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: Constant Reader who wrote (79048)	11/12/2003 3:43:41 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 82486

I'm glad you brought that in. It's an issue I have raised in the past, but always gets VERY strong negative emotional responses. It's simply a fairness and equality issue, but is seldom seen that way.

To: Constant Reader who wrote (79048)	11/12/2003 4:24:28 PM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I agree with you-- but only as long as we also have allowed the woman a choice about this- which I think you have made part of your equation. If CH is going to force the woman to pay the full price, then why should the man be excused just because HE doesn't want it? However, if I understand CH, the man is equally responsible and if DNA tests show he is the father, like it or not, he has to accept the burden of his mistake for at least 18 years- at least financially. Of course, it would be nice if he has our ideal sterling qualities and will also be there emotionally and physically for the child. But even if the woman had a choice and still decided to have the baby -- say because she shares CH's beliefs-- then I assume CH believes the man must pay, too, since he made the mistake of choosing a pro-life sperm vessel.