What's the worst thing that ever happened to lusty young dudes (and the unborn)


#1

DNA testing. Before, they could lie and deny–say the girl must have been with some other boys. And the boy’s mom would say “she’s a TRAMP! How do I know it’s my son’s??” And the girl would be on her own.

Now, they can prove paternity and child support services will get on the case, at least they do in my state. Makes them real, real anxious to get the girl to the abortion mill.

Not sure this was a good development or not.


#2

You have a point but regardless, a father should take responsibility. Why is it that the woman gets stuck with the kid? And it may have cut down on abortions. If a woman can point out the father he may marry her or take responsibility and pay child support so she will have the baby…If she cant pinpount the father and they say shes a tramp she’ll be more likely to have an abortion to avoid the rumors and stereotypes. She will have to be branded a slut whereas the guy gets off scot free. And without him to support her, she also may turn to abortion.


#3

I suspect more young males push abortion now because of DNA when in the past they could possibly ‘skate’ by denying paternity. OTOH I think it’s not likely the cause of a majority of abortions.

LIsa N


#4

I don’t suppose anybody as considered welding their zippers shut until they are old enough and mature enough to wield the contents responsibly, i.e. within the context of marriage.


#5

I lectured my 9th grade boys on sexual responsibility when I was sub-teaching. I told them that I had two words for them–child support–$500 a month for the next 18 years. Then I told them the story about my HS best friend who got a girl pregnant and she had–TWINS :bigyikes:

DaveBj


#6

Ah well, the sexual revolution liberated men, not women. But why did women fall for it?


#7

[quote=JimG]Ah well, the sexual revolution liberated men, not women. But why did women fall for it?
[/quote]

Satan is very smart and hides in the guise of feminists who want women to be ‘liberated’ by losing all of their protections and their unique qualities. You know it’s much easier to follow someone who claims to be doing this for your own good. Having lived through the age of Betty Freidan et all, I remember how they made women feel they were being oppressed by expressing their feminity, by wanting to marry and have children that they raise (not place in daycare). Women who chose the traditional path were belittled and women who succeeded in the workplace or government were lauded as role models.

I do think the tide is turning and women are realizing they were sold the proverbial bill of goods.

Lisa N


#8

[quote=DaveBj]I lectured my 9th grade boys on sexual responsibility when I was sub-teaching. I told them that I had two words for them–child support–$500 a month for the next 18 years. Then I told them the story about my HS best friend who got a girl pregnant and she had–TWINS :bigyikes:

DaveBj
[/quote]

Well in a way, that’s the trouble. I think the knowledge of the “burden” on their precious future (and fun) tends to make them frantic and more desparate for, uh, closure.

Not that I condone it…just my cynical take on everything as a former family law attorney.


#9

[quote=puzzleannie]I don’t suppose anybody as considered welding their zippers shut until they are old enough and mature enough to wield the contents responsibly, i.e. within the context of marriage.
[/quote]

Well, that’s a thought.

As long as nothing gets caught while someone is weilding the torch.

On the other hand, given how hot that torch is, there might not be an issue later…


#10

[quote=puzzleannie]I don’t suppose anybody as considered welding their zippers shut until they are old enough and mature enough to wield the contents responsibly, i.e. within the context of marriage.
[/quote]

No, no, no. . . that would akin to psychological abuse! It’s preposterous to suggest that people wait until marriage. . . simply unreasonable. . . :rolleyes:


#11

DNA testing for fatherhood is a tough problem for me, especially after I read a celebrity priest claiming they were immoral. Nonetheless, I can’t in clear conscience agree with that without reservation. It may be immoral for a man to distrust his wife thus. But I don’t think a man should ever have to bring up another man’s child from his own wife. We can talk about double standards working against women all night long, but does a woman ever get to learn her child is not hers? I believe it would be proper to deal with the doubt without DNA testing. It would be proper to take the wife at her word if there’s a reason to pose such a question. However, I am totally opposed to fatherhood tests being banned. Every man has the right to know.

With all respect and without a slightest offence intended, it’s often women who have been unfaithful and/or who don’t believe in marital fidelity, who want the tests outlawed. I believe that judges who claim “the child’s good” for refusing a fatherhood test are defrauding the man if they order him to pay child support and deprive him of his right to be sure the child is his (if it is), or isn’t (if it isn’t), and they also violate the child’s right to his identity. And his real father is also deprived of all corresponding rights. Also, a woman should have the right to know whose children she’s had.

If it “causes” abortions… Abortions are chosen by unfaithful wives who fear DNA testing. The problem is with the hiding of the adultery going to such an extreme as abortion rather than with the possibility of the crime being detected. Is the lawmaker responsible for the deaths of crime victims the perpetrators of crimes kill to cover their tracks? If we made the police and prosecutors more efficient, the suicide ration would grow by people who would rather commit suicide than face justice for their crimes. Would we become homicides, if not murderers?


#12

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.