"Robert" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 17:06:29 -0400, Animal05
wrote:

teachrmama wrote:
"Robert" wrote in message
...

On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 00:32:02 -0700, "Chris" wrote:


"Robert" wrote in message
om...

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 10:04:32 -0700, "Chris" wrote:


What do you care how irresponsible the woman is if you are taking
responsibility for YOUR sexual behavior?

Since the woman is the final arbiter of whether or not she will bear
children, the man doesn't have much of a responsibility regarding
this,

does

he.

Yep, he can make damn sure it's not his children.

Indeed he can, but not a prerequisite. Whether the children she decides
to
bring into the world are fathered by him or not does not change his
lack
of
responsibility. It is impossible for him to be responsible for her SOLE
choice to bear children.


Whether or not she has a child is none of his business, as long as
it's not his child. If he ****'s up, and she has his child he has a
obligation to support that child. Any ******* that refuses to support
his child, needs to be horse whipped, and castrated. Don't want a
woman to have your child, don't have unprotected sex with her.
A man has the absolute responsibility to support his offspring.


You keep forgetting a VERY IMPORTANT part, Robert. It is HIS CHILD! He
has
the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to parent that child. He should have that child with
him
50% of the time. And the mother should be forced to provide 50% of the
financial support of the child, just as the father is. FORCED LABOR if
necessary! You keep leaving that part out. I'm not sure why.




Isn't it interesting how "robert" wishes to ascribe as a "right" an
unatural process to a woman, and assign an "absolute responsibility" to
a man where none exists.

What both you idiots are trying to ignore, is we are discussing a
man that doesn't want a child. A responsible intelligent man, doesn't
knock up a woman that he doesn't want to raise a family with. But the
*******s that wants to enjoy unprotected sex, with the woman bearing
all the responsibility.

But, Robert, you still haven't clarified your position. IF the man wants
the child--but does not want an ongoing relationship with the woman, nor she
with him--do you feel that 50/50 shared custody with each parent providing
for the child while the child is with them is the way to go?

IF the woman does not want the child, but the father does, should the woman
bef forced to provide for the child for 18-22 years--even with forced labor
if necessary?

I really am curious as to your feelings on this subject. Not everyone
coaught up in the child support system have tried to escape their
responsibilities. Some are glad to pay, but are given NO OPPORTUNITY to be
a real parent.