Wow!
Indeed, Mexi seen a number of people who sound much as you are currently sounding go through the criminal justice system. Some of them even have chosen to make sure the Judge knows their opinion.
If you got an SP pregnant, would you take responsibility for the child?
- Thread starter fuji
- Start date
Indeed, Mexi seen a number of people who sound much as you are currently sounding go through the criminal justice system. Some of them even have chosen to make sure the Judge knows their opinion.
AgainYou failed at answering the question. How much harm is done to someone via sexual jealousy? Exactly how are they harmed?
My claim is that there's more harm done in being laid off from a job, or any other number of unpleasant things in life. In other words, no real harm.
Here you are stating your opinion as if it were the SOLE reality.
Ask the hundreds of people who KILLED THEMSELVES IN DESPAIR if no harm was done to them with cheating?
Oh I guess it was their choice eh?
at the very least YOURE just scum of a different type than me then
I actually retract that one.Wow!
Indeed, Mexi seen a number of people who sound much as you are currently sounding go through the criminal justice system. Some of them even have chosen to make sure the Judge knows their opinion.
I went a bit overboard poking at fuji. I DO agree with courts & such I just think they get involved in many things that arent their business BC of oversensitive ppl like Foooooooogeeeeeeee
I'm being a devil's advocate. I'm sure if it happened to me, I'd lose sleep if not all my hair. I would expect most guys won't be easy to find, but there are SP-Customer relations that are quite close and respectful. What would you do in those circumstances? You're going to have to face the music. Of course, get legal advice (I'm not a lawyer) but you're going to have to communicate with your SP as to a reasonable and mature solution (assuming she wants you to, and doesn't handle it alone).Having a kid by someone they have Zero expaectation of standing up as a PROPER father & then choosing to KEEP it without the resources to do it on their own IS UNFIT.
I KNOW under the law, I would be compelled to assist regardless of her decision to keep the child, Thats why I would take GREAT pains to make it impossible to find me. If I can't be found, I can't be factored into her decision & she wll have to live with her decision as it SHOULD be.
We differ in opinion sir.
I simply WILL NOT succumb to social or legal coersion to assume responsibility beyond my ability to make a decision in the matter. The Fact that I have ZERO decision making ability in a situation in my opinion absolves me from responsibility. I assert that right as best as I am able to & if I have to break an unjust law or Ten I will happily do so with clear conscence.
I do understand if you disagree.
But let's understand that the father is asked to SHARE in the financial burden, as a minimum. Some if not many SPs can earn more than their customers, and even if they work less or hire a nanny, it doesn't mean two won't pay.
The customer in any event is going to have a difficult argument to show that he can't contribute to the expense of rearing this child when he can afford to hobby.
If only the cost of child support would really be $100 per week (like that case quoted by Malibook), I think most guys might say they got off easy.
Last edited:
Hundreds of people killed themselves in dispair? Out of millions of cases? Oh yeah I'm really convinced by your (lack of) logic.Ask the hundreds of people who KILLED THEMSELVES IN DESPAIR if no harm was done to them with cheating?
Marriage, common law, cohabitation, love, casual encounter is irrelevant.I've always thought that should be a no brainer.
Used to be that Marriage was the only guarantee for child support... Not married? Dont fuck them.
I see where this is unfair in MOST cases now but in the end the instituton of marriage has become a joke...
Just ask fujis WIFE
What's relevant is the security of the child that is not aborted. THAT is the issue. THAT takes precedence over the needs & wants of two adults.
This is what child support laws are all about because a child is innocent and cannot take care of themselves.
The marital status, convenience or wishes of the biological, adult parents is relatively insignificant.
Bingo. We have a winner. But don't expect themexi to understand that, his criminal mentality doesn't allow him to consider that the needs of others might supersede his own.What's relevant is the security of the child that is not aborted. THAT is the issue. THAT takes precedence over the needs & wants of two adults.
Understood.I'm being a devil's advocate. I'm sure if it happened to me, I'd lose sleep if not all my hair. I would expect most guys won't be easy to find, but there are SP-Customer relations that are quite close and respectful. What would you do in those circumstances? You're going to have to face the music. Of course, get legal advice (I'm not a lawyer) but you're going to have to communicate with your SP as to a reasonable and mature solution.
But let's understand that the father is asked to SHARE in the financial burden, as a minimum. Some if not many SPs can earn more than their customers, and even if they work less or hire a nanny, it doesn't mean two won't pay.
The customer in any event is going to have a difficult argument to show that he can't contribute to the expense of rearing this child when he can afford to hobby.
If only the cost of child support would really be $100 per week (like that case quoted by Malibook), I think most guys might say they got off easy.
However if someone were to keep their SPing at arms length & ENSURE their privacy (CAN be done) then the court's opinion doesn't enter into it.
Marriage, common law, cohabitation, love, casual encounter is irrelevant.
What's relevant is the security of the child that is not aborted. THAT is the issue. THAT takes precedence over the needs & wants of two adults.
This is what child support laws are all about because a child is innocent and cannot take care of themselves.
The marital status, convenience or wishes of the biological, adult parents is relatively insignificant.
If a woman becomes pregnant, it's BOTH bio parent's responsibility.
If she chooses to continue the prgnancy it's BOTH bio parent's responsibility to a POINT.
But if her chosen partner didn't give her reasonable expectation that they WOULD stick around & support the kid? It's SAD but her choice is Adoption or tough it out on her own.
Sorry but AGAIN I assert that at that point so long as my ability to decide is removed, so is my responsibility.
I will NOT give up this RIGHT. And this IS a right so long as I can enforce it.
If a thief keeps a careful lookout & ENSURES no finger prints are left behind (CAN be done) then the court's opinion of grand larceny doesn't enter into it either. That's called criminal ideation.However if someone were to keep their SPing at arms length & ENSURE their privacy (CAN be done) then the court's opinion doesn't enter into it.
I think we can all agree on this. That said.. sometimes a girl who's wild in the sack is just plain.. fucking nuts.. outside it. So..I have to say I would seriously question any of my contemporaries who would choose to continue a pregnancy that results from a paid encounter with goodness knows who. And then to try and peg one or more of my dates as the responsible (or as some would suggest irresponsible party) and the label of dad and all that goes with it (from a legal standpoint) seems absolutely ludicrous to me.
Just my 2 cents worth though.
xo Jane
Call it what you like. Hell call yourself a MAN again while youre at itIf a thief keeps a careful lookout & ENSURES no finger prints are left behind (CAN be done) then the court's opinion of grand larceny doesn't enter into it either. That's called criminal ideation.
I call a spade a spade. You think like a criminal. I won't be surprised when you post on here looking for advice on hiring a lawyer.Call it what you like. Hell call yourself a MAN again while youre at it
@ Sweet Serenity @ Genintoronto @Malibook....Yikes!! let me try to put this in perspective:
If you had a fling with a man, and got pregnant, and kept the child, he'd have to pay..
If you were an escort who saw a man 5 times and got pregnant...he'd still have to pay
Why would the legal system care about the circumstances under which the child was conceived? You think they have time to individualize the THOUSANDS of child support cases a yr and do you honestly think this argument would hold up in court?:
"Well you see your Honor, my escort was selling me a fantasy, I PAID for her NOT to get pregnant but SHE stupidly did anyway and kept the child even after I DEMANDED her to get an abortion, so therefore I'm off the hook right?"
If that convoluded logic held then ANY guy who knocked up ANY girl would be off the hook for child support if he DECIDED he didn't want to pay on the basis of not wanting it in the first place... Being an escort and being a civilian are no different in the legal system's eyes, bc when you take away the title, it just boils down to TWO adults deciding to have sex and a child was the result. Period.
FYI-SHE didn't knock herself up, it takes 2 to tango. You can't make the argument that bc she was an escort she was irresponsible & HAS to get an abortion, bc then it would be legally ok to FORCE ur gf/wife/whoever to get one too when the guy thinks she shouldn't have gotten pregnant in the beginning. As I stated in another post, no man or institution can govern a woman's body...that's how Canada works...So therefore when ANY woman decides to keep a child TWO ppl made, the father will pay support unless the courts decide otherwise.
You need to take away the words "fantasy" and "escort" bc it really has no bearing in the real world's 'Bigger Picture', regardless of what you are "selling him" and what your "job is". There is no such thing as "No strings attached" "Hassle free" sex in ANY aspect of life, including escorting even if you are 'paying' for it. You can't buy an insurance policy on sex bc it doesn't exist. The only 100% guarantee of not becoming a father is not having sex,sorry but it's true. You may view this as unfair but unfortunately, Biology and the Legal System say otherwise. I'm glad you practice responsible safe sex, more girls and guys should (Teen Mom anyone?),then we wouldn't have to be debating this, but until ppl start taking this more seriously and the Law starts looking @ each child support case on an individual basis, today this is the best way to ensure that any child born out of ANY circumstance receives the support they need....
If you had a fling with a man, and got pregnant, and kept the child, he'd have to pay..
If you were an escort who saw a man 5 times and got pregnant...he'd still have to pay
Why would the legal system care about the circumstances under which the child was conceived? You think they have time to individualize the THOUSANDS of child support cases a yr and do you honestly think this argument would hold up in court?:
"Well you see your Honor, my escort was selling me a fantasy, I PAID for her NOT to get pregnant but SHE stupidly did anyway and kept the child even after I DEMANDED her to get an abortion, so therefore I'm off the hook right?"
If that convoluded logic held then ANY guy who knocked up ANY girl would be off the hook for child support if he DECIDED he didn't want to pay on the basis of not wanting it in the first place... Being an escort and being a civilian are no different in the legal system's eyes, bc when you take away the title, it just boils down to TWO adults deciding to have sex and a child was the result. Period.
FYI-SHE didn't knock herself up, it takes 2 to tango. You can't make the argument that bc she was an escort she was irresponsible & HAS to get an abortion, bc then it would be legally ok to FORCE ur gf/wife/whoever to get one too when the guy thinks she shouldn't have gotten pregnant in the beginning. As I stated in another post, no man or institution can govern a woman's body...that's how Canada works...So therefore when ANY woman decides to keep a child TWO ppl made, the father will pay support unless the courts decide otherwise.
You need to take away the words "fantasy" and "escort" bc it really has no bearing in the real world's 'Bigger Picture', regardless of what you are "selling him" and what your "job is". There is no such thing as "No strings attached" "Hassle free" sex in ANY aspect of life, including escorting even if you are 'paying' for it. You can't buy an insurance policy on sex bc it doesn't exist. The only 100% guarantee of not becoming a father is not having sex,sorry but it's true. You may view this as unfair but unfortunately, Biology and the Legal System say otherwise. I'm glad you practice responsible safe sex, more girls and guys should (Teen Mom anyone?),then we wouldn't have to be debating this, but until ppl start taking this more seriously and the Law starts looking @ each child support case on an individual basis, today this is the best way to ensure that any child born out of ANY circumstance receives the support they need....
No. I started this thread in response to that thread, because I wanted to poll people and see how many terbites would fail as human beings. Right now it looks like around 55% fail at being decent human beings.There was another thread floating around about getting an SP pregnant.
Just curious did someone get an SP pregnant ?
@ Sweet Serenity @ Genintoronto @Malibook....Yikes!! let me try to put this in perspective:
If you had a fling with a man, and got pregnant, and kept the child, he'd have to pay..
If you were an escort who saw a man 5 times and got pregnant...he'd still have to pay
Why would the legal system care about the circumstances under which the child was conceived? You think they have time to individualize the THOUSANDS of child support cases a yr and do you honestly think this argument would hold up in court?:
"Well you see your Honor, my escort was selling me a fantasy, I PAID for her NOT to get pregnant but SHE stupidly did anyway and kept the child even after I DEMANDED her to get an abortion, so therefore I'm off the hook right?"
If that convoluded logic held then ANY guy who knocked up ANY girl would be off the hook for child support if he DECIDED he didn't want to pay on the basis of not wanting it in the first place... Being an escort and being a civilian are no different in the legal system's eyes, bc when you take away the title, it just boils down to TWO adults deciding to have sex and a child was the result. Period.
FYI-SHE didn't knock herself up, it takes 2 to tango. You can't make the argument that bc she was an escort she was irresponsible & HAS to get an abortion, bc then it would be legally ok to FORCE ur gf/wife/whoever to get one too when the guy thinks she shouldn't have gotten pregnant in the beginning. As I stated in another post, no man or institution can govern a woman's body...that's how Canada works...So therefore when ANY woman decides to keep a child TWO ppl made, the father will pay support unless the courts decide otherwise.
You need to take away the words "fantasy" and "escort" bc it really has no bearing in the real world's 'Bigger Picture', regardless of what you are "selling him" and what your "job is". There is no such thing as "No strings attached" "Hassle free" sex in ANY aspect of life, including escorting even if you are 'paying' for it. You can't buy an insurance policy on sex bc it doesn't exist. The only 100% guarantee of not becoming a father is not having sex,sorry but it's true. You may view this as unfair but unfortunately, Biology and the Legal System say otherwise. I'm glad you practice responsible safe sex, more girls and guys should (Teen Mom anyone?),then we wouldn't have to be debating this, but until ppl start taking this more seriously and the Law starts looking @ each child support case on an individual basis, today this is the best way to ensure that any child born out of ANY circumstance receives the support they need....
I respectfully disagree.
Everyone on here seems to be stuck on the concept of the best way to ensure that any child born out of ANY circumstance receives the support they need....
I understand & I agree.
ADOPTION would in almost ALL cases take care of this need. Done. Problem solved.
So it is NOT really the "intrests of the child we are debating here if we are being HONEST.
It's the WHICH biological parent gets to be inconvenienced or imposed upon.
Mother: wants to keep baby, but hasnt the finances to support.
Father: Saddled with child support for a kid he had NO say in the keeping of.
Inconvenience to mother: She gives up the kid... knowing it will be ensured the support it needs If her circumstances improve, she has the option of conceiving again under better circumstances next time
Inconvenience to Father: Saddled with child support for 18+ years with NO choice... lessening HIS options for a better life for himself & future offspring for FAR longer.
So please... DONT just throw out that "the best way to ensure that any child born out of ANY circumstance receives the support they need." argument & think thats the end of it. Looking at it FAIRLY, the BEST INTRESTS OF THE CHILD is better served by ADOPTION & to boot the overall inconvenience is less to the mother giving it up than to the father FORCED TO PAY FOR 18 YEARS
To boot a childless family gets a child theyll actually be GRATEFUL FOR.
The "Best intrests of the child" argument is BULLSHIT
No, I am saying that life is often not just black or white.Nope. Both. Custody is a different question, which is I think what you're referring to.
Of course ideally a child should have 2 active parents, 2 loving competent fit parents, but this is often not a biological reality, especially since we are talking about the hooker and john scenario.
Sometimes the father is unfit, sometimes the mother is unfit, and sometimes both are unfit.
Erm... Just to chime in on this great thread themexi, where your understanding and incorrect position IMHO arises is in your last line. Once you decided to blow your load in the SP, that is the momen when you made your decision and decided whether or not to live with the consequences. Your ability to decide was not removed. You chose to take the risk with xyz SP and knowingly or not took the risk that a child of your making might come into existence. That child has its own independent claim on you that arose out of your decision to have sex (in whatever circumstances). The right to support is the right of the child and the child cannot give up that right no matter what you might think on the matter. I know that you and a great many other men like to think differently, but that is the law and IMHO the moral position. The child didn't decide for you to blow your load in its SP mother. You made that call. You make the call, you carry the ball.If a woman becomes pregnant, it's BOTH bio parent's responsibility.
If she chooses to continue the prgnancy it's BOTH bio parent's responsibility to a POINT.
But if her chosen partner didn't give her reasonable expectation that they WOULD stick around & support the kid? It's SAD but her choice is Adoption or tough it out on her own.
Sorry but AGAIN I assert that at that point so long as my ability to decide is removed, so is my responsibility.
I will NOT give up this RIGHT. And this IS a right so long as I can enforce it.
A more "responsible" man would either A) jerk off, B) only have sex with his wife, C) get a vasectomy before having sex or D) only engage in non procreative behaviour and ensure that all his sperm are flushed down the toilet. I agree that even I don't go to such lengths and never have and most of us never will (we're human after all right, not "responsible" human beings).
Support is the right of the child. A man's duty to any child of his, however conceived, originates in his decision to blow his load in a woman's vagina. Full stop.
The only guy's who aren't responsible for the children created from their sperm are sperm donors (and that's debatable both in law and morally) and the dead guys whose sperm is harvested to impregnate a woman after they have died (yes, this is actually done).
In pretty much every other case (unless perhaps you were raped by a woman, but that shit's not really gonna fly if you're an adult male. If you were 14 year old "seduced" by your 24 year old teach in grade 9, that might fly, otherwise) you're fucked...
Yeah, I know. Sucks to be a man. But we don't have periods or menopause either, so its not a terrible deal...
Any other arrangement is unjust and immoral IMHO.
As for the adoption angle, this is an alternative, but it is not one that absolves the initial responsibility of the father and mother of the child to give the child it's due. Granted, the mother (and essentially only the mother as I understand it), can give the kid up for adoption (and probably do the best possible thing for the child), but they don't have to. Regardless, until the mother decides to give up the child that resulted from the father deciding to blow his load into her vagina, the father is on the hook and should be on the hook.
I think that the law also ensures that the father gets to interact with his offspring however that child was conceived (I bet the SP's would just love that one... LOL) but I am quite aware that the courts and the law is rather less stringent on ensuring that fathers get access to their children as compared to ensuring that fathers pay child support.
So it goes... As was noted before, life ain't fair. That said, any man who fails to provide for the product of his little soldiers (almost with exception, except that you're raped by some chick...) is a douche and a loser. I know, sticks and stones and all that. But sometimes, being a douche is better than being responsible. That's just life too. Merely because you owe a creditor money doesn't mean you have to pay them. They have to get you to pay them. Smart creditors won't do business with you. Sadly, no child has the option of choosing its father or its mother. They get what they get.
I think that the law also ensures that the father gets to interact with his offspring however that child was conceived (I bet the SP's would just love that one... LOL) but I am quite aware that the courts and the law is rather less stringent on ensuring that fathers get access to their children as compared to ensuring that fathers pay child support.
So it goes... As was noted before, life ain't fair. That said, any man who fails to provide for the product of his little soldiers (almost with exception, except that you're raped by some chick...) is a douche and a loser. I know, sticks and stones and all that. But sometimes, being a douche is better than being responsible. That's just life too. Merely because you owe a creditor money doesn't mean you have to pay them. They have to get you to pay them. Smart creditors won't do business with you. Sadly, no child has the option of choosing its father or its mother. They get what they get.
