Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83 based; site hou2g.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!hou2g!scott From: scott@hou2g.UUCP (N. Ersha) Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Re: opportunits, women Message-ID: <554@hou2g.UUCP> Date: Wed, 17-Jul-85 09:39:24 EDT Article-I.D.: hou2g.554 Posted: Wed Jul 17 09:39:24 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 18-Jul-85 07:16:41 EDT References: <117@tommif.UUCP> Organization: rest, relative to the universe Lines: 25 -> Why don't you guys go out and get your corporations to provide good -> child care instead of participating in useless socio-sexual pedantry? -> Catherine Mikkelsen @Teknisk Why don't people (couples) who can't support children stop having so many of them. Granted, in a large number of "woman head of household" cases the woman may have expected the husband to "provide" and then he may have run off without paying child support, but I hardly think this is the rule. Nobody has the right to expect ME to pay for their children (via welfare, etc.) except for the case above. If their religion doesn't allow or believe in birth control, that's just tough shit. Make BIRTH CONTROL free--it's a lot cheaper than welfare support payments. (I know the above quote doesn't really address this subject, but I was in a hurry and am just pet peaving) Scott