Fathers seize child agency office

Expatica ^ | 20 November 2003 | Novum Nieuws

[Pedantic_Lady]

Again, if I missed that part in Roe vs. Wade, please show me where it is. Concerning the law, yes, that often is how it is interpreted, unfortunately.

Show me where it doesn't say that. You're the one trying to tell me that Roe v Wade doesn't give women the right to abort their children.

But you asked me what gives me the right to have a say over the child in a woman's body. I responded with "the same thing that says I'm financially accountable." So it's quite simple. Either I'm responsible for the child, or I'm not. Pick one.

You're responsible for it after it has been born. That's what the law says. Whether you will actually be responsible is up to you.

And save your heartless drivel about "after the child is born" for Law & Order. I'm interested in fair, consistent legal interpretations - not to mention the well being of every child, not just the convenient ones.

I'm interested in what the law currently mandates. As things stand, you do not have the right to decide whether your partner carries a child to term or not. You are financially responsible for it as soon as it comes out of her body...as a conservative this shouldn't be difficult for you to understand, and I would assume that you would be married to the mother of your children. If I'm giving you too much credit, please let me know. If you're not married to the mother of your children and if you want visitation or joint custody, you are financially responsible for those children. Period. If you don't like the law, don't whine to me. Change it yourself.

[Pedantic_Lady]

Here's to rusty instruments on your next abortion of convenience.

You've assumed I've had an abortion. I haven't. I'm clever enough to avoid unwanted pregnancies, thank you very much. Must have been that non abstinence-based sex ed I had in school.

[Jonx6]

"That's" is accepted vernacular for "that is."

OK, is this directed to me? If so, why?

[Rebelbase]

I didn't assume. It was written that way on purpose.

[Pedantic_Lady]

You are so BUSTED.

I said "I never said that. Cut and paste where I said that and show it to me. Show me where I said exactly that. Otherwise, stop putting words in my mouth" in response to this from you:

"In other words it's ok to sue a man for child support but refuse him custody of the child in your view."

Now, you are claiming that the following exchange means that I said it's ok to sue a man for child support but refuse him custody of his child:

Coop said: As a parent, I have every right to ensure the life and safety of my child.

I said: Only after it has been born.

Coop said: So the woman can permanently deny the father custody by killing the child (excuse me, by exercising her "choice"), but you expect the man to fulfill his financial obligations if it's convenient for the woman.

Now...I don't know what language YOU'RE using...it resembles English, but it can't be the same English I speak.

[m1-lightning]

In other words it's ok to sue a man for child support but refuse him custody of the child in your view.

I never said that. Cut and paste where I said that and show it to me. Show me where I said exactly that.

Here:

What makes you think that you have the right to determine the future of a child growing in someone else's body?

They have to be partly responsible...it takes two, unless you believe that immaculate conception mumbo-jumbo

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Why berate the abortion issue, when child custody was the focus?

If you believe that the mother has sole custody of the child, while it is in her womb, then you shouldn't need to worry about abortion... apparently, your side is winning.

Or, was that your point?

[Coop]

You're the one trying to tell me that Roe v Wade doesn't give women the right to abort their children.

Nope, not what I said.

[Coop]

Your post is fairly nonsensical. 1) I didn't make the comment you applied to me. 2) My point (the blatant hypocrisy regarding responsibility) is quite clear - a point which you're having a great deal of trouble with, as do all pro-abortion "choosers."

[Coop]

Now...I don't know what language YOU'RE using...it resembles English, but it can't be the same English I speak.

That's true. I didn't say "sh*#," "f**%" or any other of your presumably preferred words in my post. My apologies.

[bikewench]

Joint... shared.... legal and physical.

Both parents have imput into decisions affecting the child... and both parents get to deal with the dirty laundry and unfinished school projects.

[m1-lightning]

Why berate the abortion issue, when child custody was the focus?

I brought it up because I feel it's sexist for women to be able to have 100% decision in the choice of killing their kid. If the father wants to keep the kid, the woman should not be allowed to kill it. Many women who get abortions don't want to take personal responsibility for their actions prior to pregnancy but certainly feel a man is responsible for child support if she keeps it. There is little fairness towards men on parental issues but yet the major sex based groups out there are women fighting for their rights. I simply do not understand this when it's the men who should be fighting for THEIR rights.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

I often wonder about the really young couples, who find that they are pregnant, outside of marriage, and are unprepared.

When they decide to abort, the mother of the child truly does feel the greatest brunt of the responsibility. But the father must feel something too. This decision will haunt them forever! And, without waxing poetic about forgiveness, I firmly believe both parents can be forgiven for the decision they made, by the Creator.

If only they could be stopped from making this decision in the first place!

[Coop]

Part of the problem is that some men are more than happy not to have to accept responsibility for their behavior, while others may want to accept responsibility but have been "beaten" into submission by the courts and media.

[m1-lightning]

Both parents have imput into decisions affecting the child... and both parents get to deal with the dirty laundry and unfinished school projects.

You mean they SHOULD have. Our current(since the 60's) liberal legal system corked with Senate fillabusters is setting the laws in the nation through judicial fiat. It's unconstitutional for the courts to make all of the laws and then tell Congress that they cannot have a say in it since the Constitution itself gives all powers to create law to the Congress. I have 4 Supreme Court Justices to back me up on that issue.

[bikewench]

LOL

I think a Parental Fitness Standard should be created and any who wish to bring another human life into this world should have to pass with flying colors.

[m1-lightning]

I know men feel it too. I almost fainted when I found out my girlfriend was pregnant 6 years ago. My knees felt weak, I felt panic, and didn't know what to do. I wasn't ready and neither was she. She was happy about it. I was not. I was still in the military at the time. It's rare that families survive in the military. It took me about a week for it to set in. I eventually got over it and looked at the bright side of things. We've been happily married since and have also had a second child. So now you can understand the fear from a man's point of view.

[m1-lightning]

Part of the problem is that some men are more than happy not to have to accept responsibility for their behavior

Every man should have to accept that responsiblity. As per Bill O'Reilly, personal responsibility in this nation is just an abstract thought.

[m1-lightning]

I think a Parental Fitness Standard should be created and any who wish to bring another human life into this world should have to pass with flying colors.

It's bad enough for judges to dictate how we raise our children. We don't need Congress doing it as well.

[bikewench]

Do you think men should have rights in abortion decisions of their children?

YES!

Women have the right to PREVENT conception. There is NO reason for a female to get pregnant nowadays short of rape.