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
|
|||
|
|||
Not paying child support is "child abuse", says Texas Attorney General
Apologies if this gets posted twice.,
-------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.bloggingbaby.com/entry/1234000347070781/ Not paying child support is "child abuse", says Texas Attorney General Posted Dec 2, 2005, 7:03 PM ET by Jay Allen Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott is campaigning to crack down on the state's most wanted offenders who fail to pay child support - i.e., anyone who owes over $5,000 and has a warrant out for his or her arrest. Abbott is using some head-turning language, stating flatly that "Failure to pay child support is a form of child abuse." Child abuse? I'm all for cracking down on flagrant offenders who refuse to pay, but isn't it more abusive for parents not to spend time with their children than it is not to fork over child support? I'm beginning to see the point of father's rights advocates: isn't it better to provide at least some of these people incentive to remain in the lives of their children? I'd love to see an AG who can manage to wipe the dollar signs out of his eyes, and come up with a support enforcement plan that gets noncustodial parents access to their kids. You have to wonder: how many non-custodial parents would make up their arrears under such a system? Why doesn't anyone have the guts to try it and find out? Mind you, the parents who refuse to pay and don't give a damn about seeing their children can kiss the business end of a wage garnishment, as far as I'm concerned. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Offering "incentives" is only part of the problem here. When we look at the divorce industry as a whole, we see that nearly every facet of divorce is slanted to get the most money from the NCP. Period. There are no "incentives" for NCP's to hang around and be nothing more then whipping posts for radfems to abuse. Offering them a few scant hours or days to play at being a parent to one's children is, IMO, abuse. Both to the NCP and the children in question. For these wing-nuts to suggest that this is sufficient to be a constructive part of a child's life is absolute insanity. And to suggest that being "Uncle Daddy" is all an NCP can ever look forward to, or worse yet a walking wallet. Well, that would be enough to drive anyone away. "Incentives" are not needed, scrapping the entire Divorce Industry is. We need both parents with their children, not one to program them against the NCP and the other to be an ATM. We need both parents to actually be parents. [begin dream sequence...] God forbid if I ever were to become a family court judge.. Trust me, if you come into my court room and start to talk trash (or your lawyer does) you can expect to be placed under house arrest and sent to a "Family Re-education" camp where you'll be taught how to behave when your X is around and act like a parent to your kids. And you can also forget those huge "guideline" C$ awards, too. If you both have a job, good - forget having a share of the other's pie. Cause if you come crying to me about wanting thousands of bucks a month, guess what YOUR gonna be doing... Welcome to Family Camp! And if you're the Peggy Bundy type (sits on their ass eating bon-bons and spends all day watching Oprah (or drinking beer enjoying the likes of WWF)).. If you want to see daylight again, you'll find away to get off your fat ass real fast and getting a job. And something else.. That B.S. about how your feelings where hurt when he asked where the hell dinner was the other night and now you want a restraining order to boot him out of the house he bought and paid for so you can throw a Divorce Party tomorrow night... Welcome to Family Camp!! -------------------------------------------------------------------- Liberalism: that haunting fear that someone, somewhere, can help themselves without Government intervention. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Not paying child support is "child abuse", says Texas Attorney ...
Yeah, now that Texas will be getting less money from the Feds to enforce child support Greg Abbott is grasping for straws. Now he'll have to make tough decisions, just like congress and beat-dead dads. Now he'll have to decide which bureaucrats to cut from the dole. Texas has become such a socialist state just like most if not all of the 50 states. Congress and many American citizens are now figuring out that child support enforcement that eminates from the federal level is a very costly measure with no end benefit. Anytime the government forces taxes or morality down our throats, it is doomed to failure. Democrats and Republicans are equally adept at passing new law and legislation in their attempt to control the masses. However, the end result of their efforts is usually tyranny, which in turn brings revolt....Our government apparently has forgotten events such as the "Boston Tea Party" and the "Civil War". |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Not paying child support is "child abuse", says Texas Attorney General
I have considered for a long time that DIVORCE is a form of child abuse,
and by no means the least serious. I think the research into the results of divorce upon children bears out this conclusion. However, will we ever see a state attorney general, or anyone else in the government establishment, say this? No, of course not! Why? Because there are no repercussions for politicians who attack heterosexual men as a group, such as those fathers who have to pay child support. By contrast, anyone who questions any part of feminist theology--such as no barriers to wives who want to divorce their husbands (or free access to abortion)--immediately faces a cacophony of hysterical criticism from a whole crowd of screaming feminist harpies. So even those politicians who know very well that divorce produces devastating results for children, and imposes enormous costs on the taxpayers, keep their mouths shut about this aspect of the situation. "Dusty" wrote in message ... Apologies if this gets posted twice., -------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.bloggingbaby.com/entry/1234000347070781/ Not paying child support is "child abuse", says Texas Attorney General Posted Dec 2, 2005, 7:03 PM ET by Jay Allen Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott is campaigning to crack down on the state's most wanted offenders who fail to pay child support - i.e., anyone who owes over $5,000 and has a warrant out for his or her arrest. Abbott is using some head-turning language, stating flatly that "Failure to pay child support is a form of child abuse." Child abuse? I'm all for cracking down on flagrant offenders who refuse to pay, but isn't it more abusive for parents not to spend time with their children than it is not to fork over child support? I'm beginning to see the point of father's rights advocates: isn't it better to provide at least some of these people incentive to remain in the lives of their children? I'd love to see an AG who can manage to wipe the dollar signs out of his eyes, and come up with a support enforcement plan that gets noncustodial parents access to their kids. You have to wonder: how many non-custodial parents would make up their arrears under such a system? Why doesn't anyone have the guts to try it and find out? Mind you, the parents who refuse to pay and don't give a damn about seeing their children can kiss the business end of a wage garnishment, as far as I'm concerned. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Offering "incentives" is only part of the problem here. When we look at the divorce industry as a whole, we see that nearly every facet of divorce is slanted to get the most money from the NCP. Period. There are no "incentives" for NCP's to hang around and be nothing more then whipping posts for radfems to abuse. Offering them a few scant hours or days to play at being a parent to one's children is, IMO, abuse. Both to the NCP and the children in question. For these wing-nuts to suggest that this is sufficient to be a constructive part of a child's life is absolute insanity. And to suggest that being "Uncle Daddy" is all an NCP can ever look forward to, or worse yet a walking wallet. Well, that would be enough to drive anyone away. "Incentives" are not needed, scrapping the entire Divorce Industry is. We need both parents with their children, not one to program them against the NCP and the other to be an ATM. We need both parents to actually be parents. [begin dream sequence...] God forbid if I ever were to become a family court judge.. Trust me, if you come into my court room and start to talk trash (or your lawyer does) you can expect to be placed under house arrest and sent to a "Family Re-education" camp where you'll be taught how to behave when your X is around and act like a parent to your kids. And you can also forget those huge "guideline" C$ awards, too. If you both have a job, good - forget having a share of the other's pie. Cause if you come crying to me about wanting thousands of bucks a month, guess what YOUR gonna be doing... Welcome to Family Camp! And if you're the Peggy Bundy type (sits on their ass eating bon-bons and spends all day watching Oprah (or drinking beer enjoying the likes of WWF)).. If you want to see daylight again, you'll find away to get off your fat ass real fast and getting a job. And something else.. That B.S. about how your feelings where hurt when he asked where the hell dinner was the other night and now you want a restraining order to boot him out of the house he bought and paid for so you can throw a Divorce Party tomorrow night... Welcome to Family Camp!! -------------------------------------------------------------------- Liberalism: that haunting fear that someone, somewhere, can help themselves without Government intervention. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Not paying child support is "child abuse", says politician
I'm all for cracking down on flagrant offenders who refuse to pay,
but isn't it more abusive for parents not to spend time with their children than it is not to fork over child support? Moving on from your world of mythology to one of reality, what about destitute and often incarcerated fathers and those who successfully chase fathers away from their children? Congress and many American citizens are now figuring out that child support enforcement that eminates from the federal level is a very costly measure with no end benefit. Not even close, this oppression grows stronger as this news story illustrates. Show me the politician campaigning on a visitation enforcement platform. As for cost, as with other government vote buying schemes, it is born by the deemed politically inferior, duh! Why? Because there are no repercussions for politicians who attack heterosexual men as a group, such as those fathers who have to pay child support. By contrast, anyone who questions any part of feminist theology--such as no barriers to wives who want to divorce their husbands (or free access to abortion)--immediately faces a cacophony of hysterical criticism from a whole crowd of screaming feminist harpies. Well put but should more accurately read: immediately faces a cacophony of hysterical criticism from the mainstream media that politicians see as the lead that the ignorant masses of voters will follow. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Not paying child support is "child abuse", says politician
"abdd" wrote in Moving on from your world of mythology to one of reality, what about destitute and often incarcerated fathers and those who successfully chase fathers away from their children? What is really incredible is how an extremist movement was able to get these draconian ideas passed into law! Who would have ever imagined that in America, a male who is down on his luck or just never got into the right ideal situation would be jailed for not making enough money to feed and pay for his kids college education? And now you have DA's jumping on the bandwagon to advance their political careers! The Automotive companies are downsizing and laying off thousands, the spinoff from these layoffs and plant closings will affect millions! Who is the Government going to blame for economic ruin when these fathers can no longer afford to support the lifestyles these children are used to? Is everyone in America Guaranteed a life style, is that the Government's new job to enforce that life style? With the 50% divorce rate and declining economy, how long will it be until the majority of the male population will be under the direct control and supervision of a uncontrollable government agency? Why are we criminalizing a social issue? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Not paying child support is "child abuse", says politician
"DB" wrote in message . net... "abdd" wrote in Moving on from your world of mythology to one of reality, what about destitute and often incarcerated fathers and those who successfully chase fathers away from their children? What is really incredible is how an extremist movement was able to get these draconian ideas passed into law! Who would have ever imagined that in America, a male who is down on his luck or just never got into the right ideal situation would be jailed for not making enough money to feed and pay for his kids college education? And now you have DA's jumping on the bandwagon to advance their political careers! The Automotive companies are downsizing and laying off thousands, the spinoff from these layoffs and plant closings will affect millions! Who is the Government going to blame for economic ruin when these fathers can no longer afford to support the lifestyles these children are used to? Is everyone in America Guaranteed a life style, is that the Government's new job to enforce that life style? With the 50% divorce rate and declining economy, how long will it be until the majority of the male population will be under the direct control and supervision of a uncontrollable government agency? Why are we criminalizing a social issue? The complete answer to your last question has three elements, in my view. The first element is that nonpayment of child support may have implications for taxpayer-funded welfare programs. That is a legitimate concern, but it has been hugely exaggerated, in order to cover up the other two, crudely political elements. One of the other two elements is that the victims of these Draconian enforcement measures are heterosexual men, who have no political clout in matters where the interests of the sexes are in conflict. The other element is that the recipients of "child support" are adult women, whose interests invariably trump those of men and children across a whole range of social issues--from abortion to welfare. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Not paying child support is "child abuse" is useful political assertion
What is really incredible is how an extremist movement was able to get
these draconian ideas passed into law! Not really. Hitler was elected, so was Saddam. Who would have ever imagined that in America, a male who is down on his luck or just never got into the right ideal situation would be jailed for not making enough money to feed and pay for his kids college education? Huh? Oh, you must mean be jailed for not giving enough money to a woman who had sex with him. And now you have DA's jumping on the bandwagon to advance their political careers! Why should judges be the only politicians jumping on bandwagons? The Automotive companies are downsizing and laying off thousands, the spinoff from these layoffs and plant closings will affect millions! Who is the Government going to blame for economic ruin when these fathers can no longer afford to support the lifestyles these children are used to? Jailing poor fathers is akin to Uday torturing atheletes who lost a game or SS jailers picking out Jews at random for summary execution. Taking money from those of the politically inferior gender and giving it to those of the politically preferred gender is only one aspect. Government enforced oppression is a key aspect of maintaining this system. In this regard, jailing fathers for not turning over money they do not have makes good, albeit evil, sense. Why are we criminalizing a social issue? What social issue? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Not paying child support is "child abuse" is useful political assertion
"abdd" wrote in message ... What is really incredible is how an extremist movement was able to get these draconian ideas passed into law! Not really. Hitler was elected, so was Saddam. === And Dubya. Twice. === |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Not paying child support is "child abuse", says politician
Who would have ever imagined that in America, a male who is down on his
luck or just never got into the right ideal situation would be jailed for not making enough money to feed and pay for his kids college education? I understand your point. But what about the mother who was also laid off but still has to figure out a way to take care of her child. The Automotive companies are downsizing and laying off thousands, the spinoff from these layoffs and plant closings will affect millions! Who is the Government going to blame for economic ruin when these fathers can no longer afford to support the lifestyles these children are used to? Mothers are subject to the same lay offs. They still have to find a way to take care of the kids. Maybe they should send the kids to the dad for a while, just until they get back on their feet. Is everyone in America Guaranteed a life style, is that the Government's new job to enforce that life style? Any lifestyle is better than a shelter. Many women are subject to firing. But if they can't feed their kids they go to jail for neglect. With the 50% divorce rate and declining economy, how long will it be until the majority of the male population will be under the direct control and supervision of a uncontrollable government agency? Don't blame the government. Find a work around. Your kids deserve it. Lava |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Not paying child support is "child abuse", says politician
"Technopaganess" wrote in message ink.net... Who would have ever imagined that in America, a male who is down on his luck or just never got into the right ideal situation would be jailed for not making enough money to feed and pay for his kids college education? I understand your point. But what about the mother who was also laid off but still has to figure out a way to take care of her child. Sorry, there is no comparison! Nobody is going to threaten the Mother with jail time of she doesn't have the money to feed her kids. She at least has plenty of options in terms of finding free food for the kids, nobody starves to death in America. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Child Support Guidelines are UNFAIR! Lets join together to fight them! | S Myers | Child Support | 115 | September 12th 05 12:37 AM |
Sample US Supreme Court Petition | Wizardlaw | Child Support | 28 | January 21st 04 06:23 PM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | Foster Parents | 3 | December 8th 03 11:53 PM |
Kids should work. | ChrisScaife | Spanking | 16 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |
Dennis was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking | Kane | Spanking | 63 | November 17th 03 10:12 PM |