Mandatory paternity tests are coming!!!! (lawyer, Marines, suspect, cost)
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.
Well, since you suggest that single mothers should be thrown in jail, that wouldn't be a single parent home. It would be a NO parent home.
Then why do you support the law that does not contain these exceptions?
He may not mind, but the US government, which has to pay benefits to HIS child, might mind. His insurance company, if he had a policy which named "his" child as the beneficiary, might also mind. I can see the insurance carrier in this case refusing to pay because the law requiring DNA proof of paternity has not been complied with. His other relatives might mind, if he has a will naming them as heirs should he die childless.
Why? Sounds like too much trouble to me. Why don't we just compel all males over the age of 10 to submit a DNA sample and keep the data in a national database against which all births can be checked? Sounds a lot more efficient to me. Of course, it doesn't have the bonus of throwing women in jail and dumping newborns into foster care, right?
No, it's not moot. The military is run by the federal government. Birth certificates and child support proceedings are the business of state governments. The military isn't obligated to give the DNA sample to anyone, and a state government cannot compel the federal government to turn it over. Jurisdiction, hello, ever heard of it? There is no doubt, the US military will not like the idea of having to participate in the administration of state paternity programs; this simply isn't the military's job. And so in the most likely scenario, the military simply will not release those DNA samples -- not to the state, not to the families.
Well, ph1walls suggested that women who refuse the DNA test should be thrown in jail. Even a financially independent woman, who is capable of raising the child on her own. Since being thrown in jail would make the woman lose her job, I cannot think of a better way to make sure that it's the taxpayers who end up paying for the childcare. So again, it's not so much that you care for the taxpayers, as your goal is to inflict suffering and humiliation on women. It is the only thing in which the lot of you seem to be consistent.
"No, it's not moot. The military is run by the federal government. Birth certificates and child support proceedings are the business of state governments. The military isn't obligated to give the DNA sample to anyone, and a state government cannot compel the federal government to turn it over. Jurisdiction, hello, ever heard of it? There is no doubt, the US military will not like the idea of having to participate in the administration of state paternity programs; this simply isn't the military's job. And so in the most likely scenario, the military simply will not release those DNA samples -- not to the state, not to the families."
Sure they will.... even if it takes a court order... The military is not exempt the law...
Sure they will.... even if it takes a court order... The military is not exempt the law...
What law? A state law? Neither the state of Tennessee, nor any other state can pass a law forcing the military to do smack. States have no jurisdiction over the military. You know what jurisdiction is? The federal government doesn't take orders from the states on matters reserved to the federal government (such as defense). It's in the Constitution.
On being exempt from the law -- this is a platitude that doesn't translate very well into actual legal practice. If you aren't in the class of persons or entities specifically described in the law, then you are "exempt" from the law. If the law states the mother must prove the paternity of her child before she can collect benefits on the child's behalf, that law does not obligate the federal government to help her prove it. Also, if the legislative body that passed the law has no subject matter jurisdiction over you, you are "exempt" from the law. States have no subject matter jurisdiction over the military.
I disagree with that definition. A misogynist is anyone who hates women. A man who hates women is a misogynist, and a woman who hates women is also a misogynist. It's like that debate on whether or not a Jew can be an antisemite. (Answer: of course he can.)
I guess you can re-write the dictionary if you want to.
Originally Posted by reconmark
Everyone joining the military is now required to give a DNA sample!
This has been policy for a number of years now.
Your argument is moot!
No, it's not moot. The military is run by the federal government. Birth certificates and child support proceedings are the business of state governments. The military isn't obligated to give the DNA sample to anyone, and a state government cannot compel the federal government to turn it over. Jurisdiction, hello, ever heard of it? There is no doubt, the US military will not like the idea of having to participate in the administration of state paternity programs; this simply isn't the military's job. And so in the most likely scenario, the military simply will not release those DNA samples -- not to the state, not to the families.
Let's put on our thinking caps for a moment, shall we?
Your scenario states that the man was in the military and got blown up his wife is the beneficiary of all his belongings.
A simple request to the local JAG officer would result in the sample being rendered to the appropriate party, if that did not work a subpeona would also do the trick.
If you really wanted to know who your baby's daddy was, would this be too much work for you?
What law? A state law? Neither the state of Tennessee, nor any other state can pass a law forcing the military to do smack. States have no jurisdiction over the military. You know what jurisdiction is? The federal government doesn't take orders from the states on matters reserved to the federal government (such as defense). It's in the Constitution.
I guess you you work with the AG's office...
Last edited by Reads2MUCH; 08-20-2009 at 03:47 PM..
Reason: no personal comments
What law? A state law? Neither the state of Tennessee, nor any other state can pass a law forcing the military to do smack. States have no jurisdiction over the military. You know what jurisdiction is? The federal government doesn't take orders from the states on matters reserved to the federal government (such as defense). It's in the Constitution.
A local District attorney can subpeona any military person if said person has pertinent evidence or information to a case.
If the military wants to start with the shananigans then the local D.A. simply puts in a call the the Federal Prosecuter for that district, the Fed Presecuter than gets the process moving.
The military is not a government or law unto itself.
Last edited by Reads2MUCH; 08-20-2009 at 03:48 PM..
Reason: keep it clean
Mary to the military: My husband (or boy friend) was killed in Iraq and there was nothing left of him. I need his DNA sample you have on file to claim death benefits for his child that was born while he was in Iraq.
Military to Mary: Get lost...
Now do you really believe the military is like that? No, they are not. You would just have to fill out some paper work and wait. If he was just a boy friend there would be more involved but she would get it.
I know for sure who the father of my kids are without a mandatory dna test.
I dont think so. It has been some yrs. ago, but I remember filling out the birth certificate all by myself. I could have put anyones name on it, but if I had not his kids would not have been elegible for benefits when he died. That is how it is different.
You can not list the father on the birth certificate forms. If you are married, your husband is automatically the legal father whether you put his name or not. If you are not married, the father must sign a paternity affidavit. That is where he acknowledges he is the father. So you can write any name you want to, but it would be worthless.
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.
What law? A state law? Neither the state of Tennessee, nor any other state can pass a law forcing the military to do smack. States have no jurisdiction over the military. You know what jurisdiction is? The federal government doesn't take orders from the states on matters reserved to the federal government (such as defense). It's in the Constitution.
