Double Standard?

[Akka]

Gosh, this thread is starting making me sick.
All calls for "father should be obliged to blabla" or "mother should not force blablabla".
Lots talk about how the first person that should be protected is the child, lots talk about his rights and so. Lots wasted talk.

I'm the only person that think that if we talk about the best interests of the child, the FIRST thing is to be sure he was DESIRED by his parents ?
The best way to raise a child is to be both present and willing to see him born.

All that is talked here is a war between the parents about how they would tear their child apart to get the biggest part of him, or how they would try to dump him as fast as possible.

My thought : better to abort than to get a child in such conditions, and better to wait to be ready to get a child before having one.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil
I'm the only person that think that if we talk about the best interests of the child, the FIRST thing is to be sure he was DESIRED by his parents ?

We are talking about an accidental pregnancy. If its an accident then the child is most likely not desired by the parents.

The best way to raise a child is to be both present and willing to see him born.

Agreed

All that is talked here is a war between the parents about how they would tear their child apart to get the biggest part of him, or how they would try to dump him as fast as possible.

Thats not all we have been talking about. I suggest you re-read the thread.

My thought : better to abort than to get a child in such conditions, and better to wait to be ready to get a child before having one.

Obviously, but in the scenario we have been discussing the pregnancy was accidental.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Caligastia


We are talking about an accidental pregnancy. If its an accident then the child is most likely not desired by the parents.

Obviously, but in the scenario we have been discussing the pregnancy was accidental.

So if the child is not desired, let's abort. Isn't it obvious ?

[DinoDoc]

Nevermind

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil


So if the child is not desired, let's abort. Isn't it obvious ?

Not really. Its up to the woman. Abortion can render a woman infertile if something goes wrong. I agree that abortion is better than having an unwanted child, but not everyone will choose that option.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Caligastia


Not really. Its up to the woman. Abortion can render a woman infertile if something goes wrong. I agree that abortion is better than having an unwanted child, but not everyone will choose that option.

Then if it's up to the woman, don't bother the father asking him to pay to support children.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil


Then if it's up to the woman, don't bother the father asking him to pay to support children.

According to you this is just "wasted talk".

Originally posted by Akka le Vil
Gosh, this thread is starting making me sick.
All calls for "father should be obliged to blabla" or "mother should not force blablabla".
Lots talk about how the first person that should be protected is the child, lots talk about his rights and so. Lots wasted talk.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil
Then if it's up to the woman, don't bother the father asking him to pay to support children.

The father should have thought of that beforehand.

[Akka]

People are responsibles for THEIR decisions, not decisions of others.

Unless they BOTH agreed to get a child, I don't consider him to be willing having a child and to be responsible of an accident.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Caligastia


According to you this is just "wasted talk".

Yup. If you bother about the children, then the only thing to do is to be sure that both parents agree on having a child.
If one of them does not agree about the child, then I consider they SHOULD NOT have one.
So if a woman persist to keep the child she got, well it's her own responsability and she's the only one accountable for this.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil
People are responsibles for THEIR decisions, not decisions of others.

They are also responsible for the foreseeable consequences of those decisions of which this is.

[Akka]

Originally posted by DinoDoc


They are also responsible for the foreseeable consequences of those decisions of which this is.

Blablablah.

The girl can take pills, and the man can use condom. If one of them is used, then it's because they agreed to NOT have children, then the "foreseeable consequences of those decisions" is to not have children, then there is nothing to reproach to the man.
There is an accident ? Well, then they should either decide TOGETHER to keep the child or not. If the woman force the decision to keep it while the man does not want, it's HER decision.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil


Yup. If you bother about the children, then the only thing to do is to be sure that both parents agree on having a child.
If one of them does not agree about the child, then I consider they SHOULD NOT have one.

I agree.

So if a woman persist to keep the child she got, well it's her own responsability and she's the only one accountable for this.

It takes two to tango.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Caligastia
It takes two to tango.

Cf my previous message : the woman can force the decision to keep a child or not, so it's HER responsability.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil


Cf my previous message : the woman can force the decision to keep a child or not, so it's HER responsability.

Its her body. The man already took the risk of having a child when he had sex. He has to deal with the unforseen consequences.