"So, you could argue that in fact unless we all agree to stop breeding and let the chips fall where they may in supporting ourselves as we age and die, the non-breeders are in fact getting a free ride off the breeders' labor in producing the next generation of workers to support them."

The last time I checked, people without children still pay taxes towards public schools and social security taxes. I hardly call that a free ride.

"Maybe there will be more difficulty for parents of an adopted child to feel this bond, when the child is not a biological offspring. I'm no expert, but it makes sense. I had a brother who was adopted, and no matter how much the parents say they love everone equally, you have to know in the back of your mind, they feel a little differently about a biological child vs. an adopted one. Not a bad thing, it's human nature, but there has to be a difference whether people will admit it or not."

How would you explain post-partum depression? Brooke Shields gave birth to a much wanted biological daughter, yet she had fantasies about throwing the baby against the wall. Every parent's reaction to their children is unique. I do believe that there are people who aren't capable of loving an adopted child as much as a biological one, and that makes me sad for the whole family. I don't believe this is true of the majority of people who adopt. I also recognize that there are many people who resent and bond poorly with the children that came from their own bodies.

It doesn't make sense to make such generalizations about people's relationships with their children. For instance, I think that if I had one biological child and one adopted child I would slightly prefer the adopted one; adopted babies don't give you a flabby tummy and saggy breasts.

I am part of the childfree contingent, and I am also a liberal with socialist tendencies. I do support the idea that we are all responsible in some way for the raising of the next generation, but that doesn't mean I'm going to sit back and swallow the Motherhood Manifesto.

First of all, I think the idea that a screed about work/life balance is named after mothers is offensive. Women are never going to achieve economic equality as long as we accept it as our duty to do the vast majority of childcare. The only way to equalize the so called "wage gap" is to have fathers do more of their share.

Secondly, as has been pointed out before, the childfree do have family responsibilities that may require flexibility and leave. The mommyists pay lip service to this, but we all know what this manifesto is really about-- it says so right in the title!

Like I said, I do respect the fact that we have a collective responisibility towards children. I want them to have good public schools, health care and economic opportunities when they get older. I want to grow old in a civilized world, with competent younger people as my doctors, neighbors, accountants, employees, etc. I don't mind paying taxes for that kind of thing, especially since it's small change compared to what we're paying for this war.

But when you decide to become the primary caretaker for a child, you will have to make sacrifices, including in your pay if you are doing less work than your coworkers.

To Laurie and Mourning Dove: I am speaking as an adoptee who was relinquished at birth. The choice to give me up for adoption was 100% my birthmother's and she does not regret it. She made the right decision for herself and for me. She was my mother for 9 months but my real parents have been the ones who have loved me for 23 years.

It is sad if a woman feels coerced into giving a child up for adoption but most birthmothers do not feel the way you do. Most adoptions these days have some degree of openness to them and birthmothers usually pick the family that they want for the baby. What happened in the past is unfortunate, but it's not the protocol for how adoptions are done today.

My birthmother is very important to me but she is not my real mother. And newsflash, the children you gave away do have a real mother and it's NOT YOU.

I am one of those twenty something women mentioned in the article. I get up only for the elderly and the disabled. Part of it is just my innate hostility towards pregnancy and motherhood. I want to send a message: I don't approve of what you've done.

But I'm not really that cold-hearted. Luckily, most human beings are blessed with the gift of speech, allowing them to ask for things that they need. There are a lot of people with non-obvious disabilities who need seats yet who can't rely on people to get up for them without being asked. Being pregnant doen't automatically qualify you as disabled, but if you are in pain or severe discomfort, and need a seat, you have this little thing called a "voice". Please use it.

I can tell you that this sort of thing is assuredly not feminism. It's mommyism. I'm a feminist, and this sort of pandering makes me ill.

Ladies, if managing your own household makes you a CEO, and caring for your own children makes you a "childcare provider" then what does having sex with your own husband make you?