Posted on 11/20/2015 3:13:54 PM PST by Domandred
WOW! You are messed up there! Did you actually use a brain cell before posting that!?
Stuff like that is why movements like MGTOW and the Mens Rights Movement exist.
Because these screwed-up laws that take away the father’s rights while making him legally liable for 18 years of child support or face jail if SHE says so, and the white knight simps that constantly side with the female out of some misguided pity.
The west wants to reverse declining birth rates had better reform these laws or men will simply drop out of this scam.
(My opinion is that they SHOULD have both - rights and responsibilities)
My opinion is that it should be required by law. If you make a child, and you cannot support it, "snip" goes your baby making powers.
And you are still on the hook for paying for the ones you made.
People, it is not only morally wrong to make an unwanted child, it is financially insane. No nation can continue to support the bastard children of ne're do wells.
No, I don’t think unmarried men should have rights nor should they have to pay child support.
Better now?
I absolutely agree, no rights and no child support.
uh no rights just obligations, is that ok with you? what about mama, should she have kept her dress on, zipped or otherwise.
++++++++++++++=
No obligations for the man, and no rights.
She should have kept the dress zipped. She now has to determine what happens to the baby.
Until it comes to child support, then they have “responsibilities.â€
Bullfeathers.
Rights and responsibility go hand in hand. No rights - no responsibility.
(My opinion is that they SHOULD have both - rights and responsibilities)
___________________
We disagree, IMHO no rights and no responsibilities.
I’m with chicken soup, actually. If the dad won’t marry the mom, she does truly have the responsibility alone, for all practical purposes. Marriage is legal security for both parties. ‘Planning to stay together’ is not. imho. My son is in the same situation, so I have also seen this close-up and personal. If his ‘wife’ left him bc he would not commit, some of the blame would be squarely on his shoulders.
No rights means no child support...and you can damned well bet if he signed first and she changed her mind he’d be paying support till the child was 18.
Maybe you should just say unmarried parents automatically lose their rights and the children go to the State. That way both genders are treated equally.
______________
No, no rights and no responsibilities to the sperm donor, and decision and responsibility to the woman.
Because of that religious sect, I would never live anywhere in Utah.
Of course not! That would be silly.
Indeed, there are cases where a paternity test proved the sap paying child support was NOT the biological father, he still had to pay, though...
Have the "snip" apply to the mom TOO, and I'm on board with you. But only if it applies to the mom too.
WOW! You are messed up there! Did you actually use a brain cell before posting that!?
___________
Not sure what your problem is. No rights to unmarried fathers, also no responsibly either. Stop expecting sperm donors to act like committed parents.
It’s all mixed up. It begins with birth control
Men live lives of seventeen year old boys’ dreams. Women enable it
Abortions moves in.
Who should have rights giving a child up for adoption? At some point the child is some entity that is given nothing he has the right to. He wants two parents who are married and who love each other
That everything doesn’t revolve around that is what makes this a pottersville v Bedford falls
Just get married and then have sex.
It’s so uncomplicated
Stupid americans
There you go again, confusing laws with justice.
In point of fact, there are no parental rights, only maternal rights.
Otherwise the law would be sexist, wouldn't it???
Not true. Here is summary of the Utah adoption laws regarding when consent of the biological father is not required. Otherwise consent is required.
The consent of an unmarried biological father is not required if:
The court determines that the unmarried biological father’s rights should be terminated, based on the petition of any interested party.
A declaration of paternity declaring the unmarried biological father to be the father of the child is rescinded.
The unmarried biological father fails to comply to requirements to initiate proceedings to establish his paternity of the child.
A biological father is not entitled to notice of an adoption proceeding, nor is the consent of a biological father required in connection with an adoption proceeding, in cases where it is shown that the child who is the subject of the proceeding was conceived as a result of conduct which would constitute any sexual offense, regardless of whether the biological father is formally charged with or convicted of a criminal offense.
From http://laws.adoption.com/statutes/utah-laws,3.html
Because if it negated the mother's rights it would be sexist, DUH!!!
The hidden assumption here is that he has the right to force her to marry him.
Suppose she doesn't want to get married?
The only rational response to that, and the one one hundred percent of ethical people share as a corollary - is that mothers should have no right to economic support from the father unless married.
Ever.
The only rational response to that, and the one one hundred percent of ethical people share as a corollary - is that mothers should have no right to economic support from the father unless married.
Ever.
___________________________
Yep
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.