If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#831
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeats
trifold wrote:
Bob wrote in message Yes, that is exactly what there has been for the past century. Millions spent on BC research for women but NOTHING spent on BC research for men. That's not true. Research into the male pill has been ongoing for decades. A major problem has been that men won't put up with the side effects caused by the horomonal manipulations resulting when sperm production is suppressed. Women, of course, face versions of these complications when they take the Pill. BTW, what makes you think research into bc for women hasn't been importantly motivated by the self interest of men? The Pill launched a virtual sexual revolution, making sex easier for everyone (and men have been major beneficiaries--ask anyone lucky enough to be sexually active before AIDS and other SIDS put the damper on things and forced everyone back to rubbers). Anyway, for info. on male bc research check out: http://www.vasectomy-information.com...lternative.htm trifold www.vasectomy-information.com Your link was to a list of reports on BC research for men. Here is from one of them, the FOX news article: "Scientists have known for 50 years that it should be possible to fiddle with a man's hormones and make him sterile for a while. But that hasn't produced a marketed product yet for lots of reasons, like sporadic research funding, cultural concerns and limited interest by drug companies, a recent report from the Institute of Medicine noted." IOW: 1. Scientists have known for 50 years that male contraceptives are possible, but 2. Little or no funding, and no constant funding compared to massive funding for women's products, 3. Feminist opposition to development of alternatives for men who are now subject to women's exclusive power to control fertility, and 4. Lack of interest by drug companies and government in providing equal products for men. Thanks for providing a link that proves exactly what Bob said previously. Bob -- When did we divide into sides? "As president, I will put American government and our legal system back on the side of women." John Kerry, misandrist Democratic candidate for President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/ [Bob does not advocate any illegal, seditious, or immoral acts. All posts are for discussion, rhetorical, or humorous purposes only.] |
#832
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeats
trifold wrote:
Bob wrote in message Yes, that is exactly what there has been for the past century. Millions spent on BC research for women but NOTHING spent on BC research for men. That's not true. Research into the male pill has been ongoing for decades. A major problem has been that men won't put up with the side effects caused by the horomonal manipulations resulting when sperm production is suppressed. Women, of course, face versions of these complications when they take the Pill. BTW, what makes you think research into bc for women hasn't been importantly motivated by the self interest of men? The Pill launched a virtual sexual revolution, making sex easier for everyone (and men have been major beneficiaries--ask anyone lucky enough to be sexually active before AIDS and other SIDS put the damper on things and forced everyone back to rubbers). Anyway, for info. on male bc research check out: http://www.vasectomy-information.com...lternative.htm trifold www.vasectomy-information.com Your link was to a list of reports on BC research for men. Here is from one of them, the FOX news article: "Scientists have known for 50 years that it should be possible to fiddle with a man's hormones and make him sterile for a while. But that hasn't produced a marketed product yet for lots of reasons, like sporadic research funding, cultural concerns and limited interest by drug companies, a recent report from the Institute of Medicine noted." IOW: 1. Scientists have known for 50 years that male contraceptives are possible, but 2. Little or no funding, and no constant funding compared to massive funding for women's products, 3. Feminist opposition to development of alternatives for men who are now subject to women's exclusive power to control fertility, and 4. Lack of interest by drug companies and government in providing equal products for men. Thanks for providing a link that proves exactly what Bob said previously. Bob -- When did we divide into sides? "As president, I will put American government and our legal system back on the side of women." John Kerry, misandrist Democratic candidate for President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/ [Bob does not advocate any illegal, seditious, or immoral acts. All posts are for discussion, rhetorical, or humorous purposes only.] |
#833
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeats
And your child getting to know her father? Isn't that important to you?
-------------- Teachrmama that's very important to me. Do you have any ideas how I can get the dead beat to do that? I have asked him over and over. He say okay but never calls or come. It's out of my hands. I have done my part. Pammie |
#834
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeats
And your child getting to know her father? Isn't that important to you?
-------------- Teachrmama that's very important to me. Do you have any ideas how I can get the dead beat to do that? I have asked him over and over. He say okay but never calls or come. It's out of my hands. I have done my part. Pammie |
#835
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeats
And your child getting to know her father? Isn't that important to you?
-------------- Teachrmama that's very important to me. Do you have any ideas how I can get the dead beat to do that? I have asked him over and over. He say okay but never calls or come. It's out of my hands. I have done my part. Pammie |
#836
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeats
I choose Child support. He can love his child, I don't give a darn if
he likes me or the government. He can get over it or jump off a Bridge. If you don't know where a good bridge is I can give you directions. And your child getting to know her father? Isn't that important to you? As long as she gets the checks! short ------------- Please don't forget the check. The kid need to eat. Pammie |
#837
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeats
I choose Child support. He can love his child, I don't give a darn if
he likes me or the government. He can get over it or jump off a Bridge. If you don't know where a good bridge is I can give you directions. And your child getting to know her father? Isn't that important to you? As long as she gets the checks! short ------------- Please don't forget the check. The kid need to eat. Pammie |
#838
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeats
I choose Child support. He can love his child, I don't give a darn if
he likes me or the government. He can get over it or jump off a Bridge. If you don't know where a good bridge is I can give you directions. And your child getting to know her father? Isn't that important to you? As long as she gets the checks! short ------------- Please don't forget the check. The kid need to eat. Pammie |
#839
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeats
You know, they can garnish ANY person's check, any time. Whether they do
or not doesn't mean you're being forced to pay. However, I'm a deadbeat. If they weren't taking it out of my check, I wouldn't pay at all. The ex hasn't let me see my son, ever. Not one time. Hell, I don't even get pictures or know where they live. So there is NO WAY IN HELL that I would pay if I wasn't forced to. It still amazes me that there is FREE enforcement for payment, but nothing set up to enforce visitation. short ----------- As long as you are paying in some form or fashion I don't really consider you a dead beat. Now if you jumped from job to job or state to state trying to avoid payinging, then yeah. You can find out where your child is. If they have your EX info to send her payments, then they have her current address. You just have to call or write and ask. If that doesn't work then you need to file for visitation rights. You don't have to have her address. They already have that info at the child support office. They will mail her court appearance information. Pammie |
#840
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeats
You know, they can garnish ANY person's check, any time. Whether they do
or not doesn't mean you're being forced to pay. However, I'm a deadbeat. If they weren't taking it out of my check, I wouldn't pay at all. The ex hasn't let me see my son, ever. Not one time. Hell, I don't even get pictures or know where they live. So there is NO WAY IN HELL that I would pay if I wasn't forced to. It still amazes me that there is FREE enforcement for payment, but nothing set up to enforce visitation. short ----------- As long as you are paying in some form or fashion I don't really consider you a dead beat. Now if you jumped from job to job or state to state trying to avoid payinging, then yeah. You can find out where your child is. If they have your EX info to send her payments, then they have her current address. You just have to call or write and ask. If that doesn't work then you need to file for visitation rights. You don't have to have her address. They already have that info at the child support office. They will mail her court appearance information. Pammie |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Deadbeats | frankjones | Child Support | 57 | April 18th 04 01:05 AM |
Cox Strategy Targets Child Support Deadbeats | Fighting for kids | Child Support | 75 | November 14th 03 09:07 AM |
Deadbeats here to stay | Fighting for kids | Child Support | 0 | November 8th 03 01:50 AM |