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.

 

Men and Child support. What is the answer?

page: 37
52
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


It won't stand up in court, because child support isn't about YOU and HER. It is about your child, who is a human being in and of themselves.

Its been tried before. Its lost before. Based on that one minor detail.


good, then that human being can go get a jobby job.




posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:40 AM
link   
Its called double dipping and it is the real reason those that dont pay dont.

They feel that ONLY ONE MALE SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO SUPPORT THE KIDS AND IF SOMEONE ELSE IS CONTRIBUTING TO THE HOME BESIDES THEM THEN THEY FEEL THEY ARE RELEASED FROM THE OBLIGATION.

Do you think the arseholes are linig up to be papas for someone elses kids because according to their logic if someone is raising theirs they should be raising someone elses---there should never be a free second on this earth for a man who has procreated,end of story,no rest till you die.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by CobraCommander

Originally posted by Aeons
Where have I addressed women's rights? Exactly?

You don't like losing this debate. My points are on topic (with the exception of my concern about the group home) and directly address the anti-woman, anti-child sentiment of some of the male posters.

That I do so effectively doesn't make me a troll.

Interestingly, in losing of course the worst of you band together to "fight" even if it means that what you are supporting is something that if you ever took a second to look at it with eyes of a father who might have someone say and think these things about your daughter one day, you'd be horrified.


The fact is that most of "us" were disagreeing until you came along, and trying to hash out reasonable solutions. Now we all agree that you are a troll.


i almost fell out of my chair...that is so funny and true



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


It won't stand up in court, because child support isn't about YOU and HER. It is about your child, who is a human being in and of themselves.

Its been tried before. Its lost before. Based on that one minor detail.


Sorry,its about the money.The system doesnt care about the child. The system 9 out of 10 awards custody to the mother,because fathers make more money. The system uses the "excuse" that mothers are better at raising kids. Its about the COURTS AND THE STATES,making money,off children.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by CobraCommander

Originally posted by Aeons
Where have I addressed women's rights? Exactly?

You don't like losing this debate. My points are on topic (with the exception of my concern about the group home) and directly address the anti-woman, anti-child sentiment of some of the male posters.

That I do so effectively doesn't make me a troll.

Interestingly, in losing of course the worst of you band together to "fight" even if it means that what you are supporting is something that if you ever took a second to look at it with eyes of a father who might have someone say and think these things about your daughter one day, you'd be horrified.


The fact is that most of "us" were disagreeing until you came along, and trying to hash out reasonable solutions. Now we all agree that you are a troll.


The salve for the ego of those who even as a team are losing against one. I understand, I feel your plight.

Your solutions are anti-child anti-female pro-jerkwad. Your "reasonable" solutions include concepts like, treating children like cars, or making children work in workhouses. Your solutions blow goats. That's why my simply pointing how bad they are feels so mean to you.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


Yep. They've lost on that exact point several times now. If the donor can have a name put to them, a child can go for support.
edit on 2011/6/3 by Aeons because: (no reason given)




Thank you. Now we really get you.

A woman pumps herself with an anonymous spermcicle and it's STILL the man's fault.

Game set and match hotpants.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


It won't stand up in court, because child support isn't about YOU and HER. It is about your child, who is a human being in and of themselves.

Its been tried before. Its lost before. Based on that one minor detail.


Sorry,its about the money.The system doesnt care about the child. The system 9 out of 10 awards custody to the mother,because fathers make more money. The system uses the "excuse" that mothers are better at raising kids. Its about the COURTS AND THE STATES,making money,off children.


70% of men who pursue custody get it. Most men never pursue it, and therefore most of the horror stories you hear are from people who never even went through the motions to do it.

SEVENTY PERCENT.

The "excuse" is because most of the time the children are LEFT with the Mother upon relationship dissolution, proving who the parent with the most child care responsibility is. This is noted, and is used as a basis on which to make decisions.

If you don't understand what is happening, and why, you can't change it.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:45 AM
link   
reply to post by CaDreamer
 





my second wife refused support,i insisted . for my daughter, and it is spent wisely


Personally, I think I would have chosen to buy things directly for the kid if she refused. Or at least paid a bill in her name. Heck, establish credit for the kid. Put an electric bill in the kids name and pay it.

Clever little things to get over on the system that pissed off parents miss the boat on.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by CobraCommander

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


Yep. They've lost on that exact point several times now. If the donor can have a name put to them, a child can go for support.
edit on 2011/6/3 by Aeons because: (no reason given)




Thank you. Now we really get you.

A woman pumps herself with an anonymous spermcicle and it's STILL the man's fault.

Game set and match hotpants.


It is the CHILDREN who have pursued support in most of these cases.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by CobraCommander

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


Yep. They've lost on that exact point several times now. If the donor can have a name put to them, a child can go for support.
edit on 2011/6/3 by Aeons because: (no reason given)




Thank you. Now we really get you.

A woman pumps herself with an anonymous spermcicle and it's STILL the man's fault.

Game set and match hotpants.


EXACTLY!!!!

Donor,key word here. Its not a father. Thats what she believes all males are.
Pathetic.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


im ignoring you thats just to much!! the system is broke and unfair ,rong, it is vary sextest by fare lets go about how to fix it! please! I dont want one of my sons to get scrued later in life by .the freind of the court or my doughter either money should not be thare agenda thay get thare cut thats the problem. it should be joint custady give counsaling on how to make that work how to make it a eiser transishon for the kids not you are the dad pay this or go to jail. couse that is great for the kids right? if I got behind on child suport and went to jail my kids would be devastated and I have them atleast half the time so thay would probaly be with me seeing me get arested. rrrr, sorry its so rong



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by pikypiky
Child support MUST go both ways. After all, the child/ren are 50% his and 50% hers. It is for the sake of the child/ren. No exceptions.


The problem there starts with custody. If a man can afford to pay support, then why doesn't he have custody preference over the woman who cannot afford to support a child? (Or visey versey of course in some cases.)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by CobraCommander

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


Yep. They've lost on that exact point several times now. If the donor can have a name put to them, a child can go for support.
edit on 2011/6/3 by Aeons because: (no reason given)




Thank you. Now we really get you.

A woman pumps herself with an anonymous spermcicle and it's STILL the man's fault.

Game set and match hotpants.


EXACTLY!!!!

Donor,key word here. Its not a father. Thats what she believes all males are.
Pathetic.


? I believe all men are donors? Because I told him his agreement won't stand up in court and why? And that that yes, even in cases of sperm donors, they can be and sometimes are held liable for child support when their children pursue them for it. That the law is consistent on this topic, has nothing to do with me.

Who knew, that knowing that law while having a vagina was a mean thing to do to a guy.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


It won't stand up in court, because child support isn't about YOU and HER. It is about your child, who is a human being in and of themselves.

Its been tried before. Its lost before. Based on that one minor detail.


Sorry,its about the money.The system doesnt care about the child. The system 9 out of 10 awards custody to the mother,because fathers make more money. The system uses the "excuse" that mothers are better at raising kids. Its about the COURTS AND THE STATES,making money,off children.


70% of men who pursue custody get it. Most men never pursue it, and therefore most of the horror stories you hear are from people who never even went through the motions to do it.

SEVENTY PERCENT.

The "excuse" is because most of the time the children are LEFT with the Mother upon relationship dissolution, proving who the parent with the most child care responsibility is. This is noted, and is used as a basis on which to make decisions.

If you don't understand what is happening, and why, you can't change it.



LIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please,know your facts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Myth:70% of men who pursue custody get it
Fact:When parents contest custody,mothers get placement 90% of the time!!!!


PDF LINK


Pathetic...........



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by CobraCommander

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


Yep. They've lost on that exact point several times now. If the donor can have a name put to them, a child can go for support.
edit on 2011/6/3 by Aeons because: (no reason given)




Thank you. Now we really get you.

A woman pumps herself with an anonymous spermcicle and it's STILL the man's fault.

Game set and match hotpants.



yeah its stupid, a donor by definition is not a father and therefore has no children. just as it is with surrogacy biology is and should be irrelevant in those cases.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


I suppose in your hate filled world,all men believe women are just "the box the kids came in",right?

PATHETIC.........................



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


good link... half of the victims of domestic violence are men...both of my exes where physical abusers. i never have been



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 



.
edit on 3-6-2011 by CobraCommander because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


NOT COOL...............
Thats in violation of TOS..............


I suggest you take it down.
edit on 3-6-2011 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


that is so absurdly ridiculous... awesome!!


not appropriate but funny
edit on 3-6-2011 by CaDreamer because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
52
<< 34  35  36    38  39  40 >>

log in

join