It’s a dumb starting place–ignoring the problems of challenges by the real father, there’s also the fact that those men who volunteer for this silly plan will suddenly be liable for child-support, etc if the woman then changes her mind.
It’s a bit of a risk, but IMO decent men should be willing to risk a little to support and aid women whose rights are being violated by the law.
If a woman wants absolutely 100% to never be pregnant then shouldn’t have sex with a man, is that what you’re saying?
OK - if a man 100% never wants to be on the hook for child support then he shouldn’t have sex with a woman. If a man does have sex with a woman he should accept that there is a non-zero (though preferably very, very small) risk that he will wind up being financially responsible for another human being for 18 years.
So I’m pretty liberal, but what exactly is wrong with this bill? The idea that a father has a say in whether his child is aborted doesn’t sound that irrational to me.
If the law said a child couldn’t be aborted if the biological father didn’t want it aborted (it could only be aborted if both parents want an abortion, assuming both parents want responsibility for the child), that doesn’t sound bad.
…as stupid as this proposed law is: with all due respect what you propose is incredibly dangerous. We’ve just watched in real time what happens when someone says one thing (we want to ban Muslims!) and then claims another (it wasn’t a Muslim ban!) in court. You are asking people to lie under oath. In cases where the real father is on the other side of the bench. How well are these “thousands of men” going to hold up under scrutiny from aggressive interrogation? As their personal lives, their relationships with their real life wives and girlfriends, are torn to shreds?
Worry about stopping this bill from passing first. And if it does pass: then battle to repeal it. But your suggestion won’t do anyone any good at all.
I’m all for fighting the bill. There might be better ideas on how to support women’s rights if the fight against the bill fails, and my idea is obviously far from foolproof. But that this form of resistance might risk harming some men doesn’t necessarily make it a bad idea. Decent people should be willing to risk at least a little in order to fight injustice.
It doesn’t sound bad to you that a man would have the right to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term? Really? It sounds horrendous to me (for all the reasons that previous posters have articulated).
Yes it is.
I strongly agree.
…are you going to be the first to volunteer your services?
Can the state compel you to work for it? You pay taxes right? How’s that for bodily autonomy? At some point for society to work we need to concede that society can make demands upon one’s body.
If I lived in Oklahoma, sure.
These are not demands on one’s bodily autonomy (which is not to say that they can’t be discussed).
The suggestion was to refrain from PIV, not all sexual activity. Abortion arguments aside, the idea that Western society should focus way less on penetrative sex is usually a progressive feminist point. Men love PIV, but a lot of women can’t orgasm from it, plus there’s a lot of weird cultural baggage around it (virginal purity, “loose women,” male entitlement, and so on).
Sounds reasonable.
Well, there you have it, folks: The mask is off.
…you are encouraging other people to break the law. You should have the courage of your convictions. Where you live shouldn’t be an excuse. You don’t have to live in Oklahoma to declare you are the father.
Hell yes, we should.
Okay, sure. I’ll gladly do it.
…and now we have it on record that you are willing to lie to the courts about being the father of a baby for the express purpose of “obstructing the rights” of the real father.
Do you have a partner? Did you consult with them before making this decision? Are they willing to live with the consequences of everybody thinking that you had an affair? What about your friends and family? Are you going to ask them to lie on your behalf?
I’ve said many times that there are at least six sides to the abortion issue, not two, and that I get tired of the pro-life side being portrayed as anti-choice. But this? This is plain and simple the anti-choice side. I wonder if they even care that they’re making the pro-lifers look bad by association.