Posted on 03/19/2012 12:49:51 PM PDT by Morgana
I think this madness will only stop when the argument gets turned around in the opposite direction.
Some athlete or rich famous person will get a woman pregnant, that HAS the child. He will then sue based on the fact that it is entirely her body and entirely her decision, and therefore nothing to do with him. When this case is won, it will unfortunately let a lot of deadbeat dads off the hook - for a while.
I am betting that when the average sheeple finds out they will have to pay for kids these irresponsible dads are leaving all over the place, they may decide they do have an interest in this “my body, my decision” madness.
Because, the argument goes, they have a financial interest in the decision.
A moral, pro-life society equally rejects both of these sick arguments. A sick, depraved society tries to reconcile the two.
Even in the days of the absolute monarch and tyrant Henry VIII where close to 70,000 English citizens (out of a population of 2.5 million) were executed over mostly petty crimes, a woman was allowed to "plead her belly" or delay her execution until the child was born. The social depravity which allowed Henry VIII to reign supreme had, at least, enough conscience to recognize a reality which modern society refuses to recognize.
I sure he divorced her sorry butt and sued for custody of the other kids. God knows she’s capable of murdering the others as well.
I believe that this reasoning has already been rejected by the courts. The man has no say in the death and can still be made to pay for the kid. After birth is both parents responsibility tto the child. So guys are screwed.
That's why I said it would have to be someone rich. This would have to get to the Supreme Court for sanity to prevail.
Stop and thing about it for a second. Some rich guy has a 23 year old kid that is running with a bad crowd. He wants to stop it, but the law says, “sorry, he's over 21 so you have no rights.”
Later the kid and his friends commit a robbery and people are hurt. Since the kid has no money, one of the victims sues the rich parents. Of course it is going to be thrown out because a basic foundation principal of our system of laws has always been: if you have no rights, you have no responsibility. Can you imagine the chaos if this were not true? Sell a house and you are responsible for what the next owner does with it?
Yet that is EXACTLY what the convoluted reasoning that has been applied to abortion enforces. And I still say, get it to the highest court and they will have no choice but to overturn it.
I'm living in the 10th largest city in the country where we have nine family courts that spend 90% of their time on child support cases. Multiply that times every city in America and you will have some idea of the magnitude. And if you think we pay a lot now for the little bastards irresponsible fools leave all over the country, just shut down those courts and see what we pay. Even if the scumbag is only paying 40% of his kids upkeep (we pay the rest through welfare) at least he is paying something.
It sickens me that people believe “Freedom” means they can do anything they wish and damn the consequences; that there is no price to be paid for behavior.
I guess the Judge forgot about the rights of the child still inside her.
Even if he stayed married to her, the kids will most likely find out.
I’ve talked with a woman whose mother “shared” that her younger sibling was aborted because “she” was such a difficult birth.
She hasn’t spoken to her mother since that “sharing”.
“... whose mother shared that her younger sibling was aborted because “she” was such a difficult birth”.
Your post saddened me so much. It sounds like the “mom” told her daughter this info to blame her. She was the difficult birth so she was responsible for her baby brother or sister’s death. IMHO... the daughter is better off removing herself from her Mom.
“... whose mother shared that her younger sibling was aborted because “she” was such a difficult birth”.
Your post saddened me so much. It sounds like the “mom” told her daughter this info to blame her. She was the difficult birth so she was responsible for her baby brother or sister’s death. IMHO... the daughter is better off removing herself from her Mom.
I have wondered why a woman has a right to kill a person with a different DNA as hers...it is a totally seperate person..she is not allowed by law to kill her other children with diffent DNA as she had, she would go to prison for such an act....don’t want babies keep your knees together...I feel sorrow for the father that has no say in the matter...If I were male and my wife did such a thing, I would not be able to look at her with love anymore...
Abortion effects all of us....when I was a teen a girlfriend of mine had an abortion. (I didn't know about it until my 15th class reunion). As I see my kids growing up, I thought about my 'child' and what he would be today. (He would be about 30 now).
Margaret Sanger: “The kindest thing that a large family can do for its youngest member is to kill it.”
Margaret, I wish you were aborted because you were sick with that statement. how many aborted kids could have discovered a cure for cancer or cold fussion or warp speed? Think about the MILLIONS of kids aborted in the USA since Roe v Wade... and think of if 1% of them could have excelled at science or economics. What could have been..
So with an article about a father wanting to protect the life of his child, both of you opt to ignore that and bash fathers instead.
That illustrates the problem: dads are demonized by default, exactly as both of you did.
I would not even be able to look at my wife. However, during her vetting process (I think they call it “dating”) I verified that I would never have this type of problem with my wife.
And to this day, I have not. And will not.
This discussion was that the law is basically inconsistent and flawed. A man has no rights to have any say in whether or not a woman has an abortion, yet if she chooses not to, then he is liable.
It is the same as if you sold a car to some kid down the street. He now races up and down the street in it - something you are powerless to do anything about, because it is “his car, his choice.” Yet when he smashes into something, you are told you will have to pay half of the damages.
The concept that men have no rights, yet magically have responsibilities nine months later, is ludicrous. No one has ever taken it all the way to the Supreme Court, and lower courts just look the other way.
Abortion stays ‘legal’ because it doesn't affect most people, and they are willing to just sit on the sidelines. My only premise was some means to make these people get off their rear ends and take a stand.
And yes, the majority of dads are good. But there are plenty of guys out there that have no interest in their responsibilities and do their best to shirk them. I have a friend that spent most of his professional career running them down. And he was always very busy.
The big problem with my theory is that the femNazis are so crazy that if it came down to, "OK, there can be child support or there can be abortion - but not both" they'd probably chose abortion. After all, as St. Hillary said in the 90's, "it takes a village."
lol never heard of dating called the vetting process, but I like it..GG
agree with you 100% that type of mother is best left alone, some mothers deserve to be left alone and out of your life...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.