|
Straight White Shark posted:Sure, and I buy this line of reasoning 100% in scenarios where a planned adoption falls through or something like that. But it seems ludicrous that without a man's permission a woman is allowed to sign an embryo away to an incinerator, but not to a stable and loving family. welcome to america
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 12:08 |
|
|
Mirthless posted:I am genuinely sorry for you, women everywhere, and all of our countrymen that you don't think abortion access was a relevant factor to consider in this story set in Texas that was relayed to us by a man very concerned with his parental rights in the face of an unwanted pregnancy Seriously dude, walk away from the computer right now. You're hosed up and getting angry over things that haven't been said. You need to chill. I'm worried for you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
ThePeavstenator posted:lol @ the idea that Texas just poofed into its current existence and no one voted for it I'm sorry but I really can't get behind the idea of punishing every woman in a state on the grounds that very marginally more than half of them voted for pro-choice candidates
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:I am genuinely sorry for you, women everywhere, and all of our countrymen that you don't think abortion access was a relevant factor to consider in this story set in Texas that was relayed to us by a man very concerned with his parental rights in the face of an unwanted pregnancy You are projecting. Your argument about what this woman thinks is entirely a work of fiction created from your imagination to justify what you want to be true, because it's what you already decided you believe. It is mythical, created from whole cloth. It is a delusion and it is coming out as an awkward word-salad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
ThePeavstenator posted:lol @ the idea that Texas just poofed into its current existence and no one voted for it Women can be against abortion in general, or can be pro choice but not want abortion for themselves, or they'd consider it an option for themselves but decide to give birth in the case of this specific pregnancy for whatever reason they like. Women can have a variety of views of the world and do not necessarily fit into a neat "pro woman" vs "pro birth" box.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
pidan posted:Yeah it's pretty weird how a bunch of dudes in this thread assume that every unintended pregnancy should end in abortion by default. Some women prefer the idea of adopting out vs abortion, for a variety of reasons and regardless of access. The sticky part here is it looks like if the dad is stubborn you're not legally entitled to adopt it out. Which feels a bit backwards to me. Straight White Shark posted:Sure, and I buy this line of reasoning 100% in scenarios where a planned adoption falls through or something like that. But it seems ludicrous that without a man's permission a woman is allowed to sign an embryo away to an incinerator, but not to a stable and loving family. basically this
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
I should point out here that babies are incredibly unwoke and, by passing through the vagina regardless of their mothers' consent, effectively all rapistsStraight White Shark posted:Sure, and I buy this line of reasoning 100% in scenarios where a planned adoption falls through or something like that. But it seems ludicrous that without a man's permission a woman is allowed to sign an embryo away to an incinerator, but not to a stable and loving family. the foster system is not a "stable and loving family", and it seems incredibly unlikely this particular woman had an adoptive family personally picked out and bailed at the last second. Per Mirthless, it's basically an auxiliary baby dumpster that leads to [who the gently caress cares] A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Jul 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
Straight White Shark posted:Sure, and I buy this line of reasoning 100% in scenarios where a planned adoption falls through or something like that. But it seems ludicrous that without a man's permission a woman is allowed to sign an embryo away to an incinerator, but not to a stable and loving family. While obviously a slippery slope, when does the man gain such right? Because earlier in this very thread a woman tried to adopt out her own children (ages 2-4 iirc) without her husbands consent and he was only able to get them back because the US does not allow unilateral adoption in cases where parentage is known.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
i feel like half of you are talking about legal rights, and half are talking about moral decision making, and each side assumes they're talking about the same thing personally i think it's tremendously lovely of that dude to garnish his ex's pay for child support he himself admits he doesn't need; dudes a fuckhead and legal provisions to prevent this (assessment of need for support maybe?) could definitely be good but it does seem to me that the father should get a chance to raise his child, IF the woman decides to carry to term. at that point he (a hypothetical father, not the lovely guy in this particular story) isn't infringing on her bodily autonomy, he's saying he wants to raise his child, which seems reasonable again, the guy in the story is a poo poo, and this situation is horrible, but I don't think men having no choice in whether they can raise their child who is already born is the solution
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:I'm sorry but I really can't get behind the idea of punishing every woman in a state on the grounds that very marginally more than half of them voted for pro-choice candidates it's not about punishment it's about maybe your fanfic about this woman wanting an abortion didn't happen, and maybe she made the decision to have the baby which seems to be heavily implied by the fact that she was with the father for the first trimester of the pregnancy e: pidan posted:Women can be against abortion in general, or can be pro choice but not want abortion for themselves, or they'd consider it an option for themselves but decide to give birth in the case of this specific pregnancy for whatever reason they like. Women can have a variety of views of the world and do not necessarily fit into a neat "pro woman" vs "pro birth" box. that's what I'm saying. idk why there's this assumption that since she's a woman automatically she must have wanted an abortion ThePeavstenator fucked around with this message at 17:45 on Jul 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:What do you think an abortion is other than a woman not wanting to deal with a kid? An abortion is a woman not wanting to be pregnant and give birth, which would be a pretty loving significant impact to her health and wellbeing. If pregnancy was very easy and risk-free, there would be no reason whatsoever to allow women any more choice about it than men.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
Xombie posted:You are projecting. Your argument about what this woman thinks is entirely a work of fiction created from your imagination to justify what you want to be true, because it's what you already decided you believe. It is mythical, created from whole cloth. It is a delusion. So, too, is this scenario where the level of abortion access a woman has in Texas wouldn't be relevant to whether or not she decided to adopt out her kid
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
My [M/32] younger brother [M/22] passed away 5 years ago and his ex-roommate stole his bitcoins afterwardsPersonal issuesquote:Edit: Thanks for the advice so far, particularly the suggestion to post about this to /r/bitcoin for help. I will be driving down to my parents this weekend to check the computer for the bitcoin information to investigate this further. This community is amazing, I will continue to post updates as they happen.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
Straight White Shark posted:Sure, and I buy this line of reasoning 100% in scenarios where a planned adoption falls through or something like that. But it seems ludicrous that without a man's permission a woman is allowed to sign an embryo away to an incinerator, but not to a stable and loving family. embryo != baby Stop making false equivalences that would make a MRA blush.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
Pac-Manioc Root posted:My [M/32] younger brother [M/22] passed away 5 years ago and his ex-roommate stole his bitcoins afterwardsPersonal issues lol
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
Yes, bitcoin madness is how your parents want to remember him and definitely not weird obsession and possible greed on your part.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:So, too, is this scenario where the level of abortion access a woman has in Texas wouldn't be relevant to whether or not she decided to adopt out her kid No, abortion was never mentioned anywhere in this story as a thing that was being considered. You are considering it on her behalf, for no other reason than that you wanted to yell at people. Which is loving weird. Trying to justify such a tenuous grasp on logic with the history of abortion in red states is just straying you even further from something that resembles comprehension. The level of projection you're exhibiting here is beyond bizarre.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
DragQueenofAngmar posted:i feel like half of you are talking about legal rights, and half are talking about moral decision making, and each side assumes they're talking about the same thing a sane opinion, thanks friendo
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
Pac-Manioc Root posted:My [M/32] younger brother [M/22] passed away 5 years ago and his ex-roommate stole his bitcoins afterwardsPersonal issues i want to know the forums account of each person in this story and i want to know it now
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
DragQueenofAngmar posted:i feel like half of you are talking about legal rights, and half are talking about moral decision making, and each side assumes they're talking about the same thing I'd be okay with this if the mother just flat out adopted the kid to the dad. Where I consider it skeevy is now she's sorta forced to be a parent (or at least in part responsible) for a kid she wanted to adopt out. The news that she'd be legally on the hook also came after the window for abortion had passes, which may or may not have been a relevant factor in her decision to go for adoption over termination.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:Sorry but I got a little kneejerk at this: i dont think that's the definition of abortion because i don't believe a developing embryo is a human child. im for free abortions with a hefty dose of free therapy and free legal weed before and after. im not for kids growing up in poo poo situations because they only have one parent.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:48
|
|
|
I don't think one parent should have the right to terminate parental rights for both of them without the other's consent. Abortion is a different situation given the nature of pregnancy and that it involves a body autonomy and health issue, but once the child is born that changes the game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:I'd be okay with this if the mother just flat out adopted the kid to the dad. Where I consider it skeevy is now she's sorta forced to be a parent (or at least in part responsible) for a kid she wanted to adopt out. The news that she'd be legally on the hook also came after the window for abortion had passes, which may or may not have been a relevant factor in her decision to go for adoption over termination. It'd be a relevant factor for deadbeat dads, too. Their primarily motivation of avoiding having to support their nevertheless real and alive kid is not the primary motivation of the state, nor should it be. The law isn't a game of hot potato where any inequity in the system only exists to be shifted down to whoever has the least agency in the situation, no matter how many social justicey buzzwords you deploy in the name of stomping downwards. A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 17:53 on Jul 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:I'd be okay with this if the mother just flat out adopted the kid to the dad. Where I consider it skeevy is now she's sorta forced to be a parent (or at least in part responsible) for a kid she wanted to adopt out. The news that she'd be legally on the hook also came after the window for abortion had passes, which may or may not have been a relevant factor in her decision to go for adoption over termination. On the flip side the dad in this situation would never be able to waive his parental responsibilities in that way and nary a tear is shed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
I, too, think that women are a uniform bloc who all think exactly as I do in matters of abortion and parenting. I also think there's nothing weird at all about the child support conversation turning to "well, do they really NEED it???" only because the recipient is a dude. I look forward to this hard-hitting question being applied uniformly in these cases in the future
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:I'd be okay with this if the mother just flat out adopted the kid to the dad. Where I consider it skeevy is now she's sorta forced to be a parent (or at least in part responsible) for a kid she wanted to adopt out. The news that she'd be legally on the hook also came after the window for abortion had passes, which may or may not have been a relevant factor in her decision to go for adoption over termination. The entire reason for this is to protect the child. The same reason deadbeat dads can't "adopt out" the kid to a single mother. The reason why you give up parental rights during adoption is not to protect the birth parents from having to pay child support, but to completely protect the adoptive parents from custody later being disputed. Child support is not about "punishing" a parent, but to benefit the child. The child is owed the support. Xombie fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Jul 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
DragQueenofAngmar posted:i feel like half of you are talking about legal rights, and half are talking about moral decision making, and each side assumes they're talking about the same thing the dude's in his early 20s and a single father, ofc he's a fuckhead. i don't believe anyone in this circumstance who says "they have everything covered" and am glad they were at least smart enough to seek child support for when it dawns on them how expensive kids are, even moreso when you're their only parent
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
fruit on the bottom posted:On the flip side the dad in this situation would never be able to waive his parental responsibilities in that way and nary a tear is shed. I think it's different because he wasn't the one pregnant, if she decides a bit into the pregnancy that she wants to carry the baby to term specifically for a closed adoption that to me seems fine. It'd be more grey if the baby popped out and she was having second thoughts, but if it happened in the same window she could have gotten an abortion then I really don't see how the two are different. Healthy newborns are super easy to adopt out so it's not over concern for the child. I mean it is what it is, if he is gonna raise the child I'm glad that she has to help support her cause baby's aren't cheap and that's what's best now that things are as they are. But I think at the end of the day it woulda been best for both the mother and the kid to go with a closed adoption, and the father would have been able to move on and have a kid with someone else.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
Squashing Machine posted:I, too, think that women are a uniform bloc who all think exactly as I do in matters of abortion and parenting. I also think there's nothing weird at all about the child support conversation turning to "well, do they really NEED it???" only because the recipient is a dude. I look forward to this hard-hitting question being applied uniformly in these cases in the future Yeah read at its most uncharitable this scenario is basically a gender-swapped MRA spermjacking strawman, and I'm fine with the law not going out of its way to account for corner cases at the expense of the general rule that some kind of financial support from the non-custodial parent helps the other parent. I mean zoom out far enough and I will advocate that we should be a socialist paradise where the kid is taken care of regardless of the means of either parent to pay support, but one problem at a time. Owlbear Camus fucked around with this message at 17:58 on Jul 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
DragQueenofAngmar posted:personally i think it's tremendously lovely of that dude to garnish his ex's pay for child support he himself admits he doesn't need; dudes a fuckhead and legal provisions to prevent this (assessment of need for support maybe?) could definitely be good A legal assessment of need in child support cases would never fly in a million years, because it would be seen as anti-woman, and because the state's technical interest is not in doing what's "fair," but what's best for the child.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
The only moral abortion is my abortion
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
Squashing Machine posted:A legal assessment of need in child support cases would never fly in a million years, because it would be seen as anti-woman, and because the state's technical interest is not in doing what's "fair," but what's best for the child. Yes if there is one thing that won't fly in the US, it's laws which are anti women.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Yes if there is one thing that won't fly in the US, it's laws which are anti women. lmao
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:I think it's different because he wasn't the one pregnant, if she decides a bit into the pregnancy that she wants to carry the baby to term specifically for a closed adoption that to me seems fine. It'd be more grey if the baby popped out and she was having second thoughts, but if it happened in the same window she could have gotten an abortion then I really don't see how the two are different. Healthy newborns are super easy to adopt out so it's not over concern for the child. The existence of the baby, and her obligation to support it, ceased to be optional the minute it popped out of her. The system exists as it does because there is in fact no magical fairy godmother waiting in the wings to sweep your little princess off to her castle to live a life of wonder the instant you decide you don't want her; absent extreme cases the biological parents are the best shot for stable support and a normal life that a kid's got; even if one of those parents is just a gene donor and a few hundred bucks a month. Idiot goons ITT have shifted the abortion discussion from "blastocysts aren't actually people, yet" to "actual literal children aren't people", and think this is like an argument over whether the ex-boyfriend gets to charge his ex-girlfriend for repairs to her stereo that he stole or something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
i kinda wonder what the rules are in other first world nations involving women deciding to give their unborn child up for adoption. I would guess some European/Scandinavian countries let you do it unilaterally but maybe not.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:The existence of the baby, and her obligation to support it, ceased to be optional the minute it popped out of her. The system exists as it does because there is in fact no magical fairy godmother waiting in the wings to sweep your little princess off to her castle to live a life of wonder the instant you decide you don't want her; absent extreme cases the biological parents are the best shot for stable support and a normal life that a kid's got; even if one of those parents is just a gene donor and a few hundred bucks a month. Idiot goons ITT have shifted the abortion discussion from "blastocysts aren't actually people, yet" to "actual literal children aren't people". No one did this
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:I think it's different because he wasn't the one pregnant, if she decides a bit into the pregnancy that she wants to carry the baby to term specifically for a closed adoption that to me seems fine. It'd be more grey if the baby popped out and she was having second thoughts, but if it happened in the same window she could have gotten an abortion then I really don't see how the two are different. Healthy newborns are super easy to adopt out so it's not over concern for the child. I think the fact that she's no longer pregnant at that point makes a world of difference. I mean we talk about MRA types who complain that women have extra rights that men don't have, and that's only sort of true because that's how the biology works out but now we really are talking about flat out giving an extra opt-out right to women that men don't get.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
I feel really bad for this child who is going to be raised by his biological father rather than being jettisoned into the adoption system out of his mother's cargo bay.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
Terrific Accident posted:I feel really bad for this child who is going to be raised by his biological father rather than being jettisoned into the adoption system out of his mother's cargo bay. His father sounds like a piece of poo poo so agreed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 12:08 |
|
|
Terrific Accident posted:I feel really bad for this child who is going to be raised by his biological father rather than being jettisoned into the adoption system out of his mother's cargo bay. No it would work out fine because ??? (I'm adopted and it worked out pretty perfect for me, but that doesn't mean I don't know how the system be)
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2017 18:06
|
|