forced fatherhood
LilChica
Paul A Laird wrote:
>
> Much has been said in this newsgroup about the ability, or inability, of
> a woman to "force" a man into parenthood against his wishes. Many of the
> female posters, specifically Wanda, WordWarrior, and Pat, have joked
> about this and generally dismissed it as a way for men to get out of
> paying child support. However, after a little research, and I mean
> little, I have found 6 cases where a boy, under 18, has been forced to
> pay child support after the baby sitter who raped him had a child.
Were these cases considered "statutory" rape, or forced physical rape?
--
...human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn
from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent
disinclination to do so.
--Douglas Adams, "Last Chance to See"
Paul A Laird
Much has been said in this newsgroup about the ability, or inability, of
a woman to "force" a man into parenthood against his wishes. Many of the
female posters, specifically Wanda, WordWarrior, and Pat, have joked
about this and generally dismissed it as a way for men to get out of
paying child support. However, after a little research, and I mean
little, I have found 6 cases where a boy, under 18, has been forced to
pay child support after the baby sitter who raped him had a child.
1)A 14 year old boy in Kentucky, raped by his 27 year old babysitter,
was ordered to pay child support and back AFDC to Kentucky, after the
woman filed for support. The Kentucky Supreme Court ruled rhat though
the sexual act was not consensual, the rape did not release the boy from
the legal and moral obligation to support any progeny from the rape.
2) An 18 year old woman in Colorado has sued a 12 year old boy, and his
parents, for chiid support for a baby born to her. The woman, recent
released from prison after serving 9 months for raping the boy, was
awarded $100/mo in child support, and the court ordered the parents of
the boy to reimburse the State for foster care for the child while the
mother was in prison.
3) A 17 year old boy in Wisconsin, raped by his 17 year old baby sitter
when he was 12, was ordered to repay the State $16,000 in AFDC, and 17%
of his wages to the woman, now 20 years old, in child support. This
court also ruled that the circumstance of rape does not remove the boy's
responsibility to pay child support.
Paternit of JLH, 149 Wis 2d 349 441 NW 2d 273 (1989)
4)A 12 year old Kansas boy has been ordered to pay child support to his
18 year old babysitter, who gave birth after she raped him.
Hermessman v Sayer, Kansas Supreme Court 1995
5) In the case of Schierenbeck v Minor 148 Colorado 582 367 P 2nd 333
1961: a 12 year old boy was ordered to pay child support to his 17 year
old babysitter who gave birth after she raped him.
6)From the St. Louis Post Dispatch, Feb 15, 1995: A 13 year old Missouri
boy has been ordered to pay child support to an 18 year old Illinois
woman. The woman raped the boy when he was 11. She served 2 years in
prison. The courts ruled rape did absolve the boy of his responsibility
to support his child.
So, women can indeed force males to become fathers. A woman has had the
right for 75 years to abort a child conceived by rape. A man/boy still
does not have the right to not be the parent of a child conceived after
he was raped. Paul L
Women can have equality with men just as soon as they give up some of
their superiority.
Paul A Laird
LilChica wrote:
>
> Paul A Laird wrote:
> >
> > Much has been said in this newsgroup about the ability, or inability, of
> > a woman to "force" a man into parenthood against his wishes. Many of the
> > female posters, specifically Wanda, WordWarrior, and Pat, have joked
> > about this and generally dismissed it as a way for men to get out of
> > paying child support. However, after a little research, and I mean
> > little, I have found 6 cases where a boy, under 18, has been forced to
> > pay child support after the baby sitter who raped him had a child.
>
>
> --
> ...human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn
> from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent
> disinclination to do so.
> --Douglas Adams, "Last Chance to See"
By law there is no difference. And are you implying that you would favor
the law do that even for women? By the very definition of rape, all rape
is physical; only the force used to perpetuate the rape is either
physical, mental or emotional. It is rape for a baby sitter to have sex
with her charges. Why then are we re-victimizing the boy by forcing him
to be a father? And then revictimizing him yet again by forcing him to
pay child support if the babysitter gets pregnant. Your bias is showing
here. These boys could not by law choose to have sex, most likely for
certain did not want to be fathers at 12 or 13, but now are being forced
to pay their victimizers "compensation" in the form of child support.
Those boys had no opportunity or right to refuse parenthood resulting
from that rape. Yet I sens Lilchica that you think they should have no
choice here, and that it is right for the state to force them to pay for
their victimizer's crime. Your inconsistency on the issue of statuatory
rape alone reveals you obvious bias against men. Paul L
Feminism and inconsistency are now synonyms.
LilChica
Paul A Laird wrote:
>
> LilChica wrote:
> >
> > Paul A Laird wrote:
> > >
> > > Much has been said in this newsgroup about the ability, or inability, of
> > > a woman to "force" a man into parenthood against his wishes. Many of the
> > > female posters, specifically Wanda, WordWarrior, and Pat, have joked
> > > about this and generally dismissed it as a way for men to get out of
> > > paying child support. However, after a little research, and I mean
> > > little, I have found 6 cases where a boy, under 18, has been forced to
> > > pay child support after the baby sitter who raped him had a child.
> >
> > Were these cases considered "statutory" rape, or forced physical rape?
>
> the law do that even for women?
Nope. You said that. I just asked a question.
> By the very definition of rape, all rape
> is physical; only the force used to perpetuate the rape is either
> physical, mental or emotional. It is rape for a baby sitter to have sex
> with her charges. Why then are we re-victimizing the boy by forcing him
> to be a father? And then revictimizing him yet again by forcing him to
> pay child support if the babysitter gets pregnant. Your bias is showing
> here.
It is? How? I was the one who asked the question. The bias is shown
only by you in your attributing a "stance" based on that question,
without even knowing a goddamn thing about why I asked it!
> These boys could not by law choose to have sex, most likely for
> certain did not want to be fathers at 12 or 13, but now are being forced
> to pay their victimizers "compensation" in the form of child support.
> Those boys had no opportunity or right to refuse parenthood resulting
> from that rape. Yet I sens Lilchica that you think they should have no
> choice here, and that it is right for the state to force them to pay for
> their victimizer's crime.
Hows that? By asking a question, you can read my mind? If you are
soooooooo omniscent, what the hell are you doing here? Go solve all the
worlds problems, Paulyboy.
> Your inconsistency on the issue of statuatory
> rape alone reveals you obvious bias against men.
Please point out my STANCE!!!!! I don't recall POSTING it here.
> Paul L
>
> Feminism and inconsistency are now synonyms.
Jumping the gun, false attributions, and Paul Laird are also,
apparently.
Kingsley G. Morse Jr.
LilChica <yc...@itol.com> writes:
>Paul A Laird wrote:
>>
>> Much has been said in this newsgroup about the ability, or inability, of
>> a woman to "force" a man into parenthood against his wishes. Many of the
>> female posters, specifically Wanda, WordWarrior, and Pat, have joked
>> about this and generally dismissed it as a way for men to get out of
>> paying child support. However, after a little research, and I mean
>> little, I have found 6 cases where a boy, under 18, has been forced to
>> pay child support after the baby sitter who raped him had a child.
>Were these cases considered "statutory" rape, or forced physical rape?
The cases posted by Paul were statutory rape cases, which means that the
boys were considered to have been raped because they were too young to
legally consent to sex. Having said that, I believe that guys can be
forcibly raped and forced into parenthood with legal impunity under our
current laws. Let's .....
LEGALIZE CHOICE FOR MEN!
for more information contact
NATIONAL CENTER FOR MEN P.O. BOX 555 OLD BETHPAGE, NY 11804 (516) 942-2020
http://www.nas.com/c4m
--
If email to me bounces, make sure you removed NOSPAM from my address.
Christine A. Owens
Paul A Laird wrote:
>
> Much has been said in this newsgroup about the ability, or inability, of
> a woman to "force" a man into parenthood against his wishes. Many of the
> female posters, specifically Wanda, WordWarrior, and Pat, have joked
> about this and generally dismissed it as a way for men to get out of
> paying child support. However, after a little research, and I mean
> little, I have found 6 cases where a boy, under 18, has been forced to
> pay child support after the baby sitter who raped him had a child.
For some reason, the State seems to separate the circumstances of conception from the
issue of support. IMO, this is wrong. If a woman has been convicted of rape, statutory
or otherwise, she should a] be considered an unfit parent, and lose custody of any child
conceived therefrom; and b] neither she, nor any other person, should be able to collect
child support from her victim.
Chris Owens
Paul A Laird
And I would go one step further and say the male should have the right
to one of the following:a] give up all parental rights before the child
is born or;b] force an abortion to avoid being the male parent of a
child conceived by rape. Paul L
Kingsley G. Morse Jr.
Paul A Laird <THEL...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
[...]
>And, I must add that most states do not differentiate between
>"statuatory and forceful" rape in regards to sentencing if found guilty.
>The "Megan" Law which is supposed to protect society from sexual
>predators has already been used several times against men who were only
>guilty of "statuatory" rape. In Washington State, a man convicted of
>statuatory rape 6 years ago was released from prison, and the "good"
>people of the community to which he moved burned down his house. His
>"victim" testified for the defense at his trial. Women as victims of
>rape have the choice of not being mothers if they get pregnant. Men as
>victims of rape have no choice of not being fathers if the victimizer
>gets pregnant, then are victimized again by the child support system.
>Paul L
Yes Paul, I agree with you again. It's clear that our legal system is
applying a double standard to males and females in statutory rape cases by
only forcing males into parenthood. I'm certain our government is
unequally protecting people from forced legal parenthood. I expect the
Fourteenth Amendment to be an important argument for legalizing choice
for men.