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
- “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!
|Woman lies about birth control:
Man has to pay child support
|A woman’s fraudulent misrepresentation regarding the use of birth control or the ability to become pregnant, however, has never shielded the father from child support liability. [ . . .]
The courts have universally held that the father’s allegations that the mother had deceived him were totally irrelevant to the issues of paternity and support. Child support statutes are based on the financial situation of the parents and the needs of the child, not the personal agreements concerning contraception between the parties. IT’S TEN O’CLOCK: DO YOU KNOW WHERE YOUR SPERM ARE?
It is a pity that criminal courts are not equally worried about the needs of the child. They jail the adult breadwinner in statutory “rape” cases between loving long term partners, leaving the child with only the minor mother (or father) and no financial support.
|Woman gets sperm from oral sex or from a condom, injects it into herself
Man has to pay child xsupport
|the woman in question, a nurse’s aid, apparently met him in a hospital while he was visiting a relative. He further alleged that she performed oral sex on him while he wore a condom. He then claimed that after the act, and unknown to him, she inseminated herself using a syringe with semen retained from the condom.
After paternity was proven, the court decided that, because the man intentionally engaged in a sexual act with the woman, he was in fact liable to support the child. State_of_Louisiana_v._Frisard
|Lesbian asks for sperm, signs contract that she is solely responsible for child support.
Man has to pay child support.
|Is a man still liable for child support even if he does not engage in sexual intercourse with a woman, but merely provides sperm for artificial insemination and agrees with the mother that there shall be no child support liability? Once again, the answer has been yes. In these cases, the courts have uniformly held that outside the strict requirements of the jurisdiction’s statute governing artificial insemination, a mother simply cannot waive child support on behalf of the child and the father cannot waive his parental rights; such a contract is void as against public policy.
|Woman (statutorily) “rapes” underage boy.
Boy victim has to pay child support
|In every case that has addressed the issue, the court has held that a man who was underage at the time of the conception of the child, and was therefore a victim of statutory rape, is nonetheless liable for child support. Typical of the reasoning in these cases is San Luis Obispo County v. Nathaniel J., 50 Cal. App. 4th 842, 57 Cal. Rptr. 2d 843 (1996). In that case, the court stated:
|Woman rapes unconscious man
Man must pay child support.
|A friend of both the mother testified as to the same facts, plus the fact that about two months after the party, the mother said she had sex with the father while he was “passed out” and that it saved her a trip to the sperm bank. Another friend testified that the mother had said she had sex with the father, “and he wasn’t even aware of it.”
A physician testified that it is possible for a man who is intoxicated to the point of losing consciousness may nevertheless have an erection and ejaculate; they are not conscious, voluntary activities.
The father argued that because he did not have sex voluntarily with the mother, he was not liable for child support. The court disposed of the argument, comparing it to the arguments made in L. Pamela P. v. Frank S.: the wrongful conduct of the mother in causing conception did not obviate the father’s support obligation.
Civil courts seem more reasonable. If it were not for the unreasonable criminal justice system! In several cases of statuory “rape”, perpetrated by a long term loving partner, a child was born. Against the expressed desire of the minor “victim”, the adult “perpetrator” was jailed, leaving the baby in a defunct family with one minor mother/father without an adult breadwinner (who was in jail).
The court also compared the father’s argument to the arguments put forth in the statutory rape cases, concluding that the “rape” of the father could not preclude a finding of liability for support.
If the roles were reversed, if the woman was raped while unconscious, automatically, out of public interest, the perpetrator would be jailed with $500,000 bail and risk over 10 years in jail. Then he would get on the sex offender list and automatically lose the right to ever see the children, unless supervised.
|Raped woman is
NOT required to pay child support
|a man is strictly liable for where his sperm ends up even when he unknowingly and involuntarily engages in a sexual act. Instead of comparing the father’s predicament with the mother’s predicament in Division of Child Support Enforcement ex rel. Esther M. v. Mary L., No. 94-33812 (1994.DE.19031), where a mother was relieved of her child support obligation because she was raped, the court imposed a child support obligation because of the fact of paternity. This can only be termed a strict liability theory of sperm.
All italic quoted text from IT’S TEN O’CLOCK: DO YOU KNOW WHERE YOUR SPERM ARE?, a rigorous legal scholarly work.