LogFAQs > #925209089

LinkPizza posted...

streamofthesky posted...

No

BUT...In the opposite case, where the woman wants the kid and the dad does not, he shouldn't be forced to be responsible for it, financially and in all other ways.

Currently, abortion law is unbalanced and sexist. Nobody should be forced to support a child if they don't want to have one, man or woman.

I actually agree with that. I think there should be a way to cut all ties. Like, you can't see the kid or have any say in anything, but you don't have to pay child support... I would like this, tbh...

This. That's a decision he should have to make as early as possible, so the mother can make an informed decision about whether or not to abort, and this naturally must be paired with readily available abortions, but being able to cut all ties with and responsibility for the child would be the male equivalent of an abortion.

As for suing the doctors that performed the procedure and the company that made the drugs, this guy's grasping at straws and I doubt this will go anywhere because they acted perfectly legally. At least, I would doubt that this would go anywhere if it were happening anywhere but Alabama. Because it's Alabama, it could really go either way.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.