|
|
| Re: You've Come a Long Way Baby -- NY Times Position on Marriage for Women Shifting (959615) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: You've Come a Long Way Baby -- NY Times Position on Marriage for Women Shifting |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jul 16 17:31:55 2012, in response to Re: You've Come a Long Way Baby -- NY Times Position on Marriage for Women Shifting, posted by AlM on Mon Jul 16 16:35:25 2012. I disagree. Had it not been for the backlash against Roe, as reproductive rights were being firmly established in the mid to late 1970s, we probably would have a generation now that accepted contraception as routine, and fewer out of wedlock births across the economic spectrum. These women drove the acceptance of single mothers as a defiance of the attempts to backlash them out of economic opportunity and back to the 1950s. You forget how vehement the RW of the time was about working, successful women, a battle that still isn't over.No person should have to tolerate an unhappy relationship, whether or not its actually violent. That is bad for the children as well. Divorced men are far more likely to be active in support of their children simply because they reached a point of maturity tin attempting to build a relationship that the father in the NYT article did not have when he 3 kids came along. The first and foremost answer is wide acceptance and availability of contraceptives, family planning medical facilities and realization that their use is best for young sexually active people, while childbearing come slater once solid relationships are developed so the children get the best possible chance their parents can provide. Just because two humans are capable of reproducing doesn't mean they should. Especially when young. |
|
(There are no responses to this message.)
|
|