The Child Support injustice.

[VoteJP]

Originally Posted by hvp05

Congratulations on uncovering a topic worth actual discussion. Unfortunately, you're still wrong.

The government is supposed to do what it is there to do: legislate and oversee the law. Government's involvement in marriage should be granting marriage licenses as well as divorce decrees. If anyone is to "promote" marriage and condemn divorce it should be the church (or whatever body) under which the union was formed.

I really do agree with all you say here above, but the gov has made a mess of it.

The Church (or Religion) was the source of the Institution of "marriage" and granting the so-called "Marriage license" was just a way of unjustified taxation, and the gov granting legal divorces completely undermined the Church's power and position in our society.

The Churches told married people that they could not get a divorce and then they went to the gov and for a few dollars the law granted a divorce in direct opposition of the Religion.

So the gov has completely undermined the Institution of marriage and has turned marriage into a "Civil union" because now a marriage is only a legal contract that can be broken with no religious regard at all.

Under today's system then marriage as a religious Institution is all paper and words but no substance and no strength and no authority, because the gov has taken over the marriage business and the gov is now making a mess of it.

Originally Posted by hvp05

People are not machines; you can not command them all to "get married and stay married" and expect them to follow the order without fluctuation. No matter how much you work against it, there will be bad marriages, and failed marriages. Plans must be in place to handle those contingencies.

That is true under our system we have now, and our gov can not preserve the marriage Institution because the gov can be bought and manipulated with ease concerning divorce and separation.

But in Religion and in every culture worldwide then marriage as a religious Institution was promoted and protected for all of recorded history, and divorce or separation was very rare.

And I do not say to now out-law divorce but we could stop ordering a decree of Custody that legally excludes one parent from their own children, and stop ordering Child Support that makes it profitable for the parent to be divorced, and we need to stop making the divorces so easy and comfortable.

Originally Posted by hvp05

Of course, none of this has to do with that CS information that was posted earlier. They were discussing divorce only insofar as it relates to the child's needs.

That reminds me of the famous charity called "Feed the Children" that gives the perception that we can feed the children without the parents, as if the children are separate from the parents, and even if the parents are there then we are only going to feed their children and to Hell with the parents.

The only true way of helping children is by helping the children's parents.

And if "Feed the Children" were to give that food to the parents then those parents will use that food to feed their children as that is what parents do, and then it would be helping the family instead of claiming to help the children when the children's parents are being excluded.

It just does not work right that way.

And the same is true of Child Support that the child can not be helped or improved when at the same time it is hurting or excluding the child's parent(s).

Originally Posted by hvp05

But I know you'll want to continue on your tangent, so proceed...

That is always true, and I still appreciate your consideration accordingly.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by VoteJP

That reminds me of the famous charity called "Feed the Children" that gives the perception that we can feed the children without the parents, as if the children are separate from the parents, and even if the parents are there then we are only going to feed their children and to Hell with the parents.

The only true way of helping children is by helping the children's parents.

But, if the children's "cups are overflowing" from sources other than one of the parents, why help that parent?

And if "Feed the Children" were to give that food to the parents then those parents will use that food to feed their children as that is what parents do,

Well, to be honest, that's what GOOD parents do. Then, there's you, and the people like you, who desert their children to let them figure it out for themselves.

If the parents were to provide for their children, not desert them so they could figure it out for themselves, there would be no need for Child Support laws.

And the same is true of Child Support that the child can not be helped or improved when at the same time it is hurting or excluding the child's parent(s).

Child Support does nothing towards excluding a child's parent from the child. Parents do that all on their own. Like, when they desert their children to let their children figure it out for themselves, and then take actions that will knowingly put them in jail (like, vandelism against government property, for example). That's when parents willingly choose to separate themselves from their children, not when child support is ordered.

[bcp (Premo)]

Originally Posted by This_person

If the parents were to provide for their children, not desert them so they could figure it out for themselves, there would be no need for Child Support laws..

I can not agree with you more right here, perhaps the first intelligent thing you have written.
If the parents were to provide for their children.
big if, however, since so many like yourself decide it is in their best interest to just abandon the child with no support, the government is forced to step in and dictate how the divorce, the payments, and the child care will be set up.

Maybe one day you will realize that if not for people like you, there would be no need for the government interfering in the lives of people.

[hvp05 (Premo)]

Originally Posted by bcp

I can not agree with you more right here, perhaps the first intelligent thing you have written.

I thought this statement was odd. Probably a good idea to check your quoting...

[VoteJP]

Originally Posted by bcp

I can not agree with you more right here, perhaps the first intelligent thing you have written.
If the parents were to provide for their children.
big if, however, since so many like yourself decide it is in their best interest to just abandon the child with no support, the government is forced to step in and dictate how the divorce, the payments, and the child care will be set up.

Maybe one day you will realize that if not for people like you, there would be no need for the government interfering in the lives of people.

The point remains that the gov does not need to be in the parenting police business in the first place, and the gov is not "forced to step in" as that is nonsense.

The children are all completely fine and the parents doing no real crime and no victim at all, so the gov is not "forced" to "dictate" as in fact the gov is exceeding its role.

[bcp (Premo)]

The rich husband shall provide support in accordance with his means, and the poor shall provide according to the means that GOD bestowed upon him. GOD does not impose on any soul more than He has given it. GOD will provide ease after difficulty

Even God thinks you should have supported your child in some manner, either with money, that you could have had if you would have been a man and worked, or with spiritual support if you would have been a man and stuck around in the area to do so.

but you ran, you did nothing. I fear that God may have some stern words for you when the time comes.

how do you reconcile this?

[VoteJP]

Originally Posted by bcp

Even God thinks you should have supported your child in some manner, either with money,

Well I will tell you again, and it is nice on me that I do enjoy repeating this, so here it goes;

My own son and all children in the entire USA already have everything they need and are already supported to overflowing and more.

Now God does not tell me or anyone to give more and extras and to give excess to our own kids.

And you might see being a spoiled rich brat as a God given right or some gov given right, but it is not a parent given right.

Originally Posted by bcp

that you could have had if you would have been a man and worked,

A lot of people in today's society have such mixed up ideas of "Manliness" but I see it as far more Manly to do what is right and not to submit to lies or to pay into thievery or to let the gov impose horrible injustices on families and onto parents without trying to fight it.

You can try to make it some personal affront with me, but I do not see it as personal against you or your kind.

Originally Posted by bcp

or with spiritual support if you would have been a man and stuck around in the area to do so.

but you ran, you did nothing. I fear that God may have some stern words for you when the time comes.

how do you reconcile this?

Yes, you got me here, as I screwed up on my own family.

But my own past mistakes does not mean that I owe you or the State or my relatives anything outside of my own repentance.

So I have reconciled so far as best as I could, and you are not included in that reconciling.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by bcp

I can not agree with you more right here, perhaps the first intelligent thing you have written.
If the parents were to provide for their children.
big if, however, since so many like yourself decide it is in their best interest to just abandon the child with no support, the government is forced to step in and dictate how the divorce, the payments, and the child care will be set up.

Maybe one day you will realize that if not for people like you, there would be no need for the government interfering in the lives of people.

I'm guessing you thought Jimmy wrote that?

[bcp (Premo)]

Originally Posted by This_person

I'm guessing you thought Jimmy wrote that?

Figures.
I finally agree with a statment he makes,, and he isnt the one that made it.
shoulda known better

[This_person]

Originally Posted by This_person

But, if the children's "cups are overflowing" from sources other than one of the parents, why help that parent? Well, to be honest, that's what GOOD parents do. Then, there's you, and the people like you, who desert their children to let them figure it out for themselves.

If the parents were to provide for their children, not desert them so they could figure it out for themselves, there would be no need for Child Support laws.Child Support does nothing towards excluding a child's parent from the child. Parents do that all on their own. Like, when they desert their children to let their children figure it out for themselves, and then take actions that will knowingly put them in jail (like, vandelism against government property, for example). That's when parents willingly choose to separate themselves from their children, not when child support is ordered.

Jimmy, I couldn't help but notice you didn't answer any of this.