Man tricks girlfriend into taking abortion drug, gets 14 years.

[Paradoxium]

There is reason they call it, the heat of the moment. Not as easy as it is seems in practice.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I know I did and now I edited it.

You still wrote it.

The whole don't have sex if you don't want kids is ridiculous. Do you know how well abstinence sex education works? It doesn't. People will have sex anyways.

What is the point here? I have read that abstinence isn't effective in sex education. That isn't the question here. The question here is of the responsibility that comes with making the decision to have sex.

You're allowed to have sex without wanting kids. How is this so hard to comprehend? If a woman (or man) lies to have a child, they should be the ones solely responsible for it.

Yes you are allowed to have sex without "wanting" kids. This isn't question of want. I am allowed to want to eat horrible food and still lose weight. I am allowed to want to smoke and not get cancer. I am allowed to want to drink and not destroy my liver.

But want has got nothing to do with it.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

There is reason they call it, the heat of the moment. Not as easy as it is seems in practice.

I am not a fan of this argument. This is how many excuse quick tempers, abuse, etc. If you hit someone in the "heat of the moment" and they are killed, are you absolved?

 

[charl_huntress]

No, again, a con artist lies to get money. The person willingly gave them their money. They participated in the "transaction." That doesn't make what the con artist did less illegal. It's the same in this situation.

You keep using that scenario, but it is not valid and I'll tell you why. In the scenario you keep using there are only two parties. The person who was wronged and the person who did the wrong. A civil suit against the person who committed the wrong would provide a remedy to the person who was wronged. Now...the reason your scenario doesn't work is in this situation there are three parties. The person who was wronged, the person who did the wrong and the child who did no wrong but be born. You cannot seek remedy against the child. You can seek damages against the mother, but not the child. Refusing to support the child makes the father the wrongdoer and the child the one being wronged.

I am not a fan of this argument. This is how many excuse quick tempers, abuse, etc. If you hit someone in the "heat of the moment" and they are killed, are you absolved?

Yeah...saying I didn't mean to put my bullets in him and kill him usually never works.

 

[Hal_Jordan]

Using this logic, a man could tell his wife he wants to have a child with her, decide after she is pregnant he has changed his mind, and have no responsibility.

Wut? I'm not seeing this connection at all.

Again, if a man doesn't want a child, don't have sex. Why is this complicated? Self-control is not a thing anymore?

People have consensual sex all the time not for the purpose of making a baby.

When one person manipulates another into thinking that it is just mutually consensual casual sex, when it is in fact a "trap," it's a problem.

 

[Feenix]

You keep using that scenario, but it is not valid and I'll tell you why. In the scenario you keep using there are only two parties. The person who was wronged and the person who did the wrong. A civil suit against the person who committed the wrong would provide a remedy to the person who was wronged. Now...the reason your scenario doesn't work is in this situation there are three parties. The person who was wronged, the person who did the wrong and the child who did no wrong but be born. You cannot seek remedy against the child. You can seek damages against the mother, but not the child. Refusing to support the child makes the father the wrongdoer and the child the one being wronged.

Yeah...saying I didn't mean to put my bullets in him and kill him usually never works.

The third party came as a result of the fraud. You're not responsible for what a con artist does with your goods, whether it be money, sperm, etc.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Wut? I'm not seeing this connection at all.

You wrote this...

No. As I stated earlier, if the man asks for an abortion and the woman refuses, it is now her responsibility if she wants to keep it. No child support from the man. The woman can abort the child regardless of the man's wishes. He should have the same option. And in this case, it's not being tied to this woman for the next 18 years.

If she chooses to have the child and not abort when presented with that option, she should be on her own.

Did I miss something?

People have consensual sex all the time not for the purpose of making a baby.

When one person manipulates another into thinking that it is just mutually consensual casual sex, when it is in fact a "trap," it's a problem.

Am I arguing this isn't the case? My point is there are potential consequence to having consensual sex and just because you don't like that doesn't mean you simply get to do away with the responsibility.

I agree "traps" are horrible, but if you are having consciousness sex, a baby is always a risk. If you take someone else word that they can't have a child, that is the risk you are taking.

 

[Paradoxium]

I like to see some of you guys turn down a very physical 9.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I like to see some of you guys turn down a very physical 9.

Who says I would? I'd struggle to turn down a mundane 6. t:

 

[Paradoxium]

You work a 8 or 9 up. Then you don't have condoms on you. She claims to be on BC or has condoms herself. This also all happening after your 1hr lifting session at the gym. And you didn't fap or have sex for a week or two. Would you turn it down?? That's some insane self control there son.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

If a woman says she can't have a baby it wouldn't be too much to ask for medical records.

Anything is better than forcing a woman to miscarriage against her will.

The POS is lucky he wasn't tried for murder. I wonder if he gets to go to white collar prison. With a respected father I wouldn't be surprised.

 

[charl_huntress]

Who says I would? I'd struggle to turn down a mundane 6. t:

Keep it real...lol...but keep a hat on it. t:

The third party came as a result of the fraud. You're not responsible for what a con artist does with your goods, whether it be money, sperm, etc.

Yet the third party exist, so it's not the same scenario that you keep bringing up. This third party cannot be wished away and it can now also be wronged. Keep that in mind.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

You work a 8 or 9 up. Then you don't have condoms on you. She claims to be on BC or has condoms herself. This also all happening after your 1hr lifting session at the gym. And you have didn't fap or have sex for a week or two. Would you turn it down?? That's some insane self control there son.

And no, I probably wouldn't turn it down. And then the results are on me.

If a woman says she can't have a baby it wouldn't be too much to ask for medical records.

Anything is better than forcing a woman to miscarriage against her will.

The POS is lucky he wasn't tried for murder. I wonder if he gets to go to white collar prison. With a respected father I wouldn't be surprised.

Exactly. If that is what you are depending on, best fact check.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

You work a 8 or 9 up. Then you don't have condoms on you. She claims to be on BC or has condoms herself. This also all happening after your 1hr lifting session at the gym. And you didn't fap or have sex for a week or two. Would you turn it down?? That's some insane self control there son.

It depends how old you are.

Teens to early twenties anything goes.

 

[redhawk23]

But it's not an equal responsibility like you keep trying to say it is when one person gets to make all the decisions. Especially when one of those decisions can greatly benefit the decision maker for the next 18 years.

Is it actually a benefit though? Such a claim doesn't really hold up when you consider the rate at which unwed mothers and their children slip into poverty along with the related social and health issues.

 

[redhawk23]

The day an male birth control pill comes into fruition, is the day Feminists will wage nuclear war against it. They will use every possible method to prevent the spread of it. I ****ing guarantee this.

Why? Its not as if they fight against condoms, and any such pill would be unlikely to be more effective.

What would/will be interesting to see is when men start trying to get their birth control covered by insurance, public or otherwise.


Also, if a male birth control pill was ever developed, I'd imagine certain forms of STDs would skyrocket due to decreased condom use.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Child support hardly amounts to much.

Unless the father is rich.

and if you're rich you shouldn't be bare backing it with women you're not serious with.

 

[SentinelMind]

This.
The woman may be carrying the child, but it's not hers alone. Why is it that her decision is the only one that's considered legal?

you call it what abortion what it is....murder, regardless of who authorized it (mother, father, doctor)...and we don't have these silly legal disputes. For consistency, if fetus isn't a living being as pro-abortionists say, he should only be charged for poisoning/drugging her.

I don't feel sorry for the guy, though.

The only 100% fool-proof way not get pregnant....is to not have sex. Making a judgment based on whether he forgot to use a condom, whether the condom had a hole, whether she was on a pill...is all irrelevant and ridiculous.

 

[SentinelMind]

Indeed.

On the flip side, should the woman be allowed to withhold the birth control pill without the consent or knowledge of her partner? If that was the case here, then the guy should be allowed off the hook if the woman chooses to keep the child. Pregnancy by deception should void any monetary obligations the father may have towards the mother or the child.

this is all silly...nobody is signing a contract when you have sex. its all he said she said.

The moral issue is ...you broke it...you bought it.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I'm glad they made an example out of this guy.

The last thing we need are copycats.

 

[The Endless]

All women who don't want kids but want to have sex should just get those implants in the arm. Problem solved

 

[SentinelMind]

That is archaic and ridiculous. People should be allowed to have sex without the possibility of a kid hanging over their heads. This is a reality for women, as they can choose to abort. Men can't. It's not at all as simple as you're trying to make it out to be.

Why? We can control biology?

 

[Senator Pleasury]

If a woman says she can't have a baby it wouldn't be too much to ask for medical records.

Yes, nothing as appropriate for a romantic night as asking her her medical records.

 

[Hal_Jordan]

this is all silly...nobody is signing a contract when you have sex. its all he said she said.

The moral issue is ...you broke it...you bought it.

That's why Dave Chappelle has the Love Contract.

http://www.comedycentral.com/video-clips/jwmvxd/chappelle-s-show-love-contract

 

[SentinelMind]

lol...Considering my thoughts on intruders, do you really think I'm religious?

a religious comicbook fan black women who likes guns would be a complete package. sigh.