Advertisement
by Andsed » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:07 am
by Nova Cyberia » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:07 am
Purgatio wrote:Nova Cyberia wrote:Considering the inherent biases of our courts against men that's a bit iffy.
Paternity fraud is literally an open and shut case. The tort of deceit means you can claim compensation for any deception, whether deliberate or in reckless disregard for the truth, which results in consequential economic loss. Paternity fraud fits the bill. Just show the kid isn't yours and you raised him all these years and you'll win damages, simple.
by Lower Nubia » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:08 am
- Anglo-Catholic
Anglican- Socially Centre-Right
- Third Way Neoliberal
- Asperger
Syndrome- Graduated
in Biochemistry
"These are they who are made like to God as far as possible, of their own free will, and by God's indwelling, and by His abiding grace. They are truly called gods, not by nature, but by participation; just as red-hot iron is called fire, not by nature, but by participation in the fire's action."
Signature Updated: 15th April, 2022
by Estanglia » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:08 am
Torrocca wrote:"Your honor, it was not mein fault! I didn't order the systematic genocide of millions of people, it was the twenty kilograms of pure-cut Bavarian cocaine that did it!"
by Holy Tedalonia » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:08 am
Purgatio wrote:This wouldn't be a problem if we created a national DNA database, with a person's DNA entered into the database from a drawn blood sample from the moment of birth. Not only would issues like paternity and child support obligations be determined automatically, but it would allow us to solve many violent crimes through a simpler and streamlined process.
by Nova Cyberia » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:10 am
You say that you're not shaming anyone... and in the sentence right after, you're shaming literally all women, building in the premise that they're all automatically and entirely untrustworthy, to the point where even if a man trusts a woman, he has to be forced to have a paternity test.No one's being shamed. Men just don't really feel like being financially and legally on the hook for the rest of their lives for a baby that's not even theirs. Or are we expected to by default assume that all women are virtuous angels who would never sleep with anyone else?
And tbqh, if you slept around and end up with a baby who's not your SO's offspring then you absolutely deserve to be shamed.
You also started out referring to single women, now it's women with SO's sleeping around. At least get your misogynist stories straight.
by The South Falls » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:11 am
by Attempted Socialism » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:13 am
Getting child support from who you thought was the father, getting child support from who was actually the father... the cost of raising kids on your own doesn't change.Nova Cyberia wrote:Attempted Socialism wrote:Yeah, because naturally women decide who to claim child support from based on the ability to pay. You really don't have any issues coming off as a massive misogynist, do you?
Are we supposed to just pretend that raising children doesn't require a boatload of money?
You conveniently didn't read the conversation we've had?You say that you're not shaming anyone... and in the sentence right after, you're shaming literally all women, building in the premise that they're all automatically and entirely untrustworthy, to the point where even if a man trusts a woman, he has to be forced to have a paternity test.
You also started out referring to single women, now it's women with SO's sleeping around. At least get your misogynist stories straight.
Not really. In fact, my philosophy on this is pretty simple.
Trust, but verify.
Do you have any actual arguments beyond shrieking "misogynist"?
Represented in the World Assembly by Ambassador Robert Mortimer Pride, called The Regicide Assume OOC unless otherwise indicated. My WA Authorship. | Cui Bono, quod seipsos custodes custodiunt? Bobberino: "The academic tone shines through." | Who am I in real life, my opinions and notes My NS career |
by Nova Cyberia » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:19 am
Attempted Socialism wrote:Getting child support from who you thought was the father, getting child support from who was actually the father... the cost of raising kids on your own doesn't change.Nova Cyberia wrote:Are we supposed to just pretend that raising children doesn't require a boatload of money?
You conveniently didn't read the conversation we've had?Not really. In fact, my philosophy on this is pretty simple.
Trust, but verify.
Do you have any actual arguments beyond shrieking "misogynist"?
by Thepeopl » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:20 am
by Nanatsu no Tsuki » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:23 am
Slava Ukraini
Also: THERNSY!!
Your story isn't over;֍Help save transgender people's lives֍Help for feral cats
Cat with internet access||Supposedly heartless, & a d*ck.||Is maith an t-earra an tsíocháin.||No TGsRIP: Dyakovo & Ashmoria
by Attempted Socialism » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:31 am
You're talking like women decide who to claim is the father because they think they can get some men to... what? Pay extra? Bribe them to remain silent? Originally you were talking about child support. Is US child support based on income?Nova Cyberia wrote:Attempted Socialism wrote:Getting child support from who you thought was the father, getting child support from who was actually the father... the cost of raising kids on your own doesn't change.
No... it doesn't.
I'm not talking about the cost changing. I'm talking about having less money to spend.
Making a coherent and valid argument would be a nice help, but I'm not holding my breath.Do I need to start using crayons to get you to understand the fairly simple words I'm saying?
And here you're presuming that all women are inherently untrustworthy and should automatically be suspected of infidelity or fraud (And sloppy of me to forget that option before). It's libellous based solely on gender, and inherently demean their reputation, which is discriminatory towards women. I.e. it's a transgression against the rights of women. That was your original question. Your oft-repeated misogynistic "arguments" aside (Whether you wish to phrase it as just an outcome of your philosophy or not), discrimination normally not legal.You conveniently didn't read the conversation we've had?
Yes, I did. You're whining about me apparently assuming all women are untrustworthy.
So I'll reiterate again my fairly simple philosophy of "Trust, but verify."
Represented in the World Assembly by Ambassador Robert Mortimer Pride, called The Regicide Assume OOC unless otherwise indicated. My WA Authorship. | Cui Bono, quod seipsos custodes custodiunt? Bobberino: "The academic tone shines through." | Who am I in real life, my opinions and notes My NS career |
by The South Falls » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:34 am
Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:The only time I’d be for paternity tests is when there is a strong reason to have one: finding if a child belongs to one of the parents, to find a lost parent or when a parent is refusing to take responsibility for a child. Other than that, nope.
by Stellar Colonies » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:35 am
Floofybit wrote:Your desired society should be one where you are submissive and controlled
Primitive Communism wrote:What bodily autonomy do men need?
Techocracy101010 wrote:If she goes on a rampage those saggy wonders are as deadly as nunchucks
Parmistan wrote:It's not ALWAYS acceptable when we do it, but it's MORE acceptable when we do it.
Theodorable wrote:Jihad will win.
Distruzio wrote:All marriage outside the Church is gay marriage.
Khardsland wrote:Terrorism in its original definition is a good thing.
I try to be objective, but I do have some biases.
North Californian.
Stellar Colonies is a loose galactic confederacy.
The Confederacy & the WA.
Add 1200 years.
by Holy Tedalonia » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:39 am
Attempted Socialism wrote:You're talking like women decide who to claim is the father because they think they can get some men to... what? Pay extra? Bribe them to remain silent? Originally you were talking about child support. Is US child support based on income?Nova Cyberia wrote:No... it doesn't.
I'm not talking about the cost changing. I'm talking about having less money to spend.
Making a coherent and valid argument would be a nice help, but I'm not holding my breath.Do I need to start using crayons to get you to understand the fairly simple words I'm saying?
And here you're presuming that all women are inherently untrustworthy and should automatically be suspected of infidelity or fraud (And sloppy of me to forget that option before). It's libellous based solely on gender, and inherently demean their reputation, which is discriminatory towards women. I.e. it's a transgression against the rights of women. That was your original question. Your oft-repeated misogynistic "arguments" aside (Whether you wish to phrase it as just an outcome of your philosophy or not), discrimination normally not legal.Yes, I did. You're whining about me apparently assuming all women are untrustworthy.
So I'll reiterate again my fairly simple philosophy of "Trust, but verify."
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:39 am
Attempted Socialism wrote:You mean the mandatory slut-shaming and distrust based on her gender for no viable reason at all?
Attempted Socialism wrote:You're proposing a policy change on the basis that all women are automatically suspected of infidelity, and you can't see how that's a transgression?
Attempted Socialism wrote:In my country, that insinuation would be libellous (And the discrimination based on gender makes it a rights violation).
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:43 am
Attempted Socialism wrote:Yeah, because naturally women decide who to claim child support from based on the ability to pay.
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by Ethel mermania » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:45 am
by Galloism » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:45 am
Ethel mermania wrote:The South Falls wrote:What about female maternity tests? thonk about that
Indeed. I have a story.
After 10 years, the wife starts to think their kid looks kinda strange so she decides to do a DNA test.
She finds out that the kid is actually from completely different parents.
Wife: Honey, I have something very serious to tell you
Husband: What’s up?
Wife: According to DNA test results, this is not our kid
Husband: Well you dont’t remember, do you?? When we were leaving the hospital, we noticed that our baby had pooped. Then you said: - Please go change the baby, I’ll wait for you here. So I went inside, got a clean one and left the dirty one there
by Galloism » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:47 am
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Heloin wrote:Both of those sentiments are sexist.
Not really. Rape, by its original definition, requires a penis, hence the notion that women can only be potential sexual assaulters, at most. Likewise, women know the baby's hers, because they felt the baby emerge from their own womb. Men have no way of knowing this.
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:49 am
Thepeopl wrote:If you want a paternity test, that is a sign something is wrong in your relationship. Why would your girlfriend/ wife sleep with others if she is happy with you?
Thepeopl wrote:I am for open honest curiosity and good communication. If you do that in your relationship, you can tell each other your fantasy, your dreams and your wishes to bed other people. (If that wish existed)
Thepeopl wrote:If you want kinky stuff or just rpg, talk about it, pay attention to your SO. And your SO will feel safe to do the same and feel no urge to sleep around behind your back.
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by Napkizemlja » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:52 am
by Ethel mermania » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:52 am
Galloism wrote:Ethel mermania wrote:
Indeed. I have a story.
After 10 years, the wife starts to think their kid looks kinda strange so she decides to do a DNA test.
She finds out that the kid is actually from completely different parents.
Wife: Honey, I have something very serious to tell you
Husband: What’s up?
Wife: According to DNA test results, this is not our kid
Husband: Well you dont’t remember, do you?? When we were leaving the hospital, we noticed that our baby had pooped. Then you said: - Please go change the baby, I’ll wait for you here. So I went inside, got a clean one and left the dirty one there
I'll admit it, I laughed.
by Galloism » Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:52 am
Attempted Socialism wrote:The only argumentin I can see for why a woman would not pursue the actual father (If she even knows herself) would be power disparity; namely, a father with the power to contest parentage in court. I'd guess their financial situation is either unchanged or better. Your argument is even worse than I thought.
Researchers pawed through a host of scientific articles published around the world from 1950 through last year. The perceived "paternal discrepancy rate," as it is called, ranges from less than 1 percent to as high as 30 percent in the various studies. Most researchers believe the rate is less than 10 percent.
You mean the mandatory slut-shaming and distrust based on her gender for no viable reason at all? You're proposing a policy change on the basis that all women are automatically suspected of infidelity, and you can't see how that's a transgression? In my country, that insinuation would be libellous (And the discrimination based on gender makes it a rights violation).Okay, I gotta ask.
How is performing a mandatory paternity test a baby in any way a violation of the rights of women?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Big Eyed Animation, Emotional Support Crocodile, Moloto Japan, Neu California, Plan Neonie, Port Carverton, Rogue River, Talibanada, Tarsonis
Advertisement