Why are men expected to take care of their children?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

See, you have this reaction to the men but why cannot this type of comment be said to the woman like "you should not have put a dick in your pants?" Why do you think it is ok to deride the man but not the woman for the same act?

It's not the same act.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

How is this a problem of "religion" exactly, given the extreme diversity of religions and their teachings (or lack thereof in some cases) about these matters?

We can talk about "religion" in the aggregate the same way we can talk about, say, "cars" in the aggregate.

Even though we can find examples of cars that don't pollute at all (cars on static display in a museum, for instance), it's still valid to say that getting rid of cars would reduce pollution.

In the same way, it's valid in many places to say that getting rid of religion would improve access to abortion.

The religions that support abortion exist and are valid, but they're so small that they don't have much relative impact on the overall net total impact.

 

[The Hammer]

But the man IS required to support the child the rest of his life at least where I live. My question is why does the mother get this choice but not the father? They both have a burden to support the child but only the mother has an option to not support the child. They have the same reasons for not wanting to take care of the child.

He's not actually required to, unless the woman pursues him legally. My sperm donor father paid nothing, I know who and where he is. He left because he was an immature child that shouldn't have been raising a kid. Good.

 

[Quintessence]

The religions that support abortion exist and are valid, but they're so small that they don't have much relative impact on the overall net total impact.

This is simply false.

Where major religious groups stand on abortion

Abortion is still a difficult, contentious and even unresolved issue for some religious groups.

www.pewresearch.org

8 key findings about Catholics and abortion

Like U.S. adults overall, the majority of U.S. Catholics say abortion should be legal – at least in some cases.

www.pewresearch.org

 

[The Hammer]

But a man can't give up his parental rights?

I gave up mine years ago. All it takes is court.

 

[We Never Know]

Then he should have kept his dick in his pants

IMO and if the woman can't support it or doesn't want it, she should have kept her pants on.

 

[ChristineM]

IMO and if the woman can't support it or doesn't want it, she should have kept her pants on.

Yup, i agree, which i stated later in the thread. It takes two to tango

 

[Left Coast]

It’s threads like this that make my disdain for religion even greater.

The OP is an atheist.

 

[McBell]

Why do women get to choose if they can take care of their child or not but men do not get this choice? When a woman is pregnant in a country/state that allows abortion she has the option to keep the baby to term or to abort the baby. Lets say a woman decides she cannot support her baby financially and decides to have an abortion. This is thought of by many as her decision and should be respected. If the woman decides to have the baby the father is expected to support that baby financially or he is generally considered a deadbeat if he does not. Why shouldn't the father get to choose whether he wants or can support the child? What if he cannot financially take care of the child and does not want that burden? Why the double standard?

Double standard?
I tell you what.
Once the man gets to take his share of carrying the baby, submitting his body to all the changers and hardships pregnancy does to the body, come back and talk to me about "double standards".

Cause your OP here does not even come close to addressing the "double standards" concerning pregnancy.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

It is clearly nothing like as simple as that, even in the least complex situations. Regardless, you are missing a key distinction.

There are three roles for people involved in a pregnancy, the biological father, the biological mother and the person who is pregnant. The biological mother and biological father have exactly the same sets of rights and responsibilities and a person who is pregnant has a different set of rights and responsibilities. In most cases, the biological mother and the pregnant person are the same individual, and so that individual has the combined rights and responsibilities of both roles. The biological father obviously only has the one set of rights and responsibilities.

With surrogacy though, the biological mother and the pregnant person can be two different people. In that situation, the biological mother has exactly the same rights an responsibilities as the biological father and the surrogate gets the rights and responsibilities of a pregnant person. That can include the right to abortion (in given situations depending on the relevant laws).

The distinction with the surrogacy example demonstrates why there are obvious differences between the situation of a mother and a father in a conventional pregnancy. There isn't a double standard because they're not in the same situation. They're both biological parents but only one of them is pregnant. If a man could ever get pregnant by some means in the future, he would have the relevant rights and responsibilities, including options for abortion.

If this is true then the mother cannot use financial stress as a reason to abort the baby just like the father cannot. The pregnant person cannot use that reason either because they are not the one taking care of the baby. But that is the #1 reason given for abortion.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

The man is half responsible for the child. If they can afford it or not that responsibility is still there.

Why? It is not there for the mother.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Once the child is born, both parents are responsible for the child's care. During pregnancy, however, the mother's body is responsible for the child's care, and so that responsibility becomes her decision, because it's her body.

But that is forcing the father to take care of the baby where the mother has a right not to take care of the baby.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Men can choose to use contraception. If he doesn't, well those are the risks. Time to have a talk and make plans. Of course, conservatives want to butt in and be a part of the relationship, even though the couple doesn't want them there.

Why is this standard not applied to the woman as well?

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Because condoms exist as well as the ability to get snipped. So, either way men have a choice to not have kids, either a temporary fix or a permanent one. They can always abstain as well.

Why is this standard not applied to the woman as well? If both have the same ability to not get pregnant, then why can one (the woman) choose not to support the baby but the father cannot?

 

[Orbit]

Why is this standard not applied to the woman as well? If both have the same ability to not get pregnant, then why can one (the woman) choose not to support the baby but the father cannot?

I don't know, but to me your argument seems to be in favor of deadbeat dads. Yuck.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Yes, it is a double standard as far as I can see. A woman can get an abortion, killing the kid, if she doesn't want them. Or drop them at a "safe space" location and totally abandon them. But a man can't give up his parental rights?

Personally, I think the state should punish such people for creating children they don't want in the first place. I wish straight people would understand that they're not like gay people and can't fully decouple sex from baby-making, unless they are sterilized (and even that fails at times). If a penis is going into or by a vagina, there is some possibility of pregnancy and both partners should be prepared for that, otherwise they have no business having sex. People need to take sex far more seriously than many of them do and stop treating it just as a recreational game.

I disagree with the statement "consenting to having sex is not consent to pregnancy". This is like saying "consent to drinking poison is not consent to dying".

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Double standard?
I tell you what.
Once the man gets to take his share of carrying the baby, submitting his body to all the changers and hardships pregnancy does to the body, come back and talk to me about "double standards".

Cause your OP here does not even come close to addressing the "double standards" concerning pregnancy.

It was never my intent to cover all the double standards and this does not address my OP. This is just emotion.

 

[ChristineM]

Why? It is not there for the mother.

Of course there.

 

[McBell]

It was never my intent to cover all the double standards and this does not address my OP. This is just emotion.

So your OP has nothing to do with double standards, yet the whole thread is about you whining about double standards?

 

[Audie]

It's not the same act.

Not even close