POFUsers.com - Plenty of Fish Users Forum

shabbawanks wrote:Men have no rights on this question, in a lot of cases we just have responsibilities after women have made choices or as is becoming more commonplace the state has responsibilities after the woman has made choices.

I don't believe anyone should have a right to children where thier personal circumstances mean they will never be able to support that child independantly from 100% state dependancy and it's not just about the income support, the council flat paid for by housing benefit, the excemption from council tax, the free school meals etc etc it's also about the fact that these people never work and pay taxes into a society that provides for people who take the piss out of the rest of us. Some may say but everyone gets child benefit working or not working and everyone's child gets free education regardless of their parents employment status, that's boll*cks...the working parent or parents are paying taxes so their childs education is not free it's only truly free if you've never worked a day in your life.

But we are a civilized society so there is bugger all we can do about it.

This annoys me not everyone who comes to rely on state benefits is a scrounger some people were previously married in a bought and paid for house and had a full time job before their divorce,... so you would ask an abused woman to stay in their marriage to save a tax payer money??? divorced women who have worked prior to marriage and children have paid their taxes and then you are forgetting the parents with disabled children who if on their own are unable to go out to work YOU cannot tie all people on benefits with the same brush unfortunately some single parents have given others a bad reputation by abusing the system and having children purely as a financial source of income.
Not all benefits are unjust what about disability living allowance are you going to say these people should not be living off tax payers income.
I apologise if I offend anyone with my response to this but It is something which is personal to me and you cannot judge everyone to be the same, it shows lack of wisdom and basic human compassion. Not everything is about money.
This thread was supposed to be about rights, my ex husband chose not to have rights or responsibilities for his children it didn't stop me from pursuing him purely on the basis that I felt it MY CHILDRENS RIGHT to know their father.

In the case of the main carer it seems to be a case of being damned if you do and damed if you don't.
Opt to provide for your children and self then your liable to face some form of neglect accusations and opt to stay home then your liable to face charges of sponging and being a lazy arsed good for nothing.

SummerAnabelle wrote:

shabbawanks wrote:Men have no rights on this question, in a lot of cases we just have responsibilities after women have made choices or as is becoming more commonplace the state has responsibilities after the woman has made choices.

I don't believe anyone should have a right to children where thier personal circumstances mean they will never be able to support that child independantly from 100% state dependancy and it's not just about the income support, the council flat paid for by housing benefit, the excemption from council tax, the free school meals etc etc it's also about the fact that these people never work and pay taxes into a society that provides for people who take the piss out of the rest of us. Some may say but everyone gets child benefit working or not working and everyone's child gets free education regardless of their parents employment status, that's boll*cks...the working parent or parents are paying taxes so their childs education is not free it's only truly free if you've never worked a day in your life.

But we are a civilized society so there is bugger all we can do about it.

This annoys me not everyone who comes to rely on state benefits is a scrounger some people were previously married in a bought and paid for house and had a full time job before their divorce,... so you would ask an abused woman to stay in their marriage to save a tax payer money??? divorced women who have worked prior to marriage and children have paid their taxes and then you are forgetting the parents with disabled children who if on their own are unable to go out to work YOU cannot tie all people on benefits with the same brush unfortunately some single parents have given others a bad reputation by abusing the system and having children purely as a financial source of income.
Not all benefits are unjust what about disability living allowance are you going to say these people should not be living off tax payers income.
I apologise if I offend anyone with my response to this but It is something which is personal to me and you cannot judge everyone to be the same, it shows lack of wisdom and basic human compassion. Not everything is about money.
This thread was supposed to be about rights, my ex husband chose not to have rights or responsibilities for his children it didn't stop me from pursuing him purely on the basis that I felt it MY CHILDRENS RIGHT to know their father.

Interesting how different people can read the same thing and interpret it, well, differently. I read Shabba's post a while back and took it to mean people comtemplating having children when they will NEVER be able to support them without social assistance. Not that one's circumstances changed and one can no longer support them without help.

TalkinThruMyHat wrote:

SummerAnabelle wrote:

shabbawanks wrote:Men have no rights on this question, in a lot of cases we just have responsibilities after women have made choices or as is becoming more commonplace the state has responsibilities after the woman has made choices.

I don't believe anyone should have a right to children where thier personal circumstances mean they will never be able to support that child independantly from 100% state dependancy and it's not just about the income support, the council flat paid for by housing benefit, the excemption from council tax, the free school meals etc etc it's also about the fact that these people never work and pay taxes into a society that provides for people who take the piss out of the rest of us. Some may say but everyone gets child benefit working or not working and everyone's child gets free education regardless of their parents employment status, that's boll*cks...the working parent or parents are paying taxes so their childs education is not free it's only truly free if you've never worked a day in your life.

But we are a civilized society so there is bugger all we can do about it.

This annoys me not everyone who comes to rely on state benefits is a scrounger some people were previously married in a bought and paid for house and had a full time job before their divorce,... so you would ask an abused woman to stay in their marriage to save a tax payer money??? divorced women who have worked prior to marriage and children have paid their taxes and then you are forgetting the parents with disabled children who if on their own are unable to go out to work YOU cannot tie all people on benefits with the same brush unfortunately some single parents have given others a bad reputation by abusing the system and having children purely as a financial source of income.
Not all benefits are unjust what about disability living allowance are you going to say these people should not be living off tax payers income.
I apologise if I offend anyone with my response to this but It is something which is personal to me and you cannot judge everyone to be the same, it shows lack of wisdom and basic human compassion. Not everything is about money.
This thread was supposed to be about rights, my ex husband chose not to have rights or responsibilities for his children it didn't stop me from pursuing him purely on the basis that I felt it MY CHILDRENS RIGHT to know their father.

Interesting how different people can read the same thing and interpret it, well, differently. I read Shabba's post a while back and took it to mean people comtemplating having children when they will NEVER be able to support them without social assistance. Not that one's circumstances changed and one can no longer support them without help.

I am just merely offering my opinion that which was written could be read either way couldn't it?

I am just merely offering my opinion that which was written could be read either way couldn't it?

Absolutely! Quite fascinating, really.

My daughter doesn't remember her father as we were divorced before her birth and he only saw her a handful of times after she was born. I pursued him a bit to encourage him to stay in her life but then abandoned it, figuring this in and out, maybe show up and maybe not was likely to be more damaging to her than a mystery would be. Once I stopped "Are you coming to see her this week?" he drifted away completely. He did call, wanting to meet her when she was 13. She thought about it, but declined.

TalkinThruMyHat wrote:

I am just merely offering my opinion that which was written could be read either way couldn't it?

Absolutely! Quite fascinating, really.

My daughter doesn't remember her father as we were divorced before her birth and he only saw her a handful of times after she was born. I pursued him a bit to encourage him to stay in her life but then abandoned it, figuring this in and out, maybe show up and maybe not was likely to be more damaging to her than a mystery would be. Once I stopped "Are you coming to see her this week?" he drifted away completely. He did call, wanting to meet her when she was 13. She thought about it, but declined.

as is often the case

SummerAnabelle wrote:This annoys me not everyone who comes to rely on state benefits is a scrounger some people were previously married in a bought and paid for house and had a full time job before their divorce,... so you would ask an abused woman to stay in their marriage to save a tax payer money??? divorced women who have worked prior to marriage and children have paid their taxes and then you are forgetting the parents with disabled children who if on their own are unable to go out to work YOU cannot tie all people on benefits with the same brush unfortunately some single parents have given others a bad reputation by abusing the system and having children purely as a financial source of income.
Not all benefits are unjust what about disability living allowance are you going to say these people should not be living off tax payers income.
I apologise if I offend anyone with my response to this but It is something which is personal to me and you cannot judge everyone to be the same, it shows lack of wisdom and basic human compassion. Not everything is about money.
This thread was supposed to be about rights, my ex husband chose not to have rights or responsibilities for his children it didn't stop me from pursuing him purely on the basis that I felt it MY CHILDRENS RIGHT to know their father.

My post was aimed soley at people who see the benefits system as a career choice, you know the type....totally economically inactive for life, council accomodation rent paid for life, 100% council tax benefit for life, 100% free education for their children, 100% free care when they're elderly because the state can't take what they aint got to pay for it....these people contribute NOTHING.

My post was not aimed at grafters who are a victim of circumstance and need help from the benefits sysyem, the system they will have paid into.

ok thanks in that case I agree!

Is education really and truly 100% free in the UK...

That's amazing if it is....over here we have to constantly fork out money for various school costs, no matter what your income is, whether you are on the dole or not...there's lots of hidden costs which parents are liable for..like registration fees, books, pens, calculators, school uniforms, shoes, pe gear and then of course lunches (no free lunches in Ireland) and other sundries like the cost of field trips and more.

Just because you're not paying a fee and availing of free education provided by the state does not mean that your child's education is free, to you the parent at all.

That's amazing if it is....over here we have to constantly fork out money for various school costs, no matter what your income is, whether you are on the dole or not...there's lots of hidden costs which parents are liable for..like registration fees, books, pens, calculators, school uniforms, shoes, pe gear and then of course lunches (no free lunches in Ireland) and other sundries like the cost of field trips and more.

It is a lot like that over here, too. There are free lunch programs, but those are pretty stringent. We are lucky in NC that we have one weekend a year prior to the beginning of school where one does not have to pay sales tax on school items. I still spent nearly $300 on school supplies though. And we still have to pay for college unless one is lucky enough to attain a scholarship, or financially unlucky enough to need financial assistance but then you still have to pay that back.