Believe it or not

Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
this is really happening in 2016.

Proposed Illinois Law Would Deny Support from Mothers Who Don’t List Father on Birth Certificate
February 23, 2016 by Rachel Ford 606 Comments
Two Illinois Republicans, Rep. Keith Wheeler and Rep. John Caveletto, have introduced a bill (since referred to the Rules Committee) to amend state birth certificate rules by denying financial support from single mothers who don’t name the child’s father on the birth certificate.

Furthermore, they would deny the child a birth certificate altogether unless a father’s name was listed:


Sec. 1-8.6. Birth certificates. A family unit shall be ineligible for any financial aid provided under this Code for the support of a child who has not been issued a birth certificate as provided in subsection of Section 12 of the Vital Records Act.



If an unmarried mother cannot or refuses to name the child’s father at the time of birth, either:

(a) a father must be conclusively established by DNA evidence; or

(b) within 30 days after birth, another family member who will financially provide for the child must be named, in court, on the birth certificate.

If neither condition is met, a birth certificate shall not be issued for the child and the mother will be ineligible for any financial aid provided under the Illinois Public Aid Code for the support of the child.

However, if an artificially inseminated mother wishes to raise the child on her own, she may obtain a birth certificate for the child with only her name on the birth certificate if she signs a release stating that she waives her rights to any financial aid provided under the Illinois Public Aid Code for the support of the child.

If this sounds familiar, it’s because this isn’t the first time conservatives have proposed these punitive measures against single mothers. Former Senator and serial presidential hopeful Rick Santorum gained infamy, for instance, for proposing similar paternity requirements for financial assistance to save the country from the scourge of single motherhood.

Shaming women by punishing their children is a particularly disturbing means of enforcing conservative “morality” via the government. It takes a uniquely callous adult to make a child suffer like this.

You won’t be surprised to learn, then, that these two representatives, who are willing to penalize children on the basis of their mothers’ marital status, have been congratulated by a group called Illinois Right to Life for jumping onboard the defense-of-fetal-tissue bandwagon. Because what could be more “pro-life” than refusing to provide financial assistance for a baby because his or mother doesn’t meet your moral standards?

Really, this is a great demonstration of the priorities of the “pro-life” movement: scream about how fetal tissue is disposed of while threatening to deny aid to an actual infant. Nothing chokes the anti-abortion movement up like an aborted fetus… but why care about an actual baby when you can instead shame and demean sexually active women (even if their children suffer for it)?

If we’re honest, isn’t that what abortion restrictions are really about?
 

Airport

Well-known member
Dec 12, 2001
80,901
1,001
113
this is really happening in 2016.

Proposed Illinois Law Would Deny Support from Mothers Who Don’t List Father on Birth Certificate
February 23, 2016 by Rachel Ford 606 Comments
Two Illinois Republicans, Rep. Keith Wheeler and Rep. John Caveletto, have introduced a bill (since referred to the Rules Committee) to amend state birth certificate rules by denying financial support from single mothers who don’t name the child’s father on the birth certificate.

Furthermore, they would deny the child a birth certificate altogether unless a father’s name was listed:


Sec. 1-8.6. Birth certificates. A family unit shall be ineligible for any financial aid provided under this Code for the support of a child who has not been issued a birth certificate as provided in subsection of Section 12 of the Vital Records Act.



If an unmarried mother cannot or refuses to name the child’s father at the time of birth, either:

(a) a father must be conclusively established by DNA evidence; or

(b) within 30 days after birth, another family member who will financially provide for the child must be named, in court, on the birth certificate.

If neither condition is met, a birth certificate shall not be issued for the child and the mother will be ineligible for any financial aid provided under the Illinois Public Aid Code for the support of the child.

However, if an artificially inseminated mother wishes to raise the child on her own, she may obtain a birth certificate for the child with only her name on the birth certificate if she signs a release stating that she waives her rights to any financial aid provided under the Illinois Public Aid Code for the support of the child.

If this sounds familiar, it’s because this isn’t the first time conservatives have proposed these punitive measures against single mothers. Former Senator and serial presidential hopeful Rick Santorum gained infamy, for instance, for proposing similar paternity requirements for financial assistance to save the country from the scourge of single motherhood.

Shaming women by punishing their children is a particularly disturbing means of enforcing conservative “morality” via the government. It takes a uniquely callous adult to make a child suffer like this.

You won’t be surprised to learn, then, that these two representatives, who are willing to penalize children on the basis of their mothers’ marital status, have been congratulated by a group called Illinois Right to Life for jumping onboard the defense-of-fetal-tissue bandwagon. Because what could be more “pro-life” than refusing to provide financial assistance for a baby because his or mother doesn’t meet your moral standards?

Really, this is a great demonstration of the priorities of the “pro-life” movement: scream about how fetal tissue is disposed of while threatening to deny aid to an actual infant. Nothing chokes the anti-abortion movement up like an aborted fetus… but why care about an actual baby when you can instead shame and demean sexually active women (even if their children suffer for it)?

If we’re honest, isn’t that what abortion restrictions are really about?

I beleive this is an effort, right or wrong, to have a responsible male pay child support.
 

BigLickMountee

New member
Nov 10, 2003
26,693
6
0
what if she doesn't know? Why punish her or the child for not knowing the father(s) of her children! It's not her fault.
 

dave

Well-known member
May 29, 2001
167,927
721
113
what if she doesn't know? Why punish her or the child for not knowing the father(s) of her children! It's not her fault.
It seems to me that unless a woman conceived unconsciously she should have an idea.
 

mule_eer

Member
May 6, 2002
20,438
58
48
I'm saddened by the majority of the responses. I'm not going to call some woman a big time ho for sleeping with more than one person in the span of a couple of weeks. I did that in my past, so I don't feel a right to judge someone else for that.

I understand that this is an effort to hold father's responsible, but doing that at the expense of children is asinine in my opinion. Who is going to pay for the referenced DNA testing? The state? Many of the same people who gripe about how the government shouldn't be allowed to require you to buy health insurance are going to force DNA tests on people. The logistics of this proposal are flat out stupid.
 

DvlDog4WVU

Well-known member
Feb 2, 2008
46,613
1,501
113
I'm saddened by the majority of the responses. I'm not going to call some woman a big time ho for sleeping with more than one person in the span of a couple of weeks. I did that in my past, so I don't feel a right to judge someone else for that.

I understand that this is an effort to hold father's responsible, but doing that at the expense of children is asinine in my opinion. Who is going to pay for the referenced DNA testing? The state? Many of the same people who gripe about how the government shouldn't be allowed to require you to buy health insurance are going to force DNA tests on people. The logistics of this proposal are flat out stupid.
I 100% agree with this statement.
 

WhiteTailEER

New member
Jun 17, 2005
11,534
170
0
I'm saddened by the majority of the responses. I'm not going to call some woman a big time ho for sleeping with more than one person in the span of a couple of weeks. I did that in my past, so I don't feel a right to judge someone else for that.

I understand that this is an effort to hold father's responsible, but doing that at the expense of children is asinine in my opinion. Who is going to pay for the referenced DNA testing? The state? Many of the same people who gripe about how the government shouldn't be allowed to require you to buy health insurance are going to force DNA tests on people. The logistics of this proposal are flat out stupid.

I was going to say almost exactly the same thing ... probably not nearly as well as you did.
 

RichardPeterJohnson

New member
Dec 7, 2010
12,636
108
0
this is really happening in 2016.

Proposed Illinois Law Would Deny Support from Mothers Who Don’t List Father on Birth Certificate
February 23, 2016 by Rachel Ford 606 Comments
Two Illinois Republicans, Rep. Keith Wheeler and Rep. John Caveletto, have introduced a bill (since referred to the Rules Committee) to amend state birth certificate rules by denying financial support from single mothers who don’t name the child’s father on the birth certificate.

Furthermore, they would deny the child a birth certificate altogether unless a father’s name was listed:


Sec. 1-8.6. Birth certificates. A family unit shall be ineligible for any financial aid provided under this Code for the support of a child who has not been issued a birth certificate as provided in subsection of Section 12 of the Vital Records Act.



If an unmarried mother cannot or refuses to name the child’s father at the time of birth, either:

(a) a father must be conclusively established by DNA evidence; or

(b) within 30 days after birth, another family member who will financially provide for the child must be named, in court, on the birth certificate.

If neither condition is met, a birth certificate shall not be issued for the child and the mother will be ineligible for any financial aid provided under the Illinois Public Aid Code for the support of the child.

However, if an artificially inseminated mother wishes to raise the child on her own, she may obtain a birth certificate for the child with only her name on the birth certificate if she signs a release stating that she waives her rights to any financial aid provided under the Illinois Public Aid Code for the support of the child.

If this sounds familiar, it’s because this isn’t the first time conservatives have proposed these punitive measures against single mothers. Former Senator and serial presidential hopeful Rick Santorum gained infamy, for instance, for proposing similar paternity requirements for financial assistance to save the country from the scourge of single motherhood.

Shaming women by punishing their children is a particularly disturbing means of enforcing conservative “morality” via the government. It takes a uniquely callous adult to make a child suffer like this.

You won’t be surprised to learn, then, that these two representatives, who are willing to penalize children on the basis of their mothers’ marital status, have been congratulated by a group called Illinois Right to Life for jumping onboard the defense-of-fetal-tissue bandwagon. Because what could be more “pro-life” than refusing to provide financial assistance for a baby because his or mother doesn’t meet your moral standards?

Really, this is a great demonstration of the priorities of the “pro-life” movement: scream about how fetal tissue is disposed of while threatening to deny aid to an actual infant. Nothing chokes the anti-abortion movement up like an aborted fetus… but why care about an actual baby when you can instead shame and demean sexually active women (even if their children suffer for it)?

If we’re honest, isn’t that what abortion restrictions are really about?
I think they should be forced to display scarlet S (slut) somewhere.
 

Mntneer

New member
Oct 7, 2001
438,167
196
0
Lost in this entire discussion.....

mule was a player back in the day!