Quote:
Originally Posted by PrettyGirl
That's stupid. Bridget gives her baby Tom's first and middle name in 'honor' of her former lover, but she doesn't give the child his father's last name? What's the point in that?
|
Perhaps the point is that she, you know, gave him her name instead? Seems like an arbitrary toss-up to me. Even if they were together, why should the kid automatically get his name?
Quote:
|
That child deserves to have his father's name.
|
Because the father's name is somehow better than the mother's? Why doesn't the child "deserve" to have his mother's name? Especially considering that she did give him
two of his father's names and can't exactly give her son any of her feminine names, now can she?
Quote:
|
Tom and Bridget's relationship ended before she knew she was pregnant and just because they didn't marry doesn't mean their son shouldn't have his father's name.
|
Sure. Maybe. OR! Here's an idea - he could have her name! What difference does it make?
Quote:
|
You want the man to be there for the baby but because he didn't marry you, you have to 'pay the man back' by not giving his child his name?
|
Or, you know, it's a choice between two valid options, and she (maybe even they) picked the one that fit best.
Quote:
|
No man is ENTITLED to have his child have his name but 99% of people give their children their father's name.
|
Ah, yes - and this would be one of the 78% of statistics that are completely pulled out of one's ass.
Quote:
|
If some women (we'll call them Group A) are so anti-men and hate tradition or whatever you call it, then why are so many other, completely separate women (we'll call them Group B) so desperate to find a man?
|
Fixed that for ya. You see what you were doing there?
Quote:
|
Tom Brady has a child. He didn't rape this woman. She opened her legs because she wanted to. He was there.
|
Well, blow me down and give the fellow a medal! And of course, give his child his last name for some completely arbitrary reason, because gosh darn it, he's earned it!