Suit Cites Men's Version of Roe v. Wade

NewsMax ^ | 3/8/06

[JamesP81]

There's nothing equivalent for men

So men and women really are different? Imagine that...

[NapkinUser]

Radical feminazis want to have their cake and eat it too.

[Kenton]

"None of these are easy questions," said Gandy, a former prosecutor. "But most courts say it's not about what he did or didn't do or what she did or didn't do. It's about the rights of the child."

Of course, unless the woman decides that the child has no right to live. Then it's all about the little lady...

[Blueflag]

This thread will get ugly fast, but I'll opt in for a bit anyway.

This is the only arena I can think of where one party can 'choose' to obligate another party to a lifelong contract.

Now, bear in mind I do not support abortion on demand. And I think the choice (moral and civil) is to let life continue.

BUT ... if our secular society says it really is just about choice, then it is legally unsound in contract law to permit one party to 'choose' to obligate another party. That is a direct denial of due process and a violation of equal protection under the law. No person has the right to choose a contractual obligation for another.

Remember, I do not support abortion on demand, and I believe the right choice is to let life keep living, and have parentS be responsible for a child.

[sean327]

"Roe is based on an extreme intrusion by the government - literally to force a woman to continue a pregnancy she doesn't want," Brown said. "There's nothing equivalent for men. They have the same ability as women to use contraception, to get sterilized."

This entire statement could be the basis to kill Roe Vs Wade. This idiot just gave us the ammo! If men have the same ability as women to use contraception, or get sterilized, then there is no excuse for "unwanted preganancies"!!! I f you didn't use contraception or sterilize yourself, your an idiot, and that doesn't give you the right to kill another human being!!!

[Chiapet]

He contends that the woman knew he didn't want to have a child with her and assured him repeatedly that - because of a physical condition - she could not get pregnant.

And he just took her word for that? What a dumbass.

[trimom]

"But most courts say it's not about what he did or didn't do or what she did or didn't do. It's about the rights of the child."

The rights of the child? NOW mentioning the rights of the child? This woman ought to be afraid of a lightning bolt, I tell you! Geez, this outfit doesn't think the child even has a right to be BORN, for crying out loud!

[TAdams8591]

"The gist of the argument: If a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood. The activists involved hope to spark discussion even if they lose. "

It was clear the above was coming. It completes what the feminists began, reproductively speaking. Funny how these men have no idea how much they're helping the feminist vision for America....or maybe they do.

"There's such a spectrum of choice that women have - it's her body, her pregnancy and she has the ultimate right to make decisions," said Mel Feit, director of the men's center. "I'm trying to find a way for a man also to have some say over decisions that affect his life profoundly."

For the above, I offer the same advice I've offered to pro-abortionists. Keep your pants zippered.

[t2buckeye]

It's about the rights of the child."

My thoughts exactly. I almost fell off my chair when I read that! Talk about absurd arguments! If it were not so tragic, it would be funny!

[P-40]

The gist of the argument: If a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood.


That is an interesting argument...

[Keith in Iowa]

>>>There's nothing equivalent for men. They have the same ability as women to use contraception, to get sterilized."

What about a man keeping his thing in his pants? A 100% effective way for a man to make sure he is not paying for a kid he doesn't want.

[INSENSITIVE GUY]

Men have a point on all issues legal between a man and woman.There is Absolutely NO equality for men under our joke of a justice system!I think both sides need to use a different term other than "reproductive rights" because neither is reproducing anything when it comes to abortion.

[shekkian]

If a pregnant woman can choose among abortion, adoption or raising a child, a man involved in an unintended pregnancy should have the choice of declining the financial responsibilities of fatherhood.

What a stupid argument. It's just a cop-out for guys who can't control themselves.

[Woodstock]

....computer programmer ordered to pay child support for his ex-girlfriend's daughter.

Notice how the author biases the article by leaving out the fact that this child is also the programmers daughter.

[areafiftyone]

It is an interesting argument.

[linda_22003]

Remember, he could only think with one head at a time. ;)

[cvq3842]

My understanding is that even here a man is NOT the biological father but has assumed those obligations he has been held financially responsible for the child. And of course the legal presumption is that a husband is the biological father of the wife's child.

All of this has the purpose of doing everything possible to make sure a child has a father as breadwinner to support him or her.

I don't know the rules regarding forcing mothers to pay child support. I would imagine that very different (would some call them "non-feminist" assumptions?) assumptions underlie differing rules for women and men.

And of course we all hear about deadbeat dads.

This could indeed get ugly fast. I have posted many times this week on abortion. But I know what you mean - there's always the law of unintended consequences. I doubt this is what supporters of abortion on demand have in mind when they speak of "choice."

[MrEdd]

Goose, meet Gander.

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

It is an interesting concept Men's rights. I do think that the State must protect the child first and foremost. I
One point, if a woman tricks a man into impregnating her, fraudulently claiming she is on the pill, and the man relies on that, he could argue that paying her child support would perpetuate a fraud. However, if the state is paying welfare or food stamps for that child, then it is the state (taxpayers vs. the father)?