From: jsw@cray.com (Jon S. Wood)
Subject: Re: Biological Reasons fo
Reply-To: jsw@cray.com
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 20 Nov 92 11:51:39 CST

In article 1ej185INNhtj@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com, regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard) 

>We don't have slavery in this country.  We don't force a man to work at some
>task, any task deemed by society to be productive, and take his money from
>him.  This sophistry does not forward the discussion.
>
     
 When NCPs lose employment or suffer a marked decreases in pay, family courts
routinely deny modification of child support orders which in turn, acrue arrearages
that place the NCP in contempt. Men are in jail serving sentences (Hubar?)
that allow them out of jail to work but require him to serve overnight
and weekends. This is not slavery. I prefer to call it a 'labor camp'.
He is not forced to work at some task, he is 'obligated' to earn wages
that the court feels he is capable to earn or has demonstrated that he
can earn that wage based on prior income statements. If a man accrues
arrearages that exceed 1,000.00, prosecuters are encouraged to pursue, 
federal law now makes it a felony. With extremely high percentage
rate child support guidelines, a twenty percent drop in income and a 
consenmerate drop in child support payments, it would not take many
months to accrue a large debt. The collection agency (county) would
also seek interest on unpaid arrearages. We will begin seeing men 
paying 'debts' on false arrearages on inflated child support obligations
well after the child leaves home. 
 This isn't slavery, it is a country of implied criminals without proof.
A bureaucracy that empowers the state over the freedom of individuals
that smacks of the Gulag and the forced labor camps of the "Free Worker's
States" of the former (current) Soviet Union. Workers were sent to
camps for the 'good of the state'. Draconian (income) labor requirements of 
non-custodial parents exist for the 'good of the children'. Child
support requirements based on the idea that my children should continue
to live at the same standard of living had the parents not divorced is
more than a minor problem, it smacks of government facism. 
 Look up the word origin of garnishee. I believe it involves prisoners
and extortion. I am a garishee as defined by my government 'for
the good of society'. 
 Someone on the net has referenced a passage from "Atlas Shrugged" by
Ayn Rand. I'm 3/4 through the book. I highly recommend it, especially
for those who believe that government and Slick are going to save em 
and preserve their 'standard of living' based on a philosophy of 
government paternalism, i.e. fairness to women folk disguised as 
children's welfare and the expense of danglers.
 Sorry if it comes off too strong, but I'm continually battered by
the 'fairness' of Glenda Holste, editor of the St. Paul Pioneer Press
and will need sensitivity training or a treatment programme for men
designed by Gloria Steinham, because only SHE knows what is best
for the battered egos of women and therefore intuitively knows what
is best for men who force women to do and say whatever we want or ask
because we have power, therefore that explains every ill in the world.
The intellectuals who really know what is best for me pass laws
that attempt futile goals of fairness at the expense of personal
liberty. Child Support laws are merely a facist attempt at fairness,
an ideal born of the intellectual class, a non-working class.

 

 

Xref: sparky soc.men:19431 soc.women:19751