Rand on fathers rights

[tod evans]

Narry a comment during all last weeks abortion BS about fathers......

I am disappoint...:(

[euphemia]

What do you want him to say?

[juleswin]

Seeing as nobody has asked him about father's rights the same way they've asking about abortion rights, I doubt he will be talking about it anytime soon.

Maybe we can start a hashtag campaign to the media #askrandaboutfathersrights

[tod evans]

What do you want him to say?

How about fathers should have equal standing in courts relevant to their children?

How about addressing the elephant in abortions room that fathers are not even acknowledged?



!/2 the population has testicles, it's time they acted like it....

[specsaregood]

/.

[euphemia]

I wasn't attacking your point of view. I really want to know how to get beyond the same tired Republican schtick to look at real family strengthening policies we should be asking for. I'm following this discussion with great interest.

In what specific ways do you all think current policies are not serving the interests of fathers?

[tod evans]

Are there any significant Fathers' rights advocacy groups?

Not that I'm aware of. I started my custody battle over 7 years ago and researched them pretty heavily at the time and I came away feeling like they were a bunch of collective milquetoast.


-->If so, do they send out surveys to presidential candidates?

I wouldn't have any idea seeing as how I made the voluntary choice to not associate with any of the local "activists" and the online ones didn't pique my interest years ago so I wouldn't have any idea of their political endeavors.


-->-->If not, why not? Perhaps write them and ask them to do so.

This is a good question you or somebody who is not me could pose to the online organizations.


-->-->If so, have they sent one to Randal? Has he responded to it?

See above.


-->If so,Perhaps you could write them and request they sit down for an Q&A with Sen. Paul.

I made the decision to avoid "entangling alliances" with fathers rights groups when I began the fight for custody of my son, I will not change that position until the battle is won. So as I suggested above this might be something you or another member here might be able to arrange?


-->If not, why not?

Asked-n-answered at least twice......

[euphemia]

I'm not sure what the answer is. I would like to hear candidates talk more about family issues, but I think they have been moved to the fringes because the gender feminists and homosexual activists lobby for a redefinition of families and marriage.

Have you considered contacting the campaigns to see if the candidates have positions? If it weren't for friends and distant relatives experiencing custody issues, it would not occur to me to be concerned about them.

[juleswin]

I made the decision to avoid "entangling alliances" with fathers rights groups when I began the fight for custody of my son, I will not change that position until the battle is won. So as I suggested above this might be something you or another member here might be able to arrange?

I am sorry but how does one asking for help from father's right group become an entangled alliance? do they ask for your help when their other allies are in trouble? I don't even think it even qualifies as a simple alliance since they mainly ask not demand donations from you. If anything, its a one side deal where men and other professionals who have been through your experience help you in gaining full or partial custody of your kids.

Geeze, just take their offer to help instead of waiting on Rand to come to your defense.

[tod evans]

I am sorry but how does one asking for help from father's right group become an entangled alliance? do they ask for your help when their other allies are in trouble? I don't even think it even qualifies as a simple alliance since they mainly ask not demand donations from you. If anything, its a one side deal where men and other professionals who have been through your experience help you in gaining full or partial custody of your kids.

Geeze, just take their offer to help instead of waiting on Rand to come to your defense.

You have absolutely no idea what you speak of.

I am not "waiting on Rand to come to my defense", I am waging my battle with paid for counsel.

I raised the issue simply because 1/2 of the population is male and as such may be grievously affected by the current political climate.

Rand is on board with other causes/issues further outside the republican realm so it's my opinion that this one could prove fruitful to his campaign, NOT to my custody battle.

[euphemia]

I understand what you mean tod evans. AARP, for example, pretends to advocate for people over age 50. They do not. I'm sure it's like any other advocacy group. They don't always, or even often, represent the real needs of their constitutency.

[mosquitobite]

I'm not sure what the answer is. I would like to hear candidates talk more about family issues, but I think they have been moved to the fringes because the gender feminists and homosexual activists lobby for a redefinition of families and marriage.

Have you considered contacting the campaigns to see if the candidates have positions? If it weren't for friends and distant relatives experiencing custody issues, it would not occur to me to be concerned about them.

Same. Having 2 brothers with full custody now, but knowing what it took to make that happen & #FathersRights is a big issue for me.

Maybe we could do something related to Fathers Day?

[juleswin]

You have absolutely no idea what you speak of.

I am not "waiting on Rand to come to my defense", I am waging my battle with paid for counsel.

I raised the issue simply because 1/2 of the population is male and as such may be grievously affected by the current political climate.

Rand is on board with other causes/issues further outside the republican realm so it's my opinion that this one could prove fruitful to his campaign, NOT to my custody battle.

Ok, but I am still trying to figure out why you are so opposed to working with father's right groups or why you consider working with them an entangled alliance? I follow and read some of the MRA stuff on a voice for men and they usually speak very highly of father's right groups. So I am really curious as to why you see them differently from these other men's groups like AVFM.

[Working Poor]

I think the courts screw men and/or the non custodial parent quite a bit. I think it is wrong to put someone in jail and revoke their drivers license and their professional license for non support the punishment for lower and middle income men just makes the situation worse. Many men have lost their jobs and had health problems and cannot work so there seems to be a lot of blurry stuff involved. I would never have my child's dad locked up because he was broke, sick or unemployed I think that is just terrible. A wealthy man who does not pay support to be an asshole should be dealt with and forced to pay but I do not think they should be jailed unless they refuse to pay because a child should not have to suffer because dad is an ass hole...

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

[presence]

I on ground of the moral hazard to family support outlawing court ordered child support payments in any form.

I on grounds of the moral hazard to marriage support outlawing court ordered alimony to past spouses.

In support of right to life, support a father's right to overrule any non medical necessity abortion, except in the instance of rape.




Where are you on these tod?

eta lol typo

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

[jmdrake]

How is that going to be implemented? Are we going to require the names of all women requesting an abortion to be published - so that potential fathers can come forward and register their objections? I think we really need to put the onus on the fathers in this - so I propose that we set up a sex registry database: in which men register the dates of their sexual encounters and the names of their sexual partners in those encounters. That way the database can be searched for the woman's names when she requests an abortion, and her sexual partners from the previous XX weeks can be notified.

BTW, why the rape exception? I foresee a lot of cases of spousal/intimate-partner rape coming from it. And with spousal rape being one of the most difficult acts to prove or disprove - then, pragmatically, what happens when the accusation is raised? Do we go to court and try to prosecute the alleged rape before gestation gets to the point where abortion is dangerous to the mother's life? Actually, the way the legal process works, the birth would occur before the jury was chosen.

This could possibly be best handled through contract rights. Part of an actual marriage contract, not this abomination that we call "marriage licenses", would be mutual convenants between men and women on reproduction. Part of the contract could be that a married woman convenants not to abort the couples child without the father's consent unless her life is in danger. The father would covenant to support through adulthood any biological children born to their union. If they required a sperm donor that would require an addendum to the contract that only covered children who's DNA matched the agreed upon donor during the agreed upon time period. Not sure what to do about the out of wedlock births. Part of me feels that men shouldn't be on the hook for babies they didn't contract through marriage or some other means to have. Yeah they could choose not to have sex but women can choose not to have sex and to be on the pill. Condoms are good, but they do break. (I had one break on me.)

[specsaregood]

/.

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

[RPfan1992]

I think it would help Rand if he catered to the Fathers Rights movement. UKIP in the UK for example, wants 50:50 shared parenting laws.

[jmdrake]

I'd say "could" rather than "would" ... unless there's some a-thor-it-tay mandating what goes into the contract (which is to be avoided).


Another instance of "could" rather than "would".


And that's not an insignificant matter to overlook. According to a Johns Hopkins study (http://cnsnews.com/news/article/zoey-dimauro/johns-hopkins-57-percent-children-born-millennials-are-out-wedlock), up to 57% of births to millenials are out of wedlock. I'm a baby boomer, and both of my children are out of wedlock.

And a note here: "out of wedlock" is not the same thing as "illegitimate". Many of those "Out of Wedlock" families are just as stable and nurturing as a marital family. By the same token, many children from marital relationships are growing up in homes without their fathers due to divorce - and how's that distinguishable from the dreaded fatherless "illegitimate" children portrayed in so many of the news stories that are lauded by conservative darlings? But that "Tar Baby" is not going to be discusssed any place in ploitics today ... any more than actual Social Security reform will be.

Good points. One note, I'm not suggesting that children born out of wedlock are illegitmate. I would consider any agreement between a man and woman to have children to be the same whether they are married or not.

[limequat]

Oof, tackling this issue would be a sticky wicket when the left is actively trying to smear Rand with the "War on Women" meme. He'd have to tackle it from a view that even lefties could see.
The libertarian in me says get the state out of custody entirely. If two folks don't want to be together any more, let them sort out the details. I think that's another message that won't fly today. Maybe he could tie it into his minority outreach strategy. Black men are statistically much less likely to get married than non-black men. Something to protect the minority family...

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

[tennman]

You have absolutely no idea what you speak of.

I am not "waiting on Rand to come to my defense", I am waging my battle with paid for counsel.

I raised the issue simply because 1/2 of the population is male and as such may be grievously affected by the current political climate.

Rand is on board with other causes/issues further outside the republican realm so it's my opinion that this one could prove fruitful to his campaign, NOT to my custody battle.

Tod, I went through a similar battle with a friend. Fortunately, my state puts men on more equal footing with women when it comes to raising the children. And, also in this state, men don't owe women money simply for existing. If they divorce and have equal custody of the kids, she has to be an adult and actually get a job to support her own self just like him. There are groups out there (http://www.familylawrights.net/fathers-rights/) that specifically come to the aid of fathers in custody battles and in terms of keeping you from having to pay the ex-wife just for existing (I'm not talking about child support because if there's 50/50 split custody as there should be, they each have the kids the same amount of time so neither owes the other). I'm talking about the archaic and unjust "alimony" concept that basically says that since we have balls, we have to pay women instead of them getting a job to earn it. It's like we're stuck as a slave to the woman even after she leaves us. I don't know why the man would owe her anything, with the exception of child support but then only if she has the kids more than 50 percent of the time and there's not reason why the father shouldn't get equal time.

I feel for you and hope you have a great attorney who will get you justice! Oh, and be sure to check out https://fathers4kids.com/