You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Alimony: His Wallet, No Choice
You are missing the point that it's unreasonable to grant a man a say in the choice to abort or not. How would you do that? How do you even know who is the father for sure until the baby can be DNA tested? What if some guy wrongly claims "oh yes, I fucked her and got her pregnant! I demand to keep the child!" Yes, dont you realiuze the flaw in your argument here? lol
If you do not want the man to have a saying about the woman's body, then apply that same logic and do not allow the woman to have a saying in the man's wallet.
I believe the real flaw is that even once it has been proven that the man indeed was not the father, he is still forced to pay alimony after having been deceived.
Furthermore, turn your own argument around: what is some woman wrongly claims "oh yes, we fucked and got pregnant! And he is the father!"
In some countries it is not even legal to find out whether he is the father or not, but more to the point, he will be financially enslaved for 18 years all the same.
This you call equality?
I don't agree that it is right that a man should have to pay when he's not even the father. There's always situational circumstances. Where I live men can get paternity tested.
Governments do that to mitigate the expense on them and society, it has nothing to do with women and them having the right to choose.
I dont think human rights has to be men vs. women., when it comes down to gender issues.
"Equality" can never exist IMO. As with situations like these...women can have babies, men can't, there's never going to be an equal footing comparison. It's very complicated.
I appreciate the discussion.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with you feeling that is unfair. I'm just saying you're not working with reality.
Your reality, perhaps.
And I do not feel that is unfair - I have easily demonstrated through reason why it is unfair, but I guess we are not speaking the same language here.
No worries, just let the man formally abort the child support if he wishes.
Let the woman decide what she wants to do with her baby, and the man decide what he wants to do with his money. Simple, if the woman wants the baby but the man does not, then he should not be financially responsble for anything to do with the baby.
If the woman doesn't want the baby and the man does, then too bad, he's out of luck - unless maybe the woman agrees to carry the baby to term and be paid for it by the man, and then once the baby's born she can give up her parental rights and responsibilities entirely to him, like a surrogate mother.
Who do you think it is that is forcing men to pay child support? It's the same oppressive Patriarchy ruling by force, in this case for the benefit of women and children. Elsewhere it used to control women for the benefit of men. You enthusiastically got rid of that part, but somehow feel entitled to still keep everything that the same evil Patriarchy afforded to women in terms of the child support, alimony, etc. Nice scam and scram tactics.