Absinthe & Cookies (a bit bitter, a bit sweet)

I have encountered this story before. And much as it disgusts me with hoe far this nation has fallen from its Judeo-Christian values, and the societal strengthening those values provided, I cannot help (as a guy) feel sympathy with the Dubay case.

To look at it another way, if a man get’s a woman pregnant, she can kill the unborn child even if the father wishes to have and raise the baby. And in some cases he can be required to pay for the procedure even if he opposes abortion. Some would argue that since the woman has to carry the baby for the next nine months it should be her decision. But the case is talking about nine months of pregnancy versus eighteen years of child support. I really cannot blame Dubay for fileing his lawsuit.

The issue here is not is it fair, and to whom. The issue is the devaluation of sex, marriage, and reproduction that is happening in our culture. My solution while draconian would be effective. End child support, end welfare benefits to single mothers, especially single women who continue to have children. End abortion on demand. Force women to realize there is no free ride anymore. If women are smart they will stop having casual sex with irresponsible men like Dubay. Instead wait until they find a man committed to staying with her and raising a family.

Sex is good, and sex can be wonderful. But sex always has consequences. Even if the consequences are not so obvious as an unplanned pregnancy. The quest of some in our society for completely consequence free sex is nothing more then uncontrolled hedonism and narcissism. The sooner people realize this, the better. The sexual revolution has failed. Let’s start the familial revolution.

Okay, that’s enough ranting.

Sorry, no sympathy from me. It's very simple -- you don't want to be a father? Don't have sex. Don't want to be a mother? Don't have sex. Or take surgical options to ensure you won't impregnate/get pregnant.

As I said in the post: adult actions=adult consequences.

It's all gotten too out of tilt the other direction from how it used to be.

I agree with you, Ith, and isn't it sad that such a simple thing is so controversial?

It's also a strong evidence that society can't be based purely on "choice."

I remember 20+ years ago, talking to a liberal friend just after I had read Roe v. Wade. I made the argument that the same factors that applied to women - frustration of life expectation, stigma etc. - applied to men just as much as women. My liberal friend made the point that "he played, he has to pay." "Where was the woman, though, who got the benefit of Roe v. Wade, when all this was going on", I wanted to know, "In the other room doing her taxes?"

In other words, for the last 30 years we've applied - properly, in my opinion - a "Victorian moral model" for men and a pragmatic post-modern standard for women - as if women have no choice but to have sex and men do. Well, that's incoherent and something has to give.

This kind of thing may be the occasion for a broader realization that things went off the tracks with Roe.

Every time this subject comes up I am reminded of a scene from "Addams Family Values."

The scene is the waiting room outside the delivery room. Wednesday and Pugsley are talking to this little girl: "...and then Mommy kissed Daddy, and the angel told the stork, and the stork flew down from heaven, and put the diamond in the cabbage patch, and the diamond turned into a baby!"

Pugsley: "Our parents are having a baby too."

Wednesday: "They had sex."