Topic: should fathers have equal rights to make abortion decisions?
Anonymous A started this discussion 10 years ago #54,305
If a woman decides to abort, a father loses his child. If a father decides to abort, a woman loses her child support. Thanks
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later[^] [v] #706,955
This seems like a honest unbiased opinion. I wonder what intellectual discussion this thread shall receive. Golly gee willikers, this is exciting!
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 45 seconds later, 1 minute after the original post[^] [v] #706,959
They should lose their child support, but the government would have to step in.
bhuto joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 32 seconds later, 2 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #706,960
omg
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #706,961
@706,959 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
Why should my tax dollars go towards paying for men who want all the benefits of having sex but none of the consequences? Don't want to risk pregnancy? Don't have PIV sex. There's no shortage of other things you can do.
Why should my tax dollars go towards paying for men who want all the benefits of having sex but none of the consequences? Don't want to risk pregnancy? Don't have PIV sex. There's no shortage of other things you can do.
D-g !jJEom8Ii3E joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 47 seconds later, 5 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #706,963
No but a father should have a lawful right to know that he is a father.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 7 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #706,966
@706,961 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Why should one group of people who can make a baby get to choose whether to have one while the other group has no choice?
Your statement is what right wingers say against state funded planned parenthood programs.
Why should one group of people who can make a baby get to choose whether to have one while the other group has no choice?
Your statement is what right wingers say against state funded planned parenthood programs.
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 10 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #706,969
He's not losing a child if it's an abortion.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 12 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #706,974
Why should my tax money go towards paying for women who want all of the benefits of having sex with none of the consequences?
How does that sound Mark!
How does that sound Mark!
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 10 years ago, 5 minutes later, 17 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #706,979
@706,966 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
Because they're the people who actually have to carry the kid to term and bear the costs of pregnancy, or the consequences of abortion.
And yeah I guess that's a fair point. It just feels really scummy that guys get to have sex, and then when their sex leads to pregnancy, and they realize that having sex has actual consequences, wash their hands of it by paying a token fee.
Because they're the people who actually have to carry the kid to term and bear the costs of pregnancy, or the consequences of abortion.
And yeah I guess that's a fair point. It just feels really scummy that guys get to have sex, and then when their sex leads to pregnancy, and they realize that having sex has actual consequences, wash their hands of it by paying a token fee.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU double-posted this 10 years ago, 55 seconds later, 18 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #706,980
@706,974 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
You can wait ten minutes for someone to reply, fyi. You don't need to make additional posts.
You can wait ten minutes for someone to reply, fyi. You don't need to make additional posts.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU triple-posted this 10 years ago, 11 minutes later, 29 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #706,988
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Sorry this was mean and snarky. I was just antsy to get out of work.
Sorry this was mean and snarky. I was just antsy to get out of work.
Dr. Whom !7MHPahvoGY joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 30 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #706,990
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 10 years ago, 6 minutes later, 37 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #706,992
WSD !m2cp3rR5zw joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 3 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,053
@706,961 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
> Why should my tax dollars go towards paying for women who want all the benefits of having sex but none of the consequences? Don't want to risk pregnancy? Don't have PIV sex. There's no shortage of other things you can do.
I agree. Abolish Planned Parenthood.
> Why should my tax dollars go towards paying for women who want all the benefits of having sex but none of the consequences? Don't want to risk pregnancy? Don't have PIV sex. There's no shortage of other things you can do.
I agree. Abolish Planned Parenthood.
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 10 years ago, 24 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,060
squeegee joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 27 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,076
if the father wants to keep it, and the mother doesn't, the mother is forced to carry it to term and give it to the father and lose custody. she would be reimbursed for damages (pain and suffering/lost wages), but will be required to pay child support.
if the mother wants to keep it, and the father doesn't, the father is forced to pay child support and lose custody. he will not be reimbursed for anything.
if both the mother and father want to keep it, then they both are equally responsible for support and they split custody.
if neither wants to keep it, then abortion would be permissible.
in the event the child was conceived in rape, then the father loses all rights and custody and the mother may then be the only participant in the decision making.
of course, the father would be held financially responsible in the event the mother decides to keep the child and also loses custody in any form.
if the mother wants to keep it, and the father doesn't, the father is forced to pay child support and lose custody. he will not be reimbursed for anything.
if both the mother and father want to keep it, then they both are equally responsible for support and they split custody.
if neither wants to keep it, then abortion would be permissible.
in the event the child was conceived in rape, then the father loses all rights and custody and the mother may then be the only participant in the decision making.
of course, the father would be held financially responsible in the event the mother decides to keep the child and also loses custody in any form.
(Edited 3 minutes later.)
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,125
@previous (squeegee)
Forcing someone to take the foetus to term sounds...sketchy. Illegalisimg abortion doesn't stop abortions, it pushes them underground so women get sketchy back alley procedures done.
That and pregnancy irreversibly changes your body. The more I read about what it does to you the more terrifying it is. You're not forcing 9 months of eh, you're forcing something dangerous (yes it's dangerous) that creates irreversible changes to her body forever.
Forcing someone to take the foetus to term sounds...sketchy. Illegalisimg abortion doesn't stop abortions, it pushes them underground so women get sketchy back alley procedures done.
That and pregnancy irreversibly changes your body. The more I read about what it does to you the more terrifying it is. You're not forcing 9 months of eh, you're forcing something dangerous (yes it's dangerous) that creates irreversible changes to her body forever.
Syntax joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,127
@previous (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
> that creates irreversible changes to her body forever.
http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/hormones/reproductive-history-fact-sheet
One as I recently mentioned is that Child Birth reduces the chances of Cancer
Is there a relationship between pregnancy and breast cancer risk?
Studies have shown that a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer is related to her exposure to hormones that are produced by her ovaries (endogenous estrogen and progesterone). Reproductive factors that increase the duration and/or levels of exposure to ovarian hormones, which stimulate cell growth, have been associated with an increase in breast cancer risk. These factors include early onset of menstruation, late onset of menopause, later age at first pregnancy, and never having given birth.
Pregnancy and breastfeeding both reduce a woman’s lifetime number of menstrual cycles, and thus her cumulative exposure to endogenous hormones (1). In addition, pregnancy and breastfeeding have direct effects on breast cells, causing them to differentiate, or mature, so they can produce milk. Some researchers hypothesize that these differentiated cells are more resistant to becoming transformed into cancer cells than cells that have not undergone differentiation
> that creates irreversible changes to her body forever.
http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/hormones/reproductive-history-fact-sheet
One as I recently mentioned is that Child Birth reduces the chances of Cancer
Is there a relationship between pregnancy and breast cancer risk?
Studies have shown that a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer is related to her exposure to hormones that are produced by her ovaries (endogenous estrogen and progesterone). Reproductive factors that increase the duration and/or levels of exposure to ovarian hormones, which stimulate cell growth, have been associated with an increase in breast cancer risk. These factors include early onset of menstruation, late onset of menopause, later age at first pregnancy, and never having given birth.
Pregnancy and breastfeeding both reduce a woman’s lifetime number of menstrual cycles, and thus her cumulative exposure to endogenous hormones (1). In addition, pregnancy and breastfeeding have direct effects on breast cells, causing them to differentiate, or mature, so they can produce milk. Some researchers hypothesize that these differentiated cells are more resistant to becoming transformed into cancer cells than cells that have not undergone differentiation
bhuto replied with this 10 years ago, 8 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,131
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 5 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,134
WSD !m2cp3rR5zw replied with this 10 years ago, 27 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,138
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 18 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,141
squeegee replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,152
adam djensen joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,161
@previous (squeegee)
What if the guy explicitly told the woman he wore a condom but didn't? What if the condom breaks?
What if the guy explicitly told the woman he wore a condom but didn't? What if the condom breaks?
Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 15 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,165
@previous (adam djensen)
If the condom breaks you send your daughter to Harvard med school for 34 years
If the condom breaks you send your daughter to Harvard med school for 34 years
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 10 years ago, 4 hours later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,194
@707,138 (WSD !m2cp3rR5zw)
I agree.
@707,127 (Syntax)
Jesus Christ that's not relevant
@707,152 (squeegee)
Contraception fails. People like about wearing condoms. People get pregnant using both condoms and birth control.
I disagree that sex is a sentence to pregnancy. In some cases it is explicitly dangerous to carry a pregnancy to term.
If artificial wombs were a thing then maybe I'd agree.
But by forcing pregnancies you're only going to create an abortion black market. They won't stop they'll just be more dangerous.
I agree.
@707,127 (Syntax)
Jesus Christ that's not relevant
@707,152 (squeegee)
Contraception fails. People like about wearing condoms. People get pregnant using both condoms and birth control.
I disagree that sex is a sentence to pregnancy. In some cases it is explicitly dangerous to carry a pregnancy to term.
If artificial wombs were a thing then maybe I'd agree.
But by forcing pregnancies you're only going to create an abortion black market. They won't stop they'll just be more dangerous.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
squeegee joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,200
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,201
@previous (squeegee)
Sometimes you trust people you shouldn't. Not everyone is as good as you think they are.
Sometimes you trust people you shouldn't. Not everyone is as good as you think they are.
squeegee replied with this 10 years ago, 3 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,202
@707,194 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
not if the woman goes to jail for murder if she has a black market abortion. that'd stop it. men should have equal rights when it comes to their offspring. if a woman can force a man into paying support then the man should have an equal ability to force her hand too.
unless you prefer the alternative, which would be that the man can force the woman to have an abortion if he doesn't want to pay for it. so what if she wants to keep it? and, as so many people keep pointing out, pregnancy is dangerous and abortion is safe, right, so the mother should be thankful anyway.
not if the woman goes to jail for murder if she has a black market abortion. that'd stop it. men should have equal rights when it comes to their offspring. if a woman can force a man into paying support then the man should have an equal ability to force her hand too.
unless you prefer the alternative, which would be that the man can force the woman to have an abortion if he doesn't want to pay for it. so what if she wants to keep it? and, as so many people keep pointing out, pregnancy is dangerous and abortion is safe, right, so the mother should be thankful anyway.
squeegee double-posted this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,203
squeegee triple-posted this 10 years ago, 5 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,204
so yeah, women, take your pick. do you prefer forced pregnancy or forced abortions?cause, you know, that IS what guys have to deal with. and we get no say in which choice is made, we just have to live with the outcome. i mean, broken condom, failed contraceptive, manipulative partner, doesn't matter, AND the whole thing is up to someone else.
can't live with that? why not? men have been living like that for years.
oh yeah, but our bodies don't get kinda fat for 9 months, so, totally even. :/
can't live with that? why not? men have been living like that for years.
oh yeah, but our bodies don't get kinda fat for 9 months, so, totally even. :/
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous R joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,205
squeegee replied with this 10 years ago, 46 seconds later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,206
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 10 years ago, 10 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,208
@707,202 (squeegee)
hahah no it wouldn't. people will still have black market abortions. they will just be unsafe and more women will die.
since when does outlawing something do anything but create a black market?
especially for abortions.
@707,203 (squeegee)
people will never do that and you know it. people have had pre-marital sex for the entirety of recorded history.
hahah no it wouldn't. people will still have black market abortions. they will just be unsafe and more women will die.
since when does outlawing something do anything but create a black market?
especially for abortions.
@707,203 (squeegee)
people will never do that and you know it. people have had pre-marital sex for the entirety of recorded history.
(Edited 18 seconds later.)
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL double-posted this 10 years ago, 43 seconds later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,209
@707,204 (squeegee)
you don't have to carry the fucking baby. wait until artificial wombs are a thing and then you have a point.
you don't have to carry the fucking baby. wait until artificial wombs are a thing and then you have a point.
squeegee replied with this 10 years ago, 8 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,210
@previous (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
till then let's just shit on the rights of men and force them into financial hardship against their will? i don't think so. we want equitable treatment, and we want it now. women have had the rights to all of these things, including the right to make life decisions for the male. yet it's somehow wrong when i suggest the male have the same opportunity for choice in the matter?
talk about hypocrisy. somehow it's wrong to terminate a life against your wishes or carry a pregnancy to term against your wishes - if you're a woman, but if you're a man you should just be happy about it?
till then let's just shit on the rights of men and force them into financial hardship against their will? i don't think so. we want equitable treatment, and we want it now. women have had the rights to all of these things, including the right to make life decisions for the male. yet it's somehow wrong when i suggest the male have the same opportunity for choice in the matter?
talk about hypocrisy. somehow it's wrong to terminate a life against your wishes or carry a pregnancy to term against your wishes - if you're a woman, but if you're a man you should just be happy about it?
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,211
@previous (squeegee)
women pay child support if the man has custody. however what you cannot do is a woman to carry a child to term. you can certainly take her to court for custody once the chlid is born (if that occurs). push for research into artificial ways to carry life and you will get your wish.
if men were the ones getting pregnant then things would be the opposite way.
women pay child support if the man has custody. however what you cannot do is a woman to carry a child to term. you can certainly take her to court for custody once the chlid is born (if that occurs). push for research into artificial ways to carry life and you will get your wish.
if men were the ones getting pregnant then things would be the opposite way.
(Edited 28 seconds later.)
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 10 years ago, 3 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,213
@previous (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
To be honest, if men were the ones who got pregnant, I think humans would have gone extinct centuries ago.
To be honest, if men were the ones who got pregnant, I think humans would have gone extinct centuries ago.
squeegee replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,214
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,215
@previous (squeegee)
look you have equal rights once the child exists
what you do not have equal rights to is forcing someone to be pregnant
the only solution to that is artificial wombs
without that there is nothing that can or will change because that is about bodily autonomy
look you have equal rights once the child exists
what you do not have equal rights to is forcing someone to be pregnant
the only solution to that is artificial wombs
without that there is nothing that can or will change because that is about bodily autonomy
squeegee replied with this 10 years ago, 17 seconds later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,217
@707,211 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
uh, i understand how it currently works, what i'm saying is that the way it currently works isn't equitable and should be radically changed from the status quo. even if that means upsetting a privileged class and removing from them the benefits that the system bestows upon them. but, sit there and obliviously suggest we "eat cake instead" while you murder our children and drain our coin.
uh, i understand how it currently works, what i'm saying is that the way it currently works isn't equitable and should be radically changed from the status quo. even if that means upsetting a privileged class and removing from them the benefits that the system bestows upon them. but, sit there and obliviously suggest we "eat cake instead" while you murder our children and drain our coin.
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,218
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,219
@707,215 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
Actually they don't have equal rights because they mother can choose to give the child up for adoption and then will not have to pay anything for its care.
Actually they don't have equal rights because they mother can choose to give the child up for adoption and then will not have to pay anything for its care.
squeegee replied with this 10 years ago, 51 seconds later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,221
@707,215 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
unless it becomes about personhood rather than autonomy. you do realize there's a huge, huge push to change the laws regarding what women can do with their bodies. it's not like it's impossible we'll return to an era where abortion is outlawed, and then women would be forced to carry pregancy to term. it would literally solve half of the men's rights issues over their children if abortion was outlawed, all that would be left is equitable custody. but atm abortion, specifically, removes rights from men.
if you think the argument against abortion ends with women's rights you're sorely mistaken.
unless it becomes about personhood rather than autonomy. you do realize there's a huge, huge push to change the laws regarding what women can do with their bodies. it's not like it's impossible we'll return to an era where abortion is outlawed, and then women would be forced to carry pregancy to term. it would literally solve half of the men's rights issues over their children if abortion was outlawed, all that would be left is equitable custody. but atm abortion, specifically, removes rights from men.
if you think the argument against abortion ends with women's rights you're sorely mistaken.
squeegee double-posted this 10 years ago, 46 seconds later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,222
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 10 years ago, 7 seconds later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,223
@707,219 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
and then neither does the father
@707,221 (squeegee)
i sincerely hope that you are wrong.
and then neither does the father
@707,221 (squeegee)
i sincerely hope that you are wrong.
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL double-posted this 10 years ago, 39 seconds later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,224
@707,222 (squeegee)
i have never before met someone who sincerely believes that abortion should be outlawed
interesting
scary
but interesting
how do you feel about welfare btw
i have never before met someone who sincerely believes that abortion should be outlawed
interesting
scary
but interesting
how do you feel about welfare btw
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,225
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,227
squeegee replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,228
@707,224 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
welfare? i believe that capitalism leaves behind a certain amount of detritus, and as a byproduct of being a huge economic powerhouse it's our responsibility to clean it up. but, the solution is through community services rather than direct investment. handing money out furthers problems, but providing education, transportation, food, shelter and childcare are the best things welfare can do. unfortunately it's way more expensive to do that than to just give a basic income and let people fend for themselves, which is largely what we end up doing.
welfare? i believe that capitalism leaves behind a certain amount of detritus, and as a byproduct of being a huge economic powerhouse it's our responsibility to clean it up. but, the solution is through community services rather than direct investment. handing money out furthers problems, but providing education, transportation, food, shelter and childcare are the best things welfare can do. unfortunately it's way more expensive to do that than to just give a basic income and let people fend for themselves, which is largely what we end up doing.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 10 years ago, 51 seconds later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,229
@707,227 (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
Okay honey, but only one parent gets to make that decision. The mother can run more liberal adoption states and dump the kid even if the father wants custody.
Okay honey, but only one parent gets to make that decision. The mother can run more liberal adoption states and dump the kid even if the father wants custody.
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,230
@previous (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
afaik if there are relatives then the state generally tries to give them to those relatives first
@707,228 (squeegee)
i agree with you to an extent
most of the politicians who are against abortion are also against social welfare which seems counterproductive - forcing children but not providing any assistance in raising them
you only increase the lower class and crime rate
afaik if there are relatives then the state generally tries to give them to those relatives first
@707,228 (squeegee)
i agree with you to an extent
most of the politicians who are against abortion are also against social welfare which seems counterproductive - forcing children but not providing any assistance in raising them
you only increase the lower class and crime rate
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,231
@previous (chili dog !!81dzJNNYL)
No that's how foster care works. A mother can run to a state with closed adoptions and give up their kid without any say from the father.
No that's how foster care works. A mother can run to a state with closed adoptions and give up their kid without any say from the father.
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,233
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 10 years ago, 8 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,234
squeegee replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,235
adam djensen replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,237
@707,200 (squeegee)
Maybe he is just drunk and forgets or something. There are plenty of situations where you could get pregnant on accident.
Maybe he is just drunk and forgets or something. There are plenty of situations where you could get pregnant on accident.
adam djensen double-posted this 10 years ago, 56 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,238
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,239
@707,234 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
@previous (adam djensen)
Sorry I have a hard time handling such a dumb comment. I go very easy on triptych regarding this problem.
@previous (adam djensen)
Sorry I have a hard time handling such a dumb comment. I go very easy on triptych regarding this problem.
chili dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 10 years ago, 8 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,242
@707,234 (kook !!OPZbEQMT1)
so we agree that both parents should automatically have joint custody
however since these are the same men that are terrified of being responsible for someone else's child a paterntiy test must be done in utero or at birth, which takes time. until then it is only reasonable that the only proven parent has custody.
so we agree that both parents should automatically have joint custody
however since these are the same men that are terrified of being responsible for someone else's child a paterntiy test must be done in utero or at birth, which takes time. until then it is only reasonable that the only proven parent has custody.
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 replied with this 10 years ago, 9 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,244
Anonymous S joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 38 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,249
@707,213 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
Fuckalms, what precautions do you take to ensure the women you have sex with don't get pregnant?
Fuckalms, what precautions do you take to ensure the women you have sex with don't get pregnant?
bhuto replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,258
omg. the rights of men
Metæ joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #707,267
squeegee replied with this 10 years ago, 44 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #707,277
@707,258 (bhuto)
yeah, that's what most women say when talking about a father's child. irritated by it.
yeah, that's what most women say when talking about a father's child. irritated by it.
