Things to think of before you get married again..

Phil wrote:

[distortion deleted]

"His semen, his choice, his responsibility."

All his fault, got it

What about the moral responsibility she should have to at least
inform him of the pregnancy?
You keep trying that sleazy trick, but it's not gonna work.

[distortion deleted]

That she has such a moral responsibility does not serve to negate any
responsibility that he has.

A responsibility you'd never place on a woman, obviously.

But I just *did* place responsibility on the woman, and I have done so
before. What bothers you is that I will not put up with your using the
woman's responsibility to negate the man's responsibility.

What I'm asking you to do is to accept the responsibilities that *you*
have, and you respond by resisting that with every fiber of your
being.

No, you just can't accept the fact that it's all lopsided, that women
have all the choices and only the responsibility they choose while men
have no choices yet exactly the responsibility the woman chooses for
them.

That is factually false. And it's not the first time you've been
factually false, either.

What that boils down to is that the facts do not support your preferred
conclusions, and your arguments are not only factually bankrupt, but
morally bankrupt as well, so you are forced to resort to lying in a vain
attempt to maintain your bankrupt fiction.

I do not truck with liars.

I just took a look at the child support guidelines for Michigan and
Virginia, two jurisdictions in which I have lived. Both base child
support on the combined gross incomes of both parents, as well as taking
into account the amount of time the child spends with each. Basically,
it's the same sort of equity-based system that will be going into effect
here in Minnesota on January 1.

You might want to take a look at the child support guidelines in the
jurisdiction in which you live.

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Bob Whiteside wrote:
"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Tripped over it again, did you?

Phil wrote:

You also raise another interesting problem: what if the mother
doesn't tell him about the pregnancy, does he STILL have
responsibilities and what are they?
It's still his semen, right? I mean, just because he doesn't know
that
he did something doesn't mean that he didn't do it. So yeah, he still
has a degree of moral accountability, and if the child is alive, he
definitely has legal accountability.
How so?
Because it's his semen.

"His semen, his choice, his responsibility."

What about the moral responsibility she should have to at least
inform him of the pregnancy?
You keep trying that sleazy trick, but it's not gonna work.

That she has such a moral responsibility does not serve to negate any
responsibility that he has.

What I'm asking you to do is to accept the responsibilities that *you*
have, and you respond by resisting that with every fiber of your being.

Disgusting.

Your little feminist biology lesson is based on wishful thinking and not
established biological information.

It's not his semen? Whose semen is it, hers? You're gonna tell us that
she impregnated herself? Or are you going for immaculate conception?

Actually, all your questions are irrelevant.


How hard is it to understand eggs are a scarcer resource than sperm?

And how, exactly, does that negate the biological fact that it's his
semen, and that without his semen there's no pregnancy?

What y'all are all about is negating the male's responsibility by
pointing to the female's responsibility. Well, last time I read a
biology book, it took two to procreate, which makes both of them
responsible for the outcome.

Actually, what you think is irrevelant.


To say men are responsible for women's bad choices in sperm is to
transfer
the biological misjudgments made by women to men.

So don't say that. I haven't, and you shouldn't, either.

Actually, no one cares what you say.


The femwits who can't
accept their biological destiny want to have the state step in with
remedies
to cover up their biological mistakes. The state's solution is to use
men's
money to cover-up the lack of responsibility by women who don't select
good
mates.

And as always with y'all shirkers, it's all about the money.

At least you are honest enough to admit it, I'll give you that.

Actually, we are just toying with you so you can make a bigger ass of
yourself.


Problem is, the facts don't support your desired conclusions, so you're
forced to resort to falsehoods, spin, and assorted trickery. But you
can't get past the essential facts:

"His semen, his choice, his responsibility."

"Her body, her choice, her responsibility."

"For every choice, a consequence."

Actually, nobody buys your bull**** conclusions!

And actually, by the way, nobody believes you are a "Fred."

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
As before, let's get right to the nub of it:

Phil wrote:

When speaking of custody or child $upport, "responsibility" is the same
as money. Primarily, fathers have a "responsibility" for child $upport
but the mother does not have an equal "responsibility". As a matter of
course, fathers pay money to the mothers but mothers do not have to spend
it on the children as long as they are minimally cared for (using the
fact that nearly all custodial parents are mothers). IOW, she has less
"responsibility" to the same children while his sole "responsibility" is
$$$.

There you go again. To you, it's all about the money.

"responsibility ... : moral, legal, or mental accountability"

http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dicti...responsibility

Still, you have helped to make my point that, at the end of the day,
this is all about money. Not moral accountability. Not informed consent.
Not the welfare of the child. Money. And specifically evading the
payment of money when one is both morally and legally accountable to do
so.

Legally, yes. Morally, hell no.

So after all this, you do agree that it's all about the money, to the
point that you will evade your moral accountability for contributing to
the pregnancy, and even your moral accountability to the child who carries
your DNA.

That's disgusting.

Nobody said that, Fred. Quit twisting everything and really listen for a
change. Geesh!

Tracy wrote:
"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...
"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
That she has such a moral responsibility does not serve to negate any
responsibility that he has.

What I'm asking you to do is to accept the responsibilities that *you*
have, and you respond by resisting that with every fiber of your being.

To say men are responsible for women's bad choices in sperm is to transfer
the biological misjudgments made by women to men.

I'm jumping in here for a second because I have not seen a single sentence
Fred has written that suggests he is saying men are responsible for women's
bad choices. All he has said is that men should take responsibility for
where he puts his own penis. His ejaculation is due to him placing his
penis inside of the woman and engaging in the sexual act with her.
Pregnancy is a possible outcome of the act, which in most cases the act
itself is mutually agreed on. So I'm not sure why anyone is reading more
into someone stating that a man should take responsibility for his choice -
where to put his penis.

At the end of the day, it's all about the money.

These males are trying to evade responsibility for their choices so as
to falsely justify not having to pay child support, or medical bills, or
whatever else they might have to spend on someone else as a result of
their choices. And "someone else" includes the child.

I could understand an argument based on the child support laws in a
given jurisdiction being based only on the income of the noncustodial
parent. That's simply not equitable. But that is not the case in every
jurisdiction, and even if it is in a given jurisdiction, it speaks to
challenging or changing the law, as has been done here in Minnesota, not
using an inequitable law as justification to evade supporting his child.

All I'm asking is that both men and women take responsibility for their
choices. What's wrong with that?

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Let's get right to the nub of it:

Phil wrote:

Not *the* responsibility. *A* responsibility.

"Her body, her choice, her responsibility."

"His semen, his choice, his responsibility."

"For every choice, a consequence."

But not equal choices nor consequences including after childbirth when
both parents are, or should be, equal.

First of all, when it comes to reproduction, you are confusing equality
with sameness. Males and females have different sets of choices and
consequences because they are not biologically the same. When you can bear
children, then I will grant you the same set of choices regarding
reproduction as are available to women. Until then, you'll just have to
work with the choices and consequences available to men.

Huh? Did anyone ask that men be able to bear children? Where do you come
up with this weird stuff?


After childbirth, there should be equity. In some jurisdictions, that is
the case; in others, it is not. That's an issue for legislatures to
resolve.

Oh--and until then men should sit idly by and just accept the humiliation
visited upon them in family court? What is WRONG with you?

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Phil wrote:

After childbirth, there should be equity. In some jurisdictions, that is
the case; in others, it is not. That's an issue for legislatures to
resolve.

It is NOT the case in ANY jurisdiction in the US, PERIOD.

So now you are resorting to lying.

Disgusting.

[Actually, folks, he doesn't want equity. He wants to keep all the money
for himself.]

If he's wrong, why don't you inform us of where these jurisdictions are
instead of this silly little coy act of yours?

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
I just took a look at the child support guidelines for Michigan and
Virginia, two jurisdictions in which I have lived. Both base child support
on the combined gross incomes of both parents, as well as taking into
account the amount of time the child spends with each. Basically, it's the
same sort of equity-based system that will be going into effect here in
Minnesota on January 1.

You might want to take a look at the child support guidelines in the
jurisdiction in which you live.

What a load of naivete! chuckle

"Phil" wrote in message
link.net...

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Phil wrote:
"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Gini wrote:
"Fred" wrote
....................
What, I want to know, is so damned bad about suggesting that people
take responsibility?
==
Not at all--In fact we agree. She had the responsibility to not have
sex when she was ovulating
and had the responsibility to know when she is ovulating and the
responsibility to tell him when
she was ovulating. Apparently, she failed to do so. What we seem to
have (systemically, in our society)
is a failure to compel women to accept responsibility for their
actions and decisions and we them condemn
men for not anticipating her lack of responsibility.
I don't think that it is an either/or situation. Both parties bear a
responsibility. What I object to are the representations to the effect
that one party is solely responsible to the exclusion of the other.
Think about it: some men use sanctimonious statements such as "her
body, her choice, her responsibility" to evade their own
responsibilities. I know this because those men conspicuously evade my
statement, "his semen, his choice, his responsibility."

Failing to grasp that HER choice, whatever is may be, overrides his
choice and with it goes the sole responsibility for that choice.
The ONE making the decisions should accept the consequences of their
decision.

Those who contributed to the condition are both accountable.

But as you say in another post, men and women are different and have
different responsibilities due to their biological differences so take a
stand and stand by it already.


With pregnancy, men should be held equally liable to that of the mother,
which means they should have the option of raising the child as they see
fit every bit as much as the other but when the parents are not involved
in an intact relationship, BOTH parents should be equal in custody,
support (financial, emotional, spiritual and all others) and every other
facet of the child's life unless there is a valid and just reason not to
allow it.

That "valid and just" phrase speaks to equity, which is fine with me. Not
equality; equity.

No, equality, I didn't misspell it.


On the other hand, as long as women have the option to just walk away
from a living, breathing child, denying men the same right in the same
period is sexist and unequal treatment for similarly situated people. As
long as women have the option to decide whether to become parents at
all, men should have the same legal right during the same period.

And there it is! The man seeks to evade responsibility for his actions.


No, not at all. You need to learn to comprehend the written word. That is
NOT what I said. Perhaps if I typed r-e-a-l s-l-o-w...
I'm promoting equality. You see it as something else. Why, I'm not sure
but I suspect you are a gender-feminist and ashamed to admit it.

Maybe "he" is really a "she" who is not getting the amount she feels she is
entitled to. OR maybe his mother didn't get enough child support form any
of the men she let knock her up so she wouldn't have to work. He (or she)
sounds bitter, angry, and absolutely foolsih. (and maybe related to
MoonShyne--you can tell by the tap dancing)

"Phil" wrote in message
nk.net...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Gini wrote:
"teachrmama" wrote
............................
And you, Fred, are totally *dismissing* WOMEN'S responsibilities! I am
a woman, and I find it demeaning that you keep harping on what MEN
should do, but not a hint about how WOMEN should handle their
responibilities in the same situation. Everything a woman does after
the sex act is a consequence of where that mean old man left his
semen. Nonsense! Or maybe I'm just reading you wrong--why don't you
clearly delineate what the woman's responsibilities are after the
consequence of pregnancy becomes an issue.
==
A ride to the CSE office? (Because she's *owed* it, of course.)


I guess that the matter is best explained by reference to the theme of
the game Fable: "For every choice, a consequence."

So he chooses to spread his semen hither and yon, and she chooses to let
him spread it in her. And let's say that the consequence is pregnancy.
Now there are other choices to be made, in this case by her, and from
those choices will spring consequences in turn.

Had there been no pregnancy, the consequences resulting therefrom would
not have occurred, because the choices resulting therefrom would not
have had to be made. And had he not spread his semen around, or had she
chosen not to let him spread his semen in her, there would have been no
pregnancy.

Yes, she contributed to that pregnancy. But so did he, and attempts to
deny that fact with sanctimonious bleatings to the effect of "her body,
her choice, her responsibility" are simply not valid.

Yes, he does not have input into certain downstream
choices/consequences. That's unfortunate, but it does not absolve him
from taking at least some responsibility for the consequences of his
behavior in spreading his semen hither and yon, including downstream
consequences not of his choosing, for at the end of the day it's "his
semen, his choice, his responsibility."

Abortion? Without an unwanted pregnancy, there is no abortion. And
without his semen, there is no unwanted pregnancy. "His semen, his
choice, his responsibility."

Child support? Without a pregnancy, there is no child to support. And
without his semen, there is no pregnancy. "His semen, his choice, his
responsibility."

What, I want to know, is so damned bad about suggesting that people take
responsibility?

PLEASE pay better attention, Fred! You have never heard me deny the
responsibility of either parent--never! What I AM saying is that WOMEN
also need to be held responsible! BOTH parties are resposible, and BOTH
should have both RIGHTS and RESPONSIBILITIES!

I think where you're losing him is when you advocate women having similar
responsibility or men having similar rights.
Phil #3

Yep--I think you're right.