Most Recent Comments
1) Re: 2009 House Bill 4061 (Allow child support termination if DNA shows non-paternity ) [by polarbear on August 30, 2009]Under sec, (3) A to E reason the court shall not grant a motion under subsection (1).
WOW A to E alot of jump rope'n to do to get to equal rights. Court Judge,Lawyers and family services need to go back and read ,follow laws of Paternity Act-1956 Pa 205 Mcl 722.711 to 722-730. READ it again,ITS THE LAW. Slavery is unlawful.
722.714 and 722.716 a LAW of BLOOD TEST RIGHTS THAT MUST BE FOLLOWED BY COURTS< JUDGES<FIA AGENCYS.
In that order of the paternity act. states that "unless it is proven that the child is NOT the issue/subject of th marriage.
The 722.717 is the problem-this gives courts to default judgement,trick or treat clause,without dna test rights.
This 722.717 needs to have a ADD-on, like= A default Judgement shall NOT be sent to alleged father unless a DNA TEST IS DONE.
If a default order to pay child support is ordered, father pays child support,a DNA test must be done,once a alleged father is found.
Father/ husband who is NOT the BIOlogical father=child support payments will be voided, and a new alleged father should be named.
SLAVERY= one owned and forced into service.
If a non-biological man/husband works/pays for another mans child, he then becomes a slave.
Reply
another case of government by fraud and falsity.
Reply
This has absolutely nothing to do with ideology, this is common sense. Being a paternity fraud victim myself, I believe I have herd about every opinion and solution in the book.
I was forced to pay the biological father child support for his own child, theres simply no justification for this. I was denied any form of visitation while ordered to pay support; there was no best interest of the child involved.
People say, you should not have had to pay. That would be a correct analogy, however the judge by personal opinion thought I should. The way the laws are drafted, I was denied any form of legal grounds to defend my rights or the best interest of the child.
This is all about Federal Funding Period; people must realize we are not talking about increasing tax on cigarettes for the general fund; we are talking about the best interest of family heritage for generations to follow.
Reply
View Full Conversation
