I had several posts in draft that sat unpublished because they have the potential to be controversial and I’m not in much of a fighting mood of late. However, since I am taking a hiatus to prepare for the holidays, clean upholstery and closets, and enjoy some quality time with Secret Agent Man over the next couple of months, I will make my bold pronouncements, defend them over the next few days, then wish you all a blessed holiday season and a happy New Year:
~Codified Female Irresponsibility and Immorality: If there is a short, succinct way for me to describe why feminism makes my skin crawl, that would be it. We have taken women’s immorality and irresponsibility, deemed it holy and enshrined it as the law of the land, while continuing to hold men to the higher standards of generations past. We punish men for their immoral behavior while excusing women’s as if they are children.
I thought feminism bothered me because of the perpetual victimhood, since I am equally turned off when minorities claim perpetual victimhood regardless of their choices. It’s different however, when it comes to women because we can use poor judgment and make immoral choices then have the law back us up. Blacks and other ethnic minorities don’t even enjoy that luxury, even after all of the legal gains of the past 50 years. Check the prison stats if you doubt me.
A woman can abort a baby whether the father wants his child or not. She can sue him for 18 years of child support whether he wants to be a father or not. Women can kill their husbands, claim battered woman syndrome, and get off even if there is no past evidence of abuse. Never mind that the accused abuser is dead and unable to defend himself. Mary Winkler is just one example among far too many. I have a book to recommend for those who doubt my assertions:
~The Myth of Male Power: For my sisters who continue to stubbornly cling to the belief that feminism is a benign movement devoted to female equality and not female supremacy, I highly recommend this book by Warren Farrell, the first man to sit on the board of the National Organization for Women. In other words, this is not some patriarchy-obsessed preacher trying to keep women in their place. I don’t even think he’s a believer. I didn’t agree with everything in the book because I believe that the God-created differences between men and women shouldn’t be summarily dismissed with psyco-babble when discussing these issues. Men and women do have gender-specific strengths and weaknesses and we shouldn’t try and create a world where that isn’t acknowledged for a pseudo-equality that will never truly exist. Our differences complement each other. However, the fact that Mr. Farrell is able to show the blatant injustice and hypocrisy of the feminist movement using facts and verifiable data makes this book resonate even if you don’t agree with all of his conclusions. In other words, you don’t need to be religious to see the problem here. You just need to be willing to look objectively.
~I support reproductive equality for men: I have come full circle with respect to my thoughts on Roe vs. Wade ever being overturned. It probably won’t. Even if it is, abortion will remain legal in most states with few restrictions. I will always vote pro-life, but there is something we can do now to ensure true justice and reduce the numbers of abortions. It ain’t politically correct, but we can save some babies rather than none waiting for an ideal outcome we may never get in a nation with laws increasingly hostile to what we believe. We should do what’s doable, which means discouraging out-of-wedlock pregnancies to begin with. You can know if you’re truly interested in equality by your reaction to what I’m about to suggest next.
Give men the equal right to choose or not choose fatherhood along with all corresponding responsibility and rights. Women would be in same position as women generations prior knowing they have no legal right to a man’s livelihood without prior agreement that he wants or at least expects to be a father, with all the legal rights as well as responsibilities it entails. Marriage used to serve that function and should again. Actually, women wouldn’t be in exactly the same position as women in prior generations, because they can still avail themselves of the numerous birth control options available. In a few years’ time, out-of-wedlock pregnancies would decrease along with a corresponding drop in the number of abortions. Besides, it’s the right thing to do legally according to laws of the land as outlined in the 14th Amendment. I am not saying that men should be able to force women to have abortions. In fact, I’m saying just the opposite.
~I thought this video was very interesting: I ask in advance that you disregard the caption at the top, because it’s irrelevant. That a mainstream, Oscar-winning female celebrity would endorse marriage where the husband leads and the wife submits isn’t something you hear every day. I didn’t embed because the views are expressed in an unChristian tone, though nothing vulgar or over the top when discussing marriage.
I’ve said here before that I have no expectation that unbelievers would or even should adhere to the Biblical commands concerning marriage and family, but this is an sure sign that anyone can see that something is terribly wrong with our families.I hope I’ve shed light on why I feel the way I do about feminism.
Scripture says in Romans 1 that God’s attributes are clearly seen in nature, and that our deliberate rejection of God and His ways leads to a moral abyss that we cannot climb out of apart from Him. We’ve chosen to worship a God made in our own image and the results, if not the true solution are apparent to all who dare to look, believers and non-believers alike.
More and more people are looking at the landscape and figuring out that marriage interdependence with different responsibilities don’t give one person power over another, but free each partner in a marriage to maximize their potential to love and work together as a team. Most men are not and never were as powerful as we have been brainwashed to believe anyway.
Women were duped into equating the drudgery of employment with power, even though most men will tell you they feel anything but powerful breaking their backs every day (literally or figuratively) to bring home the bacon. This really isn’t about whether women work or not, though my feelings on that subject are well-documented. They have evolved a bit since I believe that what the husband of the family decides works best for the family is what matters, not my opinion no matter how passionate.
It’s about blossoming in our God-ordained positions within our families, which may or may not include paid work, but definitely includes submission to and respect for our husbands. This means not bad-mouthing them, not killing them, and not trying to pass off children conceived through illicit affairs as theirs and demanding court-ordered child support, among other things. Christians should not be supportive of a system that not only allows such injustice to flourish, but rewards it. If we can’t agree on that, then I don’t know what more I can say. But fair warning: I will continue to say it!
I am blessed to know good women who love their husbands and children and understand how this unrestricted choice on the part of women alone harms men, children and families. Many of you who read here are excellent women, godly wives, and devoted mothers. Still, I find myself dismayed that Christian women don’t appreciate what all of this means for their sons and daughters, their brothers, even their husbands. Lest we think our children are automatically immune from the problems because we are raising them in Christian homes, let me remind you that Matthew Winkler was a preacher whose alleged abuse has still never been proven, when his wife shot him in the back, served 60 days in jail, and retained custody of their children. We need to be willing to first see, and then speak, the truth. That starts with understanding that we have been fed a steady diet of lies for the past 40 years. Women collectively haven’t had it nearly as bad as we’ve been told. At least we’ve not had it any worse than men.
End rant.
Holiday greetings to everyone who reads this!
Enjoy a blessed Thanksgiving, a Merry Christmas, and a Happy and Prosperous New Year.
See y’all next year.
Comment policy will be enforced.
For the sake of the discussion, please ask me if you need anything clarified, but don’t assume anything. I will be around most of this week, and will be happy to answer any questions you have about my positions.
Next year?? I have to wait 2 months for another post? Ah, well. That was a good post to go out on. Well done, as usual!
I am bummed that we won’t hear from you until next year, but this was a great post and I did a shout out to you on my blog!
Take care and have a wonderful Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year!
Excellent use of the word “phycho-babble.”
Okay, that peeing position analogy Mo’Nique used was a tad crude but I am surprised to hear her say all those things! She has said some pretty wild things in her time that lead me not to take her seriously, but good for her. I don’t know who that couple is either that she’s interviewing but I like them. I noticed that the wife was talking and then the man started, and she didn’t talk over him like most women do : () Great material, Terry! Glad your family gets you this holiday season!
@ Catherine:
I agree with your assesment of Monique in general. I tend to skip all mainstream comedians because the profanity tends to over shadow (at least in my mind) any comedic value. If something’s funny,isn’t it funny whether you cuss or not? Thankfully, there is no profanity in this clip.
Someone else brought this video to my attention, or I never would have seen it. But I felt like you: Good for her! A few of the references such as the one you mentioned is why I didn’t embed the video.
I do think the fact that this conversation was even begun, on national television no less, proves that folks can see that the grand experiment of feminism is simply not delivering all it promised. That it in fact, has made marriage and family worse and in desperate need of rescue.
Too bad they don’t understand that the only viable solution is found in God.
I agree completely that we have codified feminine irresponsibility and immorality and that our laws do make women “more equal” than men. My main qualm about your proposed reform for child support laws is that these laws weren’t written solely to help women out, but to prevent taxpayers from having to foot the bill for “fatherless” children. Without child support payments from “fathers”, many women would be even more dependent on government support. I would predict that if women were unable to go after “fathers” for child support, they would turn to government programs. Would you also propose ending government support programs? If so, I would actually predict more abortions from this scenario, rather than fewer. I guess that I am not predicting that people would become more responsible in practicing abstinence or birth control, though I hope I’m wrong. If abortions are still easy to obtain in this future scenario, I would predict that women would become pregnant by men who uninterested in fatherhood, and then, lacking options to financially support the child, would seek abortions. Again, I hope I’m wrong. Even if I’m right though, I agree with you that the situation as it stands is a violation of equal protection.
Tarynknay,
Part of the reason women are forced to go to the government for support is because the laws are specifically designed in such a way that families can only receive assistance if no father is present. That would certainly need to be addressed. Further, men who are single fathers have a much harder time getting assistance than single mothers. The standards are again, different as a matter of law. That, too, would need to be addressed.
I am not against government assisatance for those truly in need. I would just like to see the scales balanced. For example, take the W.I.C. program, Women, Infants, and Children. Are single fathers eligible? In most cases, no. So these issues will have to be addressed.
As for the abortion/child support issue: I don’t think single men who sire children should be automatically exempt from child support obligations. What I would like to see happen is:
1) Give the men the option to shoulder the responsibility or not, in writing, upon the birth of the child with confirmed paternity. If he agrees to be a father when the child is born and consents, he CANNOT back out of his obligation 2 years later when his relationship with the mother falls apart. Most men are not looking to skip out on their kids, and will step up in most cases. The problem is they become a wallet for the mother (shoulder the financial responsibility), but the courts give her all the rights with respect to how the child is raised simply because they aren’t married. This needs to be addressed as well. Parental rights and responsibility need to be shared equally. That’s not what we have now.
2) Did I mention confirmation of paternity?
I’m glad you agree with me that the system we have in place right now is a blatant violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution. You’d be surprised how many other laws there are on the book that also violate the equal protection clause with respect to men and women. A little research is all that is needed to see how crazy this whole thing has gotten. I checked many of the legal facts presented in The Myth of Male Power. I have yet to find anything there that wsn’t true.
One of your points has given me pause. I think I may be giving people too much credit. If so, you’re right. I assumed that once women know in advance that there will be no guarantee they could sue for child support, then they would automatically be more careful. I may be wrong on that count. Here’s the thing, though. A good number of women (and I know some personally) are on public assistance anyway, and are not getting support from the fathers of their children, meaning the taxpayers foot the bill. Some live with their chilren’s fathers sans marriage and still get assistance, refusing to marry because they know they get more assistance living that way than they would if they married.
The system is broken. My suggestion may be rash, but I don’t see how inflicting an illegal, unjust system on men while coddling women helps the situation. Among lower income people, I don’t think the amount of taxpayer money going to help these children will increase all that much. These guys are already not paying support. You’d be surprised how many men are locked up for child support violation which makes it all the more difficult for them to get a job and pay child support. Still, the fact that a woman can opt of of her parenting responsibilities at any point from conception to birth while men can’t seems wrong to me.
Terry I read earlier and decided not to comment and wait and see if someone else would make my point Tarynkey did and you addressed it.
First and foremost let me say excellent post I agreed with most of it!! However (smile) I do think there is major error in your idea of having a man consent to fatherhood. You are giving WAY to much credit here to women who have already been shown to have poor decision making skills. I predict that most of these women upon learning that a man does not want to father a child will mistakenly assume he will change his mind and embrace not only the child but her after the child is born. She will then proceed to have s*x with the man hoping to keep him. When that does not happen the woman will turn to the State and we will be worse off in terms of welfare payouts than we are now.
The fact is that right now these men are forced to pay child support and they should be. If you make the decision to have s*x then you accept the fact that the consequence could be a baby and you pay, period. Yes pay to play!! By choosing to have s*x with these women these men have in my opinion already given consent to having a child by the laws our Lord has set up, children are the result of s*x, period. Unless the man did not know that was a possibility, i.e he is mentally handicapped, he should be held responsible and he should pay child support.
I believe that what is wrong with our nation now is that too many do not take responsibility for their actions. I believe that allowing men to play (have s*x) and not opt to pay (child support) will not only increase irresponsible behavior among these men, but it will leave the hard working tax payer footing the bill.
If these men don’t want to have children there is a VERY easy way to make sure that does not happen (abstain) if they don’t choose to do that, then they need to get jobs and support their children but having sex with these women and “opting out” of raising the children that result would be a disaster for us all, in my humble opinion. Also I believe it is unbiblical, men are called to provide for their families. God does not give them permission to do otherwise and neither should we.
I agree with everything you said Taunya concerning the Biblical mandate for men to support their families.
My point is that if our country would attempt to wipe away the differences between men and women, to create this false sense of perfect egalitarianism where everything is equal for everybody (this is what feminism purports to do), then to offer this utopia of choice to every segment of our society -women, GLBT, minor children with respect to s*x and abortion, etc- then to draw the line at hetereosexual men and deny them equal rights is problematic and yes, illegal. That is the only point I’m trying to make here.
On this point Taunya:
If you make the decision to have s*x then you accept the fact that the consequence could be a baby and you pay, period.
Yes! yes! yes! I agree, but that should apply to women as well as men. If men don’t get “choice”, then women shouldn’t have it either, which is why I still vote pro-life and pray that we will see these unborn children granted full rights as well.
I think you meant vote pro-life, my friend and I agree and vote ONLY pro-life as well. I have never since becoming a Christian pulled the lever for a pro-choice candidate.
I also agree with you on the issues of minor children having rights to abortion and all of the GLTB rights garbage that is being spewed today, it is all unbiblical but we must resist the temptation to fight ubiblical laws, rules, etc. with unbiblical laws, rules, etc. Therefore we (as Christians) can not say it is okay, lawful, whatever for a man to choose to turn his back on his offspring even though he willingly laid down with the child’s mother and conceived the child.
Hi Terry,
Well! You certainly chose to “go out” with a bang, didn’t ya? LOL. Seriously though great topic.
Hi Terry,
Here’s the link to Roissy’s latest post, that is related to your topic above:
http://roissy.wordpress.com/2010/11/01/feminists-agitate-to-ban-paternity-testing/
Thanks!
O.
Terry, I agree without quibble that men/fathers have suffered (and I mean that word in it’s fullness) at the hands of what for purposes of this discussion I’ll refer to as “family” court. My husbands law life has included securing sole custody for petitioning fathers, for cause (meaning not just death of or abandonment by the mother) for the first time in two separate counties in our state. The courts are so heavily weighted toward the mother and even maternal extended family that the father is essentially third or fourth in line for consideration in most instances. The very existence of dad’s new wife or girlfriend matters in these cases as a character question or safety issue, while mom’s multiple nameless partners of whatever background or variety are often excluded from mention, because mom “deserves” a life. Maternal grandmother is often attached in these situations, reiterating and affirming the countless wrongs Dad has done over the years. It is frequently her home that is considered and used in determining suitability in home studies (regardless of whether daughter has any actual intention of living there with the child(ren) in question) and because she’s older(ish) and stable(ish) and “an upstanding member of the community” (meaning homeowner/taxpayer) she suddenly becomes a friend of the court and the reliable source in her daughter’s plight to rid her life of this _________(name your accusation) man…..
*deep breath*
but…
I can’t let men who become fathers off the hook so easily as to suggest that they are just pawns in a scheme who have been duped by the wiles of conniving vixens bent on trapping them. Am I suggesting that such women don’t exist? Absolutely not. So, we all know this, and yet men continue to play with fire?
There is only one sure fire way of becoming a father that I’m aware of – either don’t do it, or protect yourself from the consequences, being aware that not all consequences (particularly involving risky behavior) are avoidable. “She said she was using something” is about as lame an excuse as was ever offered. If one is going to exercise his freedom to explore outside of a defined relationship, or even in one, because there’s no such thing as baby-proofing the act, he is responsible for his contribution, so to speak. There are preemptive,permanent solutions that one could avail oneself of, if the concern is to avoid paternity. All involved should be called to a higher standard, including insisting that impulse control is part of self-preservation. It isn’t reasonable to expect that participating in what makes babies isn’t going to make a baby, whether you want to or not. It’s not an emotional decision, it’s biology.
As for abortion, I am cynically inclined to agree with you that Roe v. Wade lives on the same third rail as Social Security – no matter how egregious the result, or flimsy the law, it’s an entitlement. Spiritual understanding is going to be the only element that can relieve the world of abortion.
I’m with you, too, on paternity testing before the assignment of support, and I’m also an advocate of severely curtailing the benefits either parent can receive outside the scope of meeting the child’s needs. If you have a car with a payment, you sell it or turn it in before you get public assistance (mom and dad both). If you were in school on a student loan, you’re not anymore. You’re working. Two jobs if necessary, like lots of folks who don’t receive benefits are. Life WILL be different if I choose a route of irresponsibility. My action, my consequences. It is NOT my Christian duty to make people comfortable in their messes, and you can’t expect to live a “private” life on public funds. *end of rant*
I’ll miss you! Be well, and love on your family. Peace of the Lord be with you, Terry. See you next year.
@ Obsidian, thanks for the intel. It appears that the issue of paternity testing is a hot button issue.
Ladies, I have checked out the site Obsidian linked to. It is not family friendly. You may want to skip it. Fair warning. I will, however, link to the article the blogger in question referenced. It is here:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/all/6391918/whos-the-daddy.thtml
Basically, the female author wants to ban paternity testing because regardless of biology, she thinks women should be free to choose who to claim is their children’s father. Often the man a woman is most sexually attracted to isn’t father material. So it’s in the best interest of the child if she pins the kid on some unsuspecting guy who is more suited to fatherhood whether he actually fathered the child or not. Long live feminism!!
Thanks again, for the intel Obsidian.
@ cottage child: I loved your closing points. The fact that we have made people so comfortable in their anti-social, immoral behavior is a big part of the problem, isn’t it?
Why, oh why, won’t people just save sex for marriage where it was intended to be enjoyed? Now I agree with you and Taunya that the biology of the thing is something men should not ignore. And the fact of the matter is that as the law stands today, men are financially responsible for any child they conceive.
I just wish women understood that the more loose they are, the lower their marriage value in the eyes of most men- even the ones that sleep with them. Marriage rates are plummeting largely as a result of the sexual freedom that was supposed to liberate us women and make us more like men. Men are not popping the question. What was it our grandma’s said about cows and milk? Oh well. Like I said, long live feminism. Not.
Hi Terry,
Very necessary corrective to the above statement by you:
The feminist author of the article isn’t talking about what’s in the best interests of the kid, she’s talking about what’s in the best interests of the mama. Whether that’s good or bad is another matter, I just want to be clear on what we’re talking about here.
Personally, I think the article, and you and Roissy’s takes on it, really speaks for itself. One would have to be a raving ideologue not to come away disgusted at this Woman after reading all that.
O.
You’re right Obsidian, she is. I just re-read the article. That makes it all the more disgusting. Thanks for setting the record straight. She basically wants women to be able to land any guy she thinks makes a good husband after conceiving a child with a man who isn’t husband/father material. Her reference to the dilemma as posed in a Hollywood movie I’ve never seen implies that she thinks nice guys are well, saps.
You’re most welcome, Terry.
These Women, and millions like them, don’t care one whit for the kids-and again, I’m not making a value or moral judgment either way, just calling things for what they are-they care what’s good for them. And if that’s the case, why is it so bad that Men can’t do the same? Don’t Men have the right to look out for what’s in their own best interests, too?
The whole feminism thing is a sham of the first order, precisely for reasons like these, and I’ve always said, that in the New Grrl Order, the biggest losers, will be WOMEN, not Men.
Roe For Men will evenutally happen, as will Paternity Testing. It’s only a matter of time now-I’d say, another decade or so, if that?
O.
I was just looking back over the comments and I think an important distinction needs to be made here. I noticed that “raising” the child and “child support” are often being used interchangeably.
For those who do not know, let me tell you that a man can be ordered to pay child support and have no legal rights nor say in how the child is raised. Period. No decision making power even when the mother is doing a terrible job of parenting. He has to sue for the right to parent at his own expense. The state sues him for support on her behalf at no expense to her. Yeah, I know it’s for the taxpayers. Still feels wrong, because when the child goes through life without a father, he costs the taxpayers on the back end.
In the case of a dissolved marriage, fathers have recourse. In the case of single parenthood, they are shut out cold. I think many men would be less hostile to the so-called family court system if the courts acknowledged them as just as important in the life of the child as the mother. Honestly, I would say after the first 5 years, the fathers are even more important in many respects.
Again, this is an issue that needs to be addressed. Have you all noticed how many issues need to be addressed, lol?
Excellent point Terry about child support and child rearing!! I think along with child support payments should come an equal say in how the child is raised. I think equal parenting rights should exist and I also think custody laws in our country should be changed. A single mother has no more right to custody of the child then the father.
This is a problem. It is assumed that if a couple is married, the husband is the father, even if the couple have been estranged for a period that makes paternity impossible. Unless there is an (expensive) petition to the court in order to establish that the husband is NOT the father, guess who is financially on the hook? And the wife can collect child support in the meantime, if so ordered by the court. There are judges in Texas who will not grant divorce to a pregnant woman, and won’t compel her to court for a period following birth, so until the divorce is final, the already offended husband is now paying to support his wife’s boyfriend’s baby.
To me, that money should go into escrow until paternity is established. And then,if it isn’t, husband gets it back, with interest, and wife goes to jail for falsifying the government document she would have to have signed in order for the process to go forward. If it is, husband pays a huge fine to the child (NOT mom, NOT the court) for withholding support. Then perhaps we’d be seeing less abuse in that circumstance.
Wow, Terry.. that video was absolutely amazing! It just confirms one thing I have always said: we can see the truth of Biblical gender roles merely by observing people and society. Those roles weren’t laid down merely because it fit some first century person’s idea of a good thing- they were laid down because they correspond to our own God-given natures. And God made us different. And hallelujah for that!
OK, I’m honestly not sure how I feel about the whole child support thing… I suppose, as an adoptive parent, I come at the issue from a bit of a different perspective. In some ways I feel that birthfathers have a bit too much power in that they can prevent a birthmother from releasing her child for adoption even if they have no desire or inclination to parent the child themselves. I know in the case of my son, it was the knowledge that he would be obligated to pay child support that finally compelled his birthfather to sign the papers releasing him for adoption. I do see the validity of many of your points though.. I’m not saying I disagree with you… but rather I just need to think the whole matter through more thoroughly before I come down firmly on either side of the subject.
And hey… I’m really sad that you’re not going to be on for a bit. I’ll miss ya. A lot.♥
I’m speechless, dumbfounded.
@ Diane:You’re very sweet. I’ll miss you, too. For the life of me I can’t understand why someone uninterested in being a parent would block a child from being placed in a loving home.
@ Joanna: I’m not sure what left you speechless, but there is plenty here to leave one slack-jawed, huh?
For the record, I’m not at all an excited advocate for allowing men to skip out on their kids. What I would like to see is the illegality of Roe v.Wade (since it’s a violation of the 14th amendment) noted by the courts. That would be a step in a positive direction. The fact that we are a nation of laws should be enough to compel the court to administer equal justice to men. Ideally, that would mean not extending rights to women (or revoking them) when they can’t be extended equally to men, which would mean no more Roe.
We are increasingly not a land of laws and equal justice, but a land where feminism rules the day. Many would argue that point with me, but it’s true nonetheless.
Loved the post and especially Taunya and TarynKay’s comments. As a woman who has two father’s on child support let me assure you this…. we don’t get off scott free.. In many instances we ( those of us who are mature enough to realize and accept our portion of responsibility for poor choices) are left holding the bag. I will always tell young woman this: You have not felt pain until you have had to look your innocent child in the eye and explain “why daddy isn’t here, did I make my daddy not like me, why my daddy hates me, and will my daddy ever love me”….. No amount of support, no court, no nothing can ever erase the guilt and pain that you KNOW you placed on your child because you chose a road outside of God’s plan.
Oh one more thing… we do pay for the costs in taking the father to court. I pay 13% off of every single child support payments for admin and court costs so the support ends up going mostly back to the state which in my eyes is rightfully so. I only hope that one day one of my daughter’s father will become more dependable and the other, we just pray will acknowledge his beautiful dark skinned baby existence while she still innocently and tenderly longs for him… But I must be responsible to say that I only blame myself for this… I had just as much input as he did and I knew both were not close to marriage material and looking back the attraction wasn’t even physical. I emotionally was afraid of being alone so I attached myself to the first thing walking…
Before we lambast these women we must create and help empower self esteem. There are two sides to a story and many of these women are emotionally vunerable and will believe any lie these guys tell them. If we believe that women are the weaker vessel then we should also accept that many men have a power over these emotionally weak women. Even the most vile Jezebel’s work from a place of vuneralbility. I don’t say this to disagree with what’s been said, because I believe you 1000% . I am just speaking on behalf of someone who was too weak to love myself and my potential babies not to ensure they were concieved properly and to weak to spare them from the emotioal pain being fatherless entails…. Just my humble opinion.
Diane and Terry for the record when we adopted our youngest daughter over ten years ago her birth mother signed off on the papers no problem but her birth father, a drug user with no job or spouse challenged our right to adopt and took us on a ten month journey of uncertainty all while his daughter was bonding with us as her parents. Ultimately our saving grace was that he could not pass his drug tests and ended up in jail. But in the meantime our daughter had to be carted to the adoption agency for weekly visits with he and his family. She would come home smelling like smoke. On one occasion some family members had to be escorted out of the building because they brought a gun to the visitation. On another a family member was disqualified because they were found to be a member of a gang that required it’s members to murder someone before becoming a member.
It is a shame that this “father”( he had no relationship with her mother she did not even know who the father was) wanted to disrupt his daughter’s adoption but he did. Some people are just sick!! I think he had a girlfriend at the time who thought it would be “neat” to have a baby!!
On a lighter note, Terry you will be missed. Have a very happy Thanksgiving and a blessed and Merry Christmas then come back in January ready to WRITE!!!
I can relate to what Diane said. We had to remain in another state for 6 weeks with our oldest adopted son – then a newborn – because the birthfather would not respond to attempts to be contacted so that parental rights could be terminated. He was 16 (and already had 2-year-old he wasn’t supporting) and had no interest in parenting our son; he apparently was just afraid of having to pay child support. He didn’t want any relationship with our son’s birthmother and she was hospitalized during pregnancy because he kicked her in the abdomen. The birthmother would not terminate her parental rights until she was certain he would, because she was terrified of what would happen if he or his alcoholic single mother did decide to “parent”. We had to pay for his legal representation (ouch), and he sure seemed to have a lot of power; too much, IMHO. This young man is now 28 and has 7 children with different mothers, none of whom he has a relationship/is supporting.
Jamala your comment gives us all much insight into this issue. I think you have very accurately described what is going on in the mind of these women who make poor decisions with regards to men. I tried to address this in my comment when I stated that women would still choose to become intimate with these men even once the men state they would not support a child should she become pregnant. The reason, as you so aptly put it, is she is looking for love. Many of these women have not been raised in healthy two parent families. Many have never known love from ANY man. Many are afraid that no man will ever commit to them or love them. They will still have these children out of wedlock, no matter what the man in question says, hoping the man will have a change of heart.
Also I do take issue with the idea that these women get off scott-free. Anyone who has ever stayed awake all night with a sick child, or taken a child to the emergency room in the middle of the night, or dealt with a baby with colic knows how hard parenting is. Doing in on your own is 100 times harder and doing it while trying to work and dealing with poverty must be unbearable and my heart aches for these women and the challenges they face.
I am sorry but I believe that many men take advantage of women like this. They can see the loneliness in these woman’s eyes. They know she is looking for love and many know they have no intentions to give her love. Terry I do think that when we talk about equal treatment whether it be racial or with regards to sex we must take vulnerability into account. In our country women still make less than a man in the workplace. I have no problem with this as I believe a man can give more to his job than a woman in most instances, but it does make women more vulnerable. Also our Lord has made women the more vulnerable of the sexes. We are, according to the Bible more easily deceived, whether we know it and believe it or not, and we are to be protected for that reason. Men have, since the beginning of time, taken advantage of this vulnerability and civilized societies have tried to put laws in place to protect women and children.
I really think this issue is a lot more complex than most realize but I don’t think the answer is to make it even easier for men to walk out on their children and their children’s mother. I don’t remember the statistic but I believe some 80-90% of black families are headed by a female. This brings everyone in our society down as we are only as strong as our weakest link. I don’t think we can afford to have that percentage increased by allowing even more men to walk away. Even if we are not concerned for the mother because as Jamala rightly said she is at fault here, we should be concerned for the children and we should be concerned for the type of citizen we produce when we have children raised without fathers.
Finally I did not realize that single mothers paid court cost. Thanks for enlightening me Jamala. I think there is much many of us do not know or understand about these complex issues.
Taunya,
It varies from state to state but here in AR before you can apply for support you have to name a father, and do all you can to give accurate information on him. When they serve him with papers he has to file that
A. he is the father or B. he is unsure and seeks paternity. The only other option is to not reply and if so the courts then award him paternity on default since he was properly served but did not file a response for a court date. They give the fathers more opportunities than needed upfront to ensure proper paternity is established and support is awarded properly. Also if the father doesn’t complete the birth certificate in the hosptial then they have to file an affidavit of paternity before his name can even be put on the certificate.
I don’t want to seem as though I am glorifying this at all, I see so many teens and young women in my program who will sell their soul to the devil for a little love and affection… Also these young men will all but say marriage vows in order to get s*x because they have been programed to equate s*x with man-hood.
But the topic is on feminism and I belive whole heartedly that it has robbed our children of an innocence they loose before they are born.
The lie of trying to date like a man, and love like a man is running like wildfire… And the deception Satan tells these women that they will always have a piece of this man by having this child is just heart wrenching… In the end they end up hating the father, passing the hate to the child and the cycle continues.
Deuteronomy 5:9-10 (New Living Translation)
9 You must not bow down to them or worship them, for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God who will not tolerate your affection for any other gods. I lay the sins of the parents upon their children; the entire family is affected—even children in the third and fourth generations of those who reject me. 10 But I lavish unfailing love for a thousand generations on those[a] who love me and obey my commands.
Bless y’all for getting through all of that., Taunya. I can’t imagine. Your daughter is so fortunate to have such wonderful and dedicated parents.
So many people seem to think that adoption is “easy” and do not realize the tremendous hurdles that can be involved. We’ve been doing a bit of research and have been amazed to have our eyes opened to the difficulties that could lie on our path if we choose the adoption route after Sean is done with the Q Course. I’ve actually had people tell me adoption is worry-free compared to my pregnancy history and they can’t appreciate why we wouldn’t be emotionally ready for that path at this point in our lives. Maybe in a few years but not quite yet. It seems adoption could easily be as devastating or go just as awry as a miscarriage.
In general I agree with both Jamala and Taunya and I have no problem with laws being out in place to protect children, and even women, because women are more vulnerable. The issue is that women insist that they do not want to be protected and treated as more vulnerable unless it suits their situation. Again, a major problem with feminism.
As I said in my other comment today, what I would like to see (ideally) is an acknowledgment that what has been done is 1) illegal and overturn Roe since it’s really the only logical way to ensure equal protection, and 2) see Christian women be the first to step up and say, “Feminism is wrong and a blatant violation of God’s standards and plan for women.We want nothing to do with it. Period.”
Instead, what we have is a cleaned up, Christian brand of feminism that really is no different than the secular brand.
I am not trying to give men a pass for the sake of it. I don’t even believe that most men would choose to skip out. The ones that would are the ones the woman should have known would in the first place and they do that NOW, even with child support laws in place. I want someone to challenge Roe in court on the grounds that it discriminates against men.
One more point, Taunya. Single childless women make more money than single men. That’s a fact. It’s different for mothers and married women for the reason you stated, married womena nd mothers can’t give as much as men can to their jobs. That does create vulnerability like you said. Why can’t we as women, just admit that? Years ago, when women accepted that truth, most men if not all, were more inclined to try to protect most women.
But now that we have gotten all empowered and want to as Jamala so eloquently stated
“date like men”, men have decided to treat women based on the way they conduct themselves. And the children pay the price.
Terry I am not familiar with that stat but I would not doubt it. I really wish we women would be able to admit our vulnerability and stop demanding men treat us as men. So many women have believed the lie that we are men with wombs. SAD!! It has caused women so much pain. When I left the corporate world ten years ago and came home my life became so much better. It is so easy for me now to understand who God created me to be and to embrace it. I am sorry for any woman who is never able to live as God created her.
Ahh at last though this all underscores that we live in a sinful, fallen world. It makes us to the reward the Lord has for each of us who are His. In this world though things are all askew and many are suffering and don’t even realize their own behavior and choices are the cause.
All of us who can take the time to debate these issues need to stop and take a moment to pray for these deceived men and women and their children. Truly a sad state of affairs.
Excuse the typos (even more than usual I fear) I have my mind on politics at the moment, lol!!
I have my mind on politics at the moment, lol!!
Me, too! I am trying to see how the FL governor’s race is going to turn out. Right now it’s too close to call.
ETA: It’s been called for Rick Scott. I’m off to bed. I’ll be calling you, Taunya over the holidays!
ETA, pt. 2 (6AM): Seems the race has not been decided. You have GOT to love Florida. We have a knack for taking elections down to the wire down here!
It was the video.
Speaking of politics (and feminism), I ask my fellow Floridians to pay close attention and tell me how much attention will be paid to the fact that FL has it’s first black, female, lieutenant governor- ever. Now I know the Florida LG has a job that is of almost no importance, but we all know if a Democrat had won and had a black female LG, the press would have been all over it. Jennifer Carroll would be the toast of the town.
However, just as in the case of Condi Rice, these things are only celebrated if the person falls on the left side of the ideological divide.
My view of women is different than some of you women. You seem to think women are rather stupid, and are incapable of changing their behavior if the rewards for bad behavior are removed.
If that is the case, then the laws in past times that did not allow women to own property or vote, were correct.
There will always be dummies. But, most women today engaged in bad behavior do so after expectations of a blank check at someone else’s expense became a social norm.
In the 90′s, Newt Gingrich announced welfare would be eliminated, and the next year unwed motherhood dropped 5%.
If no welfare and no child support from men who choose as women have chosen, not to be parents, becomes the social norm, there will be many fewer women in this mess.
This is the sort of thing one learns when living in a totally different culture, as I now do.
terry However, just as in the case of Condi Rice, these things are only celebrated if the person falls on the left side of the ideological divide.
Huh!
Condi was huge and treated as such. I may not agree with her politics 100% but the woman is a role model. Look what her parents were able to do with her given the circumstances and the times she grew up in. If I met Condi I’d want to hug , then give her a back hand.
I’m sure your new LT will have a profile in Vogue very soon since vogue likes to profile sophisticated and/or quirky blk women. I’ve learned about a number of sisters that essence(blk love blah blah blah) don’t seem to cover. Essence also has size issues but I’m off topic.
*chic noir going to read about the new blk let-gove from Florida.
Okay, confession time.
I am very ashamed to say that not only did I not know that Rick Scott’s running mate was a (very lovely) black female, I did not even get it that the gubernatorial race included such a thing as a lieutenant governor…although, duh, I know there are LGs, how did I think they got there? Call me politically humbled. I read stuff about Scott everywhere but on his actual website. That was very obtuse of me. I feel really stupid. Especiallly considering that I visited Sean Duffy’s website, and he’s was running for congress out of WISCONSIN for Pete’s sake. I can’t even vote for him. I visited Allen West’s website. I couldn’t vote for him either. Sheesh….
Please don’t hate me.
@tarynkay
Without child support payments from “fathers”, many women would be even more dependent on government support. I would predict that if women were unable to go after “fathers” for child support, they would turn to government programs.
I think this is actually the best argument for not making child support by unmarried men obligatory. Today we tell women go out and screw around as much as you want; if you get pregnant, he needs to accept his responsibility.
The problem is, this creates a form of moral hazard. The most irresponsible women aren’t afraid of getting pregnant because there is a moral consensus that it is the man’s responsibility to pay. These same women are picking men who realistically can’t pay, or handling themselves in such a way as to struggle to create a concise list of suspects in the event that they get pregnant.
So they have sex telling themselves “it’s his responsibility”, and then when he can’t be identified or can’t pay they turn to the state.
I want to be clear here- I would love to see the end of abortion. If making abortion illegal gets us there, I am on board. However, overturning Roe v Wade will not make abortion illegal. All Roe v Wade does is say that States do not have the right to make abortion illegal in the first or second trimester, b/c this is a violation of the right to privacy, a right which the Supreme Court believes can be found in the penumbra of the 1st and 4th amendments. At the time of Roe v Wade, abortion was already legal in several states. So if Roe v Wade were overturned tomorrow, all that would say is that states could make laws banning abortion. Abortion would still be legal in every state unless and until each individual state outlawed it. In order for the Supreme Court to make abortion uniformly illegal, someone would need to successfully challenge the constitutionality of state laws allowing abortion, possibly on equal protection grounds. Though if you challenged this on the grounds that it discrimates against men, it’s possible that all you’d end up with is a requirement for consent of the father to an abortion. Challenging on equal protection grounds asserting the right of the unborn child as a person would require someone speaking for the child- maybe something like Dred Scott? Anyhow, this is getting really long, sorry. I get carried away when I start thinking about the constitution.
Dalrock,
See Taunya and Jamala’s comments above on this. They say what I would have said, but much more eloquently.
I have been giving this a bit of thought, and although I thought I’d said all I had to say, I had another thought after reading the comments of Dalrock and the Anonymous Gentleman, age 68
.
Anon. 68 pointed out that in the country where he lives, the out of wedlock births are significantly lower because women know there is no benefit at all to having a baby out of wedlock. Dalrock mentioned the moral hazard inherent in the idea of telling women to go out and screw around as much as you want; if you get pregnant, he needs to accept his responsibility.
I’ll be honest here and admit that because I was thinking in terms of abortion and not child support other than as a means to an end of reducing abortions, it never occurred to me that women and men would suddenly stop fornicating. I never expected that, just that women would be more careful and protect themselves from pregnancy because it would be in their best interest to do so. And once again, my personal experience could have colored my ability to see this issue clearly, but I don’t think so.
We had twins in 1995, 11 months after our firstborn came in 1994. After that we went almost 10 years without becoming pregnant, and when we decided in 2005 to open ourselves up to children again, it was 2 months before we found out we were expecting Lil’ Princess. When she was 8 months old and we decided to try one more time, it was 1 month before we found out we were expecting Sweetie Pie. I was 37 years old. In other words, getting pregnant has never been a struggle for me. We could have easily had ten kids instead of five, lol. And we avoided a pregnancy for 10 years, much of that time without hormonal BC.
My point is that it really isn’t that hard to avoid pregnancy. When I suggested going back to the old legal system as a way of restoring justice and equality for men and reducing abortions, I was thinking not about a return to the days of chastity until marriage (although that would be great), I was thinking that women who choose the wrong men, even if it’s just because they’re looking for love in all the wrong places, would at least be smart enough to not get pregnant since they wouldn’t have the force of law backing up thier immoral choice.
Does any of that ramble make any sense at all?