I know your 'beliefs' well enough, I and everyone else has heard them over and over, and no one agrees with you. If your idea had even an iota of merit, it would be at least in SERIOUS legal process, or be law already. News flash, it's NOT. Not now, won't EVER be. You don't believe me, then go ask a lawmaker or a lawyer, see how hard they laugh at you. But you won't because you have to believe that you're right....and you're NOT. But you don't want to hear it, and you an't see past the end of your own nose to even truthfully investigate the matter legally and the repercussions of what such a law would create. You just decide to get your "facts" from some crackpot website that "agrees" with you....that site is a joke. It's comparable to a neo-Nazi or KKK site. NO ONE takes those sites or views seriously. There's NOTHING wrong with having a mission or a view, but you can't get your information from such a biased source, or one single source. Always do more research, and ALWAYS consider the source. You're being duped. Talk to real professionals, in the real world.
One major flaw in your "wonderful" idea is...YOU will be paying for other men's kids....kids YOU did not father from a woman you didn't even get to fuck, because there will be more unsupported kids using up social services that are paid for by WORKING people's taxes. So by allowing even ONE man to not support his kid, you FORCE ALL men to carry his burden that he decided to dump on YOU. Do you understand that?? You say you're all about "fair" but this is the MOST unfair thing you can propose to all working people....and ALL men. PLEASE, address that. I don't care if you address anything else in the entire post, just address THAT, OK? Please. Tell me how it's fair??
People, men AND women, need to be responsible for their actions. Period. I get what you're saying, but you have no point, it doesn't make sense morally, socially or legally. Not ONE bit.
No one agrees with me? Speak for yourself, not others. There are plenty that agree with me, and I'll name three of the more known ones. NeuroNeptunian, CoverYourEars, and Lulz. Don't say nobody agrees with me just to make yourself feel like everyone is agreeing with you, and not agreeing with me, because there are plenty that agree with me, and plenty that dissagree with you all together.
I knew it, I knew I would regret replying to you. You've said this all before in a debate with me that took three days, that I won (other users words, not mine).
Remember this marvelous line that you kept trying to avoid?
"We are already paying for other peoples kids, child support comes out of the taxpayers pockets".
I then followed up with the idea - So we don't give the money we use for child support to pay for kids that aren't ours, and give it to everybody to be able to have financial abortion, that means the "taxpayers" benefit from paying their taxes, not a parent and their kid that the taxpayers have no connection to. This way instead of paying for the kids that aren't ours from taxes, the taxpayers money is given to the kids thats parents claimed financial abortion.
Exchanging childsupport for financial abortion taxes, which the taxpayers would be happier doing, since "they" actually benefit from "their" taxes.
I have adressed that before plenty of times, it was you that avoided my answer when I gave it, and ignored it when I repeated it constantly.
So by not getting the taxpayers money spent on child support, the taxpayers money goes to helping financial abortion, that way the taxpayers actually benefit from getting their taxes spent on child support, to children that aren't theirs.
Not replying to you at all after this. I could of been reasonable in discussing this more with you, but you've done exactly what I knew you would do, you are repeating everying "exactly" the way you did back then. I proved you wrong on the matter then, most of the time you just kept repeating yourself because you "refused" to even acknowledge my taxpayers point, and I am not going on a three day debate with you again that could of been finnished in twenty minutes if you actually acknoweledged the points I made instead of intentionally ignoring it.
Even in your next reply, you will say a little bit about the actual taxpayers point I made here, and back in the older debate, then max the whole comment box out on a completely different matter.
No one agrees with you?? OK, well apparently ALL of society agrees with me, so that's hardly no one. Like I said, talk to a lawyer. But you won't....You're too much of a pussy.
Am I a bad person for being pro-choice?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
I know your 'beliefs' well enough, I and everyone else has heard them over and over, and no one agrees with you. If your idea had even an iota of merit, it would be at least in SERIOUS legal process, or be law already. News flash, it's NOT. Not now, won't EVER be. You don't believe me, then go ask a lawmaker or a lawyer, see how hard they laugh at you. But you won't because you have to believe that you're right....and you're NOT. But you don't want to hear it, and you an't see past the end of your own nose to even truthfully investigate the matter legally and the repercussions of what such a law would create. You just decide to get your "facts" from some crackpot website that "agrees" with you....that site is a joke. It's comparable to a neo-Nazi or KKK site. NO ONE takes those sites or views seriously. There's NOTHING wrong with having a mission or a view, but you can't get your information from such a biased source, or one single source. Always do more research, and ALWAYS consider the source. You're being duped. Talk to real professionals, in the real world.
One major flaw in your "wonderful" idea is...YOU will be paying for other men's kids....kids YOU did not father from a woman you didn't even get to fuck, because there will be more unsupported kids using up social services that are paid for by WORKING people's taxes. So by allowing even ONE man to not support his kid, you FORCE ALL men to carry his burden that he decided to dump on YOU. Do you understand that?? You say you're all about "fair" but this is the MOST unfair thing you can propose to all working people....and ALL men. PLEASE, address that. I don't care if you address anything else in the entire post, just address THAT, OK? Please. Tell me how it's fair??
People, men AND women, need to be responsible for their actions. Period. I get what you're saying, but you have no point, it doesn't make sense morally, socially or legally. Not ONE bit.
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
No one agrees with me? Speak for yourself, not others. There are plenty that agree with me, and I'll name three of the more known ones. NeuroNeptunian, CoverYourEars, and Lulz. Don't say nobody agrees with me just to make yourself feel like everyone is agreeing with you, and not agreeing with me, because there are plenty that agree with me, and plenty that dissagree with you all together.
I knew it, I knew I would regret replying to you. You've said this all before in a debate with me that took three days, that I won (other users words, not mine).
Remember this marvelous line that you kept trying to avoid?
"We are already paying for other peoples kids, child support comes out of the taxpayers pockets".
I then followed up with the idea - So we don't give the money we use for child support to pay for kids that aren't ours, and give it to everybody to be able to have financial abortion, that means the "taxpayers" benefit from paying their taxes, not a parent and their kid that the taxpayers have no connection to. This way instead of paying for the kids that aren't ours from taxes, the taxpayers money is given to the kids thats parents claimed financial abortion.
Exchanging childsupport for financial abortion taxes, which the taxpayers would be happier doing, since "they" actually benefit from "their" taxes.
I have adressed that before plenty of times, it was you that avoided my answer when I gave it, and ignored it when I repeated it constantly.
So by not getting the taxpayers money spent on child support, the taxpayers money goes to helping financial abortion, that way the taxpayers actually benefit from getting their taxes spent on child support, to children that aren't theirs.
Not replying to you at all after this. I could of been reasonable in discussing this more with you, but you've done exactly what I knew you would do, you are repeating everying "exactly" the way you did back then. I proved you wrong on the matter then, most of the time you just kept repeating yourself because you "refused" to even acknowledge my taxpayers point, and I am not going on a three day debate with you again that could of been finnished in twenty minutes if you actually acknoweledged the points I made instead of intentionally ignoring it.
Even in your next reply, you will say a little bit about the actual taxpayers point I made here, and back in the older debate, then max the whole comment box out on a completely different matter.
--
wigsplitz
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
No one agrees with you?? OK, well apparently ALL of society agrees with me, so that's hardly no one. Like I said, talk to a lawyer. But you won't....You're too much of a pussy.