But you said you were okay with abortion...

[Koldo]

It's the oldest story in the book. Boy meets girl, boy and girl have sex, girl has baby, boy is an immature, selfish coward and runs away from the responsibility of raising his own child. Is there something in this story you feel is missing? You don't think this happens?

I never said it doesn't happen.
You assume too much when you think Harry is the boy of this story.

 

[Draka]

I come into this thread admitting not having read it all and admitting hesitancy to posting in it. The title has been bothering me for some time. The premise has as well.

The idea that a woman has broken some promise or deal by saying before having sex that she was okay with abortion should she get pregnant but then, upon realizing she was pregnant deciding to keep the baby bothers me quite a bit. Like the idea that there isn't some moment where a woman must deal with the fact that there is something, a life, growing inside of her. That, no matter what she may have said before, no matter how fine with abortion she might have said she was, or thought she was, that she may find that she just cannot bring herself to go through with it. There is an epiphany moment for many women when they find out they are pregnant where they realize they have this tiny life growing inside them and they would do anything to protect and nurture it. Even those who thought they didn't want children. The natural "mother" instinct kicks in.

Honestly, to blame women for breaking some "deal" or "promise" when you have no concept what it is like to go through that moment to discover that you have life growing inside you...not only insensitive and heartless, but cruel and inhumane. The fact that women even have the conviction to go through abortions at all is a wonder to me and some guys sit here and casually think "what's the big deal" basically and say they "break promises" and are "irresponsible"? Honestly, grow the hell up. If you didn't want to take the chance of being a father then keep it in your pants. Zip up or shut up.

 

[Alceste]

It is, at very least, implied he meant his own biological children.

So then he should be forced to donate his sperm to an artificial insemination clinic, where I can then go collect his genetic material and conceive two of "his" children, which he would then be obliged to financially support?

You must be kidding. You are being vague again.
Indeed, he promised to buy a house where you would live with the children. That much i understood.
However, to whom the house would belong is not being mentioned here.

"Who the house would belong to" is mentioned unambiguously: We were engaged to be married. The house he bought would have been jointly owned by both of us by the time the children were born. He verbally committed himself to paying the entire cost of purchasing this jointly owned house (the down payment) and financing 100% of the mortgage payments until the kids were school aged.

I repeat, does he owe me AT LEAST half a house, or doesn't he?

 

[Koldo]

I come into this thread admitting not having read it all and admitting hesitancy to posting in it. The title has been bothering me for some time. The premise has as well.

The idea that a woman has broken some promise or deal by saying before having sex that she was okay with abortion should she get pregnant but then, upon realizing she was pregnant deciding to keep the baby bothers me quite a bit. Like the idea that there isn't some moment where a woman must deal with the fact that there is something, a life, growing inside of her. That, no matter what she may have said before, no matter how fine with abortion she might have said she was, or thought she was, that she may find that she just cannot bring herself to go through with it. There is an epiphany moment for many women when they find out they are pregnant where they realize they have this tiny life growing inside them and they would do anything to protect and nurture it. Even those who thought they didn't want children. The natural "mother" instinct kicks in.

Honestly, to blame women for breaking some "deal" or "promise" when you have no concept what it is like to go through that moment to discover that you have life growing inside you...not only insensitive and heartless, but cruel and inhumane. The fact that women even have the conviction to go through abortions at all is a wonder to me and some guys sit here and casually think "what's the big deal" basically and say they "break promises" and are "irresponsible"? Honestly, grow the hell up. If you didn't want to take the chance of being a father then keep it in your pants. Zip up or shut up.

There is no 'blame' going on here. It is just a matter of responsibility.
Honestly, i already am a grown up. And if you don't want to be hold to your word, then don't make promises or agreements.
Shut up or (wo)man up.

 

[Koldo]

So then he should be forced to donate his sperm to an artificial insemination clinic, where I can then go collect his genetic material and conceive two of "his" children, which he would then be obliged to financially support?

I already said Ana shouldn't be forced to abort. Therefore, your ex shouldn't also be forced to donate his sperm to fulfill his promise.

What do you think should happen to your ex, in this case, if he isn't willing to keep his word?

"Who the house would belong to" is mentioned unambiguously: We were engaged to be married. The house he bought would have been jointly owned by both of us by the time the children were born. He verbally committed himself to paying the entire cost of purchasing this jointly owned house (the down payment) and financing 100% of the mortgage payments until the kids were school aged.

I repeat, does he owe me AT LEAST half a house, or doesn't he?

He owes you half a house indeed.

 

[Alceste]

I come into this thread admitting not having read it all and admitting hesitancy to posting in it. The title has been bothering me for some time. The premise has as well.

The idea that a woman has broken some promise or deal by saying before having sex that she was okay with abortion should she get pregnant but then, upon realizing she was pregnant deciding to keep the baby bothers me quite a bit. Like the idea that there isn't some moment where a woman must deal with the fact that there is something, a life, growing inside of her. That, no matter what she may have said before, no matter how fine with abortion she might have said she was, or thought she was, that she may find that she just cannot bring herself to go through with it. There is an epiphany moment for many women when they find out they are pregnant where they realize they have this tiny life growing inside them and they would do anything to protect and nurture it. Even those who thought they didn't want children. The natural "mother" instinct kicks in.

Honestly, to blame women for breaking some "deal" or "promise" when you have no concept what it is like to go through that moment to discover that you have life growing inside you...not only insensitive and heartless, but cruel and inhumane. The fact that women even have the conviction to go through abortions at all is a wonder to me and some guys sit here and casually think "what's the big deal" basically and say they "break promises" and are "irresponsible"? Honestly, grow the hell up. If you didn't want to take the chance of being a father then keep it in your pants. Zip up or shut up.

I totally empathize with the kind of transformation you describe, but want to add that sometimes the very opposite of the pro-life "epiphany" moment occurs, and women who were completely against any form of abortion - even women who spend their days picketing family planning clinics - become pregnant and suddenly realize that there is no way in hell they are willing to have a baby at this particular time, or with that particular guy.

"The Only Moral Abortion is My Abortion" - When the Anti-Choice Choose

I will tell you of my own epiphany moment: I walked out of the clinic after a positive pregnancy test, took one look at the father, and immediately said "No way." There was nothing specifically wrong with him. He is nice. He is smart. He is caring and loyal. He is attractive. I liked him. But I simply could not bear the thought of being entangled in a family relationship with him for the rest of my life. On top of that, the thought of creating some creature that was a mingling of our distinct, incompatible characters was abhorrent to me. The thing is, I didn't know ANY of that until I discovered I was pregnant. I thought I was in a happy, committed relationship with major long-term potential. I was talking about marriage. (He was wiser).

He would have been a great dad. After I induced a miscarriage he confessed he actually wanted a child, and that's why he provided me with absolutely no support whatsoever throughout the entire process. (At twenty, I didn't even think to ask - I assumed nobody our age would want kids). He still doesn't have kids. I wonder what I "owe" him, according to Koldo.

 

[Alceste]

He owes you half a house indeed.

WOOHOO! I get a free half-house, just for being stupid enough to have sex with a jerk!

Thank you Koldo, for being consistent. I will email my ex and request my half-house. I'll let you know how it goes.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

WOOHOO! I get a free half-house, just for being stupid enough to have sex with a jerk!

Thank you Koldo, for being consistent. I will email my ex and request my half-house. I'll let you know how it goes.

I was promised my own apartment on the Upper West Side in NYC. I was also promised $50,000 a year for spending on clothing. And a boob job.

He's a multimillionaire in the Big Apple. I'm sure he can accomodate everything he promised me when we had sex in the back of his stretch limo.

But, you know....there's something we call men and women who are given money or items in exchange for sex.

 

[Koldo]

WOOHOO! I get a free half-house, just for being stupid enough to have sex with a jerk!

Not for having sex with a jerk. But rather for his promise.
Or perhaps it could be said he made this promise because he had sex with you...

Thank you Koldo, for being consistent. I will email my ex and request my half-house. I'll let you know how it goes.

"Half a house? Sure. Here it is: http://www.baixaki.com.br/imagens/wpapers/BXK15804_barraco800.jpg"

 

[Koldo]

But, you know....there's something we call men and women who are given money or items in exchange for sex.

Awesome?

 

[MysticSang'ha]

awesome? :d

lol!!

 

[Me Myself]

Awesome?

I was thinking "happiness spreaders" but awesome works too

 

[Alceste]

I was promised my own apartment on the Upper West Side in NYC. I was also promised $50,000 a year for spending on clothing. And a boob job.

He's a multimillionaire in the Big Apple. I'm sure he can accomodate everything he promised me when we had sex in the back of his stretch limo.

But, you know....there's something we call men and women who are given money or items in exchange for sex.

Oh! Oh! I know! Is it "entrepreneurs"? Hang on... "job creators". Oh, pooh, I can't remember now.

 

[Alceste]

Not for having sex with a jerk. But rather for his promise.
Or perhaps it could be said he made this promise because he had sex with you...

See, the difference between your position and mine is that I accept my personal responsibility for sleeping with a jerk for five years. Yeah, I didn't KNOW he was a jerk for all that time. But I got duped. I was mistaken. I chose poorly. However you want to put it. He doesn't "owe" me anything because every word he spoke was a complete fiction. If I'd been a little wiser or worldly, I wouldn't have believed a word of it.

"Half a house? Sure. Here it is: http://www.baixaki.com.br/imagens/wpapers/BXK15804_barraco800.jpg"

That's not a half house. That's a whole shack. It's nothing like the house I was promised. My half house looks more like this:

 

[Koldo]

See, the difference between your position and mine is that I accept my personal responsibility for sleeping with a jerk for five years. Yeah, I didn't KNOW he was a jerk for all that time. But I got duped. I was mistaken. I chose poorly. However you want to put it. He doesn't "owe" me anything because every word he spoke was a complete fiction. If I'd been a little wiser or worldly, I wouldn't have believed a word of it.

You can not be responsible for someone other than yourself doing something wrong.

That's not a half house. That's a whole shack. It's nothing like the house I was promised. My half house looks more like this:

Your half house would be a shop?!

 

[Debater Slayer]

How can it cruel and unjust?
By breaking her word she generated a financial loss on another person.
This loss has to be restituted. It would be cruel and unjust to not do so.

Plus, how would this affect the child?

1) Turning word of mouth into something that has legal consequences has a large potential to turn into an exploitable, broken law. Think of how many men would try to get away with not paying child support by claiming that they were "promised" something they never were.

2) There is no reason to take it that far and burden a single parent with child support payments in addition to the already difficult job of raising the child, all so that the father could get away with having sex with whoever he wants — after taking "promises" from women that they aren't going to keep any babies resulting from his sperm, of course.

3) It would affect the child because he/she would be raised a single parent who, thanks to such a law, would most likely have to work long hours to make ends meet. Instead of the single parent's undivided attention being directed toward raising the child, she now has to divide it between that and working as hard as she can to secure a living for her and her child (the latter being her child and the man's child, the man who was "promised" not to have to take responsibility for any resultant children after sex).

It is pathetic to let women abandon their responsibilities.

They don't, though: they still have to raise the child/children, so I don't see where this "abandon their responsibilities" thing comes from.

It doesn't matter for this topic. The point is that they should be.

As I stated above, I don't think there's any way for them to be legally binding without huge potential for exploitation. It would be a deficient law at best and a cruel one at worst (that's not to say it can't be or isn't both, though).

But that is simply the result of her choice.
In an analogy, imagine i lend you my cellphone, and you put it in a bag with yours. You slam the bag against a wall several times and both cellphones get broken/destroyed. We both went through a loss, but both were caused by you. Therefore, you still must restitute what i lost.

How about this: Imagine I lend you my cellphone, and you put it in a bag with yours. I know that both cellphones have a chance of being broken for whatever reason inside the bag, yet I say, "I don't want any broken cellphones, okay? I'm not going to pay for any losses in case my cellphone is broken." Both cellphones get broken, but I demand that only you pay for both to be repaired/replaced.

How does that sound? Because that's how I see blaming only the woman in this scenario for the pregnancy and wanting her to make all the child support payments, to be honest.

 

[Me Myself]

I d love to see men who give false promissed for having sex to women be prosecuted in some form

Seriously. Thats emotional damage or something. The only problem is that it would be difficult to say when it is true and when not unless they recorded him promising anything... and naturaly one should not expect many cases would happen in which that type of evidence would be available.

"Baby I love you! I want to marry and give you a half house store with some babies!" "Wait, wait, I want that on recording, ... yeah you can repeat it now. Out loud and quick! I dont have a lot of battery in this thing"

On the other side, that would be kind of awesome

 

[Alceste]

I d love to see men who give false promissed for having sex to women be prosecuted in some form

Seriously. Thats emotional damage or something. The only problem is that it would be difficult to say when it is true and when not unless they recorded him promising anything... and naturaly one should not expect many cases would happen in which that type of evidence would be available.

"Baby I love you! I want to marry and give you a half house store with some babies!" "Wait, wait, I want that on recording, ... yeah you can repeat it now. Out loud and quick! I dont have a lot of battery in this thing"

On the other side, that would be kind of awesome

I don't wanna pay taxes to enforce that kind of silliness. I'm happy to just step aside watch my exes relationships fail. If all the men (and women) who made false statements while they are trying to get laid were prosecuted, the courts would have time for nothing else.

 

[McBell]

Do you mean the one on regards to abortion?

You are so stuck on the abortion part you can't see anything else...

How much time do you thin would be wasted in court trying to figure out what was actually promised, by who, and when?
Not to mention filtering through all the conditional modifiers...

 

[Koldo]

1) Turning word of mouth into something that has legal consequences has a large potential to turn into an exploitable, broken law. Think of how many men would try to get away with not paying child support by claiming that they were "promised" something they never were.

If they can prove it happened, or if the other person agrees it did, then how can it be exploitable?

2) There is no reason to take it that far and burden a single parent with child support payments in addition to the already difficult job of raising the child, all so that the father could get away with having sex with whoever he wants — after taking "promises" from women that they aren't going to keep any babies resulting from his sperm, of course.

There is a reason: justice.

3) It would affect the child because he/she would be raised a single parent who, thanks to such a law, would most likely have to work long hours to make ends meet. Instead of the single parent's undivided attention being directed toward raising the child, she now has to divide it between that and working as hard as she can to secure a living for her and her child (the latter being her child and the man's child, the man who was "promised" not to have to take responsibility for any resultant children after sex).

What reasoning lead you to this conclusion?
Why would she have to work extra to secure a living for her and her child?

They don't, though: they still have to raise the child/children, so I don't see where this "abandon their responsibilities" thing comes from.

This is like saying that if you pay child support for only one of your children you are not abandoning your responsibilities. In other words, we have several responsibilities, and if the woman doesn't face the consequences of her action of breaking her promise, she is abandoning a responsibility.

As I stated above, I don't think there's any way for them to be legally binding without huge potential for exploitation. It would be a deficient law at best and a cruel one at worst (that's not to say it can't be or isn't both, though).

How so?

How about this: Imagine I lend you my cellphone, and you put it in a bag with yours. I know that both cellphones have a chance of being broken for whatever reason inside the bag, yet I say, "I don't want any broken cellphones, okay? I'm not going to pay for any losses in case my cellphone is broken." Both cellphones get broken, but I demand that only you pay for both to be repaired/replaced.

How does that sound? Because that's how I see blaming only the woman in this scenario for the pregnancy and wanting her to make all the child support payments, to be honest.

Your suggestion does not fit the scenario.
In this case, the woman willingly break the cellphones ( causes financial loss to both ). She made a promise that if kept would prevent any financial loss to both sides ( like the promise not to smash the bag with cellphones against the wall ).