"If women can't back out of pregnancies, men shouldn't be able to either"

[kpete]

Link to tweet

[50 Shades Of Blue]

1. I don't think one should be tied to the other.

Men should help support their children.

Women should have reproductive freedom.

Two separate issues for me.

[Ken Burch]

29. But if women lose reproductive freedom, which is a real possibility in this country...

It needs to be made impossible for the men who impregnate women to ever get out of taking responsibility for their actions.

Republicans want to ban abortion, not out of any actual concern for "life"-if they cared about preventing killing, they would be support programs to end homeless and poverty, they would oppose war and they would oppose the death penalty-but simply because they want to punish women for having sex, and particularly for daring to enjoy the sexual act.

So they pass endless pieces of legislation restricting choice, but refuse to do anything to punish the men who cause unintended pregnancies.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

34. Republicans are anti-women and anti-children. They are pro-oligarchs.

They won't pass any laws punishing men for or forcing men to support the result of their unintended pregnancies because Republicans are too beholden to the religious right which holds that women should only have procreative sex, and only in marriage. Single women and divorced women and their children? Eh! Not the Republicans' problem and never will be. Those ladies need to keep their legs together or shut that thing down, and their children can just pay the consequences for the fact that they didn't.

[SunSeeker]

2. This hardly makes up for being forced to have your rapist's baby.

Or having any baby against your will.

But I appreciate the point you are trying to make. The fact is, forced birthers don't give a shit about the baby, only the fetus. Once it is an actual baby born into this world, to these assholes the baby joins the ranks of "welfare moochers who deserve nothing."

[Mister Ed]

3. Rachel makes a good point, but you make a much better one. n/t

[Yupster]

23. No, Rachel makes a moronic point

So a guy has a one night stand with someone and she gets pregnant and decides to birth the baby.

According to Rachel, the couple should have to stay together for the next 18-21 years?

What if they can't stand one another?

Did Rachel become a fundamentalist Christian all of the sudden.

This is completely moronic.

[Mister Ed]

35. I think she's saying the opposite.

I think she's saying that since it would be ludicrous to force the guy in this scenario to commit himself to raising the child with her for the next twenty years, then isn't it also ludicrous to force a similar commitment onto the woman?

[Yupster]

36. Okay, so she's being sarcastic?

She actually means the opposite of what she's saying.

She's saying something idiotic to show how idiotic the argument is?

Okay.

I missed it, but if that's what she's doing okay.

[Sherman A1]

6. Agreed

That said, I believe her point is very valid and if we are going to force the one to occur then the other should be a given. Perhaps then we will see some logic where there apparently is none currently.

[okieinpain]

4. exactly n/t.

[ck4829]

5. If the state can ensure someone's well being for 9 months, it can do it for 72+ years.

[DeminPennswoods]

7. If so,

abortions would be legal and readily available everywhere.

[Behind the Aegis]

8. Hmmm...

[Iggo]

9. This.

[scscholar]

12. Considering the long wait and expensive (as in HUGE) costs to adopt...

I don't think this is quite true.

[Behind the Aegis]

14. How is it not true?

What does cost have to do with the truth of the cartoon?

[NickB79]

16. If you can't afford the adoption fees, your beliefs become moot

My wife and I are pro-choice and would love to adopt, but the costs stopped us pretty early in the process.

[Behind the Aegis]

26. That simply isn't true, nor what the cartoon is signifying.

It is the hypocrisy of those who are "pro-life" but aren't willing to adopt.

[pnwmom]

19. They don't have up to $45K to spare.

https://www.adoptivefamilies.com/how-to-adopt/domestic-adoption-myths-and-truths/

According to surveys conducted annually by Adoptive Families, the median total cost of a domestic adoption is $30,000 to $45,000, which tends to be considerably less than that of a typical international adoption.

[scscholar]

20. In this country, it's very expensive to buy a baby

If there wasn't a high demand, the price wouldn't be that high. A coworker recently spent over $25k to adopt.

[Behind the Aegis]

27. There are 159 million people who are "pro-life".

There are just over 107K children waiting to be adopted. I think there are plenty of "pro-lifers" who can "chose" to adopt.

[meaculpa2016]

31. The phrase "buy a baby" is ignorant...

and demeaning.

My wife and I adopted our two children when we were in our forties. Domestic agencies would not place a child with prospective parents our age so we went to Peru and Guatemala. We "bought" our son by spending four months in the middle of a war with the Sendero Luminoso. Three years later a trip to Guatemala was more like a vacation. On both occasions we came home broke, but the rewards of parenting were and are well worth it.

Our son and daughter are now 26 and 23 and are as much our children as anyone's. They have provided us with immeasurable joys and occasional heartaches, but they have enriched our lives in ways I cannot describe.

I should be surprised at this type of bigotry on a progressive site, but sadly it has become very commonplace.

[d_r]

33. for a baby

but there are older children, groups of siblings, children of color and children with disabilities waiting to be adopted.

[canetoad]

10. Maybe this idea should be taken a step further

Every male forced to give a DNA sample. Every foetus tested and the father identified. Let's see who cries about their rights being trampled on then.

[smirkymonkey]

13. If they are proven to be the father, their wages (or any legal income they have) should be garnished

and turned over to the mother for child support. I'm pretty sure we'd be seeing a lot more men at pro-choice marches.

[meow2u3]

21. In cases of rape, the payments should be called restitution

so the criminal doesn't go anywhere near the victim and her child.

[Yupster]

24. Doesn't this happen now?

Men have their wages garnished for their children all over the place.

In fact men can even have their wages garnished if a DNA test proves it's not their kid but they thought it was.

[braddy]

32. Yep, this is a weird thread, plus men can't insist on abortion and being absolved.

[demmiblue]

11. Umm... NO!

What a stupid argument.

[annabanana]

15. k&r. . . . . . n/t

[ffr]

17. Love it!

Attach that wording to any stupid KGOP bill and see how far it gets.

Then again, they might not read it. Meh.

[tenorly]

18. Yep. Most advanced countries have Patria Potestas laws.

But, thanks to decades of GOPee opposition, not the U.S.

[jmg257]

22. Well -atleast get them to cough up some cash...if a guy was gonna abandon someone

why want to keep him around?

[Yupster]

25. That was my thought too

Rachel is punishing the mother as much as the father.

If he's an ass, why would the mother want to keep him around, or even worse be forced to keep him around. Doesn't this set back women's rights a few generations.

If you have a baby with a man you must stay with him.

[Ken Burch]

28. Has any GOP-controlled body ever passed legislation to go after deadbeat dads?

n/t.

[Freddie]

30. Apples and oranges

The woman bears the physical risk of pregnancy and childbirth. The whole abortion question is, should she be forced to take that risk against her will? No. Period. And consent to sex is NOT consent to childbearing.
Men are already forced to (financially) support children "against their will". I have no problem with this as, again, she bore the physical risk. If he really doesn't want to be a father, use a condom, get a vasectomy, or (better yet) don't have sex unless you agree on the "what if."
And this goes both ways once the baby is born; she cannot give the baby up for adoption without his consent, and if he chooses to raise it she will have to pay child support.

[hamsterjill]

37. Best post I've read all night!

Very well stated. Thank you!

[meadowlander]

38. Forcing anyone to be a parent is a shitty idea

and the person who suffers the most is always the kid.

[DangerousRhythm]

39. Did Rachel even say this?

It seems like an odd thing for her to say, and we know, as Marilyn Monroe once said, "Memes can be misleading."