"Dusty" wrote in message ...

"Yet you want to punish a child as the result of an adulterous situation,"
said Briley. "You put the child in the position of bearing the burden of a
parent's conduct."

I just don't get this argument. Isn't this politician saying CS money is
more important than factual reality and truth should be ignored when there
are signs of immorality?

To accept this argument one has to ignore it is the mother who gets pregnant
as the result of her sexual misconduct outside of a relationship or with
multiple partners and believe the biological father should have no
responsibility.

You really have to use pretzel logic to advocate for the status quo when it
comes to obvious inequities in CS law.