NATION

PASSWORD

Child Support and Rape

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)
User avatar
CVT Temp
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1860
Founded: Oct 03, 2012
Ex-Nation

Child Support and Rape

Postby CVT Temp » Wed Dec 26, 2012 5:16 pm

http://clarissasblog.com/2011/08/07/rap ... d-support/

This is a discussion that I've always been bothered by. Personally, I'd rather the state subsidize child care, but that makes me a filthy socialist. However, I find it disturbing that she's so cavalier about sacrificing adult rights for the sake of children. It's not just disturbing, but irrational. From rather basic logic, children are not as much people as are most adults simply due to the fact that adults have more complex cognition, introspection, and preferences. Why would any rational person think it right to involuntarily sacrifice the well being of an innocent adult for the sake of a child, especially when alternative methods exist?

I mean, I don't really like children to begin with, but still, this is an absurd notion. Of course rape victims should not be forced to pay child support, and neither should anyone else made to become a parent against their will (forced pregnancy, semen theft, etc.). If the child really needs support, that's why we have welfare programs, is it not?
Иф ю кан рид дис, ю ар рили борд ор ю ар Россияне.

User avatar
Cameroi
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15252
Founded: Dec 24, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby Cameroi » Wed Dec 26, 2012 5:20 pm

anyone who thinks welfare programs are adaquite, has obviously never been on one.
truth isn't what i say. isn't what you say. isn't what anybody says. truth is what is there, when no one is saying anything.

"economic freedom" is "the cake"
=^^=
.../\...

User avatar
CVT Temp
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1860
Founded: Oct 03, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby CVT Temp » Wed Dec 26, 2012 5:21 pm

Cameroi wrote:anyone who thinks welfare programs are adaquite, has obviously never been on one.


I wish to make them more adequate. I'm rather to the left of most in the US.
Иф ю кан рид дис, ю ар рили борд ор ю ар Россияне.

User avatar
Camicon
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14375
Founded: Aug 26, 2010
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Camicon » Wed Dec 26, 2012 5:27 pm

Biological parents should not be forced into caring for a child they didn't want. I think people that do that are selfish pricks/cunts/whathaveyou, because I believe that they have a responsibility to care for their children, wanted or not. But when other avenues for child care are available (adoption by other adults, foster parents, state-run orphanages, increased welfare payments to single parents, etcetera) forcing biological parents into paying child support should be a last resort.
Active since May, 2009
Country of glowing hearts, and patrons of the arts
Help me out
Star spangled madness, united sadness
Count me out
The Trews, Under The Sun
No human is more human than any other. - Lieutenant-General Roméo Antonius Dallaire
Don't shine for swine. - Metric, Soft Rock Star
Love is hell. Hell is love. Hell is asking to be loved. - Emily Haines and the Soft Skeleton, Detective Daughter

Why (Male) Rape Is Hilarious [because it has to be]

User avatar
Cosmopoles
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5541
Founded: Sep 24, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Cosmopoles » Wed Dec 26, 2012 5:27 pm

It might seem harsh but if the rape hasn't been proven, what can you do? It doesn't seem right to absolve someone of their responsibility to a child if you don't know for sure that a crime has been committed.

User avatar
Coccygia
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7510
Founded: Nov 24, 2009
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Coccygia » Wed Dec 26, 2012 5:31 pm

If somebody commits rape, and it results in a child, damn right they should be required to pay child support. They did not consider the woman's rights did they now? Why should ANYBODY worry about theirs? :evil:
"Nobody deserves anything. You get what you get." - House
"Hope is for sissies." - House
“Qokedy qokedy dal qokedy qokedy." - The Voynich Manuscript
"We're not ordinary people - we're morons!" - Jerome Horwitz
"A book, any book, is a sacred object." - Jorge Luis Borges
"I am a survivor. I am like a cockroach, you just can't get rid of me." - Madonna

User avatar
CVT Temp
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1860
Founded: Oct 03, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby CVT Temp » Wed Dec 26, 2012 5:32 pm

Coccygia wrote:If somebody commits rape, and it results in a child, damn right they should be required to pay child support. They did not consider the woman's rights did they now? Why should ANYBODY worry about theirs? :evil:


You read the premise wrong. Try reading it again. Then you won't look so foolish.
Иф ю кан рид дис, ю ар рили борд ор ю ар Россияне.

User avatar
Nova_Ravenna
Envoy
 
Posts: 331
Founded: Nov 29, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Nova_Ravenna » Wed Dec 26, 2012 5:37 pm

No, the state should not be paying any money to anyone at all for anything.

User avatar
Uiiop
Senator
 
Posts: 4363
Founded: Jun 20, 2012
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Uiiop » Wed Dec 26, 2012 5:38 pm

Nova_Ravenna wrote:No, the state should not be paying any money to anyone at all for anything.

Are you able to tell us why not?

User avatar
CVT Temp
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1860
Founded: Oct 03, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby CVT Temp » Wed Dec 26, 2012 5:42 pm

Uiiop wrote:Are you able to tell us why not?


Because A = A.
Иф ю кан рид дис, ю ар рили борд ор ю ар Россияне.

User avatar
Coccygia
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7510
Founded: Nov 24, 2009
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Coccygia » Wed Dec 26, 2012 5:44 pm

CVT Temp wrote:
Coccygia wrote:If somebody commits rape, and it results in a child, damn right they should be required to pay child support. They did not consider the woman's rights did they now? Why should ANYBODY worry about theirs? :evil:


You read the premise wrong. Try reading it again. Then you won't look so foolish.

Oops. :oops: (Next time read the whole thing first...)

But in my defense, saying that rapists shouldn't have to pay child support is the kind of thing I've come to expect around here. :blush:
Last edited by Coccygia on Wed Dec 26, 2012 5:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Nobody deserves anything. You get what you get." - House
"Hope is for sissies." - House
“Qokedy qokedy dal qokedy qokedy." - The Voynich Manuscript
"We're not ordinary people - we're morons!" - Jerome Horwitz
"A book, any book, is a sacred object." - Jorge Luis Borges
"I am a survivor. I am like a cockroach, you just can't get rid of me." - Madonna

User avatar
Xathranaar
Minister
 
Posts: 3384
Founded: Jul 25, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Xathranaar » Wed Dec 26, 2012 5:51 pm

Uiiop wrote:
Nova_Ravenna wrote:No, the state should not be paying any money to anyone at all for anything.

Are you able to tell us why not?

Well quite obviously he is extrapolating from how badly state spending on education failed him.
My views summarized.
The Gospel According to Queen.
It is possible that some of my posts may not be completely serious.

User avatar
Point Breeze
Diplomat
 
Posts: 709
Founded: Dec 26, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Point Breeze » Wed Dec 26, 2012 6:43 pm

I completely agree with OP regarding the blogger's attitude. That argument is absurd.

Regarding the issue, I believe that the victim of a rape should absolutely NOT be responsible for the resulting child's care. While consent isn't necessary for procreation, it is for the establishment of a family or relationship. However, I really lament the poor guy's situation in this case. Since he didn't report the rape, I can't reasonably see the courts excusing him from child support unless he actually has some evidence of it.

Always report your rapes, people.
Thane of WA Affairs for Wintreath

User avatar
Czechanada
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14846
Founded: Aug 31, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Czechanada » Wed Dec 26, 2012 6:49 pm

Child support is rape. It rapes a man's wallet.

User avatar
Ethel mermania
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 89819
Founded: Aug 20, 2010
Father Knows Best State

Postby Ethel mermania » Wed Dec 26, 2012 6:58 pm

Coccygia wrote:If somebody commits rape, and it results in a child, damn right they should be required to pay child support. They did not consider the woman's rights did they now? Why should ANYBODY worry about theirs? :evil:



edit: ninja'ed
Last edited by Ethel mermania on Wed Dec 26, 2012 7:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion … but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.

http://www.salientpartners.com/epsilont ... ilizations

User avatar
CVT Temp
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1860
Founded: Oct 03, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby CVT Temp » Wed Dec 26, 2012 7:04 pm

Czechanada wrote:Child support is rape. It rapes a man's wallet.


No, just no.
Иф ю кан рид дис, ю ар рили борд ор ю ар Россияне.

User avatar
Point Breeze
Diplomat
 
Posts: 709
Founded: Dec 26, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Point Breeze » Wed Dec 26, 2012 7:39 pm

Czechanada wrote:Child support is rape. It rapes a man's wallet.


I hear that.
*clinks glasses*
Thane of WA Affairs for Wintreath

User avatar
Saintland
Senator
 
Posts: 3588
Founded: Dec 22, 2012
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Saintland » Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:47 am

His money, his choice. Yes, kids may need support from their father, but that doesn't mean they have the right to it. The kid's needs are irrelevant. What's relevant are the reproductive rights of the man.

A woman's right to choose is protected by law. Women have the option of choosing birth control that is not dependent upon cooperation from their partner to be effective. Women can choose whether their baby is born or aborted (and the father has no say in the matter). Women can choose whether to give the baby up for adoption (and the father has no say in the matter). Women can choose to keep the kid and raise it on their own or they can choose to get married and raise it with a man or (in some enlightened states) with a woman. A man's right to choose is not protected by law. There is no birth control for men that is effective when his partner is determined to get herself pregnant with his seed other than abstinence or sterilization (and most men that don't want kids now want to have them eventually, so abstinence is their only option). If a child is conceived, a man has no say in whether the kid is born or aborted. If the child is born, a man has no say in whether the mother gives it up for adoption. If the mother keeps the kid, a man has no say regarding whether he is compelled by law to support a kid he may not have wanted in the first place.

How would women like it if they had the same reproductive rights as men (none)? How would women like it if abortion and birth control were illegal? If giving a kid up for adoption was banned? If they could be compelled by law to raise a kid they don't want? Rick Santorum would love to bring such a nightmarish world into existence for women and then women would have as few reproductive rights as men do.

Granting men an exception to involuntary child support when they are the victim of rape or semen theft is like granting women a right to an abortion only in the case of rape, incest or life of the mother. I appreciate the small amount of concern for men's reproductive rights, but that's just not good enough. Men should have the same reproductive rights that women have and maybe then women's reproductive rights would be more secure. The problem people made when they began to push for equal rights for women was considering women's position in society as analogous to that of racial minorities in the Jim Crow days. Separate, but equal was actually separate and unequal for the "races" (which was and is a nonsensical concept). However separate, but equal accurately described the relations between men and women and by seeing women as being oppressed like African-Americans were, the "women's rights" movement went astray and became effective a movement that seeks to end oppression of women and preserve oppression of men. The society of the 1950s oppressed men and women equally, but in different ways.

To summarize, the arguments in favor of forcing men to pay child support against their will are basically many of the same arguments used in favor of banning abortion. The case in favor of a man's right to choose is at least as strong as the case in favor of a woman's right to choose and probably stronger because abortion arguably violates the "negative" rights of the fetus while the right to not pay child support violates "positive" rights, which are inherently dubious because they impose positive obligations on other people. In order to be logically consistent and non-bigoted, you have to either support or oppose the right to choose for everybody. If you favor reproductive rights for half the population and oppose them for the other half, you are a sexist.
NS Sports Results | Saintland Press | Commentaries on the WA's resolutions 7-22-14 update: Complete through #125 |
World Baseball Classic 27 co-host | World Bowl XXII host | World Cup of Hockey 23 host | Various Rankings | King Paulus XV Memorial Games
Official Name: Regnvm Sanctvsterra
Official Name in English: Kingdom of Saintland
Monarch: King Petrus XX
Prime Minister: Sara Poenius
Demonym: Sanctii
Trigram: SNT
If you're new to NS Sports and need help, feel free to send me a telegram or read my guide to NS Sports

User avatar
Tahar Joblis
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9148
Founded: Antiquity
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Tahar Joblis » Thu Dec 27, 2012 3:31 am

Point Breeze wrote:I completely agree with OP regarding the blogger's attitude. That argument is absurd.

Regarding the issue, I believe that the victim of a rape should absolutely NOT be responsible for the resulting child's care. While consent isn't necessary for procreation, it is for the establishment of a family or relationship. However, I really lament the poor guy's situation in this case. Since he didn't report the rape, I can't reasonably see the courts excusing him from child support unless he actually has some evidence of it.

Always report your rapes, people.

In an environment where rape of a man by a woman is very typically not recognized as such and often laughed out of the room, we can't exactly blame men for not reporting being raped.

Heck, we can't exactly blame women for not reporting being raped, what with the way some advocacy groups try to make it seem like nothing will ever come of their reports except more trouble.

But that's not really the point. Where does the burden of proof lie?

Traditionally, the burden of proof lies on the accuser, in order to protect the innocent from being punished. What do we have in this situation? The burden of proof is reversed. In order to avoid being punished, the rape victim must prove their rape was a "legitimate rape."

This is the travesty of justice.

Incidentally; the OP's link notes:
Reader Christopher Marshall pointed out to me that the man went to the police 2 weeks after the incident and they refused to follow up on it. This is what we need to fight: the prejudice against men that positions them always as the perpetrators of violence and never as victims. Here is the real injustice in this case. A statement that a crime has been committed is dismissed by the authorities.

Which is to say that ... yes, he did report his rape; and the authorities simply ignored that report. Probably laughed it off. But remember: You're requiring him to prove that he was raped in order to avoid being punished. You've placed the burden of proof in the place that maximizes the punishment of victims for being victims.

User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Post Czar
 
Posts: 46407
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Thu Dec 27, 2012 4:17 am

Can someone justify child support to me AT ALL?
And bare in mind, if you accept this premise that rape victims shouldn't pay, then it must have little or nothing to do with the childs welfare.
I will remind you that consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy. Thats a big part of abortion rights. Secondly, if consent is what you are concerned with, then the mere act of not wanting to pay surely shows quite clearly where the persons consent lies.

In short, can you justify forcing one person to pay, but not another.


If consent to sex = consent to pregnancy and childcare, on what basis do we permit abortions, but force continued sustainment through work for the child?
If consent to sex does not equate with that, whence cometh the supposed responsibility of either parent for the child?
Last edited by Ostroeuropa on Thu Dec 27, 2012 4:24 am, edited 4 times in total.
British Nationalist And Syndicalist.

User avatar
Kilobugya
Senator
 
Posts: 4274
Founded: Apr 05, 2005
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Kilobugya » Thu Dec 27, 2012 5:09 am

I agree with you that childcare should be socialized. The whole "child support" thing is quite broken. Everyone taking care of a child should receive funding from the state to ensure the child's well-being and happiness, and most child-related things (daycare, school, child healthcare, ...) should be totally free. A child didn't chose were to be born, and is not responsible of the poverty of his parents, nor of fights between them.
Secular humanist and trans-humanist, rationalist, democratic socialist, pacifist, dreaming very high to not perform too low.
Economic Left/Right: -9.50 - Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.69

User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Post Czar
 
Posts: 46407
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Thu Dec 27, 2012 5:12 am

Kilobugya wrote:I agree with you that childcare should be socialized. The whole "child support" thing is quite broken. Everyone taking care of a child should receive funding from the state to ensure the child's well-being and happiness, and most child-related things (daycare, school, child healthcare, ...) should be totally free. A child didn't chose were to be born, and is not responsible of the poverty of his parents, nor of fights between them.


This seems a sane solution.
British Nationalist And Syndicalist.

User avatar
Risottia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 50834
Founded: Sep 05, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Risottia » Thu Dec 27, 2012 5:18 am

CVT Temp wrote:Of course rape victims should not be forced to pay child support

This.

Also, I would question the idea that a rapist gets to keep and raise a kid. I fail to see how being raised and educated by a rapist would be in the best interest of a minor.
Statanist through and through.
Evilutionist Atheist Crusadjihadist. "Darwinu Akhbar! Dawkins vult!"
Founder of the NSG Peace Prize Committee.
I'm back.

User avatar
Ostroeuropa
Post Czar
 
Posts: 46407
Founded: Jun 14, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Ostroeuropa » Thu Dec 27, 2012 5:29 am

Risottia wrote:
CVT Temp wrote:Of course rape victims should not be forced to pay child support

This.

Also, I would question the idea that a rapist gets to keep and raise a kid. I fail to see how being raised and educated by a rapist would be in the best interest of a minor.


Alleged rapist I gather.
it is alleged that one of the people was raped by the other. (And was alleged long before the child was born, at the time the rape allegedly occured.)
It has not been proven, and the state demands that child support happen.
Last edited by Ostroeuropa on Thu Dec 27, 2012 5:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
British Nationalist And Syndicalist.

User avatar
Torisakia
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14239
Founded: Jun 04, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Torisakia » Thu Dec 27, 2012 5:30 am

Nah. If they had the audacity to rape someone, what makes you think they have the money to pay child support?
Give me the meep boys and free my soul

Next

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Absolon-7, Bienenhalde, Cannot think of a name, Cascadiuh, Charlia, Chernoslavia, Conserative Morality, Dogmeat, Dooom35796821595, Fahran, Fartsniffage, Fractalnavel, Goldwater, Grinning Dragon, Hurdergaryp, Luziyca, Majestic-12 [Bot], Mardla, Mushet, Petrolheadia, Questers, Reikoku, Resurrectionia, Right wing humour squad, Saiwania, Scomagia, Senegalboy, Soldati Senza Confini, The Black Forrest, The Empire of Pretantia, The Huskar Social Union

Remove ads