One Part Of North Dakota’s Bill Defining Life As Beginning At Conception Nobody Is Talking About

Parental rights.
North Dakota’s House of Representatives passed a bill defining life as beginning at conception and being a continuum of growth and development until death. Obviously, that means unborn babies are human beings and citizens and cannot be killed based on the whims of the mother. But something else it means is this: paternal rights over unborn children.
If a child is a human being from the time of conception, then the father of that child has parental rights no? Meaning that the father’s role in that child’s life is no longer simply bystander, at best, or bank account from which to send child support checks at worst.
That’s a good thing.
I don’t think we spend nearly enough time talking about just how much damage we’ve done to our society by minimizing the role of fathers in a child’s upbringing. In relationships that involve children the mothers get all of the choice. They get to choose abortion and the father gets no say. If they decide to keep the child, they get to choose whether or not the dad is around. If they choose not to have him around, he gets stuck footing the bill for child support and other costs.
Is it any wonder, in a situation like that, that a lot of fathers abandon their responsibilities?
We need to recognize that unborn children are, in fact, human beings. And we need to recognize that children need their fathers every bit as much as they need their mothers. I’m not much of a social conservative, but this isn’t about religious dogma or utopian societies. They’re plain, undeniable facts.

Tags: , , ,


«
»
  • http://www.willisms.com/ Zsa Zsa

    That is a cute baby!

  • Jay

    I thought that “conservatives” like you, Rob, would be against a bill that ultimately will spend millions of taxpayers dollars in court costs defending a doomed bill that is, currently, unconstitutional. I suppose it’s OK to waste millions if it complies with conservative ideology? This is garbage.

    Is Selective Reduction associated with IVF illegal? Is it “murder”?

  • Jay

    Maybe fewer abortions if the Father would have a say

    You have GOT to be kidding me. Maybe you haven’t seen the docket of deadbeat dads from State Courts who fail to pay for the kids that were birthed already? Get a clue. Parental rights isn’t going to do a damned thing.

  • yes, but

    Rob,if you are right about that consequence of the bill, then another consequence would be that pregnant minors would have the ability, as parents, to consent to health care for their unborn child; something that I think you opposed in an earlier post (http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/shouldnt_pregnant_teenagers_be_able_to_get_abortions_medical_care_without_p/)

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    If they were facts, you wouldn’t need a bill to make them true

    Tell that to Dred Scott!

  • robert108

    Dads, due to feminist hate, are excluded from parenting, and respond appropriately. Bringing them into the process would make everything better.

  • SHADY

    I would imagine the interest on HER credit cards is morethan 12% year?

    You talk like a child is a car, a bank loan, a personal item! The money is’nt a loan, it’s child support. My wife and I are licensed for foster care. Some of these kids come from single parent homes where the mother got custody.
    You paint the delusional picture of women as angels, some are, some arn’nt. Some kids come from a home where the mom is out spending the child support on gambling and drugs. But the fathers are’nt allowed to ask the courts for an itemized account of the money to see if it’s being spent on their kids!! Thats fair??
    And where I live, the courts are clearly giving custody of kids to the unfit wife. Not every single case, but more often than not.
    When the judge, county att., and social worker are all woman in the court room, sometimes even the deputy in the corner is a women. How fair do you think their going to be???

  • Jay

    You talk like a child is a car, a bank loan, a personal item! The money is’nt a loan, it’s child support.

    Umm…no. Pay attention. I’m saying that a father who doesn’t pay for his child shouldn’t complain about 12% interest on the amount he FAILED TO PAY when the mother who IS paying for the child BECAUSE THE FATHER ISN’T HELPING, is guaranteed to have higher than 12% interest on the credit cards she has to use to subsidize the non-paying “father”.

    You paint the delusional picture of women as angels, some are, some arn’nt. Some kids come from a home where the mom is out spending the child support on gambling and drugs. But the fathers are’nt allowed to ask the courts for an itemized account of the money to see if it’s being spent on their kids!! Thats fair??

    Way to change the focus of the argument. It’s another “baby out with the bathwater argument” which you guys seem to use on a regular basis. So it’s OK for a father not to pay his child support because there are mothers who may spend that amount on gambling and booze. Seems like perfect sense.

    And where I live, the courts are clearly giving custody of kids to the unfit wife. Not every single case, but more often than not.

    Bullshit. The hyperbole you use is just talking points. It’s not he truth. I don’t know or care where you live, but in ND “More often than not” the child’s “best interests” are kept at heart. If that means custody to the mother, considering the amount of inquiry that is done at the trial level with the R.F. Guidelines (you know…law), it’s “more often than not” the RIGHT decision. They don’t “favor” men. Even if the trial court were to give undue deference to the women, and made a horrible decision that does not mesh with the RF guidelines, the appellate court would be able to do another inquiry. Your argument is unsubstantiated, emotional garbage.

    When the judge, county att., and social worker are all woman in the court room, sometimes even the deputy in the corner is a women. How fair do you think their going to be???

    First, it’s “they’re” as in “they are”. Second, none of the people in the courtroom make the decisions other than the judge and “she” is bound by the law. The appellate court is currently comprised of more men than women. Again, it’s crap.

    NEXT!

  • http://reasonsnottovoteformccain.blogspot.com/ Morr

    They’re plain, undeniable facts.

    If they were facts, you wouldn’t need a bill to make them true or a blog post every three days ramming your “facts” down our throats.

    And the whole line about a “continuum of growth and development until death” that you constantly use… sounds nice, but means nothing. We all know how babies are born.

  • Jay

    Rob, everyone knows (from reading it ad nauseum) that you had your own issues with CS. So what? I blew my knee out, but I don’t fancy myself an orthopedic surgeon. Get a grip. You seem to think the majority of people are in the same situation that YOU were (although I do love the irony of you claiming “victim status” just like the “liberals” you rail against every single day) when in actuality, the truth is the exact opposite.

    Baby…bathwater…OUT WITH YOU!

  • Buzz

    Buzz – So a good christian would never even think about IVF or anything that is not a “normal” conception, right?

    That doesn’t follow.

    Every IVF procedure aborts children by its nature. To fertilize 10-15 eggs(produce humans)just to pick the 2-3 that look “viable” and implant them to have a 30% chance at one at best IS abortion. The doctor knowingly discards embryos in every procedure. There is absolutely no way around that fact. Palin and McCain were against it, and said they would outlaw the procedure for that reason.

  • Buzz

    People need to understand that a major byproduct of IVF is the destruction of millions of lives. In London alone, over one million souls were created and then wasted. The number I would like to see even more is how many of the 2.1 million embryos created actually made it to full-term pregnancy. I would imagine the number is around 300-400 thousand, as IVF success rates are usually at best around 20-25%. This is a genocide of unbelievable proportions, just for one country. 1.7 million lives created and trashed, over 1 million of those were never even given the chance for life.

    I don’t suppose that “Cristian’s” who are having trouble having a baby consider that you are creating multiple children only to grade them at a cellular level, pick the “good” ones(25%)then implant them for a 30% chance of them taking hold.

    Every IVF procedure is a willful abortion by definition, there can be no argument about that. It is a scientific fact. You will kill multiple children for the chance to birth to one.

  • Buzz

    There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him.

    -Professor Bernardo de la Paz, from The Moon is a Harsh Mistress

    “The good of the many outweighs the good of the few, or the one”

    -Spock, from The Wrath of Kahn

  • mnconservative

    You have GOT to be kidding me. Maybe you haven’t seen the docket of deadbeat dads from State Courts who fail to pay for the kids that were birthed already? Get a clue. Parental rights isn’t going to do a damned thing.

    As long as lefties and feminists continue to tell men that they don’t have to be involved with their children and shouldn’t be required to pay child support people like you will continue to get a pay check.

    For every anecdotal piece of evidence you have for deadbeat Dads I have one to match from a concerned Dad that wants to be involved with their kids. As I said before this is the left’s way of undermining the family which will be the ultimate demise of America. The America our Founding Father’s envisioned not the socialist Amerika that you Nobambites see.

  • http://theruralbusroute.com/ Jay

    And your tacked on 20% extra for back support also adds to the rising expence. So at times the payment is going to mostly interest, and little to principle

    If these idiots would drop the interest, which is a leagel scam, more people could afford paying their support!!

    Again, you’re confusing Rob’s alternate reality that we’re dealing MOSTLY with people who “can’t” support their children (which is a narrow constituency) and the ACTUAL reality that we’re dealing with people who DON’T.

    And I didn’t forget interest. I just don’t find it a big deal. It’s calculated on arrears, after 2002, at a rate of 12% per year, and it can’t be compounded. If you pay your support, you don’t have to worry. Excuse me, but I don’t really have a problem with charging 1200 bucks or so in interest over a year, if he can’t pay 500/month for his kid. I don’t get an interest-free deferral from paying for MY kids. And if I can’t afford them, interest on a credit card is going to be a shitload more than an uncompounded 12% yearly. Cry me a flippin’ river.

  • mnconservative

    Exactly! My 3 sons wouldn’t be the fine young men that they are if my husband hadn’t been there! He was every bit a part of their success as I was as their Mother.

    Children need their Fathers! A truer statement has never been made. Telling us that children don’t need their Fathers is just another way to unravel the family. It’s about time this is recognized.

    Maybe fewer abortions if the Father would have a say.

  • http://reasonsnottovoteformccain.blogspot.com/ Morr

    I’ve been doing child support hearings on and off for 5 years and it’s been insituted in a case I’ve been witness to a grand total of ZERO times.

    All well said Jay. Nice to have someone write about something they actually know about. Seems like Angry Rob has some sort of daily quota of posts he has to make. More and more of his posts (particularly since the election) are just angry petty rants.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/ likwidshoe

    Buzz – So a good christian would never even think about IVF or anything that is not a “normal” conception, right?

    That doesn’t follow.

  • SHADY

    BUZZ, go take a ride in your tax payer bought tractor!
    If they past a law saying who ever got custody of their children, had to pay every cent for raising the kids. There would be a lot bigger majority of fathers that got custody of the children. There are a few women that think of children as a free CHECK every month!!

  • http://norseberserker.blogspot.com/ Rugby Reader

    Maybe fewer abortions if the Father would have a say.

    Not likely. Most unwanted pregnancies are just as unwanted by the sperm donors, as they are unwanted by the women with their feet in the air.

  • SHADY

    Hey, jay!
    you forgot to include that the courts and your hero’s also include INTREST on back support. There are other factors to look at here. The interest that some of these counties get, are at times more that any savings account or some money markets could or would ever pay in interest.
    Say someone had a back operation and needed 18 months to heal with re-hab. Guess what they don’t stop asking for support, it keeps mounting and with interest can start to be a nightmare. And your tacked on 20% extra for back support also adds to the rising expence. So at times the payment is going to mostly interest, and little to principle
    If these idiots would drop the interest, which is a leagel scam, more people could afford paying their support!!

  • Myron Floren

    Most unwanted pregnancies are just as unwanted by the sperm donors, as they are unwanted by the women with their feet in the air.

    Source?

  • SHADY

    Second, none of the people in the courtroom make the decisions other than the judge and “she” is bound by the law.

    Do mean to tell me all judges do exactly what the law says??
    So when judges try to interpret law from the bench, you don’t think thats wrong??
    Don’t try to convince me that every sigle judge follows every single law to a tee!!!
    Some make judgements on feelings>

  • http://theruralbusroute.com/ Jay

    As long as lefties and feminists continue to tell men that they don’t have to be involved with their children and shouldn’t be required to pay child support people like you will continue to get a pay check.

    What the hell are you talking about? The “lefties” in this argument aren’t the ones arguing against people paying their support. Nor are they saying that Men shouldn’t have to be involved with their children. It’s the exact opposite. Stop watching cartoons and pay attention.

    For every anecdotal piece of evidence you have for deadbeat Dads I have one to match from a concerned Dad that wants to be involved with their kids.

    You have anecdotes. I have facts and experience. I see it every single day.

    As I said before this is the left’s way of undermining the family which will be the ultimate demise of America. The America our Founding Father’s envisioned not the socialist Amerika that you Nobambites see.

    You guys are so predictable. When facts fail you…when you finally realize you don’t have a clue what the hell you’re talking about…you resort to played rhetoric and ad hominem. Your post, at least the parts that I could follow, was filled with alot of words and absolutely NO substance at all.

  • SHADY

    It’s not he truth. I don’t know or care where you live, but in ND “More often than not” the child’s “best interests” are kept at heart.

    Really, When I divorced my unfaithful wife, the courts gave her custody of my daughter. She re-married and they had a girl. At age 2, she came to her mother and said daddy licked my pee-pee. My ex got a restraining order on him. Shortly after her older daughter of 14 came and told her that he had asked her and her friend if they wanted to have sex with them. After a week my ex dropped the restraining order. When the county seen that, they took out a restraining order on him. They caught my ex sneaking him in the house. The county gave me custody of my daughter for 4 months and gave her back to my ex. My daughter was on Meth. At 13, she has been clean for 4 yrs., she is 22 now and on medication trying to function day to day. Try and tell me they gave custody to the right parent. If you think so, you can go straight to HELL.

    In the same area, you can not tell me the courts always know best, my instance proves that. I’ve never said that the non custodial parent should’nt pay support.
    But I will say that if the courts gave parents a choice, If they want custody, and would have to pay all expenses for raising the child. More dad’s would get custody.
    I even offered that to my ex, she would’nt have to pay support if she gave custody to me!! Guess what she almost went for it. I could have reaised my daughter better than my ex.

  • http://www.crystalfeel.com/ shimarani_2009

    so cute baby

    crystalfeel

  • Buzz

    a child is a human being from the time of conception

    So a good christian would never even think about IVF or anything that is not a “normal” conception, right?

  • Jay

    I mean, I’ve met dads who would like to pay their child support but can’t because it’s too high. And it stays high, even if you lose your job or something. And then if you don’t pay it, you eventually lose your driver’s license and get put in jail.

    Bullshit.

    Your child support AMOUNT is guideline based, and I believe it was the REPUBLICANS that instituted it. You know, not liking to give those liberal Judges the ability to use their own discretion on a case by case basis. If their child support amount is large, it’s because at the time of its institution, it SHOULD have been. You Fail.

    Also, you can have your child support amount reevaluated AT A VERY MINIMUM OF ONCE A YEAR. If a person is in arreares due to him not being employed, its because of two things. One, that he SHOULD be employed and noone is going to give his lazy ass a break in lieu of making him pay for his kid. Two, he’s been too stupid to get into the CS office to have his amount ADJUSTED. In either event, it’s his own damned fault. Child Support doesn’t want a guy in jail, or without a license dumbass. They don’t get evaluated on “number of guys they put in the clink”. They get evaulated on the number of CLAIMS they regain for the custodial PARENT. And Rob, you do realize that some of these chivalrous males have their child support guideline amounts made during an off-employment stretch and don’t BOTHER to go in and have it adjusted UP, right? Your argument, again, is FAIL.

    Third, only the most aggregious violators, deadbeats and morons lose their licenses. It’s simply a talking point that you losers use without any knowledge of what actually happens in a court room. Maybe one of your deadbeat “buddies” told you a story about an uncle of his that knew this guy that had it done to him. You know, the way you get most of your “information”. I’ve been doing child support hearings on and off for 5 years and it’s been insituted in a case I’ve been witness to a grand total of ZERO times. Again, unless this wonderful male has failed to pay for eons, CS will argue that he NOT have his license revoked. People go to jail before they lose their license. In addition, the CS enforcement office is used in conjunction with the PRIDE/Job service programs. If a guy doesn’t have a job, he can get one…unless he just wants to skirt his responsibility. But a wonderful MALE would never do that right? Must be the bitch’s fault.

    Maybe, Jay, you should try knowing what you’re talking about. I know the child support status quo pleases your liberal, big-government, beta-male sensibilities but that doesn’t mean it’s right.

    Ain’t that a peach? Rob, who (as usual) doesn’t have a CLUE what he’s talking about, telling the informed masses to brush up. I’m defense counsel, dumbass. I’m not a big FAN of CS enforcement. But I’m also intellectually honest about the people who are in the system.

    And to top it off, he resorts to ad hominem about “beta-males”. So e-tough. Why don’t you use your brain and stop thinking with your dick and balls, Rob?

  • http://theruralbusroute.com/ Jay

    And what SHADY does the MOTHER of the child for whom the father is missing payments for 18 months do about not receiving any help from the “disabled” father? I would imagine the interest on HER credit cards is more than 12% year? But again, it’s the bitch’s fault in the first place right?

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Maybe you haven’t seen the docket of deadbeat dads from State Courts who fail to pay for the kids that were birthed already?

    Maybe you haven’t seen the exhorbitant child support bills fathers who have no say over their children are expected to pay, not because it’s what the child actually needs, but because the state’s TANF funding is based on how much child support the state collects and distributes and the bureaucrats like to maximize that amount.

    I mean, I’ve met dads who would like to pay their child support but can’t because it’s too high. And it stays high, even if you lose your job or something. And then if you don’t pay it, you eventually lose your driver’s license and get put in jail.

    Which does wonders for your on-going ability to pay.

    Maybe, Jay, you should try knowing what you’re talking about. I know the child support status quo pleases your liberal, big-government, beta-male sensibilities but that doesn’t mean it’s right.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development