NV: Father sent to prison for not paying child support

"abdd" wrote in

All togther now, what is it called when a person
is forced to do specific work to pay off a debt...why it's
INDENTURED SURVITUDE!

Yes, and they'll call it anything else to get around the original intent and
true spirit that the founding fathers who wrote the constitution.

In short, the Constitution was meant as an instrument to tell those people
that want to control the rest of us to just **** off and die.
We are a free people, no one will oppress us or have we forgotten that bit?

Nah, indentured servitude is what the new bankruptcy bill provides.
:-) Paying for the upkeep of your kids is just child support.

"Hyerdahl" wrote in message
oups.com...

Kenneth S. wrote:
"Hyerdahl" wrote in message
oups.com...

Dusty wrote:

Oh yeah, this makes a ****in' ****-load of sense! 24-60 months - in
the
freakin' State Pen??? For failure to pay a debt?!?!? WTF, over?!?

Oh, this story just screams of a Federal law suit on it's way.

And upon what would you base the grounds? Sending folks to jail
enables them time to think about what they're doing to themselves and
their children. More folks should be sent to jail and when they're
ready to take steps to pay support, they can leave.

It's very likely that "Hyerdahl" is motivated by nothing more than a
desire to provoke men and to draw some attention to herself. Oh well,
I'll
rise to the bait.

In the first place, the crime for which these "folks" -- almost
invariably men -- are sent to jail is not doing anything to themselves or
to
their children. Their crime is not paying substantial amounts of money
to
the mothers of their children. And, secondly, as the research data show,
these men who don't pay are usually impoverished themselves.

You don't get to decide which men are "impoverished" and which men are
cheating the system....unless you're a family court judge. They have
to look at what the man has, what he did prior to the divorce, what he
is now doing, and other issues. A man who was a brain surgeon prior to
divorce, selling ice cream from a cart now, is likely to raise judicial
suspicion. :-)

My sister earned $100,000+ as a computer programmer until her job was
shipped overseas, along with the jobs of many, many others in her area.
Available jobs were snapped up, and many of these high earners were left to
seek lower paying employment--quite a bit lower paying, as it turns out. Do
you really think that it would be fair for a judge to say "You used to make
110K as a computer programmer, and that is the amount I'm basing your CS
payment on. You did it once, so you can do it again." Would that be right?
Because that is being done every day in family court. Downward
modifications are not as simple to get as one might think.

"abdd" wrote in

Viewing this at its core, it is because it is the nature of humans to
not hold people accountable for inappropriate actions that at the
time they were performed were politically correct. For example,
how many individual Nazi death camp guards were forced to
pay for their crimes. Judges know that were (hopefully) the
current political oppression of men to be halted, they will not
be worse for wear in any way for their roll as oppressors.

It was not so long ago in America that you could legally burn people to
death because it was politically correct at the time.
It was not so long ago in America that you could own another human being
because it was politically correct at the time.

Are we so shocked that in America it's Ok to incarcerate people because we
have criminalized and devalued those citizens who are less fortunate than
the class of people that define the standard of living for everyone in the
country to live by?

Maybe one day when we all wake up and realize what is really going on, I can
write this too:
It was not so long ago in America that you could incarcerate another human
being because it is politically correct!

Why not pull down the Statue of Liberty, it doesn't stand for much anymore?

"DB" wrote in message
. com...

"abdd" wrote in

Viewing this at its core, it is because it is the nature of humans to
not hold people accountable for inappropriate actions that at the
time they were performed were politically correct. For example,
how many individual Nazi death camp guards were forced to
pay for their crimes. Judges know that were (hopefully) the
current political oppression of men to be halted, they will not
be worse for wear in any way for their roll as oppressors.

It was not so long ago in America that you could legally burn people to
death because it was politically correct at the time.

IT NEVER HAPPENED.



It was not so long ago in America that you could own another human being
because it was politically correct at the time.

IT WAS NEVER POLITICALLY CORRECT. IT WAS JUST THAT THE CENTRAL GOV'T WAS
WEAK AND WOULD NEVER HAVE BE ABLE TO ENFORCE LAWS IN THE SEPERATE STATES.



Are we so shocked that in America it's Ok to incarcerate people because we
have criminalized and devalued those citizens who are less fortunate than
the class of people that define the standard of living for everyone in the
country to live by?

Maybe one day when we all wake up and realize what is really going on, I
can write this too:
It was not so long ago in America that you could incarcerate another human
being because it is politically correct!

Why not pull down the Statue of Liberty, it doesn't stand for much
anymore?

Erm, what did you think it's there for? It's to mark the 100th anniversary
of the US that's all. That silly poem by some wacky female was tacked on
later lol

"Avenger" wrote in

Erm, what did you think it's there for? It's to mark the 100th anniversary
of the US that's all. That silly poem by some wacky female was tacked on
later lol

Yes, and the Constitution is some silly script, written by wacky men that
has become another useless landmark, something to look at in a museum!
The Government can do what ever the hell they like, as long as they play
with the words to suite their purpose.