Debtors slavery...for kids?

[Nutz]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...s-21-children-11-different-women--hes-29.html

I don't know what they expect him to do. This is like the opposite end of the spectrum for the case to be on welfare. So much can be debated on this, but I need to go take the boy to see UP.

 

[SXS]

I would like to see how look those women who are having kids with this guy. he is ugly, earns minimum salary.... They must have been desperate for some sex.

 

[Luthor Rex]

This is why I miss the eugenics programs back from the gold ole days when people like that would have been sterilized.

:nervous:

 

[Warrior74]

This is why I miss the eugenics programs back from the gold ole days when people like that would have been sterilized.

:nervous:

I question your motives for even making a statement like that. How many decendents does Genghis Khan have? Millions. Why, because he raped and plundered his way across half the known world. Fvck child support, you'd be dead asking for it.

It's man's nature to procreate with as many women as possible correct? Do you subscribe to that theory?

Let's say we changed the name to Bill Gates, or Donald Trump and they had 21 kids, would you have a problem with that? Is it an issue of money for you? Or race? Or class? I'm just curious to what you think is acceptable.

He said the women he was involved with all knew he had other children.

So what does that say about them? And about his game as DJ? He didn't lie to them.

Like the woman said at the end of the clip "he's a regular don juan isn't he?"

Interesting.


That being said...21 kids! Hell. I would've gotten clipped after the second or third. That's crazy.

 

[SXS]

It's man's nature to procreate with as many women as possible correct? Do you subscribe to that theory?

Even if it is... that is just dumb. How can a guy go nd have unprotected sex with lots of women after having already so many kids. I want to have sex with many women, but not kids. Why would I want that ?

Let's say we changed the name to Bill Gates, or Donald Trump and they had 21 kids, would you have a problem with that? Is it an issue of money for you? Or race? Or class? I'm just curious to what you think is acceptable.

money is an issue. Im the end, who is going to pay for those kids ? Taxpayers! in others words, you.

So what does that say about them? And about his game as DJ? He didn't lie to them.
Like the woman said at the end of the clip "he's a regular don juan isn't he?"
Interesting.

Like I said, those women must have been desperate...
And people complaim that theres not enough women out there... Women are poping out kids with any loser they can put their hands on...

 

[Luthor Rex]

I question your motives for even making a statement like that. How many decendents does Genghis Khan have? Millions. Why, because he raped and plundered his way across half the known world. Fvck child support, you'd be dead asking for it.

We're not talking about Genghis Khan, we're talking about some inner city ghetto loser in 21st century America.

It's man's nature to procreate with as many women as possible correct? Do you subscribe to that theory?

r/K selection

There are at least two distinct mating strategies in humans. One where the man gets as many women pregnant as possible but invests little or no resources in any of them. The other is where a man gets one or only a few women pregnant and heavily invests time and resources into his offspring.

The first type of men, like Khan, take whatever others have, they rape and steal and burn. These men end up being the destroyers of civilization, the second type are the builders of civilization like the Roman patriarchs.

The Khan strategy is self-reinforcing because it is mainly used in unstable environments, and the Khan strategy also causes the chaotic environment to begin with.

The Roman strategy builds a stable environment where you may have fewer children, but more is invested in them and thus they become higher quality. Kind of like how the high quality Spartans could hold off the mob of the Persian armies.

Let's say we changed the name to Bill Gates, or Donald Trump and they had 21 kids, would you have a problem with that?

At least they would have the money to support them.

Is it an issue of money for you? Or race? Or class? I'm just curious to what you think is acceptable.

Raging retards are breeding out of control and killing this world. The Khans of this world are a destabilizing influence and hold back the progress of civilization. Since civilization has spread around the world you can look and see that the men who support the family unit and take the Roman strategy are slowly winning the battle against the chaos of the Khans.

Eventually, people like the jackazz in the news article will either be such a small part of the population as to be insignificant, or their lines will die off completely. But maybe I'm wrong, maybe the Khans will out breed everyone else, in which case the human race has no future.

 

[Nutz]

My point in posting this thread though is what are they going to do about child support? His case actually demonstrates how stupid the entire premise is. If the state wanted to take the amount of money he's supposed to pay for all these kids his net pay would be in the negatives by a measure of several thousand dollars, and that's even if the mothers worked minimum wage or is on welfare. They're going to try and squeeze blood from a stone. Maybe everyone that gets hit for child support should just do what he did and have as many kids as possible. Follow the logic here though. If the cp for each kid is negligible all divided up like that the women will be less likely to collect.

Kid's mother: "What do you mean I'm only eligible for $25 a month??? How am I supposed to take care of this child?"
State: You should have thought about that before having sex.
Feminists bust in: Oh no you didn't! Girl power! Down with men! Castrate him! Castrate him!
Due with a ton of kids: F you all. I'm out. :applies for welfare:

 

[Nutz]

double post

 

[Teflon_Mcgee]

My point in posting this thread though is what are they going to do about child support? His case actually demonstrates how stupid the entire premise is. If the state wanted to take the amount of money he's supposed to pay for all these kids his net pay would be in the negatives by a measure of several thousand dollars, and that's even if the mothers worked minimum wage or is on welfare. They're going to try and squeeze blood from a stone. Maybe everyone that gets hit for child support should just do what he did and have as many kids as possible. Follow the logic here though. If the cp for each kid is negligible all divided up like that the women will be less likely to collect.

Kid's mother: "What do you mean I'm only eligible for $25 a month??? How am I supposed to take care of this child?"
State: You should have thought about that before having sex.
Feminists bust in: Oh no you didn't! Girl power! Down with men! Castrate him! Castrate him!
Due with a ton of kids: F you all. I'm out. :applies for welfare:

Put his a$$ to work seven days a week to serve us. That's what they should do. Make him clean parks, collect trash, dig ditches, plant trees, sweep gutters.....

How much money are his kids going to cost US?

Not only are we going to be paying his "baby mommas' " welfare but we are probably going to pay for his 21 kids for their entire lives.

This guy is no man and he's certainly not a DJ.

He's just another probelm to society that can't be dealt with.

 

[Create Reality]

Can anyone tell me if you can go to prison in the U.S. for not paying child support?

 

[Nutz]

Can anyone tell me if you can go to prison in the U.S. for not paying child support?

Yes. And even if you're not the father.

http://austinfamilylawguide.com/?p=425
http://celebgalz.com/walter-andre-sharpe-no-compensation-for-walter-sharpe/
http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/stro...ay-child-support-for-another-man-s-child.aspx

Cliffs:
Guy gets letter informing him of a child support hearing, but it's mistaken identity so he ignores it.
Guy's wages get garnished because judge declared he's the dad anyway.
Guy goes to jail for 2 years (not concurrent) for failing to keep up payments.
Judge and court denies him paternity tests to prove he's not the father.
Case is finally overturned when the child's mother failed to show for a court hearing.
The girl in question was living with the real father the whole time and the mother wasn't entitled to child support to begin with.

 

[Warrior74]

SXS. I wasn't talking to you. Next time stay out of comments that weren't aimed at you. I was addressing Luthor's eugenics statement. Read over his post history and it might enlighten you what he is really all about. They dress up nicely these days and use great analogies but the end results are still the same as they were in Germany. People with an ego large enough to think that they are an oppressed minority, they are smarter than everyone and that we need eugenics..well there's a name for those people.

It's only one reason he has a problem with this story. If it was some poor mormon family out in utah with 4 wives, he'd have nothing to say. He had nothing to say on octomom. Know who you are dealing with.

I agree with the fact that this guy is a stupid peice of ****, but he's no worse than kate plus 8 or octomom. He gets no sympathy because he is male, if he was a female with this many kids he'd have a reality show, regardless of how stupid he was.

BTW. Khan brought paper money to the world, opened up trade routes from europe to the far east and helped to unify his country and bring stability to it. How is that a chaotic force? For the people he conquered, yes(especially eastern europeans), for his people no. Your western centric view of the world is showing. You don't rule an empire be being stupid. Apparently if you don't look like Dr. House to Luthor your stupid. Awsome guy.

We're not talking about Genghis Khan, we're talking about some inner city ghetto loser in 21st century America.



r/K selection

There are at least two distinct mating strategies in humans. One where the man gets as many women pregnant as possible but invests little or no resources in any of them. The other is where a man gets one or only a few women pregnant and heavily invests time and resources into his offspring.

The first type of men, like Khan, take whatever others have, they rape and steal and burn. These men end up being the destroyers of civilization, the second type are the builders of civilization like the Roman patriarchs.

The Khan strategy is self-reinforcing because it is mainly used in unstable environments, and the Khan strategy also causes the chaotic environment to begin with.

The Roman strategy builds a stable environment where you may have fewer children, but more is invested in them and thus they become higher quality. Kind of like how the high quality Spartans could hold off the mob of the Persian armies.



At least they would have the money to support them.



Raging retards are breeding out of control and killing this world. The Khans of this world are a destabilizing influence and hold back the progress of civilization. Since civilization has spread around the world you can look and see that the men who support the family unit and take the Roman strategy are slowly winning the battle against the chaos of the Khans.

Eventually, people like the jackazz in the news article will either be such a small part of the population as to be insignificant, or their lines will die off completely. But maybe I'm wrong, maybe the Khans will out breed everyone else, in which case the human race has no future.

 

[SXS]

SXS. I wasn't talking to you. Next time stay out of comments that weren't aimed at you. I was addressing Luthor's eugenics statement.

I think I have the right here to comment on anything I want to. I did not attack anyone personaly.

BTW. Khan brought paper money to the world, opened up trade routes from europe to the far east and helped to unify his country and bring stability to it. How is that a chaotic force? For the people he conquered, yes(especially eastern europeans), for his people no. Your western centric view of the world is showing. You don't rule an empire be being stupid. Apparently if you don't look like Dr. House to Luthor your stupid. Awsome guy.

Khan was not chinese, and he did not ruled an empire for long time, since he died soon. The Chinese through all his history had problems with barbarian invasions. It has nothing to do with a "western" centric view because the chinese considered Khan and all the others like him to be just that: Barbarians...

 

[Da Realist]

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with the Roman/Khan thing simply because both truthfully built things up as well as messed everything up. Khan basically united a group of nomads and made them into a world power. The only problem is the guy was a tyrant and racist. The Romans became a world power pretty much the same way by getting rid of most of the Senate's power and embarking on a campaign to take over different places to pay for, well, taking over countries. Of course the Romans thought of anyone they took over as beneath them. Then there is the fact they were responsible for destroying the library of Alexandria in Egypt causing somewhat of a dark age because it contained a record of humanity going who knows how far back. If there really was a certain person or group that really tried to do something that helped push civilization along, I would point more towards Alexander the Great or some of the Islamic empires. Alexander seemed to want to bring enlightenment to the world of the time and some of the Muslim empires set up universities to spread knowledge.

But getting away from history, I think what the guy did is like the people in Idiocracy. You had the well educated couple who basically spent their life analyzing how and when they should have a baby without actually getting around to it, and then there was the stupid rednecks doing it out of both pants legs creating more idiots. People are down on this one guy because he had all of these babies, but there isn't near the blame on the moms who opened their legs eventhough they knew this guy had so many kids. From my point of view, the first two moms should get support but beyond that, the guy should be ordered to do nothing more than spend time with his kids. In fact, I think this whole child support thing is messed up because it reduces having a kid to just paying another bill. If time isn't being spent, $1000 a month isn't going to be worth anything because you've got another child looking for a father figure in some way. But if people are so ready to have something done, I say just put the whole lot of them on a farm and let them all work. The dad's there, everyone is being supported, and the kids learn something hopefully.

 

[SXS]

Then there is the fact they were responsible for destroying the library of Alexandria in Egypt causing somewhat of a dark age because it contained a record of humanity going who knows how far back.

The classice romans were huge fans of the greek and their achivments. Those who destroyed the library in Egypt were mostly xtians, who appeared in the late roman empire. Later muslim invasion destroyed the library one more time.
Cesar though, ACCIDENTALY MAY have burned the library, but as it is said, it was an accident, as the romans were not interested in destrying books or works of art.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Alexandria

If there really was a certain person or group that really tried to do something that helped push civilization along, I would point more towards Alexander the Great or some of the Islamic empires. Alexander seemed to want to bring enlightenment to the world of the time and some of the Muslim empires set up universities to spread knowledge.

Islamic empires ? No way! The first thing the islamic conquerors did were destroy the library, on the argument that the Quran make all others books superfluous...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amr_ibn_al-Aas

I think the greeks spread civilization on most of the ancient world, but they were not able to create a unified, stable political entity like the roman empire. Of course, when xtianity and islam appeared, everything went downhill anyway until the 15 century...

 

[Da Realist]

Of course, when xtianity and islam appeared, everything went downhill anyway until the 15 century...

Actually, the reason why Europe came up is because the Muslims where basically spreading knowledge that had been forgotten when Rome fell. Aristotle's theories were re-introduced to Europe for example. Modern chemistry is thought to have it's foundations in Muslim chemists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid

But the thing with Caesar accidentally burning down the library, I don't know. With the way Caesar has been described, I wouldn't doubt if he did it on purpose and just threatened the guy who was there to say otherwise. Since I wasn't there, I can't say. Interesting article nonetheless.

 

[Warrior74]

Yall arguing over history? Really? That **** ain't important, it was a point to show Luthor's mindset, don't get caught up in bs details, that's a weakness in your game fellas. See what's really important. See who people really are by what they say. If you can't see it with this guy, how can you see it with girls in your life?

SXS. Don't get butthurt. Read over my post a few times and look at what I'm really talking about. Think. You might learn something.

 

[SXS]

Yall arguing over history? Really? That **** ain't important,

Sorry to get off tpic, but as I was a teacher of history, I always do exagerate when something on those lines appear.

it was a point to show Luthor's mindset, don't get caught up in bs details, that's a weakness in your game fellas. See what's really important. See who people really are by what they say. If you can't see it with this guy, how can you see it with girls in your life?
SXS. Don't get butthurt. Read over my post a few times and look at what I'm really talking about. Think. You might learn something."

Dont worry about him, my friend, in the end, he is not running for president of your country, so his eugenic ideas are not coming true...

Actually, the reason why Europe came up is because the Muslims where basically spreading knowledge that had been forgotten when Rome fell. Aristotle's theories were re-introduced to Europe for example. Modern chemistry is thought to have it's foundations in Muslim chemists.
But the thing with Caesar accidentally burning down the library, I don't know.

That is mostly actual revisionism. Who revived interest in aristotles were in fact the catholic church, in the 12 and 13 century, with Tomas de Aquino and the "filosofia escolastica". They may have gotten some of the ancient texts from arab sources, but really, there was nothing they couldnt get from byzantium. Chemistry came from egypt, and the name chemistry meant something in the Egypt ancient language. Of course, in the 7 century the arabs conquered egypt, and of course, from there on, they took possession of all its ancient heritage. But remember that the greeks and romans were there before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemistry

With the way Caesar has been described, I wouldn't doubt if he did it on purpose and just threatened the guy who was there to say otherwise. Since I wasn't there, I can't say. Interesting article nonetheless.

The point is that there is no reason for Caesar to burn a library. When xtians and muslims burned the library, the reason was to make disapear ideas that were contrary to the current acepted theology, but Caesar was merely a politician and general. He would have no reason to do it on purpose. In fact, as I already read Caesar, I would say that he would be the last one I would imagine burning a library...

 

[Nutz]

Let's get back on topic. To hell what the Romans did or didn't do.

 

[Nutz]

We had a lengthy discussion about this at work today. Here's my take on this:

Once upon a time if a man and woman have sex and the baby is born, both parties are equally responsible since they share the responsibility of it's creation. This paradigm no longer exists with abortion and the day after pill being available. Women now make the decision to have a child with or without the man's consent. Yes, both are responsible for pregnancy, but that's as far as a man's responsibility goes as pregnancy not longer equates to having a child. A decision must be made. Yes abortion is an elective procedure, but so is pregnancy! That's the difference today and it's a topic nobody seems to have explored. Now women make the unilateral decision to have the child or abort. As the sole decision maker in this process I believe women should have sole responsibility for the outcome of that decision if they choose to have the baby, just as a woman does if she goes to a sperm bank. The only difference in this scenario is the method of insemination! If a woman chooses to have an abortion then the man should be responsible for 50% of the cost as that's as far as his obligation goes.

As a firm believer in equality, I do not hold with the status quo that if a woman becomes pregnant she has the option to become a mother, but men do not have a choice whether to become a father. Instead of forcing men into indebted slavery for 216 months, my suggestion is to treat men who would be forced into fatherhood against their will as inadvertent sperm donors. Give them all protections and legal shelters that a sperm donor would be afforded. This is essentially what they've become once the woman decides to have a child against a man's will. If a man wants to be the child's father then he should pay his fair share of the child's care & upbringing. Make social programs that would encourage men to want to stick around and all that, as well as provide ample opportunity and availability of abortions and birth control as well as solid sex ed courses in schools.

If women did not have mandatory child support I suspect there would be far less children born out of wedlock. Furthermore, women would no longer be able to get knocked up to lock a guy into a relationship as many do today.