The Backlash! - November 1996

Organization News - Men's Freedom Network
Canada: P.O. Box 62, Bruderheim, Alberta, Canada T0B 0S0 Phone: (403)796- 2306
International: PO Box 15311, Kenmore Station, Boston, MA 02215 (USA)
Phone/fax (617) 232-1542

A Black Day in Israel

by "Moshe"

Contact Walter H. Schneider, Canadian Director

Ya'akov Shlosser, chairman of the Movement for Men's Rights in the Family in Israel, called today "a black day for all men in Israel" when the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that Ruth Nahmani had total ownership of the fertilized ova that she and her estranged husband, Danny, had fertilized in vitro when they were newlyweds. In the interim, Ruth Nahmani had undergone a hysterectomy, and the couple had separated. Danny went to live with a girl friend, while Ruth remained alone. She decided later that she wanted to activate the agreement she had made with Danny when they lived together to have a surrogate mother carry the fertilized ovum to term and to give birth to their child. David opposed her doing so on the grounds that there was no intention for them to continue living as a couple.

This case dragged on for four years and became a showdown over gender issues. Women's groups clamoured loudly (what else?) that Ruth had the right to motherhood. The men's movement countered that she might have the right, but not against the father's will. For years, the judges had ruled that a fertilized ovum did not constitute a viable form of life and, therefore, the father had the right to block the implantation of the ova, especially when the biological mother would not carry the baby and would raise it in a single-parent family.

Today's ruling overturned that position. The judges voted 7 to 4 that the will of the mother who wanted a child overrode the will of the father who did not, a blatant statement that women have more status in the eyes of the law than men. The only thing blocking the case now is the agreement the Nahmani couple made with the surrogate agency in California: the agency practices a strict policy that without the consent of both donors, the implantation will not take place. It will not be long before the feminists will find a way to get around this obstacle, and Danny Nahmani will become a father against his will, this time without even having intercourse!

It's just one more loss for men in the world. I'll be surprised if anyone gives a damn enough to express a few words.

Moshe is an American writer who lives in Israel, trapped there ever since his visit there. Under the law, a father who has been ordered to pay child support can't obtain an Israeli exit visa. The Israeli state wants to ensure in this way that the father of the children of a divorced couple can't abscond by leaving the country. The American authorties have been unwilling, despite Moshe's continual efforts to get them to give him assistance, to help him to return to his home in the U.S.A. Because Moshe's case is still in the courts, he doesn't want to reveal his identity.

Danny Nahmani potentially faces a similar fate. Without any doubt, if his ex-wife is successful in her attempt to have her fertilized ovum implanted in a surrogate mother and the child is brought to term, he will become liable to provide child support to his ex-wife. The State of Israel can then invoke the same laws that have been used against Moshe, so that Danny Nahmani will not be able to use that avenue of escape in trying to avoid from being forced into fatherhood by his ex- wife. Quite literally, Danny Nahmani's future is on ice.

It appears that the right of women to their body extends far beyond that domain, to the detriment of men, our children, and, ultimately, that of the traditional families in our society. The foundation of civilization, the traditional family, thus faces further erosion through the efforts of the small, but militant minority of the radical gender feminists who continually manage to impose their will on the majority, although a diminishing one, of society that is comprised of members of traditional families.

Will our politicians eventually wake up, implement whatever measures of damage control can be used, and save what is left of our society? Surely there is enough evidence now that more than three decades of social engineering by the radical gender feminists have not brought about the bliss that was purported to result from the implementation of their goal of the destruction of the traditional family. Is it purely coincidence that many of the industrialized countries in which the traditional family is still valued have now surpassed by far in their economic development those that don't?


[ NOVEMBER ] [ BACK ]
The Backlash! is a feature of New Chivalry Press

Email to the Editor