[ChemistCat]

These things were once more complicated for me. I could see multiple sides to problems like this. Then I held my son for the first time, and watched my husband hold his son for the first time. It all became much clearer: I would do ANYTHING to give my child the best chance at a happy, moral, successful life.

So now it's simple. If you make a baby, you do whatever it takes to raise that baby, all the way through. The best way to do that is in a stable marriage. If you aren't willing to make the effort it takes to have a stable marriage, don't have kids.

That goes for both sexes. No success in other areas of life matter if your kids are bent by your selfish choices. There ARE no excuses for failure in the home.

Any more ad hominem arguments? Bring them on.

[StatesEnemy]

Ad Hominem? I don't think soo.... it is still a simplistic response to a complicated situation.

Your anecdote of hubby and yours experience is wonderful - but doesn't mean jack$hit to a guy who may or may not see his children, and has a set price on his head - regardless of his changing circumstances.

[HiTech RedNeck]

If you make a baby, you do whatever it takes to raise that baby, all the way through.

The law is too screwed up to accomplish this. If she walks out with the kids and she isn't a screaming crackhead or childbeater, she doesn't have to prove to the court that she's spending that child support on the kids. She can be eating porterhouse steak and caviar and driving gold Cadillac with that money, and feeding the kids old moldy peanut butter sandwiches and making them ride broken down bicycles wherever they go. Don't matter to the in-"justice" system.

[SauronOfMordor]

If you aren't willing to make the effort it takes to have a stable marriage, don't have kids. That goes for both sexes.

That's good that you include both sexes. Particularly since women initiate the overwhelming majority of divorces