The daughters of fundies won't get the vaccine. My daughters will (even if I have to take them up to Canada for it). It's interesting that people who fight so hard against the teaching of evolution will be proving it right.

Of course fundies will "stand to watch women die when it's easily preventable." If you don't have people in agony to minister to and look down upon as immoral, you really don't have a religion.

"mothers are 44 percent less likely to be hired than non-mothers given the same résumés and are offered $11,000 lower starting salary..."

How does the employer tell the mothers from the non-mothers? If the résumés are exactly the same, how would an employer know which interviewees have children? Do the mothers' résumés have the same jobs as the non-mother's, but show gaps in employment? Do the mothers talk about their children during the interview, rather than discussing their employment experience and suitability for the job? Did employers outright ask if the women had children or did the mothers mention it? Did the groups act differently during interviews (showing more or less enthusiasm for overtime, travel, moving, etc.)?

I guess I'll get over the "utterly unimportant matter of who pays" when women ask men out half the time, and pay the bill half the time. Just as I'll get over the oh-so-unimportant matter of which parent's surname a baby gets when the mother's name is used half the time (as the last name, not as a middle name or other irrelevance). Just as I'll get over the completely-unimportant matter of who stays home with the kids as soon as its the father half the time. Actually, it doesn't even have to be half the time for these trivialities. Let's just get to about one-third, to the point where it does seem to be a matter of personal choice, to the point where there's actually some surprise to how it turns out.

Think about how different a menu looks when you're paying for yourself as opposed to when the guy is going to pay. When he's paying, you have to avoid the most expensive and least expensive dishes.

It seems as though a lot of women today are looking for any way of rationalizing whatever bit of the patriarchy script they're about to follow. Just admit that, after much whining and faux soul-searching, you're going to do what society expects you to do because you like the approval and the free meals. Have fun snubbing your nose at feminism and thinking that you're being some sort of rebel. I don't care, as long as I'm not going to be one of the ones left with a crappy résumé, Neathanderthal mate*, and 90% of the household chores.

* "oh, but he's such a good father" Yeah, right. Any man who's willing to hold the kid for a minute while his wife puts dinner on the table seems in line for that title. It's really sad how little society expects of fathers.

Robert Franklin, have you read my post or are you just responding to what you think a feminist would say? I wasn't talking about men, I was talking about women. Men might spend as many hours a week working as women (though who can tell? Your citation form sucks, brush up on that), but if Jane and John Doe divorce, who has the better résumé? Women should do more paid work and men should do more childcare (I mean wiping bottoms and mopping vomit, reading the kid to sleep is the fun part).

I don't know why I bother saying this stuff. Idiots will continue to whine about how the imaginary feminists in their head are mean to them. Non-feminist women will continue to accept "free" meals as though they were hunting trophies (all the while giggling "I'm not a feminist") and then, ten years later, bitch about how "my husbad is really like another child."

It's interesting that the article frames the issue as a court telling a mother not to move. The court is actually forbidding her from moving the child. It sounds the same, but think about the different reactions each phrasing provokes. In the first sentence, it's a judge telling an adult that she cannot move about the country freely. In the second, the judge is telling one parent that she cannot unilaterally move a minor away from his/her other parent.

I think that if both parents are responsible and involved enough to have joint custody, that they should live as close to each other as possible. I've heard of some former couples who rent apartments in the same building or buy houses next door to each other, so the kids can spend a lot of time with each parents. It's not always possible, but it should be the ideal.

I'm astonished at how many posters seem to believe in intelligent design. It's true that anything that's natural has to be good; just look at earthquakes, hemlock, leprosy, hurricanes, yeast infections, etc. The very design of the human body is flawless. For instance, the way the trachea and esophagus were carefully positioned in such a way that breathing can never be blocked.

Come on, nature is not some benevolent god looking out for your best interests. Natural selection "designed" women for little else than to be pregnant most of our lives. A pill regimen based on that can only please the great and mighty Nature.