Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site nbires.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!hao!nbires!bob
From: bob@nbires.UUCP (Bob Bruck)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: marriage |= (necessarily) commitment
Message-ID: <455@nbires.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 9-Aug-85 11:59:06 EDT
Article-I.D.: nbires.455
Posted: Fri Aug  9 11:59:06 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 12-Aug-85 04:45:09 EDT
References: <650@ttidcc.UUCP>
Organization: NBI,Inc, Boulder CO
Lines: 27

Adrienne Regard:
> 
> ...  Some people even think that bearing children
> is a _reason_ (in a pre-determined reasonless relationship) _for_ marriage.
> ...
> I deal with the fact that society sees them synonomously every day -- I'm
> not married, and I am a parent, and about to parent another (with what
> "society" apparently assumes is an "uncommitted" other person (-:).
> 
> For the purposes of generalization, the high correlation certainly serves.
> But I've become aware that very few people separate these issues, not
> recognising the fact that certain legal contracts in effect under state and
> federal laws DO separate the issues, and certain other contracts do not.
> ...

I am happy that your situation works for you, Adrienne.  But you're seeing
this issue from a womans point of view and there IS a difference from a man's
point of view.  The difference is in the way the COURTS treat unmarried
fathers.  IF the relationship happens to break up, it is difficult for the
married father to get equal custody of his child - and it is almost IMPOSSIBLE
for an unmarried father to get equal custody.  Unless some sort of legal agree-
ments are made, the unmarried father has little protection under the law that
his child would not be taken away from him!  How would the knowlege of that
make YOU feel?
					Bob Bruck
					NBI Inc.   Boulder, Co.
					(hao | allegra | ...)!nbires!bob