****'s gonna get REAL in CA.

[wig]

This ought to be AWESOME!

A man in CA has petitioned the court to free him from any legal or financial responsibility for a child growing in the womb of his ex girlfriend. He claims, under the broad interpretation of Roe v Wade that he cannot be compelled to carry out a pregnancy to term even though HE is not carrying the child.

The court, of course, said that he could not make any such claim. Roe v Wade was written to protect the rights of women to choose whether or not they wanted to see a pregnancy through to term.

He responded with the mic-drop.

"I identify as a woman."

 

[Ironcitysteelers]

Lol. CA.

 

[Steeltime]

This ought to be AWESOME!

A man in CA has petitioned the court to free him from any legal or financial responsibility for a child growing in the womb of his ex girlfriend. He claims, under the broad interpretation of Roe v Wade that he cannot be compelled to carry out a pregnancy to term even though HE is not carrying the child.

The court, of course, said that he could not make any such claim. Roe v Wade was written to protect the rights of women to choose whether or not they wanted to see a pregnancy through to term.

He responded with the mic-drop.

"I identify as a woman."

 

[Ron Burgundy]

I've always thought that if the man offers to pay for an abortion and the woman declines, then he should be absolved from paying child support. After all, the woman can get an abortion without telling the man, who may possibly want to raise the child if she doesn't.

 

[wig]

Technically, under anti-discrimination laws, a man SHOULD be able to waive financial and/or legal responsibility for a child he does not wish to bring to term.

Of course the state cannot allow this. The potential for an explosion of "unattached" children would be catastrophic to a state and even federal budget.

 

[Djfan]

They are eating themselves alive with retardation.

 

[CoolieMan]

damn courts in CA trying to assume the sex of people in their courtrooms

 

[xjx]

If he identifies as a woman he should be afforded the same legal rights as any California woman.

 

[Steelr4evr]

California is like YouTube. If you follow enough links you'll end up in the super weird crazy section for the mentally insane.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Technically, under anti-discrimination laws, a man SHOULD be able to waive financial and/or legal responsibility for a child he does not wish to bring to term.

Of course the state cannot allow this. The potential for an explosion of "unattached" children would be catastrophic to a state and even federal budget.

I doubt there would be an explosion of unattached children but there would be an implosion of reduced child support. In the end there would be less children born out of wedlock since a baby would no longer guarantee a monthly child support check.

I was married to the mother of my children and when she took off and stole our kids I had to pay almost $1000 a month in child support for ten years. When my son graduated high school and came back here to go to college, my ex had to find a new man and couldn't get by on 50% child support so my daughter arrived in PA along with my son and finished high school here.

 

[IndySteel]

I think this would be fantastic, and the triggering would cause mass aneurisms: Just for a week, Trump should say that he identifies as a woman, and is the first woman President.

 

[Ironcitysteelers]

You father a child. Support the ******* kid. Period.


If your pull out game ain’t strong then them the dice.

 

[Confluence]

You father a child. Support the ******* kid. Period.


If your pull out game ain’t strong then them the dice.

Agreed. But many do not.
Sinful, immoral and unforgivable.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[BLITZ]

if California were ever to leave the u of a a democratic president would never be elected again

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

You father a child. Support the ******* kid. Period.


If your pull out game ain’t strong then them the dice.

I am totally in agreement and I believe the very same.

However, the point of the thread is that the rules are being changed whether we like it or not. Women have been given a "Get Out of Jail Free Card" with regards to pregnancy. Men have not. Men have no out. None. Period. If the woman decides to keep the child, the man MUST pay/support.

Those are facts.

Now a man is saying...."wait a minute..."

Good on him. Maybe it will, in the long run, force the system back to where it should be. Man, woman...you create a child...you support said child.

 

[Badcat]

I want to follow this to see how it plays out. In a similar matter, what if a lesbian couple decides that one of them is to be artificially inseminated and then break up. Can one woman decide for the other?

A man should have no "out" in my opinion. If you get a woman pregnant, you should help raise the child. Period. It's no different than our conservative stance on Abortions. If you aren't ready for a kid, then don't have sex. It goes for both the man and the woman.

 

[Superman]

what if you're being charged as the father, and thus your sex is assumed as male, but you decide that you're a pansexual non-binary squirrel with an underbite?

 

[Steeltime]

what if you're being charged as the father, and thus your sex is assumed as male, but you decide that you're a pansexual non-binary squirrel with an underbite?

Wait a minute here, Supe. You are cheating since you already know the answer to this question as you played that card.

 

[fedderone]

"I'll be real with you, and I know nobody gives a **** what I think anyway. I'm not for abortion.
Oh, shut up, nigga! "I'm not for it, but I'm not against it either.
I don't care what your religious beliefs are or anything.
If you have a dick, you need to shut the **** up on this one. Seriously. This is theirs.
The right to choose is their unequivocal right.
Not only do I believe they have the right to choose, I believe that they shouldn't have to consult anybody, except for a physician, about how they exercise that right.
Gentlemen, that is fair.
Ladies, to be fair to us, I also believe that if you decide to have the baby, a man should not have to pay. That is fair.
If you can kill this ************, I can at least abandon 'em.
It's my money, my choice.
And if I'm wrong, then perhaps we're wrong. So, figure that **** out for yourselves."

- Dave Chappelle, Sticks & Stones -

 

[fedderone]

This ought to be AWESOME!

A man in CA has petitioned the court to free him from any legal or financial responsibility for a child growing in the womb of his ex girlfriend. He claims, under the broad interpretation of Roe v Wade that he cannot be compelled to carry out a pregnancy to term even though HE is not carrying the child.

The court, of course, said that he could not make any such claim. Roe v Wade was written to protect the rights of women to choose whether or not they wanted to see a pregnancy through to term.

He responded with the mic-drop.

"I identify as a woman."

I, for the life of me, cannot find this ANYWHERE in my DuckDuckGo and/or Google searches.
Do you have a link?