View Single Post
Old 10-08-2011, 08:44 PM   #32
Heaven
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 516
Thanks: 126
Thanked 94 Times in 66 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltonBB View Post
And, if the woman continued to make lousy choices in partners and continued to crank out babies it is certainly a lot more her responsibility to provide for them than it is anyone elses.
I see. I agree that any child is better off with both parents involved, it is unclear to me why all the children would be better off if they had one involved father.
So the men didn't make a lousy choice and their contribution to the baby-making is understandable and can be set aside?
The tax payers are subsidizing the children because the men have vacated their responsibility.
Heaven is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to Heaven For This Useful Post: