|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't lay claim to this quote, and I can't claim that it's a direct quote, but it sums up my attitude to chosen single motherhood perfectly:
"Who said that a baby is a commodity or an accessory that you have a right to own?"
This was posted by a fellow in the Manhood forums, and for me it hits the nail on the head.
My sister's friend decided, late in life, that she "just wasn't going to meet anyone," so she went to a sperm bank and had herself inseminated. Neither she nor her little son knows who the "father" is. She loves her son very much, but I still can't shake the idea that he is her accessory. He's a "lifestyle choice". She had the Jeep and the nice little condo, but her life was missing something. Now she has it.
How, exactly, is this different from ordering a baby through amazon.com? How are people going to react if the legal idiots finally cement surrogate motherhood by making such contracts permanent and binding, and single men whose lives are "lacking" decide to order up babies from surrogate moms? Are we going to wax all mushy about Joe Blow and his new baby that just arrived by FedEx? I think not.
So why are people not hopping mad about women who pop out and make themselves pregnant when they themselves know that they haven't the emotional maturity to hold down a relationship?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you want to know more about what I think about this issue, please click on #39 under "older articles", and see my replies about the Rosie O'Donnell story.
But for now, I think that Leonard Pitts kind of misses the point when he briefly alludes to deadbeat dads.
No one is saying there are no deadbeat dads, but Pitts seems to swallow whole the idea that fathers who leave their families do so willingly, and that if the children don't see the money from child support, it's because the fathers don't pay it.
After all the horror stories of which I've become aware, concerning selfish, vindictive mothers who spend child support on themselves and then tell the children that their father never sent payment, I'm convinced that this scenario plays itself out with far greater frequency than the so-called fairer sex would be willing to admit at this time.
I think Mr. Pitts needs to recognize the fact that if certain well-to-do single women are selfish enough to try to raise a child without benefit of a dad, then many divorced or soon-to-be-divorced women think they are quite justified, perhaps, in stealing money intended by the father for the children's support, so the same women can then turn around and, not only ask the government for help, but then use that same government as a weapon against the father of their own children.
Guess what I'm saying is, not only might these women be considered "deadbeat moms," in a certain sense, but they might actually be worse than that.
fritzc77
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Featured on the front page of the link to the St Louis dispatch, I found not the article mentioned, but three--3-- links to DV shelters that help only women!
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
