This is fun. http://family-law.freeadvice.com/family-law/child_support/one_parent_support.htm There is a very strong presumption in favor of making parents pay child support for the care and upkeep of their children, in part as an effort to keep those children and families from becoming dependent on government aid such as welfare. In fact, the presumption in favor of requiring child support is so strong that one Louisiana case, State of Louisiana v. Frisard, actually ordered a father to pay child support although the mother had allegedly collected his sperm from an act of oral sex and used it to impregnate herself without his consent. Being married or not married, therefore, is irrelevant to a child support order determination, as is the question of whether you wanted the child or not. Even if you made it clear you did not want to have a child, the court can order you to pay support unless you are able to relinquish your parental rights. However, giving up parental rights is not as simple a matter as saying, "I want to give up my rights". The other parent must agree and the court needs to approve a petition allowing you to do so and only if it is in the best interests of the child (such as an adoption).
ISIS has their own interpretation of religious beliefs that encourages them to kill anyone that does not worship their religion. Should we allow them to practice this faulty belief in our country? Not all religions get it right all of the time.
My sister gave birth 13 years ago. She had issues and her daughter had to be put into ICU for a few weeks. She had 80/20 insurance. The hospital pursued $40,000 against her and forced her into bankruptcy.
Yup, and that goes right back to the tax payers... and as a tax payer myself, I'd rather pay for the pro-active birth control.
That is ridiculous and disheartening. Glad to see they may be turning that around, if even a little bit.
I dont disagree. My high school gf used PP. I don't have a bone to pick with them and think they serve a worthy purpose. The women I know tried intentionally to get pregnant though. So pro-active birth control wouldn't have worked for them.
Okay, but those women who didn't want pro-active birth control still had to get pregnant by someone and those men could've addressed pro-active birth control from the tip off... I mean from the horn... um... I mean before the... err...
My point was all parties wanted to get pregnant. The state just so happened to pick up the entire tab of the pregnancy. So i agree pro-active helps, but some people just don't care that taxpayers pay for their pregnancy....want kids....and just do it. Then the state picks it up.
Recent research into Christopher Columbus’s own diary and the diaries of others that were with him on their voyages to our continent have revealed very sad facts. Columbus feed his dogs live native baby’s for dog food. He killed hundreds of thousands of natives. He rewarded his men by giving them 8-10 year old girls to be used as sex slaves. He also started the slave trade in our continent by sending natives back to Europe as slaves. And yet, we honor him with a national holiday and give all federal employees the day off with pay. My point is, much of history as we where taught, and many of our beliefs, including religious beliefs, were formed long before modern science and research gave us an accurate accounting. We are now at a point where we should question every belief. This includes religious beliefs that support killing a life for any reason, even unborn life. And we should also question the history we where taught. And then demand corrections are made.
We should also question the belief that women are incubators. That sexuality in women is a sin that needs punishing. That men should have control over women's bodies. That what happens in a woman's body is somehow subject to veto power by a Congressperson or state legislator who does not know her or care about her. I don't want sex with Bill Gates, rich or poor.
Oh, gotcha, yeah I've run across that myself in the past and it's frustrating. I worked with a woman many years ago who had a low paying job (with health insurance) and a chronically unemployed husband who announced that she was going to have 4 children with or without her husband. They already had 2 children and were struggling to make ends meet but she wasn't content with that. The thing for me is that, for the greater good of society, we can't abandon these children even if their parents are dumbasses.
In response do D-rock's question, rare, but happens. (The opposite is more likely, the man does not pay child support.) If you don't want your partner to get pregnant, use a condom, have a vasectomy, explore alternate sexual practices besides heterosexual penis/vagina intercourse. Child support is for the child, not the parent. It's recognition the child has no control over his/her birth, regardless of circumstances. Taking away child support punishes the child.
Not really. Since death penalty is a result of breaking the law. Not because the person sentenced to death inconvienienced someone.
