| SpokenTruth said: They are against it because it's a horrible bill. It would establish equal time share for both parents regardless of circumstances. One could be a loving, capable parent that works full time while the other is a crack addict with no home and no job and they would still be required to split time evenly. Even if the parents acknowledge and agree that one should have much more time with the children, they can't...law forces them to split time evenly anyway. They aren't against it because it balances time sharing rights. They are against it because it's incredibly bad for the children. And the Republican governor of Florida even vetoed the bill. You know it's a bad bill when feminists and a very conservative politician agree on why it's bad. |
In no sane world would a law like this have the outcome you state. Men's Rights Activists don't want law to force people to split time evenly. They just want it to be the default setting. Because right now the de facto "default setting" is that women get the right to keep the children while men get "visitation rights".
By the way: The idea to have "visitation rights" to see your own children is the most bizarre thing ever. They are your children! No one should have the right to keep a parent away from their children as long as they are mentally fit to take care of them. But that's exactly what's happening under current law. And what you stated in another post (which came down to "men often don't care for their families, which is why women keep the children") is blatant sexism of the worst kind! There are as many bad mothers out there as there are bad fathers.
