I must respectfully differ. That a father should support his offspring is a foundational principle of civilization is unquestioned.
But adultery corrodes the family, and with it civilization. That is immorality.
The respondent can't even go after the actual biological father and the state won't bother. How is that just? Why not just have the judge grab any likely victim (Why would it have to be a man?) walking through the courthouse that day and assign him or her the financial responsibility?
“I must respectfully differ. That a father should support his offspring is a foundational principle of civilization is unquestioned”
The children of a man’s wife are his children.
He provides for the family.
Whether he divorces due to infidelity is a separate issue.
A father is the man who raises a child, no matter whom the biological progenitor is.
A man who forsakes a child he has raised as his own in marriage because he finds out the child was not his, biologically, is punishing the child for the failures of he and his wife and their marriage.
This case is weird because of our present society.