If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#601
|
|||
|
|||
deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)
Chris wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message t... Chris wrote: If he was willing to live in the same city as her, he would have her half of the time. It is very simple Chris. Indeed it is. Apparently, he IS willing to live in the same city as her; you just don't approve of the city. He violated a court order by moving. Irrelevant. It is *not* irrelevant. Look, we obviously aren't going to agree on anything, so continued debate is kind of pointless. Sarah Gray |
#602
|
|||
|
|||
deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message ... | Chris wrote: | "Sarah Gray" wrote in message | t... | Chris wrote: | If he was willing to live in the | same city as her, he would have her half of the time. It is very | simple | Chris. | | Indeed it is. Apparently, he IS willing to live in the same city as | her; you | just don't approve of the city. | | | He violated a court order by moving. | | Irrelevant. | | It is *not* irrelevant. Look, we obviously aren't going to agree on | anything, so continued debate is kind of pointless. | | You are just figuring that out? :-) | Sarah Gray |
#603
|
|||
|
|||
deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)
"Chris" wrote in message ... -- [Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have custody of such child] "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] "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 . net... Chris wrote: "Sarah Gray" wrote in message ... Chris wrote: The thing is, it's for *his daughter*, not for me. Uhuh. *I* don't need anyone supporting me, Umm, it's more like greed, not need. It is not greed to insist her father provide for her. Nice twist. It is GREED to insist that he give you FREE MONEY. He has no way of providing for her commensurate to how I do without either sending money, or paying in full for certain expenses on his own. His obligation to you and your daughter is exactly SQUAT! How about his obligation to HIS daughter? What part of SQUAT did you not understand; the "SQ" or the "UAT"? So men have no obligations to their children? According to the"child support" people, by THEIR reasoning............... NO! Uh....that's not exactly what they say, Chris. |
#604
|
|||
|
|||
deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)
-- [Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have custody of such child] "Sarah Gray" wrote in message t... Chris wrote: 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 never said he wasn't good enough. He has no transportation or housing of his own, and he claims he cannot afford to cover half of her basic needs. LOVE the contradiction. -- Sarah Gray |
#605
|
|||
|
|||
deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)
animal02 wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message ... | Chris wrote: | "Sarah Gray" wrote in message | t... | Chris wrote: | If he was willing to live in the | same city as her, he would have her half of the time. It is very | simple | Chris. | | Indeed it is. Apparently, he IS willing to live in the same city as | her; you | just don't approve of the city. | | | He violated a court order by moving. | | Irrelevant. | | It is *not* irrelevant. Look, we obviously aren't going to agree on | anything, so continued debate is kind of pointless. | | You are just figuring that out? :-) no, but I do so enjoy a good argument -- Sarah Gray |
#606
|
|||
|
|||
deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)
Chris wrote:
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 never said he wasn't good enough. He has no transportation or housing of his own, and he claims he cannot afford to cover half of her basic needs. LOVE the contradiction. What contradiction? He is not capable of supporting her on his own. That is not the same as "not good enough" -- Sarah Gray |
#607
|
|||
|
|||
deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)
-- [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 t... Chris wrote: If he was willing to live in the same city as her, he would have her half of the time. It is very simple Chris. Indeed it is. Apparently, he IS willing to live in the same city as her; you just don't approve of the city. He violated a court order by moving. Irrelevant. It is *not* irrelevant. Whether or not he violated ANY order makes NO difference to the fact that he is willing to live in the same city as her, thus it is irrelevant. Look, we obviously aren't going to agree on anything, so continued debate is kind of pointless. Sarah Gray |
#608
|
|||
|
|||
deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)
-- [Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have custody of such child] "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] "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] "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 . net... Chris wrote: "Sarah Gray" wrote in message ... Chris wrote: The thing is, it's for *his daughter*, not for me. Uhuh. *I* don't need anyone supporting me, Umm, it's more like greed, not need. It is not greed to insist her father provide for her. Nice twist. It is GREED to insist that he give you FREE MONEY. He has no way of providing for her commensurate to how I do without either sending money, or paying in full for certain expenses on his own. His obligation to you and your daughter is exactly SQUAT! How about his obligation to HIS daughter? What part of SQUAT did you not understand; the "SQ" or the "UAT"? So men have no obligations to their children? According to the"child support" people, by THEIR reasoning............... NO! Uh....that's not exactly what they say, Chris. They reason that men have no rights regarding children, thus it follows that they have no responsibilities. Something most second graders understand. |
#609
|
|||
|
|||
deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)
Chris wrote:
They reason that men have no rights regarding children, thus it follows that they have no responsibilities. Something most second graders understand. I thought that the reason you think men have no responsibilities towards their children was that they don't "create" them.... -- Sarah Gray |
#610
|
|||
|
|||
deadbeat and enabler list (another thread that went off topic)
"Chris" wrote in message ... -- [Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have custody of such child] "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] "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] "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 . net... Chris wrote: "Sarah Gray" wrote in message ... Chris wrote: The thing is, it's for *his daughter*, not for me. Uhuh. *I* don't need anyone supporting me, Umm, it's more like greed, not need. It is not greed to insist her father provide for her. Nice twist. It is GREED to insist that he give you FREE MONEY. He has no way of providing for her commensurate to how I do without either sending money, or paying in full for certain expenses on his own. His obligation to you and your daughter is exactly SQUAT! How about his obligation to HIS daughter? What part of SQUAT did you not understand; the "SQ" or the "UAT"? So men have no obligations to their children? According to the"child support" people, by THEIR reasoning............... NO! Uh....that's not exactly what they say, Chris. They reason that men have no rights regarding children, thus it follows that they have no responsibilities. Something most second graders understand. Unfortunately, the CS system is not run by second graders. chuckle |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
CT: New Haven witch hunt for deadbeat fathers - notice that NO mothers were on their list... | Dusty | Child Support | 1 | April 5th 05 06:37 AM |
Guest Speaker: Dr. Rita Laws Topic: Topic: Why Kids Lie and What We Can Do About It | wexwimpy | Foster Parents | 0 | March 2nd 04 05:42 PM |
Waiting list for POFAK mailing list | Herself | General | 3 | October 15th 03 06:26 PM |
Waiting list for POFAK mailing list | Herself | Breastfeeding | 3 | October 15th 03 06:26 PM |