View Single Post
  #28  
Old June 30th 03, 06:05 PM
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Where are all the pro- "child support" (backdoor alimony) folks?


"TeacherMama" wrote in message
...
I have NEVER read anything from you that states what you want done with

the
exception of your unwavering belief that all men everywhere should be able
to walk away from the children they fathered without looking back. That

if
they don't want to be fathers, the children can starve in the gutters for
all they care, because it is not their responsibility. They do not need

to
use ANY form of birth control, because they can't get pregnant. WOMEN are
the ONLY ones responsible for birth control. MEN--real men--deserve SEX
with no responsibility for attempting to prevent another unwanted child.
And these rights for men should be written into the law, put on golden
tablets, and displayed throughout the land.

Oh, yeah, one other thing: marriage is simply 2 people living together

WITH
a piece of paper. Any decisions made by the couple are really just 2
individuals making the same deision together. Marriage isn't real.

But I don't see how that fixes the CS system we have today. How does

giving
men the right to father endless bastareds with no consequence fix the
system? Our taxes will go up to pay more welfare, but how does it fix the
system? And how does it fix the high CS awards that are paid by so many
formerly married men? Or are you saying that formerly married men can

walk
away from their children, too?

And you didn't answer my question about what your system would do if the

man
wanted the child and the woman did not. Could he force her to continue

the
pregnancy?


Impossible to force anyone to "continue" a pregnancy. That's like forcing
one to breathe. You can force abortion of a pregnancy, but not the
"continuation" of a pregnancy since that's automatic.


"Max Burke" wrote in message
...
TeacherMama scribbled:
Selfish and self centered, Max.


Naaa that would be YOU......

Only "fairness to men" is important.


No TM. Fairness to *everyone,* even shock, horror, MEN. Tell me again
why YOU dont want that.....

Women "have been supported" by the poor, long-suffering victims
called men for so long that all women deserve is to be screwed blue
by the system--just as the poor, long-suffering men-victims have for
all these years.


You sound just like a feminist, but that's not surprising since you
apparently hold so many feminist beliefs........ ROTFLOL

BECAUSE the system has been so unjust to men, ALL
women deserve to be screwed.


BS.
Strawman.
Try again.

Because THAT will fix the whole system
in Max's eyes.


What I suggest is a DAMNED sight better than what you say needs to be
done. You want WOMEN to lose their rights just so we dont have to give
the same rights to men. How STUPID is that TM?

WOMEN suffering as MEN have suffered will make it all
better.


BS.
Strawman.
Try again.

I do note that you have not presented YOUR plan for fixing
the system,


Yes I have but I doubt you have even bothered to read it at all. You're
just the usual feminist hypocrite aren't you......

except for your notion that WOMEN deserve to suffer.


BS.
Strawman.
Try again.

Oh and for once in your life why not try and post a *reasonable*
response and stop whining and bitch about your hypocritical beliefs in
being all for men.....
Be honest and tell us all what you REALLY think.......
Not that I'll hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

At least I have the satisfaction of showing ACS that yet another 'woman'
claiming to be 'for men' is nothing but a hypocrite when it comes down
to what you really believe about being 'for men'.....

The wage-earner can survive on fast food, and will not die from a
dirty house.


ROTFLOL
What about when they have the kids 50% of the time? Are you REALLY
suggesting that the kids survive on fast food while in the wage
earners custody, but when in the SAH's custody the wage earner pay
the SAH just so the kids DONT have to survive on fast food in a
dirty house????


What you're really saying here is that the wage earner deserves
nothing for their chosen sacrifices made during the marriage.
As I said your hypocrisy is clearly evident when you claim to support
men and the way they are treated by the 'system' you claim to be
opposed to...
At the very least you probably haven't even thought about this
'situation' or more likely dont consider it a 'situation' at all so
there is no need for the wage earner to be considered at all.....


The SAH will have a very difficult time finding work at
a survival level after a dozen years out of the job market, let
alone providing for her children 50% of the time.


That's the result of THEIR CHOICE to be an SAH and their failure to
keep up their job skills while still married. And before you start
whining and bitching that both made that decision, both also made
the decision about who would be the wage earner, therefore if there
is a need for compensation for the consequences of those *mutual
choices* then it should apply to both parties.....


So, Max, in order that I can fully understand your position on these
issues, tell me what you think the system should be like.


That's simple. Make the system as legally and morally right to men
and their parental choices as it is for women.


Start from
scratch--don't patch up today's system by giving men "as many
rights" as women, because we know darn well that will not work.


There you go again, saying that giving men the same legal and moral
rights women already have will not work.......
Why wont it work? It works for women TM. It works damned well when
they have to decide if they will or will not be a parent.
Tell me why having that choice wont work for men?
This is why I believe your claimed stance of supporting men is so
hypocritical; You refuse to accept that men having the same legal
and moral rights as women already have to choose to be a parent or
not wont work if and when men have those rights.


I think by just awarding more and more "rights" to try to balance
things out is making a bigger and bigger mess than we have now.


IOW Society has handed out enough rights WRT being a parent; Too bad
that men missed out on those rights, they'll just have to live
without them....
You haven't even thought about this at all have you; You're making it
all up as you go along to justify your knee-jerk reactions.......


At
the points where men and women's rights clash, we need to get back
to ground Zero and rewrite it!


No we DONT! We dont need to take away women's rights to avoid men
having those same rights. After all we didn't have to take away
men's rights when giving women those same rights. I have to wonder
why you think this way, and wonder how you'd really feel when YOUR
rights get taken away just so men dont get the same rights.


Because there are places where you can't
give balancing rights--such as the man wanting the woman to continue
an unwanted pregnancy.


In cases like this men need to find and make a commitment to a woman
who wants a child as much as he does. There is no need for men to
have the right to force women to continue an unwanted pregnancy at
all.
But to make it equal, when women want to give birth to the child when
she knows the man doesn't want the child, she likewise should have no
right to force him to be a father to that unwanted child. She needs
to find a man who wants that child as much as she does and be
prepared to make the long term commitment that is required.


Should the woman be forced to carry the child
because dad wants it?


Not at all. But then neither should men be required to be an
'unwilling father' when they dont want the child and women do......


The child belongs to both--should a judge be
able to intervene in a case like this?


Men should have the legal, social, and moral right to decide if
they'll be a parent or not. Women already have this legal, social,
and moral right to decide, so should men.


Or are the only "men's
rights" we are talking about the ones that keep a man from paying
CS?


No. See above.


Telling men
"If you don't want the kid, just say you don't wanna be a dad." and
telling women "you didn't create the kid alone, you have a right to
help from the dad." is only going to create a battle of "rights"--it
won't solve the problem.
So, you found a lamp on the beach, rubbed it, and out came a genie,
who says "Tell me how to fix the family court system." What would
you say, Max?


See above and below.


You didn't say a thing, Max. Not a thing. Just the same ofl "The
girls got more cookies than I did...NO FAIR!!" stuff you always say.


ROTFLOL
And your whining and bitching about the SAH not getting the same
number of 'cookies' and the wage earner after the divorce is NOTHING
like that is it......


If you REALLY want equality TM, then you'll need to realise that it
will require you to change your attitude and realise that equality
means
being EQUAL, including men having the same rights that women already
have.


What, specifically, do you want for men? No "As much as the girls
got!" Specifically!


The SAME RIGHTS women already have. Why is that so hard for you to
understand TM? I mean what EXACTLY is it that you find so difficult
about understanding men having the same legal, social, and moral
rights as women?
You appear to be so totally against men having the right to decide if
they'll be a parent or not, you're quite willing to have that very
right taken away from women (including yourself apparently) just so
men dont get that right.
So I take it when you 'rewrite' these rights, start from scratch,
you'll say women cant abort the pregnancy they dont want, or cant
keep the [potential] child they cant possibly look after without
needing welfare or CS.....
That you'll tell women that when they choose to have sex and
conceive as a result tough that was YOUR CHOICE, you now have to
live with the consequences of that choice, and women DONT get to
decide what the outcome of that conception will be, it's all down to
the law, judges,
and child care authorities that tell women what sort of parent they
will be and what their parental 'responsibilities' are......


# If the abstract rights of men will bear discussion and explanation,
then those of women, by a parity of reasoning, will not fail the same
test; Although a different opinion prevails in the minds of most women
when their rights are put to that test....

--

Replace the obvious with paradise to email me.
See Found Images at:
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke