SivaGanesha 2 #1 February 18, 2011 Okay, imagine this scenario. A man gets a woman pregnant (consensual sex) and she wants an abortion. But she doesn't have the funds for an abortion, and he doesn't want her to have an abortion. He, on the other hand, DOES have the funds to pay for her abortion should she have one. He also is willing and able to support the child should she carry it to term. He can also prove that abortion is against his long held religious beliefs, and that she knew about his beliefs prior to having sex. Under such circumstances should he be required to pay for the abortion?"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #2 February 18, 2011 QuoteOkay, imagine this scenario. A man gets a woman pregnant (consensual sex) and she wants an abortion. But she doesn't have the funds for an abortion, and he doesn't want her to have an abortion. He, on the other hand, DOES have the funds to pay for her abortion should she have one. He also is willing and able to support the child should she carry it to term. He can also prove that abortion is against his long held religious beliefs, and that she knew about his beliefs prior to having sex. Under such circumstances should he be required to pay for the abortion? Absolutely not! But I think he should have a choice, to be determined by a jury of their piers, whether or not his child should be killed or not. They did this together. They should accept the consequense.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #3 February 18, 2011 He should not have to pay for the abortion. She should have the right to an abortion regardless of what he wants. If he wants to raise the child, and she doesn't want a child, if she's worth her salt she'll carry the baby to term and give the child up to him...and pay child support until the young'un is 18.-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #4 February 18, 2011 The decision of whether to have an abortion is 100% hers. The courts have made it very clear that it is none of his business. It seems only logical that an expense that is incurred at the behest of one person is not the responsibility of another. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #5 February 18, 2011 QuoteThe decision of whether to have an abortion is 100% hers. The courts have made it very clear that it is none of his business. It seems only logical that an expense that is incurred at the behest of one person is not the responsibility of another. The courts are not always right. Why is his right to be a father to be denied?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 333 #6 February 18, 2011 Quote Why is his right to be a father to be denied? Because he was careless in the interview process, before knocking her up. Next time, he will spend more time ahead of time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #7 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuote Why is his right to be a father to be denied? Because he was careless in the interview process, before knocking her up. Next time, he will spend more time ahead of time. What if it was planned and she decided after several weeks that it just doesn't fit her adgenda anymore? Does marriage have anything to do with the decision?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #8 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Why is his right to be a father to be denied? Because he was careless in the interview process, before knocking her up. Next time, he will spend more time ahead of time. What if it was planned and she decided after several weeks that it just doesn't fit her adgenda anymore? Does marriage have anything to do with the decision? I thought you and your WING BUDDIES... did not believe in that evil word... marriage. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #9 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote Why is his right to be a father to be denied? Because he was careless in the interview process, before knocking her up. Next time, he will spend more time ahead of time. What if it was planned and she decided after several weeks that it just doesn't fit her adgenda anymore? Does marriage have anything to do with the decision? I thought you and your WING BUDDIES... did not believe in that evil word... marriage. Marriage is good. It is just a step that is taken unwisely alot of the time. The right partner makes marriage wonderful and fulfilling. The wrong choice for a spouse is detrimental sometimes.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davjohns 1 #10 February 18, 2011 Interesting situation. Brings up all kinds of questions. If she wants the child, she can make him responsible for 18 years of child support. If he wants the child and she conceeds, she could pay for 18 years. He has no financial duty now, but could end up paying much more. She has all the decision authority once he has made his genetic donation. In general, it is a very one-sided situation in favor of the woman. This situation attempts to reverse that typical scenario to see how things go when the shoe is on the other foot.I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #11 February 18, 2011 Quote In general, it is a very one-sided situation in favor of the woman. Yes....but so are the effects of pregnancy. You don't see the boys getting kicked out of high school, or dropping their college plans in same numbers, or suffering potential death from the experience. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #12 February 18, 2011 Quote Okay, imagine this scenario. A man gets a woman pregnant (consensual sex) and she wants an abortion. But she doesn't have the funds for an abortion, and he doesn't want her to have an abortion. He, on the other hand, DOES have the funds to pay for her abortion should she have one. He also is willing and able to support the child should she carry it to term. He can also prove that abortion is against his long held religious beliefs, and that she knew about his beliefs prior to having sex. Under such circumstances should he be required to pay for the abortion? Of course not...they are trying to pass a law that makes it legal to kill the abortionist...problem solved....balance baby...balance...Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #13 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote Okay, imagine this scenario. A man gets a woman pregnant (consensual sex) and she wants an abortion. But she doesn't have the funds for an abortion, and he doesn't want her to have an abortion. He, on the other hand, DOES have the funds to pay for her abortion should she have one. He also is willing and able to support the child should she carry it to term. He can also prove that abortion is against his long held religious beliefs, and that she knew about his beliefs prior to having sex. Under such circumstances should he be required to pay for the abortion? Of course not...they are trying to pass a law that makes it legal to kill the abortionist...problem solved. By that logic any woman that does not want to have a child she does not want to have can practice preventative medicine and Lorena Bobbit the guy trying to force her to have a child she does not want to have. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #14 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote Okay, imagine this scenario. A man gets a woman pregnant (consensual sex) and she wants an abortion. But she doesn't have the funds for an abortion, and he doesn't want her to have an abortion. He, on the other hand, DOES have the funds to pay for her abortion should she have one. He also is willing and able to support the child should she carry it to term. He can also prove that abortion is against his long held religious beliefs, and that she knew about his beliefs prior to having sex. Under such circumstances should he be required to pay for the abortion? Of course not...they are trying to pass a law that makes it legal to kill the abortionist...problem solved....balance baby...balance... Actually the doc should be prosecuted for wrongful death.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #15 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Okay, imagine this scenario. A man gets a woman pregnant (consensual sex) and she wants an abortion. But she doesn't have the funds for an abortion, and he doesn't want her to have an abortion. He, on the other hand, DOES have the funds to pay for her abortion should she have one. He also is willing and able to support the child should she carry it to term. He can also prove that abortion is against his long held religious beliefs, and that she knew about his beliefs prior to having sex. Under such circumstances should he be required to pay for the abortion? Of course not...they are trying to pass a law that makes it legal to kill the abortionist...problem solved....balance baby...balance... Actually the doc should be prosecuted for wrongful death. I don't care what you crazy people do anymore... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRmBChQjZPsYour secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #16 February 18, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDuacIY58q0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJNZZI82hDU F***k you and your abortion...Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #17 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Okay, imagine this scenario. A man gets a woman pregnant (consensual sex) and she wants an abortion. But she doesn't have the funds for an abortion, and he doesn't want her to have an abortion. He, on the other hand, DOES have the funds to pay for her abortion should she have one. He also is willing and able to support the child should she carry it to term. He can also prove that abortion is against his long held religious beliefs, and that she knew about his beliefs prior to having sex. Under such circumstances should he be required to pay for the abortion? Of course not...they are trying to pass a law that makes it legal to kill the abortionist...problem solved....balance baby...balance... Actually the doc should be prosecuted for wrongful death. ....and his killing declared "justifiable homicide"?My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #18 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteOkay, imagine this scenario. A man gets a woman pregnant (consensual sex) and she wants an abortion. But she doesn't have the funds for an abortion, and he doesn't want her to have an abortion. He, on the other hand, DOES have the funds to pay for her abortion should she have one. He also is willing and able to support the child should she carry it to term. He can also prove that abortion is against his long held religious beliefs, and that she knew about his beliefs prior to having sex. Under such circumstances should he be required to pay for the abortion? Absolutely not! But I think he should have a choice, to be determined by a jury of their piers, whether or not his child should be killed or not. They did this together. They should accept the consequense. What? HE have a choice but the jury makes it for him? Doesn't make sense. No responsibility and accountability for the male? Leave all that to a jury?My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #19 February 18, 2011 Quote Okay, imagine this scenario. A man gets a woman pregnant (consensual sex) and she wants an abortion. But she doesn't have the funds for an abortion, and he doesn't want her to have an abortion. He, on the other hand, DOES have the funds to pay for her abortion should she have one. He also is willing and able to support the child should she carry it to term. He can also prove that abortion is against his long held religious beliefs, and that she knew about his beliefs prior to having sex. Under such circumstances should he be required to pay for the abortion? My take. Abortion yes/no is HER decision. If yes, he pays half. If no and she keeps - he pays child support If no and he keeps - she pays child support. Only two options so I voted yes. BTW... "A man gets a woman pregnant" is awfully sexist. It takes two to tango. One could say she got herself pregnant through the use of a man...just as sexist. Correctly, they both caused the pregnancy. My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #20 February 18, 2011 Quote F***k you and your abortion... Does this mean you are anti-abortion? My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #21 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuote Why is his right to be a father to be denied? Because he was careless in the interview process, before knocking her up. Next time, he will spend more time ahead of time. What if it was planned and she decided after several weeks that it just doesn't fit her adgenda anymore? Does marriage have anything to do with the decision? Her RIGHTS to her body will and should always trump his desires to be a father. She can change her mind at any time (do you know nothing about wimin?) (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #22 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote F***k you and your abortion... Does this mean you are anti-abortion? Did I come off a little too strong? perhaps I was too obvious...Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #23 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote Okay, imagine this scenario. A man gets a woman pregnant (consensual sex) and she wants an abortion. But she doesn't have the funds for an abortion, and he doesn't want her to have an abortion. He, on the other hand, DOES have the funds to pay for her abortion should she have one. He also is willing and able to support the child should she carry it to term. He can also prove that abortion is against his long held religious beliefs, and that she knew about his beliefs prior to having sex. Under such circumstances should he be required to pay for the abortion? My take. Abortion yes/no is HER decision. If yes, he pays half. If no and she keeps - he pays child support If no and he keeps - she pays child support. Only two options so I voted yes. BTW... "A man gets a woman pregnant" is awfully sexist. It takes two to tango. One could say she got herself pregnant through the use of a man...just as sexist. Correctly, they both caused the pregnancy. You have obviously never been on the bad side of that kind of decision have you?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #24 February 18, 2011 QuoteOkay, imagine this scenario. A man gets a woman pregnant (consensual sex) and she wants an abortion. But she doesn't have the funds for an abortion, and he doesn't want her to have an abortion. He, on the other hand, DOES have the funds to pay for her abortion should she have one. He also is willing and able to support the child should she carry it to term. He can also prove that abortion is against his long held religious beliefs, and that she knew about his beliefs prior to having sex. Under such circumstances should he be required to pay for the abortion? The options are to few so I took yes, it is cheaper than paying child support for 18 years and he should see that. but I have alway felt that within 3 months of pregnancy the father should have the right to accept or not accept the pregnancy. If the woman chooses to keep the baby and the father chooses not to in the first 3 months the woman is 100% responsible for the baby and the father looses all rights. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #25 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteOkay, imagine this scenario. A man gets a woman pregnant (consensual sex) and she wants an abortion. But she doesn't have the funds for an abortion, and he doesn't want her to have an abortion. He, on the other hand, DOES have the funds to pay for her abortion should she have one. He also is willing and able to support the child should she carry it to term. He can also prove that abortion is against his long held religious beliefs, and that she knew about his beliefs prior to having sex. Under such circumstances should he be required to pay for the abortion? The options are to few so I took yes, it is cheaper than paying child support for 18 years and he should see that. but I have alway felt that within 3 months of pregnancy the father should have the right to accept or not accept the pregnancy. If the woman chooses to keep the baby and the father chooses not to in the first 3 months the woman is 100% responsible for the baby and the father looses all rights. At what point in the worlds history did this amount of moral ineptitude trump inconvenience?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
