A false dichotomy is not proof enough. I have already argued on the last page (pretty effectively I feel, and without any response forgot that he did respond, and I'm the one who needs to address him directly) against walkingdork's premise. But let's look at it a different way. Why must we choose between a child having all the rights of a born child, or absolutely none of them? Why not all the rights, or simply most of them, trumped only in a few instances? Arguments that state you must accept all or nothing of something are usually overly-simplistic. Only a Sith deals in absolutes ;)

EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Either_or_fallacy