"teachrmama" wrote in message ...

"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.

Ok - so you can only accept it as a disease once they have gotten it into remission/under control? Do you hold the same
attitude towards people with cancer, heart disease or diabetes? If they don't have it under strict control, they earn
your scorn?


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?

I'm pretty sure I never said any such thing.