seem to recognize that abortions are generally undesirable (since this is the only reason you still support it), but apparently they aren't undesirable enough that you would let a woman's feelings and pride get hurt in order to prevent it.

Quote :

"nicolle, they do have rights. THE RIGHT TO NOT HAVE SEX."

Oh, bull-fucking-shit. When I've used this argument to apply to women in the past, you've shat a brick over it, said that was unfair to women, said it was a means of us holding you down. And you turn right the fuck around and apply it to men. That's classy. Really.

3/9/2006 12:09:57 PM

I think all men should only agree to have buttsex with women now. This would be awesome and really make people angry.

3/9/2006 12:14:04 PM

Quote :

"Oh, bull-fucking-shit. When I've used this argument to apply to women in the past, you've shat a brick over it, said that was unfair to women, said it was a means of us holding you down. And you turn right the fuck around and apply it to men. That's classy. Really."

^^GrumpyGOP, I have actually had a huge change in my views about sex and abortion. Like over the past three months. Sorry if it's unclassy of me to change my opinion.

People really are dirty, irresponsible whores.

Quote :

"This is particularly horrific. You seem to recognize that abortions are generally undesirable (since this is the only reason you still support it), but apparently they aren't undesirable enough that you would let a woman's feelings and pride get hurt in order to prevent it."

What do you suppose we should do? Should a woman have to prove in a court of law that she was raped if she wants to secure an abortion?

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 12:26 PM. Reason : sss]

3/9/2006 12:14:59 PM

Quote :

"nicolle, they do have rights. THE RIGHT TO NOT HAVE SEX. THE RIGHT TO WEAR A CONDOM. THE RIGHT TO PICK PARTNERS WHO WON'T TRICK THEM INTO PREGNANCY."

yep, if women would just exercise their right not to have sex or the right to request a condom be used or the right to birth control, then there would be no need for abortion, right?

Quote :

"What do you suppose we should do? Should a woman have to prove in a court of law that she was raped if she wants to secure an abortion?"

no, she can just go to the police station after the alleged rape and have them give her the morning after pill like they do pretty much all rape victims...

its a sad thing to say, though, that you think abortion should be legal across the board so that it can be preserved in the exception case of "rape"

3/9/2006 12:33:34 PM

Quote :

"Should a woman have to prove in a court of law that she was raped if she wants to secure an abortion?"

shit yeah

i mean, what if the guy is hot as fuck and she ends up dating him? thats not rape, and she shouldnt have been allowed an abortion.

3/9/2006 12:57:23 PM

^The police are handing out morning after pills? That's interesting. I never knew cops were able to write prescriptions.

Furthermore, after a rape, I do not think the victim should have to go to a police station. If they don't wanna say shit or see a bunch of power-tripping, skeptical dudes in uniform, they shouldn't have to.

But we're getting away from the point:

Quote :

"The reason why women can get abortions and give their children up for adoption is that men refused to take responsibility for so long. Now the courts are stepping in and forcing men to take responsibility. And let's say the courts successfuly forced men to pay child support all the time. Well, with every man taking responsibilty and paying child support, it sounds like we've got an argument against the availability abortion, not an argument against having to pay child support. "

[Edited on March 9, 2006 at 1:00 PM. Reason : sss]

3/9/2006 12:59:57 PM