It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dictatorship in OH at it's finest! Setting a precedent?

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2014 @ 08:01 AM
link   
Sorry if this has been posted, did a search and I HATE the new search, it is hard to use...hint hint Mods....Move or delete if needed

So this man, who owes $100,000 in back child support is ordered to probation until it is paid off and.....Not allowed to have anymore children until it is paid off??

chronicle.northcoastnow.com...


ELYRIA — Lorain County Probate Judge James Walther on Wednesday ordered an Elyria man who owes nearly $100,000 in back child support not to have any more children for the next five years while he is on probation for failing to make child support payments to the four children he already has....


So, is the supreme court of OH just trying to start something here? I have not dug into this to see if these are elected officials or appointed, but either way this is just WRONG!

How in the USA is anyone allowed to serve a sentence of not allowing someone to have children because of back child support? If he does, it would be a violation of his probation! I would fight this at a higher level!

Now, this man should take this upon himself to not have anymore children because of what has happened so far but to actually have a court system tell you this is just insane! What say you ATS?



+3 more 
posted on May, 15 2014 @ 08:18 AM
link   
Sounds good to me. Why should a deadbeat dad just keep cranking out kids for the government to take care of? People keep crying about how many people that are on government assistance but don't want to do anything to stop it. The government shouldn't be in peoples bedrooms but when you are doing things that will eventually involve the government like having another kid for them to take care of then they should have a right to intervene.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 08:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Chrisfishenstein
What say you ATS?


I say the government should NEVER be involved in a person's right to reproductive freedom.

And I will take this opportunity to state that if you (generic "you") support the government banning, restricting, or, in any way, infringing on a person's right to make their own reproductive choices, you are FOR government intervention, and should support this judge's decision. (Just making a point.)



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 08:23 AM
link   
How are they going to enforce this...?



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Four children is enough for one man in today's times. I'm sacred enough for the one I have. I'd see it as a wake up call for this guy. But the judge would never be able to throw this guy in jail for having another kid, whether or not the guy is paying up. If he doesn't and has another child then the judge will lock him up, but if he's paying and has one and the judge locked him up he'd have a hell of a lawsuit on his hands.

It's hard enough living alone in today's day in age, especially for someone paying child support. The system almost demands that you go out and get married right away if you want to be able to make it with child support payments. This has been my predicament for three years now, and I struggle, but the unhindered time I have alone with my daughter more than makes up for it.

Either way, it's dangerous living on the edge and barely making bills, it's dangerous trying to make a life and risking the whole process over again. What do ya do? Just make damn sure you don't lose your job and try to keep your head down.

I'd probably tell the guy the same thing if I was judge, but knowing there's no way to enforce the judgement. I think judges make these kinds of calls all the time in divorce cases.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 08:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Chrisfishenstein

As much as I'd like to see parents taking responsibility for their actions, this type of legislating personal responsibility sickens me.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 08:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: ArchAngel_X
How are they going to enforce this...?


Chastity belts. Or worse.

"No more children for you!"



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 08:46 AM
link   
Completely unconstitutional. Next thing you know the government will be saying "you're too poor to be having children."



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
Sounds good to me. Why should a deadbeat dad just keep cranking out kids for the government to take care of? People keep crying about how many people that are on government assistance but don't want to do anything to stop it. The government shouldn't be in peoples bedrooms but when you are doing things that will eventually involve the government like having another kid for them to take care of then they should have a right to intervene.


Cant believe you and I agree on anything,guess there is common ground for all of us.
Star for you.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 08:52 AM
link   
Why don't they just throw him in jail? He is obviously not going to pay, but wouldn't have to worry about any more kids.

I don't think the government should be in anyone's reproductive business.

But you should be punished if your not going to take responsibility for the ones you have.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 09:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: ArchAngel_X
How are they going to enforce this...?


Maybe forced abortion? Having the government in our reproductive choices could eventually lead to that.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 09:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: ArchAngel_X
How are they going to enforce this...?


Maybe forced abortion? Having the government in our reproductive choices could eventually lead to that.


Well I expect you'd be popping the champaigne cork when that day happens!

Aren't you all about government removing responsibility of the individual by allowing abortions?



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 09:27 AM
link   
Honestly, I don't see the big deal. Judges set conditions for probation all the time...no drinking...no drug use...employment requirements...curfews...etc.

The only difference here is that the condition of his probation is that he may not father any more kids while serving probation. Of course, he could father another kid and be sent to jail; just like those on probation that decide to drink, do drugs, remain unemployed, break curfew, etc.

ETA: This deadbeat could have declined the conditions of his probation and chose prison instead...How many children could he have fathered from prison? Umm humm, zero! so it boils down to freedom with no procreation rights for 5 years OR prison with no procreation rights for 5 years.
edit on 15-5-2014 by LeatherNLace because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 09:37 AM
link   
It looks like the state saying hey,you can't support the family you have and you want more kids?The tragic truth is someone this irresponsible needs a court order to quit not thinking with his penis.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 09:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: TDawg61
It looks like the state saying hey,you can't support the family you have and you want more kids?The tragic truth is someone this irresponsible needs a court order to quit not thinking with his penis.


I think it is more about the rights of this man. There should be nobody in the great US of A that tells you that you cannot reproduce...This isn't China! Not saying this man is a good father by any means, but for a court system to take away that right is just insane in my humble opinion that is!



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 09:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
Well I expect you'd be popping the champaigne cork when that day happens!


Well you'd be wrong. That's a very stupid thing to say.



Aren't you all about government removing responsibility of the individual by allowing abortions?


The government CANNOT remove individual responsibility. Nor can they enforce it. Either a person exercises it or they don't.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

The government CANNOT remove individual responsibility. Nor can they enforce it. Either a person exercises it or they don't.


While I agree with the sentiment of this portion of your post, I find many Americans abdicating personal responsibility for government authority.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

The government CANNOT remove individual responsibility. Nor can they enforce it. Either a person exercises it or they don't.


While this may be true, one thing the government can and will do, is protect those who are suffering from a lack of individual responsibility. By that, I mean removing children from abusive and neglectful parents. I don't think anyone has a real problem with taking children away from someone who beats them, or does not provide food or shelter for them.

To me, if you refuse to monetarily support your children, that is the same as being an abusive and neglectful parent, therefore you have lost your rights to have children until you prove yourself to be responsible for them.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 10:18 AM
link   
This is an old story and it has made the rounds on the interwebz quite a bit.

The man was not ordered to stop having children. He was told by the judge, after the ruling, that it would be a good idea to stop having kids if the man could not support the kids he already had.

No government intrusion or anything of the sort....just words of advice from the judge.

That's all it was.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 10:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

The government CANNOT remove individual responsibility. Nor can they enforce it. Either a person exercises it or they don't.


While I agree with the sentiment of this portion of your post, I find many Americans abdicating personal responsibility for government authority.


As one person said "how do they enforce this?", they can't in this fashion. I think they should offer him a vasectomy and if he says no then he could do jail time as a neglectful parent. Hell, in Portland you can do jail time for treating your dog bad....

People need to understand they are responsible for their actions, and that there are repercussions when you do not handle your responsibilities correctly, responsibilities you created.




top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join