Have you seen this billboard?

[Al Swearegen]

That's all a totally seperate issue though

When a woman gets pregnant, it is entirely her decision whether or not to get an abortion, and legally that is how it should be

It is very much tied in context.

If the man has no rights and the woman has rights then acknowledging this is not a bad thing and justifying it rather pointless I feel.
I think perhaps just saying well someone has to lose out and society has deemed the Father to be the one to lose out. It also shows that this is not confinded to whether or not to give rights to unborn children.

Society does give a mixed message when they state that Father's have no rights and no say in what happens up until the moment the child is born, and then are legally obligated from that moment on. 

Even then the Father's rights are a lot more tenuous than all of that.
Mother's rights are basically ironclad from day dot. To invalidate her rights she REALLY has to fuck up

[Adam]

What kind of rights do you think the father should have then?

[Al Swearegen]

What kind of rights do you think the father should have then?

That is simple Soph.

The Mother gets the right to be a parent and to be supported in their right to be a parent. So ought a Father.

[Adam]

That's not very clear at all

Exactly WHAT right should the father have here?

[TA]

The following is the text of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Take note of the two statements in bold. The christian pro-life lobby needs to take note of the first statement because that means their cause will NEVER become law. The second statement in bold needs to be taken into consideration because while this asshole said something stupid and needs to take the consequences, the law does not need to be involved when it comes to speech. I can not stand what he said, but it was his right to say it.

[Callaway]

What kind of rights do you think the father should have then?

That is simple Soph.

The Mother gets the right to be a parent and to be supported in their right to be a parent. So ought a Father.

If that right starts when the baby is born and neither parent has done anything to abrogate that right, then I agree with you.

What your ex-wife did to you and to your children was unconscionable.

[midlifeaspie]

The following is the text of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Take note of the two statements in bold. The christian pro-life lobby needs to take note of the first statement because that means their cause will NEVER become law. The second statement in bold needs to be taken into consideration because while this asshole said something stupid and needs to take the consequences, the law does not need to be involved when it comes to speech. I can not stand what he said, but it was his right to say it.

Freedom of speech does not extend to covering libel or slander.  If she didn't have an abortion, and he said she did, then he has committed libel at the very least.

[TA]

The following is the text of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Take note of the two statements in bold. The christian pro-life lobby needs to take note of the first statement because that means their cause will NEVER become law. The second statement in bold needs to be taken into consideration because while this asshole said something stupid and needs to take the consequences, the law does not need to be involved when it comes to speech. I can not stand what he said, but it was his right to say it.

Freedom of speech does not extend to covering libel or slander.  If she didn't have an abortion, and he said she did, then he has committed libel at the very least.

If he committed Libel, then he was in the wrong, but the Libel law is civil, not criminal. So the most that can come out of this is a lawsuit.

[midlifeaspie]

The following is the text of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Take note of the two statements in bold. The christian pro-life lobby needs to take note of the first statement because that means their cause will NEVER become law. The second statement in bold needs to be taken into consideration because while this asshole said something stupid and needs to take the consequences, the law does not need to be involved when it comes to speech. I can not stand what he said, but it was his right to say it.

Freedom of speech does not extend to covering libel or slander.  If she didn't have an abortion, and he said she did, then he has committed libel at the very least.

If he committed Libel, then he was in the wrong, but the Libel law is civil, not criminal. So the most that can come out of this is a lawsuit.

Best I can tell this entire conversation has been about civil misconduct.  Are there criminal charges involved somewhere?

[Callaway]

The following is the text of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Take note of the two statements in bold. The christian pro-life lobby needs to take note of the first statement because that means their cause will NEVER become law. The second statement in bold needs to be taken into consideration because while this asshole said something stupid and needs to take the consequences, the law does not need to be involved when it comes to speech. I can not stand what he said, but it was his right to say it.

I disagree with you.

What if I wanted to buy a billboard in the middle of the city where you live that said "Phil is a child molestor" and I included enough information on that billboard to make sure that everyone in that city that you knew or cared about or whose opinions you valued knew that I was referring to you?

Is that really a fair exercise of my free speech rights?

[TA]

The following is the text of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Take note of the two statements in bold. The christian pro-life lobby needs to take note of the first statement because that means their cause will NEVER become law. The second statement in bold needs to be taken into consideration because while this asshole said something stupid and needs to take the consequences, the law does not need to be involved when it comes to speech. I can not stand what he said, but it was his right to say it.

Freedom of speech does not extend to covering libel or slander.  If she didn't have an abortion, and he said she did, then he has committed libel at the very least.

If he committed Libel, then he was in the wrong, but the Libel law is civil, not criminal. So the most that can come out of this is a lawsuit.

Best I can tell this entire conversation has been about civil misconduct.  Are there criminal charges involved somewhere?

from what I can gather the women in question was put under some kind of protection after the billboard popped up, so maybe a threat was involved.

[Scrapheap]

Just to throw a new argument at the "it's the mother's call if she wants to carry a child to term" line of argument - 35 states in the US have a "Fetal Homicide" law.  If the mother intentionally did something to herself that caused the death of the fetus after 7.5 months (usually) she can be convicted and sentenced.  In England the crime is called "Child Destruction" and is enforced at 24 weeks.  If the state has a call in whether or not she carries that fetus to term at a certain point, shouldn't the father as well?

The state shouldn't have a call in those matters.

There's so much unconstitutional and unjustified law in this country, it makes me want to vomit.

[TA]

The following is the text of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Take note of the two statements in bold. The christian pro-life lobby needs to take note of the first statement because that means their cause will NEVER become law. The second statement in bold needs to be taken into consideration because while this asshole said something stupid and needs to take the consequences, the law does not need to be involved when it comes to speech. I can not stand what he said, but it was his right to say it.

I disagree with you.

What if I wanted to buy a billboard in the middle of the city where you live that said "Phil is a child molestor" and I included enough information on that billboard to make sure that everyone in that city that you knew or cared about or whose opinions you valued knew that I was referring to you?

Is that really a fair exercise of my free speech rights?

Point taken. I had to go back and review the article, and I found out that there was slander/libel involved. Slander, libel, and threats are where speech crosses the line

[Al Swearegen]

What kind of rights do you think the father should have then?

That is simple Soph.

The Mother gets the right to be a parent and to be supported in their right to be a parent. So ought a Father.

If that right starts when the baby is born and neither parent has done anything to abrogate that right, then I agree with you.

What your ex-wife did to you and to your children was unconscionable.

Unconscionable or no she had the backing of society and the law in what she she and the rights that I did not have...because she was a woman and because she was the mother.
There was no other reason for this.
It was not in the children's best interests and it impinged to no small degree on me BUT she had the rights that I did not have becuase i was the wrong gender and equality be damned.

[Callaway]

What kind of rights do you think the father should have then?

That is simple Soph.

The Mother gets the right to be a parent and to be supported in their right to be a parent. So ought a Father.

If that right starts when the baby is born and neither parent has done anything to abrogate that right, then I agree with you.

What your ex-wife did to you and to your children was unconscionable.

Unconscionable or no she had the backing of society and the law in what she she and the rights that I did not have...because she was a woman and because she was the mother.
There was no other reason for this.
It was not in the children's best interests and it impinged to no small degree on me BUT she had the rights that I did not have becuase i was the wrong gender and equality be damned.

I thought that she made some BS argument that her being their sole parent was best for the children based on your AS?  I didn't know that the argument was just because you are male.