You are not logged in.
The Guardian Council of Iran has vetoed a Parliament-approved divorce law that would have broadened the right of women to sue for divorce. Under current law, a woman can sue for divorce only if her husband is a drug addict, alcoholic, impotent, insane, or fails to earn a living. In contrast, a husband can divorce his wife for any reason, or no reason at all.
The Guardian Council vetoed the proposed new divorce law on the grounds that the proposed new law would be "contrary to Islamic laws." The Guardian Council is composed of six clerics and six lawyers and it has the power to veto legislation on the grounds that the legislation is unconstitutional or contrary to Islamic law.
Laws that apply unequally to men and women have existed since the beginning of civilization. Many of those laws have given men the authority to control women and such control is often exercised in a way that an ethologist would term "mate guarding." Keeping women in harems that are guarded by eunuchs is an example of mate guarding. The owner of the harem wants to be sure that all of the children produced by his wives are his biological offspring.
Now that we have genetic analysis technologies that can determine with near certainty whether a man is or is not the father of a particular child, the institution of marriage may change. In the future, laws might give women the right to contract to produce a child for a particular man and that man might legally agree to pay all of the costs of raising and educating the child. The woman might enter into such contracts with several different men. She might thereby become a professional mother.
Should the laws of Mars prescribe standards for the training and certification of professional mothers?
"Analysis, whether economic or other, never yields more that a statement about the tendencies present in an observable pattern." Joseph A. Schumpeter; Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 1942
Offline
Like button can go here
Of course, we have that now, except the man doesn't have to agree to it, and doesn't even have to be the father if he was trusting enough not to have a paternity test done early.
Human: the other red meat.
Offline
Like button can go here
Should the laws of Mars prescribe standards for the training and certification of professional mothers?
Are you suggesting that these laws would only apply to a *profession* of being a mother, whereby you produce offspring for economic gain or that the laws would apply to all women whereby they must be *certified* to be a mother?
I find it humours that you point out the historical inequality in the application of laws between genders, then begin a discussion predicated on the application of yet more inequlaity.
If you accept that standards and training are required for "professional mothers", wouldn't that also require standards and training for "professional fathers"?
My question though is, what right does society have in determing who I as an individual choose to reproduce with (as long as we are both mutually consenting *adults*)? These "laws" would in effect allow society to dictate who we can and cannot conceive with. Where is the benefit to society? Where is the need for these laws? I can understand the argument that consumers need to be protected (the mothers would be the commodity-oh lord), however, the idea that someone would need to be *proteced* when they are looking for a possible canadities to be the mother of their child is a bit propostorous, even for me.
I for one can forsee no need for these types of laws.
Offline
Like button can go here
Clark, you asked, "Are you suggesting that these laws would only apply to a *profession* of being a mother, whereby you produce offspring for economic gain or that the laws would apply to all women whereby they must be *certified* to be a mother?" Such laws would only apply to women who produce offspring for economic gain, not to all women.
Clark, you wrote, "I find it humours that you point out the historical inequality in the application of laws between genders, then begin a discussion predicated on the application of yet more inequality." I do not see the humor in this. Women have the capacity to produce children; men do not. This "inequality" is a simple fact of life and the law must deal with this fact.
Clark, you asked, "My question though is, what right does society have in determing who I as an individual choose to reproduce with (as long as we are both mutually consenting *adults*)?" A legally enforceable agreement is known as a contract. Society has the right to decide which agreements are legally enforceable. Society also has the right to decide which agreements are punishable. An agreement to commit a criminal act is known as a conspiracy.
Clark, you wrote, "These 'laws' would in effect allow society to dictate who we can and cannot conceive with." Depending on the exact wording of the law, this might be the case. Please take note that reproduction is a deadly serious matter in many societies. For example, if a woman gives birth to a child outside of marriage she might be taken into a public place and stoned to death. A woman in Africa is currently living under such a sentence. After her child is weaned, she will be killed.
Clark, you wrote, "the idea that someone would need to be *proteced* when they are looking for a possible canadities to be the mother of their child is a bit propostorous, even for me." The interests being protected would be primarily the interests of the children. If a man failed to provide the financial support that he had agreed to provide for the mother and child then the mother would have the right to bring a legal action to enforce the contract.
Clark, you wrote, "I for one can forsee no need for these types of laws." These types of laws might make sense on Mars. The Martian ecosystem is extremely harsh and most women will be in the workforce. In order to provide for the propagation of the species, some women might specialize in motherhood and become professional mothers. Some states have recently adopted legislation that legalizes "surrogate mother" contracts. "Professional mother" legislation can be regarded as an extension of the surrogate mother concept.
Scott
"Analysis, whether economic or other, never yields more that a statement about the tendencies present in an observable pattern." Joseph A. Schumpeter; Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 1942
Offline
Like button can go here
Such laws would only apply to women who produce offspring for economic gain, not to all women.
What benefit would there be in obtaining certification to be a proffesional mother? would those without certification be denied the ability to conceive with the person of their choosing? Or is this merely a means by which to enforce economic support of the children? If so, then would non-professional mothers be without the same legal protections by which to ensure financial responsibility?
Women have the capacity to produce children; men do not. This "inequality" is a simple fact of life and the law must deal with this fact.
Whymust the law "deal" with this inequality? How will this law resolve the inequality? Some people can jump higher than I can, do we need laws for that "inequality"? Why this one?
A legally enforceable agreement is known as a contract.
True. However, you are suggesting that society may stipulate who and who may not enter into this contract. Where does society derive the right to determine who may or may not enter into a legally enforceable agreement? The law you are suggesting would deny the opportunity to procreate with anyone of our choosing, and only allow procreation among the State sanctioned professional mothers. How would it be in the Martian people's best interest to have this power reside in the hands of the State?
Clark, you wrote, "These 'laws' would in effect allow society to dictate who we can and cannot conceive with." Depending on the exact wording of the law, this might be the case.
Then why allow it? What is the advantage?
The interests being protected would be primarily the interests of the children. If a man failed to provide the financial support that he had agreed to provide for the mother and child then the mother would have the right to bring a legal action to enforce the contract.
It seems that the primary interests being served is that of the State, since it would then be absolved of having to provide for the abandoned child. This also sounds like an alternative to the social contract (and legally enforcable) of marriage. I can see the legitmacy of establishing laws whereby financial obligations for offspring is enforced, however, I fail to see how establishing laws for "professional" mothers helps- it seems that this would be avoiding the real issue, the children and the financial obligations associated with them.
In order to provide for the propagation of the species, some women might specialize in motherhood and become professional mothers.
That very well may be, however you have yet to establish a need for laws that would dictate the qualifications of "professional mothers".
Offline
Like button can go here
This also sounds like an alternative to the social contract (and legally enforcable) of marriage.
Clark:
I do not envision a professional mother law as a substitute for marriage.
You have raised many good questions but we cannot debate the merits or demerits of a law that has not been drafted yet. So if you want to have that kind of debate I suggest that you to draft something that you think would work well in a Martian context.
Scott
"Analysis, whether economic or other, never yields more that a statement about the tendencies present in an observable pattern." Joseph A. Schumpeter; Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 1942
Offline
Like button can go here
I do not envision a professional mother law as a substitute for marriage.
However, it provides for an "alternative" to marriage, no? As an alternative, i can understand creating laws whereby the offspring resulting from the union of a non-traditional marriage are provided the same legal standing as those born from a traditional marriage. None of this neccessitates the need for laws governing the qualifications of who should be and who shouldn't be allowed the opportunity to enter into a non-traditional marriage (i.e. a "professional mother").
What is the neccessity of laws stipulating the qualifications of professional motherhood? How would these qualifications establish paternity roles, or obligation to the children?
You have raised many good questions but we cannot debate the merits or demerits of a law that has not been drafted yet.
Thank you. Please note, I am not debating the merits or demerits of any law, I am suggesting that there is no established need for such a law to begin with. The suggestion that motherhood, or even fatherhood by extension, should be regulated and qualified by a state is counter intutitive. I have yet to see any evidence, or any suggestion, that would merit consideration of such laws.
I don't believe such laws would work in any context.
Clark
Offline
Like button can go here
Leave the laws of breeding to mother nature.
If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost; that is where they should be. Now put the foundations under them. -Henry David Thoreau
Offline
Like button can go here