Comments on: Schwarzenegger’s Miscreant Moms http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/25/schwarzeneggers-miscreant-moms/ You're in NoNonsense Territory Fri, 18 Dec 2009 03:09:36 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Robert Stevens http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/25/schwarzeneggers-miscreant-moms/comment-page-1/#comment-144 Robert Stevens Sun, 27 Aug 2006 14:43:54 +0000 http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/?p=89#comment-144 Folks it's time for a history lesson, every society that treats its children this way does not last long! And the more we pet women on the head for socially,legally and morally irresponcible behavior, the more we slide toward that dreaded downfall of our society. We need to teach women that equality is both a right and a priviledge. That is has both rights and responsibilities atached. That equality has built in limitations and those " limitations" are not based on political correctness. It is based ulitmately on Gods law. And God will not stand for anyone treating his children this way. My God, folks... children are a BLESSING, not a curse. And one more thing, the state does not own my child to be able tell me what I can or can not do with them, as long as I take reasonable good care of them. Folks it’s time for a history lesson, every society that treats its children this way does not last long! And the more we pet women on the head for socially,legally and morally irresponcible behavior, the more we slide toward that dreaded downfall of our society.
We need to teach women that equality is both a right and a priviledge. That is has both rights and responsibilities atached. That equality has built in limitations and those ” limitations” are not based on political correctness. It is based ulitmately on Gods law. And God will not stand for anyone treating his children this way.
My God, folks… children are a BLESSING, not a curse.
And one more thing, the state does not own my child to be able tell me what I can or can not do with them, as long as I take reasonable good care of them.

]]> By: wls http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/25/schwarzeneggers-miscreant-moms/comment-page-1/#comment-143 wls Sun, 27 Aug 2006 03:00:27 +0000 http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/?p=89#comment-143 Marc Rudov said, > your previous rights and obligations to that > child cease. That's only if the parents subsequently do nothing. It's the normal course of things when a child becomes a dependent of the state, and is not part of safe-surrender, per se. The 72 hours under current law, or 30 days if Schwarzenegger signs the bill, is ONLY the period during which the act of surrender will not have criminal consequences. Parents who surrender can in principle still petition to have their child returned to them, right up to the point their parental rights are terminated---which takes considerably longer---although the fact that they surrendered it would surely count strongly against them in practice, when their fitness to parent is considered. Marc Rudov said,

> your previous rights and obligations to that
> child cease.

That’s only if the parents subsequently do nothing.
It’s the normal course of things when a child
becomes a dependent of the state, and is not part
of safe-surrender, per se.

The 72 hours under current law, or 30 days if
Schwarzenegger signs the bill, is ONLY the
period during which the act of surrender will not
have criminal consequences.

Parents who surrender can in principle still
petition to have their child returned to them,
right up to the point their parental rights are
terminated—which takes considerably
longer—although the fact that they surrendered
it would surely count strongly against them in
practice, when their fitness to parent is
considered.

]]> By: Marc Rudov http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/25/schwarzeneggers-miscreant-moms/comment-page-1/#comment-142 Marc Rudov Sun, 27 Aug 2006 02:17:19 +0000 http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/?p=89#comment-142 Surrender means surrender. Once you surrender that baby, and the 30 days expire, it isn't yours anymore. Not only will the state not prosecute you for a criminal act, but all of your previous rights and obligations to that child cease. It seems to me that, in reality, the father cannot be the surrendering parent. Imagine what would happend to him if he would try to do such a thing without the mother's involvement: he'd be a dead man. A father would have to make his claim to the child (including a DNA test) after the mother surrenders it but BEFORE the 30-day expiration. If he fails to do so, he loses. This, folks, is what happens when you ask the government to intervene in and run your life: IT WILL INTERVENE IN AND RUN YOUR LIFE. Surrender means surrender. Once you surrender that baby, and the 30 days expire, it isn’t yours anymore. Not only will the state not prosecute you for a criminal act, but all of your previous rights and obligations to that child cease.

It seems to me that, in reality, the father cannot be the surrendering parent. Imagine what would happend to him if he would try to do such a thing without the mother’s involvement: he’d be a dead man.

A father would have to make his claim to the child (including a DNA test) after the mother surrenders it but BEFORE the 30-day expiration. If he fails to do so, he loses.

This, folks, is what happens when you ask the government to intervene in and run your life: IT WILL INTERVENE IN AND RUN YOUR LIFE.

]]> By: wls http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/25/schwarzeneggers-miscreant-moms/comment-page-1/#comment-141 wls Sun, 27 Aug 2006 01:50:30 +0000 http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/?p=89#comment-141 Marc Rudov said, > I believe that the father has the legal right > to the child ONLY after the mother?s options > for reclaiming it COMPLETELY expire. NO, although he won't necessarily get immediate custody, and the process of establishing paternity usually takes longer than the mothers' grace period. Even if the mother attempts to reclaim the child, he can assert a claim to parentage and custody, just as he can if she never surrenders it. There's nothing in the safe-surrender law that absolves _either_ parent of the obligation to pay child support---only criminal responsibility and only for the surrender itself---although there doesn't seem to be a policy of pursuing parents who surrender, for that purpose. Marc Rudov said,

> I believe that the father has the legal right
> to the child ONLY after the mother?s options
> for reclaiming it COMPLETELY expire.

NO, although he won’t necessarily get immediate
custody, and the process of establishing paternity
usually takes longer than the mothers’ grace
period. Even if the mother attempts to reclaim
the child, he can assert a claim to parentage and
custody, just as he can if she never surrenders it.

There’s nothing in the safe-surrender law that
absolves _either_ parent of the obligation to
pay child support—only criminal responsibility
and only for the surrender itself—although there
doesn’t seem to be a policy of pursuing parents
who surrender, for that purpose.

]]> By: Marc Rudov http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/25/schwarzeneggers-miscreant-moms/comment-page-1/#comment-140 Marc Rudov Sat, 26 Aug 2006 14:48:58 +0000 http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/?p=89#comment-140 I believe that the father has the legal right to the child ONLY after the mother's options for reclaiming it COMPLETELY expire. If neither the mother or father claims the child, a government agency will put it up for adoption or place it in an orphanage. If the mother does reclaim the child at the last minute, the father, of course, must pay child support. Either way, he is completely at the mercy of her decision. The whole barbaric situation is yet another example of how society gives women a pass for dodging their responsibilities. Remember: The woman is the nurturing one, right? I believe that the father has the legal right to the child ONLY after the mother’s options for reclaiming it COMPLETELY expire. If neither the mother or father claims the child, a government agency will put it up for adoption or place it in an orphanage. If the mother does reclaim the child at the last minute, the father, of course, must pay child support. Either way, he is completely at the mercy of her decision. The whole barbaric situation is yet another example of how society gives women a pass for dodging their responsibilities. Remember: The woman is the nurturing one, right?

]]> By: jaustin9698 http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/25/schwarzeneggers-miscreant-moms/comment-page-1/#comment-139 jaustin9698 Sat, 26 Aug 2006 13:52:25 +0000 http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/?p=89#comment-139 Does the father get the option to have the child? If not then does the father still have to pay child support for the child? Does the father get the option to have the child? If not then does the father still have to pay child support for the child?

]]> By: Roger Knight http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/2006/08/25/schwarzeneggers-miscreant-moms/comment-page-1/#comment-138 Roger Knight Sat, 26 Aug 2006 02:40:28 +0000 http://thenononsenseman.mensnewsdaily.com/?p=89#comment-138 Last winter the Hawaii Supreme Court found that for a father in response to a paternity case to claim Equal Protection of Laws when women have the right to abortion raised a frivolous issue and sanctioned the lawyers who brought it. Further details are at: www.antipeonage.0catch.com/hawaiienemies.htm Last winter the Hawaii Supreme Court found that for a father in response to a paternity case to claim Equal Protection of Laws when women have the right to abortion raised a frivolous issue and sanctioned the lawyers who brought it. Further details are at:
http://www.antipeonage.0catch.com/hawaiienemies.htm

]]>