First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
does a man have the right to take away a womens chance of having children?
16446 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / Meh...
Offline
Posted 8/26/08 , edited 8/26/08
That fucktard should have his penis chopped up into a million pieces then fed to a pack of rabbage dogs, then have the dogs' shit burned then mixed with water and other ingredients to make a jam and have that force-fed to him... seriously, what a fuckwitted coward...

HE MIGHT AS WELL GET MARRIED TO A PROSTITUTE IF HE WANTS SEX SO BADLY!!!!

Go burn in hell, wanker! BURN IN HELL!~

Seriously, who in the devil's armpits is he to tell what a woman should do with her body? And take her chance of having a family away on top of that? He was CHEATING ON HER while she was having such a hard time with such a disease! DAMN HIM!!!!

He should get prostate cancer and DIE!~ HARHARHAR!~...
...

PS: That court case judge seriously needs to have a whack on the head with the book of human rights... ...
...

1023 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
76
Offline
Posted 8/26/08
^ Agreed.

I mean, wtf? He just took her rights to have a child, regardless of her will

I say screw the dude and chop his penis
2350 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F / somewhere..
Offline
Posted 8/26/08
The ex husband is such a prick. seriously his wife is suffering from CANCER, she had to have her reproductive organs REMOVED. She's the one that's suffering most, and he decides to go cheat on her because he's not getting any at the moment. Selfish bastard.

They both decided to preserve the eggs right? So why does the husband have sole right in deciding what to do with them and her only chance of ever having kids? Also if the only reason he destroyed the eggs is becuase he didn't want to pay child support, then I'm sure the wife would much rather have the children and not recieve child support than have him kill her chances off.

He doesn't deserve a penis.
8053 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Right Here
Offline
Posted 8/26/08
There is now a new meaning for bastard.... what a crappy person... not even considerate... only wants sex... wat a sex-maniac... WAT A BIG PIECE OF SHIT!.... poor natallie(sorry for the bad language)
8053 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Right Here
Offline
Posted 8/26/08 , edited 8/26/08
If you read the article its going to make your heart break!... It was a 5 year fight... The court agreed that the embryos not be fertilized, because of his ex-husbands right to choose... but what Ms. Natallie Evans was fighting for is her right to be a mother... Ms. Evans pleaded to his Ex to rethink it... and i bet alot! but nooo.... that sex-maniac didn't agree.. and now Ms. Evans can never be a mother .... damn.... wat kinda bastard doesn't reconsider!
2060 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / london
Offline
Posted 8/26/08

he is bad, but the judge is the worst, actually.
6497 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / F / cLouD9
Offline
Posted 8/26/08
stupid jerk!!!
757 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F
Offline
Posted 8/26/08
No way man. Her ex-husband is freaking selfish. This is her last chance to have a child but because of his disgusting selfishness she will not be able to be a mother while he can go find another woman to have his child. How i hope that he will suffer in the same manner and get some cancer of the reproductive organs so he'll understand how she feels.
1124 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 8/26/08
The win-win solution is for the woman to have the fertilized egg saved and the ex husband to get some court order to be free from any obligation of support (since the children is born without the ex husband consent).
But no chance a scenario like this would worked out, wouldn't it?
1329 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
97 / F
Offline
Posted 8/26/08 , edited 8/26/08
It's his sperm, so he should have been allowed a say in the matter. It was petty and a little cruel, but as the product was 50% his, he was well within rights to deny her.

People are getting the issues crossed here. She didn't lose her right to be a mother, she lost her right to be a mother with the fertilized eggs in storage. The fact that it was her last chance (to be a mother to her own biological children) is painful, but not the real argument. So, personally, I would say it's a fair verdict. The law has no need to take morality into account, so I'm glad they didn't in this case.

Was it a morally good choice though? I would tend to fall on the negative side here. The right thing to do would have been to get a waiver of parental rights signed, then let her have them. Of course, we're not the man here, so our logic is likely vastly different from his, partially being as we're only getting one side of the full story here.

EDIT: With all this said, I'm also a fan of the idea of a 'paper abortion'. Since in many places, a woman may get an abortion without any consultation of the male, I believe men should have the same right. The difference is, a 'paper abortion' is just that, paper only, it's not forcing the woman to have an abortion. It just means the male has no claims on the child and will never have to pay child support.

There's a host of stipulations about it though, so don't think it's an easy-out for the male.
Posted 8/26/08 , edited 8/26/08
She should be able to have a child, screw her ex-husband, he's a cheating prick!
This is a cancer-surviving infertile woman's last chance of a kid, how can anyone be so cruel
They should let her have a kid and nuder him!
551 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Earth^^
Offline
Posted 8/26/08
*sigh* What the hell is wrong with people these days... *maximum facepalm*

No. A man has no, I repeat, NO right to take away a womans chance to have a baby. That's just biblicaly insane! Why do you think God put us here on Earth? hmm, I was pretty sure it was around the line:

Go forth and mutiply

That man is disobeying God himself
1329 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
97 / F
Offline
Posted 8/26/08
I'm curious, why do so many people think this was about her right to have a baby? It was about her right to use the frozen eggs to have a baby that's all.

The fact that it was her last chance to have her own biological child is more a kicked-while-down sort of thing.
2546 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Sydney, Australia
Offline
Posted 8/26/08 , edited 8/26/08

DRO1 wrote:

Its not fair but that guy shouldn't get fucked over with child support either.


GG /thread.

Really slack of the guy, but he's the one in control of his actions, not her or any of you crybabies.
Posted 8/26/08
no..... unless of course the woman wants it >.<
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.