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
|
|||
|
|||
Child support - who needs it?
My Own Doppelganger ) writes:
Well, it's like whatever is best for the kids. However, I do have a question... Why would a NCP NOT provide some type of child support? I mean, aren't the kids theirs also? So ? In the case of children either not of marriages, or the hundreds of thousands of men being garnished from, who are *not* the bio- fathers of the children they're being stolen from to pay some lying woman, there was NO express prior agreement to become a parent offered the guy. Further, in all such cases, the *woman is the sole chooser* as to whether or not there will BE a child. " Her body, her choice... HER RESPONSIBILITY. " What part of women being *as responsible for their own choices as their choices are*, is unclear to you ? On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:20:17 -0600, Anti-Sheila J smcneillAToddpostDOTcom wrote: If the court would award me custody of my two daughters (ages 8 and 5), I would be willing to waive child support AND make certain I exceeded all visitation requirements for their mother. I would make this deal without any hesitation or reservation, whatsoever. I was wondering if anyone here feels the same. The *silence* from women is palpable. Nor do I mean the very few women here on Usenet, but the *millions* of greedy women going to kourts, demanding loot for the begging bowls *they unilaterally chose to whelp*. If sex is not the determinant time of parental choice for a woman ( The existance of abortion, RU-486, legal adopting out, and legal woman-only abandon laws shows that it *isn't* ), then its SEXIST to claim that it must be, for *men, only*... Andre -- " I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. " The Man Prayer, Red Green. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Child support - who needs it?
So-called "child support" is actually money that fathers pay to mothers.
There's no guarantee that the mothers will spend all -- or any -- of the money they get on the children. Furthermore, any time fathers suggest that there should be accountability for "child support," the proposal is fought tooth and nail by representatives of mothers. So from a father's perspective, "child support" is money that they have to pay the mothers of their children. It's not money that they are paying to support their children. Furthermore, in the vast majority of cases, it's the mothers, not the fathers, who decided that the single parent household should exist in the first place. Groucho Marx said that paying alimony was like feeding hay to a dead horse. That's the way most fathers feel about so-called "child support." They signed on to be fathers to their children, within a two-parent family. They DIDN'T sign on to be forced to pay money to the women who expelled them from their families, and who hold the power to put them in jail if they don't pay. Does that make the situation clear? (I spent more than ten years paying large amounts of "child support" to my ex-wife, and one of the greatest days of my life was when I was able to write her a letter saying that, since the children were by then grown, she would no longer be on my payroll. Since then, I gladly support directly my now adult children.) "Andre Lieven" wrote in message ... My Own Doppelganger ) writes: Well, it's like whatever is best for the kids. However, I do have a question... Why would a NCP NOT provide some type of child support? I mean, aren't the kids theirs also? So ? In the case of children either not of marriages, or the hundreds of thousands of men being garnished from, who are *not* the bio- fathers of the children they're being stolen from to pay some lying woman, there was NO express prior agreement to become a parent offered the guy. Further, in all such cases, the *woman is the sole chooser* as to whether or not there will BE a child. " Her body, her choice... HER RESPONSIBILITY. " What part of women being *as responsible for their own choices as their choices are*, is unclear to you ? On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:20:17 -0600, Anti-Sheila J smcneillAToddpostDOTcom wrote: If the court would award me custody of my two daughters (ages 8 and 5), I would be willing to waive child support AND make certain I exceeded all visitation requirements for their mother. I would make this deal without any hesitation or reservation, whatsoever. I was wondering if anyone here feels the same. The *silence* from women is palpable. Nor do I mean the very few women here on Usenet, but the *millions* of greedy women going to kourts, demanding loot for the begging bowls *they unilaterally chose to whelp*. If sex is not the determinant time of parental choice for a woman ( The existance of abortion, RU-486, legal adopting out, and legal woman-only abandon laws shows that it *isn't* ), then its SEXIST to claim that it must be, for *men, only*... Andre -- " I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. " The Man Prayer, Red Green. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Child support - who needs it?
So-called "child support" is actually money that fathers pay to mothers.
There's no guarantee that the mothers will spend all -- or any -- of the money they get on the children. Furthermore, any time fathers suggest that there should be accountability for "child support," the proposal is fought tooth and nail by representatives of mothers. So from a father's perspective, "child support" is money that they have to pay the mothers of their children. It's not money that they are paying to support their children. Furthermore, in the vast majority of cases, it's the mothers, not the fathers, who decided that the single parent household should exist in the first place. Groucho Marx said that paying alimony was like feeding hay to a dead horse. That's the way most fathers feel about so-called "child support." They signed on to be fathers to their children, within a two-parent family. They DIDN'T sign on to be forced to pay money to the women who expelled them from their families, and who hold the power to put them in jail if they don't pay. Does that make the situation clear? (I spent more than ten years paying large amounts of "child support" to my ex-wife, and one of the greatest days of my life was when I was able to write her a letter saying that, since the children were by then grown, she would no longer be on my payroll. Since then, I gladly support directly my now adult children.) "Andre Lieven" wrote in message ... My Own Doppelganger ) writes: Well, it's like whatever is best for the kids. However, I do have a question... Why would a NCP NOT provide some type of child support? I mean, aren't the kids theirs also? So ? In the case of children either not of marriages, or the hundreds of thousands of men being garnished from, who are *not* the bio- fathers of the children they're being stolen from to pay some lying woman, there was NO express prior agreement to become a parent offered the guy. Further, in all such cases, the *woman is the sole chooser* as to whether or not there will BE a child. " Her body, her choice... HER RESPONSIBILITY. " What part of women being *as responsible for their own choices as their choices are*, is unclear to you ? On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:20:17 -0600, Anti-Sheila J smcneillAToddpostDOTcom wrote: If the court would award me custody of my two daughters (ages 8 and 5), I would be willing to waive child support AND make certain I exceeded all visitation requirements for their mother. I would make this deal without any hesitation or reservation, whatsoever. I was wondering if anyone here feels the same. The *silence* from women is palpable. Nor do I mean the very few women here on Usenet, but the *millions* of greedy women going to kourts, demanding loot for the begging bowls *they unilaterally chose to whelp*. If sex is not the determinant time of parental choice for a woman ( The existance of abortion, RU-486, legal adopting out, and legal woman-only abandon laws shows that it *isn't* ), then its SEXIST to claim that it must be, for *men, only*... Andre -- " I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. " The Man Prayer, Red Green. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Child support - who needs it?
"Kenneth S." wrote in message ... So-called "child support" is actually money that fathers pay to mothers. There's no guarantee that the mothers will spend all -- or any -- of the money they get on the children. Furthermore, any time fathers suggest that there should be accountability for "child support," the proposal is fought tooth and nail by representatives of mothers. So from a father's perspective, "child support" is money that they have to pay the mothers of their children. It's not money that they are paying to support their children. Furthermore, in the vast majority of cases, it's the mothers, not the fathers, who decided that the single parent household should exist in the first place. Groucho Marx said that paying alimony was like feeding hay to a dead horse. That's the way most fathers feel about so-called "child support." They signed on to be fathers to their children, within a two-parent family. They DIDN'T sign on to be forced to pay money to the women who expelled them from their families, and who hold the power to put them in jail if they don't pay. Does that make the situation clear? (I spent more than ten years paying large amounts of "child support" to my ex-wife, and one of the greatest days of my life was when I was able to write her a letter saying that, since the children were by then grown, she would no longer be on my payroll. Since then, I gladly support directly my now adult children.) 450 days, 18 hours left for me until I can send that same letter. I've been working on it for 15 years so I'm sure it will say just a bit more than "you're fired" My plan is to spend some time writing it so that I can say everything I've had to bite my tongue through over the past 15 years due to the fact that every time I tried to help him or each time we disagreed (which was every time we spoke), she took it out on him. I do not want to lose contact with her, however. I'm extremely curious to see how she handles such a drop in income. I can only imagine what it will be to like to add over $1000 a month to my own income. It will be like getting a $1200/month raise because since I'm already paying taxes on it, it will be $1K in MY pocket. Imagine: spending one's own money. What a concept. Phil #3 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Child support - who needs it?
"Kenneth S." wrote in message ... So-called "child support" is actually money that fathers pay to mothers. There's no guarantee that the mothers will spend all -- or any -- of the money they get on the children. Furthermore, any time fathers suggest that there should be accountability for "child support," the proposal is fought tooth and nail by representatives of mothers. So from a father's perspective, "child support" is money that they have to pay the mothers of their children. It's not money that they are paying to support their children. Furthermore, in the vast majority of cases, it's the mothers, not the fathers, who decided that the single parent household should exist in the first place. Groucho Marx said that paying alimony was like feeding hay to a dead horse. That's the way most fathers feel about so-called "child support." They signed on to be fathers to their children, within a two-parent family. They DIDN'T sign on to be forced to pay money to the women who expelled them from their families, and who hold the power to put them in jail if they don't pay. Does that make the situation clear? (I spent more than ten years paying large amounts of "child support" to my ex-wife, and one of the greatest days of my life was when I was able to write her a letter saying that, since the children were by then grown, she would no longer be on my payroll. Since then, I gladly support directly my now adult children.) 450 days, 18 hours left for me until I can send that same letter. I've been working on it for 15 years so I'm sure it will say just a bit more than "you're fired" My plan is to spend some time writing it so that I can say everything I've had to bite my tongue through over the past 15 years due to the fact that every time I tried to help him or each time we disagreed (which was every time we spoke), she took it out on him. I do not want to lose contact with her, however. I'm extremely curious to see how she handles such a drop in income. I can only imagine what it will be to like to add over $1000 a month to my own income. It will be like getting a $1200/month raise because since I'm already paying taxes on it, it will be $1K in MY pocket. Imagine: spending one's own money. What a concept. Phil #3 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Child support - who needs it?
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Child support - who needs it?
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Child support - who needs it?
Phil #3 wrote in message link.net... "Kenneth S." wrote in message ... So-called "child support" is actually money that fathers pay to mothers. There's no guarantee that the mothers will spend all -- or any -- of the money they get on the children. Furthermore, any time fathers suggest that there should be accountability for "child support," the proposal is fought tooth and nail by representatives of mothers. So from a father's perspective, "child support" is money that they have to pay the mothers of their children. It's not money that they are paying to support their children. Furthermore, in the vast majority of cases, it's the mothers, not the fathers, who decided that the single parent household should exist in the first place. Groucho Marx said that paying alimony was like feeding hay to a dead horse. That's the way most fathers feel about so-called "child support." They signed on to be fathers to their children, within a two-parent family. They DIDN'T sign on to be forced to pay money to the women who expelled them from their families, and who hold the power to put them in jail if they don't pay. Does that make the situation clear? (I spent more than ten years paying large amounts of "child support" to my ex-wife, and one of the greatest days of my life was when I was able to write her a letter saying that, since the children were by then grown, she would no longer be on my payroll. Since then, I gladly support directly my now adult children.) 450 days, 18 hours left for me until I can send that same letter. I've been working on it for 15 years so I'm sure it will say just a bit more than "you're fired" My plan is to spend some time writing it so that I can say everything I've had to bite my tongue through over the past 15 years due to the fact that every time I tried to help him or each time we disagreed (which was every time we spoke), she took it out on him. I do not want to lose contact with her, however. I'm extremely curious to see how she handles such a drop in income. I can only imagine what it will be to like to add over $1000 a month to my own income. It will be like getting a $1200/month raise because since I'm already paying taxes on it, it will be $1K in MY pocket. Imagine: spending one's own money. What a concept. Phil #3 I have a very good friend who got to end payments on one kid, the other will end in a year and a half. When he stopped paying the one, the mother was all in an tizzy. And this women lives in a house that was bought for her by her father, got to go to college as an adult, paid by her father. She makes an average income but is so use to the high CS she was getting. He, like you, is like a kid again. I wish more women could see the effects of high CS payments on the NCP. And I will add, this father was in the children's lives constantly. He paid half of all clothes, carried all insurances and paid half of any medical bills. He has put braces on 2 kids and one kid had to have them put back on! She tells him how lucky HE is she didn't take him to court for MORE! He said she is lucky he is a good father and paid every month on time, no matter what. T |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Child support - who needs it?
Phil #3 wrote in message link.net... "Kenneth S." wrote in message ... So-called "child support" is actually money that fathers pay to mothers. There's no guarantee that the mothers will spend all -- or any -- of the money they get on the children. Furthermore, any time fathers suggest that there should be accountability for "child support," the proposal is fought tooth and nail by representatives of mothers. So from a father's perspective, "child support" is money that they have to pay the mothers of their children. It's not money that they are paying to support their children. Furthermore, in the vast majority of cases, it's the mothers, not the fathers, who decided that the single parent household should exist in the first place. Groucho Marx said that paying alimony was like feeding hay to a dead horse. That's the way most fathers feel about so-called "child support." They signed on to be fathers to their children, within a two-parent family. They DIDN'T sign on to be forced to pay money to the women who expelled them from their families, and who hold the power to put them in jail if they don't pay. Does that make the situation clear? (I spent more than ten years paying large amounts of "child support" to my ex-wife, and one of the greatest days of my life was when I was able to write her a letter saying that, since the children were by then grown, she would no longer be on my payroll. Since then, I gladly support directly my now adult children.) 450 days, 18 hours left for me until I can send that same letter. I've been working on it for 15 years so I'm sure it will say just a bit more than "you're fired" My plan is to spend some time writing it so that I can say everything I've had to bite my tongue through over the past 15 years due to the fact that every time I tried to help him or each time we disagreed (which was every time we spoke), she took it out on him. I do not want to lose contact with her, however. I'm extremely curious to see how she handles such a drop in income. I can only imagine what it will be to like to add over $1000 a month to my own income. It will be like getting a $1200/month raise because since I'm already paying taxes on it, it will be $1K in MY pocket. Imagine: spending one's own money. What a concept. Phil #3 I have a very good friend who got to end payments on one kid, the other will end in a year and a half. When he stopped paying the one, the mother was all in an tizzy. And this women lives in a house that was bought for her by her father, got to go to college as an adult, paid by her father. She makes an average income but is so use to the high CS she was getting. He, like you, is like a kid again. I wish more women could see the effects of high CS payments on the NCP. And I will add, this father was in the children's lives constantly. He paid half of all clothes, carried all insurances and paid half of any medical bills. He has put braces on 2 kids and one kid had to have them put back on! She tells him how lucky HE is she didn't take him to court for MORE! He said she is lucky he is a good father and paid every month on time, no matter what. T |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking | Kane | Spanking | 63 | November 17th 03 10:12 PM |
The Determination of Child Custody in the USA | Fighting for kids | Child Support | 21 | November 17th 03 01:35 AM |
| Ex Giants player sentenced-DYFS wrkr no harm noticed | Kane | Foster Parents | 10 | September 16th 03 11:59 AM |