- Click to print (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
- Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
yup!
yup!
Considering the accuracy of today’s DNA technology, I know that there is a more equitable answer to the “Mandatory Birth” debate. To wit:
Unwilling mothers who have been forced by law to carry a child to term may provide governing officials with the identity of the father, and upon DNA verification of that fact, those officials WILL legally impose on that father the obligation to fund that child’s upbringing and general welfare through his child’s education and journey to adulthood. Failure to abide by and meet these obligations will result in an extension of those obligations for a period of three years for each violation.
Tango time.
Tango time, indeed!! I’ve long thought that those forcing a woman to bear a child she doesn’t want should consequently have to help her raise that child — food, shelter, education, etc. Either that or have to legally adopt the child.
Absolutely!
why isn’t there a “dis-like” button? we are at the mercy of hypocritical ignoramuses. continue…
I agree with you. Many readers have mentioned not liking to check “like” just to show they’d stopped by.