The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on July 14, 2022, 05:52:31 pm
-
Legislation Could Allow Moms to Be Awarded Child Support While Pregnant: ‘Fathers Have Obligations’
Amy Furr 14 Jul 2022
Proposed legislation may allow mothers to receive child support during their pregnancy, WLBT reported this week.
U.S. Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith’s (R-MS) office announced she cosponsored the legislation named the Unborn Child Support Act.
The act would permit a court to award child support payments while the baby was still in the womb and up to the point of conception.
“I hope good legislation, like the Unborn Child Support Act, gets more support now that the Dobbs decision encourages us to look more seriously at supporting mothers and their unborn children,” Hyde-Smith commented.
https://twitter.com/SenHydeSmith/status/1547252218914553857
-
....but but it's not a human/baby/child yet....not until *it* is born............./s
-
The Federal government has no business being in the baby business. At all. From any direction.
If a state wanted to put forth such a law, well then fine.
-
:pondering: Interesting, so fathers have a responsibility to support but have no say in no abort? Is Hyde-Smith aware that despite her good intentions this bill would ratchet up pressure by irresponsible deadbeat sperm donors to force abortion on women?
-
The Federal government has no business being in the baby business. At all. From any direction.
If a state wanted to put forth such a law, well then fine.
888high58888
Secondly, until a DNA test is done, there is no way to positively be sure of who the father is.
-
....but but it's not a human/baby/child yet....not until *it* is born............./s
@mystery-ak
I not only see your humorous (to some of us,anyhow) point,and am a little jealous I didn't think of it first.
MY immediate first thought was "I see no problem with this. If you help make the baby,you help pay for prenatal care as well as postnatal care."
What else ya gonna do,tell the pre-born to "get the hell out of there and get a job so you can pay your own bills!"?
AND.....,it ain't like the mother got pregnant by herself.
-
:pondering: Interesting, so fathers have a responsibility to support but have no say in no abort? Is Hyde-Smith aware that despite her good intentions this bill would ratchet up pressure by irresponsible deadbeat sperm donors to force abortion on women?
@GtHawk
Let's reserve the hypocrisy on this issue for the left.
After all,from the conservative and the religious POV,life begins at conception. It either does,or it doesn't. We can't have it both ways.
-
888high58888
Secondly, until a DNA test is done, there is no way to positively be sure of who the father is.
@libertybele
Fine,let's do that,but the PRESUMED father should be paying for this up to the point where it can be proven he ISN'T the father,and then let the mother pay him back even if it is only at a 10 bucks per week level. The IMPORTANT think here is the health and the life of a baby. The details on who did what can be sorted out down the road.
-
How and when is paternity to be established while the child is in-utero?
Is the paternity ruling while the child is in-utero to be considered legally binding, permanent, and not appealable?
What is the due process right of a father to contest the woman's, and the state's, assignment of paternity to an individual male?
Is a sperm donor to be declared the father, and assigned the rights and liabilities, of fatherhood for children conceived and placed in-utero via IVF?
Since the unborn child is provided personhood while in-utero, should unborn children still in-utero be counted by the US Census for the purpose of Congressional apportionment?
What about the issue of US Citizenship by virtue of being a naturally born in the US? If a father is designated while the unborn child is in-utero, how is US Citizenship determined if the child was conceived outside the US?
When a child is conceived outside the United States, by citizens and non-citizens, which nation's courts have standing for the purpose of establishing legal and financial paternity?
If a US Court assigns paternity while the child is in-utero, is that a defacto or a dejure establishment of US Citizenship?
If the expectant mother miscarries, can the father demand a refund of the monies he paid while the child was in-utero?
If a miscarriage is caused by a 3rd party accident or crime, does the father have the right to sue third-parties for legal loss and suffering in civil court?
Can an unborn child in-utero be legally emancipated from its legal parents?
Does an unborn child in-utero qualify to receive government assistance and benefits only previously assigned to born children?
-
@libertybele
Fine,let's do that,but the PRESUMED father should be paying for this up to the point where it can be proven he ISN'T the father,and then let the mother pay him back even if it is only at a 10 bucks per week level. The IMPORTANT think here is the health and the life of a baby. The details on who did what can be sorted out down the road.
Yes, the health of the baby is important and Medicaid pays for prenatal care, hospitalization and after care up to a certain age.
Why do you think so many pregnant ILLEGALS come over the border? They and their babies are taken care of and voila, the baby becomes an American citizen!!!
-
Yes, the health of the baby is important and Medicaid pays for prenatal care, hospitalization and after care up to a certain age.
Why do you think so many pregnant ILLEGALS come over the border? They and their babies are taken care of and voila, the baby becomes an American citizen!!!
@libertybele
More importantly,that "anchor baby" becomes the reason the illegal alien mother and father can't be deported.
BUT.......,the baby didn't write or vote for those laws,and shouldn't be held responsible for them.
I see no reason at all a illegal alien baby born in America can't be deported back to the parents home nation with the parents once they become old enough to travel.
What we need to do is eliminate the "anchor baby" law.
-
If the mother miscarries after the Court has ruled that a father must pay child support during pregnancy, is a Death Certificate to be issued?
If the Death Certificate is issued for an unborn child miscarried in-utero, can life insurance benefits be collected for the death of the child?
Can the Father and/or Mother deduct the unborn baby in-utero as a dependent on their taxes?
-
If the mother miscarries after the Court has ruled that a father must pay child support during pregnancy, is a Death Certificate to be issued?
If the Death Certificate is issued for an unborn child miscarried in-utero, can life insurance benefits be collected for the death of the child?
Can the Father and/or Mother deduct the unborn baby in-utero as a dependent on their taxes?
@DefiantMassRINO
Not being a lawyur,ahma stayin away from this wun!
Just reading the questions made my head hurt.
-
888high58888
Secondly, until a DNA test is done, there is no way to positively be sure of who the father is.
That's right.
But this whole question is resolved in one simple action.
Marriage.
Yeah, I know. Call me Old Skool. :laugh: :whistle: :shrug:
-
On Government documentation, is age measured from conception or the moment when a child is no longer in-utero?
Can I legally drink 21 years after the monent I was conceived, versus, the moment I was no longer in-utero?
Can I also vote 18 years after the monent I was conceived, versus, the moment I was no longer in-utero?
-
Dang, this is going to be a bonanza of billible hours for Family Law lawyers.
There are going to be new legal precedents out the wazoo.
Of course, precedents are not law and are open to re-evaluation upon a case-by-case basis.
Does the overruling/overturning/re-interpretation of Roe v. Wade mean that all other Supreme Court precedents are now non-applicable, non-germane B.S., and can be disregarded?
What allows one precedent to be upheld, but not another? Isn't that a violation of equal protection, or is the meanining of "equal" open to new legal interpretation?
Can the precedents established using the Interstate Commerce Clause be re-challenged?
Since, air traffic control is not specifically mentioned in the US Constitution, can the FAA be abolished and air traffic control be regulated by the states, should the states' constitutions allow for such a thing?
Sounds like anarchy until the US Constitution is ameneded for items previously considered precendent.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdpAop7gp0w
-
So, the tyrrany of "stare decisis" has been ended, we can re-challenge every Supreme Court precedent for re-consideration based upon literal reading of the US Constitution.
Does this mean all Federal legal tenets based upon "stare decisis" are null and void, and can be ignored?
If "stare decisis" precedents based upon the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution be challenged?
Are the US Departments of Energy, Education, Environmental Protection; the CFTC, the FEC; the SEC; the FERC; etc. are now no longer valid Federal regulatory authorities because there is no mention of Credit Default Swaps, Education, Air Quality, Internet, and Nuclear Power in the US Constitution?
-
Cool, we can now blow up the tyranny of the current Federal regime of regulations.
If it ain't specifically mentioned in the US Constitution, it ain't Federal.
-
@libertybele
More importantly,that "anchor baby" becomes the reason the illegal alien mother and father can't be deported.
BUT.......,the baby didn't write or vote for those laws,and shouldn't be held responsible for them.
I see no reason at all a illegal alien baby born in America can't be deported back to the parents home nation with the parents once they become old enough to travel.
What we need to do is eliminate the "anchor baby" law.
@sneakypete Birthright Citizenship has been an ongoing issue -- Marco Rubio is an anchor baby, so .... it's an issue that isn't easily resolved. In my mind -- ILLEGALS shouldn't be here in the first place, shouldn't be allowed over the border and yes, deport the mother and child as well as the father. Then you have people calling foul and being inhumane.
It is a cluster that should have been resolved decades ago. Here we sit.
For the millions that are coming over, they then bring in their relatives and instead of 25 million, we'll have 50 million. Just peachy!
-
@sneakypete Birthright Citizenship has been an ongoing issue -- Marco Rubio is an anchor baby, so .... it's an issue that isn't easily resolved. In my mind -- ILLEGALS shouldn't be here in the first place, shouldn't be allowed over the border and yes, deport the mother and child as well as the father. Then you have people calling foul and being inhumane.
It is a cluster that should have been resolved decades ago. Here we sit.
For the millions that are coming over, they then bring in their relatives and instead of 25 million, we'll have 50 million. Just peachy!
@libertybele
I suspect Rubio's parents came here legally.
-
@libertybele
Fine,let's do that,but the PRESUMED father should be paying for this up to the point where it can be proven he ISN'T the father,and then let the mother pay him back even if it is only at a 10 bucks per week level. The IMPORTANT think here is the health and the life of a baby. The details on who did what can be sorted out down the road.
Yeah, I can see where a 'deadbeat mom' would have a mental daddy derby to see who could pony up the most money...
(A few years back, I recall overhearing one angelic looking young lady telling one of her co-workers that she planned to have three kids, by three dads, so she'd be more likely to get child support she could live off of. I warned all the guys I knew who had given her a second look.)
-
@libertybele
I suspect Rubio's parents came here legally.
No, that is not my understanding. He was born on US soil therefore he is a US citizen
-
No, that is not my understanding. He was born on US soil therefore he is a US citizen
@libertybele
Ok,thanks for clearing that up.
-
(https://www.professorbuzzkill.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/517e03270e8ad109c0331a0ce9752fef-e1620998385909.jpg)
-
@libertybele
Ok,thanks for clearing that up.
@sneakypete
Marco Antonio Rubio was born in Miami, Florida, the second son and third child of Mario Rubio Reina and Oriales (née Garcia) Rubio. His parents were Cubans who immigrated to the United States in 1956 during the regime of Fulgencio Batista, two and a half years before Fidel Castro ascended to power after the Cuban Revolution. His mother made at least four return trips to Cuba after Castro's takeover, including a month-long trip in 1961. Neither of Rubio's parents was a U.S. citizen at the time of Rubio's birth, but his parents applied for U.S. citizenship and were naturalized in 1975. Some relatives of Rubio's were admitted to the U.S. as refugees.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marco_Rubio
-
On Government documentation, is age measured from conception or the moment when a child is no longer in-utero?
Can I legally drink 21 years after the monent I was conceived, versus, the moment I was no longer in-utero?
Can I also vote 18 years after the monent I was conceived, versus, the moment I was no longer in-utero?
No no and no. Birth date.
-
@GtHawk
Let's reserve the hypocrisy on this issue for the left.
After all,from the conservative and the religious POV,life begins at conception. It either does,or it doesn't. We can't have it both ways.
If you are saying I'm a hypocrite I'm offended by the accusation, show me where I have ever posited that life doesn't begin at conception or supported abortion. I didn't even disagree with the proposed legislation in my comment, I simply pointed out that once again fathers are to be made responsible to support a child(even before it is born) while not having a say in a woman's decision to abort his child.
-
WOKE AGENDAS, Women get all the advantages of marriage, men get a total screwing for marrying women. Now only 6.5 men out of a hundred are getting married, and many women are bawling their eyes out, not so arrogant and proud any more. Odd, eh?
Like fair democrats giving the Treasury away to foreigners, and favoring them when they commit crimes, the whites get screwed again.
The lawful need to be disarmed, and radical muslims, Communists anddrug dealers get armed to the teeth.
Murderers often get set free,innocent babies get butchered like on a factory assembly line. The democrat voters proud their candidates get their way to do such unadulterated wickedness and evils, insist Voting democart has nothing to do with the evils they perpetrate in these wicked days. As Satans stooges the perps and the enablers all insist they are innocent, despite the butchery they support and/or engage in. You can some times watch it going on here.
:smokin: :smokin: :smokin:
-
If you are saying I'm a hypocrite I'm offended by the accusation, show me where I have ever posited that life doesn't begin at conception or supported abortion. I didn't even disagree with the proposed legislation in my comment, I simply pointed out that once again fathers are to be made responsible to support a child(even before it is born) while not having a say in a woman's decision to abort his child.
@GtHawk
I was NOT calling you a hypocrite,or even subtly suggesting such a thing. My apologies if I didn't state my case clearly enough.
What I was trying to say is that neither the men OR the women can have it both ways. Sometime is permissible,or it is not permissible,baring any ACTUAL danger to the mother if she carries to term.
I am in TOTAL agreement with you that if the mother doesn't want to keep the baby and the father does and is willing to sign legal documents stating he will provide for the child,the woman must be REQUIRED to carry to term and then hand the baby over to the father.
If the woman isn't willing to do this,she should have done something about it before the first 90 days of pregnancy. After that,she has bought the ticket,and needs to take the ride.
-
@GtHawk
I was NOT calling you a hypocrite,or even subtly suggesting such a thing. My apologies if I didn't state my case clearly enough.
What I was trying to say is that neither the men OR the women can have it both ways. Sometime is permissible,or it is not permissible,baring any ACTUAL danger to the mother if she carries to term.
I am in TOTAL agreement with you that if the mother doesn't want to keep the baby and the father does and is willing to sign legal documents stating he will provide for the child,the woman must be REQUIRED to carry to term and then hand the baby over to the father.
If the woman isn't willing to do this,she should have done something about it before the first 90 days of pregnancy. After that,she has bought the ticket,and needs to take the ride.
???? If the woman can be REQUIRED to carry to term then she could then be REQUIRED to terminate the pregnancy.
Nope. Notta. Not going to happen.
-
???? If the woman can be REQUIRED to carry to term then she could then be REQUIRED to terminate the pregnancy.
Nope. Notta. Not going to happen.
@libertybele
Do you SERIOUSLY think that is logical?
-
@libertybele
Do you SERIOUSLY think that is logical?
YES. You might want to go back and re-read my response to your 'requirement'.
-
YES. You might want to go back and re-read my response to your 'requirement'.
@libertybele
You can I clearly have different opinions on when it comes to rational thought.