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 |
#441
|
|||
|
|||
Don't Spawn 'Em If You're Gonna Pawn 'Em
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:24:16 -0800, "Chris" wrote:
I see ... Not where you store your head, you don't. Otherwise you'd understand that any man who doesn't want to support children must use birth control if he has sex. On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 19:31:02 GMT, "Gini" wrote: ... no man would want to breed ... I'm sorry you're in such a state of being unwanted, but it's obvious that your hatefulness is the cause. I certainly would never want to sire a child with a woman who hates herself so much as to advertise her hostility in a public forum. You're also showing that you can't think logically enough to avoid ad hominem fallacies. On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 10:44:54 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: ... the context ... It's that you resent your temporary lay's being held responsible for his own actions. 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. |
#442
|
|||
|
|||
Don't Spawn 'Em If You're Gonna Pawn 'Em
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 22:18:16 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:
Yes, very sad. Your irresponsible temporary lay doesn't really want your kids, either. You'll find out. Get yourself fixed now, before you make even more mistakes and contribute to overpopulation of unwanted, irresponsible people. On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:24:16 -0800, "Chris" wrote: I see ... Not where you store your head, you don't. Otherwise you'd understand that any man who doesn't want to support children must use birth control if he has sex. On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 19:31:02 GMT, "Gini" wrote: ... no man would want to breed ... I'm sorry you're in such a state of being unwanted, but it's obvious that your hatefulness is the cause. I certainly would never want to sire a child with a woman who hates herself so much as to advertise her hostility in a public forum. You're also showing that you can't think logically enough to avoid ad hominem fallacies. On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 10:44:54 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: ... the context ... It's that you resent your temporary lay's being held responsible for his own actions. 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. |
#443
|
|||
|
|||
Don't Spawn 'Em If You're Gonna Pawn 'Em
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:20:53 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:
Where does the mother who is doing the caretaking get the money to provide financially? A man who ****s a woman who doesn't have a good job, without using any contraception, is choosing to support the kid with financial contributions according to the requirements in existence at the time he does the deed. 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. |
#444
|
|||
|
|||
Don't Spawn 'Em If You're Gonna Pawn 'Em
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:52:38 -0800, "Chris" wrote:
... bizarre ... The world of reality seems so strange to the incognizant. Any man who doesn't want to pay to support a child can use contraception when he has sex. On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:20:53 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: Where does the mother who is doing the caretaking get the money to provide financially? A man who ****s a woman who doesn't have a good job, without using any contraception, is choosing to support the kid with financial contributions according to the requirements in existence at the time he does the deed. 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. |
#445
|
|||
|
|||
Don't Spawn 'Em If You're Gonna Pawn 'Em
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:05:01 -0800, "Chris" wrote:
Opinion noted. It's not an 'opinion' that a man who doesn't want to support a kid can avoid paternity by using birth control. It's a fact. 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 wouldn'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. |
#446
|
|||
|
|||
Don't Spawn 'Em If You're Gonna Pawn 'Em
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:39:05 -0500, "P. Fritz" wrote:
...concepts ... They frighten you so much you avoid them, don't they. Why do you hate women so much? Can't you just date men and be happy? On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:28:44 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: So you are saying that alcoholic women do not need to be held responsible for their choices If your temporary lay ****ed a drunk woman who was passed out, what choice did she make? On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:40:33 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: ...Should a woman provide financially for children she brings into the world. [sic] Should she get a job and earn money to accomplish this goal? If she's an alcoholic your temporary lay knocked up because he was too stupid to use contraception? If going out to work would mean abandoning the baby alone? Why do you consider childrearing to not be work? Do you believe the child doesn't need someone to perform that work? On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:15:26 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: Oh, so you DO believe that a woman should be able to take responsibility for a child before she brings one into the world! No less than the man. Why did you find it so very difficult to get this? I made it quite plain. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:17:02 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: ...are you saying that if a man is involved, the woman doesn't have to be responsible ... No. Learn how to read. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:41:28 GMT, "Gini" wrote: ... less capable than most women ... You sure are. Don't reproduce: the gene pool doesn't need the pollution. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 16:23:34 GMT, "Gini" wrote: ... women are doing it by the thousands ... Without any men? You reckon those'd be immaculate conceptions? On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 04:03:39 -0800, "Chris" wrote: One must first conquer the challenge of clear thinking before they [sic] can ever have ANY chance of understanding the concept of responsibility. Those who are responsible don't have kids they don't want to parent. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 05:37:41 GMT, "DB" wrote: Responsibility? If you learn what it is, you will discern that avoiding unwanted paternities is definitely in that category. Your American Government wants to talk about Responsibility? LOLOLOLOL The Bush regime is merely the criminal usurpation of the American government. 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. |
#447
|
|||
|
|||
Don't Spawn 'Em If You're Gonna Pawn 'Em
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:06:10 -0800, "Chris" wrote:
How does a man choose to give birth? You flunked remedial sex ed, didn't you. Men don't give birth. They fertilize eggs. They use contraception if they don't want to support kids. On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:36:38 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: ...Motherhood is *chosen,* ... So is fatherhood. You must be really stupid not to realize that. Then again, if your temporary lay goes out and ****s a woman who's in a drunken stupor, and he doesn't use contraception, it's more his doing than hers. On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:04:58 -0800, "Chris" wrote: This isn't "alt.ad-hom". So you have no excuse for not doing better. A man who ****s an alcoholic woman has all-the-more reason to make sure he uses birth control. 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. |
#448
|
|||
|
|||
Don't Spawn 'Em If You're Gonna Pawn 'Em
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:38:10 -0800, "teachrmama" wrote:
Since that is not what happened You were there, too? Why didn't you tell him to use a rubber when he decided to **** a woman who's an alcoholic? On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:28:44 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: So you are saying that alcoholic women do not need to be held responsible for their choices If your temporary lay ****ed a drunk woman who was passed out, what choice did she make? On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:40:33 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: ...Should a woman provide financially for children she brings into the world. [sic] Should she get a job and earn money to accomplish this goal? If she's an alcoholic your temporary lay knocked up because he was too stupid to use contraception? If going out to work would mean abandoning the baby alone? Why do you consider childrearing to not be work? Do you believe the child doesn't need someone to perform that work? On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:15:26 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: Oh, so you DO believe that a woman should be able to take responsibility for a child before she brings one into the world! No less than the man. Why did you find it so very difficult to get this? I made it quite plain. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:17:02 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: ...are you saying that if a man is involved, the woman doesn't have to be responsible ... No. Learn how to read. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:41:28 GMT, "Gini" wrote: ... less capable than most women ... You sure are. Don't reproduce: the gene pool doesn't need the pollution. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 16:23:34 GMT, "Gini" wrote: ... women are doing it by the thousands ... Without any men? You reckon those'd be immaculate conceptions? On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 04:03:39 -0800, "Chris" wrote: One must first conquer the challenge of clear thinking before they [sic] can ever have ANY chance of understanding the concept of responsibility. Those who are responsible don't have kids they don't want to parent. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 05:37:41 GMT, "DB" wrote: Responsibility? If you learn what it is, you will discern that avoiding unwanted paternities is definitely in that category. Your American Government wants to talk about Responsibility? LOLOLOLOL The Bush regime is merely the criminal usurpation of the American government. 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. |
#449
|
|||
|
|||
Don't Spawn 'Em If You're Gonna Pawn 'Em
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:56:30 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:
... have lost ... Phil #3 Indeed you have. Your hatred for women is your hatred for your own mother, too. On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:33:34 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: ... a part of child rearing ... Somebody has to take care of the kid. Your temporary lay doesn't want to do it. He doesn't want to pay enough for daycare, either. He's too busy looking for the next passed-out-drunk woman to **** without contraception, no doubt. On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:40:33 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: ...Should a woman provide financially for children she brings into the world. [sic] Should she get a job and earn money to accomplish this goal? If she's an alcoholic your temporary lay knocked up because he was too stupid to use contraception? If going out to work would mean abandoning the baby alone? Why do you consider childrearing to not be work? Do you believe the child doesn't need someone to perform that work? On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:15:26 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: Oh, so you DO believe that a woman should be able to take responsibility for a child before she brings one into the world! No less than the man. Why did you find it so very difficult to get this? I made it quite plain. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:17:02 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: ...are you saying that if a man is involved, the woman doesn't have to be responsible ... No. Learn how to read. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:41:28 GMT, "Gini" wrote: ... less capable than most women ... You sure are. Don't reproduce: the gene pool doesn't need the pollution. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 16:23:34 GMT, "Gini" wrote: ... women are doing it by the thousands ... Without any men? You reckon those'd be immaculate conceptions? On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 04:03:39 -0800, "Chris" wrote: One must first conquer the challenge of clear thinking before they [sic] can ever have ANY chance of understanding the concept of responsibility. Those who are responsible don't have kids they don't want to parent. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 05:37:41 GMT, "DB" wrote: Responsibility? If you learn what it is, you will discern that avoiding unwanted paternities is definitely in that category. Your American Government wants to talk about Responsibility? LOLOLOLOL The Bush regime is merely the criminal usurpation of the American government. 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. |
#450
|
|||
|
|||
Don't Spawn 'Em If You're Gonna Pawn 'Em
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:22:38 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:
... a mother going out to work was abandoning her baby alone. That's unless she and dad can afford daycare, and your temporaray lay isn't willing to support the kid at all. He doesn't want to support yours, either. On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:31:42 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: ...believe that all women who go out to work abandon their babies alone ... You must be really stupid to believe that, too. On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:40:33 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: ...Should a woman provide financially for children she brings into the world. [sic] Should she get a job and earn money to accomplish this goal? If she's an alcoholic your temporary lay knocked up because he was too stupid to use contraception? If going out to work would mean abandoning the baby alone? Why do you consider childrearing to not be work? Do you believe the child doesn't need someone to perform that work? On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:15:26 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: Oh, so you DO believe that a woman should be able to take responsibility for a child before she brings one into the world! No less than the man. Why did you find it so very difficult to get this? I made it quite plain. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:17:02 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote: ...are you saying that if a man is involved, the woman doesn't have to be responsible ... No. Learn how to read. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 21:41:28 GMT, "Gini" wrote: ... less capable than most women ... You sure are. Don't reproduce: the gene pool doesn't need the pollution. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 16:23:34 GMT, "Gini" wrote: ... women are doing it by the thousands ... Without any men? You reckon those'd be immaculate conceptions? On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 04:03:39 -0800, "Chris" wrote: One must first conquer the challenge of clear thinking before they [sic] can ever have ANY chance of understanding the concept of responsibility. Those who are responsible don't have kids they don't want to parent. On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 05:37:41 GMT, "DB" wrote: Responsibility? If you learn what it is, you will discern that avoiding unwanted paternities is definitely in that category. Your American Government wants to talk about Responsibility? LOLOLOLOL The Bush regime is merely the criminal usurpation of the American government. 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. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Child Support Policy and the Welfare of Women and Children | Dusty | Child Support | 0 | May 13th 04 12:46 AM |
Sample US Supreme Court Petition | Wizardlaw | Child Support | 28 | January 21st 04 06:23 PM |
So much for the claims about Sweden | Kane | Foster Parents | 10 | November 5th 03 06:31 AM |
| Ex Giants player sentenced-DYFS wrkr no harm noticed | Kane | Spanking | 11 | September 16th 03 11:59 AM |
Helping Your Child Be Healthy and Fit sX3#;WA@'U | John Smith | Kids Health | 0 | July 20th 03 04:50 AM |