From: matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: Pre-Sex Contract
Summary: Status-based law is good law.
Keywords: Leaky scumbags; perfidious Sluts; hetero hedonists
Date: 11 Jan 93 20:54:35 GMT
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Lab, APG MD.

In article <1993Jan9.002501.7493@cfctech.cfc.com> kevin@cfctech.cfc.com 
(Kevin Darcy) writes:

>In article <19531@smoke.brl.mil> matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt) 
>writes:

>>The duty depends only on the father's *status* as the child's flesh-and-
>>blood parent, and on his *actions* in performing the act of sexual 
>>intercourse that conceived the child.  [Matt Rosenblatt]

>Status, once a valid basis of law, is now just a smokescreen.
>[Kevin Darcy]

Ipse dixit.

>As far as punishing people for their actions, do you think 18+ years of
>indentured servitude is a fair and just punishment for e.g. being the unlucky
>victim of a broken condom, or e.g. being defrauded by a woman about her
>fertility or birth control usage?  [Kevin Darcy]

The child-support laws are not made by blue-nosed puritans interested in 
"punishing" a Stud for being unlucky in his choice of a leaky scumbag 
as a prophylactic or of a perfidious Slut as a bed partner.  They are made 
by hard-working citizens who feel they have enough of a burden supporting 
their own children and the children of poor parents, without having 
to take on the additional burden of supporting the offspring of 
Hetero Hedonists perfectly capable of providing child support.

>Taxes are, in theory, a _quid pro quo_. We pay into the pool, we get 
>government services in return. I expand on this below. Thus, consent can be 
>imputed.   [Kevin Darcy]

Consent by any individual citizen can never be imputed.  Here, again,
is that excerpt from Joshua Muravchik's article in the January '93
issue of _Commentary_ magazine:

    "the exit polls revealed a conservative tilt.  Voters
     were asked whether they would prefer that 'government
     provide more services but cost more in taxes' or that
     'government cost less in taxes but provide fewer services.'
     Fifty-three percent chose less taxes while 38 percent
     chose more services."

I may consent to the level of taxes required to keep up such fundamental,
necessary government services as "Ballistics Research" and "Army Materiel
Systems Analysis," but no one may "impute" my consent to the level of
taxes required to pay the swarms of meddling psychologists, social
workers, and pointy-headed bureaucrats on bicycles currently on the
government payroll.

>>The law says that he must pay 
>>taxes because of his *status* as a resident of his State and country,
>>not because of any choice he has made.  [Matt Rosenblatt]

>In the final theoretical analysis, taxes are voluntary. If one is willing to 
>forgo all (or almost all) income, one need not pay income taxes. If one is 
>willing to forgo all real estate ownership, one need not pay property taxes 
>(at least not directly).   [Kevin Darcy]

Let's not forget the Virginia "personal property tax" on automobiles,
which one may avoid by not owning a car.  Nor the various State 
sales taxes, which one may avoid by not buying anything.  "Taxes 
are voluntary" in the sense that one may avoid them by keeping the
status of a pauper, an economic non-person.  Right around here
is where Kent Paul Dolan's "bogosity meter" should emit an ear-splitting
shriek.  By this reasoning, child support payments are also voluntary, 
because a pauper father is excused by his status as a pauper from his
status-based obligation to support their own children -- even legitimate 
children.

>P.S. I do congratulate you on being somewhat more coherent than usual, 
>     Matthew.  Have you dropped the "Stud's 'n' Sluts" rhetoric, 
>     and the endorsements of chemical assault permanently, or 
>     are they just on hiatus?   [Kevin Darcy]

I have never endorsed "chemical assault" against the unborn, whether
carried out by Studs or by Sluts.  What I do endorse is the idea
that it makes just as much sense to let men use RU-486 as it does 
to let women use it.

					-- Matt Rosenblatt
                                        (matt@amsaa.brl.mil)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus"
Xref: sparky misc.legal:22318 talk.politics.misc:67001 alt.president.clinton:1488