From: sbishop@desire.wright.edu
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,soc.men,alt.dads-rights
Subject: Re: Biological Reasons for Male Choice
Date: 19 Dec 92 10:50:22 EST
Organization:  Wright State University 

In article <BzErHD.3xA@ddsw1.mcs.com>, karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) writes:
> In article <1992Dec13.095755.6204@desire.wright.edu> sbishop@desire.wright.edu writes:
>>In article <1992Dec12.222611.95075@watson.ibm.com>, margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis) writes:
>>> In <1992Dec12.040358.6377@zooid.guild.org> Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>>>>
>>>>"4-6-8-10  Why are all your leaders men?"
>>>>
>>>>....you'd almost believe that there were more *men* in the "Pro-Life" movement,
>>>>at the very least.
>>> 
>>> Why would you believe that?  The chant is talking about leaders, and you're
>>> talking about members.
>>
>>Just take a quick look at the Pro-Lifers.  Every time I've seen a demo on
>>TV, the spokesMAN for the group is just that, a man.  The leaders of the
>>local Pro-life group are local businessMEN.  When you see picketers at the
>>local clinics, a large percentage of the group are men.  
>>
>>Yep, looks like a large percentage of the Pro-life leaders are men, all right!
>>
>>Sue
> 
> Why is that surprising?
> 
> As long as women insist on having all the reproductive rights, and sticking
> men with all the bills, you should expect that a goodly number of men will
> take the other side of this issue out of self-defense!
> 

Then IF they don't want to be 'stuck with the bills', by supporting anti-
abortion protest, they are cutting off their noses to spite their faces.
This makes no sense at all.  BTW, the male leaders I see in my area are 
either older men (over 50) or younger MARRIED men with families.  NOT
divorced men.  
How on earth does supporting anti-abortion help men who don't want to
be stuck paying child support?  This is not logical.

> Sue, do you support the right of men to choose whether or not to become a
> parent with all the obligations that are entailed?  Women currently have
> this right, and they also have the right to impose their choice on men.
> 

I'm ambivelent on this issue.  I worry about all the kids who will not 
have fathers.....  I distinctly remember all the lies that people tell
each other to get the other into bed..... "I'll marry you if you get
pregnant.... Yes, I'll respect you in the morning..... I'll love you
forever..... I'm on the pill....."  Until someone figures out a way to
prevent this, I don't know what is the best way.  Maybe Pre-Sex agreements?

> Do you support the right of men to have >equal< custody of their children
> when marriages dissolve, without the punitive child-support?  (ie: equal
> custody, and no child support payments since the kids spend half the time
> with each parent -- and therefore receive half their support >directly< from
> each rather than through transfer payments.)
> 

YES!  I am strongly for this.  Unfortunately, since I do volunteer work with
troubled teens, I see just the opposite, i.e., people who say, 'my kid is
too much trouble.  Here, take him/her, I don't want him/her anymore.'

> If you can answer "yes" to both of the above, then help us get the same
> rights you currently enjoy.  With these reforms the reason for many men to
> be on this bandwagon will disappear.
> 

But what on earth does support for anti-abortion have to do with either of
these?  Men who want reproductive rights should be supporting abortion on
demand.  If they don't then they are just fighting themselves, not women.
Because if abortion is totally outlawed, then you can BET the number of
men required to pay support will increase dramaticly.


Sue

Xref: sparky talk.abortion:52269 alt.society.civil-liberty:6963 alt.rush-limbaugh:11840