In article , Zimm says...

I think that most of the men here really do want to support their
children (emotionally and financially). It's the system of making that
happen that ****es them off. No arguments with that. It is very far
from perfect but I sure haven't come up with a better system.

It's the 'absolute' statements that **** ME off:

CP=Always a women
NCP=Always a man
Custody should always be 50% (my ex can't even take care of himself, let
alone a child. And he doesn't want 50% anyway.)
Having a child is solely the womans idea/ability/responsibility/problem
(takes two to tango, remember?)
CP (who is always a woman) spends all the cs money on herself and
doesn't spend a dime on the kids.
Woman is evil and should be killed and thrown off a bridge. (my personal
favorite)

====
Bob-Bob speaks for no one but Bob-Bob (and Chris). As far as 50/50 custody--it
should be the default arrangement *unless* one parent wishes to opt out and pay
50% of the cost needs of the child/children. It is really very simple. It is the
state that has made it obscene for dads and complicated for all involved.
====
====

Zimm

Pammie1 wrote:
I am really shocked at the comments that the men are making. It is really
sad that a Man would not want to provide for his own flesh and blood. I
mean coming up with a plan to make extra money so he can move overseas.
What is that? You, as a man had sex and made that child. You are
responsible reguardless of how you may feel. I am a single mom of a 31/2
year old. Child care alone cost me $588 a month. That's not including
keeping a roof over her head, food, health insurance and the list goes on.
I just don't understand how a person would want to live knowing that
he/she has left all the resposiblity on one person when it took 2 to make
the kid/s. I feel that as long as there is child support enforcement than
these men would stop having all these babies. If you don't want to pay
then you don't need to play. My vote is for anyone who is all for going
after deadbeat dads.