[rintense]

This is the problem. One, folks simply can't stand that a man has been taken out of the equation. Two, it isn't a 'traditional' ideal way to have a child.

What I find completely laughable about all the objections are that single women who get knocked up accidentally garner more sympathy than a woman who makes a conscious choice to have a child. I guarantee you these women who choose to have a child are doing so because they can afford it. Yet, some here would rather a woman sleep around, have children and potentially support them through welfare.

Then there's the 'why not adopt' crowd who encourage single women to adopt someone else's child instead of having their own. If the issue is the child not having a father, then why is adopting any different than a biological child?

[papertyger]

If the issue is the child not having a father, then why is adopting any different than a biological child?

???????

...because the adopted child is already in a bad position...

Was that supposed to be a serious question?

[marajade]

The narrow minded and bigoted thinking on this forum never ceases to amaze me.

[backslacker]

What I find completely laughable about all the objections are that single women who get knocked up accidentally garner more sympathy than a woman who makes a conscious choice to have a child

The controversy is not due to women consciously choosing have children.

(A father is m i s s i n g )