deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)
"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
...
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...
"Chris" wrote in message
...
--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
well, please, Chris, enlighten me as to how he can contribute
anm
equal
share towards supporting her without sending me money.
EXACTLY the same way you are doing it.
Well how do you propose he pay for half of her food costs, shelter
costs, and childcare costs without sending me money (or the
equivalent)?
Like I said, EXACTLY the same way you are doing it.
But I *am* spending money on these things. He is unable to care for her
on his own.
NOW I get it....... duh! HE'S not good enough to care for her, but he's
good enough to send you free money. Please forgive me as I am not the
brightest bulb in the chandelier. I keep forgetting that we are talking
about a man and NOT a woman.
I spend the money I earn on those things. Why should he not do so?
Why SHOULD he? The burden of proof rests with you.
Why *should* he? You argue that she ought to live with him,
IF, keword "IF", you want her to be with him. For some reason, you keep
making sure to NOT include that part of my claim.
however,
this is not an option. If he is unwilling to do what he needs to do to
be a real dad, the last he can do is help to support her.
Argumentum ad misericordiam.
Idiotum ad infinitum
Quod erat demonstrandum.
Illegitimi no carborundum
|