To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *8451 (-20)
  Re: Family values?
 
(...) It isn't. (...) It needn't. (...) Well, I think that your main point here is that they should be prepared for the results. And I agree. But that doesn't mean that people have to get hurt. (...) Disagree. Most people, most of the time, are (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Family values?
 
(...) Agreed, but in the case above he's required to tend both his own garden and the garden of some other, deadbeat gardener. That's where I have the problem. (...) I wasn't very precise in my statement. Of course fatherhood isn't simply a matter (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Family values?
 
(...) But isn't this precisely the crux of the matter. This is why sex outside of marriage is morally wrong. Because it causes all manner of hurt and confusion on so many levels (as illustrated in the article). It is not considered wrong because (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Family values?
 
(...) Well let me see. Woman gets pregnant. Lies (or isn't forthcoming with the truth) about who the father is. Damn right he shouldn't have to pay child support. It's called Fraud. ~Mark "Muffin Head" Sandlin (24 years ago, 4-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Family values?
 
(...) little (...) Maybe he shouldn't plant the seed if he can't tend the garden. No really, the same could be said for the biological father of the child in question. He may not even know he is the father to this child and may have a family of his (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Family values?
 
(...) It's kind of like being convicted of manslaughter and given 18 in prison, and upon being found not guilty, still having to serve the term. The woman is not punished for fraud. The real father does not carry the burden of his actions. AND the (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Family values?
 
(...) At the same time, though, what if the alleged father has biological children of his own, and the financial burden of providing for someone else's child has an adverse impact on the man's own children? You refer to these men as "these fathers," (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  OT for OT - give blood!
 
Well, this is OT for .debate, but no other place to put it... GIVE BLOOD! Better yet, sign up for the Marrow program - (URL) your chance to save a life. -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Family values?
 
Note the one father did NOT want to disconnect from the child, he simply wanted the biological father to rightly shoulder the financial burden. That being said, I DO agree with something else in the article - if the "fathers" DO get out of support, (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Family values?
 
(...) Or blood boiling because these fathers find it so easy to suddenly detach themselves from children they've thought of as their own for years with little regard for their emotional and financial well-being? Maggie C. (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Family values?
 
Blood boiling because the "fathers" rightly think they owe nothing, or that the courts still force them to pay? (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Family values?
 
Here's one that's sure to get the blood boiling. Any thoughts? (URL) Dave! (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uhh, back to tax again ;-) (Was Re: Is space property?)
 
(...) I agree that I am sort-of legally _not_ entitled to those portions of my personal property. There are some problems in the US with whether the income tax is actually legal, but I suppose that's an issue for an other time. My claims that (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: It IS about Taxation ;-) (Was Re: (Sub|Ob)jectivity and related case studies on .debate (...or is it just about taxation :-)
 
(...) My mistake. I misunderstood your position. Out of interest, how could the police be funded outside the TAX system? Would one have to have insurance to ensure , say, ones own murderer is tracked down? Would one also have to have insurance to (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: It IS about Taxation ;-) (Was Re: (Sub|Ob)jectivity and related case studies on .debate (...or is it just about taxation :-)
 
(...) Oh, all of those things should be privatized...oh wait, that's not the conversation we're having... Well, defense and foreign policy pretty clearly fall under "The assurance that our global neighbors are behaving" above and police and courts I (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Uhh, back to tax again ;-) (Was Re: Is space property?)
 
Christopher Weeks wrote in message ... (...) unfair, (...) You're right. I have made two mistakes in my argument: one was to invoke the ambiguous concept of "fairness", the other one was to rigidly stick to the dictionary definition of "stealing" (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: It IS about Taxation ;-) (Was Re: (Sub|Ob)jectivity and related case studies on .debate (...or is it just about taxation :-)
 
<zapped> (...) <zapped> But what about police, "defence", courts, and some sort of governmental foreign policy office? Scott A (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Is space property?
 
<picking kernel bits out of my teeth>Golly!</picking> (...) I don't see how this paragraph supports the idea that "fair" isn't an even distribution. I mean, I basically agree with what you're saying, but I don't see the connection to defining what (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Is space property?
 
(...) Bwaaaahahhahahahaha! I can't believe I did that! *Last* century. Last. d'oh, LFB (Now if only I could stop writing "19" on my cheques...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Is space property?
 
(...) 8^) I make it a habit only to be burgled by people who accept Visa. I might be unknowingly straddling two issues here; I'm comparing taxation with burglary in terms of the "taxation is theft" principle I've read, but perhaps that's not (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR