Presexual Agreement Contracts

reply to post by MaMaa


Having to draw one up together would force that kind of talk, and honesty. The one I put up is a simplistic one, just to demonstrate format. If I were to make one myself, it would be long. Very long. Covering everything I could think of.

One person turns out to be against abortion, they would find out early on and know this is not a good partner for them.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by MaMaa

 

Having to draw one up together would force that kind of talk, and honesty. The one I put up is a simplistic one, just to demonstrate format. If I were to make one myself, it would be long. Very long. Covering everything I could think of.

One person turns out to be against abortion, they would find out early on and know this is not a good partner for them.

Also you assume that the man who impregnated her is in favor of abortion. This contract would not work very well for a man who does't believe in abortion.

I was messed up for a long time because my father was never a part of my life. If I found out later that his deadbeat status was the result of a pre-arranged agreement, I don't know how I'd feel.

reply to post by MaMaa


You are right, it wouldn't work for me.

People seem to be ignoring this:

I think that before entering into a sexual relationship, it should be discussed, and a legal agreement drawn up and signed beforehand. If you do not agree on such an important topic, then you really shouldn't be having sex in the first place, and a relationship is probably not a good idea. It would save people a lot of heartache and bitterness.

The example I put is only to show a layout, nothing more. I view abortion as morally wrong, unless for major health issues with the mother and or baby. I will not have sex with a woman that does not share that view, that would be plain foolish to do. My personal one would point to adoption as the solution to accidental pregnancy specifically, if I were to make one.

Man and I thought that this was Please me or else.

reply to post by TKDRL


Unfortunatly neither you nor momma can sign away the rights of the child.

Originally posted by TKDRL
Ok, one of the most important aspect in a relationship, and also one that seems to be the least discussed until too late, is children. Personally, it's one of the first topics I bring up when I am considering a relationship. I consider this world too corrupt to consider passing along my DNA and bloodline in. That is how I feel.

I think that before entering into a sexual relationship, it should be discussed, and a legal agreement drawn up and signed beforehand. If you do not agree on such an important topic, then you really shouldn't be having sex in the first place, and a relationship is probably not a good idea. It would save people a lot of heartache and bitterness.

An example of what such a contract could look like:

I [names here] affirm that we are entering into a serious relationship, and are planning on having sexual relations. We both agree at this time, that we do not wish to have children. Should we both agree that we decide to have children at a later time, a new contract can be drawn up, nullifying this one.

If [woman] decides upon finding out a pregnancy has occured, to keep the child, then she accepts full responsibility for said child.

It needs to be short, to the point, and written in plain english, not legalese mumbojumbo.

Good idea?

edit on Mon, 05 Nov 2012 05:20:02 -0600 by TKDRL because: bad html fixed

Why don't you just get clipped?

If a pregnancy occurs, it means that both parties screwed up in the birth control department.

A lot of guys seem to have this idea that they bear no responsibility for contraception once the magic BC pill is in play. This is a stupid, stupid attitude. If she gets to make the decision of whether to keep the child or not, and you get stuck with choice she makes, then you need to protect yourself by doing more than just trusting that she is taking birth control properly. Protect yourself.

I think the content of the contract is irrelevant.....the logistics are what matter.

And if you give that contract before sex, you're likely to not be having sex....

reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks


Tired of Control Freaks
You mean like the courts and a crazy mother ? Or are you saying sex has a cost ? If both parties agree on a contract then maybe both only want sex ! The man only has a choice to have said sex but after that, well he has none . If a woman wanted to get a abortion the man has NO choice in the matter as this is HER body . Then if she so chooses to have the child and run the man through the ringer in court , well still no choice ! The only time he has any say in anything is yes to sex ! So who is the control freak ? You must be a single mother . Stings a little huh? These contracts should be mandatory before sex as it takes two . And you can't tell me a girl has never begged for sex or got pregnant on purpose . So to each his own just sign the contract before you burry the bone .

Originally posted by letseeit7
reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks

 

Tired of Control Freaks
You mean like the courts and a crazy mother ? Or are you saying sex has a cost ? If both parties agree on a contract then maybe both only want sex ! The man only has a choice to have said sex but after that, well he has none . If a woman wanted to get a abortion the man has NO choice in the matter as this is HER body . Then if she so chooses to have the child and run the man through the ringer in court , well still no choice ! The only time he has any say in anything is yes to sex ! So who is the control freak ? You must be a single mother . Stings a little huh? These contracts should be mandatory before sex as it takes two . And you can't tell me a girl has never begged for sex or got pregnant on purpose . So to each his own just sign the contract before you burry the bone .

Or if it is only about sex, go pay someone for their 'services' LMAO

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

 

Sure, I do understand, but a lot of people don't seem to. The discussion never seems to come up, until woops, I am pregnant. That is not good at all.

Well i've never dated a woman where this conversation didn't come up at some point and always before i got them pregnant, since I never got anyone pregnant. With me i always tried to ask myself if i could see myself spending the next 20+ years married to them or however long until i died with them. If the answer was no then it didn't get serious and i let them go. I got pretty good at learning to walk away before i met my wife, but i was always kind of a loner which is why my friends nicknamed me lonewolf.

reply to post by TKDRL


Get a vasectomy if you fear having a child. Most men do this after they have had children and no longer are of an age to deal with them. Men have the ability to have children much later in life than women can, this might not be a good idea as birth defect rates climb with older men, and a 80 year old father would be very strange for a child, and very stressful for the father, ever chase a 2yr old while using a walker, talk about busting a hip?. Have your kids, raise them right, and get a vasectomy.Many of my friends do not have or want kids, it's a personal choice.
Enjoy life and never look back to what you cannot change.

All I can really say is bump the attitude of some men and women today this is a block of human life that was working just fine untill feminazis and manginas farked it up and now we have what we have today whatever that is supposed to be.

I believe it is called hypergamous sluts chaos on both men and womens sides and guess who is gonna have offspring running lose and unschooled in the so called future.

www.mgtow.com all the way baby I ghost and so you might its your choice.

We're drawing up contracts to make irresponsibility acceptable now? Wow.

Here's a thought: Get a vasectomy. Get sterilized if you don't want to get anyone pregnant. You want to put the responsibility on the woman? How about YOU be responsible?

Originally posted by Unity_99

Originally posted by Renegade2283
reply to post by TKDRL

 

Well, seeing as how even after birth the child is still less intelligent than a common rat(which most people have no remorse killing) I think that it is no less horrible to abort then to set a mouse trap in your house.

Also, the consciousness of a fetus in the womb during the latest period it can be aborted is about that of a lizard, then yes abortion should be allowed. How about we concentrate on the sanctity of life for the thousands of children who starve to death every month. With each child born, where one could be adopted from one of these horrible places, it is much worse than abortion.

This is pure ignorance. Infants take time to mature and develop, including responses. But their brain is growing and developing at a rate that far exceeds the highest scholar on earth and are what you might call SUPER INTELLIGENT, MORE INTELLIGENT THAN EINSTEIN.

You know very little. Hit the books!

Did you hear me mention the rate their intelligence evolves? No. My statements were 100% accurate and you are likely just a religious extremist.

Exactly "Infants take time to mature and develop", meaning upon the instant after they are born they are not. Who cares how fast they are developing, I am sure that rats are developing just as quickly in the short period of development they have (which is much shorter than people, so you have no experience with rats development.)

Dont even get me started on Octopi, massively intelligent creatures, yet they are eaten around the world like nothing. Also, you must realize that consciousness is much different than intelligence. A octopus for example, is far more conscious than a baby in the womb or even a new born baby. Do you remember being born? No, thats what I thought.

So let me reiterate what I am trying to say: THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH ABORTION. In fact it is selfish and naive to have a stance that it should be outlawed. Why? because it should never be up to the government on what a woman can do with HER body.

As for your statement that I should "Hit the books", I'm guessing your referring to the "books" of the bible, eh?

Originally posted by TKDRL

An example of what such a contract could look like:

I [names here] affirm that we are entering into a serious relationship, and are planning on having sexual relations. We both agree at this time, that we do not wish to have children. Should we both agree that we decide to have children at a later time, a new contract can be drawn up, nullifying this one.

If [woman] decides upon finding out a pregnancy has occured, to keep the child, then she accepts full responsibility for said child.

If you do not wish to have children, then do not have sex.

reply to post by letseeit7


I was very very clear in what I said. Legally, the definition of a contract is this:

there is an offer
There is acceptance of the offer
There is a consideration (money or some other desirable thing)

What the op is talking about is a legal agreement - which is legally non-binding on the child, who was NOT a party to the agreement.

Look - this isn't a NEW point of view - its a very very old one. Men have been trying to get out of paternal responsibility since time began. The normal response used to be to deny paternity. That argument is not out of the question because of DNA testing.

Now that argument is that "gosh darn, its just not fair - if a woman can escape maternal responsibility by having an abortion, then why can't men get out of paternal responsibility by just signing a document saying that they don't agree to having a baby with this particular woman".

Well GROW UP - life just isn't fair!!!!

You don't want a baby, but you want to have sex! That used to be called "having your cake and eating it too".

You don't want a baby? Take responsibility for birth control yourself! GET A VASECTOMY!!! DON"T HAVE SEX!!! Use condoms properly and make sure that the lady also uses birth control.

Enough with the "she tricked me" #e! You should know that NO birth control pill is 100 % effective. Its only 99.99 % effective.

Further, abortion is a theoretical concept until you are actually facing the choice. Its like saying "if I get cancer, I won't accept the treatments and will just die instead". Easy to say - not so easy to do!

The heart of the matter - the true unfairness here, is the child. Yes, its difficult to pony up the money for child support. Its even harder to be a non-custodial parent and yes, I agree that the courts are not always fair to men but at the end of the day....and here is another theoretical question...what will you say to the child that you so calleously abandon to the hazards of life.

What will you say when your daughter or son turns up and says "where have you been".

And truthfully, I have little use for the boys who can so blithely throw their own children out of their lives. If their own children can't trust them - who else can?

If all it costs you is money - if you never have to be involved in the day-to-day parenting of child - trust me you are getting off very very cheaply

Tired of Controlled

reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks


BTW - for this offer to be a true "contract" - the money or consideration is due to the mother and the child. The father offered a contract that if a child was born of the sexual interaction, the mother would take all responsibility.

Why would the mother enter into such an agreement unless there was some consideration? Why would the mother choose to accept the father's responsibility for nothing at all?

You can argue that she is getting sex out of the deal but so is the father and the father has given nothing for the same sexual act.

It is the child who loses the right to the financial support of the daddy and the role of the father in their life, therefore it is to the child that the money must be paid to.

Such a contract could only be binding if the child received financial consideration for their losses. But I don't believe that such a contract would be binding, even if the child received some money because I don't believe that anyone can sell another parties legal rights.

Tired of Control Freaks

Look - lets turn this concept around just a little and look at it from another angle.

Let us say that woman says to a man "I won't have sex with you unless you sign this little bitty paper saying that you will pay my $125,000 VISA bill" and being besotted (or whatever a man is at such a moment), you sign the "contract".

Do you really think you would have any legal difficulty in having that contract declared null and void? You received no consideration in exchange for you taking on a $125,000 debt! The woman might argue that you got sex but the judge would simply declare the contract invalid because sex isn't valued at $125,000 and why should have paid that much when it it widely available at $50.00 a pop?

There was an offer, there was acceptance but there was no MONEY or consideration - therefore, its not legally binding.

Now, if a woman says "pay my visa bill and I will give you a mortgage on my property and have sex with you" - now THAT is a legally binding contract.

There was an offer, there was acceptance and there is money. These are all the elements of a legally binding contract.

Tired of Control Freaks