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.
You don't even get it, do you? You just categorized homosexuality as something to "keep an eye out" for. Is there something wrong with homosexuality?
Not in my opionion, but perhaps for some people. The point is we have mandatory DNA tests for paternity, whats next mandatory testing for other things, additons, homosexuality, etc. I use these examples because predispostion can be tested for or so Im told. Get over it. Perhaps you dont care if the gov. decides to do mandatory testing for these things.
Quote:
Would a paternity test not be protected under the same as other medical records in regards to work, pastor? Of course the SO would know, that's kind of the point of the test.
Quote:
Medical personnel are involved in our private lives. Not sure what kind of hospital you visit that isn't
Im begining to wonder about your comprehension. My example was how medical personnel are not involved in our private lives. That is why our medical records are protected and medical personnel do not inform those in our private lives of our medical conditions. Get it?
Quote:
Sure health issues should be off limits to the public, but I don't think the SO should be kept in the dark. Isn't that what marriage is about? Sharing the good and the bad?
And its not the job of medical personnel to inform our spouses of our personal medical issues. Sharing between spouses is good. Personal unsolicited involvement of strangers into peoples marriage is bad.
Here's the question you did not answer: What harm would the paternity testing do? You just started in with a bunch of questions regarding testing that is not on the same plane as paternity.
Mandatory paternity testing is harmful in that it gives government more control in our personal medical lives.
It is a loss of personal controls and freedoms.
It is an unnecessary testing.
It is a unnecessary expense
It will cause more divorce and fatherless children
It may cause people to avoid medical attention
Does that clarify my stand on it for you?
Mandatory paternity testing is harmful in that it gives government more control in our personal medical lives.
It is a loss of personal controls and freedoms.
It is an unnecessary testing.
It is a unnecessary expense
It will cause more divorce and fatherless children
It may cause people to avoid medical attention
Does that clarify my stand on it for you?
I'm clear. Your attitude tells me you don't have much of a valid argument. You wouldn't need to get so ugly about it if you had a leg to stand on.
My guess is that it would just be another thing tacked to the bill. I certainly don't think anyone else should pay.
I think the issue with letting people decide is that you get the argument that Unexpected makes: some women will be upset. Making it mandatory would eliminate the feeling of accusation from the man.
Then why not just buy a kit take the swab and send it off for the results. She would never have to know. Why subject everyone to that, those that dont agree and those that dont have trust issues, to protect a few men that fear they will upset their SO by saying they dont trust them. Is it really worth the added expense for out of pocket payers, increased premiums and taxes for the hordes that have children on tax payers dollars to protect a few hurt feelings.
I'm clear. Your attitude tells me you don't have much of a valid argument. You wouldn't need to get so ugly about it if you had a leg to stand on.
So we disagree. I believe my argument is as valid as yours. Sorry Im being ugly, but you seem to not be able to understand my points or adress what Im actually saying and its a bit frustrating.
So we disagree. I believe my argument is as valid as yours. Sorry Im being ugly, but you seem to not be able to understand my points or adress what Im actually saying and its a bit frustrating.
I understand and I'm addressing, I'm just not telling you what you want to hear.
Fact is, this is about paternity and nothing more. You're dragging in other issues that aren't in question to try to bolster your argument. If your argument stands alone, you don't need the padding.
Location: Huntersville/Charlotte, NC and Washington, DC
26,700 posts, read 41,794,567 times
Reputation: 41397
As far as the mandatory DNA testing goes, the only situation where I would even consider making it a requirement is whenever child support is sought in court. The alleged father would have the option to waive the test if he wants and accept financial responsibility until the kid turns 18.
So you would be against testing to protect from divorce and holding a biological father responsible? If a woman is cheating, you'd rather she continue to deceive her husband???
I am not against testing, I believe it is a personal choice. What I would rather do is not always what I think the the government should do. I would rather infidelity and deception didn't happen in the first place, but I don't support making infidelity a criminal offense, for example.
I understand and I'm addressing, I'm just not telling you what you want to hear.
Fact is, this is about paternity and nothing more. You're dragging in other issues that aren't in question to try to bolster your argument. If your argument stands alone, you don't need the padding.
What is it your telling me I dont want to hear.
You ask me what I thought the harm in mandatory DNA testing was and I have tried to relay the harm I see which involves government intrusion into everyones private life. Which has a potential to go beyond testing for paternity. I told you what I thought the harm in mandatory paternity testing was less the government intrusion. Im not bolstering my arguement Im telling you my arguement. If you dont want to hear my argument dont ask. If your going to ask at least give some relevant feedback or counter points or just answer the questions I pose to you instead of just stateing my points are invalid or inflated.
As far as the mandatory DNA testing goes, the only situation where I would even consider making it a requirement is whenever child support is sought in court. The alleged father would have the option to waive the test if he wants and accept financial responsibility until the kid turns 18.
Now that I agree with. The thing tho is that in the eyes of the law if you are married at conception and birth your are presumed the father and held accountable for CS even if the child is not your biological child. It sucks and dosent seem fair but I can understand why the courts feel this is best for the child.
Location: Huntersville/Charlotte, NC and Washington, DC
26,700 posts, read 41,794,567 times
Reputation: 41397
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
Now that I agree with. The thing tho is that in the eyes of the law if you are married at conception and birth your are presumed the father and held accountable for CS even if the child is not your biological child. It sucks and dosent seem fair but I can understand why the courts feel this is best for the child.
I really think that needs to be looked at further. To me, it seems like it gives a married woman a license to cheat and BS about paternity and leaves the husband a^# out in some cases.
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.
