Texas towns make it illegal to use roads to travel out of state for an abortion.

Again not about abortion. A woman gets to decide when to be a mother. A man should get to decide when to be a father.

 

So you want the man to be able to dump all responsibility on the woman, physical, emotional, financial. Should a woman be able to dump all of it on the man?

 

So if he does not want to be a father the woman should be forced to get an abortion?

 

He opts to accept that risk when he chooses to have sexual intercourse. Here's a novel idea: Ask the woman before sex what her view of abortion is and what she would do if she became pregnant. If you don't like the answer, do what you normally do.

I think he believes the father should be relieved of any financial responsibility to the child and allow us taxpayers to pick up the tab for his 30 seconds of fun.

 

You are dealing with someone that subscribes to incel-type philosophies.

Look up "black pill". He has swallowed it.

 

Considering it is the actual topic of the thread. I'm just guessing that it "might" be important. Maybe.

 

My goodness. A white (I assume) man complaining that something isn't fair. The times they are indeed a-changing.

 

Never said that. And just for the record if the woman decides to get an abortion, whether or not the man agrees with it, then yes the man should have to pay 50% of abortion costs.

If the woman decides to keep the child after the man informs of the financial abortion then yes that’s on the woman. She is informed and knows what is waiting for her.

If it was just a random one night hookup or friends with benefits the decision should be easy. If it’s a committed relationship the man and the woman should have discussed it ahead of time so they knew where the other stood. Communication is key.

I would also be okay with a stipulation. The stipulation being the man has to have it in writing (including signed by a legal attorney and notary) that even though they are in a relationship that they have no desire at this time for children. This would be on file and required to qualify for the 8 week financial abortion. Yes it screws over casual sex and one night stands but it at least gives men who are in a relationship and open about it a legal out.

 

I am not an Incel or believe in the “black pill”. But I do believe men get screwed over on this issue and it needs to be changed

 

Attractive to even semi-attractive white women have it made in the West. If you gave me the opportunity to go back to my north and change what I was born as (not transgender, I am a man and have no intentions of changing to a woman) I would absolutely pick being an attractive or semi-attractive white woman over a man of any race.

Attractive and even semi-attractive women are essentially the only ones who can open doors professionally and get opportunities just off their looks. They get to play life on easy mode. Not saying white men have it terrible but we are definitely more on normal mode. A white man will never get wealthy just off looks. An attractive shite woman can. So sorry if I don’t feel too sorry for them.

 

I was speaking in a historical context. You know, who got to vote, who got to own property, who got to beat their spouse without repercussions, etc. Hint: it wasn't women, of any color.

 

An attractive white woman also faces a glass ceiling because she is attractive, the prevailing opinion is she's only gotten any level of success off her looks, and not because of her brains. Getting a career in modeling is an area where attractive women of any color can go far without brains. But being married to an attractive, white woman in a STEM career, I can tell you the glass ceiling is real, and frustrating as hell. It's also degrading when you know you are smarter than others, but because leadership only sees the blonde hair, you get left out of big projects, promotions, and other career advancement potential.

 

What percentage of women do you think are getting "wealthy just off looks"? Even women most would consider very attractive aren't rich or wealthy, and the select ones who are typically have more going for them than just their looks. Not to mention how society has viewed aging women versus aging men.

 

OK, well as long as it is signed by a legal attorney that should take care of everything.

On second thought, if you help make a baby, you help support that baby.

Finally, I don't see where you gave the baby a vote.

Maybe you could use this:

____ Get aborted
____ Starve

(Check one.)

 

This could very well be a one off but it is right out of the black pill playbook. We'll see what the future holds.

 

I could say the same thing about women. The woman knows the risk just as much as the man. Every time a woman has sex they know pregnancy is a possibility. So why is it only men have to take any responsibility? Maybe the woman should be more careful who she has sex with? Maybe ask the man what he would do if the condom breaks and she gets pregnant? Why is all the responsibility on the man? Outside of rape and in some cases incest no one is holding a gun to the woman and forcing her to have sex. Why is that always conveniently ignored?

 

All the responsibility on the man? Isn't the woman the one who has to take the risks and pains that come with pregnancy? Or did we conveniently forget this?

Both parties should take responsibility from before they have sex together. But again, biologically, only the male can get a woman pregnant, and only a female can get pregnant. Because of this biological inequality, we cannot expect the law to be equal. If the male could get pregnant, gain the weight, and face all the potential medical issues that come with pregnancy, then we can talk about the law being equal. Until this happens, there is going to be inequality.

 

Answer my question directly, not with platitudes. Who is holding a gun to a woman’s head and forcing them to have sex? That’s the root of the problem not just with this but our society in general. It’s never my fault, always someone else’s fault.

A woman doesn’t want an unexpected pregnancy. Abstinence is still undefeated. A woman doesn’t have sex until she’s ready and with someone she loves, no risk of an unwanted pregnancy with some one night stand or casual boyfriend. I know it’s long since out of popularity but abstinence works 100% of the time. The woman does have a choice and she makes that choice every time she decides to have sex.

If the woman doesn’t agree to sex the man’s sperm never get anywhere close to the vagina and to impregnating a woman. Can we agree on that? You make it sound like a man can get a woman pregnant from a mile away. Women still have all the power when it comes to sex.

So again, who is forcing the woman to have sex? And if she isn’t being forced then she has to take responsibility for the pregnancy and her actions. It takes two to tango, a lot of women and even many on here seem to forget that.

 

The point that you simply cannot comprehend is that your "financial abortion" plan punishes the child, not the woman stupid enough to have sex with you. You want to shift your financial obligation to the taxpayers.

For more reasons than I can list, 100% abstinence is most definitely the best plan for you.

 

It's BOTH parents obligation to financially support the child.

Here, educate yourself. Florida's child support guidelines statute.:
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

You are alone on an island here. The only people that MIGHT agree with you are the dead beat dads I see at child support enforcement court.