Discussion about hot topics trending today

[Gatefan1976]

I wonder if he can argue something about due process...but that would mean a constitutional battle...of which I doubt he has a constitution for...see what I did there?

I did.
I am not sure due process would cover it though. Due process would be him challenging the removal of money from his bank account way back in the beginning. Silence in the law often indicates agreement.

[garhkal]

Which is the whole point -- neither do your hypothetical children.

If its loaded, but locked up, they shouldn't have access to it anyway.. Especially if you keep one of those trigger locks on it..

[Gatefan1976]

If its loaded, but locked up, they shouldn't have access to it anyway.. Especially if you keep one of those trigger locks on it..

but now you have willingly put 2 locks between you and the criminal, what use is your gun?

[Falcon Horus]

If its loaded, but locked up, they shouldn't have access to it anyway.. Especially if you keep one of those trigger locks on it..

Ha, that's just an extra challenge...

[garhkal]

but now you have willingly put 2 locks between you and the criminal, what use is your gun?

Personally i have no issues if they want ONLY one or the other lock between the gun and their kids.. AS no one should be giving those kids the damn combo/keys...

[mad_gater]

Why MG, how libertarian of you
If it were done without his consent, he should have argued it back then, I am not sure he has the legal standing to argue ignorance now. Those laws that I looked into are -vast- with many seemingly contradictory positions upheld. I agree with you, and annoyed for that matter, in regards to the spirit of the law being violated but when I -try- to address something from a legal standpoint, I fall back onto what I was taught in legal studies for 2 years, my personal opinion does not matter.

well obiously not knowing the particulars regarding the case all we can do is speculate...all I do know is that the money-grubbing "lady" should not get one more dime since it's been proven that he's NOT the father

[Annoyed]

well obiously not knowing the particulars regarding the case all we can do is speculate...all I do know is that the money-grubbing "lady" should not get one more dime since it's been proven that he's NOT the father

The "lady" should be ordered to pay back whatever she has been paid already.

[SoulReaver]

The "lady" should be ordered to pay back whatever she has been paid already.

the man has a dream

btw how do the neocons feel about this happening in Texas

[Annoyed]

the man has a dream

Well, if it was a man found delinquent in child support/alimony, he would be ordered to pay, and his wages would be garnished if needed to do it. Don't we have equal rights? In a situation where the woman was paid but wasn't actually eligible for the payments, shouldn't she be ordered to pay it back?

You want equality or you don't. Which is it?

[SoulReaver]

Well, if it was a man found delinquent in child support/alimony, he would be ordered to pay, and his wages would be garnished if needed to do it. Don't we have equal rights? In a situation where the woman was paid but wasn't actually eligible for the payments, shouldn't she be ordered to pay it back?

You want equality or you don't. Which is it?

well yeah that's the point we don't have equality - but how do you feel knowing this is in Texas?

[Gatefan1976]

Well, if it was a man found delinquent in child support/alimony, he would be ordered to pay, and his wages would be garnished if needed to do it. Don't we have equal rights? In a situation where the woman was paid but wasn't actually eligible for the payments, shouldn't she be ordered to pay it back?

In this case, she -was- entitled to it, biological father or not.

[Annoyed]

Aside from crazy court decisions, if the man is not the father, how can you ethically say it's his responsibility?

[garhkal]

Well, if it was a man found delinquent in child support/alimony, he would be ordered to pay, and his wages would be garnished if needed to do it. Don't we have equal rights? In a situation where the woman was paid but wasn't actually eligible for the payments, shouldn't she be ordered to pay it back?

You want equality or you don't. Which is it?

That's how it SHOULD BE... But in society, equality means men get screwed..

In this case, she -was- entitled to it, biological father or not.

How is she entitled to child support from someone NOT THE CHILD's father??

[SoulReaver]

I think he meant legally not morally

(dura lex sed lex etc. usually it's the neocons who abide by this right?)

[Gatefan1976]

Amazing how quickly they complain about legal discrimination when it affects them. All these snowflakes wanting to be a protected class. SAD.