I've heard France doesn't require them because they feel they harm the child, it's better that the dude gets butt fucked rather than find out and refuse service to the child.
I imagine US courts feel similarly about it, they just don't announce it as policy. Personally it seems to endanger the child to not have him aware of possible genetic issues, familial heritage, or possible family members.
My ghetto ass dad literally stole me away on a visit to get me tested, because he didn't trust my mom (correct decision). When it came back I was his, he described it as a huge weight off his shoulder and stopped any hesitation he had paying his child support or even being around.
Literally a walking example of how they can benefit the child themselves, and the woman, by removing any possible nagging doubts. Without even getting into the genetic portions.
The only way it can harm is if the mother is lying to begin with.
Pretty much. A lot of states in the US have it where if a child is born in wedlock the kid automatically counts as the child of the husband even if there is direct evidence to the contrary because it "protects the child by keeping families together"
I think you could argue against the Feds requiring a paternity test on privacy or state's rights, maybe some other grounds.
But what it should be anyway is a requirement to get child support.
It's functionally the same thing because if they're married the father can just have the test done, or if he has custody (lol), or if the divorced mother with custody refuses then it's not his.
I like that the best. Mandatory DNA seems to intrusive, but in a child support case it's just evidence to prove you are responsible for a debt. It's like a receipt or a contract. I don't know if that could be made federally either though, isn't child support a state issue?
I don't think the Feds could mandate a DNA test, but I bet they could sue states for denying a father's civil rights / due process by making him pay for a child that's not his. Basically make it so each state has to put it into their laws.
Hell it should be covered under 8th's no cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Here's the thing: child support money is taxable income. The government makes money off of it. They will be naturally averse to passing any legislation that actively hampers them, even if doing so should be a fundamental right for men. Especially because it would be legislation that goes against the edicts of feminism, which promotes unrestrained, unilateral female supremacy, fighting against any obligation, expectation or responsibility that might be expected of them.
Asking them to think about the potential consequences of having unprotected sex with dozens of men or asking them to write the actual father's name on the birth certificate is genocide, you see.
DNA tests for support cases are easy enough, at least here in Texas. The problem lies in situations where the guy has been acting in the father capacity for years and only later does it come to light that he’s not the bio dad. Courts will say too bad, it’s more important that the child have a father. That’s how mandatory DNA testing fixes this issue.
If they put a clause in that the father and he alone could waive his right to the test, I think that could sweep away the privacy/right's issue. Or even just "the man being put on the birth certificate" if father was too charged a word, so that way a woman can't just scribble a random guy's name in without proof.
Or, as you say, make it a requirement for any and all government intervention in the family.
But it's not. Forced periodic testing for the presence of transmissible illnesses is the "same logic" as a single test to establish parental lineage? So much about this tweet and this bitch is ridiculous.
Jacking off into a cup is so many magnitudes of differences easier than what is being suggested here I would be surprised if such a retarded idea didn't come from some idiot leftoid woman trying to clapback.
I'm fine with that as well. I know people who have bloods taken regularly due to conditions like Graves disease so for some it wouldn't even be a step out of the ordinary.
The gotcha this idiot is trying to leverage only works because she thinks men have the same to lose as women, or even undergo the same steps.
Men could avoid contracting STDs during sex if they take certain steps, it's a bit late to change the DNA of a baby once it's born however.
A man cannot ''maternity fraud'' a woman into thinking she reproduced, but didn't and instead is rasing a child that isn't hers while her line goes extinct.
Well it's possible more women cheat with a smaller % of men, similar to dating app statistics where women share relatively few men who whore-around alot more.
Women are vociferous about being able to kill their offspring in the womb, but rabidly oppose men having the most basic of reproductive rights, the right to know if you have reproduced at all.
They're mad because they're traitorous whores who are tricking their husbands into raising another man's child. Such behavior warrants a stone age punishment frankly.
This is denial of reality. If a husband goes out, and comes back with a baby, and says it's clearly his and hers, is she obligated to take care of it as if it were her own? No parentage tests allowed, after all, and that includes "lived experience" personal interview evidence.
Their only argument against it is literally:
Which any grown adult knows is the exact line that someone cheating or lying uses immediately.
I've heard France doesn't require them because they feel they harm the child, it's better that the dude gets butt fucked rather than find out and refuse service to the child.
I imagine US courts feel similarly about it, they just don't announce it as policy. Personally it seems to endanger the child to not have him aware of possible genetic issues, familial heritage, or possible family members.
But hey women need to be protected at all cost.
My ghetto ass dad literally stole me away on a visit to get me tested, because he didn't trust my mom (correct decision). When it came back I was his, he described it as a huge weight off his shoulder and stopped any hesitation he had paying his child support or even being around.
Literally a walking example of how they can benefit the child themselves, and the woman, by removing any possible nagging doubts. Without even getting into the genetic portions.
The only way it can harm is if the mother is lying to begin with.
Not just doesn't require them. France doesn't allow them
Thanks for the correction, man that's even more insane.
their argument is pretty much what you said. It's 'bad' for the child/family so it's better the dude gets fucked
Guess if your french wife gives birth to a baby 2 or 3 shades darker than you or the wife.. you are fucked. Rip.
Pretty much. A lot of states in the US have it where if a child is born in wedlock the kid automatically counts as the child of the husband even if there is direct evidence to the contrary because it "protects the child by keeping families together"
I think you could argue against the Feds requiring a paternity test on privacy or state's rights, maybe some other grounds.
But what it should be anyway is a requirement to get child support.
It's functionally the same thing because if they're married the father can just have the test done, or if he has custody (lol), or if the divorced mother with custody refuses then it's not his.
I like that the best. Mandatory DNA seems to intrusive, but in a child support case it's just evidence to prove you are responsible for a debt. It's like a receipt or a contract. I don't know if that could be made federally either though, isn't child support a state issue?
I don't think the Feds could mandate a DNA test, but I bet they could sue states for denying a father's civil rights / due process by making him pay for a child that's not his. Basically make it so each state has to put it into their laws.
Hell it should be covered under 8th's no cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Here's the thing: child support money is taxable income. The government makes money off of it. They will be naturally averse to passing any legislation that actively hampers them, even if doing so should be a fundamental right for men. Especially because it would be legislation that goes against the edicts of feminism, which promotes unrestrained, unilateral female supremacy, fighting against any obligation, expectation or responsibility that might be expected of them.
Asking them to think about the potential consequences of having unprotected sex with dozens of men or asking them to write the actual father's name on the birth certificate is genocide, you see.
Wait... child support is taxable? Does that mean that the guy paying it gets to claim a tax deduction?
I'm going to guess that the answer is "fuck no!"
That would make sense, wouldn't it? But I've never heard of that being the case. I'm not an accountant, though. It might be true in some areas.
DNA tests for support cases are easy enough, at least here in Texas. The problem lies in situations where the guy has been acting in the father capacity for years and only later does it come to light that he’s not the bio dad. Courts will say too bad, it’s more important that the child have a father. That’s how mandatory DNA testing fixes this issue.
If they put a clause in that the father and he alone could waive his right to the test, I think that could sweep away the privacy/right's issue. Or even just "the man being put on the birth certificate" if father was too charged a word, so that way a woman can't just scribble a random guy's name in without proof.
Or, as you say, make it a requirement for any and all government intervention in the family.
Forced medical procedures aren't cool regardless of how you dress it up.
But it's not. Forced periodic testing for the presence of transmissible illnesses is the "same logic" as a single test to establish parental lineage? So much about this tweet and this bitch is ridiculous.
She’s a lying cheater so naturally she assumes all men are, too.
Is she saying babies are STDs?
Close. babies are parasites apparently.
13% parental fraud in the US and women wonder why they aren’t trusted?
That we know of
Honestly, with how much it has been hoeing up I would not be surprised in a much higher number.
13%? Why does that number ring a bell? What is 13%, but also...
Wait until you find out what % of African American ladies have STIs!
They're all for reproductive rights, except for the right to know if you actually reproduced.
men don't have reproductive rights, don't you know!?
Terms accepted, thot.
Jacking off into a cup is so many magnitudes of differences easier than what is being suggested here I would be surprised if such a retarded idea didn't come from some idiot leftoid woman trying to clapback.
STD tests typically require a blood sample.
I'm fine with that as well. I know people who have bloods taken regularly due to conditions like Graves disease so for some it wouldn't even be a step out of the ordinary.
The gotcha this idiot is trying to leverage only works because she thinks men have the same to lose as women, or even undergo the same steps.
Men could avoid contracting STDs during sex if they take certain steps, it's a bit late to change the DNA of a baby once it's born however.
Depends on the STD. If you want to test for all of them, you'll need a blood test, a urine sample, and multiple swabs.
Just one of many reasons this whore's proposal makes no sense.
Her other argument was much stronger unfortunately... we don't want to give the government a database of every man woman and child's DNA.
Make it even harder for women to scam men, count me in!
I don't mind being guidance for other kids but if some woman tries to screw both me AND the child lying about who the father is, fuck her.
I guess aborting their children isn't enough, they must be from cheating as well.
They take baby's footprints and blood type. Why not parentage too?
In some circumstances, the blood type is also an accidental indication of paternity fraud.
Ex : An 0- mother and an 0+ husband, but the baby is B+. That means the real father has B+ in his blood type. ( Can be AB+ or B+ )
Bonus points for her first instinct being to compare a baby to an STD. They're all the same.
I would argue even further.
DNA tests for aborted kids, permanently stuck to the mother and father (if you can find him).
Women cheat about as much as men.
A man cannot ''maternity fraud'' a woman into thinking she reproduced, but didn't and instead is rasing a child that isn't hers while her line goes extinct.
I'll bet women cheat more. They certainly have the option to.
Well it's possible more women cheat with a smaller % of men, similar to dating app statistics where women share relatively few men who whore-around alot more.
Hey wait a second, marriage is a sacrament. What kind of Pope would argue against a sacrament? You aren't the real Pope.
So you're not a fan of a 13th century pontiff?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Innocent_V
Women are vociferous about being able to kill their offspring in the womb, but rabidly oppose men having the most basic of reproductive rights, the right to know if you have reproduced at all.
What if I decline because I don’t want my genetic identity going into a government database?
Does that mean I don’t get paternal rights to my kid?
Apples and oranges. But I'd be OK with monthly STD tests for everyone in addition to paternity testing.
Alternatively, they could just make paternity fraud a felony.
They're mad because they're traitorous whores who are tricking their husbands into raising another man's child. Such behavior warrants a stone age punishment frankly.
She's a jew
This is denial of reality. If a husband goes out, and comes back with a baby, and says it's clearly his and hers, is she obligated to take care of it as if it were her own? No parentage tests allowed, after all, and that includes "lived experience" personal interview evidence.
I don't trust a cunt as far as I can see her.