Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: E. Pluribus Unum
"Wouldn't that be a further denial of a child's natural right to receive support and provision from his father?"--
"No.
It would make legitimate, married fathers more important."

While agreeing with you entirely that legitimaacy must be re-emphasized, I still say you have failed to show how your solution (abolishing financial liability for unwed fathers) honors the natural right of every child to his father's support and provision.

If only married fathers have this responsibility, while unmarried fathers can (in your scheme) get off scot-free, you further decrease the likelihood that men will seek marriage.

Women (plural) in general need to re-assert the sexual rule: no matrimony, no sex. OK. But in each and every case where a man and a woman have produced a child by their sexual union, both the man and the woman must be called to responsibility. Otherwise you have only the woman being treated as a responsible adult, and the man being treated as somthing less than an adult: either a mental defective, a rutting animal, or a perpetual lad.

24 posted on 09/30/2009 2:51:03 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("It is our choices, far more than our abilities, that show us what we truly are. " -- J.K.Rowling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


To: Mrs. Don-o
...I still say you have failed to show how your solution (abolishing financial liability for unwed fathers) honors the natural right of every child to his father's support and provision.

You seem to that illegitimacy is a good thing and want more of it by rewarding women for making illegitimate babies. Why would they even bother to get married? Collecting half a dozen support checks and sleeping with whoever they feel like is a much better deal than marriage.

I think illegitimacy is a bad thing, and that if you make it unpleasant and financially devastating enough there won't be any illegitimate children born to be deprived of their illegitimate father's "support and provision."

Problem solved.

29 posted on 09/30/2009 7:48:36 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Ask not what the Kennedys can do for you, but what you can do for the Kennedys.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson