Your Day

DwnWthVwls · 12-16-2019, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

idk how true that is, but what kind of regulation would you have in mind?

If youre talking to me, I think they should have to provide evidence in the form of receipts or something showing that the money is being spent to actually support the child its for.. I know it's anecdotal but I know a good amount of people whose exs use the money for bs like most anyone with free money would do.

The Batlord · 12-16-2019, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

nah I just think this would be more fair

For the same reason prenupts exist.. you should be at least able to try to avoid the scenario where you're forced to pay. If it's voluntary then it will only be relevant if she agrees to it. She has exactly the aiming of power she deserves, in that scenario.

If you cared about fair you wouldn't design a contract to screw over the kid. You just want to give women the finger and get attention on the internet.

~~jwb~~ · 12-16-2019, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

Nah I mean should she be able to just abandon it cause maybe she just decided she doesn't want the kid and doesn't care enough to bother with adoption.

that would be some form of child neglect since she's going to leave it without an adult to supervise it. Which isn't the same.

Plus.. " I can't be bothered with adoption" is a very lazy and petty complaint. Compared I don't want to pay for a kid for 18 years after we specifically agreed not to have one.

DwnWthVwls · 12-16-2019, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

this prob happens but the well being of the mother is going to overlap with the child in many areas

it seems kinda intrusive to start asking for receipts

I was just throwing it out there, the main point is that I feel its currently not monitored closely enough. I dont have the answers.

~~jwb~~ · 12-16-2019, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

If you cared about fair you wouldn't design a contract to screw over the kid. You just want to give women the finger and get attention on the internet.

the contract isn't designed to screw the kid, but to give men a bit more reproductive control than they have.

The Batlord · 12-16-2019, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

the contract isn't designed to screw the kid, but to give men a bit more reproductive control than they have.

It literally is designed to screw the kid by denying them support. Are you really that dumb?

Lucem Ferre · 12-16-2019, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

eh **** men anyway

Fa...

Nah.

~~jwb~~ · 12-16-2019, 07:30 PM

That's like saying that abortion is designed to kill the kid, or adoption is designed to strip them of their birth parents

These are options given to people so that they can better exercise control of their own lives, which necessarily have some negative impact on the kid.

You keep harping on as if the man in this contract is the one harming the child. I would say it's arguably the woman who has the kid after explicitly agreeing not to.

The Batlord · 12-16-2019, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb

That's like saying that abortion is designed to kill the kid, or adoption is designed to strip them their birth parents

Yes that is the case.

Quote:

These are options given to people so that they can better exercise control their own lives, which necessarily have some negative impact on the kid

Which is why we weigh both sides of the equation. We abort fetuses up to a certain point but not after. We allow men the opportunity to wear condoms or get snipped but not to abandon their children.

Quote:

You keep harping on as if the man in this contract is the one harming the child. I would say it's arguably the woman she has the kid after explicitly agreeing not to.

Two things can be true at the same time. Stop being a whiny bitch.

~~jwb~~ · 12-16-2019, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

Which is why we weigh both sides of the equation. We abort fetuses up to a certain point but not after. We allow men the opportunity to wear condoms or get snipped but not to abandon their children.

it's not abandoning if they specifically agree not to have them. It's similar to a woman suing her sperm donor for child support.

Quote:

Two things can be true at the same time. Stop being a whiny bitch.

stop letting your daddy issues blind you

12-16-2019, 07:30 PM	#65598 (permalink)
~~jwb~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 4,403	That's like saying that abortion is designed to kill the kid, or adoption is designed to strip them of their birth parents These are options given to people so that they can better exercise control of their own lives, which necessarily have some negative impact on the kid. You keep harping on as if the man in this contract is the one harming the child. I would say it's arguably the woman who has the kid after explicitly agreeing not to.