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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Stupidity 101.. First up - Michigan
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2009/01/20/...wocky-justice/
Richard L. Davis Jabberwocky Justice 2009-01-20 "It is a far, far better thing to have a firm anchor in nonsense than to put on the troubled seas of thought." -John Kenneth Galbraith It seems almost impossible to make up a story like this one. An AP story in the Chicago Tribune claims that the state of Michigan is giving a father "a choice." Pay the medical cost of his daughter's birth or marry the girl's mother. Ahhh, fathers rights. Gary Johnson, - the father - not Rebecca Witt, - the mother - is being billed by the state of Michigan for $3,800.00 for the birth of their daughter. The Michigan Legislature passed a law five years ago that would wave the hospital costs for fathers who are willing to marry the child's mother. Johnson appears willing. However, it appears that no one in the Michigan Legislature understands or appreciates the concept of equal rights. A man and a woman have a child and only the father is expected to pay? Does that somehow seem like equal rights to the Michigan legislators? Have Michigan legislators somehow missed the equal rights battles - pun intended - of the 20th and 21st centuries? In 1971 Representative Martha W. Griffiths of Michigan - also a lawyer and a judge - presented to the U.S. House of Representatives House Joint Resolution No. 208. That boys and girls, is the equal rights amendment. When the ERA was presented to the voters of the great state of Michigan it was overwhelmingly supported by both men and women. This is one of those stories that just continues to defies logic. Jack Battles, - see above pun - apparently has no sense of equal rights, history or irony. It is Battles office that enforces paternity rulings, child support and other aspects of family law claims, "It's totally up to them." Battles says, "Until Johnson can produce a marriage license, "they have to pay." Just where does Battles get the them or they from? Unless the AP has the story wrong, it is Johnson - the father - not Witt - the mother - that is expected to pay. Johnson is a him not a them. Johnson and Witt claim that they do want to get married, however, Witt - the mother - wants the marriage to be her choice and not the choice of the state of Michigan. "I don't think anybody should tell me when to get married," said Witt. As for Johnson, he says that he respects Witt's decision. "It's a woman's dream to have the best wedding she can have," Johnson said. Perhaps there is someone in Michigan, other than Battles, who actually believes this is somehow, as this story is titled, "a fathers choice." Johnson is willing to marry Witt, however, Witt refuses. The irony here gets even better. It is generally agreed that Michigan Representative Griffiths is the person most responsible for including the prohibition of sex discrimination under Title VII in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Is it just me or is it obvious that the concepts of equal rights and sex discrimination mean little to nothing to Battles or the Michigan legislators? -------------------------------------------------------- And here's the MI story.. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...83,print.story Michigan paternity law forces man to pay for daughter's birth or marry mom to avoid $3K bill By Associated Press 6:07 AM CST, January 19, 2009 FLINT, Mich. (AP) - The state of Michigan is giving a father a choice: pay the medical cost of his daughter's birth or marry the girl's mother. Gary Johnson was billed $3,800 for the birth of his daughter JaeLyn, The Flint Journal reported in Sunday online editions. Johnson is not married to the child's mother, Rebecca Witt. The Michigan Legislature amended the state's paternity act five years ago to waive birthing costs for a father, if he married the child's mother. A year later, Witt gave birth to JaeLyn. The state paid for the hospital costs because Witt was on Medicaid at the time and is now trying to recover the money. Jack Battles, the Genesee County Friend of the Court, said the law is an incentive to maintain the sanctity of marriage. "It's totally up to them," said Battles, whose office enforces paternity rulings, child support and other aspects of family law. Until Johnson can produce a marriage license, "they have to pay." Johnson and Witt said they want to marry eventually, but Witt said she wants her marriage date to be her choice. "I don't think anybody should tell me when to get married," said Witt. "I would like to have a nice wedding, and I can wait for it." Witt and Johnson said they have been struggling since the state started coming after Johnson for the hospital costs. Johnson said he was told he would be billed $500 a month and planned to meet with a caseworker to work out a solution. "Losing just $10 hurts us," said Johnson, who makes $8 an hour at a Grand Blanc-area nursery. "We don't have a car, we don't even have an oven." Johnson said he understood the state wants to promote marriage for parents but he respects Witt's position. "It's a woman's dream to have the best wedding she can have," he said. ___ Information from: The Flint Journal, http://www.mlive.com/flintjournal |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Stupidity 101.. First up - Michigan
Oh for the love of God, when is this madness going to end?
Do we still live in 1910? "Dusty" wrote in message ... http://mensnewsdaily.com/2009/01/20/...wocky-justice/ Richard L. Davis Jabberwocky Justice 2009-01-20 "It is a far, far better thing to have a firm anchor in nonsense than to put on the troubled seas of thought." -John Kenneth Galbraith It seems almost impossible to make up a story like this one. An AP story in the Chicago Tribune claims that the state of Michigan is giving a father "a choice." Pay the medical cost of his daughter's birth or marry the girl's mother. Ahhh, fathers rights. Gary Johnson, - the father - not Rebecca Witt, - the mother - is being billed by the state of Michigan for $3,800.00 for the birth of their daughter. The Michigan Legislature passed a law five years ago that would wave the hospital costs for fathers who are willing to marry the child's mother. Johnson appears willing. However, it appears that no one in the Michigan Legislature understands or appreciates the concept of equal rights. A man and a woman have a child and only the father is expected to pay? Does that somehow seem like equal rights to the Michigan legislators? Have Michigan legislators somehow missed the equal rights battles - pun intended - of the 20th and 21st centuries? In 1971 Representative Martha W. Griffiths of Michigan - also a lawyer and a judge - presented to the U.S. House of Representatives House Joint Resolution No. 208. That boys and girls, is the equal rights amendment. When the ERA was presented to the voters of the great state of Michigan it was overwhelmingly supported by both men and women. This is one of those stories that just continues to defies logic. Jack Battles, - see above pun - apparently has no sense of equal rights, history or irony. It is Battles office that enforces paternity rulings, child support and other aspects of family law claims, "It's totally up to them." Battles says, "Until Johnson can produce a marriage license, "they have to pay." Just where does Battles get the them or they from? Unless the AP has the story wrong, it is Johnson - the father - not Witt - the mother - that is expected to pay. Johnson is a him not a them. Johnson and Witt claim that they do want to get married, however, Witt - the mother - wants the marriage to be her choice and not the choice of the state of Michigan. "I don't think anybody should tell me when to get married," said Witt. As for Johnson, he says that he respects Witt's decision. "It's a woman's dream to have the best wedding she can have," Johnson said. Perhaps there is someone in Michigan, other than Battles, who actually believes this is somehow, as this story is titled, "a fathers choice." Johnson is willing to marry Witt, however, Witt refuses. The irony here gets even better. It is generally agreed that Michigan Representative Griffiths is the person most responsible for including the prohibition of sex discrimination under Title VII in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Is it just me or is it obvious that the concepts of equal rights and sex discrimination mean little to nothing to Battles or the Michigan legislators? -------------------------------------------------------- And here's the MI story.. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...83,print.story Michigan paternity law forces man to pay for daughter's birth or marry mom to avoid $3K bill By Associated Press 6:07 AM CST, January 19, 2009 FLINT, Mich. (AP) - The state of Michigan is giving a father a choice: pay the medical cost of his daughter's birth or marry the girl's mother. Gary Johnson was billed $3,800 for the birth of his daughter JaeLyn, The Flint Journal reported in Sunday online editions. Johnson is not married to the child's mother, Rebecca Witt. The Michigan Legislature amended the state's paternity act five years ago to waive birthing costs for a father, if he married the child's mother. A year later, Witt gave birth to JaeLyn. The state paid for the hospital costs because Witt was on Medicaid at the time and is now trying to recover the money. Jack Battles, the Genesee County Friend of the Court, said the law is an incentive to maintain the sanctity of marriage. "It's totally up to them," said Battles, whose office enforces paternity rulings, child support and other aspects of family law. Until Johnson can produce a marriage license, "they have to pay." Johnson and Witt said they want to marry eventually, but Witt said she wants her marriage date to be her choice. "I don't think anybody should tell me when to get married," said Witt. "I would like to have a nice wedding, and I can wait for it." Witt and Johnson said they have been struggling since the state started coming after Johnson for the hospital costs. Johnson said he was told he would be billed $500 a month and planned to meet with a caseworker to work out a solution. "Losing just $10 hurts us," said Johnson, who makes $8 an hour at a Grand Blanc-area nursery. "We don't have a car, we don't even have an oven." Johnson said he understood the state wants to promote marriage for parents but he respects Witt's position. "It's a woman's dream to have the best wedding she can have," he said. ___ Information from: The Flint Journal, http://www.mlive.com/flintjournal |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Stupidity 101.. First up - Michigan
-- Any man that's good enough to pay child support is good enough to have custody of such child. "Dusty" wrote in message ... http://mensnewsdaily.com/2009/01/20/...wocky-justice/ Richard L. Davis Jabberwocky Justice 2009-01-20 "It is a far, far better thing to have a firm anchor in nonsense than to put on the troubled seas of thought." -John Kenneth Galbraith It seems almost impossible to make up a story like this one. An AP story in the Chicago Tribune claims that the state of Michigan is giving a father "a choice." Pay the medical cost of his daughter's birth or marry the girl's mother. Ahhh, fathers rights. Gary Johnson, - the father - not Rebecca Witt, - the mother - is being billed by the state of Michigan for $3,800.00 for the birth of their daughter. The Michigan Legislature passed a law five years ago that would wave the hospital costs for fathers who are willing to marry the child's mother. Johnson appears willing. However, it appears that no one in the Michigan Legislature understands or appreciates the concept of equal rights. A man and a woman have a child and only the father is expected to pay? Does that somehow seem like equal rights to the Michigan legislators? Have Michigan legislators somehow missed the equal rights battles - pun intended - of the 20th and 21st centuries? In 1971 Representative Martha W. Griffiths of Michigan - also a lawyer and a judge - presented to the U.S. House of Representatives House Joint Resolution No. 208. That boys and girls, is the equal rights amendment. When the ERA was presented to the voters of the great state of Michigan it was overwhelmingly supported by both men and women. This is one of those stories that just continues to defies logic. Jack Battles, - see above pun - apparently has no sense of equal rights, history or irony. It is Battles office that enforces paternity rulings, child support and other aspects of family law claims, "It's totally up to them." Battles says, "Until Johnson can produce a marriage license, "they have to pay." Just where does Battles get the them or they from? Unless the AP has the story wrong, it is Johnson - the father - not Witt - the mother - that is expected to pay. Johnson is a him not a them. Johnson and Witt claim that they do want to get married, however, Witt - the mother - wants the marriage to be her choice and not the choice of the state of Michigan. "I don't think anybody should tell me when to get married," said Witt. As for Johnson, he says that he respects Witt's decision. "It's a woman's dream to have the best wedding she can have," Johnson said. Perhaps there is someone in Michigan, other than Battles, who actually believes this is somehow, as this story is titled, "a fathers choice." Johnson is willing to marry Witt, however, Witt refuses. The irony here gets even better. It is generally agreed that Michigan Representative Griffiths is the person most responsible for including the prohibition of sex discrimination under Title VII in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Is it just me or is it obvious that the concepts of equal rights and sex discrimination mean little to nothing to Battles or the Michigan legislators? -------------------------------------------------------- And here's the MI story.. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...83,print.story Michigan paternity law forces man to pay for daughter's birth or marry mom to avoid $3K bill By Associated Press 6:07 AM CST, January 19, 2009 FLINT, Mich. (AP) - The state of Michigan is giving a father a choice: pay the medical cost of his daughter's birth or marry the girl's mother. Gary Johnson was billed $3,800 for the birth of his daughter JaeLyn, The Flint Journal reported in Sunday online editions. Johnson is not married to the child's mother, Rebecca Witt. The Michigan Legislature amended the state's paternity act five years ago to waive birthing costs for a father, if he married the child's mother. A year later, Witt gave birth to JaeLyn. The state paid for the hospital costs because Witt was on Medicaid at the time and is now trying to recover the money. Jack Battles, the Genesee County Friend of the Court, said the law is an incentive to maintain the sanctity of marriage. "It's totally up to them," said Battles, whose office enforces paternity rulings, child support and other aspects of family law. Until Johnson can produce a marriage license, "they have to pay." Johnson and Witt said they want to marry eventually, but Witt said she wants her marriage date to be her choice. "I don't think anybody should tell me when to get married," said Witt. "I would like to have a nice wedding, and I can wait for it." Witt and Johnson said they have been struggling since the state started coming after Johnson for the hospital costs. Johnson said he was told he would be billed $500 a month and planned to meet with a caseworker to work out a solution. "Losing just $10 hurts us," said Johnson, who makes $8 an hour at a Grand Blanc-area nursery. "We don't have a car, we don't even have an oven." Johnson said he understood the state wants to promote marriage for parents but he respects Witt's position. "It's a woman's dream to have the best wedding she can have," he said. Yeah, he says that now. Let's see if he's still saying it when she sues him for "child support". ___ Information from: The Flint Journal, http://www.mlive.com/flintjournal |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Left-Wing Stupidity In The Educational System -- Eliminating Competition | R. Steve Walz | Solutions | 0 | October 7th 07 08:14 PM |
Stupidity | 0:-> | General | 1 | January 19th 07 08:57 PM |
Stupidity | 0:-> | Foster Parents | 1 | January 19th 07 08:57 PM |
Stupidity | 0:-> | General | 0 | January 19th 07 01:12 AM |
Stupidity vs. Hydrogen | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 9 | August 6th 04 03:00 PM |