A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.support » Child Support
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Things to think of before you get married again..



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #141  
Old October 10th 06, 03:00 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Phil
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 387
Default Things to think of before you get married again..


"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Ken Chaddock wrote:
Fred wrote:
Gini wrote:

"teachrmama" wrote
............................

And you, Fred, are totally *dismissing* WOMEN'S responsibilities!
I am a woman, and I find it demeaning that you keep harping on
what MEN should do, but not a hint about how WOMEN should handle
their responibilities in the same situation. Everything a woman
does after the sex act is a consequence of where that mean old man
left his semen. Nonsense! Or maybe I'm just reading you
wrong--why don't you clearly delineate what the woman's
responsibilities are after the consequence of pregnancy becomes an
issue.

==
A ride to the CSE office? (Because she's *owed* it, of course.)


I guess that the matter is best explained by reference to the theme
of the game Fable: "For every choice, a consequence."


It's too bad that you seem to grasp the obvious fact that all
post conception choices are the woman's and therefore, in accordance
with the precepts of "Natural/Fundamental" Justice, all the
consequences that follow from those choices should also be hers.


I am aware of what Canada's notion of "natural justice". I know that
it allows Canada to declare age discrimination to be legal even though
it is unconstitutional; see McKinney v. University of Guelph. So if
you expect me to buy any argument based on that concept, you are
swimming upstream.

I read your entire message. What it boils down to is yet another
attempt to evade your responsibilities by ignoring the doctrine of
informed consent. Sorry, but men can't just spread their semen hither
and yon and walk away from the consequences thereof because those
consequences are ... *inconvenient*. That's "inconvenient" as in
financially inconvenient, because at the end of the day it's always
about the money with y'all.


It's about RIGHTS and equality.
This is another of those unintended consequences of rabid feminism.
If you want to hold rights for only women then only women will have the
responsibility that goes with those rights. Logic dictates that either
women share the rights or accept the whole responsibility.
In a way, you are right about the money aspect; many women use any means
available to dig into a man's pocket and this is just another way that
sleazy women utilize children for income.
Phil #3


It's disgusting, really.



  #142  
Old October 10th 06, 03:01 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
teachrmama
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,905
Default Things to think of before you get married again..


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Ken Chaddock" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
Fred wrote:
Gini wrote:

"teachrmama" wrote
............................

And you, Fred, are totally *dismissing* WOMEN'S responsibilities! I
am a woman, and I find it demeaning that you keep harping on what MEN
should do, but not a hint about how WOMEN should handle their
responibilities in the same situation. Everything a woman does after
the sex act is a consequence of where that mean old man left his
semen. Nonsense! Or maybe I'm just reading you wrong--why don't you
clearly delineate what the woman's responsibilities are after the
consequence of pregnancy becomes an issue.

==
A ride to the CSE office? (Because she's *owed* it, of course.)


I guess that the matter is best explained by reference to the theme of
the game Fable: "For every choice, a consequence."


It's too bad that you seem to grasp the obvious fact that all post
conception choices are the woman's and therefore, in accordance with the
precepts of "Natural/Fundamental" Justice, all the consequences that
follow from those choices should also be hers.


So he chooses to spread his semen hither and yon, and she chooses to let
him spread it in her. And let's say that the consequence is pregnancy.


But that's as far as the "consequence" of his "spreading his sperm
around" go. After that the woman has many options and CHOICES...even if
she decides (note the word "decides") not to abort the fetus, that to, is
a CHOICE, the consequence of which will most likely be the birth of a
child...


And if the child is born, how does that absolve the man from any
responsibility for or to the child?
Isn't it still 50% genetically his child, and legally his child as well?


Now there are other choices to be made, in this case by her, and from
those choices will spring consequences in turn.


Yes, as I noted above, but ALL post conception choices are HER choices,
to hold him responsible for the consequences that follow from HER choices
is fundamentally unfair, unjust and, on top of all that, most likely
unconstitutional...


So because she has choices that pertain strictly to undergoing (or not
undergoing) a medical and surgical procedure, you think this absolves the
man from any responsibility, even though it's still his child?


When the father legally has 50% of the rights to match his responsibilities,
the we can come back to his responsibilities toward the child. Until he
becomes an actual parent in the life of the child he helped create--50/50
with the mother, he also should not be the bankroll.


  #143  
Old October 10th 06, 03:01 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Phil
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 387
Default Things to think of before you get married again..


"Fred" wrote in message
. net...

Absolutely nothing of value.
Phil #3


  #144  
Old October 10th 06, 03:02 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
teachrmama
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,905
Default Things to think of before you get married again..


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Phil" wrote in message
link.net...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Tripped over it again, did you?

Phil wrote:

You also raise another interesting problem: what if the mother
doesn't tell him about the pregnancy, does he STILL have
responsibilities and what are they?
It's still his semen, right? I mean, just because he doesn't know
that
he did something doesn't mean that he didn't do it. So yeah, he
still
has a degree of moral accountability, and if the child is alive,
he
definitely has legal accountability.

How so?

Because it's his semen.

"His semen, his choice, his responsibility."

What about the moral responsibility she should have to at least
inform him of the pregnancy?

You keep trying that sleazy trick, but it's not gonna work.

That she has such a moral responsibility does not serve to negate any
responsibility that he has.

What I'm asking you to do is to accept the responsibilities that
*you*
have, and you respond by resisting that with every fiber of your
being.

Disgusting.

Your little feminist biology lesson is based on wishful thinking and
not
established biological information. How hard is it to understand eggs
are a
scarcer resource than sperm? And having a child takes a greater
investment
on the part of a woman. Because of those biological facts woman by
nature
should be more selective in mates because a bad choice has long term
implications and is a reflection on her discretion in selecting the
right
sperm.

To say men are responsible for women's bad choices in sperm is to
transfer
the biological misjudgments made by women to men. The femwits who
can't
accept their biological destiny want to have the state step in with
remedies
to cover up their biological mistakes. The state's solution is to use
men's
money to cover-up the lack of responsibility by women who don't select
good
mates.


You might as well talk to a brick, Bob. This one can't see beyond their
own hatred for men, much like a couple of other gender-feminists I could
name.


Have you seen the TV commercial where hundreds of sperm are shown
swimming
across the screen and the announcer talks about all the available choices
and then the sperm morph into PC mice?

It reminds me of these feminist types who could have chosen better sperm
providers just as easily as they could have chosen a better PC mouse
providers. :-)

And, in case you are wondering, I find it offensive male reproductive
biology is used in such a light-hearted way to sell a product. You would
NEVER see a woman's egg used in such a whimsical way.


But ya sure don't mind when they use her tits and ass to sell things, huh?


Wow, Bob. I didn't know you were an ad man! How interesting.


  #145  
Old October 10th 06, 03:19 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Phil
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 387
Default Things to think of before you get married again..


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Phil" wrote in message
link.net...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Tripped over it again, did you?

Phil wrote:

You also raise another interesting problem: what if the mother
doesn't tell him about the pregnancy, does he STILL have
responsibilities and what are they?
It's still his semen, right? I mean, just because he doesn't
know
that
he did something doesn't mean that he didn't do it. So yeah, he
still
has a degree of moral accountability, and if the child is
alive,
he
definitely has legal accountability.

How so?

Because it's his semen.

"His semen, his choice, his responsibility."

What about the moral responsibility she should have to at least
inform him of the pregnancy?

You keep trying that sleazy trick, but it's not gonna work.

That she has such a moral responsibility does not serve to negate
any
responsibility that he has.

What I'm asking you to do is to accept the responsibilities that
*you*
have, and you respond by resisting that with every fiber of your
being.

Disgusting.

Your little feminist biology lesson is based on wishful thinking
and
not
established biological information. How hard is it to understand
eggs
are a
scarcer resource than sperm? And having a child takes a greater
investment
on the part of a woman. Because of those biological facts woman by
nature
should be more selective in mates because a bad choice has long
term
implications and is a reflection on her discretion in selecting the
right
sperm.

To say men are responsible for women's bad choices in sperm is to
transfer
the biological misjudgments made by women to men. The femwits who
can't
accept their biological destiny want to have the state step in with
remedies
to cover up their biological mistakes. The state's solution is to
use
men's
money to cover-up the lack of responsibility by women who don't
select
good
mates.


You might as well talk to a brick, Bob. This one can't see beyond
their
own hatred for men, much like a couple of other gender-feminists I
could
name.


Have you seen the TV commercial where hundreds of sperm are shown
swimming
across the screen and the announcer talks about all the available
choices
and then the sperm morph into PC mice?


Naw, I've all but given up TV. I watch a movie on satellite occasionally
but can't stand the constant ads proporting 'dad to be an idiot' or
'supermoms save the day' and the shows themselves must have been written
by NOWcows.


It reminds me of these feminist types who could have chosen better
sperm
providers just as easily as they could have chosen a better PC mouse
providers. :-)

And, in case you are wondering, I find it offensive male reproductive
biology is used in such a light-hearted way to sell a product. You
would
NEVER see a woman's egg used in such a whimsical way.


Well, I guess it's true that the typical TV audience is women and
children gauging from the content which seems to be aimed at making mom
feel good about her bad choices in life and numb children's ability to
think or reason for themselves. It seems children don't read, can't
spell and have such a limited knowledge of the world outside their own
neighborhood, at least in the US. Then some of the books they use to
teach in public schools, especially history and social studies....
GRRRRRRRRRR.
Phil #3


  #146  
Old October 10th 06, 03:27 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
GL Fowler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default Things to think of before you get married again..

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 14:01:35 GMT, "Phil" wrote:


"Fred" wrote in message
.net...

Absolutely nothing of value.
Phil #3

So why are you playing his game?

A jury is 12 individuals who decides who has the best lawyer.
- Mark Twain
  #147  
Old October 10th 06, 03:35 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Phil
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 387
Default Things to think of before you get married again..


"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Tracy wrote:
"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...
"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
That she has such a moral responsibility does not serve to negate
any
responsibility that he has.

What I'm asking you to do is to accept the responsibilities that
*you*
have, and you respond by resisting that with every fiber of your
being.

To say men are responsible for women's bad choices in sperm is to
transfer
the biological misjudgments made by women to men.


I'm jumping in here for a second because I have not seen a single
sentence Fred has written that suggests he is saying men are
responsible for women's bad choices. All he has said is that men
should take responsibility for where he puts his own penis. His
ejaculation is due to him placing his penis inside of the woman and
engaging in the sexual act with her. Pregnancy is a possible outcome
of the act, which in most cases the act itself is mutually agreed on.
So I'm not sure why anyone is reading more into someone stating that
a man should take responsibility for his choice - where to put his
penis.


At the end of the day, it's all about the money.

These males


Now they're "males", not "men"; Wording used by gender feminists.

are trying to evade responsibility for their choices so as to falsely
justify not having to pay child support, or medical bills, or whatever
else they might have to spend on someone else as a result of their
choices. And "someone else" includes the child.


Your opinion... and incorrect, I might add.


I could understand an argument based on the child support laws in a
given jurisdiction being based only on the income of the noncustodial
parent. That's simply not equitable. But that is not the case in every
jurisdiction, and even if it is in a given jurisdiction, it speaks to
challenging or changing the law, as has been done here in Minnesota,
not using an inequitable law as justification to evade supporting his
child.

All I'm asking is that both men and women take responsibility for
their choices. What's wrong with that?


No, all you've done is whine and weep about MAN'S... er... "males"
responsibility. You've said jack **** about women's.
You cannot perceive that you are holding men to a standard to which you
refuse to hold women.
In short, you are a gender feminist, IMO.
It has been pointed out to you that after conception, the woman has the
ability to make any one of several choices, one of which involves
voluntarily becoming a parent; rights that men *do not* have, not even
ONE but yet here you are, wringing your hands and whining about "equity"
and accusing me of being a bigot for failing to agree with your biased
point of view.
Phil #3


  #148  
Old October 10th 06, 03:37 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Phil
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 387
Default Things to think of before you get married again..


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Bob Whiteside wrote:
"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Tripped over it again, did you?

Phil wrote:

You also raise another interesting problem: what if the mother
doesn't tell him about the pregnancy, does he STILL have
responsibilities and what are they?
It's still his semen, right? I mean, just because he doesn't
know

that
he did something doesn't mean that he didn't do it. So yeah, he
still
has a degree of moral accountability, and if the child is alive,
he
definitely has legal accountability.
How so?
Because it's his semen.

"His semen, his choice, his responsibility."

What about the moral responsibility she should have to at least
inform him of the pregnancy?
You keep trying that sleazy trick, but it's not gonna work.

That she has such a moral responsibility does not serve to negate
any
responsibility that he has.

What I'm asking you to do is to accept the responsibilities that
*you*
have, and you respond by resisting that with every fiber of your
being.

Disgusting.

Your little feminist biology lesson is based on wishful thinking
and not
established biological information.


It's not his semen? Whose semen is it, hers? You're gonna tell us
that
she impregnated herself? Or are you going for immaculate conception?


Actually, all your questions are irrelevant.


How hard is it to understand eggs are a scarcer resource than
sperm?


And how, exactly, does that negate the biological fact that it's his
semen, and that without his semen there's no pregnancy?

What y'all are all about is negating the male's responsibility by
pointing to the female's responsibility. Well, last time I read a
biology book, it took two to procreate, which makes both of them
responsible for the outcome.


Actually, what you think is irrevelant.


To say men are responsible for women's bad choices in sperm is to

transfer
the biological misjudgments made by women to men.


So don't say that. I haven't, and you shouldn't, either.


Actually, no one cares what you say.


The femwits who can't
accept their biological destiny want to have the state step in with

remedies
to cover up their biological mistakes. The state's solution is to
use

men's
money to cover-up the lack of responsibility by women who don't
select

good
mates.


And as always with y'all shirkers, it's all about the money.

At least you are honest enough to admit it, I'll give you that.


Actually, we are just toying with you so you can make a bigger ass of
yourself.


Problem is, the facts don't support your desired conclusions, so
you're
forced to resort to falsehoods, spin, and assorted trickery. But you
can't get past the essential facts:

"His semen, his choice, his responsibility."

"Her body, her choice, her responsibility."

"For every choice, a consequence."


Actually, nobody buys your bull**** conclusions!

And actually, by the way, nobody believes you are a "Fred."


I'd like to buy a vowel
Phil #3


  #149  
Old October 10th 06, 03:41 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Phil
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 387
Default Things to think of before you get married again..


"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Phil" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Phil wrote:
"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Phil wrote:
"Fred" wrote in message
. net...
Andre Lieven wrote:
"Tracy" ) writes:
"Gini" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
wrote
.............................
Deary, a vasectomy is cheaper than a month of child support.
If you
don't want to breed, don't have sex with a fertile woman,
==
And how is he to know when she is fertile?
Isn't a vasectomy only cheaper than a month of child support
if child support is more than a vasecotmy? How much is a
vasectomy?
How much is a tubal ligation ?
Here's something interesting:

"The cost of vasectomy is typically 3 to 4 times less than the
cost of tubal ligation. Although prices vary, regionally,
vasectomy costs generally range from about two hundrend fifty to
one thousand dollars, while the cost of tubal ligation often
begin at about one thousand dollars and may go as high as
twenty-five hundred dollars. The cost difference is mainly due
to the fact of where each procedure is performed; an office
procedure vs. a hospital procedure."

http://womenshealth.about.com/cs/ste...zhisorhe_3.htm

But it's not really about cost, is it?

It's about taking responsibility.
Apparently, it's about applying responsibility to only men as
noted in your next statement.
Your bigotry is showing. But on we go ...

Equality is bigotry???

You aren't talking about equality. You are talking about inequality,
as in assigning responsibility to one in a matter where it is
properly assigned to both.


Men and women share responsibility for any pregnancy that occurs when
they agree to have sex. BOTH and equally, not just the man. You are
bending over backward to promote the idea that men are solely
responsible for any pregnancy while saying absolutely nothing about
any responsibility the woman may or may not have. Why is that?


She's pregnant?


Ohmigod! I hadn't even THOUGHT of that. Probably because I can't imagine
any man getting drunk enough to get that close to a man-hater like this
but I failed to realize that perhaps she became a man-hater when she
forgot to ask his name. My bad.
Phil #3


  #150  
Old October 10th 06, 03:49 PM posted to alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce
Ken Chaddock
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 53
Default Things to think of before you get married again..

Moon Shyne wrote:

"Ken Chaddock" wrote in message
news:[email protected]


But that's as far as the "consequence" of his "spreading his sperm around"
go. After that the woman has many options and CHOICES...even if she
decides (note the word "decides") not to abort the fetus, that to, is a
CHOICE, the consequence of which will most likely be the birth of a
child...


And if the child is born, how does that absolve the man from any
responsibility for or to the child?


If you, Moon Shyne (I'm making a possibly bad assumption here Moon
Shyne and if you're not a woman I apologize in advance) go to a sperm
bank and become impregnated with donor sperm, and assuming that you let
the pregnancy continue to birth, the child you give birth to is the
genetic child of the sperm donor, no ? If a child is entitled to support
from his/her biological father, what legal fiction absolves this man of
responsibility for this child ?

Isn't it still 50% genetically his child, and legally his child as well?


As above, the issue is *exactly* the same for a sperm donor, actually
it's even MORE problematic than that because arguably, the sperm donor
*wants* to pass his genetic material along to one or more children where
as the unwilling father does not. The *only* difference between these
two men is that the first, the sperm donor, is unknown while the other
is known and can be targeted


Yes, as I noted above, but ALL post conception choices are HER choices, to
hold him responsible for the consequences that follow from HER choices is
fundamentally unfair, unjust and, on top of all that, most likely
unconstitutional...


So because she has choices that pertain strictly to undergoing (or not
undergoing) a medical and surgical procedure, you think this absolves the
man from any responsibility, even though it's still his child?


As demonstrated in the sperm donor example above, the fact that this is
his biological child or not is fundamentally irrelevant since not *ALL*
biological fathers are held responsible for their biological children.
On a more fundamental legal level, access to abortion breaks the causal
link between intercourse and child birth. With the decision at
Roe-V-Wade, a living child can NO LONGER be considered a direct
consequence of pregnancy since the mother must make the choice to
gestate and give birth.
On top of all of this, the "theory" that you promote, of unrestricted
genetic liability is abhorrent and leads to miscarriages of justice like
the following:


STATE of Kansas, ex rel., Colleen HERMESMANN, Appellee,
v.
Shane SEYER, a minor, and Dan and Mary Seyer, his parents, Appellants.
No. 67,978.
Supreme Court of Kansas.
March 5, 1993.
Syllabus by the Court

1.
1. In an action for support of a minor child, the parents have
a common- law, as well as a statutory, duty to support their minor
child. This duty applies equally to parents of a child born out of wedlock.
2. In an action against a father for reimbursement to the
State for support furnished under the aid to families with dependent
children program, the fact that the father was under the age of 16 when
the child was conceived and born and that the mother may have been
guilty of violating K.S.A.1992 Supp. 21-3503, or some other criminal
statute, cannot serve to relieve the father of his legal
responsibilities towards his child.
3. The issue of consent to sexual activity under the criminal
statutes is irrelevant in a civil action to determine paternity and for
support of a minor child born of such activity.
4. The State's interest in requiring minor parents to support
their children is superior to the State's competing interest in
protecting juveniles from their improvident acts, even when such acts
may include criminal activity on the part of the other parent.
5. In an action by the State against a minor father for
reimbursement of funds paid for support of his child, the fault or
wrongdoing of the mother at the time of conception, even if criminal,
has no bearing on the father's duty to support such child.

The district judge, upon judicial review of the hearing officer's
order, determined that Shane was the father of Melanie Hermesmann and
owed a duty to support his child, stating:

"Okay. I'm ready to rule. It's my view in this case that the
Hearing Officer's ruling, which essentially is that a minor may be held
legally liable to provide reimbursement to the State of Kansas under
K.S.A. 39-701 et seq., is a correct ruling of law and that the issues of
consent and the criminal case and so forth are not really relevant in a
paternity proceeding, which we're talking about, civil liability to
support a child.

"Second, I'm going to hold that the State, by proceeding
under 39-701 et seq., that there is no discretion in the Court regarding
liability. The courts, I believe, are ministerial at that point and are
the vehicle for SRS to collect the support and it was error for the
Hearing Officer not to assess all of the monies paid jointly and
severally liable against both of the parents of this child.

"And so I would enter a judgment for all of the SRS
reimbursement against Colleen Hermesmann and Shane Seyer jointly and
severally for the six thousand plus."

The court found that the issue of Shane's consent was irrelevant
and ordered Shane to pay child support of $50 per month. The court also
granted SRS a joint and several judgment against Shane and Colleen in
the amount of $7,068, for assistance provided by the ADC program on
behalf of Melanie through February 1992. The judgment included medical
and other birthing expenses as well as assistance paid after Melanie's
birth. Shane appeals the judgment rendered and the order for continuing
support but does not contest the trial court's paternity finding. SRS
has not cross-appealed from any of the orders or judgment of the
district court.


Further, what's not mentioned in this summary of the court appeal is
that Colleen Hermesmann was found guilty of statutory rape and gave
birth to the the child in prison. When Shane Seyer, supported by his
parents, sought custody of the child, it was denied on the grounds that
he was a minor child and therefore could not be "responsible" for a child...
What hypocrisy, he isn't old enough to be "responsible for" a child but
his age (and consent to sexual intercourse) is irrelevant when his
*financial responsibility* for the child is considered...humm, can YOU
say bias ?

....Ken
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 February 28th 05 06:27 AM
Parent-Child Negotiations Nathan A. Barclay Spanking 623 January 28th 05 05:24 AM
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 December 29th 04 06:26 AM
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 November 28th 04 06:16 AM
misc.kids FAQ on Good things about having kids [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 June 28th 04 07:42 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2021 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.