|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My appoligies to those on this board who suffer from insanity.
With that out of the way. WTF. That has got to be the most rediculous arguement I have ever heard. A novice should be able to beat this arguement, but like you said they are one powerful group, and as the courts keep proving time and time again 'might equals right', or 'rights' in this case.
Personally, I think they should consentrate on the 'Criminal aspect of it' if this legislation goes through, DNA evidence could be affected in many other areas . If not, than this will be the start of a war and the start of true oppression. Men can not use DNA to find out about their children, but DNA can be used to prosecute them in criminal court.
.
Dan Lynch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday July 06, @05:20PM EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah right. I bet these same women would testify that DNA evidence in rape cases is not to be trusted too, right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah right. I bet these same women would testify that DNA evidence in rape cases is not to be trusted too, right?
Which is why some men are not release from jail after being proven innocent by DNA testing. In fact we saw a feminist governer refuse to release a man that was proven innocent. Anybody remember the details on that one?
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In fact we saw a feminist governer refuse to release a man that was proven innocent. Anybody remember the details on that one?
I'm thinking maybe Jane Swift, in Massachusetts? I think I can remember a Paul Craig Roberts article about it as well.
Try massnews.com if need be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeez, I wish these people would read more Stephen Jay Gould and less Carol Gilligan. If someone were to have a kidney transplant, his DNA would not change from the sample sources (blood, hair, semen). Same goes for any internal organ, and I have never heard of a man who would have a testicle transplant. Hair grafts and blood transfusions may be iffy, but the guy should tell the testers if any of these procedures have been performed on him in the last year. But I'd play it safe and go with the semen. (OK, if your'e a "womynist", that Male-Stuff-That-Shall-Not-Be Named would be more corrosive than hydrochloric acid and have a Level 4 biohazard attached to it...but yet it is used safely and effectively to produce children. Go figure. ^^ But I can't hear those "womyn", they talk with their heads up their vaginas.)
I doubt there is any scinetific link between organ donation and false results on a paternity test. End of story.
-Rivka
Learning to Adjust.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I doubt there is any scientific link between organ donation and false results on a paternity test. End of story.
You are absolutely correct. And it is idiocy to suggest that genetic testing cannot be reliably used to determine the father of a child. Yet these arguments are being presented and they are being taken seriously. I've already seen these radical feminist professors presenting these absurd arguments that are beyond stupid against paternity testing, and other feminist are buying the load of crap. Their brains are mush!
We must acknowledge that these radical feminists have the skill, influence, power, and credentials to make these arguments and make them sound quite credible. They have already demonstrated their power in trying to sabotage AB2240.
I’ve even listened to a prof ask the question, “do we really know that a clone must grow up from a fetus?” And the entire class was ignorant enough to answer no! Then they sat there and claimed that it might be possible to have a full grown male clone. After that they sat there and concluded that genetic testing isn’t reliable in determining the paternity of a child’s father! Only a geneticist can explain why the clone must grow from a fetus. We must have that expert testimony if at all possible.
It is the dumbest thing that I’ve ever seen! Yet, we cannot discount this fact and just pretend that the Senate will be intelligent enough to know why the radical feminist arguments are bogus. Radical feminist are highly skilled at dressing up their arguments to sound legitimate. Only an expert in genetics will be able to help us in this area. We need that testimony.
Also, we must take the organ transplant argument seriously, and we cannot just dismiss the idea that a person will not in the future have a transplanted organ that impacts the saliva, hair sample, or whatever. I agree that this is unlikely in the near future, however our medical professionals are rapidly going down that road. So, we need to be sufficiently prepared to counter these arguments if they should be brought up before the Senate.
Finally, we cannot discount the possibility of a human clone. Just because the U.S. has banned human cloning doesn't mean other countries will follow suit. We already have groups that are moving forward in secret locations on human cloning. This effort is under way right now and this cannot be stopped. Radical feminist are already asking the question, "well how will we know if somebody has been secretly cloned against their will or otherwise?" Then they argue, "if somebody is secretly cloned without their knowledge then we cannot rely on genetics for paternity testing." We must be prepared to counter this argument and suggest solutions. For example, what if a woman has been cloned and there is a paternity dispute? How will we determine the actual mother?
Remember, the objective of the radical feminist will be to cloud the issue. They want men to be 100% reliant on the word of a woman in paternity matters. They view this as a means of transferring power to woman. They don't care if their arguments are little more than bogus lies. They only want to make them sound nice. They only care about the rhetoric. From their perspective there is no such thing as the truth. These radicals have a religious theology of relativism. So, we need to be prepared with every possible means of countering surprise arguments.
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OK I am dumbfounded by this whole conversation. As a college student I am quite aware of some of the far fetched converstations that occur in liberal arts classes. (Note: one of my pet peevs is that feminist theory is the only way gender is discussed even when the class is not listed as a "women's studies" class) Following that I need some names and references for these claims that are being made. One of the things I attempt to do is get the story from the "horse's mouth" if you will. I refuse to let feminists get away with making statements without using references and I feel that it is vital that we as people involved in men's issues and rights keep our work firmly planted in the moral and empirical arena.
As a final note, I concur with Dan. ANYONE with basic biology can argue the strength of genetic testing. While one can argue the theoretical aspect of the existance of a "clone" the real world facts are that human clones as functioning adults, children or infants do not exist. (note: human cloning is NOT outlawed. The lawmakers basically refused to allow any government funds to be used for research involving human cloning. Which for all intensive purposes is the samething due to the enourmous cost of such research and that the institutions that can do such research are usually government insitutions ie. colleges.
Please email me the people that are making these claims about genetic testing and made these statements. (menrights@aol.com)
Tony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tony is right! Even if no one shows up, such as a scientist on this, make a big stink and challenge the issue. As far as I know anyone can challenge it and present a 'dissenting case' before the 'hearing body'. At the very least you will piss a few of them off, and give the 'body' something to think about. And from what I can tell, thats half the problem , no one is showing up to stand up to this crap as in the past.
Tony I have done some research regarding DNA in the past, and have a decent grasp of law, if you want to confer with me on some arguements I would be more than willing to offer my services. I think this is something all of us should look into, to see how the gears work and how to present dissenting arguements to committees and such. That will be a huge step in the men's movement. But no matter what your talent is try to utilize it to its fullest because it DOES make a difference. I swear on my heart.
.
Dan Lynch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tony. This is a debate taking place in So. CA on the collage campuses. I cannot name my sources that are putting up these absurd arguments at this time. Doing so has the potential for causing me personal harm. I am simply an observer reporting on the arguments that I am finding are being put forth by these crackpot radical feminist professors.
The purpose in the post is to simply solicit the help of genetic experts to short-circuit such arguments. It is not sufficient to go before the CA Senate Committee of Judiciary and state, "I took a couple of biology courses" and then claim to have expertise. Such individuals will be laughed out of the room and dismissed. We need medical doctors and geneticist to appear on 8/6/2002.
If you have any question as to whether these radical feminists can influence the legislation and the amendments then I suggest that you research the history of AB2240. There are repeated quotes from the radical feminist that are used to justify amendments. The arguments include outright bigoted statements directed against men. And the CA Assembly Committee of Judiciary bought into those arguments. So, I am repeating my request of helping to find these experts in (preferably) CA on genetics. This isn’t about how a high school biology student can argue that genetic testing is reliable. This is about politics and the opposition using every form of trickery possible to defeat AB2240.
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As far as I know anyone can challenge it and present a 'dissenting case' before the 'hearing body'.
That is correct. We have attorneys at NCFM, LA that can take your testimony by email. We already have one and we are looking at a second person to testify by email. This is working! Yea! I'll keep everybody posted on the results of the contacts. Cool! I luv this site. It really works!
Warble
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
" We have attorneys at NCFM, LA that can take your testimony by email"
I'd be careful about that e-mail , if I were you I would try and get a hard and signed copy of the testimony. And if at all possible, have it done under oath.
Emails are still on thin ice as far as I know. The email will obviously be helpful in getting the lawyers prepared, but.... something under oath might be recomended. And there are various fractions that can provide that service, if the 'specialist' will take an hour of his/her day to do so.
I think Sacks should jump on this and write a bit about (actually its probably been done) the cross over of 'why dna is good for criminal but not good for family'.
On that note, I also want to remind this group about the home testing kits that are being surpressed from the market.
Personally I think, its just government red tape to hold up process so they can keep dna knowledge in their power. But Im anti-government so my opinion is completely biased, but I think its all related to that socialist agenda. I think I will put a link to an article I saw today as well for anyone interested in the "men as slave class" arguements.
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/stories/reader070702. htm "Socialism and Divorce".
.
Dan Lynch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No testing is 100% accurate. Given correct procedures current DNA testing can rule out with very high certainty any putative father who isn't either the real father or his identical twin brother. IIRC about 1 man in 200 has an identical twin, so for this category the alternative of paternity by the twin brother must be excluded by other evidence.
Incompetence or malice on the part of the testers can make it as inaccurate as you like.
The only other possibly difficult case I can think of is where the putative father has no legally collectable DNA (eg brain / whole body transplant cases). Such cases are unlikely to arise for decades.
Organ transplants per se are irrelevant. They don't take samples for paternity tests from your internal organs. Hair and skin transplants could be confounding, but they are generally grafted from elsewhere on the patient's own body.
The whole question of forcibly removing parts of accused fathers bodies for paternity testing bothers me somewhat, particularly as the "alternative uses" of DNA samples are going to expand greatly over the next few years.
cheers,
sd
Those who like this sort of thing
will find this the sort of thing they like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Organ transplants per se are irrelevant. They don't take samples for paternity tests from your internal organs. Hair and skin transplants could be confounding, but they are generally grafted from elsewhere on the patient's own body.
Nobody on this forum is disputing the facts presented. However, we are dealing with a legal process. That process requires expert testimony so the opposition cannot get away with their trickery. All that is required is for an expert to make a signed declaration of these facts. We have two expert witnesses in the works. Hopefully, they will both sign on. But we need more volunteers. They can be from anywhere in the U.S. It looks like we may have two expert witnesses. We want at least two more. About a dozen expert witnesses on genetics, pathology, and medical doctors would be ideal. Such testimony would be overwhelming and help to support our position.
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
