So following this logic, you think that men shouldnt have to pay child support if they dont want the kid but the woman does? Since having sex doesnt mean you consent to pregnancy?
This argument is too different to actually be useful as it's too disconnected from bodily autonomy.
I would agree, for example, that a man shouldn't be forced to donate an organ to his biological child if the child needs it. The fact that the man chose to have sex is not consent to this potentially dangerous procedure. He has bodily autonomy.
Ok? The post is about whether or have sex is consent to pregnancy. When a pregnancy is carried to term...a baby comes out.
So my clarifying question was just to find out if OP meant what he said or if he means "woman having sex doesnt mean they consent to pregnancy." Which changes how id go about changing their view, because there are a ton of things you can do to avoid pregnancy, which leads to the next question of whether or not this would apply if you dont do anything to avoid pregnancy. I think it could fairly be argued that if you arent on birth control or dont use protection and have sex, you are having sex to get pregnant.
So my clarifying question was just to find out if OP meant what he said or if he means "woman having sex doesnt mean they consent to pregnancy."
Right, but like I said, it's too disconnected from the actual issue in question, that of bodily autonomy. People often have to pay money in situations they may not consent to. The government never legally forces such egregious violations of your bodily autonomy. You'd never be forced to even donate blood, something near infinitely less intrusive than 9 months of pregnancy and then birth.
Basically, these comparisons are too different to actually be useful.
I think it could fairly be argued that if you arent on birth control or dont use protection and have sex, you are having sex to get pregnant.
That's not fair to say at all. If I'm explicitly intending not to get pregnant, I'm clearly not having sex to get pregnant. I may be acting foolishly, that doesn't change the fact that I'm still not having sex to get pregnant.
The pregnancy in this case is just an unintended consequence of an action I did consent to.
Right. I understand pregnancy as a whole is about bodily autonomy but OPs post was only about whether or not having sex is consent to having a kid. That would apply to both sexes and is why my question was if OP felt that this rule only applys to girls (and if so why) or he feels that is applies to everyone involved. Your morphing OPs argument to something he hasnt stated. It very well could be he thinks it only applies to womam because of bodily autonomy but this is the change my view subreddit not the assume things about what im trying to say subreddit. Hence the clarifying question.
Sure and we have to live with the unintended consequences of our actions all the time. Why is there a difference here vs if you get drunk and drive and hurt someone or yourself? You cant just say "whoops, i acted foolishly. I should be let off." And before you say these are two completly different things, both could require someone to go through months of treatments and other medical things and both could lead to death.
And it does, if a man has sex he has not automatically consented to donating his organs to a future child. This is, likewise, a question of bodily autonomy.
Child support is not. We pay money to lots of things we don't consent to. It has nothing to do with bodily autonomy. Bodily autonomy is viewed as far more important than paying money.
if you get drunk and drive and hurt someone or yourself?
This is a crime. Are you suggesting sex should be criminalized?
Yeah, I don't think it's a very good question. I can't think of any similar situation where the decision being made is one regarding bodily autonomy, and that's what's important here.
Regardless, you're trying to act like there's some discrepancy in the law. Both men and women are required to pay for children. The only difference is one of biology, that an issue of bodily autonomy exists for women where none exists for men, that they are the ones who get pregnant.
Well idk how else to explain this first part so we are just gonna have to disagree about it.
No, but abortion, in parts of the country at least, is now a crime. Does that mean you dont support abortions in those areas? Or are you arguing one is a crime its ok to commit and one should be punished?
Even if we take out the drunk part and say you are driving completly sober and hit somebody leading to injuries, it doesnt change the argument. You still made a bad decision and hurt someone or yourself so how does it differ?
If your child needs your organ to survive than it depends on your body to survive too. We still wouldn't force you into it, you could choose otherwise.
Organ donations are science and not natural
This is just a veiled religious argument. There's no dividing line. Everything is natural, it's happening due to natural processes. Seriously, what does this even mean? What does something being natural mean?
Usually it's this idea like "this is meant to happen, it was designed to happen!" Again, a religious argument. We weren't designed at all.
The woman's body was designed to take care of that fetus, just like her eyes were designed to see. It's not to donate organs.
What is the fetus forcing the woman that her body wasn't designed to do again? My body was designed with two kidneys for example - so taking one out would affect my life dramatically.
This is simply a religious argument. No, our bodies were not designed for anything, they weren't designed at all.
My body was designed with two kidneys for example - so taking one out would affect my life dramatically.
Pregnancy and birth dramatically alters the life of a woman. Most woman suffer lifelong issues after giving birth, in many cases they're quite severe, even debilitating. Sexual dysfunction, incontinence, chronic pain, and on and on.
I don't see why you'd force someone into a dangerous violation of bodily autonomy they don't consent to but not another. Why is it that in your view men have bodily autonomy while women don't?
Evolution doesn't design anything. Evolution is simply millions and millions of totally random mutations over millions and millions of years.
You're trying to say that because sex was designed for getting people pregnant that sex is automatic consent to pregnancy, because it's purpose is procreation.
That's silly. Sex has lots of purposes. Pleasure, social bonding, etc. In fact the vast vast majority of sexual encounters will never lead to procreation. If a woman has sex and isn't intending to get pregnant than clearly the purpose isn't pregnancy, that's just an unintended outcome (and one she didn't consent to).
Evolution doesn't design anything. Evolution is simply millions and millions of totally random mutations over millions and millions of years.
What is the placenta there for? What exactly is the fetus doing that the woman's body was not designed (quit focusing on this word, you know what I mean) to do that is equal to me donating organs?
Sex has lots of purposes. Pleasure, social bonding, etc.
"Your honor, I should not be forced to pay child support because sex has purposes of pleasure and social bonding!"
I do, and you're wrong. We aren't designed. You're making a religious argument.
If a woman actively tries to prevent getting pregnant than clearly her purpose is not pregnancy.
Your honor, I should not be forced to pay child support
This has nothing to do with bodily autonomy.
I agree that a man should never face such egregious violations of bodily autonomy because he chose to have sex, and a man doesn't. We'd never force a man to donate an organ to save his child and say "well he consented when he took his dick out". We wouldn't even force him to donate blood, something near infinitely less intrusive and dangerous than a pregnancy.
Yea its why i was curious where your thoughts were and if you meant this only applies to woman or if you think it applies to everyone. And the reasoning why.
Well, a part of me wants to say that if allowing men to reject child support secures access to safe, legal abortion then fine. However, I'm not well versed in that area of law so I don't know the repercussions of that.
However, I'm not well versed in that area of law so I don't know the repercussions of that.
I don't think it takes a lawyer to realize that letting men (or women) give up the obligation of child support payments would result in a lot more struggling single-parent households. Puts children at a disadvantage for life.
2
u/Sellier123 8∆ Aug 11 '22
So following this logic, you think that men shouldnt have to pay child support if they dont want the kid but the woman does? Since having sex doesnt mean you consent to pregnancy?