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