ANTIFEMINIST Models of Blogspot

Paternity fraud is legal throughout most of the country. Additionally, if a tricked husband divorces his cheating wife, most states require him to pay child support EVEN IF THE CHILDREN ARE NOT HIS. This is one of the reasons American men are increasingly rejecting marriage. Why get married if your wife can legally walk all over you?

Several civic groups have initiated paternity fraud legislation. Their goal is to prevent men from having to pay child support for other men's children. At a minimum, any paternity fraud law should allow a divorced tricked husband to recover money paid to his fraudulent ex wife for child support. If necessary, the fraud ex wife can sue the other man for back child support payments. Some argue that mandatory DNA testing at birth would solve the paternity fraud problem.

Feminists, however, strongly oppose paternity fraud laws. They have attempted weaken or stop paternity fraud legislation.

In Oklahoma for example, paternity fraud was limted to only 5 years after the child's birth. If a wife is able to manipulate and fraud her husband (as well as the children) up to this time then legally the husband must raise and finance her boyfriend's child. Some have also resorted to insulting tricked husbands. In a Denver News Editorial, a pro feminist male journalist labeled tricked husbands as "the picky type whose parental love depends on a genetic link" and said they seek to throw their nonbiological children "overboard with a minimum of fuss". A feminist Temple University professor stated paternity fraud legislation is "really about men deserting children they have been parenting". A woman opposing paternity laws interviewed on ABC NEWS claimed "the children are the innocent victims in all of this [paternity fraud laws]." She causually left out the tricked husband.

Opponents of paternity fraud legislation claim they are mainly concerned for the child's well being. If that were true, they would be advocating divorce laws which award custody of the child to the honest "nonbiological father" rather than the fraudulent cheating mother. It was the tricked husband who was faithful and more likely to teach good behavior to the child. The wife was a fraud, a liar and a cheat. Are these good characteristics to pass on to children? Awarding custody to the tricked husband would mean the fraudulent ex wife has to pay child support. Opponents of paternity fraud laws are strongly against this idea.

Lastly, feminists traditionally argue the 'other man' meets the cheating wife's emotional needs because he is understanding. Her husband, they claim, is only concerned with himself. If feminists believe the 'other man' is so wonderful then why aren't feminist demanding he be the father and pay child support rather than the 'selfish' tricked husband?? Wouldn't a "wonderful' man teach better behavior than a selfish man? Feminists are full of female chauvinist crap!

Opposition to paternity fraud laws is not about the welfare of children. Rather, its about preserving the exploition of husbands for the benefit of selfish fraudulent wives. Its about continuing the idea a husband must do as he is told. Its about maintaining laws which judge people on the basis of their gender not their actions. Its all about preserving the feminist social order in America.

# posted by Rob @ 5:59 PM