NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/talk/abortion/48244

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-17 | 2.6 KB

Xref: sparky talk.abortion:48244 soc.men:19442 alt.dads-rights:2623
Path: sparky!uunet!caen!sdd.hp.com!nobody
From: [e-mail] (Adrienne Regard)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,soc.men,alt.dads-rights
Subject: Re: Biological Reasons fo
Date: 17 Nov 1992 09:10:42 -0800
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsdde.sdd.hp.com

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ray Fischer) writes:
>[e-mail] (Adrienne Regard) writes ...
>> [e-mail] (Karl Denninger) writes:
>>>This is unequal, wrong, and has nothing to do with "privacy".  It has
>>>everything to do with making men a walking wallet.  It is time that this
>>>is stopped - permanently.
>>Which *again* ignores the woman's financial contribution!
>One key (and to me, obvious) difference is that women have far greater
>say about their level of financial contribution.  A woman need not pay
>much of anything if she is so inclined.

Obviously, by not having the baby.

However, for those women who have had the baby, either through a belief that
abortion is a moral wrong, or a desire to become a mother, this isn't true.
A mother is as obliged to support her child as a father, under the law.

And, if we split child support down the middle, 50% of the time giving sole
custody to the mom (and requiring a support payment of the dad) and 50% of
the time doing it the other way around, you would see this clearly demonstra-
ted.

Of course, some people would then have another complaint, that being that
the women ordered to pay child support generally make less, and therefore
would be paying out less, but that's a different social problem altogether.

>While it is true that women also
>contribute financially, this contribution is usually _voluntary_.

So, I say a better solution would be to strengthen men's rights to tehir
children, to reduce the incentive an unscrupulous woman might have to
voluntarily soak a man.  If she's as likely to lose the child, and have
to pay support herself, she's not going to 'trick' anybody.

And, of course, if these women don't exist, there is no problem with
unscrupulous women, and men gain the full measure of their paternity,
EQUALIZING the parental benefit and responsibility.  What a concept.

>A more equitable situation would have custody of the child
>automatically go to the state, requiring _both_ parents to sue for
>custody, and with judgements equitably distributed between men and
>women.

What I said.

Adrienne Regard