[Skybird]

One has to accept that such cases cannot be judged by a universal standard blueprint, but need to be decided on a case-to-case basis, carefully inclouding all the many different implications here. Whatever it is, the children usually are the most innocent of all factions in family court battles. I personally would not want to be a judge at a family court.

Law and order itself can become a brutal tyranny if not inspired and ennobled by a strong sense of humane justice and protection of the weakest. we are no band of wandering wolves, and who is unlucky gets left behind - we are humans. Much of our societies nevertheless works by the principle of "the stronger one moves on, the weaker gets eaten" - especially in america. But that is no compliment for an intelligent, self-reflective lifeform claiming to be able to reflect about itself.

Consider this: mother unable for whatever a reason to finance children, her having cheated and left her husband, the man not being the biological father. what to do? The man paying for them you say is not justice. the mother in my example can't. Is it just to expect the taxpayer to finance it? Hardly, it is even less just, imo, than having the husband paying. Society had no deciison to engage with his former wife - but he made such a decision - so he ic closer to the case.

Is there a just solution in this situation? no, none i could imagine. However, the kids need to be taken care of, and their future opportunity is not to be sacrificed on the altar of cold-blooded law and order justice, whatever happened between the adults - it is not the children fault, nor have they been asked wether they want to get born or not. Justice or not - you need to reach a solution to protect the children.

And if you accept society to pay for it all nevertheless, you already have created a dangerous precedent that will be abused massively, and will encourage couples to cheat and separate even more carelessly than many already do. It is the same kind of system abuse then that you guys complain about in social parasites sucking social wellfare while not working. Regarding that, many of you are agreeing that it is not acceptable, and you easily exaggerate the ammount to which this happens. but in the example regarding fathers you want to easily accept the same conditions being created that before you have criticised? Is this what you are arguing for?

In case of doubt, community interests rule higher than individual interests, and the interests of the innocent rule over that of those who can afford not to be too concerned.

But as i said earlier: just that the mother abuses children to rip of the father although she does not need it - this and comparable examples have to be prevented by courts and laws as well. But where there are laws, there are those finding ways to abuse these laws. Question is whether this keeps to be an exception to the rule - or becomes the rule.

"Strong and noble is the one whose eyes can bear everything, but whose heart still feels everything."