its 2025, men have grown up and have abandoned the idea of having kids.
the few brave ones who do end up in a ball crying like babies and regretting it everyday

Make DNA test as part of the requirements to receive child support and half of the complaints will go away. There will always be issues with what one can afford/what it cost to raise a kid/kids however.

Yes, same reason for marriage, to give men reason to avoid reckless sex and promiscuity. Same reason why marriages were once arranged or forced. Marriages may still be arranged or forced somewhere in our world. I haven't been following.

Originally posted by steven1mac:

Make DNA test as part of the requirements to receive child support and half of the complaints will go away. There will always be issues with what one can afford/what it cost to raise a kid/kids however.

Take it a step further, and make it mandatory that the woman pay a restitution to the man she accused if she gets it wrong.

It was introduced to aid child nutrition and education. It was to assist in the cost of feeding children and allowing them to stay in the education system longer. It was also often introduced after war as an attempt to help repopulate a country.

Its a good thing when people actually pay it

it should be :

1 no divorces

2 if rule 1 is broken, than let the person that broke the marriage bleed.
all property to the woed including kids all debts to the victem.
**
woman more often cheat and are the one to run away with another guy and if they do they shoulf get nothing.
-

it is anoying if like for my brother his ex wife ran away with his former best friend.

no reason just "she fell like it"
he had entered the marriage with money and a good income she with a massive debt and little income.. amd she kept this overspending going in the marriage..
which ment she basicly spend 90% of his income on brand products for herself.. while secretly still building up more debt despite having been bailed out of a hole.
they had joined account as we are raised one should enter no holding back in marriage

not only did she manage to pull a surprise revealing this debt at the moment of divorce.. despite it clear she entered the marriage with it and made more 100% of the debt was laid on him for she had no income (and would thus bankrupt and never pay)

on top of that
she kept suing him for full costody.. with fall claims of their kid.
she due poor could do this for free he had to pay defence out of pocket.
he won every case.. but she kept opening new ones
the judge did advise to countersue.. for he was more stable and that would end this.. but he deemed it not in the childs interest to not see both parents.
-
her greed for child support which she had zero claim at, the chuld was 4 days a week with him. costed him in the end more in lawyer costs than it would ever have costed him in child support.

and yet she still got alimony..

if ever there was a case where the judge should have granted none.. but the system is blind. and discriminating of man..

-yes it sees 1 partner with high income and 1 with low and bases it on that alone. no factor of guild considered.
but even in cases where the woman earns more the judge tends to judge far less favorable.. there is a clear bias..

it presumes the man are the jackasses who cheat and walk away.. but very often its the woman..

I dont really care where it comes from, I just know its a form of slavery no different than indentured servitude. It's a breach of human rights and should be struct down everywhere

Originally posted by videomike_Ultimate_Plushie:

I dont really care where it comes from, I just know its a form of slavery no different than indentured servitude. It's a breach of human rights and should be struct down everywhere

not if your guilty.

if you are the one breaking a marriage ake the guilty party you deserve to be paying trough your nose and loose everything.

but the keyword here is guilt.. which very often is the woman who walks away.. and thus carries it..

Originally posted by Dutchgamer1982:

Originally posted by videomike_Ultimate_Plushie:

I dont really care where it comes from, I just know its a form of slavery no different than indentured servitude. It's a breach of human rights and should be struct down everywhere

not if your guilty.

if you are the one breaking a marriage ake the guilty party you deserve to be paying trough your nose and loose everything.

but the keyword here is guilt.. which very often is the woman who walks away.. and thus carries it..

Okay guilty of what? Are you suggesting say marital abandonment should result in indentured serviotude? the thing we outlawed as actual slavery?

Originally posted by videomike_Ultimate_Plushie:

Originally posted by Dutchgamer1982:

not if your guilty.

if you are the one breaking a marriage ake the guilty party you deserve to be paying trough your nose and loose everything.

but the keyword here is guilt.. which very often is the woman who walks away.. and thus carries it..

Okay guilty of what? Are you suggesting say marital abandonment should result in indentured serviotude? the thing we outlawed as actual slavery?

if you walk away unprovoked guilt.
if you cheat.. guilt
(I would add that repeat cheating aka that no trust can be it not happens again.. would make this case stronger)
if you use excessive violence guilt
(there is a normal correctional slap for kids and there is abuse.. similairly one can be stupid once and hold to hard at the arm and full on beat a wife up..)

basicly those are the 3 things I can imagine.

so if a person walks away from a marriage without clear cheating or abuse.. they should get all the debts and none of the possesions they also loose acces to their kids.

if two people mutually agree to terminate thats different than a more 50-50 split is fair. and nothing is owed after that.

but very often it is one side that does cheating or abusing.. or one side that desires the divorce when the other wishes to continue the partnership..

you make a promise with marriage for life. there should not even be divorces..
sp breaking that promise should come with dire consequences.
just not so one sides only for man or for the side that happens to earn more.
but aimed at let they who caused the break pay.

Originally posted by videomike_Ultimate_Plushie:

Originally posted by Dutchgamer1982:

not if your guilty.

if you are the one breaking a marriage ake the guilty party you deserve to be paying trough your nose and loose everything.

but the keyword here is guilt.. which very often is the woman who walks away.. and thus carries it..

Okay guilty of what? Are you suggesting say marital abandonment should result in indentured serviotude? the thing we outlawed as actual slavery?

Not sure if you could tell by the screen name but this guy probably has more old-school European social values rather than contemporary American ones.

Soon enough female robots will become a thing and you won't have to worry about stuff like this.

Originally posted by abdominusrex696969:

So child support actually stems from conservative values, not liberal feminism.

Both are actually. One is traditional feminism, the other is liberal feminism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_b8Gs6WoW0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ah2rh-fKifQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-myk23yTyM

Originally posted by Dutchgamer1982:

Originally posted by videomike_Ultimate_Plushie:

Okay guilty of what? Are you suggesting say marital abandonment should result in indentured serviotude? the thing we outlawed as actual slavery?

if you walk away unprovoked guilt.
if you cheat.. guilt
(I would add that repeat cheating aka that no trust can be it not happens again.. would make this case stronger)
if you use excessive violence guilt
(there is a normal correctional slap for kids and there is abuse.. similairly one can be stupid once and hold to hard at the arm and full on beat a wife up..)

basicly those are the 3 things I can imagine.

so if a person walks away from a marriage without clear cheating or abuse.. they should get all the debts and none of the possesions they also loose acces to their kids.

if two people mutually agree to terminate thats different than a more 50-50 split is fair. and nothing is owed after that.

but very often it is one side that does cheating or abusing.. or one side that desires the divorce when the other wishes to continue the partnership..

you make a promise with marriage for life. there should not even be divorces..
sp breaking that promise should come with dire consequences.
just not so one sides only for man or for the side that happens to earn more.
but aimed at let they who caused the break pay.

That is some victorian era crap....yeah id rather not people being deemed as literal criminals for not honoring a social tradition. If financial fraud is involved sure but thats a diffferent subject.