Posted on 07/22/2017 12:41:29 PM PDT by AbolishCSEU
A Houston man is on the hook for $65,000 in child support for a child that's not his.
Gabriel Cornejo, 45, took a DNA test proving a child his ex-girlfriend had 16 years ago was not his.
The test was too late. In 2003, a child support court in Houston ruled that Cornejo owed his ex-girlfriend child support because, she claims, there was no way he wasn't the father.
(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...
There’s no point in trying to discuss this with you. Your mind is closed.
Bible supports the legal system and this nations legal system was based on Biblical principals.
“...fraudulent support orders.”
This is not a thing. Learn someone about civilization and law.
I know what you are trying to say, but in your ignorance are unable to say.
You are like a liberal whose emotional outrage overcomes any sort of rational thought.
Your outrage is what matters rather than a rational examination of a legal case.
Your post shows great, willing ignorance on your part. And that's your cross to bear, not mine. So go forth and be ignorant. I'm done with you...and your assertion there's no such thing as a "fraudulent support order," is sad.
You pretend you're some kind of messenger preaching to us heathens but no one who paid even a little attention would listen.
Your version of 'justice' is a dystopian society gone bad.
To analogize: Say this woman is murdered. The guy is living with her. The cops pin the crime on him, and the courts convict. He's doing life.
A few years later, new DNA evidence emerges that it was not him as the murderer.
You'd say, "Sorry. You're convicted. I don't care about DNA evidence to the contrary. Shouldn't have been living with her."
Yours is a world I do not want to live in.
“To analogize: Say this woman is murdered. The guy is living with her. The cops pin the crime on him, and the courts convict. He’s doing life.”
Lol.
That’s not an analogy.
To be analogous both men would have had to have done something to her that could kill her.
But, ok. Let’s go with your flawed analogy.
“The cops pin the crime on him, and the courts convict. He’s doing life.”
To be analogous he would have not plead innocent when charged.
It took him 15 years or so to finally say he didn’t do it.
If a murder suspect does not contest his guilt, what do you expect?
This is what happened. If he had addressed this when it came up 15 years ago he would not be in this position.
Furthermore, and like I said, yours is a twisted, dystopian vision of justice.
You stand for all I stand against.
YOU are saying if a man has sex with but does NOT impregnate a woman, then he is responsible for some other man's child, and that paying for that other man's child is fair, under the law.
Wow.
“YOU are saying if a man has sex with but does NOT impregnate a woman, then he is responsible for some other man’s child, and that paying for that other man’s child is fair, under the law.”
No. Of course not.
Perhaps you should reread your own posts, FRiend. My summary is exactly what you have espoused.
“Perhaps you should reread your own posts, FRiend. My summary is exactly what you have espoused.”
Incorrect.
Perhaps you should present the argument using what I’ve written.
In doing so you will see your error.
“YOU are saying if a man has sex with but does NOT impregnate a woman, then he is responsible for some other man’s child, and that paying for that other man’s child is fair, under the law.”
Present your argument and if you can show where I said this I will thank you for pointing it out to me.
If you are referring to a married couple wherein the wife has a child from another man, then yes, that man is responsible. That has been western law for centuries, if not more, that the husband is the father of his wife’s children. I didn’t make the law or western Christian civilization.
But otherwise, show me where I’ve said what you contend and I will greatly appreciate it.
Pride goeth... You fall short of your self image, FRiend.
“Pride goeth... You fall short of your self image, FRiend.”
Yes. We all have such problems.
Yet, I assure you I did not argue for what you contend and you cannot document it,
You are mistaken.
If not, show me.
You ask me to parrot your words while ignoring their plain meaning. How liberal of you, FRiend. Have a great day.
the mother should have some financial responsibility as well. She shouldn’t be able to sit on her ass and collect CS for her “lifestyle.”
Where in the article does it state that she is “sitting on her ass and collecting CS for her ‘lifestyle’?”
>So, interestingly, I agree with you in large part, except the psycho killer stuff. You need to maybe think about that.
I stated facts, not projection. You’re the one hiding from reality. A large portion of domestic murders every year involve children being withheld or forced child support payments that men can get pretty murderous about. Freemen don’t like being being made slaves.
Another reason to wait til marriage and commit to “for better or worse”. The irresponsibility of outside of marriage is precisely that the kids get hurt, regardless of other circumstances.
“A large portion of domestic murders every year involve children being withheld or forced child support payments that men can get pretty murderous about.”
Which is not this topic.
Your melodramatic rhetoric is cute.
Don’t forget that while he, the non-bio-dad still owes $65K in back child support, there’s nothing stopping the woman from going after the actual bio-dad for back child support...
...because it’s all for the child.
Just makin' friends wherever you go, huh?
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.