Wednesday, July 26, 2006

The rights of the father

I haven't been following the case closely, but it looks like the guy who wanted the choice to opt out of child support payments (because his girlfriend promised him she was infertile and taking birth control) lost his case.

Last week, U.S. District Court Judge David M. Lawson dismissed the lawsuit, writing in his decision, "[Dubay] had difficulty accepting the financial consequences of his conduct so the state came to his assistance." (AlterNet)

The gist of the AlterNet article is that this is perfectly right and fair. And most of the comments appear to agree with the author.

the man's choice occurs earlier in the process...he can CHOOSE to ensure that conception does not occur by using a condom correctly

A male should take responsibility for being fertile...either abstain from sex until you are ready, or get your self "fixed"

Never mind that these arguments for earlier choice and responsibility also apply to a woman wanting to abort her baby.

There were some glimmers of consistancy in some of the comments.

I am shocked at the hypocrisy of so-called “smart & progressive” women like the writer of this commentary.

Do not force something on a man that you do not want forced upon you. It is that simple.


Everything changes IF ABORTION RIGHTS ARE TAKEN AWAY FROM WOMEN. Then, and only then, may women ethically and logically FORCE men to pay out the nose. Trap them. Do whatever. But, as long as women are able to control their own reproductive process, they have no right in this world to force a man to pay a dime for a child they choose to have.

Needless to say, I am all for a father supporting his children. It is to the benefit of society to encourage this. It is also to the benefit of society to discourage promiscuity and encourage childbearing within a traditional family. But you won't, for the most part, see the abortion crowd arguing for traditional values and against "choice" unless it is being applied to men exclusively.

No comments: