Fathers' Rights and the Marriage Movement, Part 3

Men's News Daily ^ | October 6, 2003 | Roger F. Gay

[Orangedog]

It's irrational to pretend men and women are the same in terms of reproduction.

What's irrational is pretending that one parent has any special rights that the other does not. The sex of one parent does not make it superior to the other.

[jimt]

You better believe that in matters of reproduction, I'm sexist.

Well you've certainly proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

[SarahW]

One parent has certainly had "special rights" as long as the pregnancy exists. Men never become pregnant and do not have the same interests in the situation that women do.

It is irrational to pretend otherwise, and also to ignore the other reasons women have greater biological attachment and investment in children.

There are few areas of life where it makes sense to discriminate on the basis of a persons sex. Sexual reproduction is one of them.

[SarahW]

Only a fool would declare women's and men's roles in reproduction are identical.

[Orangedog]

One parent has certainly had "special rights" as long as the pregnancy exists.

Under Roe v Wade, yes. She has the legal right to an abortion, even to the sick procedure that was illegal for about 12 minutes this week. If she goes through with the pregnancy, she then has the "right," as a matter of public policy, to use that child as a pawn to exact revenge on the father and as a human shield to protect her from the consequences.

It is irrational to pretend otherwise, and also to ignore the other reasons women have greater biological attachment and investment in children.

And just how far does this "greater biological attachment and investment" go? Should a woman who gives up her child at birth for adoption have the "right" to reclaim custody of that child from the adoptive parents? After all, she does have that "biological attachment." [sarcasm]Remember, this attachment trumps everything. [/sarcasm]

There are few areas of life where it makes sense to discriminate on the basis of a persons sex. Sexual reproduction is one of them.

And I'll buy that just as soon as women can reproduce without the contribution of any male DNA.

But, hey, you've got nothing to complain about. Your side won. You now have the wonderful world of declining birth rates and increasing number of men who will not get married because of all the double-standards that strip fathers of their rights to be fathers. Just be ready for the country to be flooded with foreigners and ran by Islamic whack-jobs. Then you'll really have something to complain about, considering how highly they think of women's rights. They won't give a damn about your biology. And don't think that the Mexicans or other illegal aliens will lift a finger to defend any of your rights.

[RogerFGay]

You will probably find the reference to Roe v. Wade in the following article interesting in relation to your discussion.

Fathers Rights? In defense of family and other fundamental rights