Police: Man faked death to avoid child support

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:23:11 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

I mentioned neither respect nor birth control.

So you aren't following the subject.

No man is forced into paternity.

Every man has the ability to avoid it.

prejudice ...

Yours is interfering with your reasoning.

No woman ever forces a man into fatherhood.

The stupidity of a man who has sex without
contraception is not the fault of the woman,
no matter how much you hate women.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 22:51:14 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

... a rabid man-hating ...

If you respected men you'd know that there's no
reason for them not to use birth control.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:16:01 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

...mistaken ..

Of course you a you are unaware of how
intelligent people manage parenthood.

Impossible for a man to predict what a woman will
be willing to do...

Nonsense: intelligent people discuss such things,
and don't have sex without doing so.

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:18:48 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

When a woman separates a father from his child, there exists no paternity to
manage...

You are mistaken: the man who manages paternity
only has children with a woman he knows will be
willing to promote the child's relationship with
the father.

You may believe that men are just helpless irresponsible
dupes, but you're not real cognizant of reality.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:06:19 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... I believe he was referring
to NOT interfering with paternity management as opposed to providing such
management.

No woman can interfere with any man's management
of his paternity: it's his responsibility, not hers. Hers
is maternity.

The specific role in human reproduction of a woman, according to your
government, is making the SOLE decision whether or not to create a child.

That's untrue. No woman can force any man to father
a child if he truly doesn't want to do so.


On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:40:03 GMT, "Bob Whiteside" wrote:

Mothers owe their children the right to paternity management.

No, mothers owe their children the right to maternity management.

Fathers owe their children the right to paternity management.

Do your very best to learn the difference between men and women,
and their specific roles in human reproduction, if you possibly can.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 14:15:17 -0500, "Pathetic Fritz" paulfritz ATvoyager DOTnet wrote:

... a brainn damaged troller ...

That explains your abject failure to address the aspect
of reality in which no man is ever forced into fatherhood.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 17:08:26 GMT, "Gini Dimwit" wrote:

... the best you could do ...

I'm not the one having kids I can't afford to raise.

...She has a
choice.
He does not...

You are clueless. Any man who doesn't want to deal
with paternity can get fixed, use contraception, or
keep it in his pants.

Nobody else owes any man management of paternity.

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:42:51 GMT, "Gini Dimwit" wrote:

...I assumed ...

You thus make an ass of yourself.

No one forces a man to undertake fatherhood.

When he does so, he becomes responsible for it.

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:27:56 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Umm...It was the mother (with assistance of the state) whose methods caused

She raped a man and forbade his use of birth control?

Oh, do tell.

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 10:40:44 -0500, "P. Fritz" paulfritz ATvoyager DOTnet wrote:

Yawn

So you're an idiot due to oxygen deprivation.

Thanks for the confirmation.

If only women were held to that standard.

So you hate women and want to try to blame
them for not managing _paternities_.

You're not merely misogynist, but stupid.

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 09:49:20 -0500, "P. Fritz" paulfritz ATvoyager DOTnet wrote:

Yet another clueless boob.

You must be, if you can't even understand that
responsible adults don't have kids they can't
afford to raise.

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:14:35 -0800, "teachrmama" 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.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:27:47 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

... one of those who lack the intelligence to shut their mouth
when a bird ****s in their face.
Phil #3

Of course you a one can only hope that you muster
the smarts, somehow, to use contraception, and thus
avoid polluting the gene pool with more idiots such
as yourself.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:55:28 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

...what I actually
said.

You blather a lot of bull**** about how men
would somehow be unable to determine
whether or not they have kids.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:12:41 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

...It does not seem as if ...

The response to the ignorant misperception that men
would somehow not be able to manage paternities with
personal responsibility is to point out that it's erroneous.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:08:10 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

...a fictitious
discussion.

No one else is forcing you to lie.

Take responsibility for yourself.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:37:28 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Believe it ...

Mere 'belief' is not a fitting substitute for reasoning.

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, "teachrmama" 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.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:26:29 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

My guess is ...

Your guesses aren't very intelligent.

Don't guess about parenthood: avoid it.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:27:47 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

... one of those who lack the intelligence to shut their mouth
when a bird ****s in their face.
Phil #3

Of course you a one can only hope that you muster
the smarts, somehow, to use contraception, and thus
avoid polluting the gene pool with more idiots such
as yourself.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:55:28 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

...what I actually
said.

You blather a lot of bull**** about how men
would somehow be unable to determine
whether or not they have kids.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:12:41 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

...It does not seem as if ...

The response to the ignorant misperception that men
would somehow not be able to manage paternities with
personal responsibility is to point out that it's erroneous.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:08:10 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

...a fictitious
discussion.

No one else is forcing you to lie.

Take responsibility for yourself.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:37:28 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Believe it ...

Mere 'belief' is not a fitting substitute for reasoning.

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, "teachrmama" 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.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:36:36 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

...wrong again ... hatred.
Phil #3

Your hatred toward yourself and others is unhealthy for you.

No wonder you're so wrong about basic sexual education.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 07:31:54 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

I know ...

You don't know enough if you don't realize
that men can avoid unwanted fatherhoods
by using contraception.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:31:02 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Let alone raising someone ELSE'S children.

That's what we taxpayers end up doing when those
of you who don't take responsibility for yourselves
fail to use birth control.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:07:49 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

... a hate-filled feminist (I ...

Well something has you convinced that men
are unable to be responsible for their own
sexuality, and while you are hateful due to
a lack of ability to control yourself, the
rest is probably your ignorance.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:12:39 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

...Do you believe ...

I prefer to learn facts, not indulge in belief.

... never work ...

What's changing diapers?

Why do you hate women and wish to devalue
to nothing the genuine effort required to raise
children? They'd get paid for it if they had to
work a daycare center.

Are you mathematically incapable?

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:53:25 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

Perhaps, in thie [sic] case, a proctologist

Why do you prefer to fantasize about that orifice
rather than avoid making yourself look like one in
public on newsgroups?

Getting back to the actual subject:

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.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:38:23 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

...molest ...
Phil #3

Your desire to commit pedophilia isn't an excuse
for you to avoid using birth control, either.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:07:49 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

... a hate-filled feminist (I ...

Well something has you convinced that men
are unable to be responsible for their own
sexuality, and while you are hateful due to
a lack of ability to control yourself, the
rest is probably your ignorance.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:12:39 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

...Do you believe ...

I prefer to learn facts, not indulge in belief.

... never work ...

What's changing diapers?

Why do you hate women and wish to devalue
to nothing the genuine effort required to raise
children? They'd get paid for it if they had to
work a daycare center.

Are you mathematically incapable?

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:53:25 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

Perhaps, in thie [sic] case, a proctologist

Why do you prefer to fantasize about that orifice
rather than avoid making yourself look like one in
public on newsgroups?

Getting back to the actual subject:

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.

On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 03:41:59 GMT, "DB" wrote:

No better than a Bum looking for a handout!

Of course you a no one owes you support for
kids you weren't careful enough to avoid having.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:59:39 -0800, "teachrmama" wrote:

I consider a woman who expects someone else to pay for 100% of not only her
children's food, clothing, and shelter, but also 100% of her own food,
clothing, and shelter to be derelict in her duties as a parent.

You're merely making that up, though.

Your temporary lay shouldn't **** passed-out drunk
women at all, much less without using contraception.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:19:37 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

Parents care for their children.

Yet you consider the woman who feeds, clothes, cleans,
and shelters her children to be doing no work for them.

You are, of course, mistaken.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:07:49 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

... a hate-filled feminist (I ...

Well something has you convinced that men
are unable to be responsible for their own
sexuality, and while you are hateful due to
a lack of ability to control yourself, the
rest is probably your ignorance.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:12:39 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

...Do you believe ...

I prefer to learn facts, not indulge in belief.

... never work ...

What's changing diapers?

Why do you hate women and wish to devalue
to nothing the genuine effort required to raise
children? They'd get paid for it if they had to
work a daycare center.

Are you mathematically incapable?

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:53:25 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

Perhaps, in thie [sic] case, a proctologist

Why do you prefer to fantasize about that orifice
rather than avoid making yourself look like one in
public on newsgroups?

Getting back to the actual subject:

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.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 22:19:45 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

... cannot respond to the point
that was made ...

Of course you can't: the point is that your temporary lay
didn't manage himself responsibly.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:59:39 -0800, "teachrmama" wrote:

I consider a woman who expects someone else to pay for 100% of not only her
children's food, clothing, and shelter, but also 100% of her own food,
clothing, and shelter to be derelict in her duties as a parent.

You're merely making that up, though.

Your temporary lay shouldn't **** passed-out drunk
women at all, much less without using contraception.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:19:37 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

Parents care for their children.

Yet you consider the woman who feeds, clothes, cleans,
and shelters her children to be doing no work for them.

You are, of course, mistaken.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:07:49 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

... a hate-filled feminist (I ...

Well something has you convinced that men
are unable to be responsible for their own
sexuality, and while you are hateful due to
a lack of ability to control yourself, the
rest is probably your ignorance.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:12:39 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

...Do you believe ...

I prefer to learn facts, not indulge in belief.

... never work ...

What's changing diapers?

Why do you hate women and wish to devalue
to nothing the genuine effort required to raise
children? They'd get paid for it if they had to
work a daycare center.

Are you mathematically incapable?

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:53:25 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

Perhaps, in thie [sic] case, a proctologist

Why do you prefer to fantasize about that orifice
rather than avoid making yourself look like one in
public on newsgroups?

Getting back to the actual subject:

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.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:47:32 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

...unintelligent ...

It's why you don't realize that no man is ever
forced into any unwanted paternity.

You hate women, though, so you might as
well stick to homosexual liaisons.

That'll help protect the gene pool.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:26:17 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

So are you saying that the mother is just as responsible for providing for
the children as the father is?

Why would anyone be so stupid as to imagine otherwise?

Do you believe support would be nothing more than money?

...Suzy Spread-em ...

Tell your temporary lay to stay off her unless he wears a rubber.

Your use of such terminology shows that you're filled with hate.

You shouldn't even be allowed near any children in that state.

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.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:17:02 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

She is responsible for being a mother.

He's responsible for being a father.

He shouldn't have neglected contraception
if he was not willing to support a child.

... how that plays out financially ...

Somebody has to take care of the kid.

If he doesn't want to pay for daycare, that
leaves either him or the woman to do that.

He really doesn't want to support your spawn,
either, but you're in denial of that aspect, too.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:12:33 -0800, "garbageteachr" shouted
incoherently due to her frustration from her own stupidity:

IF A WOMAN HAS SEX WITH AN ALCOHOLIC MAN,
DOES SHE HAVE ONLY HERSELF TO BLAME FOR HER SELF-INFLICTED PROBLEMS?

She's responsible for maternity.

He's responsible for paternity.

Still unable to understand basic human reproduction, aren't you.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 19:37:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... should know ...

You should know not to **** an alcoholic woman
without using contraception when you don't want
to father a child with her.

What a shame for you that you don't know.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:26:17 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

So are you saying that the mother is just as responsible for providing for
the children as the father is?

Why would anyone be so stupid as to imagine otherwise?

Do you believe support would be nothing more than money?

...Suzy Spread-em ...

Tell your temporary lay to stay off her unless he wears a rubber.

Your use of such terminology shows that you're filled with hate.

You shouldn't even be allowed near any children in that state.

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.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:03:54 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

...Let's see if you get it ...

We know you won't.

It costs to take care of kids, whether someone
does it 'gratis' or someone gets paid to do it.

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 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.