Whenever I see news stories about controversial human rights issues I dive into them like John Goodman on a Thanksgiving dinner. Listening to people disagreeing about what they believe they are entitled to makes me want to pop a bag of popcorn and pull up a cozy chair. There are few better ways to get people fired up than when they're exercising their "gimme" muscles.
So you can imagine how excited I was to learn that a certain group of men (The National Center for Men, I guess they like to be called) is filing suit to remove some dude's responsibility for paying child support to the mother of his unwanted kid.
I was initially swayed by their argument. "Hey yeah," I thought, "He didn't want the child, didn't get a say in whether to abort (since it's solely the woman's decision), so why should he have to financially support a choice he didn't make?"
Of course, this line of reasoning opens up a twenty gallon can of worms that scatter like Mexicans when you yell "immigration" outside the unemployment office. It didn't take me long to realize my position was on the other side of the fence. What's to prevent this from happening in a majority of the unwedded pregnancy cases, allowing guys to behave recklessly and not even have to skip town when their number comes up ? Ultimately, the necessary support of the child outweighs any inequity experienced by the father.
Personal responsibility may suck sometimes, but it's the moral fabric of society. Every guy knows the potential consequences of his actions when he starts playing the whack-a-mole game.
I would be fully willing to financially support my bastard child if I were given ample visitation rights. If I were denied rights to see the kid, and still forced into financial support, we would be going to court (hopefully not to Judge Judy). I don't think it would ever come to that though. My biggest complaint would be the inevitable delay of my early retirement, which can't possibly come soon enough as it is.
Since we're only discussing the financial aspect of childrearing, I'm not going touch on whether abortion is morally acceptable. But I will say that bringing an unwanted child into this world is setting everyone involved up for a lifetime of failure and resentment--and I mean that especially in the neglected kid.
I think forcing the father to pay up is cheaper for all of us in the long run anyway. If the father isn't forced to pay, then we as taxpayers will probably have to foot the bill as welfare to the mother. And as we all know, there's hardly enough welfare money to go around for single mothers to afford to feed their babies and buy crack the way it is.
If anyone is discouraged by the current state of affairs, let me remind you of the bright side: at least it's not like the old days where society forced you into marriage, too.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to get a vasectomy.