--
Any man that's good enough to pay child support is good enough to have
custody of such child.
"Chris" wrote in message news:...


--
Any man that's good enough to pay child support is good enough to have
custody of such child.
wrote in message
...
On Feb 10, 2:38 pm, "Chris" wrote:
--
Any man that's good enough to pay child support is good enough to have
custody of such wrote in message

...
On Feb 8, 3:55 pm, "Chris" wrote:





--
Any man that's good enough to pay child support is good enough to have
custody of such child."Phil" wrote in message

news

Oh, they'll pay for it, they just won't get any benefit from it. It
will
remain both a part of child support guidelines and as an add-on to
the
final bill dads must pay.
He also got smokers with this one; smokers are being targeted to pay
excessive taxes that benefit only non-smokers.
Phil #3

Something to the tune of 24 million new smokers will be required to
foot
the
bill. Just what the government people are hoping for, because they will
make
more money. Through the years, they have been consistently increasing
their
profits in the tobacco business. They know a good thing when they see
it!

"Chris" wrote in message
...

--
Any man that's good enough to pay child support is good enough to
have
custody of such child.

Now that President Obama signed the child healthcare bill, everyone
who
pays "child support" will no longer have to also pay additional for
health insurance. Isn't that wonderful!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What they will do is instead of making it be medical support, they'll
just add that amount to child support and increase it...period.
Anyway, where is the link to this?

****************

http://www.democrats.org/a/2009/02/p...nt_obama_4.php "But this bill
is
only a first step." Indeed it is! Stay tuned........

*****************

I need this...We have a horrible
situation with our kiddo, where it costs us LESS money to get
insurance with a 722USD deductible for our kiddo, because if we have a
different plan, since we have to pay insurance for SD, the cost is
MORE than the deductible of 722 per year just for her...And because
our son is special needs, yes, we have ALREADY met the 722USD
deductible for him in just ONE MONTH of simple speech therapy, not
counting any other medical bills. By the way, no complaining about me
not wanting to provide insurance for the witch's daughter...you see,
the witch has insurance through her work for her, her husband and her
2 other children...adding SD didn't cost her a dime, since her
insurance cost is the same for employee+family, whether it is ONE
spouse or a spouse and 82 children...And no, the witch mandated he
carry insurance on SD, the courts make him carry it, but in the last
two years she has NOT used it ONCE because she does NOT want to have
to pay any of the deductible...so she uses her insurance...

*********************

Just another example of the "child support" system being NOTHING more
than
extorting money from men.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Chris, thanks for the link, but I don't see where it specifically says
that if the courts have you paying CS AND insurance, that you no
longer have to pay insurance and that CS is part of paying for it...In
our case the CP has insurance through her work, so does the NCP, but I
don't see where the NCP would no longer be required to pay for that
insurance for his daughter...I might be a bit out of it...sorry...

**************

You're not out of it at all. As you can see, my point has been made.
Although it does not specifically state that NCPs would no longer have to
pay, that is most definitely what it implies. The children of CPs are,
afterall, ......... CHILDREN! Thus, they are included in the group of
"children" covered by said insurance. Now if you apply liberal "logic" to
their law, then the children of NCPs quickly become exempt. It certainly
doesn't make sense to pay two insurance policies for one coverage, does
it?