A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.support » Child Support
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Update on Mother with 14 children



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old February 3rd 06, 12:49 AM posted to alt.child-support
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Update on Mother with 14 children


"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message nk.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message

ink.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nati...en-Beaten.html

''We looked at all the facts, and the facts at this point do not
point
to what was first being alleged,'' prosecutor
Bob Donohoo said."


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp

"A mother arrested last week on allegations that she beat three

of
her
children so brutally that they sought refuge
in an abandoned home was released from jail Tuesday without

being
charged.

Milwaukee police accounts of the situation were grossly

inaccurate,
Nina Parker said in an interview Tuesday
evening, hours after her release."



Still no word about the father as in how many, who or where they

(he)
might be, how much support they (he) are or are
not paying?

Why does that matter? This is a woman who worked double shifts on
occasion, to support her family. Bob Whiteside, and
others, tried to slam this woman as some sort of abusive welfare

queen.
I've tried to show that their unfounded
accusations are precisely that - unfounded.

Perhaps the father simply abandoned, who knows?

Unfortunately, the facts are being ignored that the six oldest

children
had
already been removed from the mother's home and placed in the Child
WELFARE
System because of previous charges of abuse and neglect.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp
"Parker said she was told by county prosecutors that all of her

children
were to be returned to her as soon as
possible."


As the result of the most recent events the other 8 children were

also
removed from her care and placed in the Child WELFARE System.

Try reading the article, she doesn't have 14 children.

I'd read the article if it didn't require me to give your source my

email
address, my home address, and other personal information just to read

it.
Surely you know you posted a source most people would ignore for privacy
reasons.


Um, actually I posted a source because it was a source. If you didn't

read it, where did you get the fodder for your
accusations?


Google news search using mother of 14. Got lots of free articles and much
more detailed info than your source.


Ok - may as well get the most recent ones.

http://news.lp.findlaw.com/ap/o/632/...875426a11.html
Tuesday, Jan. 31, 2006
(AP) - MILWAUKEE-A woman who was arrested after police found three of her 14 children hiding in an abandoned house,
claiming that she beat them, was released from jail Tuesday after prosecutors decided not to file charges against her.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...n/3627062.html
Jan. 31, 2006, 10:28PM
MILWAUKEE - A woman who was arrested after police found three of her 14 children hiding in an abandoned house, claiming
that she beat them, was released from jail Tuesday after prosecutors decided not to file charges against her.

http://www.sacbee.com/24hour/nation/...11829575c.html
The Associated Press
Last Updated 10:25 pm PST Tuesday, January 31, 2006
MILWAUKEE (AP) - A woman who was arrested after police found three of her 14 children hiding in an abandoned house,
claiming that she beat them, was released from jail Tuesday after prosecutors decided not to file charges against her.






  #22  
Old February 3rd 06, 01:23 AM posted to alt.child-support
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Update on Mother with 14 children


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nati...en-Beaten.html

''We looked at all the facts, and the facts at this point do not
point to what was first being alleged,'' prosecutor Bob Donohoo
said."


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp

"A mother arrested last week on allegations that she beat three
of her children so brutally that they sought refuge in an
abandoned home was released from jail Tuesday without being
charged.

Milwaukee police accounts of the situation were grossly
inaccurate, Nina Parker said in an interview Tuesday evening,
hours after her release."



Still no word about the father as in how many, who or where they
(he) might be, how much support they (he) are or are not paying?

Why does that matter? This is a woman who worked double shifts on
occasion, to support her family. Bob Whiteside, and others, tried
to slam this woman as some sort of abusive welfare queen. I've
tried to show that their unfounded accusations are precisely that -
unfounded.

Perhaps the father simply abandoned, who knows?

Phil #3


She's doing somethig better than a father working two jobs to pay
child support... how, exactly?

Who said she did anything better than anyone else? Certainly not me.

If you really think this single mother working two jobs is fully and
solely supporting 14, soon to be 15, children, can I interest you in
some oceanfront property in Nebraska?

Try reading the article. She doesn't have 14 children, and she's not
pregnant.


http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=ht...FXiQ2FJQ25FiAc
"A woman who was arrested after police found three of her 14
children..."
Ok, so she didn't have 14 children, she had 14 children. I got it now.
(Is that some form of feminstimath?)
Phil #3

http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp

Parker said the inaccuracies included the number of children she has
(11, not 14), which of her children were found in the so-called "safe
house" and that she is pregnant, which she denies.



Why are you defending this woman?


I'm not defending the woman, per se - I'm defending people at least
sticking to the truth.

I can tell the difference - can you?

Phil #3


I know your information is to be taken with a grain of salt as you are
extremely biased.
There's more wrong with the situation than is right with it. In this day and
age, having 11 children is a bit extreme and almost a guarantee that the
state is financing her choice to have them.
Phil #3







  #23  
Old February 3rd 06, 10:11 AM posted to alt.child-support
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Update on Mother with 14 children


"Phil #3" wrote in message k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message ink.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message .net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message nk.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nati...en-Beaten.html

''We looked at all the facts, and the facts at this point do not point to what was first being alleged,''
prosecutor Bob Donohoo said."


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp

"A mother arrested last week on allegations that she beat three of her children so brutally that they sought
refuge in an abandoned home was released from jail Tuesday without being charged.

Milwaukee police accounts of the situation were grossly inaccurate, Nina Parker said in an interview Tuesday
evening, hours after her release."



Still no word about the father as in how many, who or where they (he) might be, how much support they (he) are
or are not paying?

Why does that matter? This is a woman who worked double shifts on occasion, to support her family. Bob
Whiteside, and others, tried to slam this woman as some sort of abusive welfare queen. I've tried to show that
their unfounded accusations are precisely that - unfounded.

Perhaps the father simply abandoned, who knows?

Phil #3


She's doing somethig better than a father working two jobs to pay child support... how, exactly?

Who said she did anything better than anyone else? Certainly not me.

If you really think this single mother working two jobs is fully and solely supporting 14, soon to be 15,
children, can I interest you in some oceanfront property in Nebraska?

Try reading the article. She doesn't have 14 children, and she's not pregnant.


http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=ht...FXiQ2FJQ25FiAc
"A woman who was arrested after police found three of her 14 children..."
Ok, so she didn't have 14 children, she had 14 children. I got it now.
(Is that some form of feminstimath?)
Phil #3

http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp

Parker said the inaccuracies included the number of children she has (11, not 14), which of her children were found
in the so-called "safe house" and that she is pregnant, which she denies.



Why are you defending this woman?


I'm not defending the woman, per se - I'm defending people at least sticking to the truth.

I can tell the difference - can you?

Phil #3


I know your information is to be taken with a grain of salt as you are extremely biased.


I quoted from entirely external souces. Haven't posted my opinion at all. That's extremely biased?


There's more wrong with the situation than is right with it. In this day and age, having 11 children is a bit extreme
and almost a guarantee that the state is financing her choice to have them.


Perhaps so - but again, since there are no facts to back up the assertion, it would be disingenuous to be making the
accusation.

Phil #3









  #24  
Old February 3rd 06, 02:23 PM posted to alt.child-support
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Update on Mother with 14 children


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nati...en-Beaten.html

''We looked at all the facts, and the facts at this point do not
point to what was first being alleged,'' prosecutor Bob Donohoo
said."


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp

"A mother arrested last week on allegations that she beat three
of her children so brutally that they sought refuge in an
abandoned home was released from jail Tuesday without being
charged.

Milwaukee police accounts of the situation were grossly
inaccurate, Nina Parker said in an interview Tuesday evening,
hours after her release."



Still no word about the father as in how many, who or where they
(he) might be, how much support they (he) are or are not paying?

Why does that matter? This is a woman who worked double shifts on
occasion, to support her family. Bob Whiteside, and others, tried
to slam this woman as some sort of abusive welfare queen. I've
tried to show that their unfounded accusations are precisely
that - unfounded.

Perhaps the father simply abandoned, who knows?

Phil #3


She's doing somethig better than a father working two jobs to pay
child support... how, exactly?

Who said she did anything better than anyone else? Certainly not
me.

If you really think this single mother working two jobs is fully
and solely supporting 14, soon to be 15, children, can I interest
you in some oceanfront property in Nebraska?

Try reading the article. She doesn't have 14 children, and she's
not pregnant.


http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=ht...FXiQ2FJQ25FiAc
"A woman who was arrested after police found three of her 14
children..."
Ok, so she didn't have 14 children, she had 14 children. I got it
now.
(Is that some form of feminstimath?)
Phil #3

http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp

Parker said the inaccuracies included the number of children she has
(11, not 14), which of her children were found in the so-called "safe
house" and that she is pregnant, which she denies.



Why are you defending this woman?

I'm not defending the woman, per se - I'm defending people at least
sticking to the truth.

I can tell the difference - can you?

Phil #3


I know your information is to be taken with a grain of salt as you are
extremely biased.


I quoted from entirely external souces. Haven't posted my opinion at all.
That's extremely biased?


Stop playing games. I doubt there's anyone who has read over three of your
posts who are unaware of your bias. NOT this one post, all your posts.


There's more wrong with the situation than is right with it. In this day
and age, having 11 children is a bit extreme and almost a guarantee that
the state is financing her choice to have them.


Perhaps so - but again, since there are no facts to back up the assertion,
it would be disingenuous to be making the accusation.


There are none so blind....

Phil #3


  #25  
Old February 3rd 06, 09:32 PM posted to alt.child-support
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Update on Mother with 14 children


"Phil #3" wrote in message k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message ink.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message .net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message nk.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nati...en-Beaten.html

''We looked at all the facts, and the facts at this point do not point to what was first being alleged,''
prosecutor Bob Donohoo said."


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp

"A mother arrested last week on allegations that she beat three of her children so brutally that they
sought refuge in an abandoned home was released from jail Tuesday without being charged.

Milwaukee police accounts of the situation were grossly inaccurate, Nina Parker said in an interview
Tuesday evening, hours after her release."



Still no word about the father as in how many, who or where they (he) might be, how much support they (he)
are or are not paying?

Why does that matter? This is a woman who worked double shifts on occasion, to support her family. Bob
Whiteside, and others, tried to slam this woman as some sort of abusive welfare queen. I've tried to show
that their unfounded accusations are precisely that - unfounded.

Perhaps the father simply abandoned, who knows?

Phil #3


She's doing somethig better than a father working two jobs to pay child support... how, exactly?

Who said she did anything better than anyone else? Certainly not me.

If you really think this single mother working two jobs is fully and solely supporting 14, soon to be 15,
children, can I interest you in some oceanfront property in Nebraska?

Try reading the article. She doesn't have 14 children, and she's not pregnant.


http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=ht...FXiQ2FJQ25FiAc
"A woman who was arrested after police found three of her 14 children..."
Ok, so she didn't have 14 children, she had 14 children. I got it now.
(Is that some form of feminstimath?)
Phil #3

http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp

Parker said the inaccuracies included the number of children she has (11, not 14), which of her children were
found in the so-called "safe house" and that she is pregnant, which she denies.



Why are you defending this woman?

I'm not defending the woman, per se - I'm defending people at least sticking to the truth.

I can tell the difference - can you?

Phil #3

I know your information is to be taken with a grain of salt as you are extremely biased.


I quoted from entirely external souces. Haven't posted my opinion at all. That's extremely biased?


Stop playing games. I doubt there's anyone who has read over three of your posts who are unaware of your bias. NOT
this one post, all your posts.


But we're talking THIS post. So, what issues did you have with the information I provided in THIS post?



There's more wrong with the situation than is right with it. In this day and age, having 11 children is a bit
extreme and almost a guarantee that the state is financing her choice to have them.


Perhaps so - but again, since there are no facts to back up the assertion, it would be disingenuous to be making the
accusation.


There are none so blind....


As those who love to make accusations and allegations without the data to back them up?


Phil #3




  #26  
Old February 7th 06, 01:18 AM posted to alt.child-support
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Update on Mother with 14 children


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nati...en-Beaten.html

''We looked at all the facts, and the facts at this point do
not point to what was first being alleged,'' prosecutor Bob
Donohoo said."


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp

"A mother arrested last week on allegations that she beat
three of her children so brutally that they sought refuge in
an abandoned home was released from jail Tuesday without
being charged.

Milwaukee police accounts of the situation were grossly
inaccurate, Nina Parker said in an interview Tuesday evening,
hours after her release."



Still no word about the father as in how many, who or where
they (he) might be, how much support they (he) are or are not
paying?

Why does that matter? This is a woman who worked double shifts
on occasion, to support her family. Bob Whiteside, and others,
tried to slam this woman as some sort of abusive welfare queen.
I've tried to show that their unfounded accusations are
precisely that - unfounded.

Perhaps the father simply abandoned, who knows?

Phil #3


She's doing somethig better than a father working two jobs to pay
child support... how, exactly?

Who said she did anything better than anyone else? Certainly not
me.

If you really think this single mother working two jobs is fully
and solely supporting 14, soon to be 15, children, can I interest
you in some oceanfront property in Nebraska?

Try reading the article. She doesn't have 14 children, and she's
not pregnant.


http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=ht...FXiQ2FJQ25FiAc
"A woman who was arrested after police found three of her 14
children..."
Ok, so she didn't have 14 children, she had 14 children. I got it
now.
(Is that some form of feminstimath?)
Phil #3

http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp

Parker said the inaccuracies included the number of children she has
(11, not 14), which of her children were found in the so-called
"safe house" and that she is pregnant, which she denies.



Why are you defending this woman?

I'm not defending the woman, per se - I'm defending people at least
sticking to the truth.

I can tell the difference - can you?

Phil #3

I know your information is to be taken with a grain of salt as you are
extremely biased.

I quoted from entirely external souces. Haven't posted my opinion at
all. That's extremely biased?


Stop playing games. I doubt there's anyone who has read over three of
your posts who are unaware of your bias. NOT this one post, all your
posts.


But we're talking THIS post. So, what issues did you have with the
information I provided in THIS post?


The information was that she had 14 children and was pregnant, now she's
'only' got 11 and isn't pregnant. What difference does it make if it's 11 or
111, the state is paying for her choices and you seem to want to defend her,
as you do all CPs, that's all.



There's more wrong with the situation than is right with it. In this
day and age, having 11 children is a bit extreme and almost a guarantee
that the state is financing her choice to have them.

Perhaps so - but again, since there are no facts to back up the
assertion, it would be disingenuous to be making the accusation.


There are none so blind....


As those who love to make accusations and allegations without the data to
back them up?


It was YOUR information, duh.


Phil #3






  #27  
Old February 7th 06, 03:02 AM posted to alt.child-support
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Update on Mother with 14 children


"Phil #3" wrote in message link.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message ink.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message .net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nati...en-Beaten.html

''We looked at all the facts, and the facts at this point do not point to what was first being alleged,''
prosecutor Bob Donohoo said."


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp


snip


But we're talking THIS post. So, what issues did you have with the information I provided in THIS post?


The information was that she had 14 children and was pregnant, now she's 'only' got 11 and isn't pregnant. What
difference does it make if it's 11 or 111, the state is paying for her choices and you seem to want to defend her, as
you do all CPs, that's all.


The information is that she worked full time, and at times worked double shifts to support her family.

What's your problem with large families, anyway? Staunch Catholics do it all the time.




There's more wrong with the situation than is right with it. In this day and age, having 11 children is a bit
extreme and almost a guarantee that the state is financing her choice to have them.

Perhaps so - but again, since there are no facts to back up the assertion, it would be disingenuous to be making
the accusation.

There are none so blind....


As those who love to make accusations and allegations without the data to back them up?


It was YOUR information, duh.


My accusations? Not likely.



Phil #3








  #28  
Old February 8th 06, 02:29 AM posted to alt.child-support
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Update on Mother with 14 children


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
link.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nati...en-Beaten.html

''We looked at all the facts, and the facts at this point do
not point to what was first being alleged,'' prosecutor Bob
Donohoo said."


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp


snip


But we're talking THIS post. So, what issues did you have with the
information I provided in THIS post?


The information was that she had 14 children and was pregnant, now she's
'only' got 11 and isn't pregnant. What difference does it make if it's 11
or 111, the state is paying for her choices and you seem to want to
defend her, as you do all CPs, that's all.


The information is that she worked full time, and at times worked double
shifts to support her family.

What's your problem with large families, anyway? Staunch Catholics do it
all the time.




There's more wrong with the situation than is right with it. In this
day and age, having 11 children is a bit extreme and almost a
guarantee that the state is financing her choice to have them.

Perhaps so - but again, since there are no facts to back up the
assertion, it would be disingenuous to be making the accusation.

There are none so blind....

As those who love to make accusations and allegations without the data
to back them up?


It was YOUR information, duh.


My accusations? Not likely.



If what you posted was an accusation, there it be.
Phil #3










  #29  
Old February 8th 06, 10:28 AM posted to alt.child-support
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Update on Mother with 14 children


"Phil #3" wrote in message ink.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message link.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message ink.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message .net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nati...en-Beaten.html

''We looked at all the facts, and the facts at this point do not point to what was first being
alleged,'' prosecutor Bob Donohoo said."


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp


snip


But we're talking THIS post. So, what issues did you have with the information I provided in THIS post?


The information was that she had 14 children and was pregnant, now she's 'only' got 11 and isn't pregnant. What
difference does it make if it's 11 or 111, the state is paying for her choices and you seem to want to defend her,
as you do all CPs, that's all.


The information is that she worked full time, and at times worked double shifts to support her family.

What's your problem with large families, anyway? Staunch Catholics do it all the time.




There's more wrong with the situation than is right with it. In this day and age, having 11 children is a bit
extreme and almost a guarantee that the state is financing her choice to have them.

Perhaps so - but again, since there are no facts to back up the assertion, it would be disingenuous to be making
the accusation.

There are none so blind....

As those who love to make accusations and allegations without the data to back them up?

It was YOUR information, duh.


My accusations? Not likely.



If what you posted was an accusation, there it be.


So let me get this straight - you'd like to say it's an accusation, but you're just not sure that it is?

That about the size of it?

Phil #3












  #30  
Old February 8th 06, 01:27 PM posted to alt.child-support
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Update on Mother with 14 children


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
link.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
k.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Phil #3" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nati...en-Beaten.html

''We looked at all the facts, and the facts at this point
do not point to what was first being alleged,'' prosecutor
Bob Donohoo said."


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jan06/389054.asp

snip


But we're talking THIS post. So, what issues did you have with the
information I provided in THIS post?


The information was that she had 14 children and was pregnant, now
she's 'only' got 11 and isn't pregnant. What difference does it make if
it's 11 or 111, the state is paying for her choices and you seem to
want to defend her, as you do all CPs, that's all.

The information is that she worked full time, and at times worked double
shifts to support her family.

What's your problem with large families, anyway? Staunch Catholics do
it all the time.




There's more wrong with the situation than is right with it. In
this day and age, having 11 children is a bit extreme and almost a
guarantee that the state is financing her choice to have them.

Perhaps so - but again, since there are no facts to back up the
assertion, it would be disingenuous to be making the accusation.

There are none so blind....

As those who love to make accusations and allegations without the data
to back them up?

It was YOUR information, duh.

My accusations? Not likely.



If what you posted was an accusation, there it be.


So let me get this straight - you'd like to say it's an accusation, but
you're just not sure that it is?

That about the size of it?



Ya idjit, you posted it then protested your own post.
I've really tried to see things from your perspective but my head won't fit
up my ass.
Phil #3


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
misc.kids FAQ on Firearms Safety & Children [email protected] Info and FAQ's 0 January 18th 06 05:48 AM
A School Paddling Correlation Study [email protected] Spanking 5 November 9th 05 01:51 PM
A School Paddling Correlation Study [email protected] General 2 November 9th 05 01:48 PM
Child Support Guidelines are UNFAIR! Lets join together to fight them! S Myers Child Support 115 September 12th 05 12:37 AM
Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care Releases Sweeping Recommendations to Overhaul Nation's Foster Care System wexwimpy Foster Parents 0 May 19th 04 05:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.