~ archived since 2018 ~

UK: Government Petition: Give fathers/second parents a right to 6 weeks' paid leave in baby's first year

AdobiWanKenobi

July 26, 2023

24 upvotes

/r/MensRights

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/640814

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	UK: Government Petition: Give fathers/second parents a right to 6 weeks' paid leave in baby's first year
Author	AdobiWanKenobi
Upvotes	24
Comments	14
Date	July 26, 2023 11:04 PM UTC (2 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/15aksxw/uk_government_petition_give_fatherssecond_parents/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/uk-government-petition-give-fatherssecond-parents.1226586 https://theredarchive.com/post/1226586

Comments

[–]WeEatBabies 4 points5 points6 points 2 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]AdobiWanKenobi[S] 2 points3 points4 points 2 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]n0tqu1tesane 3 points4 points5 points 2 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]AlexKingstonsGigolo -3 points-2 points-1 points 2 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]n0tqu1tesane 5 points6 points7 points 2 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]AlexKingstonsGigolo -1 points0 points1 point 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]n0tqu1tesane 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Overall_Cap_8831 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]AlexKingstonsGigolo 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Taking each in turn.

Prove it; surely someone has said they want to help children survive by discriminating against men if what you say is true.
So, survival of a man’s child is not the dad’s “problem”?
The purpose of government is to make the lives of the people better, including their survival; if the survival of children is somehow outweighed by the cost to employers, you should be able to prove this easily.
An employee who is not worried as much about the survival of their child is more productive than one who is more worried; while productivity will drop during that year, unless you want to micromanage each and every single second an employee is working to the point they take absolutely zero breaks when they are on the clock, you are going to have some inconsistency in your objections. How does welfare factor into this when it’s paid by the government and not the employer?
Again, the purpose of government is to improve the lives of the people. Of course you have now shifted from your implied claim in 2 of the child’s welfare being a “problem” of mom and mom alone to that of both parents and you shifted from your position in 4 from “welfare is an employer’s problem” to “welfare is a government problem”; you would be more convincing if you didn’t seem self-contradictory. Of course, if you were a fifth-column troll trying to make this sub look bad, your inconsistency would make sense.
Are taxpayers worried about it? Either the maternity pay is paid by the employer, in which case taxpayers don’t enter into it in any direct sense, or government pays for it, in which case just about everything you said about employers goes into the rubbish bin. You seem extremely unfocused in your objections.

[–]Overall_Cap_8831 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Can't afford them don't breed them.

I am a libertarian. Not extreme one. More like the Hoppean private cities one.

How can a woman have her children survive? Easy. Pick a rich guy as father.

Something that government make difficult with alimony, child support, palimony and so on.

Polygamy would work too. Some guys are rich.

The rest? The rest can use whores first or share a beautiful women. There are many market solution.

Men in rich countries can hire wives from poorer countries.

You said government job is to make people life better? Which people?

The problem with democracy is the city itself doesn't have clear owners.

You pay taxes, you control territories, but you never claim you own it. Kind of weird right?

Why not turn voters into shareholders? All interests are properly aligned and we have less conflicts among voters.

[–]Current_Finding_4066 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]FallenFromTheLadder 2 points3 points4 points 2 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]AdobiWanKenobi[S] 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]FallenFromTheLadder 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link