But you said you were okay with abortion...

[Willamena]

There are two different responsibilities here.
We are not relieving Ana of her responsibility to the child by making Harry pay the child support.
However, if the woman doesn't restitute the loss caused to Harry, we are relieving her of the responsibility to the agreement made with Harry.

There are two different agreements here. The agreement to abort if she got pregnant, and the agreement to compensate him for child support. They are not connected in any way.

Edit: I also hope you're not going to employ the slippery slope of implicit agreement, since if you do it's also the case that Harry implicitly agreed to pay child support if she changed her mind since it's the law, and ignorance of the law is no excuse of the law.

 

[NIX]

No, YOU think he owes me something. Isn't that what you've been arguing? That because he changed his mind, or broke his promise, or whatever you want to call it, that he's liable to pay me damages? At the very least, he owes me a house, right? Since our many conversations about our future together involved discussion of the kind of house we would live in, and that I would be a full-time mom?

It's clear that he owes you a house and child support for two children. That was the agreement.

 

[Koldo]

It matters to her.

I doubt so.

No, YOU think he owes me something. Isn't that what you've been arguing? That because he changed his mind, or broke his promise, or whatever you want to call it, that he's liable to pay me damages? At the very least, he owes me a house, right? Since our many conversations about our future together involved discussion of the kind of house we would live in, and that I would be a full-time mom?

Would you really care to know what i think about it?

 

[Willamena]

I doubt so.

The fact that she asked indicates that it matters to her that you answer.

Although, in fact, you might be right.

 

[NIX]

The fact that she asked indicates that it matters to her that you answer.

Although, in fact, you might be right.

Some men might also assume that because a woman says she doesn't want to have any children (with him/right now/period/in general) it might indicate that she would have an abortion if she got pregnant.

They may be right. or not.

 

[Koldo]

There are two different agreements here. The agreement to abort if she got pregnant, and the agreement to compensate him for child support. They are not connected in any way.

Edit: I also hope you're not going to employ the slippery slope of implicit agreement, since if you do it's also the case that Harry implicitly agreed to pay child support if she changed her mind since it's the law, and ignorance of the law is no excuse of the law.

If you were to destroy my cellphone, would you need to agree to pay for it to be compelled to do it?

 

[Koldo]

Some men might also assume that because a woman says she doesn't want to have any children (with him/right now/period/in general) it might indicate that she would have an abortion if she got pregnant.

They may be right. or not.

I have already said that the agreement has to be specific on regards to abortion though.

 

[Willamena]

If you were to destroy my cellphone, would you need to agree to pay for it to be compelled to do it?

Yes, but only because I'm nice, not because I have to.

Edit: I mis-read. No, I wouldn't have to make an agreement to be compelled to do it. I would be compelled to do it because I'm nice.

 

[Koldo]

Yes, but only because I'm nice, not because I have to.

So if you are nice, you need to agree to pay for it to be compelled to do it.
And if you are not nice, you don't need to agree to pay for it to be compelled to do it.
It must nice to be nice then.

 

[Koldo]

Edit: I mis-read. No, I wouldn't have to make an agreement to be compelled to do it. I would be compelled to do it because I'm nice.

Ha. I thought so.

Wouldn't you be compelled to do it by law?

 

[Willamena]

Ha. I thought so.

Wouldn't you be compelled to do it by law?

Not presently. If there was a law that said I had to pay you back for breaking your phone, yes.

Fortunately, there won't ever be.

 

[Me Myself]

Not presently. If there was a law that said I had to pay you back for breaking your phone, yes.

Fortunately, there won't ever be.

Hum, this is curious.

So if someone breaks any of your things he is not at all forced by law to pay you? What if he purposefully breaks them?

 

[Willamena]

Hum, this is curious.

So if someone breaks any of your things he is not at all forced by law to pay you? What if he purposefully breaks them?

Red herring.

What does this have to do with the discussion?

 

[Koldo]

Not presently. If there was a law that said I had to pay you back for breaking your phone, yes.

Fortunately, there won't ever be.

Do you mean a law as specific as 'you have to pay back for breaking Koldo's cellphone' or a law about damaging/destroying someone's property?

 

[Alceste]

I doubt so.



Would you really care to know what i think about it?

Yes, obviously, or I wouldn't have asked. Considering he promised me two children, a house, and at least six or seven years of total financial support so I could stay home with the kids until they were school-aged, what does he owe me?

I suppose you would argue that I should be awarded at least the cost of a house, but should he also cover my costs for adoption, artificial insemination or fertility treatments if I'm now too old to conceive naturally? Or should he just give me the child he had with one of his mistresses while we were engaged? Then, if I can get my hands on the two kids I was promised, what should our child support arrangements be?

 

[Willamena]

Do you mean a law as specific as 'you have to pay back for breaking Koldo's cellphone' or a law about damaging/destroying someone's property?

No.

I mean a law that's frivolous.

Frivolous laws are a bad thing.

 

[ChristineES]

No. I think it is morally wrong to break your word.

I think it is morally wrong to have sex but not want to pay any consequences that may result, including pregnancy and childbirth and so is not taking care of a child that is yours (without it being adopted, that is).

 

[Koldo]

Yes, obviously, or I wouldn't have asked. Considering he promised me two children, a house, and at least six or seven years of total financial support so I could stay home with the kids until they were school-aged, what does he owe me?

I suppose you would argue that I should be awarded at least the cost of a house, but should he also cover my costs for adoption, artificial insemination or fertility treatments if I'm now too old to conceive naturally? Or should he just give me the child he had with one of his mistresses while we were engaged? Then, if I can get my hands on the two kids I was promised, what should our child support arrangements be?

I doubt you would be currently interested in having sex with him to have two children, right? Did he promise to give you a house? Or was it a promise to share a house with you?

 

[Koldo]

No.

I mean a law that's frivolous.

Frivolous laws are a bad thing.

I agree.

 

[Koldo]

I think it is morally wrong to have sex but not want to pay any consequences that may result, including pregnancy and childbirth and so is not taking care of a child that is yours (without it being adopted, that is).

Do you mean to say you don't think it is morally wrong to break your word?
Or do you mean this as an addition to what i said?