Thank you for not only proving that Feminism is NOT and has NEVER been about " equality ", but that it is no more than a special interest lobby.
Had men been as generous as you, you'd all still be wearing burquas...
No proof offered ? loveist misandristic fact free loon claim fails.
Not as long as it mean you'd have to do anything about it...
Heres the *real info* on Choice For Men, aka C4M:
P O S I T I O N P A P E R O N L E G A L I Z I N G " C H O I C E " F O R M E N
We want to improve the law to protect men's family planning. Men should be given relief, a recourse or a remedy when tricked or trapped into parenthood.
It's beyond question that unplanned parenthood can completely disrupt a man's life. It disrupts his education(0), it disrupts his mental health, and it often disrupts his entire family life(1). We feel that, because of the impact to the man in this matter of such basic concern, inasmuch as there are any rights which are fundamental, that he should be given some relief, a recourse or remedy from being tricked or trapped into parenthood. There is also the distress buttociated with the unwanted child. The continuing stigma of unwed fatherhood may be involved. Men are the victims. The government cannot deny the detrimental effect that the current paternity laws have on men.
Certainly there are problems regarding even the use of contraception. Regardless of the circumstances of conception, whether he is a victim of statutory rape(2) or whether it is because of contraceptive fraud(3) he currently has no relief.
In a Consbreastution for a free people, there can be no doubt that the meaning of "liberty" must be broad indeed. The Consbreastution nowhere mentions a specific right of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life, but the "liberty" protected by the Fourteenth Amendment covers more than those freedoms explicitly named in the Bill of Rights. Certainly we cannot say that there is in the Consbreastution, so stated, the right to relief, recourse or remedy from being tricked or trapped into parenthood. But neither is there stated the right to travel or some of the other very basic rights.
There is a long body of precedent where the Supreme Court has held that it is the right of the individual to determine the course of their own life in family matters; for whom they will marry - the Loving case; that the state may not interfere with the individual's choice regarding birth control - the Griswold case. Roe v. Wade is the main case, holding that a woman's right to privacy includes the right to end. Women's right to control their reproductive lives was upheld in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. So there is a long body of Supreme Court cases in the areas of marriage, love, contraception and procreation, which says that there are certain things that are so much a part of the individual's concern that they should be left to the determination of the individual. One of the purposes of the U.S. Consbreastution was to guarantee to the individual, the right to determine the course of their own lives. The ability of men to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation would be facilitated by our ability to control our reproductive lives. It is our position that men should have some relief, a recourse or remedy when this right is infringed.
While over a million U.S. women abort each year(4), many thousands of men have their "paternities established" in U.S. courts(5) and preliminary data indicates that 33% of U.S. births may be unintended by fathers(6). Men have been treated as an under clbutt without reproductive rights since Roe v. Wade in 1973, despite the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection", and we seek to emancipate men from this hypocrisy. Forcing only men into parenthood is demeaning and offensive to the basic principles of human dignity.
Where fundamental rights such as procreation are involved, limiting these rights may be justified only by a compelling state interest, and merely saving the state money doesn't rise to that standard(7). Certainly, burdening a child with a bitter parent doesn't rise to that standard either. The potential child's right to child support and to share in the man's standard of living is not absolute, as is demonstrated by single parent adoptions, which are legal and looked upon favorably by the various social service agencies. Biology isn't destiny.
If done properly, legalizing choice for men may reduce our taxes. It would eliminate a subsidy for unwanted children who are more vulnerable to drug abuse, dropping out of high school, crime and prison. Discouraging these social ills would also be in children's best interests.
We aren't taking a position on end. We don't argue that the man's right to relief, recourse or remedy is absolute. What we do advocate, is that men should have some relief, a recourse or remedy when tricked or trapped into parenthood.
References
0.) The high school drop-out rate among young fathers is over twice as high as the average. "Adolescent Fathers in the United States: Their Initial Living Arrangements, Marital Experience and Educational Outcomes", Family Planning Perspectives, Volume 19, Number 6, November-December 1987 by William Marsiglio.
1.) Nock, S.L., The consequences of premarital fatherhood, American Sociological Review, 1998, 63(2):250-263
2.) State ex re. Hermesmann v. Seyer & parents, Kans. Supr. Ct. No. 67,978 (1993)
3.) L. Pamela P. v Frank S., Court of Appeals of New York: 462 N.Y.S.2d 819 (Ct.App. 1983)
4.) Alan Guttmacher Insbreastute, (212) 248-1111
5.) Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement, Congressional Report
6.) Unintended Births: Women's Atbreastudes vis-a-vis their Male Partners' Atbreastudes: 1982-1990, Joyce C. Abma and Linda J. Piccinino, NCHS, 6525 Belcrest Road, Hyattsville, MD 20782, (301) 436-8731
7.) See generally Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254, 265-6, 90 S.Ct. 1011, 1019, 25 L.Ed.2d 287, 1970.
Protect Planned Fatherhood www.choiceformen.com
-- C4M FAQ:
Q: What is "Choice for Men"?
A: Choice for Men is a proposal to improve the law so it protects men's right to plan their families.
Q: Would Choice for Men force women to have ends?
A: No.
Q: What exactly is Choice for Men?
A: Choice for Men would give men a recourse, remedy or relief from being tricked or trapped into parenthood, perhaps by allowing them to relinquish their parental rights and responsibilities, like in an adoption, via financial compensation or by forcing an actual adoption. Some proposals would limit the time during which the choice can be made, make the choice irrevocable, only apply when men are lied to about birth control or when boys are statutorially raped. One proposal even allows women to relinquish their parental rights and responsibilities. Choice for Men isn't a medical procedure.
Q: How many men are tricked or trapped into parenthood?
A: No one knows the exact number, but we can estimate from the following statistics:
* Preliminary data indicates that 33% of U.S. births may be unintended according to fathers0.
* Paternities are established in U.S. courts at the rate of one or two per minute.
Q: Isn't Choice for Men simply a way for men to get out of paying child support?
A: No, it's more. Choice for Men is about fairness and family planning.
Q: Can't men avoid paying child support by just using condoms?
A: Proponents of legalizing choice for men generally support contraception, but keep in mind that condoms are unreliable. They have a 16% annual failure rate 1. After just four years you can bet on having an accidental pregnancy and after 20 years of using condoms, the chances are that a man will most likely experience not one, not two, but three accidental pregnancies!
Q: Can't men avoid paying child support by not consenting to love?
A: Many people are surprised to learn that men can't legally avoid parenthood by not consenting to love. It's true! Here's a quote from a court case in Kansas:
"The issue of consent to loveual activity under the criminal statutes is irrelevant in a civil action to determine paternity and for support of a minor child born of such activity." 3
Similar cases have happened in other states.
Q: Aren't all children enbreastled to support from both parents?
A: No. A common exception is single parent adoptions, which are fully legal and looked upon favorably by the various social service agencies.
Q: Wouldn't Choice for Men impoverish children?
A: It's not yet clear whether legalizing choice for men would affect how many fathers choose to be absent. The simple reason is that the current paternity laws reward women with child support for forcing men into fatherhood and may well result in more absent fathers. Even if legalizing choice for men did result in more single parent families, adoption and sperm donorship are already legal for single parents and looked upon favorably by various social service agencies. One can also show that the economic benefits of a second parent's income don't rise to the level of a "compelling state interest" which justifies the state forcing men into legal parenthood. 4
Q: Where can I find out more about Choice for Men?
A: 1. Email list servers dedicated to legalizing Choice for Men (www.choiceformen.com-listservers.html) 2. www.choiceformen.com 3. National Center for Men. Call (503) 224-9477 4. Men's Rights Inc. Call (916) 484-7333
References
0 - Abma, Joyce and Linda Piccinino, 1994 "Unintended Births: Women's Atbreastudes vis-a-vis their Male Partners' Atbreastudes: 1982-1990", paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological buttociation, August 3, 1994, Los Angeles, CA. NCHS, 6525 Belcrest Road, Hyattsville, MD 20782, (301) 436-8731
1 - Facts in Brief, Contraceptive Use, Alan Guttmacher Insbreastute, New York City, New York, (212) 248-1111.
2 - Griswold v. Connecticut 381 U.S. 479 (1965)
3 - State of Kansas, ex rel., Colleen Hermesmann, Appellee, v. Shane Seyer, a minor, and Dan and Mary Seyer, his parents, Appellants. No. 67,978. Supreme Court of Kansas. March 5, 1993.
4 - See generally Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254, 265-6, 90 S.Ct. 1011, 1019, 25 L.Ed.2d 287, 1970.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Feminists oppose C4M, thus proving that Feminists ARE man hating loveist bigots.
QED.
Andre
