"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...
I notice that you did not respond to my answer to your question. I
can only assume that it did not come through to your server, so I am
reposting it for you:

Moon:
Of course, if you REALLY want to get down to picayune semantics,
he shouldn't have been in jail. Therefore, he should have been
continuing to support his children. So, who would you like to
blame for that one?


TM:
I actually, have not been blaming people, Moon. I have been saying
that it is outrageous that he has been hit with such a huge
arrearage. I think everyone involved should show compassion and
remove this debt from him by whatever means available. He has
endured enough. Would you, in a similar circumstance, demand that
money?

Moon:
I don't know. I DO know, however, that you don't show the same
compassion for an alcoholic woman (keeping in mind that alcoholism
is a desease found in the physician's guide) who is unable to
support her family :-)

It cuts both ways, Teach - even though you may not like it.

TM:
Are you saying that choosing to drink even though you know that
taking that
first drink will cause a flare-ip of your disease is the same as
being sent
to prison for a crime you didn't commit? Alcoholism can be
controlled--just don't drink.


It's a disease - a really ****ty one. I didn't say it was the same as
being jailed, except that both can land a person in a position where
they are unable to support their families.

Diabetes is a disease--a really ****ty one. But millions of people
control it by proper diest, exercise, use of insulin, etc. They do not
use it as an excuse to avoid their responsibilities.

High blood pressure is a disease--a really ****ty one. But millions of
people deal with it by diet, exercise, proper diet and medication.
They do not use it as an excuse to avoid their responsibilities.

Perhaps alcoholism, too, is a disease. But millions of people control
it by not drinking (one day at a time). They do not use it as an
excuse to avoid their responsibilities.

Being in jail for a crime you did not commit is not a disease, and
cannot be controlled by the person who experiences it. They are unable
to meet what would be their responsibilities were they not unfairly
incarcerated.


And, Moon, there is a huge difference between being unable to support
your
family (such as being locked up in jail) and being unwilling to do
so,
knowing that if you don't haul your butt out of bed and go to work,
someone
else will step in and provide for both you and the children you bring
into
the world. A huge difference. One is out of your control--and one
is
choice.

I'm not sure I necessarily agree with you on that last one.

What part do you disagree with? The part about a mother who refuses to
haul her butt out of bed because she knows she and her children will be
supported any way?

I disagree that you can claim to know someone else's motivations.

Ah, but I notice you don't disagree with the fact that, if she doesn't
haul her butt out of bed, she and her children will be cared for anyway.

I don't know that for fact - actually, all anyone has is your statement
that this is so.




Or the part about the person locked up in jail being unable to
support his family? Or the part about taking that first drink being a
choice?

Most certainly I disagree with this part.

That first drink can be a trigger to the disease - one that they may
well not have known they were going to suffer from.

Not the first drink they ever took!! The first drink each and every time
they go on a bender! Do you think that once an alcoholic drinks they are
incapable ever after of refraining from drinking? If so, you are very,
very wrong! There are millions of alcoholics who refrain from drinking
one day at a time! Just as other diseases can be kept under control by
following certain regimens, so, also, can alcoholism. There are drinking
alcoholics and alcoholics who have made the choice to stop drinking.
Many, many of them have been sober for years--even decades. The fact
that they have the disease of alcoholism does not stop them from holding
jobs, supporting their families and living life sober. Having the
disease may not be a choice--but drinking *is* a choice.

Well, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

About what? About the fact that there are millions of alcoholics that do
not indulge themselves by taking that first drink and causing a flare-up of
their disease? Because that is fact, Moon, not opinion. Once they accepted
their alcoholism, they stopped drinking, and continue to not drink. Some of
them lost everything they had--jobs, families, homes--before they quit. But
they did quit.

That drinking is a choice? IT IS! Whether you like it or not. Otherwise
these alcoholics who have chosen not to drink would not be able to stop! Or
are you saying that anyone who can choose to stop drinking is really not an
alcoholic?