Mar. 24th, 2006
(no subject)
Mar. 24th, 2006 06:00 pmI want this so much. It's...so...wonderful and cute and...I just love it to death.
A question for the masses.
Mar. 24th, 2006 08:22 pmOk, so the other day I stumbled upon a blog (which I now can't find, dammit it all) that was discussion a father's rights when it came to children and abortion. I can't remember the exact content, but all that you need to know is that it made me think of a question.
Situation No. 1
A completely inocuous one night stand happens, and oops! The woman gets pregnant, and, for whatever reason, decides that she will have and keep the baby. The man, on the other hand, wants absolutely nothing to do with the child.
Situation No. 2
A completely inocuous one night stand happens, and oops! The woman gets pregnant, and, for whatever reason, decides she doesn't want the baby. The man, after hearing that she doesn't want the child, decides he wants the child himself.
Here's my question: If, in situation number one, the man was forced to pay child support for an unwanted child (and men often times are), wouldn't the woman in situation two (who decides abortion isn't right for her) also have to pay child support? Where's the line between the two?
Ultimately it takes two to tango, or in this situation have sex, and while there is a greater responsibility and pressure on the woman for the nine months that she is pregnant, after that there's nothing keeping her from walking away from it. Yes, it's easier for the man to walk away at any point, but if the guy wants to have the child, he'll stick around and help her for the nine months the woman is pregnant. While the two situations aren't exactly the same, they should be similar enough that child support would be warranted, right? And what if it wasn't a one night stand, but were long time lovers?
Situation No. 1
A completely inocuous one night stand happens, and oops! The woman gets pregnant, and, for whatever reason, decides that she will have and keep the baby. The man, on the other hand, wants absolutely nothing to do with the child.
Situation No. 2
A completely inocuous one night stand happens, and oops! The woman gets pregnant, and, for whatever reason, decides she doesn't want the baby. The man, after hearing that she doesn't want the child, decides he wants the child himself.
Here's my question: If, in situation number one, the man was forced to pay child support for an unwanted child (and men often times are), wouldn't the woman in situation two (who decides abortion isn't right for her) also have to pay child support? Where's the line between the two?
Ultimately it takes two to tango, or in this situation have sex, and while there is a greater responsibility and pressure on the woman for the nine months that she is pregnant, after that there's nothing keeping her from walking away from it. Yes, it's easier for the man to walk away at any point, but if the guy wants to have the child, he'll stick around and help her for the nine months the woman is pregnant. While the two situations aren't exactly the same, they should be similar enough that child support would be warranted, right? And what if it wasn't a one night stand, but were long time lovers?
*chants* Spam, spam, spam, spam...
Mar. 24th, 2006 09:07 pm1. Grab the nearest book.
2. Open it to page 161.
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the text of the sentence in your journal along with these instructions.
5. Don't search around and look for the coolest book you can find. Do what's actually next to you.
"It turned out that legislation was necessary for that, and Congress passed a bill adding the Philippines to the list of countries--the others were South American republics--eligible to receive U.S. military missions."
How sad is that?
2. Open it to page 161.
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the text of the sentence in your journal along with these instructions.
5. Don't search around and look for the coolest book you can find. Do what's actually next to you.
"It turned out that legislation was necessary for that, and Congress passed a bill adding the Philippines to the list of countries--the others were South American republics--eligible to receive U.S. military missions."
How sad is that?