(05-29-2019, 01:46 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Is all that legally obligated? Or is that more of an "on good faith" kind of thing?

(05-29-2019, 09:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You're quick on your reply as you see I edited my post about the same time you replied. Pretty sure it's relevant with or without the edit

(05-30-2019, 12:24 AM)JSR18 Wrote: Since the mother would more or less be legally obligated, then its only fair father's part be legally obligated also. However, I'm assuming that if the father feels as strong as he would have to take complete custody, he'd do it out of love for child...

(05-28-2019, 01:09 AM)JSR18 Wrote: My thought is this:

Women should be able to make decisions about their body's....right up to the point of pregnancy.
She can't/didn't get pregnant by herself.
That makes the fetus/baby 50% someone else's...Therfore,

Both contributors to the making of said baby should have equal say in fetus/baby's outcome...

(05-29-2019, 11:46 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Medical care and support. Nobody forced her to participate in the activity that created the child against her will.

(05-29-2019, 05:13 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: No Loophole there, the mother wasn't consenting in rape. Not sure how to classify incest, but those babies are generally born with defects. So I guess it's there to protect the general population?

Anyways, my stance is scientific based. Once the baby has passed gestation and has its own unique DNA code, that is when it is considered a human being to me. It's all part of the human life cycle. Every single one of us goes thru that stage.

Now the "meet in the middle" part says, no abortions allowed after first trimester (unless mother or baby's life is in danger). Which I don't think most of us would have a problem agreeing with simply because almost all abortions happen in the first trimester.

(05-29-2019, 05:17 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Now I have a question for you.

If we find or figure out a way to tell while the baby in the womb if it will be gay or not, should the mother be allowed to abort if they do not want a gay or straight child?

Just asking cause I feel this might come up in the future.

(05-30-2019, 08:56 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The logic being she shouldn't have had sex knowing the potential consequences. On the flip side of that coin, nobody forced him to participate. Therefore, he shouldn't have had sex knowing the consequences that he can't force a woman to carry a pregnancy against her will.

(05-30-2019, 08:04 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: The point is, your scenario is at least 2 laws away from reality.

1. Create a bill that gives the father autonomy over his pregnant lover's body.
2. Create a bill that requires the father to be financially and legally bound to the child if he elects to use the autonomy he has been granted over his pregnant lover's body.

I'm just not sure either of those laws are really passable.

(05-30-2019, 08:46 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: If the woman doesn't want a child, but the man does that is an equal say. Forcing the woman to do what the man wants and not what she wants isn't equal say. So what's the tie breaker? The person's body who is pregnant. Yes, both contributed to the conception, but only one contributes during the next 40 weeks of pregnancy. In otherwords, they're not equally pregnant.

(05-31-2019, 12:40 AM)JSR18 Wrote: I see what you're saying. But I think I'd go a different route: 
   
             1. Autonomy over a females body is not needed. A legal definition defining the fetus/baby as 1/2 belonging to the female---1/2 belonging to the participating male.
             2. The custody laws that are in place will do fine with a little case by case tweaking...

(05-31-2019, 12:46 AM)JSR18 Wrote: One person can't decide death for something 2 people made...

(05-30-2019, 12:24 AM)JSR18 Wrote: Since the mother would more or less be legally obligated, then its only fair father's part be legally obligated also. However, I'm assuming that if the father feels as strong as he would have to take complete custody, he'd do it out of love for child...

(05-30-2019, 09:07 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Gestation in humans last approximately 40 weeks and ends with the birth of a child. In order for one to "pass gestation" they would need to be born.

(05-31-2019, 12:40 AM)JSR18 Wrote: I see what you're saying. But I think I'd go a different route: 
   
             1. Autonomy over a females body is not needed. A legal definition defining the fetus/baby as 1/2 belonging to the female---1/2 belonging to the participating male.
             2. The custody laws that are in place will do fine with a little case by case tweaking...

(05-31-2019, 12:46 AM)JSR18 Wrote: No, they aren't equally pregnant, but half of the fetus/baby belongs to each sexual participant. She may be the only one who contributes during the next 40 weeks, but if the male wants the child he'll have no help for the next 18-22 years.

One person can't decide death for something 2 people made...

(06-01-2019, 02:03 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Do they have joint custody?  No.  That's why your opinion isn't supported by US law.

(06-03-2019, 01:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: If the law changes will your opinion?

(06-08-2019, 08:11 AM)JSR18 Wrote: No. I'll always be pro-life...