* US * wrote in message ...
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:18:19 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

Good--now let's go one step further. Do you believe that both men and
women
are responsible to provide for their children FINANCIALLY?

There's a concept

Something you know NOTHING about.

called opportunity cost.
Of course you're too stupid to know what
it means, but it entails the fact that the
person providing caregiving is providing
for the child financially.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:27:36 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

* US * wrote in message
...
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:34:40 GMT, "Gini" wrote:
... issues, TM, not the least of which is comprehension...

Yes, obviously you don't comprehend that those who don't
want to take care of or pay for children should make use of
proper birth control methods.

Including women?

Why would anyone be so stupid as to imagine otherwise?

That woudn't, of course, relieve any man of his responsibility
to use birth control when he does not prefer to parent.

Obviously you're too stupid to avoid a false dichotomy. You
shouldn't be permitted to impose your stupidity on children.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 19:26:59 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

... all they need do is pop a pill.

Or roll on a rubber.

Don't you believe men would be sufficiently
capable to use birth control?

Why do you hate men?

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:34:40 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

... issues, TM, not the least of which is comprehension...

Yes, obviously you don't comprehend that those who don't
want to take care of or pay for children should make use of
proper birth control methods.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 05:35:49 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

... we live in a culture of victimhood where
everyone competes to be the most 'abused'.

Yes, we have men who can't learn how to use
basic contraception whining that they're being
abused for being expected to support their own
young - they're pathetic.

I'm not dismissing anyone's responsibility for raising
their young.

I'm pointing out that anyone who ****s an alcoholic
without using contraception is an idiot who has no
business expecting anyone else to take care of his
self-inflicted problems.

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:50:00 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

...Are you saying that a health problem can excuse a person from being
responsible for their own children?

If they die of cancer?

You are an idiot and shouldn't be polluting the gene pool.

...this woman
has never earned a dime

You hate motherhood so much you feel it should be done
gratis. Try telling a daycare center they shouldn't charge
for their services.

They, too, will inform you that you are an idiot.

... she has chosen ...

He chose, too. You flunked sex-ed, didn't you.

Ummm--are you saying that expecting a woman to shoulder the
responsibilities
for the children she brings into the world is *punishment*?

No. I wrote nothing of the sort. If you weren't too
stupid to read for comprehension the punishment is
forced labor without pay.

You're into the idea of slavery, aren't you.

If you were an American you'd be into the idea
of freedom, instead.

...my
comment was that she has *never* undertaken the responsibility of
providing
for her own children

If you hadn't been stupidly lying, the children would
have died of starvation or neglect within days.

Your temporary **** should have had the wits about
him not to lay an alchoholic without contraception.

He's making a lot of really stupid choices in his 'life'.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:55:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Yet they deem EVERY child to be irrelevant.

Well, those who have unprotected sex without the
specific consensual desire to procreate do, anyway.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:03:27 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... it might be nice if the mother took a stab at it...

Are you claiming that she has abandoned the child?

... our children are irrelevant...

To the matter of precedent responsibilities, they are.

It's your own problem if you didn't determine that
your temporary sexual liaison had a history of
careless profligacy.

Silly child--I

You seem prone to abuse of those you believe
to be children. I hope you are supervised with
all due diligence in any interactions with them.

that mean old alcohol

Apparently you aren't well-enough educated to
realize that alcoholism, as a drug addiction, is
a health problem.

It's quite inhumane, hate-filled, and spiteful of
you to want to punish sick people.

...grumpy mood...

I'm sorry you suffer such so severely that you
project it where it is inapplicable.

I pity you.

I pity your poor children even more.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:16:58 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

I bet

You shouldn't gamble.

You can't calculate the odds well enough.

You don't even dimly sense that when you attempt
to insist that someone else should shoulder the sole
responsibility for the actions of two people you
should at least first do so yourself.

overinflated ego ...

So that's why you believe others would owe you
compensation for your failures.

Thanks for the confirmation.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:00:33 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... gone haywire ...

All the more reason for you to avoid procreation.

Here's the info you can't seem to process, so that
you can have another try if you work up the guts:

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:41:05 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Doubtful. ...

You sure are, if you can't even learn how and when
to use birth control.

Perhaps you can't even learn how to read this:

"Before copping an attitude about child support, consider the situation.
In this modern world, you can have sex without reproducing. So, whether
your children were intentional, or accidental, your actions caused them to
be here. It isn't their fault they were born. And, the fact that your life
situation
has changed should have as little impact as possible on their quality of
life. Both
of you made a financial, as well as an emotional decision when you decided
to
have kids. Now that they are here, it is too late for either of you to
back out
of your commitment to them."

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/indiana/in_art04

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:48:07 -0800, "teachrmama"
wrote:

You would haveto explain your reasoning here, US.

I've stated the facts plainly enough. If you're just not the
sharpest tool in the shed you sure shouldn't procreate.

It's rather unsettling to imagine that you'd be a 'teacher'.

I'm not certain what it
is that you think I am not controlling.

Yourself.

No one forced you to have kids at all, much less to do so
with a man already proven unwilling to support them.

I certainly had no control over ...

You can't control yourself. You got pregnant carelessly, by
a 'father' who isn't suitable.

Now you want to gripe about nothing more than your own
sequence of errors in having done that.

... her mother decided ...

You don't speak for her. It's disingenuous for you to try to
pretend otherwise.

How could you teach a child to be honest when you're not?

Since he has been found to be this young ladies father

You thus disprove your false claims about the mother.

... mother who has never worked a day in her life
to support any of her children.

You don't believe that raising children is work per se?

What do you do, lie on the couch eating bonbons as your
own neglected spawn rot in their own urine and feces?

We had two children--the number we knew we could afford.

You didn't know that. He didn't know that. You lie.

You're now complaining that you can't afford it.

You made the mistake. Don't beg for sympathy.

decisions were made by others that deprived her of a father.

Obviously the father cut out. He'll do it to you, too.

Uh--I don't think you really understand the accounting practices that
create
a monthly late payment

Actually, I'm well qualified in accounting.

You beat that system (intentionality notwithstanding)
with one well-timed advance payment.

If you're too arithmetically impaired to figure that out,
I hope your kids can find someone else from whom to
learn well enough to become numerate.

...Any payment made outside
the wage garnishment would not be counted as current CS

Try learning about the contractual nature of check memos.

He could be better off settling the arrearage via financing,
but considering that your temporary spouse hasn't the mental
tackle to manage basic birth control, that may be beyond him.

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:14:35 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:
...
does not give a rat's tookus if other children are forced into poverty by
their methods ...

Yes, you don't care that your 'methods' cause your own
children to suffer. You can't control yourself.

... the payments garnished from my husband's wages are NOT COUNTED
as paid on time ...

If you weren't really stupid, you could've solved that 'problem'
a long time ago, with but one extra properly-timed payment.

Those as unintelligent as you and your temporary 'partner'
shouldn't be permitted to procreate, actually.