If by racists you mean political pundits then yes.
I think you're seeing a dog whistle where none exists.
Or they could have just created the law that said “the child was conceived under wedlock, the husband is on the hook.”
To make someone the father they have to inform them of it. There's nothing stopping the father from flying the coop once divorced. While the proceedings are in progress, the judge has the right to keep the father to be present. And this was more of a concern when you could disappear and start a new life by moving across town.
Franchise leader in 30pt and 40pt playoff games.
People cheated for sure, but if you were married you were simply on the hook for the offspring even if it wasn't yours.
I'm not saying the law is good, I'm saying it made sense for the time it was passed in. Now that we have genetic testing to confirm paternity or should be repealed.
It's not a racist dog whistle. It's an accurate representation of the polls.
Dude that's the question they try to answer in the article.
That's my point. It doesn't have to look nearly that good.
There was no genetic testing for paternity back then. If you weren't married you could contest paternity.
The headline makes it sound like Israel attacked the aid. That's not the case according to the body of the article. Odd.