[an error occurred while processing this directive]
About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadPage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Forward one pageLast Page


Post 0

Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 10:39pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
It's about damn time...women get to decide if they have a child or not, but men get no choice on whether or not they should support said progeny...personally, I think that you're a shitbag if you don't, but men should have the same choice women do.



Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Post 1

Thursday, March 9, 2006 - 10:48pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
When I first saw this, I thought, wait a minute, this sounds like another deadbeat dad trying to evade parental responsibility. But after reading the article and thinking about it, I realized that this could well be a case of fraud, if what he says is true. He alleges that the woman told him she was using protection. If she lied about it just so she could have a child, is he responsible for supporting that child? No, because he didn't consent to it. But what if she simply forgot to take her birth control pills? In that event, she should properly have gotten an abortion, unless of course she was morally opposed to it, in which case, she cannot demand that her partner assume responsibility for raising the child. The child then becomes her responsibility.

So this case really hinges on the father's being able to prove that the woman mislead him, and that he was not a willing partner in the child's conception and birth. If he can do that, then I don't think he should be liable for child support. But it may be a difficult thing to prove, and if he is unable to prove it, then he becomes liable by default. That's why a man should be careful whom he has sex with. If he doesn't know his partner well enough to trust her, he could be saddled with a kid for the next 18 years.

- Bill



Sanction: 2, No Sanction: 0
Post 2

Friday, March 10, 2006 - 5:14amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I have said for a long time that I support choice for men.  I still do.  I hope this man wins his case and sets a precedent.  If women can choose to abort or adopt, so should men.



Post 3

Friday, March 10, 2006 - 6:11amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
To all the young bucks out there...get a vascectomy. It is the only way to take complete control over your destiny in the context of fatherhood and family. Condoms break, or as in one case, are retrieved from the wastebin and the er contents harvested (I know... ick). And leaving the birth control up to the woman is crazy. Eighteen years is a long time to have to pay up to 1/2 your income for support children you never consented to have.

Have the vascectomy, then if and when *you* are ready, you can make the decision to conceive (the medical technology is there for reversal or harvesting and insemination).


John



Post 4

Friday, March 10, 2006 - 6:40amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
John Newnham wrote:

To all the young bucks out there ... get a vascectomy.

Get a sperm count every six months after the operation as well.  Sometimes the tubes heal back together and restore fertility.  I know someone who became a father unexpectedly because of that.  Fortunately, he and his wife were newlyweds who loved children, though it was the second marriage for both of them and they thought their parenting days had passed, so it all worked fine for them.

In another story, a friend of a coworker faced a paternity suit in court.  The man in question made good money and she clearly wanted a piece of that action.  When the trial came, the man offered as evidence against his paternity the medical records documenting his vasectomy long prior to the alleged impregnation along with his most recent sperm count of zero.  The woman's jaw dropped, her face turned pale and her eyes grew wide and round in shock.  She had no idea he would do that.  Two weeks later, she married the real father of her baby.  Ah, sweet justice!

Finally, we can say the same for women who have tubal ligations.  I have a relative on my wife's side of the family who had her tubes tied after her second birth.  The operation evidently failed as she became pregnant with her third daughter.  When she saw the doctor on the city bus, she cornered him and read him the riot act.  This took place in the Republic of Panama so you can imagine a passionate Latina doing this.  This unexpected birth put additional strain on her marriage and they eventually divorced.




Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 5

Friday, March 10, 2006 - 7:17amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
 this sounds like another deadbeat dad trying to evade parental responsibility
The peril of putting ones brain on autopilot. 
 
As as aside, Deadbeat Dad is a wicked, pejorative phase, that presumes guilt; a bromide that is not worth repeating.
 




Post 6

Friday, March 10, 2006 - 7:54amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Robert Davison wrote:

Deadbeat Dad is a wicked, pejorative phase, that presumes guilt; a bromide that is not worth repeating.

Don't forget its counterpart, the Walkaway Wife.




Post 7

Friday, March 10, 2006 - 8:33amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Deadbeat Dad is a wicked, pejorative phase, that presumes guilt; a bromide that is not worth repeating.
He says, as he repeats it. ;-) Seriously, these guys exist. The number of "illegitimate" births and single parent households has exploded since the 1960's, especially in the African-American community, but also among whites as well, due to the pernicious effects of government welfare programs and a breakdown in moral responsibility. "Young bucks" screw around and then cut and run when a kid is on the way. And who are the victims? The children, of course, many of whom wind up joining gangs and running wild, because there is no father present to provide discipline and guidance. And they, in turn, repeat the vicious cycle. Is this news to anyone? After fathering a child, now one-year old, my neighbor found someone he liked better and told his wife to take the baby and leave. Of course, he will presumably be paying child support, but is that any substitute for being a part of his child's life? Objectivism doesn't address these issues directly, but they're a real problem, as the family structure is decaying all around us.

- Bill



Post 8

Friday, March 10, 2006 - 8:45amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The assumption is that it is an epidemic, when, in fact, the reverse is true - noncustodial *mothers* fail to pay child support in greater numbers than do noncustodial fathers.


"Census figures show only 57 percent of moms required to pay child support -- 385,000 women out of a total of 674,000 -- give up some or all of the money they owe. That leaves some 289,000 "deadbeat" mothers out there, a fact that has barely been reported in the media.

That compares with 68 percent of dads who pay up, according to the figures."


from a news story here:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,59963,00.html






Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 9

Friday, March 10, 2006 - 10:12amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
>That leaves some 289,000 "deadbeat" mothers out there, a fact that has barely been reported in the media.

I think it is barely reported in comparison to men because there are ten times that number of men who do not pay child support, and that is much more sensational reporting, along with stories about women who can't feed their children because they aren't getting support. I don't know that a story about a man who can't feed his kids without his wife's child support would arouse much sympathy...people would probably think it was pathetic. I guess this is the other side of the coin as far as gender stereotyping goes.

I agree with John's sentiment about men taking some responsibility for birth control. Trusting a woman you don't know well when she tells you she is protected is silly, just as silly as trusting someone you don't know if they tell you they are disease free. I don't believe that consenting to sex is the same as consenting to support a child that may result from it, especially when there is an assurance that contraception is being used.

And men, here are some things to consider when a woman tells you she is "protected": When I was on the pill, I needed to remember to take it (around the same time) every day. This proved quite difficult for me, even though I absolutely did not want to be pregnant. When I traveled I didn't always remember to pack pills, I had difficulty taking them at an appointed time because I was often in other time zones, or waking and sleeping at odd times, or on a plane when the time came. I often failed to take a pill if I went out at night, either because I came home comfortably numb and went to bed without remembering, (or occasionally ejected the contents of my stomach which may or may not have included my pill.) I tried switching to mornings but am very bad at waking up in the morning and forgot it all the time (and yes, I also forget to eat breakfast). I switched to the nuvaring, which you just put in and then forget about it for a month. Much better for me, and yet I still managed to screw it up. Like not remembering what day it went in, and then not knowing if it had ceased to be effective and needed to be replaced. Like going on a trip and forgetting to bring a new one along - easy since it's not an "every day" thing. Like taking it out during especially athletic sex and forgetting all about it. Also remember that pills/rings cost $50-60 per month, which may be an issue for some (especially young) women and affect their reliable use of the product.

Was I out to get anyone? Of course not, I don't want any kids and I don't want to be pregnant. I do have a very difficult time being responsible with contraception. And lots of other things. I am bad at taking any medication. I don't change my contacts every 14 days. Sometimes I pass out at night without brushing my teeth or even getting into bed. Please don't leave the responsibility for contraception in my hands, or anyone's - because most girls aren't going to tell you they are this sloppy about it. They will just say "yeah, I'm on the pill." Although these products are very reliable (although not 100%) with PERFECT USE, almost no one uses them perfectly, so your risk is higher.

While I don't think men should be forced to take responsibility for children they never wanted, I do think they should take more initiative in ensuring that a pregnancy will not occur. In even casual encounters, I find that most men prefer not to wear a condom. I suppose I can understand that from a pleasure point of view, but the risks are simply not worth it.

Fortunately my birth control stress is gone for now. I totally recommend same-sex relations, unless you are willing to go permanent sterilization :-)



Post 10

Friday, March 10, 2006 - 10:34amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Fortunately my birth control stress is gone for now. I totally recommend same-sex relations, unless you are willing to go permanent sterilization :-)
Yeah, and I recommend sex with sheep for the same reason. Problem is: You want sex with the object of your interest, which may not be sheep or same-sex partners.

- Bill



Post 11

Friday, March 10, 2006 - 10:57amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Wow, the only other person I've heard mention bestiality in the same sentence as homosexuality is Rick Santorum.

It was only a joke, Bill. I mentioned the two foolproof ways to ensure noone will get pregnant because I *know* neither is of interest to most people. I will try to use a smiley face when I am joking. Oh, I did.



Post 12

Friday, March 10, 2006 - 10:57amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Objectivism doesn't address these issues directly
 If by directly you mean that we are not petitioning the gov't for remedy, you are correct.
 
Objectivism certainly addresses these issues and offers the only solution in my opinion.  To make a long story short, ethics matter.
 
 
 




Post 13

Friday, March 10, 2006 - 2:22pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"To all the young bucks out there...get a vascectomy."

Sage advice, but easier said than done. Very few urologists will perform a vasectomy on someone who's not over a certain age, married and who's already bred a couple times. If you're under 25 and childless, good luck finding someone willing to perform one.




Post 14

Friday, March 10, 2006 - 2:36pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Aaron wrote:

Sage advice, but easier said than done. Very few urologists will perform a vasectomy on someone who's not over a certain age, married and who's already bred a couple times. If you're under 25 and childless, good luck finding someone willing to perform one.

Is this based on a personal search, young buck, or on empirical studies?  In any case, I am not terribly surprised.  They will not do it for married men without the written consent of their wives, either.  As far as I know, a woman can get an abortion without permission of her husband, however.  Does this strike anyone else as a double standard?




Post 15

Friday, March 10, 2006 - 9:09pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I'm not aware of empirical studies on the matter, so it is anecdotal evidence. As for the possibility of a double-standard, I'd be surprised if childless young women didn't have a similarly difficult time finding someone to perform a tubal ligation.




Post 16

Saturday, March 11, 2006 - 5:12amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
If you're under 25 and childless, good luck finding someone willing to perform one.
Ya, it's too tough, forget it.




Post 17

Saturday, March 11, 2006 - 8:30amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
A Google search on "vasectomy+age" yielded this site:

http://www.askmen.com/love/dzimmer/44_love_answers.html

It says, in part:

Common sense suggests, "Older is wiser." Men under the age of 25 can come to regret the decision made too early in their lives. And regardless of the man's age, if the female partner is under the age of 25, couples may later become dissatisfied with the choice.

So, in the meantime, men should use condoms and women should use something -- the pill, the sponge or whatever.

Speaking of the sponge, those who want to use it but cannot locate it at their local pharmacy can buy it online at

http://birthcontrol.com/




Post 18

Saturday, March 11, 2006 - 11:50amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
*laugh* I liked the image of a Hugh Hefner getting turned down for a vasectomy because of having a female partner under 25.




Post 19

Saturday, March 11, 2006 - 2:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ashley wrote,
Wow, the only other person I've heard mention bestiality in the same sentence as homosexuality is Rick Santorum.
Geez! So, now I'm a homophobe. Okay, whatever. Btw, if people who are cordial practice cordiality, what do people who are the best practice? Don't answer! And what's wrong with bigamy, anyway? If I'm into bigamy, isn't that bigamy (big-a-me)? And if best is the superlative of good (good, better, best), then what is the superlative of big? Let's see...big, bigger, bigamist! So if you're going to be big, then why not be the bigamist of all! "The bigamist of all" -- now that's really being inclusive.
It was only a joke, Bill. I mentioned the two foolproof ways to ensure noone will get pregnant because I *know* neither is of interest to most people. I will try to use a smiley face when I am joking. Oh, I did.
Sorry, I didn't pick up on the joke, but smiley faces don't necessarily imply sarcasm; they are just as often used to soften the expression, rather than to indicate that the writer is being facetious. A better emoticon (if that's the right word) to indicate a joke would be a "g" or the word "gag" in brackets.

- Bill



Post to this threadPage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Forward one pageLast Page
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]