03-11-2006, 12:56 AM
ShadowHM,Mar 10 2006, 07:04 PM Wrote:*raises eyebrow*
And fathering a child and not supporting him/her to the same living style you enjoy is what?
[right][snapback]104205[/snapback][/right]
Agreed. Unwilling to comply when able, male or female, deserves prosecution (though the result of prosecution is either fine or prison, each of which are unlikely to result in improved compliance), however, those who cannot support themselves can only share their poverty.
It seems to me that the question that Doc points back to repeatedly is the case of a party who may be willing to comply but is unable to comply (ordered payment exceed reasonable earning expectations). We can have a seperate discussion about "reasonable earning expectations" which will varry from one individual to another within a market and from one market to another, but the point stands, those who cannot buy their own groceries may not deserve prison for not being able to buy someone elses groceries. I agree they have a responsibility to their child, and many rational parents would recognize that the responsibility to the child often outweighs the responsibility to one's self, however, what punishment should be levied against those who can ("can" mind you not "will") share only lack of money despite their "best effort" to the contrary?
but often it happens you know / that the things you don't trust are the ones you need most....
Opening lines of "Psalm" by Hey Rosetta!
Opening lines of "Psalm" by Hey Rosetta!