Things to think of before you get married again..

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Ken Chaddock" wrote in message
news:RzLWg.10968$H7.5814@edtnps82...
Fred wrote:
Gini wrote:

"teachrmama" wrote
............................

And you, Fred, are totally *dismissing* WOMEN'S
responsibilities! I am a woman, and I find it demeaning that
you keep harping on what MEN should do, but not a hint about
how WOMEN should handle their responibilities in the same
situation. Everything a woman does after the sex act is a
consequence of where that mean old man left his semen.
Nonsense! Or maybe I'm just reading you wrong--why don't you
clearly delineate what the woman's responsibilities are after
the consequence of pregnancy becomes an issue.

==
A ride to the CSE office? (Because she's *owed* it, of
course.)


I guess that the matter is best explained by reference to the
theme of the game Fable: "For every choice, a consequence."

It's too bad that you seem to grasp the obvious fact that all
post conception choices are the woman's and therefore, in
accordance with the precepts of "Natural/Fundamental" Justice,
all the consequences that follow from those choices should also
be hers.


So he chooses to spread his semen hither and yon, and she
chooses to let him spread it in her. And let's say that the
consequence is pregnancy.

But that's as far as the "consequence" of his "spreading his
sperm around" go. After that the woman has many options and
CHOICES...even if she decides (note the word "decides") not to
abort the fetus, that to, is a CHOICE, the consequence of which
will most likely be the birth of a child...

And if the child is born, how does that absolve the man from any
responsibility for or to the child?
Isn't it still 50% genetically his child, and legally his child
as well?


Now there are other choices to be made, in this case by her,
and from those choices will spring consequences in turn.

Yes, as I noted above, but ALL post conception choices are HER
choices, to hold him responsible for the consequences that
follow from HER choices is fundamentally unfair, unjust and, on
top of all that, most likely unconstitutional...

So because she has choices that pertain strictly to undergoing
(or not undergoing) a medical and surgical procedure, you think
this absolves the man from any responsibility, even though it's
still his child?

When the father legally has 50% of the rights to match his
responsibilities, the we can come back to his responsibilities
toward the child. Until he becomes an actual parent in the life
of the child he helped create--50/50 with the mother, he also
should not be the bankroll.

So if one parent dumps all of the responsibility onto the other
parent, the parent shouldering the responsibility gets all the
rights, and the parent who dumped their responsibilities gets no
rights?

Depends. Unmarried: default 50/50 with both mom and dad having the
same rights to walk away in the exact same time frame. But the
default 50/50 is the key.

Married and divorcing: default 50/50. No rights to walk away. If
Dad wants only 20%, he pays mom to handle his other 30 percent. If
mom wants 80/20 and can get dad to agree, she handles the other 30 %
she chooses on her own. Other than that, they pay for their own
expenses.

"No rights to walk away".

How do you propose stopping someone from doing so?

"they pay for their own expenses"

So one parent doesn't cover the kids with health insurance, and the
other parent doesn't cover the kids with health insurance, either.
They both insist it's the other's expense.

So what happens, you just hang the kids out to dry and no one is
required to provide health insurance?
(or any other expense that both parents insist isn't their expense,
it's the *other* parent's expense)

Absolutely, Moon. Who gave kids of divorce more rights than kids of
marriage? Why should kids of divorce be guaranteed health insurance
when kids of marriage are not? As long as the basic needs are met,
why should *anyone* be forced to provide sometning he/she doesn't want
to?

Well, if you think it's ok to not be required to provide for children
on the basis of "I don't want to", then there's probably not a whole
lot more that's going to be said here.

I don't think divorced parents should be forced to provide any more than
married parents are forced to provide, Moon.

Married parents are not required to work.

Married parents are not required to provide health insurance, and in many
cases are not required to provide medical attention.

Married parents are not required to successfully battle alcoholism.

But golly gosh gee whiz, you sure want that mean old CP to work, and all
the rest!

No, I don't. If that's what the CP chooses to do, fine. But I don't
think the CP should be required to do any more than married parents are
required to do, either. You're just complaining because you choose to do
all those things and would probably like more help from your children's
father.

I wasn't complaining at all - I was pointing out some of the things that you
are requiring of your stepdaughter's mother, that are NOT required of
married parents.

I can
understand that. But I don't think the law should require anything of
him, you, or anyone else than it requires from married parents.