Do you agree with the right to have financial abortions ?

EulenWatcher · 2022-06-14T03:50:06+00:00

I'm in favor of paper abortions with a few important caveats:

They should protect both men and women. For that they would have to have a very short timeframe for men to opt out so women would have enough time to make their own informed decision whether they want to keep this pregnancy or not.
Men shouldn't be able to reverse it. If you opted out when you've never seen your kid and you saw them 10 years later when they're all adorable and look like you...too bad, you're nobody to them and you have no right to go and tell them you're their father. Refusing paternity should mean you refuse both rights and responsibilities, not only the latter.

JCSledge · 2022-06-14T14:08:27+00:00

Why only men? Can women have financial abortions and force the dad to raise the child alone with no financial support from the mother?

Emmett_is_Bored · 2022-06-14T16:28:33+00:00

It's interesting to me how many men say they want this option...but only if they can change their mind at any point. Sorry no. I fully support the ability to choose to opt-out. But if you opt-out you're OUT. You don't get to suddenly decide later you want to be a part of the kid's life w/o contributing anything more than sperm.

PM_ME_ZED_BARA · 2022-06-14T05:33:10+00:00

I would support financial abortions if medical abortions are significantly unrestricted. I don’t want a situation where a man financially aborts late term when a woman can no longer abort.

Financial abortion deadlines should be at least a month earlier than medical abortion deadlines, to give women time to deal with hurdles like waiting periods or traveling in case they decide to get medical abortions.

Financial abortion should also be irreversible, just like medical abortion.

beleidigtewurst · 2022-06-14T07:00:39+00:00

A boy raped by an adult woman is legally obliged to pay support.

No, I am not joking or making it up.

Yes, it's very fucked up.

As it stands, women can decide "they are not ready to parent a child" while men can not. Situation is not symmetric, obviously, as parental investment up to child birth is a heavy burden on female side. However, fair is it not, obviously.

Ultimately, especially in the Western countries, most of which suffer from demographic crisis, chances of "legal abortion" getting into legislation are close to zero, since if father is not forced to, it would mean that state would need to pay.

fakingandnotmakingit · 2022-06-14T04:43:01+00:00

I agree with financial abortions with the following rules:

abortion is legal and safe
the decision to financially abort is done within an early enough time frame that the mother can then decide whether its feasible to have the child as a single parent. Therefore she can then make the decision to abort or keep the child.
the one doing the financial abortion is not entitled to anything about the child. They can't come back and ask for a reversal or play the "I'm the father card". If they make contact with the child (before the child turns 18) for any reason, using any medium (Facebook, relatives etc) he has to back pay all child support with interest due to its delay and keep paying it.

majani · 2022-06-14T07:35:56+00:00

It SHOULD be that women SHOULD be able to take care of the kids by themselves. But the reality is that women more often get overwhelmed by sole responsibility for children, leading them into the poverty cycle. And the government has no incentive to pile child support bills on their books. So they try as hard as they can to force the man to share the responsibility

BasilTechnical6693 · 2022-06-14T13:11:35+00:00

In most states all men have to do is sign away their parental rights and this will excuse them from all child support obligations in the future.

NiceGuyNumber4 · 2022-06-14T05:50:32+00:00

You can't be pro-choice and not believe in financial abortion. Equal rights.

icefire54 · 2022-06-14T06:27:25+00:00

Yes of course. Anyone who is pro choice but in favor of forcing men to take responsibility for women's choice to give birth with child support is just a someone that wants to maintain female privilege. They may try to obfuscate that with a bunch of BS "arguments", but none of it stands up to scrutiny.

sabiinvesting · 2022-06-14T04:08:42+00:00

I grew up in a small conservative town, and my godparents were against premarital sex altogether and my mom told me to not have sex unless I could be responsible for the child, and only with a man I would choose to raise a child with. However, I am more or less pro choice.

I don't think people take potential pregnancy seriously enough though. I think everyone should write up an agreement on what should happen if conception was to happen, not just for the agreement's sake, but for people to be more aware of the potential consequences. With such written agreement, I am all for abortions and financial abortions.

gofigure62 · 2022-06-14T15:01:51+00:00

I'm an advocate of vasectomies. They're cheaper and easier for men to get, than it is for women.

I don't understand why men who don't want children just don't get a vasectomy, and/or freeze their sperm if they want children later on in life. Both options are cheap, easy, and non-invasive.

If a man actually didn't want children, he'd take precautions to not have children.

I'm not an advocate of men freely ejaculating into vagina's then dumping the burden of his bastards onto society. If he's not going to practice safe sex or get sterilized, he wants to be a parent. The men that complain about having to pay for their kids don't even use condoms.

Unless a man has been raped, he's responsible for the children that he creates. No one else is to blame that he wants to ejaculate into fertile vagina's with ZERO contraceptive measures. He's responsible for the functions of his own sex organs, meaning he's responsible for making sure that his sperm doesn't fertilize any eggs.

purplish_possum · 2022-06-14T14:16:04+00:00

Biology is not fair. Life's not fair. Parents are parents regardless of whether they wanted to be parents or not. Once a baby is born both parents are responsible. That's just the way it is.

purplish_possum · 2022-06-14T14:25:04+00:00

Financial abortion would force many women to get real abortions they wouldn't have otherwise had. It's financial coercion and a gross invasion of a woman's autonomy. Both religious conservatives and secular liberals will obviously oppose it. It's never going to happen -- not ever -- don't know why guys here keep bringing this up.

catniagara · 2022-06-14T14:34:56+00:00

A few studies have found that up to 75% of women, depending where you live, feel pressured into abortions because of financial difficulties or a partner who refuses to support the child.

80% of single parent families are female led, suggesting that men who are choosing not to raise their children are also angry that they have to pay for them. This is certainly borne out by anyone who has ever watched a divorce proceeding. “She can have the kids but I want the house and car” is common. So is “I can’t afford to pay for that family, I have to pay for my new family”.

The idea of legalizing paper abortions is meant as a threat against free, legal abortion. It isn’t meant as a suggestion to solve any authentic problem. 45-80% of child support orders go unenforced in the USA depending on where you live.

Men actually do have the option of not caring or paying for their children and overwhelmingly compared to women, they take it. Maybe we need to look into the social training that makes us all believe that women have a responsibility to “take care of” children, one way or another, while constantly advocating for men to be allowed to use and abuse women and children with no consequences.

Orange_Paisley · 2022-06-14T05:03:51+00:00

No, I don’t believe in them considering that the Supreme Court’s opinion is going to make abortion difficult for for women. So now they won’t be able to get an abortion AND the father can refuse to pay child support too?

Potential_Respond224 · 2022-06-14T07:46:47+00:00

Lol women's stipulations on Financial Abortions really snitch on themselves.

How is jailing a man who's child reaches out to him good for the wellbeing of the child?

Oh it's not?

So it seems like you're strategically using moralising ie for the wellbeing of the child, to manipulate the best result for you?

Just like TRP always says you do.

anon-sucks · 2022-06-14T09:19:40+00:00

In the US women have this right. They can leave their infant at a “safe haven.” They don’t even need to notify the father that he is a father, let alone that she left his kid there. So men definitely should have the right to financially about. Won’t happen though. Women are the priority and men are the ATMs.

MelodiousTones · 2022-06-14T11:19:52+00:00

It’s not equal because of the fact of pregnancy. The reproductive process is not equal in any way.

social_mule · 2022-06-14T13:19:48+00:00

No, I do not.

GlowingAsItDazzles · 2022-06-14T14:59:09+00:00

i would not put it this what. what i believe is that theres no such thing as out of wedlock "paternity" at all. an out of wedlock child is 100% the mothers and HER family's child and the bio father should have no legal rights to or responsibilities for it all. however, as long as theres a welfare state for unwed mothers the state is going to dun men for CS, so i dont know what you all want. men didnt want their tax money supporting tyrones crotchspawn 100% in the 90s and ended AFDC and went after dads. c'est la vie

that_cat_gets_me · 2022-06-14T15:32:25+00:00

Vasectomies prevent abortion. Even financial. Which is such a trivial thing to me.

Both men and women who old enough to have sex, know what the outcome/consequences of sex can be. If you left your load somewhere that could result in a pregnancy, like, that is sort of on you.

With everything going on with the SCOTUS, I would be less worried about your financial obligations to the choices you made, and be fighting for a women's right to choose.

I am having a hard time with anyone wanting to have a discussion about financial abortions when the options for women who need one to live are on the verge of not having that option.

drawmatoman · 2022-06-14T17:37:13+00:00

All of these issues can be solved if humans were genetically engineered to be sterile until they have earned the privilege to be a responsible child-bearer. There must be minimum health, financial and social requirements for person to contribute to the gene pool and raise a child. Once they meet those requirements, they can acquire a license to breed which would be valid for 3-5 years tops. Some sort of gene therapy would be administered to 'unlock' fertility for that period of time until they can re-new their license. It shouldn't matter what sex that individual is.

Draco359 · 2022-06-14T05:56:13+00:00

During my career as an English to Romanian interpreter I had to book an abortion for an 8 month pregnant elder gypsy woman.

She made the mistake of breeding too much and could not get governmental financial aid to raise this soon to be newborn.

So rather than condemn the child to a life of poverty and misery or a life devoid of parental love and sense of belonging by handing that child over to the orphanage system, she chose to give her fetus a swift death.

This helped reinforce my beliefs that abortions should be available to women who do not wish to condemn their fetus/child to an unhappy life by their standard as the mother.

NockerJoe · 2022-06-14T03:29:48+00:00

Calling it a financial abortion is a false equivalence. If you want the right to dip just say so but you're equating abandoning a kid that's biologically yours with a legal battle that's been fought for generations mostly because abortion has a better public perception.

Valuable-Marzipan761 · 2022-06-14T05:01:08+00:00

nope. as far as I can see there are three options.

the man is forced to pay

the taxpayer is forced to pay

the child goes unprovided for.

as unfair as it is, I'd say the father being forced to pay is the best of the three.

sleuthoftrades1 · 2022-06-14T03:28:33+00:00

I support it. The argument I see made here is that it will transfer the cost to the government. Well, the government already pays for shit I don't think it should. Add it to the heap, it isn't like the US government is fiscally responsible anyway. I think it would be a good way to accelerate the decline and overload the nanny government. What I hope will happen is that if a man chooses financial abortion, it will influence the women to go through with an abortion anyway so the government doesn't have to cover the cost of raising a child. The issue is women aren't exactly great at making rational decisions.

I am intellectually pro-choice, but I will vote against it if financial abortion is not an option.

jayval90 · 2022-06-14T05:11:11+00:00

No, but I'm pro-life.

However, I'm 100% on board with consistency here. If we're going to make abortions legal, it shouldn't be so one-sided. That's obviously just an extreme bias against men, which isn't helpful for creating healthy male-female relationships.

banjocatto · 2022-06-14T07:18:26+00:00

So many people here don't understand that abortion is a matter of bodily autonomy, not taking responsibility.

Women aren't allowed to abandon or neglect their (born) children either, and can absolutely be sued for child support.

ohdiddly · 2022-06-14T03:29:04+00:00

Sure. I would like to live in a world where a child's wellbeing isn't largely dependent on a deadbeat dads child support payments. It would be nice to have more government support go towards helping kids/single parents in those situations, but idk I honestly haven't given this topic that much thought.

BrazenRaizen · 2022-06-14T11:39:03+00:00

I used to agree with you. However, after watching my wife bleed out, go into shock, organs shut down, airlifted to another hospital, breathing+feeding tube for two weeks when she gave birth, it’s just not the same. My wife is young, healthy, exercised regularly, no prior health conditions, and had given birth before.

Society doesn’t put enough emphasis on educating men: labor/birthing is literally the most dangerous thing a women will likely ever do. It’s just not the same as the impact to your (our?) wallets.

tired_hillbilly · 2022-06-14T04:30:15+00:00

Best world: Abortion, both financial and medical, banned

Bad world: Both kinds of abortion legal

Worst (and current) world: Only medical abortion legal

DreamsOfWishes · 2022-06-14T06:08:42+00:00

It's bodily autonomy > best of the child.

Abortion isn't being allowed so that women can choose to not have kids, that's a side effect. A side effect that might be the primary reason that a lot of women get an abortion, but a side effect for legalizing it anyway.

The primary reason for why abortion is legal, is because otherwise you are forcing pregnancy and the consequences of pregnancy on people. And that's a step too far.

Forced pregnancy is even listed as a form of torture, that has been used AS a form of torture, so impregnating people with the intent of torturing them.

And we don't perform torture as a punishment anymore. And it doesn't matter that it wouldn't be torture for a majority, we don't accept torture as a punishment even if only 1% would consider it torture.

So why is abortion allowed and paper abortions aren't? Because one is a barbaric act and we've already moved beyond that and the other is people acting like a forced financial contribution is a barbaric act.

Detach paper abortions from actual abortions, stop pissing off about 50% of the population by trying to be an edge lord and have a chance of actually pushing for this modern form of progress that has nothing to do with banning barbaric acts, but tries to provide more choice.

Ok-Map-7596 · 2022-06-14T03:43:22+00:00

Why should the government pay for your kids? Your problems your responsibility.

Laytheblameonluck · 2022-06-14T04:14:45+00:00

I don't believe in it but I think a corollary of Roe vs Wade is that men actually have total privacy to their DNA and thus women cannot use it to prove fatherhood, and that fatherhood is a private matter unless a marriage certificate is available, and so the state cannot decree a man as a father.

And so, constitutionally, men by default have "financial abortion" rights that can only be vetoed through Marriage, and this has always been the case in history in various previous cultures until about a century or two ago when Bastard laws were changed.

angryearth · 2022-06-14T05:23:53+00:00

The consequences for women are she can get pregnant, abort or give birth to a child. It does her no good to say it’s not fair men don’t have to make these choices. The only way for her to avoid them 100% is not to have sex.

You’re assuming women don’t have a point of no return when they have sex.

Katatonicsnake · 2022-06-14T07:01:51+00:00

To be honest I don’t want to talk about paternal or maternal rights. Parents only have responsibilities, rights are earned.

Life’s unfair. Sometimes you get pregnant or get someone pregnant even if you don’t want to. Nobody cares about that after there’s a living child who needs support. I sure as hell don’t want government using my tax money to pay child support in situations where one or both parents are financially financially capable of doing it.

subgamer89 · 2022-06-14T14:21:48+00:00

No. You cannot compare a uterus to a bank account. Bodily autonomy is the highest and most fundamental right of a human being. The abortion choice is the woman's alone because it's her body. Once a baby is born, both parents should be obligated to contribute to its care

ThorLives · 2022-06-14T04:55:07+00:00

I'm a man. I also think it's "unfair" that women can have an abortion, but a man cannot choose whether or not to have a child, and financial responsibility that comes with it. Men's option to have a child or not ends with him deciding to have sex. This is essentially the same situation that pro-life people think women should be forced into, and women hate it.

But, I also think it's harmful for the child to be raised in poverty.

In the end, I don't support financial abortion, while fully acknowledging that it's unfair to men. And I feel that way only because of the harmful indirect effects that financial abortion would have on other people in society. It would, at least, be good if society could acknowledge the fact that men are placed in this position.

Allowing women to get abortions but not men is misandry and no, it isn't doing what's best for the child because then you'd also ban abortions.

No it isn't. There are times when you need to draw a line somewhere, and sometimes the line looks illogical when you look at it from a certain perspective. For example, the Geneva Convention makes it illegal to employ weapons which permanently blind enemy soldiers. But you can kill them. How does that make sense? Wouldn't it be better to blind them than kill them? "If you really cared about people, you'd make it illegal to kill them, too!" One of the side-effects of permanent blindness is that the rest of society has the burden of taking care of a bunch of blind people, and it also results in a lot of poverty (both for the blind and everyone around them who has to support them). Those effects will last for the next 50 years or so. Just because you can create an argument that X is worse than Y, and we allow X but not Y, therefore we're "being illogical", then you should think about viewing it from a variety of perspectives. Because when things look illogical from one particular perspective doesn't mean it looks illogical from ALL perspectives.

eyesayhello · 2022-06-14T04:59:20+00:00

Yes, I agree. But, it'll never happen. Too much money involved for women and the government in child support.

briiiana1122 · 2022-06-14T04:31:28+00:00

Oh yay this topic for the 600th time. You want to be deadbeat dads without the stigma, we know. Just get snipped, please.

And it is doing what’s right for the child. The difference between actual abortion and this abomination Reddit made up is there is a child in this scenario, one that people in these conversations would like to abandon. It’s an actual human. Like it or not.

ETA: k I’m not going to go through all the strawman replies about how “akshully a literal human child existing and being abandoned is literally exactly the same as no child being born”. Enjoy defending your rights to abandon your kids though, boys.

Catherine772023 · 2022-06-14T11:53:10+00:00

No because women can get traumatised by abortions and this “financial abortion” doesn’t risk traumatising the man it just lets him get off Scott free while the woman suffers more knowing she would have no support.

I think child support is good because it’s the only challenge to many men’s mindset of trying to go for tonnes of hookups Scott free regardless of what happens to the women.

Men need the potential for child support to make them think about their choices. Women already have the risk of being severely judged and traumatised by abortions so since women never have a risk free escape neither should men.

I think there should be no financial abortions because it would encourage men to be more careful. Women have to be anyway because of their bodies.

Lots of men deliberately break condoms during sex or don’t bother to use them or store them right and are less likely to take clinical trials for male birth control seriously.

“Financial abortions” may sound equal or something but they’re really not.

wtknight · 2022-06-14T12:02:52+00:00

No, I don’t agree because it means children who are still born will either be supported by taxpayers or they will starve.

Aborting fetuses is also something that I believe should be avoided, although, as a man, I don’t think that I have a right to dictate how women should handle this issue. People born with uteruses should decide whether abortion is illegal or not.

meattornado52 · 2022-06-14T12:14:15+00:00

When I was pro-choice in the more traditional sense, I would have taken the Dave Chappelle stance of “if you get to kill it, I should at least get to abandon it,” but now I’m pro-choice in a different way. Abstinence, parenthood, contraception, and adoption are all choices. It’s barbaric and evil to sacrifice a child at the altar of money or lifestyle, whether you’re a man or a woman. Don’t stick your dick in, or accept the dick of, anybody whose child you wouldn’t want to raise with them.

Demasii · 2022-06-14T12:37:22+00:00

Ive always been pro choice and Ive never really thought it fair to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term or to make a woman support a child that she does not want/is incapable of caring for.

Abortions in the US are only available to those who have the means to pay and travel to get an abortion. Availability of abortions differs depending on where you live.

Politicians have passed many laws to restrict access to abortions. For example it's a medical procedure is not generally offered at a normal hospital (which is weird) due to various laws that designed to make it difficult.

My friend's baby died in the womb. She had to travel 5 hours to another state to have an late term abortion to remove the dead baby because the hospital nearby legally could not.

However, as I've grown older I've noticed that men do not have this option.

Because they physically can't. They can't get pregnant.

If they get a woman pregnant they're on the hook for child support.

If the woman gets an abortion then there is no child to support for both.

If a man gets a financial abortion than the woman has the child to support.

This is not an equal outcome. Equal outcome is PHYSICALLY impossible.

An abortion literally get rid of the existence of the child. Financial abortions do not do this. Many men are not able to walk away from a child that exists with their DNA. Reducing this down to just about money is ridiculous.

People are quick to blame men and tell them that they shouldn't have had sex if they aren't willing to accept the consequences but doesn't that apply to women too then?

The consequences are vastly different biologically. You can't socially engineer equality (no matter what feminists claim) when it comes to biology.

Allowing women to get abortions but not men is misandry and no,

Men can't get abortions! It's not an equal outcome.

Women can die from both birth and abortions (rare but happens). Why should men get the one upside of the "choice" of abortions without the other consequences that comes with it?

ErenYDidNothingWrong · 2022-06-14T14:25:50+00:00

I don’t agree with the argument of ‘forcing a woman to become pregnant’. In 99% of cases women aren’t forced into sex. It’s their choice.

just_a_place · 2022-06-14T16:06:38+00:00

YES!!!

The reason I am anti-choice for women is because women themselves are anti-choice when it comes to men's rights, so I figure... Phuck 'em.

Women want to enjoy reproductive rights and privileges that they want to deny to men such as the right NOT to be a parent against your will. Women are 100% onboard with being able to reject motherhood but they will raise a hell-storm if men dare to ask to have the same rights that they enjoy. Let me explain:

If a woman uses protection or not, or if a woman chooses to have sex or not, her reproductive rights are protected under the law and WE AS MEN WANT THE SAME FUCKING THING!

Women's feminist argument is that just because they get pregnant they shouldn't be denied equal rights with men. Well our argument is that just because men don't get pregnant we should not be denied equal rights under the law! Women will sit there and moan, bitch, and scream that biology is not destiny well I say that men should have control of their own reproductive destinies! But no, women are being complete fucking hypocrites on this one. I have had this argument with a lot of them in this subreddit over and over again. They are so viciously hypocritical that they employ every kind of mental gymnastics to deny the obvious and to dodge reason and logic.

Even the damned language is stacked against men. For example notice you said "if men get a woman pregnant" implying that pregnancy is something that men do to women, as if women are just passive victims of pregnancy. That being pregnant is something that happens to them with zero consent or responsibility on their part. As if women do not consent to the sex in the first place thus any consequences that come of it is not their fault. The man should pay cause he did it! Notice the sneaky ass language here! The correct language to use is "When women get pregnant." Because women get pregnant through their consent! They spread their legs just as willingly as men throw their own leg over them. Rape being the obvious exception - so do not even bother to bring that up.

Men have the moral and fair right to opt out of parenthood (financially) if we do not wish to be fathers. The law is unjust and since the law is on women's side they couldn't be more gleeful about it. Literally MILLIONS of men are getting screwed over by this system and hundreds of thousands are losing even more rights over it (such as licenses and the ability to find work or sustain themselves due to crippling woman-support payments) and a great deal are even losing their very freedom by being imprisoned for it!

How the hell are we all as men getting this badly screwed over and not doing jack shit about it? At the very least why aren't more men angry about it? This is the problem. Men are not angry enough. We need to get pissed if we are going to do shit about it. This is what the Red Pill was originally about. Not all this Dating Woes BS. The Red Pill is about opening men's eyes! We need to get angry! We need to see reality!

RealNiceLady · 2022-06-14T04:04:42+00:00

Do you agree with the right to have financial abortions ?

No.

However, as I've grown older I've noticed that men do not have this option.

Women naturally have it worse than men because they are the ones that get pregnant.

People are quick to blame men and tell them that they shouldn't have had sex if they aren't willing to accept the consequences but doesn't that apply to women too then?

I think unless she is a rape victim or has a heath problem women should be forced to give birth when they are impregnated.

but shouldn't men be able to demand financial abortions ?

Men have a responsibility to financially care for their children.

To walk away and not pay any child support if he gives up all paternal rights ?

That only happens if the baby is adopted. If the mother raises the baby, men are obligated to care for their own children.

Allowing women to get abortions but not men is misandry and no, it isn't doing what's best for the child because then you'd also ban abortions.

Women in general be should be barred from getting abortions, but I don't think it's misandry to let a woman abort, but make a man pay because the man is naturally at an advantage because he can't get pregnant, but the woman is at a natural disadvantage because she can get pregnant.

PurpleSuppository · 2022-06-14T05:46:16+00:00

No. Abortion has to do with bodily autonomy. That is what the right to abortion is about. It is not about having the right to be or not be a parent. That is simply a consequence of women’s bodily autonomy. So women’s right to abortion does not require men to have a right to not be a parent.

manfredoalfredo · 2022-06-14T09:23:17+00:00

No, not really. The reason women get to have them is a fundamental bodily autonomy issue, which is not the case with men as they are not carrying the child in their body. Simple as that really.

PatientZucchini2893 · 2022-06-14T10:41:08+00:00

A) calling a man a hubby is a form of disrespect

B) Reddit has no attractive women

nothatyoucare · 2022-06-14T13:46:22+00:00

Something that has always stood out to me is that something around 45%, aka almost half, of pregnancies in the US are UNPLANNED. Considering every child on this planet is born from a woman, that means this is one of the few areas in life women have to step up and handle their responsibilities. But they try every which way to foist those responsibilities onto men.

Think about it, when have you ever seen a woman with a woman specific condom? I've never seen one. Some women think they're being responsible by carrying male condoms but again, that's a form of making it the man's responsibility when its only the woman that gets pregnant. "Well you shouldn't have had sex if you didn't want the child" doesn't that apply to the woman as well? If so, then the implication is the woman does want the child and the man doesn't, all the more reason to leave her with it right?

Think of how many different choices women have with birth control versus men. And then women want to suggest men undergo evasive surgery to their bodies to have vasectomies. Imagine us suggesting the same to women? They would be beside themselves.

Yes vasectomies can be reversed, most times. But its a surgery, there can always be complications and the reversal isn't guaranteed.

In saner times, you couldn't force a woman to give birth to your child if you wanted her too. I was cool with that. And on the flip side of the coin, if I couldn't force the woman to give birth against her will, in other words if she could abort the baby in a unilateral decision then I should be able to walk away from the child, especially if I didn't want the child.

But now we live in insane times and it seems soon we will be able to force women to have children against their wills and I think that is all kinds of fucked up. Just like I don't think I should be forced to have a vasectomy if I don't want one, I don't think a woman should be forced to give birth if she doesn't want to. Its not like we have shit for parental paid leave, universal pre-k, etc etc for babies once their born anyways.

sarkington · 2022-06-14T03:45:46+00:00

Nope. We used to have that; didn’t work out so well

neetykeeno · 2022-06-14T04:58:40+00:00

While the current situation certainly has flaws I don't agree with the model of financial abortion put forward by men's rights activists. It isn't as equal as they claim at all. For starters to make it "equal" one would need to at the very least put the man through a similar set of pain,gore and invasiveness as is involved in a woman having an abortion then recovering and roll the dice on inflicting complications that occur sometimes during abortion...which occasionally include serious complications.

There's a bunch of other options that seem sensible to me. An insurance program for example...where maybe for the first oopsy the government will step up and pay a fair livable child support but he will need to then pay an affordable insurance premium and for every oopsy thereafter that premium rises with every new oopsy baby born until at say five oopsies it is just as crippling as child support and at six it is just about crushing. That would, I think, improve things incredibly for the average male idiot who makes the oopsy carelessly just once before getting his act together.

Another option that could work might be compulsory offering of the right to ask the woman if they can take up that child support burden to his other family members before he can hand the responsibility to the government if they all say no or are said no to. I think that would provide an incentive not to oopsy equivalent to that presented by the physical intrusiveness of abortion. A lot of grandparents would take up the option eagerly if the woman agreed...to pay and to get access.

Teflon08191 · 2022-06-14T07:58:50+00:00

I think it would probably be better for society if neither party had the option to walk away from responsibility, but so long as women have the right via abortion and abandonment, then it's utterly hypocritical to believe that men shouldn't have the same right via financial abortion.

MelodiousTones · 2022-06-14T11:35:14+00:00

Reproduction is fundamentally unequal. This is biological fact. We cannot pretend as if it is.

AutoModerator · 2022-06-14T03:19:38+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Key-Selection-522 · 2022-06-14T04:32:43+00:00

Her body her choice. That statement is purely of saying that all responsibility falls on one person. You have a lot of tax paying citizens who on both sides of the fence whether against or pro that claim to be okay with shouldering monetary responsibility for others depending the outcome.

freerossulbrich · 2022-06-14T05:55:01+00:00

Yes. However, while a woman can know she is pregnant early, how can a man know he is the father?

I would say there has to be some deal that's between free sex and marriage. Things like, if someone is pregnant the man pays certain amount. Absent such agreement and absent the woman correctly choosing the man giving him a chance for paper abortion, the man should be free from child support

SupportNo4060 · 2022-06-14T06:08:14+00:00

void that charge while it's still pending!!!

John_Oakman · 2022-06-14T09:34:01+00:00

All this talk of responsibility is rather interesting, as modern societies in the developing world has been moving away from the concept of personal responsibility for a while, dumping more and more of that on the collective in general. This is why many people have come to accept governments (either in whole or its various subcomponents) taking on more responsibilities and acquiring more power/budget.

Thus under this mentality relieving the financial burden of those who don't want to pay up and spreading them out to general population is just another step in that direction.

vivvienne · 2022-06-14T09:48:20+00:00

Abortion and financial abortion are not the same thing. Someone needs to care for the child. Either taxpayers, parents, or adoption. The only reason why women have a right to abortion is because of the parasite argument, not because she has no responsibility to the child. The only reason why a woman is off the hook is because the child is no longer alive, but if given the ability of say artificial wombs, if it were possible to keep the child alive the woman would still be on the hook financially. So no, it's very specifically written based on very specific principles. The fact abortion is legal at all was a logistical argument.

Allowing parents the right to completely abandon their children to starvation is a can of worms no country would pen into legalhood. Someone needs to take responsibility. If it's not the direct or indirect parents, it's the taxpayers. Which means instead of being on the hook for your children you didn't want you are now on the hook for every irresponsible parent in existence you never had a choice in as well as yours. That's shortsighted, and completely redundant. Its existence would defeat it's intended purpose. It's also bonkers because there would no longer be a reason for contraception. You are asking for consequence free sex that hoists all the responsibilities and consequences of your choices onto society at large. Abortion doesn't do that.

This is not a men's rights vs women's rights topic. It just sucks because our technology hasn't progressed enough to force an asymmetrical situation with a satisfactory solution. It will come in time but not by nonsensical solutions that creates an exponentially growing poverty machine for the sake of perceived gender equality. That's throwing the baby out with the bathwater, no pun intended..or the biggest example of cutting off one's nose to spite their face.

JaffyScarry · 2022-06-14T10:12:32+00:00

In the words of Frank Ocean: “Never fuck someone you wouldn’t want to be though”. This can extend to a child, don’t have sex with someone you wouldn’t want a child with. While I agree that if a woman wants an abortion, she should be able to, along with a man who decides to not be present - don’t put yourself in that position. Prevention is better than a cure, as said by Skrapz. You can argue about what’s right and what’s wrong OR you could not even be in that position. That is just my two pence

CautionaryWarning · 2022-06-14T11:17:00+00:00

Only if it's rape. Otherwise you sign your life away the moment you put a dick where it belongs. The woman puts her signature with a 9 month delay.

hazysparkle · 2022-06-14T12:23:00+00:00

I’m against abortion, or at least I think it is murder. Abortion is usually however argued for in the sense of body autonomy or something like that, not to escape responsibility. I don’t agree with that because there is someone elses body (the child) affected by the decision, but it’s still somewhat relevant because men just don’t seem to get how serious a pregnancy is. It can be downright dangerous and abortion carries mental and physical risks too. As much as I think it is murder, abandoning a child is a different issue. I guess since 1/3rd of pregnancies end in miscarriages anyway I do think that abandoning a child is worse, maybe we are pre programmed to be aware that the child might die during pregnancy. Regardless, it shows what a dangerous process it is.

To call abadoning your offspring ”financial abortion” is just absurd, and men can already run away from their responsibilities and pay just a little bit. Back in the days they had to marry the woman and promise to if they had the means provide for the woman as well until their dying days. Probably the issue is that men need even more incentive to think before they dip their dick in any living thing with a uterus.

In the end the man makes the woman pregnant, he has the power in the end. He reproduces with pretty much zero risk. Buhu they need to pay for a woman fullfilling what every humans evolutionary goal is? I’d think men would be happy a woman carries their child. Well, this might also make women think more and very easily weed out the bad men because saying you are pro abandoning children is essentially carrying a ”I am low quality” sign on your head.

Men that argue this are sometimes against abortion because it’s killing their child (very valid imo) but now suddenly want men to be able to not have their child? Sometimes I feel like this is done out of resentment rather than actually based on any sort of belief.

Ok_Razzmatazz_1751 · 2022-06-14T12:52:31+00:00

Once Roe vs Wade is over turned my state bans abortion all together , so no I do not believe in finacial abortions. I'm living in the reality we are living in now. Tax payers don't want to care for individuals situational issues fully. We don't mind a hand up ,but a constant hand out. No! Republican states are confusing in many ways. They wanna revamp the welfare system , down size wic , cut medicaid state insurance recipients.
Why would logical thinking tax payers allow for either parent off the hook .

Cupcakelover1985 · 2022-06-14T13:00:44+00:00

Yes as long as it comes with equivalent operations and procedures as medical abortions I’m all for it.

localmicrodosechamp · 2022-06-14T15:41:20+00:00

No. I agree with men being forced to give any organ to their kids that they need even if it kills them.

Paliant · 2022-06-14T15:45:10+00:00

I lean more pro choice generally. However I’m of the opinion that allowing for one type of abortion (whether that’s physical or financial) means not offering both at the same time is not equitable to both genders.

Basically as it stands today physical abortion should be illegal not because anything to do with its morality, but because financial abortion is not legal at the same time as physical. Imo, it is an all or nothing scenario.

Title	Do you agree with the right to have financial abortions ?
Author	dukesaces
Upvotes	140
Comments	493
Date	June 14, 2022 3:19 AM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/vbtxs2/do_you_agree_with_the_right_to_have_financial/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/do-you-agree-with-the-right-to-have-financial.1116063 https://theredarchive.com/post/1116063

Comments

A boy raped by an adult woman is legally obliged to pay support.