View Full Version : Should men be able to choose?
pultneytooner
20-Apr-06, 19:36
A 25-year-old Michigan computer programmer named Matthew Dubay sued in federal court to avoid paying child support for his 7-month-old daughter. The girl's mother, he alleges, had claimed to be both infertile and on birth control, and he had made it clear all along that he didn't want children. The resulting pregnancy, as he saw it, was simply not his fault, and the child not in any way his responsibility. I don't think he should have to pay unless he wants to but what's your opinion?
If it is true that she claimed infertility and to be on birth control then no I don't think he should have to pay. Realistically he could have taken precautions but if he had can you imagine the fuss she probably would have made.
He ought to have seen that something was up when she claimed to be both infertile and using contraception, since you don't need the latter if you're the former.
Of course he should pay up - who else should? The taxpayer?
pultneytooner
20-Apr-06, 19:45
Being infertile and on birth control seems a bit strange to start with, maybe the alarm bells should have rang then.
connieb19
20-Apr-06, 19:47
As much as I feel sorry for him( alittle bit) I cannot understand how any man thinks he shouldn't pay for his child. Who does he think should? I think a man should take responsibility for birth control as much as a woman, if just for his own peace of mind. Better safe than sorry, and if not then he should accept the consequences.
pultneytooner
20-Apr-06, 19:49
Sorry Drutt, I must have posted at the same time as you, great minds think alike eh.:lol:
Being infertile and on birth control seems a bit strange to start with, maybe the alarm bells should have rang then.
But wimen are natural born little liars...its bred in to them along with their mothers milk, what chance has a poor male got in this day and age, they drink, they smoke, they swear, allegedly some keep the toilet seat up, they drive big 18 wheelers.....What chance has a decent man got? [mad] [para]
changilass
20-Apr-06, 19:57
But wimen are natural born little liars...its bred in to them along with their mothers milk, what chance has a poor male got in this day and age, they drink, they smoke, they swear, allegedly some keep the toilet seat up, they drive big 18 wheelers.....What chance has a decent man got? [mad] [para]
Thats half the wimen on here you have just struck out at including me, but as I know it was done tongue in cheek I will let you off lol
You are really just a big softie, but don't worry, I won't tell any one
connieb19
20-Apr-06, 20:09
I think men should have no choice at all, about anything!! They should do as they're told and keep us women happy...[smirk]
Billy Boy
20-Apr-06, 20:24
I think men should have no choice at all, about anything!! They should do as they're told and keep us women happy...[smirk]
i have been doing that for year's and i'm still alway's wrong lol[mad]
connieb19
20-Apr-06, 20:27
i have been doing that for year's and i'm still alway's wrong lol[mad]Of course, and you never will be right..lol but keep on trying..:lol:
I think men should have no choice at all, about anything!! They should do as they're told and keep us women happy...[smirk]
And how exactly does one keep a woman happy?!
The contraceptive pill would have worked a lot better if he'd got her to clamp it between her knees.
A 25-year-old Michigan computer programmer named Matthew Dubay sued in federal court to avoid paying child support for his 7-month-old daughter. The girl's mother, he alleges, had claimed to be both infertile and on birth control, and he had made it clear all along that he didn't want children. The resulting pregnancy, as he saw it, was simply not his fault, and the child not in any way his responsibility. I don't think he should have to pay unless he wants to but what's your opinion?
A child is not someone's "fault". Nor is the issue here faulty birth control. A person lives who needs the care, nurture and support of its parents.
connieb19
20-Apr-06, 20:32
And how exactly does one keep a woman happy?!Jeid, don't you know? Do you need Auntie Connies assistance? I will send you a pm. I don't want banned again..lol;) :o
connieb19
20-Apr-06, 21:11
I think men should have no choice at all, about anything!! They should do as they're told and keep us women happy...Grrrr[mad] thanks for the bad rep!!!! you men just cannot take a joke..[evil]
connie ya win some an u lose some lol
If you are going to tango and you don't want any "consequences", you make sure you take care of contraception at your end. That child exists because of two people, not one. Therefore two people are responsible for it. The only way he could garantee not becoming a daddy was not to dance. Once he danced he took a risk.
Can you imagine the spate of children abandoned because fathers no longer want the responsibility of taking care of their off-spring?
Jeid, don't you know? Do you need Auntie Connies assistance? I will send you a pm. I don't want banned again..lol
Thanks for the offer... Think I'll pass[para]
At the risk of major bad rep here lol.... what about the women who get pregnant to deliberately hold a man??? people can say it doesn't happen but of course it does I have heard stories of pins being pushed through condom wrappers etc. I know it is not the child's fault and it still deserves a loving upbringing but why should a man pay when he has been deliberately trapped?
Cedric Farthsbottom III
20-Apr-06, 21:33
At the risk of major bad rep here lol.... what about the women who get pregnant to deliberately hold a man??? people can say it doesn't happen but of course it does I have heard stories of pins being pushed through condom wrappers etc. I know it is not the child's fault and it still deserves a loving upbringing but why should a man pay when he has been deliberately trapped?
Sticking pins in condoms.Is that not a poor mans voodoo doll.:roll:
And how exactly does one keep a woman happy?!
If men knew the answer to that Jeid, the whole world would be a happier place, as Connie says keep trying mate, because females are very trying :eyes
dragonfly
20-Apr-06, 21:36
if its through the break up of a marriage / long term relationship then yes the man should pay but if through a quick fumble then I believe its the womans responsibility to ensure that she doesn't become pregnant
Unicorn, I agree with what you say too, some women do deliberately get pregnant in the hope they can keep the man :eyes
changilass
20-Apr-06, 21:38
if its through the break up of a marriage / long term relationship then yes the man should pay but if through a quick fumble then I believe its the womans responsibility to ensure that she doesn't become pregnant
Unicorn, I agree with what you say too, some women do deliberately get pregnant in the hope they can keep the man :eyes
If a man takes care of his own contraception he wouldn't be in a position to worry about having to 'pay'
yeah but what about the cases where it has been tampered with?
At the risk of major bad rep here lol.... what about the women who get pregnant to deliberately hold a man??? people can say it doesn't happen but of course it does I have heard stories of pins being pushed through condom wrappers etc. I know it is not the child's fault and it still deserves a loving upbringing but why should a man pay when he has been deliberately trapped?
The only man that ends up trapped is the complacient one. Men are not stupid (?) and should know how babies come about and how to avoid them.
connieb19
20-Apr-06, 21:41
Unicorn, I agree with what you say too, some women do deliberately get pregnant in the hope they can keep the man :eyesAll the more reason why men should be responsible for their own protection, just to be on the safe side.
changilass
20-Apr-06, 21:41
yeah but what about the cases where it has been tampered with?
If its his own contraception, any tampering must therefore be his own lol
Bingobabe
20-Apr-06, 21:41
At the risk of major bad rep here lol.... what about the women who get pregnant to deliberately hold a man??? people can say it doesn't happen but of course it does I have heard stories of pins being pushed through condom wrappers etc. I know it is not the child's fault and it still deserves a loving upbringing but why should a man pay when he has been deliberately trapped?
Yes thats pretty uncalled for if you want a baby at least have the decency to let that man know your not protected.Also a child should grow up in a loving enviroment not in a bitter dispute about maintence. And should be allowed to grow up knowing both parents but this is reality and that doesnt happen very often its the kids i feel sorry for.
pultneytooner
20-Apr-06, 21:42
If a man takes care of his own contraception he wouldn't be in a position to worry about having to 'pay' The fact the guy had no paternal instinct and the woman knew this and the fact that the women was 'infertile' and using contraception :confused then I think he kinda figured he was safe.
pultneytooner
20-Apr-06, 21:43
If it is proved that she knew all this and tricked him into fathering her child then I think, no, he should not pay unless he wants to.
so in this case we are just looking at one night stands then I assume and not relationships where a partner doesn't want or isn't ready for children and the other reckons a great way to keep a hold of them is a baby and will do anything to get one.
The only man that ends up trapped is the complacient one. Men are not stupid (?) and should know how babies come about and how to avoid them.
The best way to avoid babys is to stay out of Mothercare. Loads of them in there.
Bingobabe
20-Apr-06, 21:45
so in this case we are just looking at one night stands then I assume and not relationships where a partner doesn't want or isn't ready for children and the other reckons a great way to keep a hold of them is a baby and will do anything to get one.
I cant understand why any woman would want a baby with a total stranger sometimes people baffel me.:confused:
Something just ocurred to me about the title of this thread: Shouls a man be able to choose. YES he should be able to choose 100% of the time.
This man made a choice 8 months before the birth of his child..... and guess what, he cannot change his mind now.
changilass
20-Apr-06, 21:46
The fact the guy had no paternal instinct and the woman new this and the fact that thewomen was 'infertile' and using contraception (:confused ), then I think he kinda figured he was safe.
Back to what was said earlier, if she was infertile she would not need contraception, ignorance and gulibility on the mans part is no excuse, I feel sorry for the poor kid involved, there is another thread on here about bullying, if this kid stays in the same area it is likely to get bullied on this very subject.
Infertility is caused by different things. Some by hormone imbalances, BCP's are given to make periods come monthly but not as a cure for infertility.
BCP's can fail and (as I know myself) you can get pregnant after years of infertility.
If he truely never wanted children he should have had a vasectomy. He played the game now he has to pay the price.:eyes
i agree with you sandra b!
if he truly did not want kids he should have took more perm precations.
however at the end of teh day their is an innocent child in the middle of this.
also people need to remember there are two sides to every story .. so i very seriously doubt we know the whole of it..
for one he should have been using protection purley on a health basis
expecially if this was not a secure relationship.
also i can totally understand how a woman can be so desprate for a child she would use fair means or foul to acomplish that.
however i do not think she should try to entrap him.. exspecially if she went into this willing to decive the man.
social services would give her as much support as the man.
and if he truly wants nothing to do with the child .. then the best thing would be to sign away parental rights and walk away.. before this poor child can begin to inderstand what is going on in its life..
Billy Boy
20-Apr-06, 22:24
you can all say what you want at the end of the day he should got off at georgemas:eek:
pultneytooner
20-Apr-06, 22:26
Here's the full story:
http://smh.com.au/news/world/father-wants-to-divorce-his-sevenmonthold-daughter/2006/03/19/1142703216800.html
A 25-year-old Michigan computer programmer named Matthew Dubay sued in federal court to avoid paying child support for his 7-month-old daughter. The girl's mother, he alleges, had claimed to be both infertile and on birth control, and he had made it clear all along that he didn't want children. The resulting pregnancy, as he saw it, was simply not his fault, and the child not in any way his responsibility. I don't think he should have to pay unless he wants to but what's your opinion?
You ladies have all gotten away from the origional question set by pooltneytooner. The man in this case should get the benifit of the doubt, how could she be infertile and on the pill, and he made it clear he did not want children, another case of ...it has to be the mans fault, because its us that gives birth.
connieb19
20-Apr-06, 22:27
you can all say what you want at the end of the day he should got off at georgemas:eek:I don't think he should have gone on the train at all..[disgust] if he's not prepared to pay the fare..
connieb19
20-Apr-06, 22:28
You ladies have all gotten away from the origional question set by pooltneytooner. The man in this case should get the benifit of the doubt, how could she be infertile and on the pill, and he made it clear he did not want children, another case of ...it has to be the mans fault, because its us that gives birth.It dosn't really matter whos "fault" it is. There is now a child involved. If he shouldn't pay to bring it up, then who should?
It dosn't really matter whos "fault" it is. There is now a child involved. If he shouldn't pay to bring it up, then who should?
Good question connie...Her!!!!!
Billy Boy
20-Apr-06, 22:39
speaking as man i would'nt trust any woman i had only just met and was going to have a one night stand with [para] (besides Mrs Billy Boy would batter me ):~(
You ladies have all gotten away from the origional question set by pooltneytooner. The man in this case should get the benifit of the doubt, how could she be infertile and on the pill, and he made it clear he did not want children, another case of ...it has to be the mans fault, because its us that gives birth.
Once upon a time and reality...... which one is reality and which fiction?
A fella sees a lovely lass down at the waterfront. The lass does not find the lad distasteful either. They get to know eachother a little bit better over a drink and dance, and...as things tend to do, one thing led to another ......
Fiction (usually): they decide to take things slowly and arrange to have a coffee at weatherspoons the next day
reality (usually): animal instict is rearling it's ugly head, and heck....you only live once.
Supposing we go with reality, either one invites the other in for coffee. Over coffee things evolve a little:
fiction : both are cautious, and have taken care of contraception and discuss the use of condoms to avoid STD's like the sensible adults that they are, even though both are two sheets to the wind
Reality: The fella supposes or asks if the lassie is on contraceptives. The lassie thinks "it's only once....nothing is going to happen this once..its not even the right time of the month". The fella gets told that everything is taken care of or that it's the wrong time of the month.
Reality 2: contraception?whats that....don't bother us, we're busy!
A few weeks later the lassie finds out that maybe that only once actually could happen:
reality: two people were necessary to create that baby. Both made assumptions and took risks. Both have to live with the consequences.
Fiction: The lad calls foul, after all, he never intended to be a father with a stranger. He never intended to be a father full stop.
Fertility is not an exclusively female characteristic. No one is partitioning blame. Both are to blame (if you want to use this word). Nor is the financial contribution of this reluctant father expected to be the only financial contribution to the up-bringing of this child. The mother also contributes financially. Both pay. Both should pay to raise this child that resulted from poor judgement on both parts.
I say again: everyone has an equal choice in becoming a parent. If you are a man you make your choice being responsible for your contraception. If you are a woman you make a choice being responsible for your contraception. If you are responsible for your contraception you will know that it is not 100% infalible. You will also think, as a responsible person, that if you have a fumble with a stranger, that you don't know they are telling the truth. If you are in a stable relationship and know that you definately don't want to be a parent and are not sure of your partner, you will have to take care of yourself. Knowing all this you will measure the risk versus the thrill and live with the consequences if you choose the thrill.
It's not a case of it's the man's fault because we give birth. It's a case of two people making individual desicions that have a single outcome. If you cannot live with that outcome you (male and/or female) make sure not to take the wrong decision. The one person that should not be the one to pay is the child,which unfortunately happens all to often.
I suppose it's one way of getting a meal ticket for 18 years!
I suppose it's one way of getting a meal ticket for 18 years!
Hmmm...mealticket for child or mother??? You have to be precise oh wise JAWS, this is caitness.org after all!;)
I wouldn't know having been a single parent myself, although I must admit that my two weren't babies at the time.
I'm mindful of another thread where there was some grave doubt expressed that any mother would walk away from her children. Yes some do, and some do it even when the children are babies.
Such matters are not as one sided as people would like to believe, although it is much more comforting to believe it is.
changilass
21-Apr-06, 01:34
I wouldn't know having been a single parent myself, although I must admit that my two weren't babies at the time.
I'm mindful of another thread where there was some grave doubt expressed that any mother would walk away from her children. Yes some do, and some do it even when the children are babies.
Such matters are not as one sided as people would like to believe, although it is much more comforting to believe it is.
Being involved in fostering, you would be surprised at just what some parents can do, there are times when a child is better off without its parents
Being involved in fostering, you would be surprised at just what some parents can do, there are times when a child is better off without its parents
Changilass, you have my total respect. Thee are times when you must have to put the pieces of some poor child back together when somebody else has made a very good attempt at totally destroying them.
I know that some parents should be drowned at birth, the birth of their child that is, because they are unfit to be let loose with a pet cockroach never mind a child.
I suppose it's one way of getting a meal ticket for 18 years!
A meal ticket? How much is child support?
Just went back and read the article, he's being asked to pay $500 a month, that works out to be about 70 pounds a week. After she buys clothes, nappies, food, childcare and all the other things a baby needs I doubt she'll be living the life of luxury.
Being involved in fostering, you would be surprised at just what some parents can do, there are times when a child is better off without its parents
I have always said you have a beeg heart Changilass
The fact the guy had no paternal instinct and the woman knew this and the fact that the women was 'infertile' and using contraception :confused then I think he kinda figured he was safe.
Safe? Has he never heard of AIDS, ghonorrea and other STD's?
A meal ticket? How much is child support?
Just went back and read the article, he's being asked to pay $500 a month, that works out to be about 70 pounds a week. After she buys clothes, nappies, food, childcare and all the other things a baby needs I doubt she'll be living the life of luxury.
Exactly, 100% agree with you SandraB.
And that money is not equivalent to investment of the custodial parent ( be they father or mother).
Do not think for one minute that the 70 quid a week is easy money for the time, the work, the constraints on your life and just being alone puts on you. Most custodial parents do not begrudge their children all this. But the non custodial parent (who is often adored as the parent who comes round to take them out for fun and games every so often and will more often than not have nothing to do with the nitty gritty of daily living and discipline) gets to do only the fun bits (if he/she wants) and considers their responsibilities to end when signing the doted line at the ottom of the check ( if they actually do this and don't just do their best not to)
He should have to pay[mad] ,nobody forced him not to where a condom! If he was certain he never wanted to bring a child into the world regardless of the women saying she was infertile he should have still use protection. It is as much his responsibility as the womans.
the only person responsible for his mistake is himself. We are responsible for our own actions - if she had said - walk off that cliff and youll fly then could he sue cos he fell and broke his neck???
sex makes babies and it does it very effectively - the only 100% sure way not to make a baby is not to have sex. contraception is never 100% safe nor is infertility. if you are prepared to have sex then you have to live with your responsibility for your mistake
Excuse me ladies, it takes two to tango...she was up for it as much as he was, she told the lies...thus she is 80% responsible IMHO[disgust]
and she is going to provide a happy healthy and secure home for the child she says in the article and he isnt going to have anything to do with it except pay for it - he is getting off lightly if you ask me which is the harder of the two do you think
How do you know she told lies??
Excuse me ladies, it takes two to tango...she was up for it as much as he was, she told the lies...thus she is 80% responsible IMHO[disgust]
It take TWO to tango....you said it!!!!!!Do you think that 70 pounds a week is the be all end all to raising that child. Do you think it covers even half? Do you think it covers 20%?
If you can't pay the fine then don't commit the crime.
moose and Lindsay
21-Apr-06, 18:39
It take TWO to tango....you said it!!!!!!Do you think that 70 pounds a week is the be all end all to raising that child. Do you think it covers even half? Do you think it covers 20%?
If you can't pay the fine then don't commit the crime.
Well said :o)
How do you know she told lies??
Obviously she lied, he said so didn't he?
Obviously she lied, he said so didn't he?
and men dont lie??
and men dont lie??
Obiron, I will not even answer such a daft question, we are all saints...I know my Mother told me so
Obiron, I will not even answer such a daft question, we are all saints...I know my Mother told me so
lol:lol:
guessing thats where the theory about lying comes from. not saying nothing cause am inclined to tell a few to the kids.
Where does anybody want to start?
From the point of view of a child brought up in a single parent family? Been there.
From the point of view of a single parent abandoned by a partner? Been there.
From the point of view of a mother who decides she wants nothing to do with her child’s father, and having taken that decision decides that means nothing to do with any support from him? Well, not been there, wrong sex, but I have somebody very close to me who has!
I also knew a woman who insisted her first husband paid maintenance for their children, even though she had remarried and didn't need the money. She did it just because she believed it put pressure on his marriage by reminding his wife she was still around.
She was married to a friend of mine who brought her children from babies as his own. Once they were in their teens and could look after themselves she walked out on him too and moved in with somebody else.
There's always more to any story than meets the eye and some people simply come under the heading of "users".
I am surprised that more people are not aware of how mercenary and manipulative some people are.
Oh yes, the "only £70 a week”, I've come across that one too. Ask for something very reasonable in order to get your court order, leave it a while, and then keep going back for more and more and more and more!
Of course, if you can find somebody who has good future job prospects then you're quids in!
It beats the risk of marrying a doddering old millionaire who might be stubborn enough not to die quickly!
Oh yes, the "only £70 a week”, I've come across that one too. Ask for something very reasonable in order to get your court order, leave it a while, and then keep going back for more and more and more and more!
Of course, if you can find somebody who has good future job prospects then you're quids in!
It beats the risk of marrying a doddering old millionaire who might be stubborn enough not to die quickly!
I think this thread is about discussing average people on an average wage. We are definately not talking "Elizabeth Hurley" situations here (not that I don't think the child is to be maintained by both parents and kudo's for her for fighting for that).
That child had to be fed clothed, housed and educated everyday, so if both parents are worse off then they are both going to have to make sacrifices. I am not sure about what I am going to say now, because it is a feeling I get from the news here, but parents who are clever enough to evade taxation and the child support agency (?) (which is about as easy as dodging a ball thrown by a visually impaired person) can live their lives without worrying about what their children might need. I also get the idea that the ammount of child support is not proportionate to the income of the parent, being a very large percentage for those on a low income and very low percentage for those on an average income. In Portugal it is expected that the child grow up in the same financial ease as the parents. You cannot be living in luxury while your child is on social service welfare benefits and living in third generation hand me downs. So child support is supposed to be in proportion to your income, with evaluation from social services into your life style and ajusted in function of it (there are also major tax evaders back home).
Another thing that was mentioned: remarriage. The non-custodial parent still continues to be the parent and should carry on supporting his children. The children already benefit from the financial boost that two adults in the household naturally brings with the remarriage. But the reponsibility of the absent father/mother does not end nor can it end. Afterall, that would leave you a step away from non-custodial parents remarrying and claiming they can no longer support their own children because they are supporting their new spouses ones. It makes no sense.
I think men should have no choice at all, about anything!! They should do as they're told and keep us women happy...[smirk]
My wife lets me make all the decisions as long as I ask her first :)
Seriously though, if a man is adamant that he doesn't want any children he has two options, vasectomy or condoms, if he opts for neither then he must trust his partner and abide by her decision no matter what the motivation or outcome. I have no sympathy for any man who complains of being "trapped", we all have to take responsibility for our actions.
Ju, the Child Support Agency is a joke and was never intended to live up to it's title. It was set up as a tax collecting organisation and failed spectacularly. The idea was that the "form filling idiots" would be forced to pay up and the excess would pay for those children where the disappeared parent could not be found or could not afford to pay up.
If I remember correctly it didn't matter how much the missing parent payed into the system the amount payed to the single parent remained the same no matter what. At the end of the day, the single parent and child was no better off.
It might have changed since then but I do know that the whole system is a complete failure which has created far more problems than it was ever intended to resolve.
I'm old enough to remember the trick of "get yourself pregnant then he'll have to marry you!" or even better, say you were pregnant and mysteriously become un-pregnant after the wedding. Of course, those tricks fell out of general use after unmarried mothers were not shunned by society in the 1960s.
It's fine wagging the finger at those "nasty evil men", but many women are just as devious and using as many men and always have been. The picture painted of the poor little woman misused by the nasty brute just does not bear up to scrutiny in this day and age. Long gone are the days when sweet young innocent girls could get away with pleading they didn't know what they were doing. The average 13 year old now knows far more than their unmarried great-grandmother did when she was six or seven years older.
Then there is the other trick. Refuse to marry the father, especially if he really does have an interest in the child. That way you can bully him to your hearts content using the threat, "Well, we're not married. You have no rights so I'll make sure you don't see the children ever again but you'll still have to pay up!"
Unmarried fathers will be forced to pay for their child but have virtually no rights at all as a parent and, under those circumstances, the grand-parents have no rights at all!
darkie@dreamtilt.com.au
23-Apr-06, 06:19
But wimen are natural born little liars...its bred in to them along with their mothers milk, what chance has a poor male got in this day and age, they drink, they smoke, they swear, allegedly some keep the toilet seat up, they drive big 18 wheelers.....What chance has a decent man got? [mad] You are a brave man Golach,hope the wimen dont find you,might do you some damage you know where [para]
Bingobabe
23-Apr-06, 07:08
Unmarried fathers will be forced to pay for their child but have virtually no rights at all as a parent and, under those circumstances, the grand-parents have no rights at all![/quote]
Correct my husband pays maintence for a child he dosent see and his mother doesnt see this child either.Its a sad fact of life some women are twisted and bitter and will use the child to make there ex partner suffer.Why should someone pay for a child there not allowed to see.
pultneytooner
23-Apr-06, 09:57
Should he have had a vasectomy if he didn't want children?
The simple answer is yes, but psychologically it's a very different proposition.
Should he have had a vasectomy if he didn't want children?
The simple answer is yes, but psychologically it's a very different proposition.
Vasectomy is not the only solution. You have condoms with which you accept the risk of pregnancy. You have "keeping your troosers on", 100% safe with regard contraception. And I do believe that a vaccine is being developed to eliminate the production of spermatozoides temporarily, but considering its experimental and is not available yet, better use the other two not to be called daddy in the next couple of years.
He wanted the sex and didn't want to use protection. Result waaaaaaaaaa nine months later.
.
He wanted the sex and didn't want to use protection. Result waaaaaaaaaa nine months later.
Obviously she wanted it also, so it was ok for her to trap him.She told the porkies, so she should pay the piper
Obviously she wanted it also, so it was ok for her to trap him.She told the porkies, so she should pay the piper
Golach, he was trapped because he did not cover his behind. If he did not want to be a dad he should have made sure he would not "be trapped". He had the means to do so.Anyway, you are supposing that the only possible lair is the female in the story. Could you not entertain just for a moment that maybe he is lying when he says he was told she was sterile/ on contraception ( which to my mind makes no sense, afterall why take a tablet a day if you know you aren't going to get pregnant?)?
If I tell you I can make mud to gold will you buy the formula off me???
Golach, he was trapped because he did not cover his behind.
How sure to be sure should this bloke have been to not to be a father. The lass said she couldn't concieve and she was on the pill, should he have worn a condom as well? LOL
Is the word of a woman not worth anything?
Niall Fernie
23-Apr-06, 18:28
I'm pretty sure that there are a few medical reasons why a woman could be on the pill (or have a coil) other than contraception.
changilass
23-Apr-06, 18:53
Is it not about time people accepted responsibility, rather than blaming others for their 'mistakes'.
Does it really matter what he/she said or who is lying.
If you take full responsibility for your actions then this situation would not arise
How sure to be sure should this bloke have been to not to be a father. The lass said she couldn't concieve and she was on the pill, should he have worn a condom as well? LOL
Is the word of a woman not worth anything?
HIV, herpes virus, papilloma virus, hepatitis, syphallis, Trichomona, lice, ghonorrea, Chlamydia.... these are a few of the reasons you should use a condom even if your sexual partner claims to be a virgin having lived in a convent to the date he/she met you.
Niall, there are reasons to take the pill if not for contraception, but that is mute since apparently this person wasn't ( I say apparently because even with the pill there is 2% failures.
HIV, herpes virus, papilloma virus, hepatitis, syphallis, Trichomona, lice, ghonorrea, Chlamydia.... these are a few of the reasons you should use a condom even if your sexual partner claims to be a virgin having lived in a convent to the date he/she met you.
Niall, there are reasons to take the pill if not for contraception, but that is mute since apparently this person wasn't ( I say apparently because even with the pill there is 2% failures.
With so many experts advising people to take so many precautions against so many dangers I worry about how the human race is ever going to survive. No wonder there is a panic over a falling birth rate, I'm surprised there are any births at all.
A lot of the dangers associated with sex is the modern day secular version of the old outdated religious dogma that sex is sinful and will lead to debauchery in this world and to eternal damnation in the next.
The same sort of people who used to try to terrorise us with the dangers of the Devil are now trying to terrorise us with the dangers of diseases.
They remind me of old Private Frazer in Dad's Army, "We're all Dooooomed!"
With so many experts advising people to take so many precautions against so many dangers I worry about how the human race is ever going to survive. No wonder there is a panic over a falling birth rate, I'm surprised there are any births at all.
A lot of the dangers associated with sex is the modern day secular version of the old outdated religious dogma that sex is sinful and will lead to debauchery in this world and to eternal damnation in the next.
The same sort of people who used to try to terrorise us with the dangers of the Devil are now trying to terrorise us with the dangers of diseases.
They remind me of old Private Frazer in Dad's Army, "We're all Dooooomed!"
On this, my friend I must agree whole - hearted'ly,but if I do remember Old Frazer had more teeth than you.[lol]
On this, my friend I must agree whole - hearted'ly,but if I do remember Old Frazer had more teeth than you.[lol]
Aye, and more hair too as I remember! :grin:
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.