08-09-2016, 06:40 PM
(08-09-2016, 01:22 PM)fredtoast Wrote: But how does this apply to a system that also forces the mother to be financially responsible if the father is the custodial parent? Apparently feminists do not understand the law. That is not my problem.
The law treats both parties equally. There is nothing patriarchal about that. But giving the father the power to abandon the responsibility for his child would make many women suffer, and THAT is very patriarchal.
Feminists do not want equality. They want a matriarchal system where the mother can cut off the parental rights of the father. That is why you included the "or otherwise" in your comment.
Apparently you don't understand what this discussion was about. It wasn't about what the law is, it was what the law would be if we were really talking about equality. You don't understand the argument, yet again.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
