A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.support » Child Support
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Stupidity 101.. First up - Michigan



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 21st 09, 06:12 AM posted to alt.child-support
Dusty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 340
Default 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  
Old January 21st 09, 08:29 AM posted to alt.child-support,alt.politics.economics,alt.politics.usa.constitution
DB[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 266
Default 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  
Old January 22nd 09, 02:40 AM posted to alt.child-support
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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 09:57 PM
Stupidity 0:-> Foster Parents 1 January 19th 07 09:57 PM
Stupidity 0:-> General 0 January 19th 07 02:12 AM
Stupidity vs. Hydrogen Todd Gastaldo Pregnancy 9 August 6th 04 03:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.