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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (5851)	2/14/2001 6:58:15 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

I don't think it's unfair to have to take his share of the responsibility. He can minimize his cost by convincing her to have an abortion or give the baby up for adoption. If she won't, well, it's a shame, but forcing an abortion is, IMO, morally unacceptable. I'm not saying force an abortion. I'm saying make a choice whether to abort or have the baby, knowing that if you have the baby you won't have the financial support of this particular man, but OTOH you are free without any hassle from him to have it legally adopted by your husband or significant other. As a family law attorney I've seen all sides of this situation and thought about it long and hard, and just don't see either the legal or the moral justification for placing all the rights on one party and none of the rights on the other when there are viable options. Once the child is born, there are three parties who have an interest. The baby is a truly innocent party, blameless, and dependent. Its interests have to rule. A lot more than three. There are siblings, grandparents, the state . . . But your point is valid. However, it would be the same situation as if the father died before the child was born. Only this way, the mother would know the situation in advance and be able to make a decision based on that decision. Life isn't always clean, and it usually isn't totally fair to everybody. I'm just looking for something a bit fairer than the present system which lets a woman have all the power and leaves the man helpless. Of course, that sounds about right to lots of feminists. (Not suggesting you are one -- I have no idea. It's just that that sort of outcome has real appeal to many of my feminist friends.)