Do you know of the prosecutors who tamper with DNA testing and present false evidence to the jury? Are you aware of the prejudice of the courts, interference of the government, state welfare and media, including gender discrimination, violation of the Due Process of Law, the 14th Amendment Protection Clause and the lack of Men’s Reproductive Rights?
Do you know of the flaws in the paternity defendants’ cases and of the morally offensive behaviors of those representing the Supreme Court? Are you aware of lawmakers who exercise pressure to make men accountable in paternity cases before presenting evidence? Do you know of the existing, unequal treatment of most paternity defendants, despite the major holes presented at trial hearings?
How many judges, court offices, law clerks, attorneys, prosecutors, lobbyists, paralegal, legal securities, state and government officials, legal editors and journalists, law professors, mental health officials have witnessed the morally offensive attitudes and behaviors conducted in paternity cases, and the prejudice of men’s reproductive rights? How many of these witnesses have chosen to turn the other cheek to the actual treatment of this issue?
Are liberty and justice "rights" diminishing, or are we simply in denial whenever we discuss men’s rights? Of course, to believe that liberty and justice is fairly obsolete in this country would mean we must face reality, that what this country for decades stands for is ceasing to exist.
Once upon a time, a majority of Americans believed, without a doubt, in liberty, justice and the pursuit of happiness. Nowadays, talking over the above-referenced topic in detail to male family members and friends, most wonder if liberty and justice exist for them. Particularly since the Internet is thick with men’s organizations, articles, cases and information disputing liberty and justice for men who are forced into parenthood.
Where are the liberty and the justice whenever paternity sued defendants appear in court and seek guidance, fairness and truth from folks representing the legal system in the House of Law?
Where is the justice we rely on from the Presiding Judge perched on his (her) high chair, gavel intact, hammering away at incorrectness and fighting with determination to protect men from further injustice?
Where is the justice to protect men whenever a female alleges she is pregnant by the defendant and decides to have the child despite the father not being financially prepared for parenthood?
Where is the justice for all when the legal system sympathizes and protects the plaintiff’s reproductive rights and choices? Where are the equal protection law and choices for men?
Whenever the subject about women’s rights crops up, it means that she has the right to choose or refuse to become a parent. Only she has the right to deprive a man of his right to become a parent or force him to become a parent often against his will. And whatever decision she makes, the law will protect her choices. These same rights do not apply to men. Men have no right to choose or refuse to become a parent.
Justice is on her side. Justice is on her side if she decides to have the child and by law take the alleged father to court and make him pay. Justice is on her side even if men contend to misrepresentation, misconduct or criminal wrongdoing by the plaintiffs.
Justice is on her side if she decides to share the child with the father, or decides to keep the child to herself. Justice is on her side if she decides to put the child up for adoption if she is not financially prepared for parenthood and without the father’s consent.
Where is the justice if a female decides to abort the pregnancy, and her partner wants to keep the child? She has the right to say no, proceed with the abortion, force him to pay for the abortion even if he is anti abortion and coerce him to participate in her decision to end the life of his unborn child.
She owns the rights and choices if she decides to bear a child or obtain an abortion. This decision is hers because the law sees that she has the burden to carry the child and must go through whatever physical or mental traumas she may suffer through childbirth or abortion.
As humans, we can imagine that women, who feel abortion is the only way out, may grieve for a long time after an abortion. Is it possible for us to imagine the father’s grief, or mourning for the loss of the child he had always wanted and denied by law? Is her grief more intense or acceptable than his? Is her grief more profound because she feels the guilt of deciding to terminate her pregnancy? Is his grief more real and human since he had no say in saving and fighting against the termination of his unborn child?
Under the law, she can choose abortion, adoption or to keep the child. Under the law, he has no right to interfere with her adoption or abortion decisions, nor if she decides to keep the child to herself. He has no right to choose whether or not he wants to become a parent. He has no rights to abortion options, putting the child up for adoption, gaining sole custody when the mother is unfit and decides to put the child up for adoption. Men have no rights whenever females come forward to make men liable for children who are two-three years of age or more, nor of children whom the biological fathers have no knowledge of. Men have the right to remain silent while forced parenthood is pinned on him.
The legal world strips men of their freedom to participate in the decision-making process, the opportunity to express how having, or not having a child will affect him, which suggests that his opinion or feelings do not count. The state, the court and the government have a tendency to dismiss the possibility that he may need help, juggling school, working part-time to survive while bearing the distress of a paternity suit.
The courts continue to give women constitutional protection and control over their bodily reproductive functions. The Courts continue to deny men the right to interfere with his partner’s right to conceive, give away or abort a pregnancy.
The United States Constitution guarantee females a fundamental right not to be forced into parenthood because they supposedly know the female biology and risk of pregnancy. (No one needs a high school diploma to know this.) Whatever happened to the United States Supreme Court’s case law that had instituted the Equal Protection Clause? Is this Equal Protection Clause not instituted to protect the reproductive rights of both women and men?
Where is the justice for men in the House of Law, the state welfare, and the government, Congress and the media? Where is the justice when these same agencies choose to turn their backs on male defendants in paternity cases? Where are the equal rights and choices for men? Is gender equality unprotected in paternity cases for men?
The Houses of Law, the state welfare, the government, Congress and the media we rely on to voice a fair judgment without the double standards, without prejudice, are often the people who deny, dismiss and work against the rights of men and take away the small percentage of the Reproductive Rights Law that men do own away from them along with his right to the Due Process of Law.
His right under the Due Process of Law is to choose not to pay child support to an unmarried female or an illegitimate child. Despite this right, state statutes, and law practices favor the unwed mother controlling her reproductive rights. The Court of Law, with the assistance of the legal and psychological worlds perceive abortion, adoption, sole custody choices and rights for women. These same groups have conveniently forgotten the effects women’s reproductive choices have on men, without whom there would be no children conceived, aborted or put up for adoption.
Clearly, paternity suits serve in the best interest of females, and often discriminate against men, despite misrepresentation, misconduct or criminal acts to conceive a child.
State welfare and the government do not give biological fathers any rights or consideration. He is guilty until he proves, over and beyond a reasonable doubt that he is not the biological father, and at the same time, men tend to be discredited whenever they contend misrepresentation, misconduct or criminal wrongdoing by the plaintiffs.
The time is now for the state welfare system to end interfering and using discriminatory tactics and manipulation to impose paternity accusations, judgment and liability while in the process of verifying paternity.
In today’s legal practice, the state welfare and its female plaintiffs show no burden of proof. It is unconstitutional under paternity laws that once a female completes the necessary forms stating the defendant is the biological father of her illegitimate child, the mother’s allegations in the complaint are admissible as evidence, before concrete evidence is presented at trial. This method is prejudiced, unconstitutional and unprecedented in American Law.
The time is now for the state welfare agency to cease relying on coercion to empty the pockets of men and force financial liability from them for out-of-wedlock births to cover the public expense for an illegitimate child the state welfare incurs in. These agencies’ primary concerns are not concern for the welfare of the child in question. Their concern is not to pay the public expense. Their concern is to replace the welfare commitment and keep welfare reform. To accomplish this, the state must get the revenue from another avenue - men.
In cases of out-of-wedlock children, support enforcement offices will handle these cases by coaching females in how to get money from alleged fathers. However, these same enforcement offices will not guide men to fight a false claim or to obtain custody if he wishes to be a father. To assume that the plaintiff’s word is far more reliable and important than the male is suggestive of Jim-Crow statutes that imply that Blacks are incompetent to give testimony in Courts of Law against whites.
A handful of men’s organizations, despite great effort and determination to change the laws, has received but a fraction of the public’s attention, and more important, the sensitivity this issue deserves. There is a downpour of paternity cases on a waiting list, cases the legal system may often consider insignificant or worthless.
Across the globe, there is equally a handful of women - mothers and daughters - who have male family members and friends they love and want to protect; who feel tremendous empathy for all men shocked by a paternity suit, presumed guilty, and who must carry the burden of proving their innocence.
But, of course, the only way to win is for men to continue to fight back to keep their dignity and wallets’ intact. Men have to fight to gain their equal rights and end the manipulative tactics played by the system to steal his means of survival and force him to pay paternity.
Men must fight against having their income taxes and wages garnished, and against the state taking professional business licenses away to make them pay.
Men - our fathers and brothers, uncles and friends - must beware the maternal opportunist, and keep in mind that in mutual sex they are the potential sperm donors.
Men must beware of females who may falsely claim that they are on the pill, or unable to conceive. Men must take precautions just the same.
Men must think twice, knowing they have limited reproductive and limited equal protection rights.
Men in a new relationship should be aware that if she becomes pregnant, he is economically liable, and all his rights will be threatened. They will have no right to family choices, such as abortion, or adoption. They will have no rights to keep the child under equal rights or custody, notwithstanding if she is either mentally fit or mentally unstable.
Men get nothing but liability, eighteen years of child support payments, for a child he may never have wanted, and a long-term relationship with someone he does not love or know. His life is ruined.
Men must give serious thought to parenthood, and know without a doubt whether they are ready to become a genetic father or not.
Men must petition and challenge their state’s laws in Federal Court. Men must petition Congress, the Courts of Law, the State welfare system, the government and the media. They should petition to allow men mutual adoption, abortion rights, and/or keeping the child with equal financial support when both parties agree to this.
Men must get in touch with other men who feel and want to challenge their state’s law. Men should join, to create advocacy or pressure groups, and become activists against forced parenthood. You are not alone. There are too many examples of men who are penalized for fighting for their right to make a choice not to be liable in paternity cases, and judged for making that choice.
Let us keep in mind the benefits we all receive by acknowledging that men have rights and emotional needs that will encourage them to get more involved.
Let us remove the alienation many men feel from the lack of liberty and justice when it comes to Equal Protection Clause, the Due Process of Law, and Reproductive Rights. Men must challenge Congress against forced parenthood, for the right to Due Process of Law, to exercise the 14th Amendment, to end gender discrimination by the state and the government.
Let us cease depriving men of the opportunity to be a parent due to past or present hostility toward females because this issue is of great importance to them.
Let us give men the same respect, to feel they have an active role in planning their own families. Men who have an equal role in participating the planning of his family will feel far more committed than when he is forced into parenthood.
To accomplish this, it makes sense that we must recognize and understand his needs, emotions and legal rights, so that men can reciprocate in kind.
If men sued for paternity are to believe that there is liberty and justice for all of us, as well as the right to equal justice and protection under the law, then the House of Law, the state and government’s responsibilities to all Americans is to protect and defend everyone’s right to equal justice.
✞©RmA2007