Child Support as Politics.

@DrewDad,

Republican would be my guess Drew Dad! LOL
Dum Dum dum.............

0 Replies

@JP Cusick,

JP Cusick wrote:

So I was wondering if anyone here has any input onto this subject?

Magginkat said

Quote:

If there is one thing we do not need in Congress it's another dipwad who doesn't know his head from his other end.

Is that the sort of imput you were looking for?

0 Replies

@CalamityJane,

CalamityJane wrote:

I became an avid advocate for pro choice as I do not believe that children should suffer in a manner they do, just because they're not wanted.

An abortion as you call a "pro choice" is the ultimate in a child being unwanted.

You want children aborted so they will not be unwanted.

That is a sicko logic which I reject.

Drunk

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

In Internet lingo: can't decide if serious or just trolling.

If you're serious, then you're seriously disconnected from reality. I assume you're running on the Republican ticket?

I am a proud candidate of the Democratic Party, and this is not my first attempt at election as in the last election cycle of 2010 then I ran for Governor of Maryland and me with my running mate Mr Lang received 46,411 votes statewide, see link HERE.

I lost to the big rich incumbent, but now that result gives my a sound footing for the US Senate 2012 election.

And I did run in 2010 on the same platform of reforming the evil Child Support laws, so the momentum is rising.

Shocked

0 Replies

@Magginkat,

Magginkat wrote:

The child support payments are based on the income of both parents. It is not a fixed amount.

The Child Support is-to-be percentages and NOT to be "based on" percentages.

The State Courts do violate the federal guidelines, link HERE.

Magginkat wrote:

I'll be sure to notify my fellow child support advocates in Maryland about your run for the Congress.

They have no power against me.

Cool

0 Replies

@CalamityJane,

Quote:

He disqualified himself already when he said that he doesn't believe in
a women's right to choose over her own body.

Strange is it not when someone wish to take away the right of women to not be parents against their wishes, after the sex act, you are unhappy but on the other hand you see nothing wrong with not granting the same rights to men.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Well when men start ovulating and carrying babies they can have the same rights. Your argument is ridiculous, it's just mysogeny couched in the language of libertarianism. There are distinct biological differences between men and women, and to whine on about rights won't change that.

3 Replies

@izzythepush,

Sorry but the carrying or not carrying a child to term does not justify allowing women to force man to bear the burden of parenthood and at the same time they alone get to decided for both themselves and their male sexual partners if both of them will have that burden/joy or not have this burden/joy.

As equal adults a man unless he had agreed on assuming this task ahead of time had as must right to reject this as any woman.

Men without such a commitment ahead of time with his sexual partner should have the right to notify the woman that he is not willing to assume such a task and then if she decide to go on with having a child he would have no more rights or responsibility to the child then a man who had donate sperm to a sperm bank.

The window to do this notification would be narrow in time period of an early abortion once more assuming that the woman had informed the man in a timely manner of her condition.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Or he could put something on the end of it like the rest of us. You're excusing fecklessness and irresponsibility.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Second comment this in no way would placed a women at a disadvantage as they can demand from any sexual partner an agreement to assume the burden of parenthood if a pregnancy should occur.

If the woman decided to go ahead with sex without such a agreement then she would know that the man now have the same rights to reject parenthood as she now does.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

It's a really wonderful world where every aspect of human interraction is subject to litigation. You're suggesting people sign a contract before they ****?

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

Quote:

You're excusing fecklessness and irresponsibility.

W e seem to have a doubt standard once more as is it is not allowing/promoting irresponsibility behaviors on women parts in allowing them to have sex with men that they have no agreements with concerning possible children as the state will hunt down and force the men to pay for their decisions no matter what?

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

if that were the case i'd have to stop masturbating with my left hand, there's no way i could sign the contract

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Nine times out of ten they don't get tracked down, and if they do there's nothing that can be done. When I worked for the social security there was one bloke responsible for 50+ pregnancies. His disposable income was all gone after the first two, so the taxpayer picked up the bill.

1 Reply

@djjd62,

You could probably get them made to order, and carry a pile of ready signed ones around with you, in case you need an emergency shag.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

Talk about allowing and promoting irresponsibility, courts had already ruled that adults women who had broken the law and seduce a minor male is still able to demand child support from her victim the moment he had reached the age of adulthood.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Let's just cut to the chase and say for whatever reason you're pissed off with women in general. I know you and Hawkeye both feel oppressed by women, but I don't know anyone else who does. Try thinking objectively instead of running round fighting paper tigers.

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

izzy, it's best you don't engage them in any discussion, they just continue with
their utter nonsense ad nauseum. It's a repetitive cycle they spin around and around (billRM and hawkeye).

1 Reply

@CalamityJane,

CalamityJane wrote:

izzy, it's best you don't engage them in any discussion, they just continue with
their utter nonsense ad nauseum. It's a repetitive cycle they spin around and around (billRM and hawkeye).

In this case "utter nonsense" is defined as heresy that you can not disprove....thing is not everyone can execute the head in the sand maneuver as well you desire, to include you.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

Well when men start ovulating and carrying babies they can have the same rights. Your argument is ridiculous, it's just mysogeny couched in the language of libertarianism. There are distinct biological differences between men and women, and to whine on about rights won't change that.

When science gave women the ability to easily regulate fertility the proper response of our morals should have been to remove from women the special considerations which were put in place assuming that women had no control over the matter, back when God decided. Women should not make babies without the consent of the man they are having sex with, and if she fails to get that consent she should be on her own to raise it unless the man decides after the fact that he would like to be a father.

0 Replies

Child Support as Politics.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know