American Family Courts’ wholesale destruction of constitutional rights

"Family Court" tramples due process, puts men into life long indentured slavery, confiscates property worth Millions and Billions, confiscates future income and pension, re-instated debtor’s prison where men are imprisoned for a decade for non-payment of spousal support to the slave owner. "Family Court" accepts hearsay as proof enough to kick a man out of his home (SAID: Sexual Allegations in Divorce). Ex parte (one party accusation) orders are based on the flimsiest of evidence or upon mere accusations, "temporary" orders allow unconstitutional orders to be extended for years on end. "Protection from Abuse" (restraining) orders, like all other abominations of family court, abuse mostly men and confer special rights upon women.  Human Rights are enforced for criminals, but not for law abiding family men.

We recommend you read the entire post we excerpt here

American Family Courts, the First Amendment, and Violations of Free Speech

Family Court.  What a friendly sounding name. A court for families, so open and inviting.

A place where families are welcome and invited, a place for families to bring their troubles and disagreements, where there are people specially trained to help them with their problems, and where issues can be resolved in a fair compromise, so that everyone can be happy. […]

How true. What a promising nice name

And yet, nothing could be better Orwellianly named than this institution; there is nothing friendly about it. It is a snakepit of anguish and despair, impacting millions of people each year.

By re-casting all familial issues into a mutated type of civil court action variously termed  “special proceedings”, and by radically recasting the concepts of just what a judicial court is, e.g., its procedures, discretions and evidentiary standards, the state had effectively done away with all the inconvenient and expensive due process and constitutional protections required in every other American court.

While retaining the traditional powers of a judicial court – enforcement, fines and imprisonment – none of the checks and balances against those powers were concomitantly retained. Expedience of process and the legitimization of raw state power was the goal.

In creating these special “People’s Courts”  – not-quite-criminal, not-quite-civil – dozens of  due process protections were sloughed away leaving a raw, grinning changeling in its place.

Domestic violence abuse is based on falsified science and enforced by unconstitutional family court. SAID: Sexual Allegations in Divorce is a potent weapon thanks to complicity of family courts. Debtor’s prison longer then a decade has been reinstated under the guise of "contempt of court".

Constitutional procedural protections against self-incrimination, right to an attorney, presumptions of innocence, right to jury were done away with.

Inviolable substantive rights to federal parenting guarantees, property and liberty, became optional concerns and subordinate to statutory directives. Legal financial obligations to others persons were created out of whole cloth and determined from the flimsiest allegations.

The rights to financial and medical privacy were extorted away, as was the Constitutional right to free travel.

Astonishing. Men can get deprived of their passports to prevent them from fleeing their indentured wage slavery. Fugitive slave laws are still in effect world wide: Robert Sand: ‘Most wanted deadbeat dad’ arrested in Thailand for owing millions to his slave owner wife.

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “American Family Courts’ wholesale destruction of constitutional rights” »
American Family Courts’ wholesale destruction of constitutio… » continues here »

Share

Make fatherhood a man’s choice! Like a sperm donor, not forced to pay

(A) Financial abortion, reproductive rights for men have been discussed by MRA’s, but usually rejected by feminists.

We will see that some feminists actually propose that men should have reproductive rights other then be forced to pay up for unintended consequences for sex.

(B) Further down we will also discuss the strange logic: If the father kills the fetus, it is murder. If the mother kills the fetus, it is reproductive rights.  See here, here, here, here and hereWhen is it illegal to make reproductive choices for others? When you’re a man

 

Make fatherhood a man’s choice!

The burden of pregnancy will never be fair. Child support can be — but men need to have a chance to opt out

Over the past fifteen years, some feminists have argued that ending the current child support system is an important social issue. In the October 19, 2000 issue of Salon,Cathy Young argued that women’s freedom to choose parenthood is a reproductive right men do not have but should. Her article, “A Man’s Right to Choose,” identifies abortion rights and adoption as options that allow women greater sexual freedom than men when a sexual encounter results in conception.  While there are alternatives to parental responsibility for women, for men, “in the eyes of the law, it seems that virtually no circumstances, however bizarre or outrageous, can mitigate the biological father’s liability for child support.”

Amen!   Even if mother cheated, lied, or raped: father always pays child support.

Kerrie Thornhill’s article “A Feminist Argument Against Child Support” in the July 18, 2011 issue of Partisans picks up this point, arguing that where birth control and safe abortion are legally available, choosing a sexual encounter should be a different choice than choosing to be a parent. She offers a three-step replacement for the current child support system. First, Thornhill writes that “when informed of a partner’s pregnancy, a man should get a single, time-sensitive opportunity to choose fatherhood.” Second, by accepting, a man would assume all the responsibilities of fatherhood, but by declining he would legally be no different than a sperm donor.

Great suggestion. If a man wants no financial responsibility, he gets treated like a sperm donor. This is a great way to put it.Though it still begs the question if it was not best, in the interested of the well being of the child, if the man could contribute, visit, as he wishes.

 

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Make fatherhood a man’s choice! Like a sperm donor, not forced to pay” »
Make fatherhood a man’s choice! Like a sperm donor, not forc… » continues here »

Share

Child support judgments traumatize famous athletes, hamper NBA teams

 A $50,000, or mere $ 8,000 monthly child support judgment is the greatest career move for an uneducated young woman..Successful male athletes and singers get easily ruined by female predators empowered by feminist child support laws. Getting pregnant by such a man is like winning the jackpot.

Highly paid basketball and football stars, boxers, rap singers are easy prey. They are high testosterone, impulsive, quick acting successful males, usually with more brawns then brains.

We will point out numerous legal traps devised by the feminist sexual trade union in collaboration with religious zealots.

Fathering out-of-wedlock kids has become commonplace among athletes, many of whom seem oblivious to the legal, financial and emotional consequences

This shocking 5 part article is from 1998’s Sport Illustrated. Today, nothing has changed for the better. Probably athletes are probably a little less naïve by now.

Paternity can be an expensive proposition. In several states the baseline amount for a man who is proved to have fathered a child is roughly 20% of his income as support until the child turns 18. Considerations such as time spent with the child and the income of the mother are factored into a complex equation and can slightly reduce or increase the award.

A high earning athlete who has to pay to 7 children women 7 times 20% of his gross income certainly faces a dilemma.

there are women who hunt pro athletes in the hope of becoming pregnant and filing paternity suits to make an income," says Pat Richie, the chaplain for the San Francisco Giants and 49ers. "I’d say that teams probably have two or three women per year who are purposely looking for this."

Certainly there have been false charges made against athletes 4

 

End of career, end of big income

Add to that the short term nature of his dwindling income, and we understand how fading fame also brings about arrests for now un-payable child support judgments that exceed the poor ex-athlete’s waning gross income.

High-wage earners such as athletes present courts with a dilemma: Should judges follow the 20% guideline, which would mean a windfall to mothers and children? Or should support payments cover only the basic needs of the children, depriving the youngsters of their dads’ standard of living? Many judges have compromised by limiting support—sometimes at $10,000 per month per child—regardless of the father’s income, a decision that has sparked debate among family-law attorneys.  2

Even US$ 10.000 is un-payable for a simple man whose sports career is over. It is also cruel and unusual punishment to demand he depredate his savings until poverty, to pay such support.

In some cases, however, even a player earning millions can fail to meet his obligations. In 1995 slugger Kevin Mitchell, now with the Oakland Athletics, was making $4.5 million a year. The next year he declared bankruptcy, in part because he was supporting four children by four women.

Athletes’ out-of-wedlock kids can end up in poverty if their fathers are cut or retire before the children turn 18. "Often, you need to tell these women to bank as much money as they can because it’s going to be a very short payday," says Schwartz, the California paternity lawyer. "I’m handling a case involving an NBA player who had been making more than $2 million a year and this year wasn’t picked up. The mother was getting more than $5,000 a month, and suddenly we’re talking about $1,000 to $1,500. That’s only because, through good management, he still has some money. Some of these guys will be pumping gas, if they’re lucky." 6

 

Does baby consume $10,000 per month?

Nobody questions the sanity and necessity of awarding a child of an often poor mom US$ 50,000.- or even 3,000.- per month.  If that same woman had an honest, simple, working husband, $ 500 after tax income would feed an entire family, not just one child.

Child support to support mom’s new lover and their children
  • Child support should cover the basic needs of a child, not luxury, much less a luxurious life for mom and her new lover. If mom wants lots of money, have her make the effort to treat a man so he voluntarily parts with his money. Not just lie about birth control.
Pay child support, never see the child
  • It gets worse. In our modern matriarchy, even men who pay US$ 10.000 monthly in child support have no practically enforceable rights to actually meet and see their children.
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Child support judgments traumatize famous athletes, hamper NBA teams” »
Child support judgments traumatize famous athletes, hamper NBA tea… » continues here »

Share

Daughter awarded US$ 110,000 for father’s emotional neglect- Brazilian Supreme Court

The Brazilian Supreme court awarded US$ 110,000 of moral damages to a daughter who felt emotionally abandoned and felt treated as second class daughter by her father. The court dismissed the father’s defense that this emotional abandonment was caused by the mother’s aggressive behavior. Also the fact that paternity of the now adult daughter was only officially established recently.

Such legal liability is now in the process of being incorporated into the ECA statute of adolescent and children’s rights.

The intent of giving emotional support is noble. Human-Stupidity deplores the overcriminalization and total regulamentation of all aspects of human behavior under the threat of heavy civil liabilities.

Due to the importance of such decisions to Libertarians,  the men’s rights (and feminist) movement, we translated two newspaper articles in their entirety.

Translation: Superior Tribunal in Brazil orders father to pay compensation for emotional abandonment 
(STJ condena pai a indenizar filha por abandono afetivo)brazilian-supreme-court

SAO PAULO – The Third Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) ordered a father to pay R $ 200 thousand [US$ 110 000] to his daughter for "emotional distance". The decision is unprecedented. In 2005, the Fourth Chamber of the Supreme Court had rejected moral damages for emotional distance.

The case judged originates from São Paulo. The author of the case obtained judicial recognition of paternity and filed suit against the father because he had suffered material and emotional neglect during childhood and adolescence. The trial judge dismissed the petition and attributed the father’s distance to "aggressive behavior" of her mother towards the father. The woman appealed to the appeals court and said the father was "wealthy and prosperous." The Court of São Paulo (TJSP) reversed the judgment and set the compensation for R$ 415,000.

On appeal to the Supreme Court, the father argued that there was no abandonment, and even if he had done so, there would be illegal to be financially indemnified and the only possible punishment for failing with such obligations fathers would be the loss of family power.

Minister Nancy Andrighi , the of the court’s third chamber, however, understood that it is possible to demand compensation for moral damage caused by emotional abandonment by parents. "Love is optional, care is duty," she said in the sentence. For her, there is no reason to treat the damage to family relationships differently from other civil damages.

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Daughter awarded US$ 110,000 for father’s emotional neglect- Brazilian Supreme Court” »
Daughter awarded US$ 110,000 for father’s emotional neglect-… » continues here »

Share

Legal right to renounce child support empowers women, increases birth rates

Contractual freedom to agree about child support rights

Many women want to have a baby, but, for some reason, don’t find the appropriate man or husband. A man willing to the father and take on fatherly duties. The typical solution is to “forget” to take the pill or just let the man falsely assume she is taking birth control.

child-support-hearing1) Women should have right to renounce rights to father’s child support

We propose that

a) A woman should be empowered to contractually agree with a man to have his baby and not demand any child support.

Advantages:

  1. In most developed countries, more babies are urgently needed. This probably will lead to higher birth rates. The richer, more educated, more capacitated women will have children of their choice, that are wanted.
  2. No manipulation needed, no dishonesty about accidentally “forgotten birth control” to get pregnant against the man’s expressed wish
  3. female empowerment: the woman can have her wish, pick the father of her choice and have a baby.
      1. Most men would feel honored to be chosen as a father, without being obliged to support the baby nor having to get along with the woman for the next 20 years.
      2. many men would, voluntarily, by mutual agreement give some aid and support in child raising, in spite of the waiver.
  4. funny-pictures-child-support-catIt fixes our perverted system in which
    1. the most irresponsible and uncontrolled, least intelligent and poorest men have the most offspring
      1. these people are the most unfit genetically (their offspring will be less intelligent and have less self control)
      2. these people are also most unfit as parents and educators: they are less responsible, less intelligent
      3. these people are less unfit financially to provide a good home
    2. society pays for these offspring, with welfare that often encourages the poor to have more offspring to receive more money. These children are not welcome and loved, they are either accidents or planned to increase welfare income. A bad and traumatic start of a life for a baby.
    3. The well-to-do fear child support payments. Poor deadbeats that are unable to pay, and anonymous one night stances can get unlimited offspring without legal and financial responsibility
  5. island-child-supportb) A man should be allowed to contractually assume all child care and support obligations after birth

    Equally, a man can agree to take a child, after birth, assuming all child care and support.

    This might convince a woman to forego abortion, or to become pregnant.

    This ultimately empowers women, because it still is fully her choice to decide to terminate a pregnancy. She might find it attractive to have a baby without obligations.

    Or she might do it as favor for the man, almost like a surrogate pregnancy.

    All this would help to increase birth rate and reduce the population shortage problem in developed countries.

    Who will pay for children’s needs?

    If one party was relieved of his/her obligation, the other party.

    1. The party that took up the contractual obligation, mostly the mother. After all are women not empowered and independent? Don’t women have professions, salary, self sufficiency. Women did this for centuries and millennia, before the advent of liberated professional women and welfare.
    2. Welfare support. Government already pays support for children of deadbeat dads and moms in poverty. Why can’t they pay for the honest working tax paying father? Whoever took up the responsibility should pay him/herself, unless they are below poverty level.

    Your comments are welcome

    All this is a suggestion and, of course, open to discussion. Please comment

    Contractual freedom to agree about child support rights

    Many women want to have a baby, but, for some reason, don’t find the appropriate man or husband. A man willing to the father and assume fatherly duties. The typical solution is to dupe a man into fatherhood by lying about birth control.

    child-support-hearing1) Women should have right to renounce rights to father’s child support

    We propose that

    a) A woman should be empowered to contractually agree with a man to have his baby and not demand any child support.

    Advantages:

    1. In most developed countries, more babies are urgently needed. This probably will lead to higher birth rates. The richer, more educated, more capacitated women will have children of their choice, that are wanted.
    2. No manipulation needed, no dishonesty about accidentally "forgotten birth control" to get pregnant against the man’s expressed wish
    3. female empowerment: the woman can have her wish, pick the father of her choice and have a baby.
      1. Most men would feel honored to be chosen as a father, without being obliged to support the baby nor having to get along with the woman for the next 20 years.
      2. many men would, voluntarily, by mutual agreement give some aid and support in child raising, in spite of the waiver.
  6. funny-pictures-child-support-catIt fixes our perverted system in which
    1. the most irresponsible and uncontrolled, least intelligent and poorest men have the most offspring
      1. these people are the most unfit genetically (their offspring will be less intelligent and have less self control)
      2. these people are also most unfit as parents and educators: they are less responsible, less intelligent
      3. these people are less unfit financially to provide a good home
    2. society pays for these offspring, with welfare that often encourages the poor to have more offspring to receive more money. These children are not welcome and loved, they are either accidents or planned to increase welfare income. A bad and traumatic start of a life for a baby.
    3. The well-to-do fear child support payments. Poor deadbeats that are unable to pay, and anonymous one night stances can get unlimited offspring without legal and financial responsibility
  7. island-child-supportb) A man should be allowed to contractually assume all child care and support obligations after birth

    Equally, a man can agree to take a child, after birth, assuming all child care and support.

    This might convince a woman to forego abortion, or to become pregnant.

    This ultimately empowers women, because it still is fully her choice to decide to terminate a pregnancy. She might find it attractive to have a baby without obligations.

    Or she might do it as favor for the man, almost like a surrogate pregnancy.

    All this would help to increase birth rate and reduce the population shortage problem in developed countries.

    Who will pay for children’s needs?

    If one party was relieved of his/her obligation, the other party.

    1. The party that took up the contractual obligation, mostly the mother. After all are women not empowered and independent? Don’t women have professions, salary, self sufficiency. Women did this for centuries and millennia, before the advent of liberated professional women and welfare.
    2. Welfare support. Government already pays support for children of deadbeat dads and moms in poverty. Why can’t they pay for the honest working tax paying father? Whoever took up the responsibility should pay him/herself, unless they are below poverty level.

    Your comments are welcome

    All this is a suggestion and, of course, open to discussion. Please comment

    Contractual freedom to agree about child support rights

    Many women want to have a baby, but, for some reason, don’t find the appropriate man or husband. A man willing to the father and assume fatherly duties. The typical solution is to dupe a man into fatherhood by lying about birth control.

    child-support-hearing1) Women should have right to renounce rights to father’s child support

    We propose that

    a) A woman should be empowered to contractually agree with a man to have his baby and not demand any child support.

    Advantages:

    1. In most developed countries, more babies are urgently needed. This probably will lead to higher birth rates. The richer, more educated, more capacitated women will have children of their choice, that are wanted.
    2. No manipulation needed, no dishonesty about accidentally "forgotten birth control" to get pregnant against the man’s expressed wish
    3. female empowerment: the woman can have her wish, pick the father of her choice and have a baby.
      1. Most men would feel honored to be chosen as a father, without being obliged to support the baby nor having to get along with the woman for the next 20 years.
      2. many men would, voluntarily, by mutual agreement give some aid and support in child raising, in spite of the waiver.
  8. funny-pictures-child-support-catIt fixes our perverted system in which
    1. the most irresponsible and uncontrolled, least intelligent and poorest men have the most offspring
      1. these people are the most unfit genetically (their offspring will be less intelligent and have less self control)
      2. these people are also most unfit as parents and educators: they are less responsible, less intelligent
      3. these people are less unfit financially to provide a good home
    2. society pays for these offspring, with welfare that often encourages the poor to have more offspring to receive more money. These children are not welcome and loved, they are either accidents or planned to increase welfare income. A bad and traumatic start of a life for a baby.
    3. The well-to-do fear child support payments. Poor deadbeats that are unable to pay, and anonymous one night stances can get unlimited offspring without legal and financial responsibility
  9. island-child-supportb) A man should be allowed to contractually assume all child care and support obligations after birth

    Equally, a man can agree to take a child, after birth, assuming all child care and support.

    This might convince a woman to forego abortion, or to become pregnant.

    This ultimately empowers women, because it still is fully her choice to decide to terminate a pregnancy. She might find it attractive to have a baby without obligations.

    Or she might do it as favor for the man, almost like a surrogate pregnancy.

    All this would help to increase birth rate and reduce the population shortage problem in developed countries.

    Who will pay for children’s needs?

    If one party was relieved of his/her obligation, the other party.

    1. The party that took up the contractual obligation, mostly the mother. After all are women not empowered and independent? Don’t women have professions, salary, self sufficiency. Women did this for centuries and millennia, before the advent of liberated professional women and welfare.
    2. Welfare support. Government already pays support for children of deadbeat dads and moms in poverty. Why can’t they pay for the honest working tax paying father? Whoever took up the responsibility should pay him/herself, unless they are below poverty level.

    Your comments are welcome

    All this is a suggestion and, of course, open to discussion. Please comment

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Legal right to renounce child support empowers women, increases birth rates” »
    Legal right to renounce child support empowers women, increases bi… » continues here »

    Share

    "Mother’s baby. Father’s maybe." Mandatory DNA testing at birth can instate gender equality.

    When technological progress could be of disadvantage for feminists, they use their manipulative skills to outlaw its usage. Recent technological advances in DNA paternity tests could uncover female adultery and liberate a cuckold from life long payments. To avoid this, feminists’s infinite creativity invented a baby’s “right to her/his genetic material” to prevent a father from taking a bit of blood, saliva or hair from his putative offspring for genetic testing. Feminist women want to maintain the status: before the advent of DNA testing, women managed to hide the offspring of adulterous relations and made the cuckold husband paternity and pay for the resulting offspring. Now most countries create obstacles to paternal DNA testing, so cheating wives do not get discovered.

    The Conspiracy Against Cuckolds. Women are sure of maternity. They know for sure the baby is hers. Men can’t be sure. Feminists are against gender equality, they want to prevent men from being sure about paternity.

    Summary

    Women who actually introduce cuckold babies into her family, make her husband pay for her infidelity, defraud the men out of huge amounts of money. This female fraud is treated leniently. The female adulterous fraudsters are even are protected by laws that make it difficult for cuckolded fathers to do genetic testing.

    In some countries fathers who do paternity test on their putative offspring risk 3 years in jail.

    We propose equal rights. Women are sure about maternity, so mandatory paternity testing at birth is the only way to level the playing field and have equality of information.

    Human-Stupidity analysis

    As always, women want to have their cake and eat it. Whenever they are at a disadvantage, they want equality. Whenever they have a privilege, they want to keep it. No equality.

    When paternal certainty gets them child support money, they enforce laws for DNA testing:  Even if mother cheated, lied, or raped: father always pays child support.

    When uncertainty favors a cheating adulterous wife, they instate other laws that punish putative fathers for DNA testing.

    It never ceases to amaze me that women get men to enact and enforce their lopsided laws. Most likely this is not a planned conspiracy by feminists, but evolutionary inborn ‘feelings” that translate into concerted action by big groups of females, (Female evolutionary Superiority in social manipulation causes feminist Language Distortions’ universal acceptance )

    What damage is done if a woman cheats? 20 years of expense for her husband to feed a cuckold baby!

    A cheating wife can make a man invest his life’s work and savings into a child that is not his. This is one of the worst frauds there can be. 20 years of work, a major part of a man’s life, stoled, due to fraud. This fraud should be a felony with long mandatory prison term.

    That is real cheating! Amazing, cuckolding a man with a child that is not his is not regarded high treason!  And now we have the technology to prevent this cheating, to protect men from the worst effect of their wive’s infidelity.

    A man who goes to a prostitute, who has enough money, harms nobody. Except the pride of his wife.Maybe reduces a little the time and money alotted to his wife and kids. But his wife will never pay for a man’s girlfriend’s offspring.

    Modern paternity tests threaten female cheaters, so protective laws were enacted

    Amazingly, the feminist influenced legal system managed to undo the technological progress. The female cheater is often protected by law, which makes paternity tests difficult or illegal.

    The Conspiracy Against Cuckolds: Cheating women get legal protection.

    [Snce 2006] all men who suspect they may be the father of a child, but who do not have parental responsibility, will be banned from testing a child’s DNA. The new Human Tissue Act will make it a criminal offence to test a bodily sample, including for paternity testing, without proper consent
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article554070.ece

      And as usual, women manage to come up with some amazing logic, that the 6 month old baby has a right and interest in his/her genetic material. And stupid men just lap up such drivel and buy it. I am amazed!

      Yes: up to 3 years in jail when a British man does genetic testing on his own child!

      www.hta.gov.uk/licensingandinspections/consentanddnafaqs.cfm
      http://www.easydna.co.uk/dnanews.php/human-tissues-act-paternity-testing

      This drakonian law is from Britain.  But in most countries, genetic testing by cuckold fathers is getting complicated. In Germany, a similar law to impose jail sentences on fathers was defeated.

      In Germany, even if a cuckold father takes a genetic test and sees he is not the father, this test is invalid. And it is not grounds enough to do a court ordered test. Father will be forced to go on paying for the kid his adulterous wife bore from another man.

      Insanity! Absolute injustice against the man. The woman commits large scale fraud to get large part of a man’s earnings for her boyfriend’s son. And the law protects the adulterous woman and her boy toy. Insanity enshrined in legal code. Amazing!

      All this DNA secrecy with the intent to protect family peace and the well being of the children.

      Amazing how feminists win all wars, and men are just the lambs who accept all injustice.

      Why not 3 years in jail for deceiving a man and make him pay for a child that is not his?

      A woman who makes a cuckold dad work for 20 years to pay a few hundred thousands $, €, £, for a child that is not his, causes severe financial and emotional damage to a man. Then later on, society wants to protect the child by preventing dad from knowing he is not the father. Well, the culprit for any trauma to the child is the lying cheating woman.

      Does she get 3 years in jail for that? For causing trauma to her husband and her child? No. the law protects her. It makes it hard or impossible for a man to find out the truth about her cheating. And if he finds out he usually is required to go on paying.

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “"Mother’s baby. Father’s maybe." Mandatory DNA testing at birth can instate gender equality.” »
    "Mother’s baby. Father’s maybe." Mandatory … » continues here »

    Share

    Even if mother cheated, lied, or raped: father always pays child support.

    When paternity testing is useful for the women, it will be enforced and used to prove paternity, so father can pay up. And pay he must, always.  If the sperm is the man’s, he has to pay child support.

    Man has to pay child support even if pregnancy is result of

    • deceit,
    • fraud,
    • “stolen” sperm taken from a condom and artifically injected,
    • statutory rape of a minor
    • or even real  rape of an unconscious passe out man by the woman.

    On the other hand, cuckolded men are supposed to pay for children of adulterous relations of cheating wives, when the sperm is not theirs. When paternity testing is against the mother’s best interest, they invent the the well being of the child requires that paternity tests be NOT allowed. See “Mother’s baby. Father’s maybe.” Mandatory DNA testing at birth can instate gender equality.

    We are awe-struck how feminists manage to tilt all laws so they serve their personal interest.

    We don’t favor a “conspiracy theory”. Women do not conspire consciously how to bet manipulate public opinion with distortions.  Rather we propose a female evolutionary mechanism to band together to lobby for what feels right to them. (Female evolutionary Superiority in social manipulation causes feminist Language Distortions’ universal acceptance )

    Keep reading the rest of this post!

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Even if mother cheated, lied, or raped: father always pays child support.” »
    Even if mother cheated, lied, or raped: father always pays child s… » continues here »

    Share