(Andre Lieven) wrote in message ...
My Own Doppelganger ) writes:
Well, it's like whatever is best for the kids.

However, I do have a question... Why would a NCP NOT provide some
type of child support? I mean, aren't the kids theirs also?

So ? In the case of children either not of marriages, or the hundreds
of thousands of men being garnished from, who are *not* the bio-
fathers of the children they're being stolen from to pay some lying
woman, there was NO express prior agreement to become a parent
offered the guy.

Further, in all such cases, the *woman is the sole chooser* as to
whether or not there will BE a child.

" Her body, her choice... HER RESPONSIBILITY. "

What part of women being *as responsible for their own choices as
their choices are*, is unclear to you ?

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:20:17 -0600, Anti-Sheila J
smcneillAToddpostDOTcom wrote:

If the court would award me custody of my two daughters (ages 8 and
5), I would be willing to waive child support AND make certain I
exceeded all visitation requirements for their mother. I would make
this deal without any hesitation or reservation, whatsoever.

I was wondering if anyone here feels the same.

The *silence* from women is palpable. Nor do I mean the very few
women here on Usenet, but the *millions* of greedy women going
to kourts, demanding loot for the begging bowls *they unilaterally
chose to whelp*.

If sex is not the determinant time of parental choice for a
woman ( The existance of abortion, RU-486, legal adopting out,
and legal woman-only abandon laws shows that it *isn't* ),
then its SEXIST to claim that it must be, for *men, only*...

Andre
I think you had better wrap yourself up in cotton wool and never go
near a woman again - or men either just to be on the safe side. I am
sure you do already, but make sure to account for every one of your
sperm cos those women are everywhere!!