17/03/03

Paternity Fraud

Some Politicians Have To Go!

Hi M

Men like Professor Stephen Baskerville are nowadays doing very well in exposing to the public the self-serving corruption of judges - Supreme or otherwise - and he is revealing how their activities are designed mostly to line their own pockets and those of their legal cronies.

It is amazing how morally corrupt the western justice systems have become.

In the USA, for example, the judges, on the one hand, claim that women must have equal funding with men, regardless of legitimate requirements (e.g. Title IX in the area of sports, where far fewer college women than men actually wish to be involved in sports, and so men have to be denied funding) but when it comes to say, domestic violence shelters, women are entitled to just about all of the funding!

How come men don't get 50% of it as per Title IX? Or at least an amount commensurate with their needs?

The only principle in operation seems to be that men must continually and purposefully be disadvantaged.

The politicians and the judges bend over backwards to re-interpret laws and principles always to the detriment of men and they hope that not enough men will notice the inconsistencies and the moral bankruptcy behind their thinking.

But my guess is that it won't be long now before enough men wake up to the situation and finally pull the rug from under these self-serving phonies.

Indeed, I look forward to the day that many of these fraudulent creeps who have grown rich and fat by slavishly pandering to the man-hating feminist groups are finally prosecuted and punished.

At the moment, these arrogant shysters seem to think that they are the law. But - as they will surely find out one day - they most certainly are not.

You can tell that I'm getting wound up!

It's because I'm thinking of this ...

From my own point of view, one of the most sickening examples of their utter vileness lies in the area of paternity fraud, where duped men are forced into providing funds to women who have cheated not only them, but also the children and, in most cases, the real fathers with regard to paternity. The very idea that all these people should have their entire futures blighted horrendously by the self-serving political shenanigans of corrupt judges and politicians really nauseates me. And I intend to do my utmost to see that these revolting toads are finally brought to book.

And I think that I'll get a lot of support! ...

USA A 1999 study by the American Association of Blood Banks showed that, out of more than 280,000 tests for paternity at accredited labs in the United States - most of them done in child support cases - 28 percent excluded the man as the father.

Further, as just one example of how appalling is the current law in many places, a couple of months ago, the Orlando Sentinel published a story about paternity fraud which really angered me. The link is now gone, but here is the excerpt that I put on Tickertape at the time ...

When they married in February 1994, Cathy Anderson was pregnant. She filed for divorce in October 1995 when her daughter was a toddler. The divorce was final in December 1996, and Michael Anderson was ordered to pay support.

But the child wasn't his!

She was actually pregnant with somebody else's child during the marriage ceremony! 

Not his! 

She divorces him just over a year later. And now he has to pay for the upkeep of her child?

It is almost unbelievable.

This man has been well and truly cheated.

Badly!

And yet, what some US politicians like Gray Davis call justice, requires that he support this child for the next two decades!

Well, I don't think so.

In fact, I have a dream!

And, in it, I am the judge.

And sitting before me is someone like that smug self-serving toad, Gray Davis, the so-called Governor in California (e.g. see Preserving Paternity Fraud by Glenn Sacks).

In the courtroom sit fifty poor children with their single mothers who have been brought in from some ghetto in California.

"Do you know these children, Mr Davis?" I ask him in my dream.

"Why, no Sir," the smug self-serving toad replies.

"Are they yours? Are they related to you?" I persist.

"Why, no Sir," the smug self-serving toad replies.

"But Mr Davis. Am I not right in thinking that you supported a law that made men responsible financially for children who are not theirs?"

"Why, yes Sir. But ... "

"No Buts, Mr Davis. It is clearly your belief that forcing men to pay for children who are not theirs is 'in the best interests of children'. And, as such, you will, henceforth, pay annually, $50,000 to the families of each of these children. And if you default, then you will be treated just like we now treat any other Deadbeat Dad."

"But, but, but ... "

"No Buts, Mr Davis. It is clearly 'in the best interests of the children' sitting in this courtroom that you personally contribute financially to their families. And the fact that you are unrelated to them is of no significance to me at all. 

"Take him away!

"Next!"

And in my dream every politician who is responsible for maintaining this disgusting law is marched before me. And I strip them of every corrupt cent that they own and hand it over to needy single-mother households.

They really corrode and debase our whole society with their obnoxious presence.

And, in my view, not only should they be stripped financially with their assets handed over to needy children, they should also spend some time in prison for their total disregard for justice and for their abuse of power. 

Further, of course, it will clearly be in the best interests of the children - and of all future children - for them to be properly punished.

Doing so will send the message out to all politicians that they disregard natural justice at their peril - because it will backfire very heavily on them.

And they won't be so smug and self-serving then!

I know that some reasonable laws often do inflict injustices upon some people - usually because these laws are seeking some 'greater good' for the vast majority of people - but forcing men to support financially children who are not theirs, is different from most of these in a number of respects.

1. It is sex-discriminatory in that it affects only men - and children.

2. The injustice inflicted is not trivial. It is long-term and very serious.

3. It actually encourages this type of injustice to take place. And it further motivates women to lie and deceive for as long as possible - and, in this case, to deceive the children and the real fathers as well.

4. Where injustices occur as a result of the law, there is usually some attempt to ameliorate them in some way. In the case of paternity fraud, however, the very opposite is true. The injustice to a man that follows from being cheated through paternity fraud is actually buttressed, magnified and perpetuated by a law that requires him to pay, long term, for someone else's children . And, as per 3. above, paternity fraud is actively encouraged by such a law.

5. It has definitely got nothing to do with the 'greater good' of the people.  

In my view, if politicians or judges do not have enough concern for justice, then they must not have power!  And if they support laws that clearly inflict and perpetuate serious injustices, then they ought to be punished.

Finally, if it was women who were being defrauded in this manner by their partners - if such a thing were possible - and if it was women who were currently being forced to pay for years on end for children who were not theirs, not only would the law be changed instantly - to protect women from such gross 'abuse' - we would already be enacting laws to DNA test all children - at birth - to ensure that women could not possibly be hoodwinked in such an appalling manner by their 'lying and abusive' partners.

Can you imagine women, who were defrauded by their partners with regard to their very own children, being forced by law to pay money for years on end to the very men who had cheated them in the first place? - in order to support their children?

Indeed, if men defrauded women in this terrible way it would probably be categorised as a particularly severe form of 'domestic violence' (e.g. as a 'very serious and long term act of emotional and financial abuse') and they would probably go to prison for a very long time.

But politicians like Gray Davis not only show no concern for those men who are put into this situation, they are the very politicians who actually choose to make matters much worse for them!

Men are clearly nothing but dirt in their eyes.

Such politicians are very much the enemy of us all - both men and women - and, at the very least, they must be booted out of office.

I, myself, would like to see them sent to prison. 

And in the case of Gray Davis, I would like to see him imprisoned for the rest of his life to account for the untold misery that he has willfully inflicted on many thousands of men and families.

AH