Whaddaya think a this...?

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Bullypulpit, May 12, 2004.

  1. Bullypulpit
    Offline

    Bullypulpit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,849
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +379
    <center><h1><a href=http://www.wbns10tv.com/global/story.asp?s=1859951&ClientType=Printable>Court to Decide if Man Can Be Barred From Fathering</a></h1></center>

    <blockquote>Can someone be ordered not to have more children? That's the unusual condition a judge placed on a convicted felon as part of his probation for failing to pay child support.

    The debate is now in the hands of the Ohio Supreme Court. And the future of a 32-year-old window installer from Akron is at stake.

    A Medina County judge handed down the sentence two years ago: five years probation instead of prison. But there's a catch.

    Convicted deadbeat dad, Sean Talty, must make "reasonable efforts" to not father any more children. Talty's attorney argued before the Ohio Supreme Court Tuesday that it is unconstitutional because it makes wealth a requirement to reproduce. </blockquote>

    The guy has 7 kids by 5 women, he owes $38,000 in child support. I believe that if you can't support the children you already have, you don't have any business having more. If there was any justice at all, they would sterlize his dumb ass.
     
  2. JIHADTHIS
    Offline

    JIHADTHIS Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,055
    Thanks Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Mowing a grassy knoll....
    Ratings:
    +22
    Wow, to think I agree with you 100%:D
     
  3. fuzzykitten99
    Offline

    fuzzykitten99 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,965
    Thanks Received:
    199
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    You'll have to check the Marauder's Map...
    Ratings:
    +199
    I thought this was a joke at first, as I saw it on the local news. But it is something that would be a REAL good idea.
     
  4. NewGuy
    Online

    NewGuy Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    You people are as bad as the ones in support of the patriot act.

    You would gladly fork over a bit of liberty for security.
     
  5. Big D
    Online

    Big D Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
  6. JIHADTHIS
    Offline

    JIHADTHIS Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,055
    Thanks Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Mowing a grassy knoll....
    Ratings:
    +22
    If I didn't have to pay the entitlements for these kids since he can't keep it in its pants, I really could give a rat's ass about him.
     
  7. NewGuy
    Online

    NewGuy Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Then you would be in favor of stiffer sentences against him, or existing ones to be enforced over actually taking away liberties, right? :)
     
  8. nycflasher
    Offline

    nycflasher Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    Messages:
    3,078
    Thanks Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    CT
    Ratings:
    +14
    Throw the fucker in jail. I don't see how you can order someone not to have kids. Can he not eat chocolate, too? I don't want to live in China, which is the only other country I know of to do this (enforce the number of kids you can have).
     
  9. acludem
    Offline

    acludem VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,500
    Thanks Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    71
    Location:
    Missouri
    Ratings:
    +69
    I agree that this guy should quit fathering children, but the women have to take responsibility, too. Men can't father children unless women let us. My question is what constitutes a "reasonable effort"? Does that mean he can still sleep around as long as he uses a condom?

    acludem
     
  10. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540

    I would think that would be a "reasonable solution," according to the judge. However, the whole sentence is BS, IMO. I agree with NewGuy - this tramples on a basic human liberty (the freedom to get laid, which I'm sure is in the Declaration of Independence somewhere! :) ) and the judge is out of line ordering it.

    My solution: start auctioning off the guy's possessions if he owes money. Bye bye car, TV, furniture, CDs, etc.
     

Share This Page