Topic : 07/06 Baby Wars

Matt is saying he did not have a choice, that his rights are not being recognized.  What a crock!  It takes two to make a baby.  No one forced him to have sex.  I was taught in middle school that the only way to be 100% effective in not getting pregnant is abstinance.  If you choose to have sex you have to be prepared to face the consequences of your actions.  

The baby looks like her father, let's hope she doesn't grow up to be as mean, cold hearted  and irresponsible.   

The baby had less of a choice than the father if you want to talk about choices. 

Sex was created for reproduction.  Yes, it is a enjoyment, too!  However, these men should make sure they have an honest spouse.  Maybe he should have looked more into her problem.  

We will give her the benefit of the doubt, maybe she really did have some kind of problem with conception...  but a miracle happened.  God has his hand in all conceptions.  He was a part of that too!  If Mr. Father doesn't want to be Dad then give up your rights.  That mother has every right to keep that child.  Maybe he should learn next time to take better precausions or get fixed!  

Get over yourself Mr. Father and give up your rights.  

Ok, this is MY take on this as a person who has been involved in the past with men who didn't want children and now married and pregnant with a child who is wanted... 

The idiot would have a better chance in his argument IF HE HAD DONE WHAT HE COULD DO TO PREVENT A PREGNANCY.  He *chose* to give up his control of the situation by not wearing a condom.  PERIOD!  Based on legal principals, the fact that he admits "well, I was the one who didn't want a kid, but didn't object enough by making sure that *I* was doing whatever I could to prevent it." will cause his lawyer to be wrong.  IF he had worn a condom and she became pregnant either through tampering or birth control failure then he would have a leg to stand on.  If you're THAT opposed to becoming a parent right now, you take ALL precautions that you can to make sure it doesn't happen.  There's also the possibility of the "reversable vasectomy" where silicone plugs are inserted into the vas deferens to prevent sperm from leaving - which is ****100% reversable**** and is 99.999999999% effective in preventing conception.  Just as effective in other words as permanent sterilization.  He HAD options that he CHOSE not to take in order to prevent conception. 

1) he was still "shooting live rounds" 

2) he didn't do what HE could to prevent the conception. 

3) he had sex which is the #1 cause of pregnancy. 

IF he had taken steps himself to prevent it, I would have a lot more sympathy for his position.  I agree with Dr Phil that this lawsuit he's bringing will open the FLOODGATES to deadbeat Dads to claim "well I never actually consented to the pregnancy so I don't think I should have to pay child support" if some judge actually buys his absurd argument.  It also opens the floodgates to essentially eliminate the choice that women have regarding their own bodies.  IF this case goes his way it opens precendence for a lot of things.  Just play this forward - men now have the right to deny responsibility if this case is won.  How big of a step is it for some guy to say "I don't want a child with my DNA out there so I refuse to *allow* her to carry to term - even if she gives the child up for adoption"?  This means that if this case is won there could be precedence for a man to take a woman to court to FORCE ... YES!!!!!!!! FORCE!!!!!!!!!! a woman to have SURGERY to terminate the pregnancy.  Think about the possible legal ramifications.  And before you start saying that "oh, that can't happen"  ... this kid had sex without protecting himself ... he gave up his control of the reproductive process and now wants to reverse that simply because he doesn't like the outcome.  He says "I wasn't being a responsible person who truly did everything I could to prevent this from happening" and now wants to abrogate his reposibility FOR HIS ACTIONS.