If you got an SP pregnant, would you take responsibility for the child?

[Madeline Rhodes]

Two things:

1. You all assume with the comments about being named on the birth certificate, or potential child support, having to pay, etc. that she would put your name on it.

2. My reply to the other thread, and subsequent posts stand for this one as well. https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...from-clients&p=3546216&highlight=#post3546216

 

[fuji]

I always dispose of my own condom in front of the SP

At which point I am pretty sure she notices whether or not it is broken. So you were just being pedantic, you actually had no disagreement here.. fine. So let's move on: The SP knows whether or not the condom broke.

You quote child rights again which is irrelevant since the argument from texmex and the SP supporting him that not only is the scenario of the pregnancy remote, but the pregnancy will not come to term.

You cannot guarantee that the child will not come to term. Perhaps the child should not come to term, but that is debatable--not everyone believes in abortion, and no matter how vehemently you disagree with it, the SP may choose to bring the child to term, and may choose not to put that child up to adoption. You have no control over that, and no right to have any control over that, so you cannot insist that it won't happen.

Again, I suspect you're being a pedant, and arguing for the sake of argument, without having any point of real substance.

You point out we're talking about something rare--we surely are. We're talking about what would you do in that rare, but not unheard of, circumstance. It's certainly happened that SP's have got pregnant and that children have been born--someone posted an article about such a case earlier. It's certainly far more common than space alien immigration, so in that respect you were being foolish.

 

[JustSex]

At which point I am pretty sure she notices whether or not it is broken.

Now it's - I'm pretty sure. You don't know. More backpedaling. You were trying to make the argument in response to someone pointing out the futality of tracking customers by suggesting 100% of SP's closely inspect customer's used condoms before they leave.

Again, I suspect you're being a pedant, and arguing for the sake of argument, without having any point of real substance.

I came, as others have, to the defense of texmex whom you labeled as criminal and a low life because he stated he has no obligations other than - if he was aware of it - helping with an abortion. You then brushed aside the support that there would be no child from many SP's by leaping from one improbability to a greater one by quoting rights to a child that doesn't exist. In the end, this incredible flight of fantasy was to avoid recognizing that you were unfair with texmex. Or greater yet - admitting that you were wrong.

Other than that I'm going to be unable to respond since my IT dept is replacing my PC and I have completely forgot how I signed on.

 

[Narg]

Tell you what Fuji ... I'll respond to your comments and continue the debate right after you explain how you came to this conclusion in another thread and why we should not consider you to be a racist:

Is getting into an ivy league school on a race quota better or worse than getting in because your dad's an alumni and pulled some strings on your behalf? That's how the white kids generally get in, as they generally don't have the grades to compete with the asians on merit. Well, I mean, other than the eastern european kids--they're white too, but you know what I mean.

 

[blackrock13]

Tell you what Fuji ... I'll respond to your comments and continue the debate right after you explain how you came to this conclusion in another thread and why we should not consider you to be a racist:

You'd better take big breath because you'll probably get a tsunami of unrated factoids from mouth Fuji, but then maybe nothing at all and he'll go off on a total tangent; your choice.

 

[Narg]

You'd better take big breath because you'll probably get a tsunami of unrated factoids from mouth Fuji, but then maybe nothing at all and he'll go off on a total tangent; your choice.

OK, so I'm inexperienced on this board, but I'm hoping that Fuji just admits his comment was an error, written in the heat of the moment, and that he's retracting it and apologizing. Hey ... it could happen.

 

[red]

OK, so I'm inexperienced on this board, but I'm hoping that Fuji just admits his comment was an error, written in the heat of the moment, and that he's retracting it and apologizing. Hey ... it could happen.

it will happen when trump gives out his financial records.

 

[WoodPeckr]

it will happen when trump gives out his financial records.

Or when The Donald levels with us on that thing crawling on his head!....:biggrin1:

 

[rt-24]

i would support any woman i got pregnant; regardless or her profession. i would fully support any decision she makes.

 

[fuji]

Now it's - I'm pretty sure. You don't know. More backpedaling. You were trying to make the argument in response to someone pointing out the futality of tracking customers by suggesting 100% of SP's closely inspect customer's used condoms before they leave.

Nope. Wrong. I was refuting the claim that an SP couldn't possibly know who the fathre was by pointing out that she would most likely have noticed the broken condom. The claim that she can't know is refuted regardless of whether it is "most likely" or "100%" so your arguments here amount to pedantry--they don't cut to the substance of the debate. Even if you win this particular point, you lose the debate. Even in your version it's still likely that the SP will be able to figure out which customer was the father, and have the contact information he used to make the booking on hand.

I came, as others have, to the defense of texmex whom you labeled as criminal and a low life because he stated he has no obligations other than - if he was aware of it - helping with an abortion.

That label is correct. His view does make him a low life and a criminal and you haven't offered ANYTHING to defend him against that criticism. You've only questioned how likely it is that his unethical and immoral beliefs will actually be put into practice.

You then brushed aside the support that there would be no child from many SP's by leaping from one improbability to a greater one by quoting rights to a child that doesn't exist.

Correct. Everybody agrees this is a pretty rare thing. It's not an unheard of thing, but it's plainly rare. The question is what would you do if this rare event happens to you? Your answer, themexi's anwer, sheds just as much light on his moral poverty regardless of whether the event is rare or commonplace.

 

[fuji]

Tell you what Fuji ... I'll respond to your comments and continue the debate right after you explain how you came to this conclusion in another thread and why we should not consider you to be a racist:

You mean starting with the fact that I'm not asian and I came by my view by attending graduations at Ivy League universities and counting the number of non-asians who were there? Or would you like to go and look into the articles that have been written examining the question as to why asians dominate the top programs, and whether something should be done about it?

 

[fuji]

i would support any woman i got pregnant; regardless or her profession. i would fully support any decision she makes.

+1 see not everybody on terb is a lowlife.

 

[alexmst]

Watched Kill Bill on Movie Network last night.

Bill: Now... When it comes to you, and us, I have a few unanswered questions. So, before this tale...reaches its climax, I'm going to ask you some questions, and I want you to tell me the truth. However, therein lies a dilemma. Because, when it comes to the subject of me, I believe you are truly and utterly incapable of telling the truth, especially to me, and least of all, to yourself. And, when it comes to the subject of me, I am truly and utterly incapable of believing anything you say.

The Bride: How do you suppose we solve this dilemma?

The issue Fuji is complex as assume for a moment the condom didn't break but there was transfer leakage. How would a client even know he got the SP pregnant? If it was a one time visit and he saw her incall, how would she A) Know it was him and not any other client seen in a 3-day period, and B) Get in touch with him? The agency would perhaps have his booking contact # if he was a regular if they felt inclined to give it to her, but I don't see them giving her all the clients who saw her over a 3-day or 1 week period's numbers to her to call up a dozen or more guys to set up a mass DNA test. If all the agency had was a prepaid cell # the client could toss the phone and no way of tracking him unless his DNA was in the system. Sure they could match the DNA, but you need something to match it to. Even if the client would be willing to support the child, there is a good chance he would never even know he was a dad. If he wanted to be known I suppose the agency could start a thread on Terb saying "anyone who saw X the week of Y - she is pregnant, so if any of you want to phone us to arrange for DNA tests to see if you are the dad, you know where to find us'. Not all clients read the boards though. Some might not believe her that it was them.

Then there is the issue of whether the SP would want to have the baby of a client she didn't know the ID of. I've asked two SPs now and both said they would use the morning after pill if the condom broke, which I think the majority of SPs would do. Of course if it wasn't known that the condom broke, or it didn't actually break but spatter got in during removal, then the pill would be a moot point.

I would, if I knew, get tested to see if I was the dad, sure. If I had Hugh Grant's taste in SPs it might be painful, but since I only see SPs I find very hot and attractive, the kid would probably have good genes. So yes, I'd support the kid financially as per the legal guidelines.

 

[fuji]

Sure alex, in the case where the SP honestly doesn't know who the father might be, because it happened via a leak rather than a break, and nobody knows... well then that sucks for the SP but there's plainly no moral dilemma for the client. You can't be asked to take responsibility for a child that nobody has any idea might be yours.

This is quite different than themexi hiding anonymously behind is phone so that an SP who actively knows it's him and is trying to find him is prevented from finding him.

 

[themexi]

JustSex you are lying, or inexperienced, or maybe just blind,

Ok Mr Kettle....

if you think SP's don't check out the condom afterwards. I'll agree that "always" is too strong, but I'll stand on "usually".

Maybe for YOU.. I know I would be EXTRA vigilant against having your psychotically Judgemental CHUD of an offspring in ME if I were a woman....

The difference between "always" and "usually" doesn't alter the argument in any meaningful way,

Really?

Why are they different words then? Why do most reasonable people Use them to mean different things?????

in either case there's a good probability that she is going to be able to contact you to tell you that you're the most likely father.

Not if you use your prepaid phone ONLY for outgoing calls & immediately expected Incoming ones she can't....



This is where it gets GOLDEN

As for SP's claiming to assume responsibility--they cannot do so.

Oh so ONLY THE MAN can take responsibility then?

The rights of the child to support are not rights that the SP is in any position to transact away. .

NO transaction required. SHE DECIDES unilaterally to abort or adopt it or keep it without involving the father that's it.

Unless of course you would take THOSE choices away from her... because the LAW you keep clinging to as the FINAL word DOES NOT.

The child's rights are not the SP's.

Um..... since she can TERMINATE it before it even becomes "Live" I think she has ALL the power in the world to determine it's "rights"

She has no say in the matter. Your obligations to your children are between you and your child.

Earlier on you said If she decided to have & keep it I would be stuck.... Implying she had the ability to choose....

Now that several WOMEN have taken the white night value of you BS.... you switch to taking away their choices.....

LAME


You people really do seem obsessed with "rights" that are "guaranteed" on paper so long as they suit your argument...... then youre the FIRST to disregard them when theyre inconvenient.


LAME

As you're including Gen in that please note that she said she felt an obligation to avoid pregnancy, but agreed fully that once the child is born it is entitled to support from its father. In short, it may be "wrong" for an SP to allow a pregnancy to come to term, but once it does, the child's rights clearly prevail regardless of who made what mistake prior to that point.

NO it is NOT so clear

If the child had this "RIGHT"... then how is it possible for an SP or any other woman to simply not involve or even inform the father?

If it's the childs "right" then that too would be illegal or impossible.

IT'S NOT


People like you ALWAYS confuse RIGHTS with "Legally binding priviliges"

One CANT be taken away, one can.

 

[themexi]

With respect... I stated that my support would go a bit beyond an abortion


I also stated that if she COULDNT terminate that I would contribute to her comfort DURING pregnancy too....

MY major point of contention is being on the hook for 18 years should she decide to Keep it & drag me into it instead of adopting it out....


Just a clarification...


Sadly I wouldnt even be able to offer THAT amount of support for fear that once involved I could be snagged by the courts into more than I deem fair...

It's because of the courts BS that I just Ignore & feel too unsafe to offer nothing

 

[GPIDEAL]

+1 see not everybody on terb is a lowlife.

Fuji, there are married men who hobby. Even if they wanted to step up to the plate and 'do the right thing', there are drastic consequences and repercussions that they just can't fathom or reconcile. Their fear is genuine.

I'm not married or attached, nor do I have dependants, so it might be easier for me to be involved in the resolution to that hypothetical situation with an SP, but we can't quickly judge others. I can't just write-off those guys who take a different position as low lives.

 

[themexi]

That label is correct. His view does make him a low life and a criminal and you haven't offered ANYTHING to defend him against that criticism. You've only questioned how likely it is that his unethical and immoral beliefs will actually be put into practice..

The definition of a criminal is someone who breaks the law

ANY LAW no matter how petty, or poorly written, outdated or unjust

GODDAMNED NEARLY EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD IS SOME SORT OF CRIMINAL


FooooooooGeeeeeeeeeee:

When you take an inflexible stance & say shit like the law this & the law that & You hope criminals get caught & whateverthefuck...... dont think you realize just how hypocritical you are on THIS point alone.... let alone most other times...


Did you know that ADULTERY was once a crime? A REAL one??? I bet you wouldnt consider YourSelf a crimijnal in ANY case because youre always RIGHT!

 

[GPIDEAL]

I think the results of this poll are such because of the impersonal business aspect of the scenario.
Obviously the results would be quite different if the question was about a girlfriend or even a first date.

Without a doubt!

 

[S.C. Joe]

I kill myself and leave the little money i have to my child--how's that one, lol