Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (58912)	8/19/1999 4:58:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

Well I would support his right to choose if we had a level playing field now, which we don't. There is a loose, poorly enforced child support program where kids get $50/month or something - and that appears to be the entire ramification for an unwanted birth to the male involved. So its just natural for the courts to assign more rights to the woman at this point. But lets say just for arguments sake that there was some heavily enforced law that said a man's income would be split evenly between himself and his offspring for 18 years. Then I bet you'd see some real father's rights issues come to pass. Think the men in this country would support legislation like that (% income to all children, heavily enforced?) I doubt it. As far as I know child support ranges around $50./month and nobody even pays that!