The South will rise again . . . on women's backs 😡
Pharoah didn't spare the baby girls out of the goodness of his heart--he spared them to become sex slaves and breeding stock. And that's what's happening across a good chunk of the South (and too many other states), as legislatures taking away women's reproductive freedom. They're punishing women for wanting to have sex without consequences, which men have been doing for thousands of years. 😡 When Judah's wife died, he sought comfort in the arms of a prostitute, and the Torah has absolutely nothing to say about that. But when his daughter-in-law Tamar appeared to have done the same thing--after all, her spouse had also died--Judah nearly had her executed for adultery. So maybe Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida is just reading the Bible. 😡
posted by Shira Salamone at 8:53 PM
6 Comments:
Men can no longer have sex without consequences. Don't you know just how strict our current child support laws are? Right now, if men want to have a 100% guarantee of avoiding being forced to pay child support for 18+ years, they need to either abstain from penis-in-vagina sex with all fertile and potentially fertile (cisgender) women for their entire lives or else get surgically castrated. Even vasectomies and bilateral epididymectomies combined can simultaneously fail, after all. And child support insurance unfortunately doesn't actually exist. Why exactly aren't pro-choicers pushing for child support insurance?
As sad and tragic as the current abortion bans are--and I do hope that they will get repealed--this is a case of pro-lifers giving pro-choicers who oppose any sort of more reasonable child support laws a taste of their own medicine. After all, if it's fair game to tell men to keep it in their pants, then it should likewise be fair game to tell women to keep their legs closed. And vice versa.
Fundamentally, I do view it as being seriously problematic that, unlike in other cases, such as with car accidents, both mitigating circumstances and negligence are completely irrelevant in regards to child support. Read Laura Wish Morgan's article It's Ten O'Clock: Do You Know Where Your Sperm Are?
Meanwhile, sperm donors who donate the right way are completely exempt from forced child support payments. The best interests of the children is completely irrelevant in those children's cases.
Yeah, anyone who genuinely believes that men can have sex without consequences (not merely without the consequence of getting pregnant, which I agree with, but without any significant consequences at all) should tell me where exactly men can find cheap and accessible child support insurance. To my knowledge, though, such insurance only exists in fantasy worlds, not in our real world, at least not at this specific point in time. I even contacted over 100 Lloyd's specialty insurance brokers asking them about this. Not a single one of them actually gave me a positive reply in regards to this.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I really, truly don't understand why exactly giving unwilling parents a "financial abortion", with the other parent's pre-sex consent, in cases where they used LARC (long-acting reversible contraception) or previously got sterilized is so much of a problem. Sure, some children will suffer, but one can say the same thing right now about children of sperm/egg donors who only have one legal parent, especially if they will ever become in a financially insure position/situation.
"especially if they will ever become in a financially *insecure* position/situation."
(Corrected typo.)
Post a Comment
<< Home