"Relayer" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Apr 15, 12:43?pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
"Robert" wrote in message

...





On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 00:32:02 -0700, "Chris" wrote:

"Robert" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 10:04:32 -0700, "Chris" wrote:

What do you care how irresponsible the woman is if you are taking
responsibility for YOUR sexual behavior?

Since the woman is the final arbiter of whether or not she will bear
children, the man doesn't have much of a responsibility regarding
this,
does
he.

Yep, he can make damn sure it's not his children.

Indeed he can, but not a prerequisite. Whether the children she decides
to
bring into the world are fathered by him or not does not change his lack
of
responsibility. It is impossible for him to be responsible for her SOLE
choice to bear children.

Whether or not she has a child is none of his business, as long as
it's not his child. If he ****'s up, and she has his child he has a
obligation to support that child. Any ******* that refuses to support
his child, needs to be horse whipped, and castrated. Don't want a
woman to have your child, don't have unprotected sex with her.
A man has the absolute responsibility to support his offspring.

You keep forgetting a VERY IMPORTANT part, Robert. It is HIS CHILD! He has
the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to parent that child. He should have that child with
him
50% of the time. And the mother should be forced to provide 50% of the
financial support of the child, just as the father is. FORCED LABOR if
necessary! You keep leaving that part out. I'm not sure why.- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

Teacher, that is only true in some States. In Illinois, it is not.

Not saying its right, but in Illinois, it's the law and therefore must
be followed.

I'm not talking about the law--I'm talking about right and wrong. Robert
keeps ranting about putting fathers into forced labor camps to make them
provide financial support. (I'm pretty darn sure forced labor camps are not
the law in Illinois.) He never even mentions the father's right to parent
his own child. He jsut keeps ranting about the money. He also never
mentions the mother's responsibility to provide her 50% of the children's
needs. He jsut keeps ranting about irresponsible men who do not shell out
the $$$$$. His point of view is unbalanced and unfair. He probably does
not realize that and assumes that everyone knows that children should be
with their fathers 50% of the time, and that mothers should provided 50% of
the money. I'm just giving him the opportunity to correct the terrible
misimpression he has made.