Child Support

[year2late]

When i see deflection of valid questions as "whiney" i literally see stupidity and one that lost the debate hands down.

And yet, your posts come off whiney and the potential for you being told to support the children you create will always exist in this country. You may feel you win the debate, but your war is a non starter. Most tax payers want to pay for the child you fathered unless you have no personal resources..

There are ways (outside of depending on women for contraception ) to help prevent unintended pregnancy. In fact if both partners are using contraception appropriately the chance of unintended pregnancy is quite small.

The win-able war is one to improve the child support and custody system.

 

[Bodi]

And yet, your posts come off whiney and the potential for you being told to support the children you create will always exist in this country. You may feel you win the debate, but your war is a non starter. Most tax payers want to pay for the child you fathered unless you have no personal resources..

There are ways (outside of depending on women for contraception ) to help prevent unintended pregnancy. In fact if both partners are using contraception appropriately the chance of unintended pregnancy is quite small.

The win-able war is one to improve the child support and custody system.

Again with the "whiney" instead of debating the argument?

You know what I never did in Court to the lawyer I disagreed with while in cross? Called his argument whiney or anything else emotive. I would have lost the case. As it was i stuck to facts and the argument and i won. Just some advice.

 

[year2late]

Again with the "whiney" instead of debating the argument?

You know what I never did in Court to the lawyer I disagreed with while in cross? Called his argument whiney or anything else emotive. I would have lost the case. As it was i stuck to facts and the argument and i won. Just some advice.

So you won a court case saying that you do not owe child support to a baby you fathered?

Laws in Australia must be very different than here.

 

[Bodi]

So you won a court case saying that you do not owe child support to a baby you fathered?

Laws in Australia must be very different than here.

Where do you pull that out from? I never said what the case(s) were about. Or was that some kinda insult attempt?

 

[year2late]

Where do you pull that out from? I never said what the case(s) were about. Or was that some kinda insult attempt?

I am sorry, I thought you were insinuating that from your post.

My apologies.

I did not dawn on me that you were bringing up a case totally unrelated to the topic.

 

[Bodi]

I am sorry, I thought you were insinuating that from your post.

My apologies.

I did not dawn on me that you were bringing up a case totally unrelated to the topic.

All good. I am a bit defensive as of late with all the anger at DP. I apologize as well.

I also tire of putting down an argument as (insert emotion) instead of debating the merit of the actual argument. In my cases... insurance and child custody i won by sticking to the argument.

 

[year2late]

All good. I am a bit defensive as of late with all the anger at DP. I apologize as well.

I also tire of putting down an argument as (insert emotion) instead of debating the merit of the actual argument. In my cases... insurance and child custody i won by sticking to the argument.

And those should be the biggest issues. I stayed out of court with my ex because I knew he would get screwed. What I thought would be fair and what the courts thought would be fair were two separate issues.

But opting out? Like I said hundreds of other times, individuals may have agreements but if the taxpayers are involved? Hell no. I do not want to support a child before both parents have been tapped.

 

[Henrin]

Does the guy that sells lumber to a builder pay for part of the property taxes?

 

[Henrin]

And those should be the biggest issues. I stayed out of court with my ex because I knew he would get screwed. What I thought would be fair and what the courts thought would be fair were two separate issues.

But opting out? Like I said hundreds of other times, individuals may have agreements but if the taxpayers are involved? Hell no. I do not want to support a child before both parents have been tapped.

How is the government deciding to help children effect what the man can and can not do himself?

 

[year2late]

How is the government deciding to help children effect what the man can and can not do himself?

Because the government gets involved when children are not supported. The more people on public support, the crankier taxpayers get.

 

[cuban smokes]

having children is a choice

if the baby daddy doesn't want to be a father then don't screw baby mommy

if the baby mommy doesn't want to be a mother then don't screw baby daddy

TOO MANY Americans believe that their life style is an entitlement to behave irresponsibly

screw that ..............

 

[Henrin]

Because the government gets involved when children are not supported. The more people on public support, the crankier taxpayers get.

That however has nothing really to do with the man. What you're saying is that because the government decided to support children that the man has greater duties put on him.

 

[year2late]

That however has nothing really to do with the man. What you're saying is that because the government decided to support children that the man has greater duties put on him.

Fathering a child that needs to be supported has nothing to do with the man?

Thank you for your "insight"

 

[Henrin]

Fathering a child that needs to be supported has nothing to do with the man?

Thank you for your "insight"

That's not what I was saying and you know it. What I was saying is that the decision by the state to provide welfare and make taxpayers pay for it has nothing to do with the man.

 

[Bodi]

having children is a choice

if the baby daddy doesn't want to be a father then don't screw baby mommy

if the baby mommy doesn't want to be a mother then don't screw baby daddy

TOO MANY Americans believe that their life style is an entitlement to behave irresponsibly

screw that ..............

So you are pro-life and you also can't answer the question of the OP?

 

[Bodi]

Fathering a child that needs to be supported has nothing to do with the man?

Thank you for your "insight"

He didn't father a child. He impregnated a woman.

She chose to have the baby... it was 100% her choice. It should be 100% her responsibility.

If the government wants to step in and help out that is the governments choice. The fact that the government can go after the man for the woman's choice is unconstitutional.

 

[year2late]

That's not what I was saying and you know it. What I was saying is that the decision by the state to provide welfare and make taxpayers pay for it has nothing to do with the man.

Again, it has EVERYTHING to do with the mother and the father of the child. EVERYTHING.

It is a head scratcher why you do not think the government/taxpayers would care if the parents of a child are supporting it.

 

[year2late]

He didn't father a child. He impregnated a woman.

She chose to have the baby... it was 100% her choice. It should be 100% her responsibility.

If the government wants to step in and help out that is the governments choice. The fact that the government can go after the man for the woman's choice is unconstitutional.

Their born child. Their responsibility.

People who do not wish to support children that are theirs should consider consistently using the best contraception they can afford (REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEIR PARTNER IS USING) OR even consider sterilization.

Bracing myself for the whining to come........steady.....steady......

 

[Bodi]

Their born child. Their responsibility.

People who do not wish to support children that are theirs should consider consistently using the best contraception they can afford (REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEIR PARTNER IS USING) OR even consider sterilization.

Bracing myself for the whining to come........steady.....steady......

Are you calling my disagreeing with you on objective facts "whining"?

Why didn't you address what I actually said as I did with your argument?

 

[year2late]

Are you calling my disagreeing with you on objective facts "whining"?

Why didn't you address what I actually said as I did with your argument?

I did answer. The fact that you consistently try to make men unaccountable for their actions is where it gives the feel of "whineyness".

Men and women have different reproductive choices. Just because a woman can choose abortion is not a free pass for you, I have said this over and over and over and over.

The repetitive nature of this makes it seem whiney.

Do you think you are ever going to convince me differently? Really.

If a man (or woman!) does not want to accept the potentially decades long consequences of their sexual liasons...they need to either abstain or consider the best possible contraception regardless of what their partner is using or consider sterilization.

Let me repeat. men and women by virtue of biology have different reproductive choices. An available choice of abortion does not negate the a man's potential responsibility for a child he created with a woman.

 

[Henrin]

I did answer. The fact that you consistently try to make men unaccountable for their actions is where it gives the feel of "whineyness".

Men and women have different reproductive choices. Just because a woman can choose abortion is not a free pass for you, I have said this over and over and over and over.

The repetitive nature of this makes it seem whiney.

Do you think you are ever going to convince me differently? Really.

If a man (or woman!) does not want to accept the potentially decades long consequences of their sexual liasons...they need to either abstain or consider the best possible contraception regardless of what their partner is using or consider sterilization.

Let me repeat. men and women by virtue of biology have different reproductive choices. An available choice of abortion does not negate the a man's potential responsibility for a child he created with a woman.

If the woman is not bound by pregnancy then why should the man be bound by birth?

 

[Bodi]

The fact that you consistently try to make men unaccountable for their actions is where it gives the feel of "whineyness".

Men and women have different reproductive choices. Just because a woman can choose abortion is not a free pass for you, I have said this over and over and over and over.

The repetitive nature of this makes it seem whiney.

Do you think you are ever going to convince me differently? Really.

So if a person argues facts but does not share your opinion it is whiney... good to know. :roll:

If a man (or woman!) does not want to accept the potentially decades long consequences of their sexual liasons...they need to either abstain or consider the best possible contraception regardless of what their partner is using or consider sterilization.

Let me repeat. men and women by virtue of biology have different reproductive choices. An available choice of abortion does not negate the a man's potential responsibility for a child he created with a woman.

1. What you ignore is the fact that the argument is about once a conception occurs regarding equal rights... ?

2.

If he wants the kid and she does not she has an option to not be a mother by aborting.
If she wants the kid and he does not he does not have the option to not be a father.

Do you disagree with these facts?

I did answer.

No. You didn't.

3. He didn't father a child. He impregnated a woman.

4. She chose to have the baby... it was 100% her choice. It should be 100% her responsibility.

5.

If the government wants to step in and help out that is the governments choice.
The fact that the government can go after the man for the woman's choice is unconstitutional.

 

[cuban smokes]

So you are pro-life and you also can't answer the question of the OP?

if a couple has a child IMO both parents should be obligated to financially support the child until such time the child reaches the minimum 'legal' age, which in most states I believe is 18 years of age

I don't believe in any general exceptions to this for either parent, mother, or father

 

[Bodi]

if a couple has a child IMO both parents should be obligated to financially support the child until such time the child reaches the minimum 'legal' age, which in most states I believe is 18 years of age

I don't believe in any general exceptions to this for either parent, mother, or father

My argument is about men not wanting the child but being forced to pay for the woman's choice.

Can you address that?

 

[cuban smokes]

My argument is about men not wanting the child but being forced to pay for the woman's choice.

Can you address that?

I stand by my previous statements; both posts

both statements should be pretty clear