Police: Man faked death to avoid child support

"Chris" wrote in message
news:AmyDf.16294$sA3.14575@fed1read02...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

* US * wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:36:20 -0800, "garbageteachr"

wrote:

TM said: ...Are healthy adult women responsible to earn money to
support the children that they bring into the world?


US replied: Why do you believe that rearing the children isn't support?


TM said: Do you believe that you can rear children without any money?
Do
you believe that financial responsibilty isn't a part of child rearing?

US replied: ....believe that you can rear children without any money ...

You must be really stupid to believe that, too.

Once again, US seems incapable of answering a question, but cuts words
out
of context and sneers at them.

Either the poster is just having fun or they're mentally retarded. I
haven't
figured it out yet.

Totally unbalanced but it's fun screwing with her. She does not have a
clue how good she makes men look with her vile hatred for men. She's the
posterchild for feminism. We should thank her. Maybe I will if I'm ever in
the gutter.
Phil #3

* US * wrote in message ...
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 22:00:43 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

...There are thousands of men paying child support for
children they neither adopted nor fathered.

Name one. Then explain what measures that individual
took to avoid being held responsible for a child.

I actually know one. He married a woman in a whirlwind romance, and "they"
had a beautiful baby girl. When the child was 4, she kicked him out of the
house. He ended up paying child support and spousal support. Another guy
moved in. The ex-wife told her foprmer hubby that he was not the bio dad,
and could no longer have visitation. The judge agreed, and let the woman
move out of the county--some 300 miles away. He tried to get child support
ended, but the judge refused--the same judge who said that, since he was not
the bio dad, he did not need visitation! Even DNA proof and the mom's
statement that he was not the dad didn't matter. Turns out the guy she
moved away with was the bio dad, and this poor sucker ended up paying the
bio mom and dad to raise their own child!

* US * wrote in message ...
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:24:54 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... Any other
reasons ...

Full quote: "Any other
readons her mother shouldn't earn money to provide for the children she
produced?"

When US doesn't have an answer (which is most of the time) he/she simply
responds to random words. snicker

* US * wrote in message ...
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:30:37 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... incapable of answering a question ...

I'll ask again: why should a man who ****s an unemployed
alcoholic woman without any birth control complain when
he's required to support the resulting child?

I wouldn't know. I don't know anyone who has done it. That particularly
distasteful scenario seems to have emerged from your tortured and twisted
fantasy life. You should get some help for that.

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

* US * wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:30:37 -0800, "garbageteachr"

wrote:

... incapable of answering a question ...

I'll ask again: why should a man who ****s an unemployed
alcoholic woman without any birth control complain when
he's required to support the resulting child?

I wouldn't know. I don't know anyone who has done it. That
particularly
distasteful scenario seems to have emerged from your tortured and
twisted
fantasy life. You should get some help for that.



Why should a women who ****s an umemployed alhoholic not using birth
control expect support for raising the resulting child? Especially when
she has alternate post conception choices.
Only feminitwits like 'US' don't what women to be responsible for their
sole and unilateral choices.

On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:05:13 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

...doesn't have an answer ...

The answer is that those who don't want to have
children should use birth control if they decide to
have intercourse.

If you weren't really stupid, you'd know that by now.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:24:54 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

... Any other
readons ...

Hopefully your temporary lay will get a vasectomy
before the next time he ****s an unemployed and
alcoholic woman.

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.

On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 06:50:43 -0500, "Pathetic Fritz"
wrote:

... ****s an umemployed alhoholic ...

Nobody else would have your type.

Use birth control or don't complain
when you have to support your kid.

On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:08:55 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

I wouldn't know. I don't know ...

So quit whining and do some learning.

tortured and twisted ...

That's no excuse for your ignorance.

Those who can't be bothered to use
birth control have no reason to gripe
when they have to support children.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:30:37 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

... incapable of answering a question ...

I'll ask again: why should a man who ****s an unemployed
alcoholic woman without any birth control complain when
he's required to support the resulting child?

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:36:20 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

... believe that you can rear children without any money ...

You must be really stupid to believe that, too.

It also can't be done without someone willing
to spend the time and effort on the child.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:42:37 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

...Are healthy adult women responsible to earn money to
support the children that they bring into the world?

Why do you believe that rearing the children isn't support?

Is it because you're stupid?

It must have been stupid for your temporary lay to go out
and **** an unhealthy woman without birth control.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:19:30 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

Are healthy adult women responsible for their own decisions to have or not
have children?

Why wouldn't they be so, just as men?

Are you as stupid as you seem here?

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:58:22 -0500, "P. Fritz" paulfritz ATvoyager DOTnet wrote:

... another clueless supporter ...

Actually, one doubts that you even support yourself.

Healthy adult men are responsible for their own decisions
to have or not have children.

You should learn what that's like if you possibly can.

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.

On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:08:55 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

I wouldn't know. I don't know ...

So quit whining and do some learning.

tortured and twisted ...

That's no excuse for your ignorance.

Those who can't be bothered to use
birth control have no reason to gripe
when they have to support children.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:30:37 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

... incapable of answering a question ...

I'll ask again: why should a man who ****s an unemployed
alcoholic woman without any birth control complain when
he's required to support the resulting child?

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 10:36:20 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

... believe that you can rear children without any money ...

You must be really stupid to believe that, too.

It also can't be done without someone willing
to spend the time and effort on the child.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:42:37 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

...Are healthy adult women responsible to earn money to
support the children that they bring into the world?

Why do you believe that rearing the children isn't support?

Is it because you're stupid?

It must have been stupid for your temporary lay to go out
and **** an unhealthy woman without birth control.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:19:30 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

Are healthy adult women responsible for their own decisions to have or not
have children?

Why wouldn't they be so, just as men?

Are you as stupid as you seem here?

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:58:22 -0500, "P. Fritz" paulfritz ATvoyager DOTnet wrote:

... another clueless supporter ...

Actually, one doubts that you even support yourself.

Healthy adult men are responsible for their own decisions
to have or not have children.

You should learn what that's like if you possibly can.

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.

On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:40:46 -0800, "garbageteachr" wrote:

I actually know one...

Well, you claim you do, but you have no credibility.

That couldn't happen to anyone who is responsible
and careful, anyway.

You need to learn about that responsibility issue.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 22:00:43 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

...There are thousands of men paying child support for
children they neither adopted nor fathered.

Name one. Then explain what measures that individual
took to avoid being held responsible for a child.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 08:15:22 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... you are ...

I'm smart enough to know what contraception is
and how it's used to avoid unwanted parenthood.

What a shame for you that you're too stupid to
figure even that much out.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:34:53 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

...I clearly
was NOT making reference to contraception.

That must be because you're too stupid to know
how it works.

Hint: it prevents unwanted child-support payments.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:18:43 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Uhuh, which is just what Scott Peterson did...

You really are an idiot if you believe that contraception
must be done by murdering a mate.

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.

"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

* US * wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:30:37 -0800, "garbageteachr"

wrote:

... incapable of answering a question ...

I'll ask again: why should a man who ****s an unemployed
alcoholic woman without any birth control complain when
he's required to support the resulting child?

I wouldn't know. I don't know anyone who has done it. That
particularly
distasteful scenario seems to have emerged from your tortured and
twisted
fantasy life. You should get some help for that.



Why should a women who ****s an umemployed alhoholic not using birth
control expect support for raising the resulting child? Especially when
she has alternate post conception choices.
Only feminitwits like 'US' don't what women to be responsible for their
sole and unilateral choices.


People like US don't want women responsbile for *anything*.
Phil #3