Up to one in TEN Britons 'don't know who their real father is' - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

News stories of lesser political significance, but still of international interest.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

Forum rules: Please include a source with news articles. No stupid or joke stories. The usual forum rules also still apply.
#15010381
Pants-of-dog wrote: Also, the guy could just ask and then he would have that knowledge without requiring the state to force people to undergo medical testing.

You must be joking now I think.
How can he get an honest answer if the wife screwed other men behind his back and will try to hide this from him ?

Pants-of-dog wrote:And what right of the father are you referring to?

The right to know if the children he is devoting his time, energy and finances for, not to mention his emotional involvement, are his or the product of his wife's infidelity.

Pants-of-dog wrote:How so? How does it not benefit others?


You are defending the position that a woman, even if her children are the result of fucking her boss at work, can hide that fact.
A paternity test would clarify matters for the father and the children, and maybe also for the adulteress if she had many extra-marital fucks.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Should the father be able to get out of paying child support if the test determines a lack of biological relation?

yes
#15010384
SolarCross wrote:He wouldn't have a father's obligation if he wasn't the father, obviously. What is wrong with you?


Not necessarily.

The obligations of a father are not necessarily dependent on biological relation.

In fact, it is up to you and @Ter to show that it is.

——————————

Ter wrote:You must be joking now I think.
How can he get an honest answer if the wife screwed other men behind his back and will try to hide this from him ?


If the relationship is already filled with distrust, lies, and the accompanying lack of respect, they should break up anyway.

Why should this woman stay with this guy who thinks she is a cheating slut? He sounds insecure.

T wrote:
The right to know if the children he is devoting his time, energy and finances for, not to mention his emotional involvement, are his or the product of his wife's infidelity.


Is this right mentioned in law anywhere?

T wrote:...
A paternity test would clarify matters for the father and the children, and maybe also for the adulteress if she had many extra-marital fucks.


Since this knowledge may or may not bring about benefits, I find this argument for benefits quite dubious.

As I already said, if the child wants to know, the child and the dad can go do it together and the state does not need to force anyone. This renders your argument moot.

T wrote:yes


If the idea is to get out of obligations to a child, then you can now descend from your supposed moral high ground.

Do you have kids, Ter?
#15010386
Pants-of-dog wrote:Not necessarily.

The obligations of a father are not necessarily dependent on biological relation.

In fact, it is up to you and @Ter to show that it is.

He isn't the father at all without a "biological relation"! You actually need to give some justification for hassling some poor cuck for money to pay for someone else's progeny. So far you have nothing.
#15010387
Pants-of-dog wrote:Why should the biological paternity matter in terms of child support? Should the father be able to get out of paying child support if the test determines a lack of biological relation?

:lol: As someone who likes to take bold provocative ideological stances, I have to admire your's even if I'm in wide disagreement on the particular issue. Now i'm not up on Canada's law, but in England it is the State and more generally public opinion that hold's a man financially responsible for his biological offspring. So at least for England of course he should be able to get of paying child support because that was the only reason that he was legally and socially liable in the first place.

In Britain the government and its implementing bureaucracy do not really care about getting extra support for children, although they do offer a private collection service for a fee, to those mothers (primary carers, so not always mothers) who are not in receipt of benefits. The State (backed up by many concerned tax paying voters) cares about reducing its benefit payouts. What we have is two conflicting paradigms /political philosophies. By your left logic (paradigm) surely all adults are equally responsible for the financial welfare of all children?

According to the traditional Conservative paradigm, if a man is having sex and living with a women then he is financially responsible for her never mind whether they have had kids or not. The State has seen fit to continue this and even expand it into absurdity by making homosexuals and lesbians financially responsible for their sexual partners. However they can no longer really enforce it because that would mean asking any 2 guys in a flat share, whether they were living together as man and man. :)
#15010388
SolarCross wrote:He isn't he father at all without a "biological relation"! You actually need to give some justification for hassling some poor cuck for money to pay for someone else's progeny. So far you have nothing.


No, you must show why we should change the existing conditions, since the law as it currently stands supports my side.

I had a friend once whose dad wanted to do this to her. Her stepdad, who could not have been my friend’s biological father since he and the mom met years later, was as shocked as the mom and my friend. And to his credit, he immediately said “If he doesn’t want her, then she can be my kid,” and promised his support.

Now, perhaps I am a romantic or watch too many Vin Diesel movies, but I think the mark of a father is that he always supports his kids. Even when he finds out that they are not his biological kids.
#15010398
Solar Cross, Rich and Ter seem to be saying that children should be made to pay back the money these men spent on bringing them up.

Amazing!

They also seem to want to go back to the stone age.
I think they'd probably like it, there.

I'd suggest the three of you start a support group, except none of you have children, which makes it pretty pointless.

Still, something to think about.
#15010433
snapdragon wrote:Solar Cross, Rich and Ter seem to be saying that children should be made to pay back the money these men spent on bringing them up.

I'm not sure anyone has suggested that. I certainly haven't.
I'd suggest the three of you start a support group, except none of you have children, which makes it pretty pointless.

I have a son, who I've never doubted was biologically mine. I can remember the moment of conception (well not the actual moment of conception, but the moment that led to the moment of conception, you know what I mean.) I notice different people seem to hear different things in what I say. i think in this thread I have said much about what was and what is, but little on what ought to be.
#15010476
snapdragon wrote:Solar Cross, Rich and Ter seem to be saying that children should be made to pay back the money these men spent on bringing them up.

Amazing!

They also seem to want to go back to the stone age.
I think they'd probably like it, there.

I'd suggest the three of you start a support group, except none of you have children, which makes it pretty pointless.

Still, something to think about.


So it looks like @snapdragon admits defeat on the arguments presented in this thread. According to her and her fellow feminist PoD the father has no right to know if the children in his household are his or if their mother got impregnated by someone else.
Noice !

In the meantime, I remain a father to my four children.
What about you @snapdragon ?
#15010480
POD goes to a restaurant

POD: "hi I'd like to order steak and eggs please!"

Waitress: "Sure thing!"

(an hour passes)

POD: "excuse me where is my steak and eggs?"

Waitress: "Oh you are still here? I gave your steak and eggs to that handsome devil over there, honestly you are a bit of a fugly."

POD: "oh I see, well I guess food isn't that important, I'll just go then."

Waitress: "Wait! You haven't paid the bill!"

POD: (sigh) "I suppose I should pay for something I didn't get or my fellow libtards will probably suspect me of patriarchy and other wrongthink, so ok"

Waitress: "there's a good cuck"
#15010483
I am still waiting for an explanation as to how the sex life of the mother has any impact on the promises made by the father to the child.

I can do a little dialogue of your position if you wish:

Dad: Hey son, remember how I said I love you and I would always support you? Well, it turns out that none of that is true, and I am leaving you and your mom and abandoning you. But none of this is my fault. This is all because your mom is a slut.

Child: Um, what?
#15010485
Pants-of-dog wrote:I am still waiting for an explanation as to how the sex life of the mother has any impact on the promises made by the father to the child.

I can do a little dialogue of your position if you wish:

Dad: Hey son, remember how I said I love you and I would always support you? Well, it turns out that none of that is true, and I am leaving you and your mom and abandoning you. But none of this is my fault. This is all because your mom is a slut.

Child: Um, what?


Wait all you want. You don't need a debate you need an exorcism.
#15010567
Pants-of-dog wrote:Dad: Hey son, remember how I said I love you and I would always support you? Well, it turns out that none of that is true, and I am leaving you and your mom and abandoning you. But none of this is my fault. This is all because your mom is a slut.


It is not only about the children. First of all that man needs to get away from the slut.
For the children, depending on their age, I would consider helping them under certain circumstances and depending on their age. If they are mere babies, well good luck to them.

Pants-of-dog wrote:So, is marriage and dating a strictly economic transaction for you?

There is definitely an economic aspect to marriage.
According to some people, it is the major aspect.
#15010587
Ter wrote:So it looks like @snapdragon admits defeat on the arguments presented in this thread. According to her and her fellow feminist PoD the father has no right to know if the children in his household are his or if their mother got impregnated by someone else.


Yes he does. I've told you right from the beginning that you're wrong - and provided proof.

It's not my fault you can't understand the links I provided.

I've taken a bit from one.

If someone refuses a DNA test
The person carrying out the test can only take a DNA sample if they have permission from either:
the person being tested, if they’re an adult
someone with parental responsibility, if the person being tested is under 16


See? No need to thank me. It only took a minute as I live in the UK.

In the meantime, I remain a father to my four children.
What about you @snapdragon ?


I remain a mother to my three children.

If it turned out that one of your four children wasn't biologically yours, would you seriously try to take the child to court and claim the money from them that it cost you to bring them up?

Of course, though, you could be one of those strange men who think children don't cost anything and that child maintenance is spent on the mother.

Still, according to you, Trump allows you to do it, so good luck.
#15010593
snapdragon wrote:Yes he does. I've told you right from the beginning that you're wrong - and provided proof.

It's not my fault you can't understand the links I provided.


As you can see from the OP, it said that it wasn't allowed.
I also provided an article saying that very soon, it will absolutely no longer be allowed.
In the mean time, if your references are still valid, the "father" could check, yes. And I acknowledged that.

snapdragon wrote:If it turned out that one of your four children wasn't biologically yours, would you seriously try to take the child to court and claim the money from them that it cost you to bring them up?


I never claimed that. Please take that up with the poster who said that. And take some reading classes to avoid embarrassing yourself in future.

snapdragon wrote:Of course, though, you could be one of those strange men who think children don't cost anything and that child maintenance is spent on the mother.

I am not in such a situation nor could I be as I live in a country where feminists have no say whatsoever.
I know that children are expensive and I was very happy to pay all the costs to bring them up in style. Of course they lived with me since birth.
#15010596
snapdragon wrote:Are you saying that the "father" can have his children DNA tested for paternity without agreement by the mother?


Indeed, it is quite hilarious watching these guys clutching at these ridiculous straws, screeching about the great injustice that men from the street cannot force dna tests on any child they deem. It is even more cringeworthy especially after watching the entire premise of this thread collapse completely:

snapdragon wrote:
Of course you don't. There are lots of places online, including government websites.

Here's one:

https://www.affinitydna.co.uk/legal-paternity-test/

and here's the government website:

https://www.gov.uk/get-dna-test

Why couldn't you find them, Ter?

Please do tell.


That was some serious pawnage right there snapdragon.
#15010603
Ter posted fake news that were totally trashed by the reality of the government links that snapdragon posted. In the UK you do not need a mother's permission to dna test your children. Anyone of the parents can order a DNA test so the argument that a mother can deny paternity tests from the father in the UK is totally fake. But that's what happens when you read bullshit tabloids like the daily fail.

To make matters worse some people in here have actually argued that any male should should have the right to order a paternity test for any child in the world without even requiring a court order which is absolutely ridiculous but that's what you get when you post fake news, you get proven wrong and then you try to shift the goalposts to save face. Cringe happens.
Vote For Me You Lying Racist!

2020 is shaping up to be even crazier and more fun[…]

Trump and Russiagate

Barr is the Senate confirmed US Attorney General […]

Nadler himself lectured that a partisan impeachmen[…]

You cannot govern when you have zero credibility.[…]