"Men Must Approve Abortion, Women Are Hosts"

[Walrusvylon]

Nice strawman. Neither do I want to kill anyone, nor was Hitler a fascist. He was a national socialist. Before you rag on me for splitting hairs, there are many noticeable differences in ideology.

How was Hilter not a facsist? He was a dictator.

[Knights of Columbia]

I subscribe to and believe in many doctrines of fascism. Also, I can shame too. Shame on you for supporting democracy.

When has facsism ever worked as a form of government that didn't result in a disaster or a collapse of said government?

If you want to be specific, never. Every "fascist" nation has been defeated in war. If you want to define fascism more loosely and open the term to simply "totalitarianism", nearly every nation up until the late 1700s.

[Lady Scylla]

I thought you were against mandatory child support from absent fathers?

Abandoning that is one possible solution. There are other nonsexist propositions, but they require substantially more governmental intervention.

My primary concern is lack of sexism in law.

I'm quoting this for simple convenience, not as a direct reply to the above statement but just to show that I'm addressing you.

In your comment beforehand, where I accidentally stepped on some toes over my use of 'donate'. I've come up with a potential solution to the Female-on-Male rape problem. As followed:

Men do not have the authority nor right to determine whether a pregnancy must remain or be terminated; with the exception of court order in incidents involving Female-on-Male rape where the (female) Rapist may either have her pregnancy terminated on the victim's behalf, or lose all custody and rights to the child, as well, on the victim's behalf (in such case where the male might want the child -- I'm not sure why they would, but I figured it'd be a good measure there anyway). As such, no matter the choice taken, the female rapist shall have no visitation rights, nor ever be permitted to contact the father under any circumstance barring third-party legal authority in cases of medical necessity (such as, and probably the only reason: STDs and other legal filings needed for the child to establish family history).

[Utceforp]

Then you should support parental relinquishment for both genders - to save lives.

Babies are killed every year by parents who cannot either mentally or financially support their children and have no choice.

It is blatantly hypocritical to support parental relinquishment that in practice can only be used by parents of your preferred gender, in the same way poll tests with grandfather clauses were pure hypocrisy.

I don't have a problem with men relinquishing infants. I'm just not concerned enough to make it my lifes work to change the laws in states that don't allow it.

I've noticed that "financial abortion" is really only brought as a form of whataboutism whenever actual medical abortion is discussed. I'm in favour of it, but I'd have a lot more respect for its proponents if they actually fought for their cause in some way.

[Wallenburg]

The traditional sense? I presume you are referring to the nuclear family model. If so, the traditional model isn't necessarily the best model nor is it the worst.

The traditional as in father, mother, children. It's nature's best model for the production and rearing of offspring.

In nature, I see far more multigenerational groupings, extended families and the like. The nuclear family is a product of modern Western civilization.

[Neutraligon]

I obviously don't support this Oklahoman measure, but I would prefer at least an attempt to implement a sort of McCulley male abortion concept (though I'm not too fond of the name) to give men a bit more of an option.

I support the ability of a father to give up all rights before the birth of the child. That being said we would need a much better system to support those children who are in less well off situations. Short term I think the best option is to try and improve the system so that child support does not begger the non custodial parent.

[Walrusvylon]

When has facsism ever worked as a form of government that didn't result in a disaster or a collapse of said government?

If you want to be specific, never. Every "fascist" nation has been defeated in war. If you want to define fascism more loosely and open the term to simply "totalitarianism", nearly every nation up until the late 1700s.

My point.

[Finium]

[THREAD HIJACKING INTENSIFIES]

[Trotza]

I obviously don't support this Oklahoman measure, but I would prefer at least an attempt to implement a sort of McCulley male abortion concept (though I'm not too fond of the name) to give men a bit more of an option.

It would be kind of difficult because It would be opposed by both sides of the argument

That seems to be the trouble with a lot of ideas, but someone has to support them.

[Knights of Columbia]

Nice strawman. Neither do I want to kill anyone, nor was Hitler a fascist. He was a national socialist. Before you rag on me for splitting hairs, there are many noticeable differences in ideology.

How was Hilter not a facsist? He was a dictator.

Fascism isn't just totalitarianism. Fascism also focuses on the improvement of the people over the pleasures of the individual. That's one of the core tenets, anyway.

[Lady Scylla]

If family is that important, then perhaps everyone should adopt the practise of the Hapsburgs.

Family is actually the most important factor in the creation and maintenance of Western civilization. Also, completely unrelated. Why does recognizing the importance of family immediately mean that I support inbreeding? You're not making any sense.

You're going to need to get your sarcastic meter serviced. It wasn't serious.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

prison? for not allowing the father a veto?

But they do reflect the facial gymnastics I had.

Look at the guy's flag and name - he's clearly some variety of Fascist. (Or a Fascist in denial.)

There's no point in engaging him, just ignore him.

Does KoC being a fascist somehow warrant him to be ignored? I don't see any benefit in ignoring someone based upon their political beliefs, if anything it is rather childish.

[Utceforp]

When has facsism ever worked as a form of government that didn't result in a disaster or a collapse of said government?

If you want to be specific, never. Every "fascist" nation has been defeated in war. If you want to define fascism more loosely and open the term to simply "totalitarianism", nearly every nation up until the late 1700s.

Hush, the adults are talking.

[Galloism]

Actually, at that time, many feminists were fighting for that notion. Prior to that, men were assumed to be superior parents - or, at least, more needed by their children.

Not exactly, mens at the time were expected to pay for the expenses of every member of the family, even in the case of a divorced wife. So they just gave the children to the father because he was(suposeddly) the parent with more money and the "natural" provider. The Tender Years Doctrine was not exactly a revolution in the field of gender dynamics.

If that were the case - it was merely a provider issue - children would have gone with the ex, as the father is supporting the ex and therefore supporting the child is merely an extension of supporting the ex.

Your latter assertion undercuts the former.

[Knights of Columbia]

If you want to be specific, never. Every "fascist" nation has been defeated in war. If you want to define fascism more loosely and open the term to simply "totalitarianism", nearly every nation up until the late 1700s.

My point.

Which I just refuted. Every group/tribe/nation/country/kingdom/whatever was totalitarian. You can't say every single one ended in horrible failure.

[Knights of Columbia]

If you want to be specific, never. Every "fascist" nation has been defeated in war. If you want to define fascism more loosely and open the term to simply "totalitarianism", nearly every nation up until the late 1700s.

Hush, the adults are talking.

Not an argument.

[Knights of Columbia]

Look at the guy's flag and name - he's clearly some variety of Fascist. (Or a Fascist in denial.)

There's no point in engaging him, just ignore him.

Does KoC being a fascist somehow warrant being ignored? I don't see any benefit in ignoring someone based upon their political beliefs.

Thanks for being decent

[Trotza]

I obviously don't support this Oklahoman measure, but I would prefer at least an attempt to implement a sort of McCulley male abortion concept (though I'm not too fond of the name) to give men a bit more of an option.

I support the ability of a father to give up all rights before the birth of the child. That being said we would need a much better system to support those children who are in less well off situations. Short term I think the best option is to try and improve the system so that child support does not begger the non custodial parent.

It just prolongs the conflict between the two, even as the kids grow older and try to adapt to the situation. Growing up my parents still actively hated each other, despite being separated for years. Issues with money will do that to you.

[Knights of Columbia]

Family is actually the most important factor in the creation and maintenance of Western civilization. Also, completely unrelated. Why does recognizing the importance of family immediately mean that I support inbreeding? You're not making any sense.

You're going to need to get your sarcastic meter serviced. It wasn't serious.

I thought we could have a serious argument.

[Lady Scylla]

You're going to need to get your sarcastic meter serviced. It wasn't serious.

I thought we could have a serious argument.

Some of us drop sarcastic humour and silliness to lighten the mood and avoid flaming or the like. Just to keep tension at bay.

[Knights of Columbia]

The traditional as in father, mother, children. It's nature's best model for the production and rearing of offspring.

In nature, I see far more multigenerational groupings, extended families and the like. The nuclear family is a product of modern Western civilization.

I agree with you there. That's why I support a more traditional extended family as opposed to the nuclear one.

[Wallenburg]

You're going to need to get your sarcastic meter serviced. It wasn't serious.

I thought we could have a serious argument.

You are on NationStates. Serious argument is three doors down.

[Galloism]

Abandoning that is one possible solution. There are other nonsexist propositions, but they require substantially more governmental intervention.

My primary concern is lack of sexism in law.

I'm quoting this for simple convenience, not as a direct reply to the above statement but just to show that I'm addressing you.

In your comment beforehand, where I accidentally stepped on some toes over my use of 'donate'. I've come up with a potential solution to the Female-on-Male rape problem. As followed:

Men do not have the authority nor right to determine whether a pregnancy must remain or be terminated; with the exception of court order in incidents involving Female-on-Male rape where the (female) Rapist may either have her pregnancy terminated on the victim's behalf, or lose all custody and rights to the child, as well, on the victim's behalf (in such case where the male might want the child -- I'm not sure why they would, but I figured it'd be a good measure there anyway). As such, no matter the choice taken, the female rapist shall have no visitation rights, nor ever be permitted to contact the father under any circumstance barring third-party legal authority in cases of medical necessity (such as, and probably the only reason: STDs and other legal filings needed for the child to establish family history).

I mean, that's all well and good, but there's a necessary societal shift before that will do any good.

I counsel men who are rape victims by memory. The most common response to men attempting to report this crime is either laughter or threats of charges for wasting police time or filing a false report.

I still encourage men to report it - shits important - but without a societal shift the above measure is hollow.

[Walrusvylon]

My point.

Which I just refuted. Every group/tribe/nation/country/kingdom/whatever was totalitarian. You can't say every single one ended in horrible failure.

Well how do you define facsism? I feel that it is too broad of a term. Also, why do you like facsism. (I'm not being an ass, and have an open mind right now.)

[Knights of Columbia]

I thought we could have a serious argument.

You are on NationStates. Serious argument is three doors down.

Lol I guess you're right. And I guess I kind of derailed this thread. Sorry guys, you can get back to discussing abortion again