Herochat

Male Abortion

AP

  • ********
  • 16509
  • +80/-52
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #15 on: January 20, 2018, 09:46:15 PM »
What exactly are you asking?

therock

  • ********
  • 8303
  • +35/-64
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #16 on: January 21, 2018, 12:04:56 AM »
Same question I ask before. Think I got the answer

Was just responding to your comment about courts

Either way seem like this would cause issues

if a woman can just say "Your the father, the child born but you have no rights"

Sure it going to be some trouble from that

AP

  • ********
  • 16509
  • +80/-52
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #17 on: January 21, 2018, 02:21:47 AM »
Same question I ask before. Think I got the answer

Was just responding to your comment about courts

Either way seem like this would cause issues

if a woman can just say "Your the father, the child born but you have no rights"

Sure it going to be some trouble from that

Assuming Sweden has the same paternity laws as the US, she can choose not to have the father in her kid's life, sure.  That happens all the time.

This situation is the opposite in which the father chooses to not be in the child's life if the mother decides to keep the kid.

therock

  • ********
  • 8303
  • +35/-64
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #18 on: January 21, 2018, 02:58:21 AM »
Same question I ask before. Think I got the answer

Was just responding to your comment about courts

Either way seem like this would cause issues

if a woman can just say "Your the father, the child born but you have no rights"

Sure it going to be some trouble from that

Assuming Sweden has the same paternity laws as the US, she can choose not to have the father in her kid's life, sure.  That happens all the time.

This situation is the opposite in which the father chooses to not be in the child's life if the mother decides to keep the kid.

But the thing is that doesnt actully happen all the time.  Once the kid born, the father have parternity rights even if the mother doesnt like him. They have to do somethign to show their unfit to be a parent. They cant just ice the father out.  That simply not how current parental laws work. They have equal rights to the kid as the mother. 


This would be new. Since now they have Zero rights to the kid if the mother dont want him.

Riv1

  • ************
  • 22345
  • +40/-875
  • ...Kaze ni Nare...
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #19 on: January 21, 2018, 04:51:36 AM »
https://www.rt.com/news/334720-legal-male-abortion-sweden/

TL;DR In Sweden, the Liberal Party is proposing "male abortion", which is essentially men opting out of parenthood if they so choose.  So if a girl gets knocked up and wants to keep the baby but he doesn't, he won't have to pay child support.

Yay or nay?
Yay.

AP

  • ********
  • 16509
  • +80/-52
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #20 on: January 21, 2018, 08:16:10 AM »
Same question I ask before. Think I got the answer

Was just responding to your comment about courts

Either way seem like this would cause issues

if a woman can just say "Your the father, the child born but you have no rights"

Sure it going to be some trouble from that

Assuming Sweden has the same paternity laws as the US, she can choose not to have the father in her kid's life, sure.  That happens all the time.

This situation is the opposite in which the father chooses to not be in the child's life if the mother decides to keep the kid.

But the thing is that doesnt actully happen all the time.  Once the kid born, the father have parternity rights even if the mother doesnt like him. They have to do somethign to show their unfit to be a parent. They cant just ice the father out.  That simply not how current parental laws work. They have equal rights to the kid as the mother. 


This would be new. Since now they have Zero rights to the kid if the mother dont want him.

That's not new at all.  It's very common but that's a different topic.

The Shuruku Demon

  • ******
  • 2330
  • +21/-7
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #21 on: January 21, 2018, 08:39:30 AM »
Fundamentally, I'm not in favour of financial abortions, because I think a father has a moral obligation to provide for his kids, both materially and emotionally. And I take this to quite an extreme; I believe even men who've given their semen to sperm banks are under the same moral obligation, regardless of what they're obliged to do legally.

I see no real excuse for not providing for your kids as best you can. Even if the mother is blatantly exploiting the system to screw the father out of access, while ensuring she gets a roof over her head and a steady income (something a father without custody is by no means assured of). I believe a father is still morally obliged to provide for his kids even under those circumstances, because it's a personal debt he owes directly to them which transcends all other considerations.

That being so, financial abortions aren't a direction I'd be keen to go in if I ruled the world, but I wouldn't leave the current set-up unchanged either. I think parental custody should be split 50/50 by default, so the father is not only entitled to visitation (which obstructive mothers can deny in practice), but to have the kids living with him 50% of the time, and receive 50% of any child benefits paid if he does so. This would help to level out the current playing field where mothers who don't want the fathers involved can pretty much have everything their own way.

I'm also very much in favour of the development and distribution of the male pill, so men who don't want to conceive can all but guarantee that, without having to be celibate. This is not only in the interests of those men, I think it's in the interest of prospective fatherless children as well, because even if they're provided for financially, I still think they're missing out by not having their father involved in their upbringing. Fewer unwanted conceptions would also save the state some money, and there's some question in my mind over whether the tax payer should be footing the bills incurred when people have kids they aren't willing or able to provide for.

AP

  • ********
  • 16509
  • +80/-52
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #22 on: January 21, 2018, 08:48:35 AM »
Shuruku, are you pro-life?

The Shuruku Demon

  • ******
  • 2330
  • +21/-7
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #23 on: January 21, 2018, 09:33:07 AM »
I don't wholeheartedly align with either side of that debate. I'm an atheist, so religious considerations don't come into it for me. Even so, I'm still morally troubled by the concept of abortion, especially when it's a result of people not taking as much care as they could have to avoid conception. Aside from rape cases, nobody has to risk conception if they don't want to. Far too often, we allow (and even incentivise) people to act like children, making messes and relying on others to clean up after them. To truly be an adult is to take full responsibility for your own actions.

I'm speaking in terms of what I'd prefer to see in an ideal world though; people being less irresponsible and selfish. In the real world, you have to consider the potential suffering a child may endure if they're born to parents who didn't want them, or are unable to provide for them. With that in mind, I see abortions as a necessary evil, but I vastly prefer for unwanted conceptions not to occur in the first place. And to the extent that it can do, I think society should encourage and incentivise more responsible behaviour regarding sex, conception, and heck, life in general.

therock

  • ********
  • 8303
  • +35/-64
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #24 on: January 21, 2018, 12:21:11 PM »
Same question I ask before. Think I got the answer

Was just responding to your comment about courts

Either way seem like this would cause issues

if a woman can just say "Your the father, the child born but you have no rights"

Sure it going to be some trouble from that

Assuming Sweden has the same paternity laws as the US, she can choose not to have the father in her kid's life, sure.  That happens all the time.

This situation is the opposite in which the father chooses to not be in the child's life if the mother decides to keep the kid.

But the thing is that doesnt actully happen all the time.  Once the kid born, the father have parternity rights even if the mother doesnt like him. They have to do somethign to show their unfit to be a parent. They cant just ice the father out.  That simply not how current parental laws work. They have equal rights to the kid as the mother. 


This would be new. Since now they have Zero rights to the kid if the mother dont want him.

That's not new at all.  It's very common but that's a different topic.


It kind of on topic. Least now it tends to become a decesion of a court. And the father got every right to fight for custody. May not win but he can fight it. Do the court favor the mother, sure. But doesnt mean they always getting sole custody. This law would make it 100 percent all the time with no recourse to fight it. So not its not that common...for a mother to not let the kid see the father for no good reason and the courts to let that shit slide. Father just got to fight for it. I dont know what cases your talking about where you think they would have no recourse to fight it. Since unless the parent is a real fuck up, courts like the parents to both have some part of the kids lives. Now they may have to prove they the father first. Now in a lot of states the mother when they are unmarried consider automatic primary child custody, if the father name not on the birth cetificate.  But again the father can fight for custody, it not a done deal. If their name on it, its equal. Now if they wanted things to be equal. They change THAT part of the law. Where it automaticly equal birth certificate or no birth certifcate. Where the father wouldnt have to fight for it.  Right now you go to go to court...but least you can go to court


like this law make it automatic..with no chance to fight it in court.

See I think the law was them saying women got an unfair advantage. And want men to have power. But in practice in certain cases it would give men less power then they have now, if the man in fact wants to be in the kids life. Since you now have zero recourse to fight the decesion. It only benifits guys who dont want to be in thier kids life.. Its an unitended consquence

« Last Edit: January 21, 2018, 12:29:12 PM by therock »

AP

  • ********
  • 16509
  • +80/-52
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #25 on: January 21, 2018, 12:59:39 PM »
Same question I ask before. Think I got the answer

Was just responding to your comment about courts

Either way seem like this would cause issues

if a woman can just say "Your the father, the child born but you have no rights"

Sure it going to be some trouble from that

Assuming Sweden has the same paternity laws as the US, she can choose not to have the father in her kid's life, sure.  That happens all the time.

This situation is the opposite in which the father chooses to not be in the child's life if the mother decides to keep the kid.

But the thing is that doesnt actully happen all the time.  Once the kid born, the father have parternity rights even if the mother doesnt like him. They have to do somethign to show their unfit to be a parent. They cant just ice the father out.  That simply not how current parental laws work. They have equal rights to the kid as the mother. 


This would be new. Since now they have Zero rights to the kid if the mother dont want him.

That's not new at all.  It's very common but that's a different topic.


It kind of on topic. Least now it tends to become a decesion of a court. And the father got every right to fight for custody. May not win but he can fight it. Do the court favor the mother, sure. But doesnt mean they always getting sole custody. This law would make it 100 percent all the time with no recourse to fight it. So not its not that common...for a mother to not let the kid see the father for no good reason and the courts to let that shit slide. Father just got to fight for it. I dont know what cases your talking about where you think they would have no recourse to fight it. Since unless the parent is a real fuck up, courts like the parents to both have some part of the kids lives. Now they may have to prove they the father first. Now in a lot of states the mother when they are unmarried consider automatic primary child custody, if the father name not on the birth cetificate.  But again the father can fight for custody, it not a done deal. If their name on it, its equal. Now if they wanted things to be equal. They change THAT part of the law. Where it automaticly equal birth certificate or no birth certifcate. Where the father wouldnt have to fight for it.  Right now you go to go to court...but least you can go to court


like this law make it automatic..with no chance to fight it in court.

See I think the law was them saying women got an unfair advantage. And want men to have power. But in practice in certain cases it would give men less power then they have now, if the man in fact wants to be in the kids life. Since you now have zero recourse to fight the decesion. It only benifits guys who dont want to be in thier kids life.. Its an unitended consquence

No, you really have it all wrong.

therock

  • ********
  • 8303
  • +35/-64
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #26 on: January 21, 2018, 01:08:16 PM »
How under this law

if the kids born, will the mother not be able to give the father no rights to the kids..with zero ability to take her court and fight

MTL76

  • ********
  • 9849
  • +1118/-13
  • "What if I know all your secrets, Your Eminence?"
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #27 on: January 21, 2018, 01:51:36 PM »
This policy seems like an overreaction to the fucked up Family Court system.

Opting out of your kid’s life is a massively immoral thing to do. Yet men are routinely removed by the government from the decision-making process in families, so it’s no surprise some men will push for this.

I agree with Shuruku that everything should be split down the middle: custody, child support, etc. The current system, in which men almost never get equal custody, yet pay what can be crushing amounts of child support, is not working and leads to overreactions like this and MGTOW.


Minority Shareholder, Combine Honnete Ober Advancer Mercantiles (CHOAM)

The Create A Team / Power Set Combo Compendium

Mightily Oats

  • *******
  • 6100
  • +76/-578
  • Master of Fagnetism
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #28 on: January 21, 2018, 02:00:43 PM »
My cousin got knocked up in high school, and the guy who did it opted out of being a part of the kid's life and she let him

Never had to go to court or whatever. Just something they talked about and agreed to.

But I am pretty sure it is 100% he isn't even allowed to see their daughter, even if I am also pretty sure that every now and again, if circumstances work out (they live 700km apart) that she'll let him see her

But he doesn't pay anything and is otherwise not involved at all in the kid's life

AP

  • ********
  • 16509
  • +80/-52
    • View Profile
Re: Male Abortion
« Reply #29 on: January 21, 2018, 05:00:31 PM »
This policy seems like an overreaction to the fucked up Family Court system.

Opting out of your kid’s life is a massively immoral thing to do. Yet men are routinely removed by the government from the decision-making process in families, so it’s no surprise some men will push for this.

I agree with Shuruku that everything should be split down the middle: custody, child support, etc. The current system, in which men almost never get equal custody, yet pay what can be crushing amounts of child support, is not working and leads to overreactions like this and MGTOW.

For the most part, I agree with you and Shuruku.  I'm not a fan of abortion, but I know the reality of the situation.