Of course you have, I proved you were wrong.
You didn't prove me wrong. what you proved is that you dismiss facts which get in the way of your opinions.
take this case for example. Only a child would deny that these people simply did not follow the law in a way which would have prevented this from happening. Yet you insist that the state is at fault rather then the people who didn't comply with the law.
Also I have noticed that you fail to concede that the state has an absolute right to try to recoup welfare.
I can only conclude that you are only here to read your own post and congratulate yourself on how smart you think you are rather than actually to discuss anything.
I dismiss facts? Aren't you the guy that insisted that the state didn't get a cut of the child support? Aren't you also the guy that insisted that, because you worked with DCFS you knew for a fact that my claim was wrong? How did that work out for you again?
Are you saying that this guy has children acting as his lawyers? Because, I can assure you, they are very insistent that their client did not violate any law, that he signed a valid contract, and that the state does not have the power to force him to pay child support simply because he donated sperm. Do you really want to take the position that only children would make that statement?
Do I want to dent that the state has the right to recoup welfare? Absolutely, governments do not have rights. Now that I have dealt with that nonsense, I am free to point out that the state is not attempting to recoup any welfare payments from the father, they are attempting to force him to provide child support. Since your initial position was that the state doesn't actually get anything out of child support, yet you simultaneously insisted they were only trying to get back the cost of the welfare, I am not sure exactly how to deal with your contradictory position. Can I just mock it because you are trying to argue that white is both white and black at the same time, while simultaneously claiming it is purple?
I am here to read my own posts? Is that why I am so familiar with yours, and can point out how absurd you have been during this entire discussion?