Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    'One' choose to engage in sexual acts fully knowing the potential consequences
    So your solution is celibacy. Brilliant.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    So your solution is celibacy. Brilliant.
    Sterilisation or acceptance of the risk. Deal with it like every other adult man does.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    It is clearly the responsibility of both parents, especially since the woman will be financially at a disadvantage through having a child and therefore it is the mans responsibility to compensate for that, whether he likes it or not.

    It's best for society to have kids growing up with the financial support they need.
    Yes, 'clearly'. Since you're no longer engaging with my points whatsoever, I have to assume you have no rebuttal for them.

    If a woman would be at a financial disadvantage, that is a factor for her to take into consideration when deciding whether to keep the child. Her decision, her responsibility.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    Yes, 'clearly'. Since you're no longer engaging with my points whatsoever, I have to assume you have no rebuttal for them.

    If a woman would be at a financial disadvantage, that is a factor for her to take into consideration when deciding whether to keep the child. Her decision, her responsibility.
    That's not exactly fair when the man is in a position where he can go off and have as many kids as he wants whereas the women may never get the opportunity again and has to make huge sacrifices in her life in order to support the child.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    Sterilisation or acceptance of the risk. Deal with it like every other adult man does.
    News flash everyone: he's updated his options to 'celibacy, sterilisation or deal with it'. I guess that's problem solved!

    These arguments are a pro-lifer's gold mine.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    News flash everyone: he's updated his options to 'celibacy, sterilisation or deal with it'. I guess that's problem solved!

    These arguments are a pro-lifer's gold mine.
    No it's just taking responsibility for your mistakes and not allowing a child to suffer because "you don't want to pay". It's immoral and immature.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    News flash everyone: he's updated his options to 'celibacy, sterilisation or deal with it'. I guess that's problem solved!

    These arguments are a pro-lifer's gold mine.
    And it is problem solved as that's what the law states. I don't see it changing any time soon.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    That's not exactly fair when the man is in a position where he can go off and have as many kids as he wants whereas the women may never get the opportunity again and has to make huge sacrifices in her life in order to support the child.
    Is it fair that a guy should have to shell out about £80k simply because someone he had sex with wants a child really, really badly?

    I think it's entirely fair that women should bear the consequences of their decisions. Fairness does not mean always getting what you want.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    And it is problem solved as that's what the law states. I don't see it changing any time soon.
    I'm aware of what the law states, I'm simply saying it's absurd.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    A lot of women don't want the child or the abortion or adoption. Just the pros/cons of each decision lead her to effectively make a forced decision (as she didn't want to have to make any choice ie contraceptve)
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    Is it fair that a guy should have to shell out about £80k simply because someone he had sex with wants a child really, really badly?

    I think it's entirely fair that women should bear the consequences of their decisions. Fairness does not mean always getting what you want.
    Child support is income dependent so yes it is fair.

    Fairness means compensating for the fact women got the ****ty end of the deal biology wise and have far more limited options when it comes to choosing when and where to have kids.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    If I got pregnant now. I'd have a baby. Not because I want one (I really don't and neither does my partner), but the consequences and emotional effects of an abortion would be harder to bare than having an unwanted child. My partner knows this, accepts this, and knows he'd have a child if an accident happened.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    Child support is income dependent so yes it is fair.

    Fairness means compensating for the fact women got the ****ty end of the deal biology wise and have far more limited options when it comes to choosing when and where to have kids.
    They can bloody well have kids, just don't drag an unwilling sperm donor into it!
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    They can bloody well have kids, just don't drag an unwilling sperm donor into it!
    They were willing as soon as they had sex and ****ed up
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    So your solution is celibacy. Brilliant.
    Every action in life has various outcomes that could occur. One of the potential outcomes from sex is a baby. The only way to avoid this outcome is not to have sex. You cannot have everything - you can't do things and then ignore the consequences. Nobody is saying you should never have sex, only that if you choose to, you have to do so under the assumption that you MAY end up with a baby.

    Ultimately, reproduction is what sex is for. If you choose to do it for pleasure that's up to you. But it would be selfish to then not accept the consequences when everyone knows that it is the biological and historical aim of sex to have babies.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    They were willing as soon as they had sex and ****ed up
    If the law stated that women had no right to abortion, would you be happy to accept that women take on the risk to carry a child to full term whenever they have sex?

    Don't you realise how ridiculous this argument sounds?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xoxAngel_Kxox)
    Every action in life has various outcomes that could occur. One of the potential outcomes from sex is a baby. The only way to avoid this outcome is not to have sex. You cannot have everything - you can't do things and then ignore the consequences. Nobody is saying you should never have sex, only that if you choose to, you have to do so under the assumption that you MAY end up with a baby.

    Ultimately, reproduction is what sex is for. If you choose to do it for pleasure that's up to you. But it would be selfish to then not accept the consequences when everyone knows that it is the biological and historical aim of sex to have babies.
    See above.

    Accepting a baby might come of sex and accepting the financial burden of that baby are two separate things. Women can choose whether or not to keep the baby; I do not see why men should not have the choice whether to have anything to do with it.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    If the law stated that women had no right to abortion, would you be happy to accept that women take on the risk to carry a child to full term whenever they have sex?

    Don't you realise how ridiculous this argument sounds?
    Women do have the choice and that's right as that is exorcising body autonomy and a physical/hormonal change to their body-whether she chooses to have the baby or not.What you're wanting is the choice to be absconded from financial burden because "you don't want to pay". There's no physical hardship you go through.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    They can bloody well have kids, just don't drag an unwilling sperm donor into it!
    Not if they can't afford it they can't according to you.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    Women do have the choice and that's right as that is exorcising body autonomy and a physical/hormonal change to their body-whether she chooses to have the baby or not.What you're wanting is the choice to be absconded from financial burden because "you don't want to pay". There's no physical hardship you go through.
    Right, so it is legitimate to stop a baby being born because you don't want the physical hardship, but it isn't legitimate to refuse to give that baby money on the basis that you don't want the financial hardship?

    What's the logic here?
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.