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: 49
52
<< 46  47  48    50  51  52 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
Because so many of you hate the thought of paying child support...but you know you have to.....answer my question earlier......what amount is fair with the two examples I have shown.


In other words, how much should I be forced to pay for the result of someone else's unilateral choice?

Nothing of course.

I happily support my kids voluntarily though.




posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


Yes,hes asking for some kinda of help.Hes struggling.His BACK is against the wall.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Yes, that's why I put that up there. So that one can see a spectrum. The rebuttal's points are good, except in that it assigns bias in cases of uncontested custody arrangements, which makes no sense.

You can read further. You'll find that in cases of contested custody (the minority) that in subsequent cases, the percentages of males receiving custody goes up to more than 50%. Upto 70% when appealed. Upto 90% when they go to the Supremes.

Of the cases you are citing, her rebuttal centers around the fact that men don't have primary physical custody most of the time. They didn't ask for it, didn't seek it, and that is being presented as a case of bias. It may be. It may be that guys are biased against themselves in cases of custody.

However, your type of custody impacts your child support.

You are arguing using statistics that are out of context, intentionally.

I have presented you both the case and the rebuttal. If men are freely not contesting that their children's mother is the primary care giver, and therefore the primary legal guardian, that's their choice.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by SevenBeans
 


So when a husband/wife team happily has 2-3 children then separated after 10 years, suddenly it's her fault and she should be 100% responsible for their children?

Or are you talking about a loser shanking a harlot and a child is concieved?

READ THIS: BOTH parents are equally responsible for their child. If you don't want to concieve a child.....keep your junk in your pants!



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by bluemirage5
Because so many of you hate the thought of paying child support...but you know you have to.....answer my question earlier......what amount is fair with the two examples I have shown.


In other words, how much should I be forced to pay for the result of someone else's unilateral choice?

Nothing of course.

I happily support my kids voluntarily though.


Yes, biology affords women a slightly longer window in which to make a decision before the legal personhood of the future-person kicks in.

Once a child exists, it has rights of its own. That's where you kick in.

Biology - I wish I could reach the top shelf without hopping on the counter. You wish that you could have some control over the cell division proceeding in someone's stomach. Alas, it isn't to be.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   
first i have to say, Thank God I havent had children yet! makes me so glad that i am smart enough (i hope) to wait and pick the rightr one!. however since i cant really comment on this in good faith as i have never been here i would like to ask another question. im not sure how vehicle insurance works in your state but here in Louisiana ( a VERY backward state) when you get insurance u have to state if you are male or female. if you are male your insurnace is almost DOUBLE that of a female. however it is statistically proven that women wreck more the 3X more than men. i can personally vouch for this as i am a police officer and i work these everyday. im sure that a lot of it is because women tend to driver more than men since most men are at a work place and not driving. sure i understand that. however my insurance is double what a female is with the same driving record and time behind the wheel as I. hwo si that fair? are you saying that because i have a penis i am going to drive worse? i mean i would like to say its huge but it in no way gets in the way of my driving lol however i dont think they would find that funny lol. its just one of the many things that never caught up with real time. women fought and raised hell to get equal rights and placement in the work place. however as soon as something goes against them they want to scream they are a woman and they need help. im sorry but im telling you know that if we are on a sinking boat, i will take as many kids as i can. as far as the women, you wanted equal rights then i suggest you run faster than me for that boat!



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
So when a husband/wife team happily has 2-3 children then separated after 10 years, suddenly it's her fault and she should be 100% responsible for their children?


It was her unilateral choice to create the children.

That's how you all wanted it right?

Why should someone else be held responsible under threat of jail for the results of her unilateral choices?

Does "My body, my choice, our responsibility" make sense to you?


Originally posted by bluemirage5
READ THIS: BOTH parents are equally responsible for their child. If you don't want to concieve a child.....keep your junk in your pants!


How so?

Conception isn't a child, it's just a lump of tissue that a woman can unilaterally throw in the garbage for absolutely any reason.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


EQUALITY. equal in EVERY ASPECT OF THE CHILD. From love,to clothing to housing. 50%,without the courts dictating ANYTHING. If one parent cant give equal,then that parent doesnt get hammered for it,looked down on because of it.If said parent doesnt want to be in the kids life,then so be it. Good riddance.Who wants trash in a kids life?? The other parent has do it all. That simple.I dont have the State or the Government giving me anything.I dont have my EX's giving me anything either.I do it on my own.My problem.Not yours,or society's.I had the children.Its my responsibility,because I love them.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


EQUALITY. equal in EVERY ASPECT OF THE CHILD. From love,to clothing to housing. 50%,without the courts dictating ANYTHING. If one parent cant give equal,then that parent doesnt get hammered for it,looked down on because of it.If said parent doesnt want to be in the kids life,then so be it. Good riddance.Who wants trash in a kids life?? The other parent has do it all. That simple.I dont have the State or the Government giving me anything.I dont have my EX's giving me anything either.I do it on my own.My problem.Not yours,or society's.I had the children.Its my responsibility,because I love them.


That's your choice.

Personally, I'd advocate like pitbull for my children unless there was a safety concern.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


How so? He alleges he is a professional man on very good income; he has 3 children between two different women, takes months to save up just for one pressie for the kids, he often goes without food & clothing, can't afford his own apartment and lives in shared accomodation. He is taxed 30% of his gross wages for child support.

Do you see something wrong with this picture?

Allow me to repeat. He says he is a PROFESSIONAL man on VERY GOOD INCOME.....pays 30% in child support for all 3 of his children.

Keep in mind, on average across the board....women tend to receive approx 20% less in income than men do.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
Yes, biology affords women a slightly longer window in which to make a decision before the legal personhood of the future-person kicks in.

Once a child exists, it has rights of its own.


Such as? Surely not financial support from two parents... no such right exists.


Originally posted by Aeons
Biology - I wish I could reach the top shelf without hopping on the counter. You wish that you could have some control over the cell division proceeding in someone's stomach. Alas, it isn't to be.


Nope, just don't force me to pay for the results of someone else's unilateral choices.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


One study.One BIASED study at that,not representing ALL the Child Support cases in the US.You do know this?But you cited it as fact yesterday,without the rebuttals. The System is broken.Fact. You have never went through a custody hearing for your children. Fact. You know nothing about the corrupt system,except your biased opinions. Fact. Did I miss anything? You also cited sources that couldnt even get their facts straight about Judges. Are they Biased or not? You Failed to answer that question also. And if Judges are BIASED,how can a man fight a currupt sytem,if the very person whos going to JUDGE him,might be compromised? Sorry your response fails on so many levels.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by SevenBeans
 


So when a husband/wife team happily has 2-3 children then separated after 10 years, suddenly it's her fault and she should be 100% responsible for their children?

Or are you talking about a loser shanking a harlot and a child is concieved?

READ THIS: BOTH parents are equally responsible for their child. If you don't want to concieve a child.....keep your junk in your pants!


You are sooooooo far off it's not even funny. As for your other question about how much I think it should cost to raise a child? I'm not going to quantify that because it's relative. I will tell you this. If someone can go to the super market with 300 coupons, buy $1000 worth of food, get it all FREE plus have the grocery store pay YOU $8 (this is for real) then I don't see you're stupid point.

Now you answer me this. Who is responsible for the child if the woman purposely gets pregnant and lies to the man that she can't even have kids? Your logic is so flawed
edit on 3-6-2011 by FlySolo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by SevenBeans
 


If that doesn't exist....please explain to me this ENTIRE thread, and all the laws about custody, child support, taxation, divorce law, human rights, rights of the child, and you know....the entire problem all these guys have to begin with.

Apparently, the law doesn't agree with your opinion. Consistently. Overwhelmingly. Deeply. Broadly.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 





Yes, biology affords women a slightly longer window in which to make a decision before the legal personhood of the future-person kicks in.

Once a child exists, it has rights of its own. That's where you kick in.

Biology - I wish I could reach the top shelf without hopping on the counter. You wish that you could have some control over the cell division proceeding in someone's stomach. Alas, it isn't to be.


But why should a man that did not want the baby pay for it, then?

If the woman wants the child, but man does not, she should pay for the child, and not the man. It is her unilateral choice to have the child. With choices comes responsibility.

It is that simple.

reply to post by bluemirage5
 


I will make it simple for you. If the man does not want the child, but only woman does, then when he declares so up to abortion limit, he should be freed from child support payments - so called male abortion. Talking about married couples with already born children is irrelevant, and shows that you do not understand the point of discussion.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
If that doesn't exist....please explain to me this ENTIRE thread, and all the laws about custody, child support, taxation, divorce law, human rights, rights of the child, and you know....the entire problem all these guys have to begin with.


Many parents don't work and therefore don't provide financial support (my wife for one). I suppose my children's rights are being violated! Not really... because no such right exists lol.

You generally only get threatened with jail for not providing financial support if you're a non-custodial parent.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by sonnny1
 


How so? He alleges he is a professional man on very good income; he has 3 children between two different women, takes months to save up just for one pressie for the kids, he often goes without food & clothing, can't afford his own apartment and lives in shared accomodation. He is taxed 30% of his gross wages for child support.

Do you see something wrong with this picture?

Allow me to repeat. He says he is a PROFESSIONAL man on VERY GOOD INCOME.....pays 30% in child support for all 3 of his children.

Keep in mind, on average across the board....women tend to receive approx 20% less in income than men do.


But you CHERRY PICKED HIS POST!!!!!!!!

I happily pay support for all of my beautiful children.
I often go without food, I can not afford it. I often go without clothing I need, I can no longer afford it. I can not even afford to rent a 1 bedroom apartment in this, my town. I am forced to live with room mates.

You purposely didnt add this to it also. How could I NOT think you are biased,with your response? No compassion? For a fellow human being? Would it be different if the OP's piece would be titled," Women and Child Support?" I wonder..................................



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Ok....kids don't need trash in their life if the father want to sherk his responsibilties. You won me on that. Let's just hope to God the kids have a level headed mother who loves them dearly and just gets on with it. Like I do.

HOWEVER......let the father run like the coward he is......but he WILL be financially responsible to help out his kids by paying child support. If a mother does'nt fight for her right to receive child support for her children, she's going to regret it somewhere down the track. Why? Because many fathers who don't pay child support usually find greener pastures.

Non-custodial parents do have a better chance of picking themselves up financially while custodial parents are unable to break out of poverty and debt.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by Aeons
 


One study.One BIASED study at that,not representing ALL the Child Support cases in the US.You do know this?But you cited it as fact yesterday,without the rebuttals. The System is broken.Fact. You have never went through a custody hearing for your children. Fact. You know nothing about the corrupt system,except your biased opinions. Fact. Did I miss anything? You also cited sources that couldnt even get their facts straight about Judges. Are they Biased or not? You Failed to answer that question also. And if Judges are BIASED,how can a man fight a currupt sytem,if the very person whos going to JUDGE him,might be compromised? Sorry your response fails on so many levels.


Peer reviewed legal opinions and statistics are also not good enough. Good stuff.

If you'd like more sources, you can take those that I cited and look through their references for more data and opinions on the subjects.

But I think that we both know at this point that you got what you wanted, and still want to claim you are oppressed by.....something. You are taking your personal story, and ranking it as more powerful than statistics, studies, peer reviewed judicial studies. The fact is that no data is good enough for you unless it already agrees with you. That you are a victim of a system in which you apparently won custody.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Here's a thesis from Canada citing Canadian and US cases, thesis, and statistics.

www.collectionscanada.gc.ca...

I particularly enjoyed some of chapter three, showing that men advocating on behalf of men's lobby groups tend to ignore statistics.



new topics




 
52
<< 46  47  48    50  51  52 >>

log in

join