Father's Rights? Men Want Right To Turn Down Fatherhood

[jman507]

masondoggy:

The thing that is very scary to me is that a lot of people AGREE with this guy. On another message board I participate in almost everybody is all for this. They’re more concerned about men getting “tricked” into fatherhood (as if they have a gun held to their head ) than the poor child that is a result.

The attitudes of people really scare me. I think it’s very likely with public opinion the way it is that it could end up being very common for father’s to get away with abandoning their children.

And the ones to pay the price for our selfishness are the children.

I don’t think that very many of us actually agree with it, but it really seems the logically fair conclusion of the current policy. Why should a person have no rights, but still has liability? But I assume most of us has the position, that abortion should not be legal, so when a woman becomes pregnant both parents have responsiblity of the child.

 

[estesbob]

The whole thing shows the absurdity of the Roe V wade decision. He is using the exact same arguments f used to argue for the right to an abortion. It is humorous to listen topro-aboprtionists now say he made his choice when he had sex-try using that argument to say a woman shouldnt have an abortion and see what they say.

I heard a spokewoman for a womans right organization this AM saying it all cane down to the rights of the child-I was hoping the interviewer would respond -“you mean the rights of those children fortunate enough to escape the womb”

 

[legeorge]

But I assume most of us has the position, that abortion should not be legal, so when a woman becomes pregnant both parents have responsiblity of the child.

EXACTLY

The whole thing shows the absurdity of the Roe V wade decision. He is using the exact same arguments f used to argue for the right to an abortion. It is humorous to listen topro-aboprtionists now say he made his choice when he had sex-try using that argument to say a woman shouldnt have an abortion and see what they say.

And that’s why this is going to be very interesting to watch. No matter what decision gets made in this particular suit, it is going to open a whole new can of worms. Perhaps it will lead to the implosion of the abortion argument. I will just collapse in on itself. I would love to see this happen. I can’t believe it has taken men 33 years to bring this whole issue up. I just wish it was a different case.

 

[Rob_s_Wife]

****I find myself absolutely thrilled with this lawsuit.

---

I am so sick of these women who don’t want to really take responsibilities, but rather take a paycheck from a man. Feminist rights my bum.

---

Yes, it’s true that we all have the option of “just say no”.

---

Yes, pregnancy is a consequence of sex.

---

**But currently the only 1 who HAS to live with the consequence is the father. The mother can get an abortion, adopt out, or CHOSE to be a mother. If this is about equality, then the father should get the same choices. If the mother doesn’t agree with him, then that’s fine - but he shouldn’t be forced to accept, and then pay for 18 years, her decision. **

---

Can we hear the feminist outrage if the situation was reversed and the father could do that to these mothers?! Yeah. How about the father’s deciding to keep the baby and the mother paying for 18 years whether she wanted to become a mother or not?

---

Bottom line, all these women really want from these men is a free check in the mail. Most would be horrified and resentfull if these men started comming by every other day to see the kid, wanting a say in daycare/schools, and insisting on equal time with these babies.

---

These women want to paint these men as horrible and juvenile. I think it’s stupid to have sex with such a man and then get ticked when he isn’t the father/paycheck they think he should be. Frankly, it doesn’t speak well of the character of the women either, imo.

---

**I don’t feel for this woman at all. It’s her body and she’s the only person who can be responsible for how she uses it. **

---

I do feel horrible for the kid though as it doesn’t appear she’s too lucky in either parents.

---

I think many men would be much better at accepting these situations if they weren’t treated as nothing but a paycheck. Hard to feel very loving about that.

 

[WhatMeWorry]

I’m tired of hearing both men and women whining about how they’re being victimized by the other party. The only “victim” in this whole thing is the child. The baby never has any “rights.”

 

[masondoggy]

WhatMeWorry:

I’m tired of hearing both men and women whining about how they’re being victimized by the other party. The only “victim” in this whole thing is the child. The baby never has any “rights.”

Exactly why this whole subject has my blood boiling. Our society is just so selfish and self-centered. It’s all about what’s fair for her and what’s fair for him. Well what about what’s fair for the poor child brutally being ripped out of it’s mommy’s womb because mommy wanted what’s “fair”?

And the real victims in all of this will be more children who’s Daddy’s walked away because now society decided that Daddy should get what’s “fair” just like mommy. And now the children have to pay the price for our ignorance.

 

[beckers]

WhatMeWorry:

I’m tired of hearing both men and women whining about how they’re being victimized by the other party. The only “victim” in this whole thing is the child. The baby never has any “rights.”

AMEN!!!

If you can’t take the responsibity and gift that might come with having sex then you shouldn’t have sex! It takes two to tango…

 

[Pug]

I don’t know if it is really related, but I’d at least like to see someone take a stab at it:

Women are allowed to give children up at police stations and places like that with no strings whatsoever. They hand over the baby and they have no economic responsibility. The child becomes a ward of the state, I presume. Why don’t men have the same card to play? (in a legal sense)

 

[TarAshly]

HAHA! according to NOW, children now have rights…what about their rights to be born, what a bunch of morons, the children dont have rights to life but you better believe mama has a right to that paycheck all in the name of the child’s rights. DUH!:whacky:

 

[TarAshly]

SO TRUE! Great post!

trustmc:

This is an issue in which the men are at once 100% right and 100% wrong. What I like about this case is that it calls attention to the double standard that feminists themselves have set up.

The feminists insist that abortion is necessary to level the playing field for women, giving them the choices that are unencumbered by child bearing and child rearing – same as men. However, by insisting on access to abortion, the message they send to women is that they shouldn’t have to own up to their responsibilities if they so choose – quite unlike what is expected of men.

When men father a child, he is expected to “own up like a man” and “step up to his responsibilities” no matter what the circumstances are, and at great sacrifice to his time, resources and energy, and even if a man has to put off social advancement in the form of seeking an education or moving to where a more lucrative job awaits. Abortion abrogates that expectation and duty for women, portraying them as a weaker sex, unable to own up or step up to their own responsibilities, especially for – though not limited to – women with few resources. Only a feminist would define this as “progress.”

In essence, what this lawsuit shows is that while men, who have no choice in the matter of an unplanned pregnancy, are expected to bear the consequences of their actions, women are not. They can choose to avoid motherhood and all the labor and expense attached to it even though men are held to a higher standard of responsibility. Men who do not are chided as “dead beat dads” whereas women who abort their children are lauded as bravely exercising their “right to choose.” These men are only seeking the same respect by society and a level playing field.

So men are 100% wrong in denying their responsibility to raise a child, but 100% right when their argument is grounded in the lie know as “reproductive choice.” Like Bishop Fulton Sheen said, anyone can logically rationalize their way to a lie when they begin with a lie.

I have yet to hear a feminist or any of the libs on this forum defend this anti-feminist double standard of their own design.

Mike

 

[coyote]

TarAshly:

HAHA! according to NOW, children now have rights…what about their rights to be born, what a bunch of morons, the children dont have rights to life but you better believe mama has a right to that paycheck all in the name of the child’s rights. DUH!:whacky:

The INTENTION of the “paycheck” is not as a bonus for the mother. It is to provide for the financial support of the child. How she decides to spend it IS NOT the fault of the child.

If men truly feel victimized by the mothers of their children, they need to petition the courts for enforcement of their rights as fathers–and then EXERCISE them. BE fathers.

I am appalled when people entering this argument actually expend more passion on behalf of the political ideals then on what is rightous for the children. The children are more than by-products of the immoral decisions of the parents. Once they exist, THEIR rights supercede any inconveniences the parents want to claim.

 

[TarAshly]

I think you missed my point…I was poking at NOW not mothers…

coyote:

The INTENTION of the “paycheck” is not as a bonus for the mother. It is to provide for the financial support of the child. How she decides to spend it IS NOT the fault of the child.

If men truly feel victimized by the mothers of their children, they need to petition the courts for enforcement of their rights as fathers–and then EXERCISE them. BE fathers.

I am appalled when people entering this argument actually expend more passion on behalf of the political ideals then on what is rightous for the children. The children are more than by-products of the immoral decisions of the parents. Once they exist, THEIR rights supercede any inconveniences the parents want to claim.

 

[AmyS]

****I find myself absolutely thrilled with this lawsuit.

---

I am so sick of these women who don’t want to really take responsibilities, but rather take a paycheck from a man. Feminist rights my bum.

---

Yes, it’s true that we all have the option of “just say no”.

---

Yes, pregnancy is a consequence of sex.

---

**But currently the only 1 who HAS to live with the consequence is the father. The mother can get an abortion, adopt out, or CHOSE to be a mother. If this is about equality, then the father should get the same choices. If the mother doesn’t agree with him, then that’s fine - but he shouldn’t be forced to accept, and then pay for 18 years, her decision. **

---

Can we hear the feminist outrage if the situation was reversed and the father could do that to these mothers?! Yeah. How about the father’s deciding to keep the baby and the mother paying for 18 years whether she wanted to become a mother or not?

---

Bottom line, all these women really want from these men is a free check in the mail. Most would be horrified and resentfull if these men started comming by every other day to see the kid, wanting a say in daycare/schools, and insisting on equal time with these babies.

---

These women want to paint these men as horrible and juvenile. I think it’s stupid to have sex with such a man and then get ticked when he isn’t the father/paycheck they think he should be. Frankly, it doesn’t speak well of the character of the women either, imo.

---

**I don’t feel for this woman at all. It’s her body and she’s the only person who can be responsible for how she uses it. **

---

I do feel horrible for the kid though as it doesn’t appear she’s too lucky in either parents.

---

I think many men would be much better at accepting these situations if they weren’t treated as nothing but a paycheck. Hard to feel very loving about that.

I agree. I guess I kind of look at this as the fact that men have no say so when the baby is concieved. It is all about the women and “her” body. Despite the fact that it is the child’s body that is ripped apart. Anyways, a women can get an aboriton and it is “her” choice. The man is not aloud to have a say in her abortion. Why should he be forced to pay when a baby is born…

When it comes down to it, in either situation… abortion or child support, the most important person is forgot about… the baby. Maybe this suit will bring some focus back to that MOST important person in all of this, that baby!

 

[jman507]

This can be a pretty good arguement to remind those who say that men should have no say in the abortion debate. Typically a person that has rights also has duties. A person with no rights have no duties. If a man should have no say in the abortion debate they should have no duties at stake.

 

[Vanny]

Abortion has poisoned all family relationships- between mother and child and between man and woman.
It’s now all about what the selfish adults want, and “my” rights, not about the new precious life created.
But this is what happens whne sex outside of marriage is tolerated and encouraged. Abortion and these lawsuits are just a rotten fruit of the sexual revolution.
Screwtape must be proud.

 

[Liberalsaved]

Vanny:

Abortion has poisoned all family relationships- between mother and child and between man and woman.
It’s now all about what the selfish adults want, and “my” rights, not about the new precious life created.
But this is what happens whne sex outside of marriage is tolerated and encouraged. Abortion and these lawsuits are just a rotten fruit of the sexual revolution.
Screwtape must be proud.

We probably shouldn’t ever change anything in the world. There’s a chance that some of the results could be negative.

 

[mjdonnelly]

Men already have this right.

It is called keeping your pants buttoned.

 

[Vanny]

Liberalsaved:

We probably shouldn’t ever change anything in the world. There’s a chance that some of the results could be negative.

Sorry, I’m not quite sure what you mean by this…
Here’s what I meant by what I said.
First- the sexual revolution convinced a large part of society that sex was good and right outside of marriage- sort of the free love movement back in the '60’s. With all that free love, unexpected and unwanted pregnancies were bound to happen, and babies were very unconvenient to non-committed couple- so abortion arose to take care of that.
That pitted a mother against her own child- and men against women.
Fathers did not have a say to stop a mother from aborting his own child, and the flip side of the coin, abortion on demand is a great thing for men who don’t want to commit to marriage/fatherhood.
The sexual revolution was predicated on the whole idea of sexual pleasure without consequences- which is not the way God designed men and women.
This is why I think all these aberrations are cropping up- such as men bringing this type of lawsuit, men killing pregnant wives, girlfriends and women dumping born children. I think it’s a natural extension of the unraveling of the family and sanctity of human life.

 

[BioCatholic]

Pug:

I don’t know if it is really related, but I’d at least like to see someone take a stab at it:

Women are allowed to give children up at police stations and places like that with no strings whatsoever. They hand over the baby and they have no economic responsibility. The child becomes a ward of the state, I presume. Why don’t men have the same card to play? (in a legal sense)

exactly. and i sure dont see ANY people up in arms about this. many of these children are bounced from foster care to foster care their entire childhood. i guess Legislators felt it was better to have a women drop a child off with Paramedics or police than to smother it or leave it for dead. we actually have had this happen quite a few times. we arent allowed to ask hardly ANY questions. if the child is kidnapped, then fingerpriting would most likely discover it, otherwise the child will never know its biological parents. its a pretty good policy if you ask me. in the end, the child isnt killed, and it is at least put in homes along the way. foster care(s) are better than being dead.

 

[chicago]

Are we a nation of self serving, radical libertarians or aren’t we? Some consistency, please!

This is the plea which this suit calls to attention. It would be nice to see the Supreme Court forced to answer it. Unfortunately, they’ll probably be coward enough to avoid that matter entirely, pretending that the question is foolish and does not matter.