[babygene]

What is Christian about being taken advantage of - or condoning it as in the case of Tallhappy.

This boy was conceived illegitimately. It was not the fault of the husband. Any hurt that this child feels as a result can be laid at the feet of the wife and her stud.

Children being hurt by the acts of their parents is not new, unfortunately, but in this case the husband and the child are victims.

Are Christians supposed to volunteer to be the victim? I don’t think so…

[Clara Lou]

There is nothing Christian about being taken advantage of. There is something Christian about taking into consideration the well-being of an innocent child who never asked to be born in the first place. If the duped man can get his money back from his philandering wife, good. The accompanying problem, though, is this: What will happen emotionally to the child who was formerly loved by his father, but suddenly appears no longer to be loved? He learns that love is something to be turned off at will. It's an emotional scar he/she carries for life. It is Christian to take this into consideration. It is Christian for the duped father to do something to see that the child is damaged as little as possible.

[FITZ]

It's Christian but that doesn't mean the government should impose it by making it the law. I think it's great if men will be the fathers to children who are not biologically theirs but forcing that is another matter. It does take more than one sperm to be a real father.

[FITZ]

What is Christian about being taken advantage of - or condoning it as in the case of Tallhappy.

I also don't think he was condoning being taken advantage of either ---I'd go further and say that the father (biological or not) might be even more Christian to demand custody of the child and raise him a better home than allow that type of woman to bring him up.