Guest converge241 Report post Posted July 22, 2002 So the state of Massachusetts decides they are NOT going to let us even vote on whether or not we want to approve this (I would vote yes). On the same day that that decision comes down a court decides that a lesbian must pay child support to an exlover for a child she is not the biological or adopted parent of? what the hell is that? They dont make single heterosexuals do that...this just reeks Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Retro Rob Report post Posted July 22, 2002 While reading the "Marriage" thread I also started thinking about double standards. Some people think it is OK is two women get married, but not two guys. Double standards suck in general. Everyone should have the same rights period. As for the child support thing, that is just plain ludicrous. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Some Guy Report post Posted July 22, 2002 On Dateline the other day they had a story about a man who was falsely lead to believe that he was the father of his wife's three boys, he really was the dad of the first child, a daughter. So they divorce, a jury gives the *MAN* full custody of all 4 kids, but his job a a train conducter caused him to have to give custody to the woman, he wasn't home enough. So the youngest son has lung disease, the father goes to the hospital to try to donate somethign to him, but the DNA doesn't match. So the doctor asks him to take DNA tests on all 4 of his kids, the result for the daughter was 99.9% positive and 0% for all three boys. Needless to sya he was pissed. His wife was a whore, got knocked up by another guy and then told him that they were his kids. So the man goes to court to try to stop having to pay 1/3 of his salary in child support for teh three kids who aren't hiw, but he did still want to be a father-figure to them. the judge said he had ot keep paying and because he told the kids that he couldn't visit them at all. The poor guy has to continue paying throught hte nose for kids that aren't even his and that he is not allowed to see. This was in Texas. So yes that type of thing does happen to straight people. Rob double standards are everywhere, for all people regardless of race, gender, or sexual preference. And they aren't going anyewhere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest jimmy no nose Report post Posted July 22, 2002 On Dateline the other day they had a story about a man who was falsely lead to believe that he was the father of his wife's three boys, he really was the dad of the first child, a daughter. So they divorce, a jury gives the *MAN* full custody of all 4 kids, but his job a a train conducter caused him to have to give custody to the woman, he wasn't home enough. So the youngest son has lung disease, the father goes to the hospital to try to donate somethign to him, but the DNA doesn't match. So the doctor asks him to take DNA tests on all 4 of his kids, the result for the daughter was 99.9% positive and 0% for all three boys. Needless to sya he was pissed. His wife was a whore, got knocked up by another guy and then told him that they were his kids. So the man goes to court to try to stop having to pay 1/3 of his salary in child support for teh three kids who aren't hiw, but he did still want to be a father-figure to them. the judge said he had ot keep paying and because he told the kids that he couldn't visit them at all. The poor guy has to continue paying throught hte nose for kids that aren't even his and that he is not allowed to see. This was in Texas. So yes that type of thing does happen to straight people. That is the worst court decision ever. If you aren't the father of the kids then you owe them nothing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest LooseCannon Report post Posted July 22, 2002 It somewhat depends on the specifics of what the court ruled. There is a very strong presumption in most states that the husband is the father of his wife's children, and it can be very hard to even be allowed to introduce evidence that rebuts that presumption. It is really stupid to still have that rule these days, but historically it existed to prevent the husband from trying to argue he wasn't the biological father. DNA tests have rendered the rule obsolete, but it's possible that the father wasn't even allowed to introduce the DNA test at the hearing, and that's why the court ruled the way it did. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest converge241 Report post Posted July 23, 2002 Thanks Some Guy for pointing out a precedent for heterosexuals. I stand corrected. I still however thing the lesbian forced to pay is ludicrous Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Some Guy Report post Posted July 23, 2002 Oh it is and so is the making the guy pay in the story I mentioned. BTW the judge refused to allow the man's DNA evidence and refused to make the woman's ex-boyfriend to take a paternity test. The saddest part is that the mother has lead her children to beleive that the man has deserted them, which is not the case according to him or anything in that story. The solution IMO is to take a DNA test the day the baby is born. All it takes is a cotton swab and a lab. When the results come in the husband can decide whether or not to sign the birth certificate if he is not the biological father. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MD2020 Report post Posted July 23, 2002 Sort of continuing with this idea.... About a month ago, I read about this story in Sweden. Seems like two lesbians used donated sperm to have a kid (think the sperm was donated by a friend, but not sure). The two lesbians have the baby and raise it as a family. All well and good so far. Anyhow, years later, the two women split up. Then, some judge makes the guy, who has had no contact with the kid, as agreed by all parties, pay child support. The law can be really crazy at times. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
