Should men get a jail term for fathering children out of wedlock? (border, education)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I already suggested what should be done about the "problem": nothing. Gun violence is a bigger problem and we continue to do nothing about that. Get over your jealousy of men you think have escaped responsibility. 1. There aren't that many of them. 2. They are not likely living all that wonderful a life if they don't have assets that can be attached. 3. Why is it always only about the money? Did anyone answer my question? How much money do you believe you are paying every month to support the children of deadbeat dads? I'm serious. How much? If men and women were as interchangebale as you say the Creator would not have gone so far out of his way to endow men and women with uniquely sex linked personalities. I wouldn't have wanted my father to have sole custody of me!!!!!!!! A country with 424 billionaires can afford a few deadbeat dads... or is it the fact that its Louisiana, and whatever other southern states were mentioned... ... this whole thread reeks of superiorism, racism, sexism and naivism.
H
Really? Gun violence is a bigger problem? More people of the past 10 years have been killed by improper medical care than by gun violence. More kids have drowned in pools, than by gun violence! I think your priorities are confused. Besides, all I did was answer a question proposed by the OP. Additionally, I never made it about the money, in fact YOU brought up money, I brought up responsibility. I think you have a problem with men. You appear to think you are superior. BTW, you aren't.
In my posts, i never looked at money, never discussed race, the only thing I referred to is the reverse sexism displayed by YOU and the superiorism displayed by you. You, who appears to think you are better than I when it comes to raising kids. Sorry, you aren't. ANY parent who care for their children, is EQUALLY capable of raising them.
You know, back in the early 90's, I took my youngest to the mall. A bit into our trip, it became obvious to anyone within 6 feet of us, she had done the nasty in her diaper. As I went to wheel her into the Men's room to change her, there was this older woman, probably in her mid 70's, who gave me this horrified look when she saw me wheeling a baby girl into the men's room to change her. I really wanted to pause and tell her, "Look lady, if you don't like it, I can shuck this diaper right here in the middle of the mall, (and then point to my daughter) - SHE, isn't going to care.". I mean really... The only REALLY rough spot was some of my daughter's teachers had their heads in the sand also, and felt a man couldn't raise a daughter, and reported me to CPS on several occasions, one time, because they thought I didn't buy my daughter enough dresses. YOU remind me of her.
Gun violence? How about drunk drivers? THEY kill more people than medical malpractice, gun violence and swimming pools combined.
You are right about the first 9 years, the reason for my proposal, in all actuality is, the fist 9 years, are probably some of the roughest. MANY men are not interested in the responsibility that child rearing entails. If they were faced with it as a certainty, they may not be so willing to "free willy" and have fun at someone elses expense. MANY men are not held responsible, and because of that, go about their way without caring what impact they are having on others.
If they were in fact impacted, and were held responsible, things may be different.
I LOVE my 2 daughters, and would have walked through hellfire itself for them.
I guess thats the differences we as opposite genders face in society. I raised two boys as a single parent and I would say the first 9 years were easier than the second 9 years for me. Taking care of younger children seems easier and more emotionally rewarding than it is in the pubescence and later teen years.
I would also throw out there that many men are not GIVEN the opportunity to be responsible outside of financially. When I was growing up not many men actually physically took care of their children because our society told us that was a mothers job not because they didnt have the ability. These days I see many great fathers that are as hands on and nurturing as any mother. I know often some single mothers dont want any involvement from the childs father.
Unless they are paying child support I believe they should get 3 years in prison for each child they father out of wedlock and our taxes end up paying for. Then we could all buy stock in Trojan Co and be set for retirement.
But seriously, how long are we going to allow this cycle of ignorance, poverty, welfare and crime to go on? It's like a ponzie scheme.
With today's DNA technology this law would be very easy to enforce. Maybe 3 years is not enough?
For your next trick thread, can you please address promiscuous wives, from the out of wedlock men?
Because I know of a married woman who had a son with a very close man friend, and her husband was told the kid was his, that she didn't play him. This lie went on for at least 18 years.
Oh, and BTW, these people I know, are well to do, wealthy, not in your description of ignorance-poverty-welfare-or crime.
Was there a point to your reference of a prophylactic manufacturer? or, were you just soliciting ill responses?
You guys would like Saudia Arabia much more than the USA.
No I'm just annoyed with women who lay down with idiots and expect these fools to help them raise their kids. I'm not saying give them a break or taking away their responsibilities as the father, but just women should be more careful and sure of who they're having sex with.
Chances are if you the guy you're dating is a dumb, irresponsible, immature dumbass; he's going to be the same after the baby is born.
We need to reduce benefits for welfare if women receiving get pregnant. that would put a stop to unwanted pregnancies within 9 months.
While we are at it. Lets make circumcision a non covered procedure by healthcare.
When men produce more than 1 child they can't support then they need to be sterilized. That would put an end to irresponsible fatherhood. ... I Would do the same for a woman, especially if they were from multiple fathers.
We may not be able to legislate morals, but we can stop paying for them.
Do you know what I think is dumb? Allowing men to run around impregnating 10 different women and never paying a dime of support or spending 10 mins with any of his children.
And then taxing hard working people to raise those children and building more and more prisons to house those neglected children who grow up to break the law because they never had a mentor or guidance.
But thanks for your brilliant contribution.
I want to know where this fantasy world is you live in where woman play no part in procreation. Where woman are perfect angels and never attempt to extort or take advantage of men. Please share with the audience this location.
Back here on earth, I have 2 male friends who's drug using wives will not let them see their children. They are not deadbeats, but because the Texas legal system is a ridiculous circus in which woman have all the rights and advantages, they can't get joint custody. I also know more than one female that has attempted to get knocked up because they wanted kids but didn't have husbands/boyfriends or if they did, couldn't have kids. yes, woman doing bad things. Should we lock them up too? Throwing people in jail for bad choices is not a free society. If you open to door for improsining for such things, what next, poor diet? Bad TV choices? You are not a smart individual to propose such an idea. Thereofre, I say again, dumbest idea ever.
I'm tired of paying for everyone else's kids to go to public school. My kids never went to public school and I still had to pay that little tax even though I also paid tuition at private school. Now my kids are grown and have their own children and have been out of school for about 10 years now and I still have that little tax to pay.
Same here. I don't have kids but always had to pay for other kids.
It would only make sense to arrest and criminalize the mothers under these circumstances. Women can make the legal decision as to whether to bring a child to term or not.
We need to reduce benefits for welfare if women receiving get pregnant. that would put a stop to unwanted pregnancies within 9 months.
While we are at it. Lets make circumcision a non covered procedure by healthcare.
When men produce more than 1 child they can't support then they need to be sterilized. That would put an end to irresponsible fatherhood. ... I Would do the same for a woman, especially if they were from multiple fathers.
We may not be able to legislate morals, but we can stop paying for them.
This may have just been a typo on your part, but circumcision isn't related to sterilization. I'm not sure if circumcision is usually even covered.
That's a really bad analogy. Doesn't even make any sense.
I'm talking about enforcing a little personal responsibility. No one is telling the man he can't have sex, but they are giving him an incentive to have safe sex.
What is the difference between this and any "sin tax" like alcohol or tobacco?
It wasn't meant to be an analogy but instead a comparison to how terrible of a idea you propose. Should Arnold Schwarzenegger whom was married while he had a child out of wedlock be imprionsed for that? What about Lil Wayne who has several children out of wedlock? I have a cousin that recently had his first child out of wedlock, nonetheless him and his spouse make $600,000 combined at very the least annually, should he be imprisoned? You're pushing for a agenda that traditional Christians would push for not contemporary Christians.
Now in regards to your argument that having children out of wedlock shouldn't be accepted as a society is debatable, remember not all of us are religious. Just as I said about my cousin, he isn't going to pay child-support solely because his girlfriend and him already know that financial support will be coming from him; should he be punished for having a child out of wedlock and not paying child support? Yes, as a society it would be nice for potential parents to have children with those who have intentions of staying with their partner while also providing financial support without the state, but in reality that'll never happen. Maybe you should propose a more rational approach to things, and then we'll be able to debate honestly with each other.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
