Register for a FREE GoComics account and get this plus any other comic strip delivered to your Personalized
Comic Page, Daily. With a free account you will be able to build a Comic Page filled with the Comics you
want to see each day.
With the largest collection of Comics and Editorial Cartoons online there is plenty to choose from. Upgrade
to a GoComics Pro account (Only $.99/Month) and have unlimited archive access to decades of comics.
The point of the ad was that his mother had a choice and she choose to have him, so, to me, the ad is about having a choice: She had a choice, made her decision, and therefore every woman should have a choice.
I think the line about “Abort Gays” is so true that if it could be done the Far Right and GOP would be pushing for it right now.
Read Scott’s second paragraph carefully. His phrasing may be a little over the top, but his concept is right on the money. I would be more sympathetic to freedom of choice if men had any hint of a choice. Our only choice is to shut up and pay!
I would actually argue that if a father does not want to bring a child into the world (ie., wants the abortion), but the mother wants to have the child, then the father ought to have the right to be absolved of child support duties. If, on the other hand, the father wants to keep the child and the mother wants to abort, that should still be her right.
Having said that, I always wonder about Scott’s jaded view of marriage. I did experience a similar situation – divorced by my first wife even though I was faithful in every way. Fortunately, it was in a state without alimony, so all I paid was child support. I’ve been married to my second wife for nearly 20 years and still happy.
Alimony is a joke. It’s based on the old mentality that a woman lives at home, doesn’t have a job and needs her ex to pay her expenses. Totally out-dated and irrelevant for most people these days.
Depends on where you are I guess, but in Quebec there’s been a good shift towards respecting men’s rights to raise their kids and move on from their ex, even if she is a gold-digger.
I remember one of my aunts totally screwed her ex so bad with lawsuits, he was only allowed to see them every second weekend. On top of that, he had to pay her so much he actually stopped working and went on welfare because it allowed him to have more money than having a job and paying her ridiculous amounts of alimony. Then she had the nerve to move across the country with the kids. Most of the family stopped talking to her for years out of disgust.
Alimony = the screw you get for the one you got? BTW- many “Christian” faiths of he evangelical type DO insist the wife is merely the husband’s possession- have heard it expressed many times- so scooter’s second paragraph is trashed.
Regular alimony is tax-deductible to the husband, taxable income to the wife. No decent judge awards alimony. Support is tax-free to the wife, non-deductible for the husband. This includes some (but not all) forms of spousal support, and all child support. And the law applies to whatever man the woman names, DNA tests are inadmissible.
In some states, there are limits. In some states, child support ends at 18.
But only primitive, barbaric states award 100% of the man’s take-home pay to the woman. Progressive states award 200% to the woman in perpetuity, no matter how old the children, so, under the Clinton law, the cuckolded husband goes to jail at hard labour for life without parole (all proceeds from the hard labour are split between the ex and the state).
As governor, Clinton saw to it that women were encouraged to divorce, and were awarded 200% of the man’s take-home pay, so divorced men had to leave Arkansas (or go to jail), and Arkansas could collect Federal AFDC (no AFDC payments could be made if there was a man around). And very little of the AFDC money was wasted on the women and children, most went to the Federal and state bureaucracy that administered AFDC. So Clinton was both safe from his cuckolds as governor, and had more money to spend as governor, but this wouldn’t work as President, so he got Congress to pass a law that, if the state awarded more than 100% of the man’s income, the full force of the Federal government would track the divorced man down and see that he went to jail until child support ended in his state (and it never ends in Arkansas). And in a lot of other poor states besides Arkansas, the guidelines (developed for AFDC) are that the court MUST award more than 100% of the man’s take home pay as child support and the kinds of spousal support that are taxable to the man and tax-free to the woman, so the man would leave and the state would collect AFDC. Then, with the Clinton Law, the man must be sentenced to hard labor and all proceeds split between the woman and the state, which is a win-win situation (for the woman and the state).
Lord almighty, what state do you all live in? It doesn’t resemble mine – and I mean “state of marriage” here.
As it happens, my father was a deadbeat dad (he didn’t want to pay when it was inconvenient, but he sure got his dozen beers every single night), and the ability to garnishee his wages made a difference as to whether we ate or not. My mother raised their five kids pretty much single-handed.
Contrary to what you loonies seem to think, women typically have to take care of the children regardless of what the man chooses to do – more often than not the man divorces the wife and dumps the kids, and gets child support dictated by a MALE judge, who may well have his own axe to grind against an ex-wife. (And yes, I’ve seen it happen.) Indeed, the evidence shows quite clearly that even in a marriage where both spouses work, women still do the majority of the housework and child care.
So get over yourselves. There are exceptions the other way, but they are exceptions. Mostly women are still in charge of the kids.
Maybe it would be a good idea to make getting married as difficult as getting divorced. At least it would give the people who want to get married time to think about what that means.
Of course it would probably mean people would have sex outside of marriage – but we can trust people not to do that, I mean no one does that now do they?
Marriage is the most expensive long term contract anyone will ever enter into. I pays to know the person before you “take a vow” before God and Man. Marriage shouldn’t be rushed, just to be able to sleep togeather.
I have no respect for any man that would father children and then b.tch about taking care of them. That includes changing diapers and two AM feedings.
Joel Pett is a three-time finalist for Pulitzer Prize for cartooning. He won the award in 2000. He joined Lexington Herald-Leader in 1984 and USAToday as contributing cartoonist in 2002.
Henry Payne by Henry Payne
Ted Rall by Ted Rall
Comments (16) (Please sign in to comment)
Ken Warren said, over 3 years ago
The point of the ad was that his mother had a choice and she choose to have him, so, to me, the ad is about having a choice: She had a choice, made her decision, and therefore every woman should have a choice.
I think the line about “Abort Gays” is so true that if it could be done the Far Right and GOP would be pushing for it right now.
bradwilliams
said, over 3 years ago
Scott, go take a nap.
olfart said, over 3 years ago
Read Scott’s second paragraph carefully. His phrasing may be a little over the top, but his concept is right on the money. I would be more sympathetic to freedom of choice if men had any hint of a choice. Our only choice is to shut up and pay!
cdward said, over 3 years ago
I would actually argue that if a father does not want to bring a child into the world (ie., wants the abortion), but the mother wants to have the child, then the father ought to have the right to be absolved of child support duties. If, on the other hand, the father wants to keep the child and the mother wants to abort, that should still be her right.
Having said that, I always wonder about Scott’s jaded view of marriage. I did experience a similar situation – divorced by my first wife even though I was faithful in every way. Fortunately, it was in a state without alimony, so all I paid was child support. I’ve been married to my second wife for nearly 20 years and still happy.
iamthelorax said, over 3 years ago
Alimony is a joke. It’s based on the old mentality that a woman lives at home, doesn’t have a job and needs her ex to pay her expenses. Totally out-dated and irrelevant for most people these days.
Depends on where you are I guess, but in Quebec there’s been a good shift towards respecting men’s rights to raise their kids and move on from their ex, even if she is a gold-digger.
I remember one of my aunts totally screwed her ex so bad with lawsuits, he was only allowed to see them every second weekend. On top of that, he had to pay her so much he actually stopped working and went on welfare because it allowed him to have more money than having a job and paying her ridiculous amounts of alimony. Then she had the nerve to move across the country with the kids. Most of the family stopped talking to her for years out of disgust.
Anthony 2816
said, over 3 years ago
When reading Scott’s posts, keep in mind his deep-rooted hatred of women, meaning one should take his diatribes against them with a grain of salt.
dtroutma
said, over 3 years ago
Alimony = the screw you get for the one you got? BTW- many “Christian” faiths of he evangelical type DO insist the wife is merely the husband’s possession- have heard it expressed many times- so scooter’s second paragraph is trashed.
"Friendly"Kitty said, over 3 years ago
I’m so glad the fourth estate can handle these issues so well; makes me want to give the government even more power…
Anthony 2816
said, over 3 years ago
Like the power to stop gays from getting married, for instance?
Michael wme said, over 3 years ago
Regular alimony is tax-deductible to the husband, taxable income to the wife. No decent judge awards alimony. Support is tax-free to the wife, non-deductible for the husband. This includes some (but not all) forms of spousal support, and all child support. And the law applies to whatever man the woman names, DNA tests are inadmissible.
In some states, there are limits. In some states, child support ends at 18.
But only primitive, barbaric states award 100% of the man’s take-home pay to the woman. Progressive states award 200% to the woman in perpetuity, no matter how old the children, so, under the Clinton law, the cuckolded husband goes to jail at hard labour for life without parole (all proceeds from the hard labour are split between the ex and the state).
As governor, Clinton saw to it that women were encouraged to divorce, and were awarded 200% of the man’s take-home pay, so divorced men had to leave Arkansas (or go to jail), and Arkansas could collect Federal AFDC (no AFDC payments could be made if there was a man around). And very little of the AFDC money was wasted on the women and children, most went to the Federal and state bureaucracy that administered AFDC. So Clinton was both safe from his cuckolds as governor, and had more money to spend as governor, but this wouldn’t work as President, so he got Congress to pass a law that, if the state awarded more than 100% of the man’s income, the full force of the Federal government would track the divorced man down and see that he went to jail until child support ended in his state (and it never ends in Arkansas). And in a lot of other poor states besides Arkansas, the guidelines (developed for AFDC) are that the court MUST award more than 100% of the man’s take home pay as child support and the kinds of spousal support that are taxable to the man and tax-free to the woman, so the man would leave and the state would collect AFDC. Then, with the Clinton Law, the man must be sentenced to hard labor and all proceeds split between the woman and the state, which is a win-win situation (for the woman and the state).
motivemagus said, over 3 years ago
Lord almighty, what state do you all live in? It doesn’t resemble mine – and I mean “state of marriage” here. As it happens, my father was a deadbeat dad (he didn’t want to pay when it was inconvenient, but he sure got his dozen beers every single night), and the ability to garnishee his wages made a difference as to whether we ate or not. My mother raised their five kids pretty much single-handed.
Contrary to what you loonies seem to think, women typically have to take care of the children regardless of what the man chooses to do – more often than not the man divorces the wife and dumps the kids, and gets child support dictated by a MALE judge, who may well have his own axe to grind against an ex-wife. (And yes, I’ve seen it happen.) Indeed, the evidence shows quite clearly that even in a marriage where both spouses work, women still do the majority of the housework and child care. So get over yourselves. There are exceptions the other way, but they are exceptions. Mostly women are still in charge of the kids.
Ken Warren said, over 3 years ago
Maybe it would be a good idea to make getting married as difficult as getting divorced. At least it would give the people who want to get married time to think about what that means.
Of course it would probably mean people would have sex outside of marriage – but we can trust people not to do that, I mean no one does that now do they?
Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago
Marriage is the most expensive long term contract anyone will ever enter into. I pays to know the person before you “take a vow” before God and Man. Marriage shouldn’t be rushed, just to be able to sleep togeather.
I have no respect for any man that would father children and then b.tch about taking care of them. That includes changing diapers and two AM feedings.
Ken’s right, it should be hard to get married.
d_legendary1 said, over 3 years ago
Yeah nobody watches the super bowl for the game. Just the ads that are gonna air there.
Hence the tiny T.V. next to the CBS sign.
d_legendary1 said, over 3 years ago
<=====We gotta declare war on these homos! They hate us for our freedom!