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: The Philosopher who wrote (17152)	6/20/2001 2:16:57 AM
From: average joe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

1. Should a man have any right at all to determine the fate of a child he has conceived? If not, why not? None, the woman carries all the physical risk of bearing the child. 2. If a woman has a right to abort a child and avoid the financial burden of raising a child, should a man have a right to "abort" his rights to the child if he does so at a time when the woman can still choose whether or not to have a safe and legal abortion, and thus choose to avoid the financial burden of raising the child? At no time can a woman have a completely safe termination. So your question as posed can't be answered. However, if the man has no control over her pregnancy in (1) he certainly would appear to have the right not to financially support the woman if there were no underlying covenants. If he said he would support her then simple contract law would say he is obligated. Offer, Acceptance & Consideration.