Important issues you have changed your mind on

I used to hate 'social drinking' i.e sitting down with a few bottles but recently its grown on me. I was all about nights out, pullin' but out of nowhere I just like the idea of a casual drink. What's happening?

Henlars67 wrote: »

There's definitely no going back. I hate religion more with every passing day

Ummm I dunno there are a lot of priests who if you listen actually have a lot of good to say but then you get the nutjobs(went to my mums months mind at weekend) and the priest was going on about how he read in the newspaper about some young famous persons biggest wish in life was to see Michael Jackson, he used this wish to demonstrate young peoples move away from Catholicism. Wacko. Proper was like something out of Father Ted.

I used to be pro-life until I had an unplanned pregnancy at 19, was dumped by the father and had to give an abortion serious consideration. I decided not to have one but I am staunchly pro-choice ever since.

I used to be a bit dubious of welfare recipients, especially young single mothers (girls I knew from school who never worked etc). I didn't hold them in very high regard and couldn't understand why they wouldn't just "get a job". Until I became a single mother and was doing my best to get back to work and being thwarted at every turn by the welfare trap (which I realised is a very very real thing where childcare is concerned).

So for me, it was definitely a case of "walk a mile in my shoes" and my eyes weren't long being opened!

Potatoeman wrote: »

For me its the double standard. Having to support a child has a huge impact on a mans life too but this is just overlooked and many that are pro abortion they dont even see their own double standard.
I was talking to someone pro abortion and they actually said that the man should not do it if he is not ready for the consequences and it was not the same for women. The argument made
no sense. It is a double standard at least if they admitted that and excused it through the cost in taxes.

It's much easier for a man to duck out on his financial responsibilities though. He can move on, marry someone else and have more children and this will be taken into account when his maintenance is being assessed even though his new wifes income will not form part of the equation.
He has no obligation to take care of the child other than financial. He can feck off to Australia, claim he is not working and send a minimal amount for the child. And if he doesn't, there is no court who will be able to force him to pay if he is elsewhere.

So if all things were equal then I'd agree that it's a double standard. But all things are not equal. I've not seen my childs father since the day I told him I was pregnant. She is 10 now. So for eleven years I've been solely responsible for her because he moved away, didn't tell me where to and he changed his number. So no maintenance and no responsibility and when I was trying to find him, his privacy was protected by his old employers and the college etc. so I couldn't get a forwarding address.

Anyway, my point is that when a man wants out it's easier for him than a woman. It works the other way too obviously and I'm aware that fathers rights are abysmal.

But the responsibility will for the most part fall on the mother as well as the physical side of things. So yes, she has final say. Maybe it's not fair but there's no other solution for men other than to prevent pregnancy in the first place. That's just biology.
But on the flip side, if a woman chooses to have a child, the bulk of the responsibility for the child is on her so there's double standards aplenty.