On 25 Feb 2005 09:17:06 -0800, "Hyerdahl"  wrote:

>
>Skinner1{at}hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 00:01:03 -0800, Hardpan 
>wrote:
>>
>>
>>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2005/02/24/national/a095250S07.DTL
>> >
>> >Court: Man Can Sue Over Surprise Pregnancy
>> >
>> >By CARLA K. JOHNSON, - Associated Press Writer
>> >
>> >Thursday, February 24, 2005
>> >
>(edit)
>
>> OK. This one is so wrong on so many levels that it just defies logic.
>>
>> If a woman had been MADE pregnant against her desires...... the
>tables here would be SOOOOO turned!
>
>Not so, dear.  If a woman is raped, and she bears a child she doesn't
>want, she is still responsible for that child unless the child is
>adopted.  Of course, men don't have a legal option to "make" women
>pregnant, nor can they (in the west) force a woman to continue a
>pregnancy.   Men and women have the same rights but not the same
>abilities, and no, men have no right to reach into the body or rights
>of another simply because they sent their own sperm into the stream of
>possibility.
>
>And before you finger pointers start in
>> on me read the paragraph third from the last again...... The Friggin
>> courts awarded this bimbo (and I use that term correctly here) $800 a
>> month in child support for a child she conceived through out and out
>> deception!
>
>There was ZERO "deception" in the sending of the sperm into the stream
>of possibility, and that's all the court is looking at or needs to look
>at in the best interests of children.  If you don't want to risk having
>a child, keep your sperm to yourself.
>
>
>That's not mysogony folks.... that's just calling it like
>> it is! ANYBODY who wants to argue in this witche's defense is showing
>> their out and out bias against men and towards women!
>
>Oh, hon....women could care less whether you call them witches,
>bitches, or 'hos'.  They have the law;  they have equal rights, and
>they even have guns.  What they don't have to put up with is bitter
>boys like you.
>
>>

OK I am guessing that you are one of those that believes that the
manufacturers of firearms are liable for the improper use of their
products simply because they placed them in the flow too?
And the auto manufacturers and knife manufacturers as well??

Let me ask you this one thing...... You seem to believe very strongly
in the personal responsability of men for the children they foster no
matter how they are conceived.... do you hold the same conviction when
that personal responsability falls onto a woman?  Do you hole that
same standard true if the woman accidentally bwcomes pregnant because
of an oversight in taking her birth control pills??  I suppose your
extension of this standard of personal responsability does not extend
beyond the decision to about this same pregnancy too does it?




--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 2/26/05 1:33:49 PM ---