The Child Support Issue.

[MMDad]

Originally Posted by JPC, Sr.

It is in the "Preamble" as in, "We the people..." "...in order to..." ",promote the general welfare,..." "...do establish this constitution..."

The Cnstitution of the USA, press "Preamble" link for short text here.

I love that part.

The preamble is an introduction, stating the intent of the document. The articles and amendments establish the laws our nation is based on. Now tell me, which article or amendment of the constitution grants welfare.

Originally Posted by JPC, Sr.

It really is not a joke. It hurts people, it hurts families, it needs to be stopped. MP writes that she sees putting a parent that can not pay the child support into jail and that is what we have now. For her to be so misguided is one thing but to have governmental leaders putting parents in jail for being poor is tyranny and foolish.

---------------------

It's not the the fact that they "can not" but the issue that "some" just don't wanna pay and don't care if they do or not, because the punishment is a joke.. I am not misguided, I am one of those custodial parents who does not receive CS from the non-custodial on a consistent basis.

It takes 2 to make a kid, why should only 1 of them be responsible for the well being of the kid, emotionally, physically and financially?

[Ken King (Premo)]

Originally Posted by MMDad

The preamble is an introduction, stating the intent of the document. The articles and amendments establish the laws our nation is based on. Now tell me, which article or amendment of the constitution grants welfare.

If he's smart he will say Article 1, Section 8

Originally Posted by Ken King

If he's smart he will say Article 1, Section 8

I saw that!

[FastCarsSpeed]

Originally Posted by JPC, Sr.

Because all of the children are fine and taken care of. The child support is based on nothing. We do not have children in need because of their parents. Plus, providing welfare is part of the U.S. Constitution and children on welfare are cared for.

Excluding physical abuses, of course.

I give up, you are an effin moron.....all of the children are fine and taken care of??? Please feel free to visit any school in the area, and I guarantee you that you will find children that didn't eat dinner the night before.....

We do not have children in need because of their parents??? Basically what you mean to say here is because of their mothers, since you believe fathers have no obligation or responsibility to their children, correct??

This argument isn't even worth arguing, you are a deadbeat POS and I am very thankful for your child that your ex remarried and found someone to take care of YOUR responsibility....



NOTE: THIS POST WAS POSTED BY TINA2001ANIT, FASTCARSSPEED WAS STILL LOGGED IN ON THE LAPTOP OOPS!

[ylexot (Premo)]

Originally Posted by JPC, Sr.

It is in the "Preamble" as in, "We the people..." "...in order to..." ",promote the general welfare,..." "...do establish this constitution..."

The Cnstitution of the USA, press "Preamble" link for short text here.

I love that part.

As others have said, that is not what welfare means in the preamble. But, since you probably won't accept that, why don't we ask the founders...

James "Father of the Constitution" Madison said in a speech delivered in the House of Representatives on January 10, 1794, "The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government."

Or how about Thomas "The Liberal Founder" Jefferson who wrote to Michael Megear in 1823 and said, "It is a duty certainly to give our sparings to those who want; but to see also that they are faithfully distributed and duly apportioned to the respective wants of those receivers. And why give through agents whom we know not, to persons whom we know not, and in countries from which we get no account, when we can do it at short hand to objects under our eye, through agents we know and to supply wants we see?"

It sure doesn't sound to me like they want the Federal government to provide charity (what is currently called "welfare").

Originally Posted by onebdzee

Here's the situation:

Mom and Dad go to court....Mom has the kids, so the judge court orders the dad to pay a certain amount to the mom for those kids....You with me so far?

Dad doesn't pay for those kids....I know you're with me on this one because you did it!

Because the dad went against a COURT ORDER he is put in jail....Plain and simple enough for you?

Government orchestrated Child Support as it stands today is based on a dilusion. That some parents will not take care of their own children unless the government forces them to pay child support. It is a dilusion.

We know that cave-men and cave women took care of their children because they matured. In darkest Africa the gov does not tell parents to take care of their children. It comes naturally to those parents. In outer Mongolia and in the Arabic world the peoples / parents do take care of their children.

So it is mostly in America and western Europe and industrialized Countries that some parents are believed to have mysteriously become sub-human and neglect their own children. It is not true - it is a dilusion.

American parents are not lower than ignorant savages that so many need the government to force the parents to take care of their own children. Thus child support is based on false premises and so we have laws that demand money that the parent does not have and we put deadbroke parents in jail just for being poor, and I mean working poor. The parents do get jobs and the law enforcement attacks the people for no justifiable reason at all and those laws have created the injustice we now have.

We need to let the parents take care of their own children, naturally by the parents own standards. Having government as a big-daddy is a big mistake and it needs to be stopped.

--------------------------------

[bcp (Premo)]

Government orchestrated Child Support as it stands today is based on a dilusion. That some parents will not take care of their own children unless the government forces them to pay child support. It is a dilusion.

We know that cave-men and cave women took care of their children because they matured. In darkest Africa the gov does not tell parents to take care of their children. It comes naturally to those parents. In outer Mongolia and in the Arabic world the peoples / parents do take care of their children. So it is mostly in America and western Europe and industrialized Countries that some parents are believed to have mysteriously become sub-human and neglect their own children. It is not true - it is a dilusion.

American parents are not lower than ignorant savages that so many need the government to force the parents to take care of their own children.
Thus child support is based on false premises and so we have laws that demand money that the parent does not have and we put deadbroke parents in jail just for being poor, and I mean working poor. The parents do get jobs and the law enforcement attacks the people for no justifiable reason at all and those laws have created the injustice we now have.
We need to let the parents take care of their own children, naturally by the parents own standards.
Having government as a big-daddy is a big mistake and it needs to be stopped.

Do you actually read anything that you write?
The reason I ask is due to the areas of your latest spew that I took the liberty of putting in bold for you.
its obvious that the government has to step in to control the parents because there are some sub human parents that will try to NOT support their children.
Government orchestrated Child Support as it stands today is based on a dilusion. That some parents will not take care of their own children unless the government forces them to pay child support. It is a dilusion.

In the above paragraph, where is the dilusion in your case? you say that the government does not have to step in, yet even with the government order you failed to support your child. So tell me, where is the dilusion that some parents will not take care of their won children? you have proven your own statement wrong.
So it is mostly in America and western Europe and industrialized Countries that some parents are believed to have mysteriously become sub-human and neglect their own children.

Are you stating as fact that due to your concious neglect of your child, that you are sub-human? it would seem to be true based on your own thoughts
American parents are not lower than ignorant savages that so many need the government to force the parents to take care of their own children.

and in the above statement made by you, it almost looks as if you are claiming to be lower than an ignorant savage.

Having government as a big-daddy is a big mistake and it needs to be stopped.

Until people like yourself begin taking the responsibility to raise their offspring, the sad thing is that the government will have to continue to step in and levy fines and imprisonment to those that fail their duties.

In other words, your very actions are what cause the need for the control that the government must take.
Or, do you claim that had the government not stepped in, you would have helped support your child in the first place.

[BS Gal (Premo)]

Originally Posted by JPC, Sr.

Government orchestrated Child Support as it stands today is based on a dilusion. That some parents will not take care of their own children unless the government forces them to pay child support. It is a dilusion.

We know that cave-men and cave women took care of their children because they matured. In darkest Africa the gov does not tell parents to take care of their children. It comes naturally to those parents. In outer Mongolia and in the Arabic world the peoples / parents do take care of their children.

So it is mostly in America and western Europe and industrialized Countries that some parents are believed to have mysteriously become sub-human and neglect their own children. It is not true - it is a dilusion.

American parents are not lower than ignorant savages that so many need the government to force the parents to take care of their own children. Thus child support is based on false premises and so we have laws that demand money that the parent does not have and we put deadbroke parents in jail just for being poor, and I mean working poor. The parents do get jobs and the law enforcement attacks the people for no justifiable reason at all and those laws have created the injustice we now have.

We need to let the parents take care of their own children, naturally by the parents own standards. Having government as a big-daddy is a big mistake and it needs to be stopped.

--------------------------------

I really think you are demented. We could argue the point forever. You just didn't want to pay for your kid, work, or become a responsible member of society. You are the reason my taxes are so high. I have to pay for your lazy arse. I wish I could spend my entire day at a public libraray and play in the forums. I can't. I work. Try it sometime. You make me sick. Who pays your rent?

Originally Posted by missperky

It's not the the fact that they "can not" but the issue that "some" just don't wanna pay and don't care if they do or not, because the punishment is a joke.. I am not misguided, I am one of those custodial parents who does not receive CS from the non-custodial on a consistent basis.

It takes 2 to make a kid, why should only 1 of them be responsible for the well being of the kid, emotionally, physically and financially?