Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Something in Gorsuch's dissent that is confusing

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Saturday, January 3rd, 2015
    Last Online
    Today @ 6:13 PM
    Posts
    11,501
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste Chalfonte View Post
    That's exactly what happens in an adoption. Why do you think adopted kids sometimes have such a hard time finding their birth parents?
    Like I said, then its not a birth certificate. Its a certificate of "ownership", like a car title.


    Mark
    Race Card: A tool of the intellectually weak and lazy when they cannot counter a logical argument or factual data.

    "Liberals have to stop insisting that the world is what they want it to be instead of the way it is." - Bill Maher

    Political correctness is ideological fascism. Itís the antithesis of freedom. Dr. Piper

    Gender is not a "Social Construct", it is an outgrowth of biological reality.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Wednesday, October 2nd, 2013
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    13,074
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm dePlume View Post
    They've always been happy to list the husband of a heterosexual couple as the father, even in cases where the mother got pregnant by a different man. If Alan gets Betty pregnant and then skips town, and then Charlie steps in and marries an already pregnant Betty, and the couple wants to list Charlie as the father, the state always says, "Yeah, sure, if you say so." They never say, "Now, wait a minute, here. This here's a biological record, young man."
    That's because Charlie was the husband at the time of the birth and there is a common law theory of "presumption of paternity" that says the law will presume the husband of the child is the father of the child, except under certain limited exceptions.

    If Alan and Betty are married, Alan skips town, Betty gets pregnant by Charlie and doesn't divorce Alan until after the birth of the child, the law presumes Alan is the father of the child except under certain limited circumstances. Those circumstances do not necessarily include Betty, Charlie and Alan saying so.
    Not where I breathe, but where I love, I live...
    Robert Southwell, S.J.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Tuesday, October 22nd, 2013
    Last Online
    Today @ 5:47 PM
    Posts
    14,021
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by phillygirl View Post
    That's because Charlie was the husband at the time of the birth and there is a common law theory of "presumption of paternity" that says the law will presume the husband of the child is the father of the child, except under certain limited exceptions.

    If Alan and Betty are married, Alan skips town, Betty gets pregnant by Charlie and doesn't divorce Alan until after the birth of the child, the law presumes Alan is the father of the child except under certain limited circumstances. Those circumstances do not necessarily include Betty, Charlie and Alan saying so.
    So, accuracy of the biological record is no impediment to heterosexual spouses getting their names on the birth certificate.

    On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heartís desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
    -H. L. Mencken

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Wednesday, October 2nd, 2013
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    13,074
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm dePlume View Post
    So, accuracy of the biological record is no impediment to heterosexual spouses getting their names on the birth certificate.
    Correct. Of course, at the time this legal premise was developed the only way a woman could get pregnant was via sexual intercourse with a man and there was no way of proving paternity absolutely, therefore where a woman was married, a child could not be "bastardized" by the husband disputing the parentage.
    Not where I breathe, but where I love, I live...
    Robert Southwell, S.J.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Saturday, October 5th, 2013
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    In the mainstream of American life.
    Posts
    14,931
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 80zephyr View Post
    Like I said, then its not a birth certificate. Its a certificate of "ownership", like a car title.
    If you're trying to pick a fight over that, you're barking at the wrong person. I'm a lawyer and a feminist. You don't have to tell me that women and kids were chattel.
    No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. This offer VALID in 35 34 33 32 31 26 20 17 15 14 13 ALL 50 states.

    The new 13 original states to stand up for freedom: CA, CT, IA, MA, DE, MN, NH, NY, RI, VT, ME, MD, NJ (plus DC).

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Tuesday, October 1st, 2013
    Last Online
    Today @ 10:26 AM
    Posts
    10,754
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste Chalfonte View Post
    If you're trying to pick a fight over that, you're barking at the wrong person. I'm a lawyer and a feminist1. You don't have to tell me that women and kids were chattel.












    1. Designation currently under review due to stance on guns and general common sense.
    "What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people. January 20th 2017, will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again. The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer."

    link

    Time will tell.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Saturday, January 3rd, 2015
    Last Online
    Today @ 6:13 PM
    Posts
    11,501
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Celeste Chalfonte View Post
    If you're trying to pick a fight over that, you're barking at the wrong person. I'm a lawyer and a feminist. You don't have to tell me that women and kids were chattel.
    Accuracy has nothing to do with what you "feel". A "birth" certificate should be a record of birth, as close as possible, to actual facts. The birth mother and birth father do not change, as much as you wish that to be true.

    Mark
    Race Card: A tool of the intellectually weak and lazy when they cannot counter a logical argument or factual data.

    "Liberals have to stop insisting that the world is what they want it to be instead of the way it is." - Bill Maher

    Political correctness is ideological fascism. Itís the antithesis of freedom. Dr. Piper

    Gender is not a "Social Construct", it is an outgrowth of biological reality.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Wednesday, June 17th, 2015
    Last Online
    Today @ 9:54 AM
    Posts
    10,871
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 80zephyr View Post
    Like I said, then its not a birth certificate. Its a certificate of "ownership", like a car title.


    Mark
    Ehhhhh........... just call it adoption papers and be done with it.

  9. Likes 80zephyr liked this post
  10. #19
    Join Date
    Saturday, October 5th, 2013
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    In the mainstream of American life.
    Posts
    14,931
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 80zephyr View Post
    Accuracy has nothing to do with what you "feel". A "birth" certificate should be a record of birth, as close as possible, to actual facts. The birth mother and birth father do not change, as much as you wish that to be true.
    Where did I say anything about what I "feel?"

    Dude, I don't wish anything about it. The changing of birth certificates was done and put into law a long time ago so that men who couldn't get it up or shot blanks could pretend they fathered an heir and never have to tell Junior different. Also to keep the stigma of bastardy off Junior.

    I would have all of it changed to the governmental function it is, and record it like deeds and mortgages. The whole and entire purpose of it UNDER LAW is to establish property rights and orderly disposition of inheritances. Always has been. That's why in the old countries, only the landed gentry kept public records. Nobody cared how the peasants sorted themselves out.
    No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. This offer VALID in 35 34 33 32 31 26 20 17 15 14 13 ALL 50 states.

    The new 13 original states to stand up for freedom: CA, CT, IA, MA, DE, MN, NH, NY, RI, VT, ME, MD, NJ (plus DC).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •