Perhaps some of the animosity towards large families, mothers and "breeders" has to do with the over child-centric society we have here? And some of the concern for the child is really hypocritical and seems superficial.

And a lot of it comes up during political season, so people feel they are being manipulated?

No - it is not always "for the children" nor should it be.

But if were were genuinely "for the children" we would have an excellant education system not dependant upon the neighbourhood. We would universally insure medical coverage for all children. And we would not be as upset with Janet Jackson's nip on Superbowl entertainment as we would be with the sheer amount of marketing towards children to condition them into good little consumers.

I am not aware of this 'breeder' animosity in other industrialized countries - maybe because the child is not more important than the family? Or because there are public programs that improve the life condition for all citizens?

Really weird the number of posts this article generated - and how hostile and us vs them many of them read. On both sides.

So - being that I was in the Army and had a first class view to some of these issues:

1) All the female soldiers I knew who got pregnant while in the Army did so with the co-operation of male soldier. Not to say this is 100% true but the ones I knew had soldier lovers. I would lay odds that the person who is the father of the child in this story is also a soldier. The woman is the custodial parent - signing over custodial rights to the father would probably just make another soldier in the same position this woman is in.

2) No single custodial parents are allowed to join the Army (or at least they weren't). Children need to be signed over to someone else before the prospective soldier is accepted. Once they reach permanent party status, they can get their children back - it is a way around the rules. This exist for both men and women, but women seem to be the ones who seek custody and the difficulties that come with it. There are a lot of single dads in the military - blowing steam is (was) actively advocated. Accidents happen.

3) The UCMJ (military justice code - the laws) has just about everything covered, not that they enforce it uniformly. It can and is used selectively. Rules are often bent or relaxed if it serves the Army. The more obscured "laws" of the UCMJ will be enforced when the unit really wants to get someone. Punish them, control them, kick them out. This case could have been handled effectively - don't know how much the woman tried to use avenues available (honourable hardship discharge) but obviously her unit commanders did not try.

4) Everyone in the military of the same rank (and usually in the same unit) gets paid the same. If someone has an internal work ethic that keeps them busy - they get paid the exact same as the slacker who has to be told to do every single thing. Asehpe - there is no reward for being a hard consistant worker in the Army. In fact - you are often given more to do because it is easier than getting the slacker to take the responsibility. Until that is fixed, all the crap laddled against women in the Army not holding up their end should cease. But it won't. I worked with some amazing people in the army - male and female. And saw some amazing sloths slouch their way though their tour. Everyone got paid the same within the same rank.