Police: Man faked death to avoid child support

* US * wrote in message ...
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 07:31:54 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

I know ...

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

Keyword: if


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

Let alone raising someone ELSE'S children.

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

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

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

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

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

...Do you believe ...

I prefer to learn facts, not indulge in belief.

... never work ...

What's changing diapers?

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

Are you mathematically incapable?

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

Perhaps, in thie [sic] case, a proctologist

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

Getting back to the actual subject:

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:55:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Yet they deem EVERY child to be irrelevant.

Well, those who have unprotected sex without the
specific consensual desire to procreate do, anyway.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:03:27 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... it might be nice if the mother took a stab at it...

Are you claiming that she has abandoned the child?

... our children are irrelevant...

To the matter of precedent responsibilities, they are.

It's your own problem if you didn't determine that
your temporary sexual liaison had a history of
careless profligacy.

Silly child--I

You seem prone to abuse of those you believe
to be children. I hope you are supervised with
all due diligence in any interactions with them.

that mean old alcohol

Apparently you aren't well-enough educated to
realize that alcoholism, as a drug addiction, is
a health problem.

It's quite inhumane, hate-filled, and spiteful of
you to want to punish sick people.

...grumpy mood...

I'm sorry you suffer such so severely that you
project it where it is inapplicable.

I pity you.

I pity your poor children even more.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:16:58 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

I bet

You shouldn't gamble.

You can't calculate the odds well enough.

You don't even dimly sense that when you attempt
to insist that someone else should shoulder the sole
responsibility for the actions of two people you
should at least first do so yourself.

overinflated ego ...

So that's why you believe others would owe you
compensation for your failures.

Thanks for the confirmation.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:00:33 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... gone haywire ...

All the more reason for you to avoid procreation.

Here's the info you can't seem to process, so that
you can have another try if you work up the guts:

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:41:05 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Doubtful. ...

You sure are, if you can't even learn how and when
to use birth control.

Perhaps you can't even learn how to read this:

"Before copping an attitude about child support, consider the situation.
In this modern world, you can have sex without reproducing. So, whether
your children were intentional, or accidental, your actions caused them to
be here. It isn't their fault they were born. And, the fact that your life
situation
has changed should have as little impact as possible on their quality of
life. Both
of you made a financial, as well as an emotional decision when you decided
to
have kids. Now that they are here, it is too late for either of you to
back out
of your commitment to them."

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/indiana/in_art04

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:48:07 -0800, "teachrmama"
wrote:

You would haveto explain your reasoning here, US.

I've stated the facts plainly enough. If you're just not the
sharpest tool in the shed you sure shouldn't procreate.

It's rather unsettling to imagine that you'd be a 'teacher'.

I'm not certain what it
is that you think I am not controlling.

Yourself.

No one forced you to have kids at all, much less to do so
with a man already proven unwilling to support them.

I certainly had no control over ...

You can't control yourself. You got pregnant carelessly, by
a 'father' who isn't suitable.

Now you want to gripe about nothing more than your own
sequence of errors in having done that.

... her mother decided ...

You don't speak for her. It's disingenuous for you to try to
pretend otherwise.

How could you teach a child to be honest when you're not?

Since he has been found to be this young ladies father

You thus disprove your false claims about the mother.

... mother who has never worked a day in her life
to support any of her children.

You don't believe that raising children is work per se?

What do you do, lie on the couch eating bonbons as your
own neglected spawn rot in their own urine and feces?

We had two children--the number we knew we could afford.

You didn't know that. He didn't know that. You lie.

You're now complaining that you can't afford it.

You made the mistake. Don't beg for sympathy.

decisions were made by others that deprived her of a father.

Obviously the father cut out. He'll do it to you, too.

Uh--I don't think you really understand the accounting practices that
create
a monthly late payment

Actually, I'm well qualified in accounting.

You beat that system (intentionality notwithstanding)
with one well-timed advance payment.

If you're too arithmetically impaired to figure that out,
I hope your kids can find someone else from whom to
learn well enough to become numerate.

...Any payment made outside
the wage garnishment would not be counted as current CS

Try learning about the contractual nature of check memos.

He could be better off settling the arrearage via financing,
but considering that your temporary spouse hasn't the mental
tackle to manage basic birth control, that may be beyond him.

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:14:35 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:
...
does not give a rat's tookus if other children are forced into poverty by
their methods ...

Yes, you don't care that your 'methods' cause your own
children to suffer. You can't control yourself.

... the payments garnished from my husband's wages are NOT COUNTED
as paid on time ...

If you weren't really stupid, you could've solved that 'problem'
a long time ago, with but one extra properly-timed payment.

Those as unintelligent as you and your temporary 'partner'
shouldn't be permitted to procreate, actually.

* US * wrote in message ...

Mine's valid.

Uhuh.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:23:04 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... you ...

I'm not the subject here. Your obsession to the
contrary is fallacious.

Getting back to the subject: no man is ever forced
to father a child.

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:14:17 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

A woman has unprotected sex ...

Then so does a man.

Perhaps you could find a remedial sex-ed course.

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

...Do you believe ...

I prefer to learn facts, not indulge in belief.

... never work ...

What's changing diapers?

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

Are you mathematically incapable?

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

Perhaps, in thie [sic] case, a proctologist

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

Getting back to the actual subject:

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:55:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Yet they deem EVERY child to be irrelevant.

Well, those who have unprotected sex without the
specific consensual desire to procreate do, anyway.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:03:27 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... it might be nice if the mother took a stab at it...

Are you claiming that she has abandoned the child?

... our children are irrelevant...

To the matter of precedent responsibilities, they are.

It's your own problem if you didn't determine that
your temporary sexual liaison had a history of
careless profligacy.

Silly child--I

You seem prone to abuse of those you believe
to be children. I hope you are supervised with
all due diligence in any interactions with them.

that mean old alcohol

Apparently you aren't well-enough educated to
realize that alcoholism, as a drug addiction, is
a health problem.

It's quite inhumane, hate-filled, and spiteful of
you to want to punish sick people.

...grumpy mood...

I'm sorry you suffer such so severely that you
project it where it is inapplicable.

I pity you.

I pity your poor children even more.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:16:58 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

I bet

You shouldn't gamble.

You can't calculate the odds well enough.

You don't even dimly sense that when you attempt
to insist that someone else should shoulder the sole
responsibility for the actions of two people you
should at least first do so yourself.

overinflated ego ...

So that's why you believe others would owe you
compensation for your failures.

Thanks for the confirmation.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:00:33 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... gone haywire ...

All the more reason for you to avoid procreation.

Here's the info you can't seem to process, so that
you can have another try if you work up the guts:

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:41:05 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Doubtful. ...

You sure are, if you can't even learn how and when
to use birth control.

Perhaps you can't even learn how to read this:

"Before copping an attitude about child support, consider the situation.
In this modern world, you can have sex without reproducing. So, whether
your children were intentional, or accidental, your actions caused them to
be here. It isn't their fault they were born. And, the fact that your life
situation
has changed should have as little impact as possible on their quality of
life. Both
of you made a financial, as well as an emotional decision when you decided
to
have kids. Now that they are here, it is too late for either of you to
back out
of your commitment to them."

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/indiana/in_art04

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:48:07 -0800, "teachrmama"
wrote:

You would haveto explain your reasoning here, US.

I've stated the facts plainly enough. If you're just not the
sharpest tool in the shed you sure shouldn't procreate.

It's rather unsettling to imagine that you'd be a 'teacher'.

I'm not certain what it
is that you think I am not controlling.

Yourself.

No one forced you to have kids at all, much less to do so
with a man already proven unwilling to support them.

I certainly had no control over ...

You can't control yourself. You got pregnant carelessly, by
a 'father' who isn't suitable.

Now you want to gripe about nothing more than your own
sequence of errors in having done that.

... her mother decided ...

You don't speak for her. It's disingenuous for you to try to
pretend otherwise.

How could you teach a child to be honest when you're not?

Since he has been found to be this young ladies father

You thus disprove your false claims about the mother.

... mother who has never worked a day in her life
to support any of her children.

You don't believe that raising children is work per se?

What do you do, lie on the couch eating bonbons as your
own neglected spawn rot in their own urine and feces?

We had two children--the number we knew we could afford.

You didn't know that. He didn't know that. You lie.

You're now complaining that you can't afford it.

You made the mistake. Don't beg for sympathy.

decisions were made by others that deprived her of a father.

Obviously the father cut out. He'll do it to you, too.

Uh--I don't think you really understand the accounting practices that
create
a monthly late payment

Actually, I'm well qualified in accounting.

You beat that system (intentionality notwithstanding)
with one well-timed advance payment.

If you're too arithmetically impaired to figure that out,
I hope your kids can find someone else from whom to
learn well enough to become numerate.

...Any payment made outside
the wage garnishment would not be counted as current CS

Try learning about the contractual nature of check memos.

He could be better off settling the arrearage via financing,
but considering that your temporary spouse hasn't the mental
tackle to manage basic birth control, that may be beyond him.

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:14:35 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:
...
does not give a rat's tookus if other children are forced into poverty by
their methods ...

Yes, you don't care that your 'methods' cause your own
children to suffer. You can't control yourself.

... the payments garnished from my husband's wages are NOT COUNTED
as paid on time ...

If you weren't really stupid, you could've solved that 'problem'
a long time ago, with but one extra properly-timed payment.

Those as unintelligent as you and your temporary 'partner'
shouldn't be permitted to procreate, actually.
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:23:04 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... you ...

I'm not the subject here. Your obsession to the
contrary is fallacious.

Getting back to the subject: no man is ever forced
to father a child.

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:14:17 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

A woman has unprotected sex ...

Then so does a man.

Perhaps you could find a remedial sex-ed course.

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

...Do you believe ...

I prefer to learn facts, not indulge in belief.

... never work ...

What's changing diapers?

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

Are you mathematically incapable?

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

Perhaps, in thie [sic] case, a proctologist

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

Getting back to the actual subject:

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:55:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Yet they deem EVERY child to be irrelevant.

Well, those who have unprotected sex without the
specific consensual desire to procreate do, anyway.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:03:27 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... it might be nice if the mother took a stab at it...

Are you claiming that she has abandoned the child?

... our children are irrelevant...

To the matter of precedent responsibilities, they are.

It's your own problem if you didn't determine that
your temporary sexual liaison had a history of
careless profligacy.

Silly child--I

You seem prone to abuse of those you believe
to be children. I hope you are supervised with
all due diligence in any interactions with them.

that mean old alcohol

Apparently you aren't well-enough educated to
realize that alcoholism, as a drug addiction, is
a health problem.

It's quite inhumane, hate-filled, and spiteful of
you to want to punish sick people.

...grumpy mood...

I'm sorry you suffer such so severely that you
project it where it is inapplicable.

I pity you.

I pity your poor children even more.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:16:58 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

I bet

You shouldn't gamble.

You can't calculate the odds well enough.

You don't even dimly sense that when you attempt
to insist that someone else should shoulder the sole
responsibility for the actions of two people you
should at least first do so yourself.

overinflated ego ...

So that's why you believe others would owe you
compensation for your failures.

Thanks for the confirmation.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:00:33 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... gone haywire ...

All the more reason for you to avoid procreation.

Here's the info you can't seem to process, so that
you can have another try if you work up the guts:

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:41:05 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Doubtful. ...

You sure are, if you can't even learn how and when
to use birth control.

Perhaps you can't even learn how to read this:

"Before copping an attitude about child support, consider the situation.
In this modern world, you can have sex without reproducing. So, whether
your children were intentional, or accidental, your actions caused them to
be here. It isn't their fault they were born. And, the fact that your life
situation
has changed should have as little impact as possible on their quality of
life. Both
of you made a financial, as well as an emotional decision when you decided
to
have kids. Now that they are here, it is too late for either of you to
back out
of your commitment to them."

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/indiana/in_art04

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:48:07 -0800, "teachrmama"
wrote:

You would haveto explain your reasoning here, US.

I've stated the facts plainly enough. If you're just not the
sharpest tool in the shed you sure shouldn't procreate.

It's rather unsettling to imagine that you'd be a 'teacher'.

I'm not certain what it
is that you think I am not controlling.

Yourself.

No one forced you to have kids at all, much less to do so
with a man already proven unwilling to support them.

I certainly had no control over ...

You can't control yourself. You got pregnant carelessly, by
a 'father' who isn't suitable.

Now you want to gripe about nothing more than your own
sequence of errors in having done that.

... her mother decided ...

You don't speak for her. It's disingenuous for you to try to
pretend otherwise.

How could you teach a child to be honest when you're not?

Since he has been found to be this young ladies father

You thus disprove your false claims about the mother.

... mother who has never worked a day in her life
to support any of her children.

You don't believe that raising children is work per se?

What do you do, lie on the couch eating bonbons as your
own neglected spawn rot in their own urine and feces?

We had two children--the number we knew we could afford.

You didn't know that. He didn't know that. You lie.

You're now complaining that you can't afford it.

You made the mistake. Don't beg for sympathy.

decisions were made by others that deprived her of a father.

Obviously the father cut out. He'll do it to you, too.

Uh--I don't think you really understand the accounting practices that
create
a monthly late payment

Actually, I'm well qualified in accounting.

You beat that system (intentionality notwithstanding)
with one well-timed advance payment.

If you're too arithmetically impaired to figure that out,
I hope your kids can find someone else from whom to
learn well enough to become numerate.

...Any payment made outside
the wage garnishment would not be counted as current CS

Try learning about the contractual nature of check memos.

He could be better off settling the arrearage via financing,
but considering that your temporary spouse hasn't the mental
tackle to manage basic birth control, that may be beyond him.

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:14:35 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:
...
does not give a rat's tookus if other children are forced into poverty by
their methods ...

Yes, you don't care that your 'methods' cause your own
children to suffer. You can't control yourself.

... the payments garnished from my husband's wages are NOT COUNTED
as paid on time ...

If you weren't really stupid, you could've solved that 'problem'
a long time ago, with but one extra properly-timed payment.

Those as unintelligent as you and your temporary 'partner'
shouldn't be permitted to procreate, actually.
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:23:04 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... you ...

I'm not the subject here. Your obsession to the
contrary is fallacious.

Getting back to the subject: no man is ever forced
to father a child.

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:14:17 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

A woman has unprotected sex ...

Then so does a man.

Perhaps you could find a remedial sex-ed course.

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

...Do you believe ...

I prefer to learn facts, not indulge in belief.

... never work ...

What's changing diapers?

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

Are you mathematically incapable?

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

Perhaps, in thie [sic] case, a proctologist

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

Getting back to the actual subject:

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:55:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Yet they deem EVERY child to be irrelevant.

Well, those who have unprotected sex without the
specific consensual desire to procreate do, anyway.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:03:27 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... it might be nice if the mother took a stab at it...

Are you claiming that she has abandoned the child?

... our children are irrelevant...

To the matter of precedent responsibilities, they are.

It's your own problem if you didn't determine that
your temporary sexual liaison had a history of
careless profligacy.

Silly child--I

You seem prone to abuse of those you believe
to be children. I hope you are supervised with
all due diligence in any interactions with them.

that mean old alcohol

Apparently you aren't well-enough educated to
realize that alcoholism, as a drug addiction, is
a health problem.

It's quite inhumane, hate-filled, and spiteful of
you to want to punish sick people.

...grumpy mood...

I'm sorry you suffer such so severely that you
project it where it is inapplicable.

I pity you.

I pity your poor children even more.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:16:58 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

I bet

You shouldn't gamble.

You can't calculate the odds well enough.

You don't even dimly sense that when you attempt
to insist that someone else should shoulder the sole
responsibility for the actions of two people you
should at least first do so yourself.

overinflated ego ...

So that's why you believe others would owe you
compensation for your failures.

Thanks for the confirmation.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:00:33 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... gone haywire ...

All the more reason for you to avoid procreation.

Here's the info you can't seem to process, so that
you can have another try if you work up the guts:

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:41:05 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Doubtful. ...

You sure are, if you can't even learn how and when
to use birth control.

Perhaps you can't even learn how to read this:

"Before copping an attitude about child support, consider the situation.
In this modern world, you can have sex without reproducing. So, whether
your children were intentional, or accidental, your actions caused them to
be here. It isn't their fault they were born. And, the fact that your life
situation
has changed should have as little impact as possible on their quality of
life. Both
of you made a financial, as well as an emotional decision when you decided
to
have kids. Now that they are here, it is too late for either of you to
back out
of your commitment to them."

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/indiana/in_art04

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:48:07 -0800, "teachrmama"
wrote:

You would haveto explain your reasoning here, US.

I've stated the facts plainly enough. If you're just not the
sharpest tool in the shed you sure shouldn't procreate.

It's rather unsettling to imagine that you'd be a 'teacher'.

I'm not certain what it
is that you think I am not controlling.

Yourself.

No one forced you to have kids at all, much less to do so
with a man already proven unwilling to support them.

I certainly had no control over ...

You can't control yourself. You got pregnant carelessly, by
a 'father' who isn't suitable.

Now you want to gripe about nothing more than your own
sequence of errors in having done that.

... her mother decided ...

You don't speak for her. It's disingenuous for you to try to
pretend otherwise.

How could you teach a child to be honest when you're not?

Since he has been found to be this young ladies father

You thus disprove your false claims about the mother.

... mother who has never worked a day in her life
to support any of her children.

You don't believe that raising children is work per se?

What do you do, lie on the couch eating bonbons as your
own neglected spawn rot in their own urine and feces?

We had two children--the number we knew we could afford.

You didn't know that. He didn't know that. You lie.

You're now complaining that you can't afford it.

You made the mistake. Don't beg for sympathy.

decisions were made by others that deprived her of a father.

Obviously the father cut out. He'll do it to you, too.

Uh--I don't think you really understand the accounting practices that
create
a monthly late payment

Actually, I'm well qualified in accounting.

You beat that system (intentionality notwithstanding)
with one well-timed advance payment.

If you're too arithmetically impaired to figure that out,
I hope your kids can find someone else from whom to
learn well enough to become numerate.

...Any payment made outside
the wage garnishment would not be counted as current CS

Try learning about the contractual nature of check memos.

He could be better off settling the arrearage via financing,
but considering that your temporary spouse hasn't the mental
tackle to manage basic birth control, that may be beyond him.

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:14:35 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:
...
does not give a rat's tookus if other children are forced into poverty by
their methods ...

Yes, you don't care that your 'methods' cause your own
children to suffer. You can't control yourself.

... the payments garnished from my husband's wages are NOT COUNTED
as paid on time ...

If you weren't really stupid, you could've solved that 'problem'
a long time ago, with but one extra properly-timed payment.

Those as unintelligent as you and your temporary 'partner'
shouldn't be permitted to procreate, actually.
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:23:04 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... you ...

I'm not the subject here. Your obsession to the
contrary is fallacious.

Getting back to the subject: no man is ever forced
to father a child.

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:14:17 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

A woman has unprotected sex ...

Then so does a man.

Perhaps you could find a remedial sex-ed course.

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

...Do you believe ...

I prefer to learn facts, not indulge in belief.

... never work ...

What's changing diapers?

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

Are you mathematically incapable?

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

Perhaps, in thie [sic] case, a proctologist

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

Getting back to the actual subject:

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:55:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Yet they deem EVERY child to be irrelevant.

Well, those who have unprotected sex without the
specific consensual desire to procreate do, anyway.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:03:27 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... it might be nice if the mother took a stab at it...

Are you claiming that she has abandoned the child?

... our children are irrelevant...

To the matter of precedent responsibilities, they are.

It's your own problem if you didn't determine that
your temporary sexual liaison had a history of
careless profligacy.

Silly child--I

You seem prone to abuse of those you believe
to be children. I hope you are supervised with
all due diligence in any interactions with them.

that mean old alcohol

Apparently you aren't well-enough educated to
realize that alcoholism, as a drug addiction, is
a health problem.

It's quite inhumane, hate-filled, and spiteful of
you to want to punish sick people.

...grumpy mood...

I'm sorry you suffer such so severely that you
project it where it is inapplicable.

I pity you.

I pity your poor children even more.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:16:58 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

I bet

You shouldn't gamble.

You can't calculate the odds well enough.

You don't even dimly sense that when you attempt
to insist that someone else should shoulder the sole
responsibility for the actions of two people you
should at least first do so yourself.

overinflated ego ...

So that's why you believe others would owe you
compensation for your failures.

Thanks for the confirmation.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:00:33 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... gone haywire ...

All the more reason for you to avoid procreation.

Here's the info you can't seem to process, so that
you can have another try if you work up the guts:

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:41:05 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Doubtful. ...

You sure are, if you can't even learn how and when
to use birth control.

Perhaps you can't even learn how to read this:

"Before copping an attitude about child support, consider the situation.
In this modern world, you can have sex without reproducing. So, whether
your children were intentional, or accidental, your actions caused them to
be here. It isn't their fault they were born. And, the fact that your life
situation
has changed should have as little impact as possible on their quality of
life. Both
of you made a financial, as well as an emotional decision when you decided
to
have kids. Now that they are here, it is too late for either of you to
back out
of your commitment to them."

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/indiana/in_art04

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:48:07 -0800, "teachrmama"
wrote:

You would haveto explain your reasoning here, US.

I've stated the facts plainly enough. If you're just not the
sharpest tool in the shed you sure shouldn't procreate.

It's rather unsettling to imagine that you'd be a 'teacher'.

I'm not certain what it
is that you think I am not controlling.

Yourself.

No one forced you to have kids at all, much less to do so
with a man already proven unwilling to support them.

I certainly had no control over ...

You can't control yourself. You got pregnant carelessly, by
a 'father' who isn't suitable.

Now you want to gripe about nothing more than your own
sequence of errors in having done that.

... her mother decided ...

You don't speak for her. It's disingenuous for you to try to
pretend otherwise.

How could you teach a child to be honest when you're not?

Since he has been found to be this young ladies father

You thus disprove your false claims about the mother.

... mother who has never worked a day in her life
to support any of her children.

You don't believe that raising children is work per se?

What do you do, lie on the couch eating bonbons as your
own neglected spawn rot in their own urine and feces?

We had two children--the number we knew we could afford.

You didn't know that. He didn't know that. You lie.

You're now complaining that you can't afford it.

You made the mistake. Don't beg for sympathy.

decisions were made by others that deprived her of a father.

Obviously the father cut out. He'll do it to you, too.

Uh--I don't think you really understand the accounting practices that
create
a monthly late payment

Actually, I'm well qualified in accounting.

You beat that system (intentionality notwithstanding)
with one well-timed advance payment.

If you're too arithmetically impaired to figure that out,
I hope your kids can find someone else from whom to
learn well enough to become numerate.

...Any payment made outside
the wage garnishment would not be counted as current CS

Try learning about the contractual nature of check memos.

He could be better off settling the arrearage via financing,
but considering that your temporary spouse hasn't the mental
tackle to manage basic birth control, that may be beyond him.

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:14:35 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:
...
does not give a rat's tookus if other children are forced into poverty by
their methods ...

Yes, you don't care that your 'methods' cause your own
children to suffer. You can't control yourself.

... the payments garnished from my husband's wages are NOT COUNTED
as paid on time ...

If you weren't really stupid, you could've solved that 'problem'
a long time ago, with but one extra properly-timed payment.

Those as unintelligent as you and your temporary 'partner'
shouldn't be permitted to procreate, actually.

* US * wrote in message ...

...have a child ...

Please don't.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:27:21 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

...don't know what that term means.

That's why you can't apply it correctly.

Assumption does not make fact.

So don't assume men can't take personal
responsibility for having only children that
they are prepared to support.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:08:30 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Tu quoque.

Apparently you don't know what that term means.

There was no reference to you, unless you assume so.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:55:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Yet they deem EVERY child to be irrelevant.

Well, those who have unprotected sex without the
specific consensual desire to procreate do, anyway.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:03:27 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... it might be nice if the mother took a stab at it...

Are you claiming that she has abandoned the child?

... our children are irrelevant...

To the matter of precedent responsibilities, they are.

It's your own problem if you didn't determine that
your temporary sexual liaison had a history of
careless profligacy.

Silly child--I

You seem prone to abuse of those you believe
to be children. I hope you are supervised with
all due diligence in any interactions with them.

that mean old alcohol

Apparently you aren't well-enough educated to
realize that alcoholism, as a drug addiction, is
a health problem.

It's quite inhumane, hate-filled, and spiteful of
you to want to punish sick people.

...grumpy mood...

I'm sorry you suffer such so severely that you
project it where it is inapplicable.

I pity you.

I pity your poor children even more.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:16:58 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

I bet

You shouldn't gamble.

You can't calculate the odds well enough.

You don't even dimly sense that when you attempt
to insist that someone else should shoulder the sole
responsibility for the actions of two people you
should at least first do so yourself.

overinflated ego ...

So that's why you believe others would owe you
compensation for your failures.

Thanks for the confirmation.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:00:33 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... gone haywire ...

All the more reason for you to avoid procreation.

Here's the info you can't seem to process, so that
you can have another try if you work up the guts:

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:41:05 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Doubtful. ...

You sure are, if you can't even learn how and when
to use birth control.

Perhaps you can't even learn how to read this:

"Before copping an attitude about child support, consider the situation.
In this modern world, you can have sex without reproducing. So, whether
your children were intentional, or accidental, your actions caused them to
be here. It isn't their fault they were born. And, the fact that your life
situation
has changed should have as little impact as possible on their quality of
life. Both
of you made a financial, as well as an emotional decision when you decided
to
have kids. Now that they are here, it is too late for either of you to
back out
of your commitment to them."

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/indiana/in_art04

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:48:07 -0800, "teachrmama"
wrote:

You would haveto explain your reasoning here, US.

I've stated the facts plainly enough. If you're just not the
sharpest tool in the shed you sure shouldn't procreate.

It's rather unsettling to imagine that you'd be a 'teacher'.

I'm not certain what it
is that you think I am not controlling.

Yourself.

No one forced you to have kids at all, much less to do so
with a man already proven unwilling to support them.

I certainly had no control over ...

You can't control yourself. You got pregnant carelessly, by
a 'father' who isn't suitable.

Now you want to gripe about nothing more than your own
sequence of errors in having done that.

... her mother decided ...

You don't speak for her. It's disingenuous for you to try to
pretend otherwise.

How could you teach a child to be honest when you're not?

Since he has been found to be this young ladies father

You thus disprove your false claims about the mother.

... mother who has never worked a day in her life
to support any of her children.

You don't believe that raising children is work per se?

What do you do, lie on the couch eating bonbons as your
own neglected spawn rot in their own urine and feces?

We had two children--the number we knew we could afford.

You didn't know that. He didn't know that. You lie.

You're now complaining that you can't afford it.

You made the mistake. Don't beg for sympathy.

decisions were made by others that deprived her of a father.

Obviously the father cut out. He'll do it to you, too.

Uh--I don't think you really understand the accounting practices that
create
a monthly late payment

Actually, I'm well qualified in accounting.

You beat that system (intentionality notwithstanding)
with one well-timed advance payment.

If you're too arithmetically impaired to figure that out,
I hope your kids can find someone else from whom to
learn well enough to become numerate.

...Any payment made outside
the wage garnishment would not be counted as current CS

Try learning about the contractual nature of check memos.

He could be better off settling the arrearage via financing,
but considering that your temporary spouse hasn't the mental
tackle to manage basic birth control, that may be beyond him.

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:14:35 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:
...
does not give a rat's tookus if other children are forced into poverty by
their methods ...

Yes, you don't care that your 'methods' cause your own
children to suffer. You can't control yourself.

... the payments garnished from my husband's wages are NOT COUNTED
as paid on time ...

If you weren't really stupid, you could've solved that 'problem'
a long time ago, with but one extra properly-timed payment.

Those as unintelligent as you and your temporary 'partner'
shouldn't be permitted to procreate, actually.
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:27:21 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

...don't know what that term means.

That's why you can't apply it correctly.

Assumption does not make fact.

So don't assume men can't take personal
responsibility for having only children that
they are prepared to support.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:08:30 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Tu quoque.

Apparently you don't know what that term means.

There was no reference to you, unless you assume so.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:55:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Yet they deem EVERY child to be irrelevant.

Well, those who have unprotected sex without the
specific consensual desire to procreate do, anyway.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:03:27 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... it might be nice if the mother took a stab at it...

Are you claiming that she has abandoned the child?

... our children are irrelevant...

To the matter of precedent responsibilities, they are.

It's your own problem if you didn't determine that
your temporary sexual liaison had a history of
careless profligacy.

Silly child--I

You seem prone to abuse of those you believe
to be children. I hope you are supervised with
all due diligence in any interactions with them.

that mean old alcohol

Apparently you aren't well-enough educated to
realize that alcoholism, as a drug addiction, is
a health problem.

It's quite inhumane, hate-filled, and spiteful of
you to want to punish sick people.

...grumpy mood...

I'm sorry you suffer such so severely that you
project it where it is inapplicable.

I pity you.

I pity your poor children even more.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:16:58 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

I bet

You shouldn't gamble.

You can't calculate the odds well enough.

You don't even dimly sense that when you attempt
to insist that someone else should shoulder the sole
responsibility for the actions of two people you
should at least first do so yourself.

overinflated ego ...

So that's why you believe others would owe you
compensation for your failures.

Thanks for the confirmation.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:00:33 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... gone haywire ...

All the more reason for you to avoid procreation.

Here's the info you can't seem to process, so that
you can have another try if you work up the guts:

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:41:05 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Doubtful. ...

You sure are, if you can't even learn how and when
to use birth control.

Perhaps you can't even learn how to read this:

"Before copping an attitude about child support, consider the situation.
In this modern world, you can have sex without reproducing. So, whether
your children were intentional, or accidental, your actions caused them to
be here. It isn't their fault they were born. And, the fact that your life
situation
has changed should have as little impact as possible on their quality of
life. Both
of you made a financial, as well as an emotional decision when you decided
to
have kids. Now that they are here, it is too late for either of you to
back out
of your commitment to them."

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/indiana/in_art04

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:48:07 -0800, "teachrmama"
wrote:

You would haveto explain your reasoning here, US.

I've stated the facts plainly enough. If you're just not the
sharpest tool in the shed you sure shouldn't procreate.

It's rather unsettling to imagine that you'd be a 'teacher'.

I'm not certain what it
is that you think I am not controlling.

Yourself.

No one forced you to have kids at all, much less to do so
with a man already proven unwilling to support them.

I certainly had no control over ...

You can't control yourself. You got pregnant carelessly, by
a 'father' who isn't suitable.

Now you want to gripe about nothing more than your own
sequence of errors in having done that.

... her mother decided ...

You don't speak for her. It's disingenuous for you to try to
pretend otherwise.

How could you teach a child to be honest when you're not?

Since he has been found to be this young ladies father

You thus disprove your false claims about the mother.

... mother who has never worked a day in her life
to support any of her children.

You don't believe that raising children is work per se?

What do you do, lie on the couch eating bonbons as your
own neglected spawn rot in their own urine and feces?

We had two children--the number we knew we could afford.

You didn't know that. He didn't know that. You lie.

You're now complaining that you can't afford it.

You made the mistake. Don't beg for sympathy.

decisions were made by others that deprived her of a father.

Obviously the father cut out. He'll do it to you, too.

Uh--I don't think you really understand the accounting practices that
create
a monthly late payment

Actually, I'm well qualified in accounting.

You beat that system (intentionality notwithstanding)
with one well-timed advance payment.

If you're too arithmetically impaired to figure that out,
I hope your kids can find someone else from whom to
learn well enough to become numerate.

...Any payment made outside
the wage garnishment would not be counted as current CS

Try learning about the contractual nature of check memos.

He could be better off settling the arrearage via financing,
but considering that your temporary spouse hasn't the mental
tackle to manage basic birth control, that may be beyond him.

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:14:35 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:
...
does not give a rat's tookus if other children are forced into poverty by
their methods ...

Yes, you don't care that your 'methods' cause your own
children to suffer. You can't control yourself.

... the payments garnished from my husband's wages are NOT COUNTED
as paid on time ...

If you weren't really stupid, you could've solved that 'problem'
a long time ago, with but one extra properly-timed payment.

Those as unintelligent as you and your temporary 'partner'
shouldn't be permitted to procreate, actually
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:27:21 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

...don't know what that term means.

That's why you can't apply it correctly.

Assumption does not make fact.

So don't assume men can't take personal
responsibility for having only children that
they are prepared to support.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:08:30 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Tu quoque.

Apparently you don't know what that term means.

There was no reference to you, unless you assume so.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:55:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Yet they deem EVERY child to be irrelevant.

Well, those who have unprotected sex without the
specific consensual desire to procreate do, anyway.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:03:27 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... it might be nice if the mother took a stab at it...

Are you claiming that she has abandoned the child?

... our children are irrelevant...

To the matter of precedent responsibilities, they are.

It's your own problem if you didn't determine that
your temporary sexual liaison had a history of
careless profligacy.

Silly child--I

You seem prone to abuse of those you believe
to be children. I hope you are supervised with
all due diligence in any interactions with them.

that mean old alcohol

Apparently you aren't well-enough educated to
realize that alcoholism, as a drug addiction, is
a health problem.

It's quite inhumane, hate-filled, and spiteful of
you to want to punish sick people.

...grumpy mood...

I'm sorry you suffer such so severely that you
project it where it is inapplicable.

I pity you.

I pity your poor children even more.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:16:58 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

I bet

You shouldn't gamble.

You can't calculate the odds well enough.

You don't even dimly sense that when you attempt
to insist that someone else should shoulder the sole
responsibility for the actions of two people you
should at least first do so yourself.

overinflated ego ...

So that's why you believe others would owe you
compensation for your failures.

Thanks for the confirmation.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:00:33 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... gone haywire ...

All the more reason for you to avoid procreation.

Here's the info you can't seem to process, so that
you can have another try if you work up the guts:

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:41:05 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Doubtful. ...

You sure are, if you can't even learn how and when
to use birth control.

Perhaps you can't even learn how to read this:

"Before copping an attitude about child support, consider the situation.
In this modern world, you can have sex without reproducing. So, whether
your children were intentional, or accidental, your actions caused them to
be here. It isn't their fault they were born. And, the fact that your life
situation
has changed should have as little impact as possible on their quality of
life. Both
of you made a financial, as well as an emotional decision when you decided
to
have kids. Now that they are here, it is too late for either of you to
back out
of your commitment to them."

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/indiana/in_art04

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:48:07 -0800, "teachrmama"
wrote:

You would haveto explain your reasoning here, US.

I've stated the facts plainly enough. If you're just not the
sharpest tool in the shed you sure shouldn't procreate.

It's rather unsettling to imagine that you'd be a 'teacher'.

I'm not certain what it
is that you think I am not controlling.

Yourself.

No one forced you to have kids at all, much less to do so
with a man already proven unwilling to support them.

I certainly had no control over ...

You can't control yourself. You got pregnant carelessly, by
a 'father' who isn't suitable.

Now you want to gripe about nothing more than your own
sequence of errors in having done that.

... her mother decided ...

You don't speak for her. It's disingenuous for you to try to
pretend otherwise.

How could you teach a child to be honest when you're not?

Since he has been found to be this young ladies father

You thus disprove your false claims about the mother.

... mother who has never worked a day in her life
to support any of her children.

You don't believe that raising children is work per se?

What do you do, lie on the couch eating bonbons as your
own neglected spawn rot in their own urine and feces?

We had two children--the number we knew we could afford.

You didn't know that. He didn't know that. You lie.

You're now complaining that you can't afford it.

You made the mistake. Don't beg for sympathy.

decisions were made by others that deprived her of a father.

Obviously the father cut out. He'll do it to you, too.

Uh--I don't think you really understand the accounting practices that
create
a monthly late payment

Actually, I'm well qualified in accounting.

You beat that system (intentionality notwithstanding)
with one well-timed advance payment.

If you're too arithmetically impaired to figure that out,
I hope your kids can find someone else from whom to
learn well enough to become numerate.

...Any payment made outside
the wage garnishment would not be counted as current CS

Try learning about the contractual nature of check memos.

He could be better off settling the arrearage via financing,
but considering that your temporary spouse hasn't the mental
tackle to manage basic birth control, that may be beyond him.

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:14:35 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:
...
does not give a rat's tookus if other children are forced into poverty by
their methods ...

Yes, you don't care that your 'methods' cause your own
children to suffer. You can't control yourself.

... the payments garnished from my husband's wages are NOT COUNTED
as paid on time ...

If you weren't really stupid, you could've solved that 'problem'
a long time ago, with but one extra properly-timed payment.

Those as unintelligent as you and your temporary 'partner'
shouldn't be permitted to procreate, actually
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:27:21 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

...don't know what that term means.

That's why you can't apply it correctly.

Assumption does not make fact.

So don't assume men can't take personal
responsibility for having only children that
they are prepared to support.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:08:30 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Tu quoque.

Apparently you don't know what that term means.

There was no reference to you, unless you assume so.

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

* US * wrote in message ...

...make the effort to learn...

Indeed you should.

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

... should know ...

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

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

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

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

Why would anyone be so stupid as to imagine otherwise?

Do you believe support would be nothing more than money?

...Suzy Spread-em ...

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

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

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

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 05:35:49 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

... we live in a culture of victimhood where
everyone competes to be the most 'abused'.

Yes, we have men who can't learn how to use
basic contraception whining that they're being
abused for being expected to support their own
young - they're pathetic.

I'm not dismissing anyone's responsibility for raising
their young.

I'm pointing out that anyone who ****s an alcoholic
without using contraception is an idiot who has no
business expecting anyone else to take care of his
self-inflicted problems.

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:50:00 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

...Are you saying that a health problem can excuse a person from being
responsible for their own children?

If they die of cancer?

You are an idiot and shouldn't be polluting the gene pool.

...this woman
has never earned a dime

You hate motherhood so much you feel it should be done
gratis. Try telling a daycare center they shouldn't charge
for their services.

They, too, will inform you that you are an idiot.

... she has chosen ...

He chose, too. You flunked sex-ed, didn't you.

Ummm--are you saying that expecting a woman to shoulder the
responsibilities
for the children she brings into the world is *punishment*?

No. I wrote nothing of the sort. If you weren't too
stupid to read for comprehension the punishment is
forced labor without pay.

You're into the idea of slavery, aren't you.

If you were an American you'd be into the idea
of freedom, instead.

...my
comment was that she has *never* undertaken the responsibility of
providing
for her own children

If you hadn't been stupidly lying, the children would
have died of starvation or neglect within days.

Your temporary **** should have had the wits about
him not to lay an alchoholic without contraception.

He's making a lot of really stupid choices in his 'life'.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:55:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Yet they deem EVERY child to be irrelevant.

Well, those who have unprotected sex without the
specific consensual desire to procreate do, anyway.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:03:27 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... it might be nice if the mother took a stab at it...

Are you claiming that she has abandoned the child?

... our children are irrelevant...

To the matter of precedent responsibilities, they are.

It's your own problem if you didn't determine that
your temporary sexual liaison had a history of
careless profligacy.

Silly child--I

You seem prone to abuse of those you believe
to be children. I hope you are supervised with
all due diligence in any interactions with them.

that mean old alcohol

Apparently you aren't well-enough educated to
realize that alcoholism, as a drug addiction, is
a health problem.

It's quite inhumane, hate-filled, and spiteful of
you to want to punish sick people.

...grumpy mood...

I'm sorry you suffer such so severely that you
project it where it is inapplicable.

I pity you.

I pity your poor children even more.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:16:58 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

I bet

You shouldn't gamble.

You can't calculate the odds well enough.

You don't even dimly sense that when you attempt
to insist that someone else should shoulder the sole
responsibility for the actions of two people you
should at least first do so yourself.

overinflated ego ...

So that's why you believe others would owe you
compensation for your failures.

Thanks for the confirmation.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:00:33 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... gone haywire ...

All the more reason for you to avoid procreation.

Here's the info you can't seem to process, so that
you can have another try if you work up the guts:

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:41:05 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Doubtful. ...

You sure are, if you can't even learn how and when
to use birth control.

Perhaps you can't even learn how to read this:

"Before copping an attitude about child support, consider the situation.
In this modern world, you can have sex without reproducing. So, whether
your children were intentional, or accidental, your actions caused them to
be here. It isn't their fault they were born. And, the fact that your life
situation
has changed should have as little impact as possible on their quality of
life. Both
of you made a financial, as well as an emotional decision when you decided
to
have kids. Now that they are here, it is too late for either of you to
back out
of your commitment to them."

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/indiana/in_art04

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:48:07 -0800, "teachrmama"
wrote:

You would haveto explain your reasoning here, US.

I've stated the facts plainly enough. If you're just not the
sharpest tool in the shed you sure shouldn't procreate.

It's rather unsettling to imagine that you'd be a 'teacher'.

I'm not certain what it
is that you think I am not controlling.

Yourself.

No one forced you to have kids at all, much less to do so
with a man already proven unwilling to support them.

I certainly had no control over ...

You can't control yourself. You got pregnant carelessly, by
a 'father' who isn't suitable.

Now you want to gripe about nothing more than your own
sequence of errors in having done that.

... her mother decided ...

You don't speak for her. It's disingenuous for you to try to
pretend otherwise.

How could you teach a child to be honest when you're not?

Since he has been found to be this young ladies father

You thus disprove your false claims about the mother.

... mother who has never worked a day in her life
to support any of her children.

You don't believe that raising children is work per se?

What do you do, lie on the couch eating bonbons as your
own neglected spawn rot in their own urine and feces?

We had two children--the number we knew we could afford.

You didn't know that. He didn't know that. You lie.

You're now complaining that you can't afford it.

You made the mistake. Don't beg for sympathy.

decisions were made by others that deprived her of a father.

Obviously the father cut out. He'll do it to you, too.

Uh--I don't think you really understand the accounting practices that
create
a monthly late payment

Actually, I'm well qualified in accounting.

You beat that system (intentionality notwithstanding)
with one well-timed advance payment.

If you're too arithmetically impaired to figure that out,
I hope your kids can find someone else from whom to
learn well enough to become numerate.

...Any payment made outside
the wage garnishment would not be counted as current CS

Try learning about the contractual nature of check memos.

He could be better off settling the arrearage via financing,
but considering that your temporary spouse hasn't the mental
tackle to manage basic birth control, that may be beyond him.

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:14:35 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:
...
does not give a rat's tookus if other children are forced into poverty by
their methods ...

Yes, you don't care that your 'methods' cause your own
children to suffer. You can't control yourself.

... the payments garnished from my husband's wages are NOT COUNTED
as paid on time ...

If you weren't really stupid, you could've solved that 'problem'
a long time ago, with but one extra properly-timed payment.

Those as unintelligent as you and your temporary 'partner'
shouldn't be permitted to procreate, actually.
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 19:37:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... should know ...

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

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

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

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

Why would anyone be so stupid as to imagine otherwise?

Do you believe support would be nothing more than money?

...Suzy Spread-em ...

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

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

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

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 05:35:49 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

... we live in a culture of victimhood where
everyone competes to be the most 'abused'.

Yes, we have men who can't learn how to use
basic contraception whining that they're being
abused for being expected to support their own
young - they're pathetic.

I'm not dismissing anyone's responsibility for raising
their young.

I'm pointing out that anyone who ****s an alcoholic
without using contraception is an idiot who has no
business expecting anyone else to take care of his
self-inflicted problems.

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:50:00 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

...Are you saying that a health problem can excuse a person from being
responsible for their own children?

If they die of cancer?

You are an idiot and shouldn't be polluting the gene pool.

...this woman
has never earned a dime

You hate motherhood so much you feel it should be done
gratis. Try telling a daycare center they shouldn't charge
for their services.

They, too, will inform you that you are an idiot.

... she has chosen ...

He chose, too. You flunked sex-ed, didn't you.

Ummm--are you saying that expecting a woman to shoulder the
responsibilities
for the children she brings into the world is *punishment*?

No. I wrote nothing of the sort. If you weren't too
stupid to read for comprehension the punishment is
forced labor without pay.

You're into the idea of slavery, aren't you.

If you were an American you'd be into the idea
of freedom, instead.

...my
comment was that she has *never* undertaken the responsibility of
providing
for her own children

If you hadn't been stupidly lying, the children would
have died of starvation or neglect within days.

Your temporary **** should have had the wits about
him not to lay an alchoholic without contraception.

He's making a lot of really stupid choices in his 'life'.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:55:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Yet they deem EVERY child to be irrelevant.

Well, those who have unprotected sex without the
specific consensual desire to procreate do, anyway.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:03:27 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... it might be nice if the mother took a stab at it...

Are you claiming that she has abandoned the child?

... our children are irrelevant...

To the matter of precedent responsibilities, they are.

It's your own problem if you didn't determine that
your temporary sexual liaison had a history of
careless profligacy.

Silly child--I

You seem prone to abuse of those you believe
to be children. I hope you are supervised with
all due diligence in any interactions with them.

that mean old alcohol

Apparently you aren't well-enough educated to
realize that alcoholism, as a drug addiction, is
a health problem.

It's quite inhumane, hate-filled, and spiteful of
you to want to punish sick people.

...grumpy mood...

I'm sorry you suffer such so severely that you
project it where it is inapplicable.

I pity you.

I pity your poor children even more.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:16:58 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

I bet

You shouldn't gamble.

You can't calculate the odds well enough.

You don't even dimly sense that when you attempt
to insist that someone else should shoulder the sole
responsibility for the actions of two people you
should at least first do so yourself.

overinflated ego ...

So that's why you believe others would owe you
compensation for your failures.

Thanks for the confirmation.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:00:33 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... gone haywire ...

All the more reason for you to avoid procreation.

Here's the info you can't seem to process, so that
you can have another try if you work up the guts:

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:41:05 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Doubtful. ...

You sure are, if you can't even learn how and when
to use birth control.

Perhaps you can't even learn how to read this:

"Before copping an attitude about child support, consider the situation.
In this modern world, you can have sex without reproducing. So, whether
your children were intentional, or accidental, your actions caused them to
be here. It isn't their fault they were born. And, the fact that your life
situation
has changed should have as little impact as possible on their quality of
life. Both
of you made a financial, as well as an emotional decision when you decided
to
have kids. Now that they are here, it is too late for either of you to
back out
of your commitment to them."

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/indiana/in_art04

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:48:07 -0800, "teachrmama"
wrote:

You would haveto explain your reasoning here, US.

I've stated the facts plainly enough. If you're just not the
sharpest tool in the shed you sure shouldn't procreate.

It's rather unsettling to imagine that you'd be a 'teacher'.

I'm not certain what it
is that you think I am not controlling.

Yourself.

No one forced you to have kids at all, much less to do so
with a man already proven unwilling to support them.

I certainly had no control over ...

You can't control yourself. You got pregnant carelessly, by
a 'father' who isn't suitable.

Now you want to gripe about nothing more than your own
sequence of errors in having done that.

... her mother decided ...

You don't speak for her. It's disingenuous for you to try to
pretend otherwise.

How could you teach a child to be honest when you're not?

Since he has been found to be this young ladies father

You thus disprove your false claims about the mother.

... mother who has never worked a day in her life
to support any of her children.

You don't believe that raising children is work per se?

What do you do, lie on the couch eating bonbons as your
own neglected spawn rot in their own urine and feces?

We had two children--the number we knew we could afford.

You didn't know that. He didn't know that. You lie.

You're now complaining that you can't afford it.

You made the mistake. Don't beg for sympathy.

decisions were made by others that deprived her of a father.

Obviously the father cut out. He'll do it to you, too.

Uh--I don't think you really understand the accounting practices that
create
a monthly late payment

Actually, I'm well qualified in accounting.

You beat that system (intentionality notwithstanding)
with one well-timed advance payment.

If you're too arithmetically impaired to figure that out,
I hope your kids can find someone else from whom to
learn well enough to become numerate.

...Any payment made outside
the wage garnishment would not be counted as current CS

Try learning about the contractual nature of check memos.

He could be better off settling the arrearage via financing,
but considering that your temporary spouse hasn't the mental
tackle to manage basic birth control, that may be beyond him.

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:14:35 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:
...
does not give a rat's tookus if other children are forced into poverty by
their methods ...

Yes, you don't care that your 'methods' cause your own
children to suffer. You can't control yourself.

... the payments garnished from my husband's wages are NOT COUNTED
as paid on time ...

If you weren't really stupid, you could've solved that 'problem'
a long time ago, with but one extra properly-timed payment.

Those as unintelligent as you and your temporary 'partner'
shouldn't be permitted to procreate, actually.
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 19:37:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... should know ...

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

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

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

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

Why would anyone be so stupid as to imagine otherwise?

Do you believe support would be nothing more than money?

...Suzy Spread-em ...

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

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

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

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 05:35:49 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

... we live in a culture of victimhood where
everyone competes to be the most 'abused'.

Yes, we have men who can't learn how to use
basic contraception whining that they're being
abused for being expected to support their own
young - they're pathetic.

I'm not dismissing anyone's responsibility for raising
their young.

I'm pointing out that anyone who ****s an alcoholic
without using contraception is an idiot who has no
business expecting anyone else to take care of his
self-inflicted problems.

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:50:00 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

...Are you saying that a health problem can excuse a person from being
responsible for their own children?

If they die of cancer?

You are an idiot and shouldn't be polluting the gene pool.

...this woman
has never earned a dime

You hate motherhood so much you feel it should be done
gratis. Try telling a daycare center they shouldn't charge
for their services.

They, too, will inform you that you are an idiot.

... she has chosen ...

He chose, too. You flunked sex-ed, didn't you.

Ummm--are you saying that expecting a woman to shoulder the
responsibilities
for the children she brings into the world is *punishment*?

No. I wrote nothing of the sort. If you weren't too
stupid to read for comprehension the punishment is
forced labor without pay.

You're into the idea of slavery, aren't you.

If you were an American you'd be into the idea
of freedom, instead.

...my
comment was that she has *never* undertaken the responsibility of
providing
for her own children

If you hadn't been stupidly lying, the children would
have died of starvation or neglect within days.

Your temporary **** should have had the wits about
him not to lay an alchoholic without contraception.

He's making a lot of really stupid choices in his 'life'.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:55:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Yet they deem EVERY child to be irrelevant.

Well, those who have unprotected sex without the
specific consensual desire to procreate do, anyway.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:03:27 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... it might be nice if the mother took a stab at it...

Are you claiming that she has abandoned the child?

... our children are irrelevant...

To the matter of precedent responsibilities, they are.

It's your own problem if you didn't determine that
your temporary sexual liaison had a history of
careless profligacy.

Silly child--I

You seem prone to abuse of those you believe
to be children. I hope you are supervised with
all due diligence in any interactions with them.

that mean old alcohol

Apparently you aren't well-enough educated to
realize that alcoholism, as a drug addiction, is
a health problem.

It's quite inhumane, hate-filled, and spiteful of
you to want to punish sick people.

...grumpy mood...

I'm sorry you suffer such so severely that you
project it where it is inapplicable.

I pity you.

I pity your poor children even more.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:16:58 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

I bet

You shouldn't gamble.

You can't calculate the odds well enough.

You don't even dimly sense that when you attempt
to insist that someone else should shoulder the sole
responsibility for the actions of two people you
should at least first do so yourself.

overinflated ego ...

So that's why you believe others would owe you
compensation for your failures.

Thanks for the confirmation.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:00:33 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... gone haywire ...

All the more reason for you to avoid procreation.

Here's the info you can't seem to process, so that
you can have another try if you work up the guts:

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:41:05 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Doubtful. ...

You sure are, if you can't even learn how and when
to use birth control.

Perhaps you can't even learn how to read this:

"Before copping an attitude about child support, consider the situation.
In this modern world, you can have sex without reproducing. So, whether
your children were intentional, or accidental, your actions caused them to
be here. It isn't their fault they were born. And, the fact that your life
situation
has changed should have as little impact as possible on their quality of
life. Both
of you made a financial, as well as an emotional decision when you decided
to
have kids. Now that they are here, it is too late for either of you to
back out
of your commitment to them."

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/indiana/in_art04

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:48:07 -0800, "teachrmama"
wrote:

You would haveto explain your reasoning here, US.

I've stated the facts plainly enough. If you're just not the
sharpest tool in the shed you sure shouldn't procreate.

It's rather unsettling to imagine that you'd be a 'teacher'.

I'm not certain what it
is that you think I am not controlling.

Yourself.

No one forced you to have kids at all, much less to do so
with a man already proven unwilling to support them.

I certainly had no control over ...

You can't control yourself. You got pregnant carelessly, by
a 'father' who isn't suitable.

Now you want to gripe about nothing more than your own
sequence of errors in having done that.

... her mother decided ...

You don't speak for her. It's disingenuous for you to try to
pretend otherwise.

How could you teach a child to be honest when you're not?

Since he has been found to be this young ladies father

You thus disprove your false claims about the mother.

... mother who has never worked a day in her life
to support any of her children.

You don't believe that raising children is work per se?

What do you do, lie on the couch eating bonbons as your
own neglected spawn rot in their own urine and feces?

We had two children--the number we knew we could afford.

You didn't know that. He didn't know that. You lie.

You're now complaining that you can't afford it.

You made the mistake. Don't beg for sympathy.

decisions were made by others that deprived her of a father.

Obviously the father cut out. He'll do it to you, too.

Uh--I don't think you really understand the accounting practices that
create
a monthly late payment

Actually, I'm well qualified in accounting.

You beat that system (intentionality notwithstanding)
with one well-timed advance payment.

If you're too arithmetically impaired to figure that out,
I hope your kids can find someone else from whom to
learn well enough to become numerate.

...Any payment made outside
the wage garnishment would not be counted as current CS

Try learning about the contractual nature of check memos.

He could be better off settling the arrearage via financing,
but considering that your temporary spouse hasn't the mental
tackle to manage basic birth control, that may be beyond him.

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:14:35 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:
...
does not give a rat's tookus if other children are forced into poverty by
their methods ...

Yes, you don't care that your 'methods' cause your own
children to suffer. You can't control yourself.

... the payments garnished from my husband's wages are NOT COUNTED
as paid on time ...

If you weren't really stupid, you could've solved that 'problem'
a long time ago, with but one extra properly-timed payment.

Those as unintelligent as you and your temporary 'partner'
shouldn't be permitted to procreate, actually.
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 19:37:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... should know ...

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

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

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

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

Why would anyone be so stupid as to imagine otherwise?

Do you believe support would be nothing more than money?

...Suzy Spread-em ...

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

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

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

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 05:35:49 GMT, "Phil #3" wrote:

... we live in a culture of victimhood where
everyone competes to be the most 'abused'.

Yes, we have men who can't learn how to use
basic contraception whining that they're being
abused for being expected to support their own
young - they're pathetic.

I'm not dismissing anyone's responsibility for raising
their young.

I'm pointing out that anyone who ****s an alcoholic
without using contraception is an idiot who has no
business expecting anyone else to take care of his
self-inflicted problems.

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:50:00 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

...Are you saying that a health problem can excuse a person from being
responsible for their own children?

If they die of cancer?

You are an idiot and shouldn't be polluting the gene pool.

...this woman
has never earned a dime

You hate motherhood so much you feel it should be done
gratis. Try telling a daycare center they shouldn't charge
for their services.

They, too, will inform you that you are an idiot.

... she has chosen ...

He chose, too. You flunked sex-ed, didn't you.

Ummm--are you saying that expecting a woman to shoulder the
responsibilities
for the children she brings into the world is *punishment*?

No. I wrote nothing of the sort. If you weren't too
stupid to read for comprehension the punishment is
forced labor without pay.

You're into the idea of slavery, aren't you.

If you were an American you'd be into the idea
of freedom, instead.

...my
comment was that she has *never* undertaken the responsibility of
providing
for her own children

If you hadn't been stupidly lying, the children would
have died of starvation or neglect within days.

Your temporary **** should have had the wits about
him not to lay an alchoholic without contraception.

He's making a lot of really stupid choices in his 'life'.

On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 03:55:46 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

Yet they deem EVERY child to be irrelevant.

Well, those who have unprotected sex without the
specific consensual desire to procreate do, anyway.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:03:27 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

... it might be nice if the mother took a stab at it...

Are you claiming that she has abandoned the child?

... our children are irrelevant...

To the matter of precedent responsibilities, they are.

It's your own problem if you didn't determine that
your temporary sexual liaison had a history of
careless profligacy.

Silly child--I

You seem prone to abuse of those you believe
to be children. I hope you are supervised with
all due diligence in any interactions with them.

that mean old alcohol

Apparently you aren't well-enough educated to
realize that alcoholism, as a drug addiction, is
a health problem.

It's quite inhumane, hate-filled, and spiteful of
you to want to punish sick people.

...grumpy mood...

I'm sorry you suffer such so severely that you
project it where it is inapplicable.

I pity you.

I pity your poor children even more.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:16:58 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:

I bet

You shouldn't gamble.

You can't calculate the odds well enough.

You don't even dimly sense that when you attempt
to insist that someone else should shoulder the sole
responsibility for the actions of two people you
should at least first do so yourself.

overinflated ego ...

So that's why you believe others would owe you
compensation for your failures.

Thanks for the confirmation.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:00:33 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

... gone haywire ...

All the more reason for you to avoid procreation.

Here's the info you can't seem to process, so that
you can have another try if you work up the guts:

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:41:05 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Doubtful. ...

You sure are, if you can't even learn how and when
to use birth control.

Perhaps you can't even learn how to read this:

"Before copping an attitude about child support, consider the situation.
In this modern world, you can have sex without reproducing. So, whether
your children were intentional, or accidental, your actions caused them to
be here. It isn't their fault they were born. And, the fact that your life
situation
has changed should have as little impact as possible on their quality of
life. Both
of you made a financial, as well as an emotional decision when you decided
to
have kids. Now that they are here, it is too late for either of you to
back out
of your commitment to them."

http://www.divorcenet.com/states/indiana/in_art04

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:48:07 -0800, "teachrmama"
wrote:

You would haveto explain your reasoning here, US.

I've stated the facts plainly enough. If you're just not the
sharpest tool in the shed you sure shouldn't procreate.

It's rather unsettling to imagine that you'd be a 'teacher'.

I'm not certain what it
is that you think I am not controlling.

Yourself.

No one forced you to have kids at all, much less to do so
with a man already proven unwilling to support them.

I certainly had no control over ...

You can't control yourself. You got pregnant carelessly, by
a 'father' who isn't suitable.

Now you want to gripe about nothing more than your own
sequence of errors in having done that.

... her mother decided ...

You don't speak for her. It's disingenuous for you to try to
pretend otherwise.

How could you teach a child to be honest when you're not?

Since he has been found to be this young ladies father

You thus disprove your false claims about the mother.

... mother who has never worked a day in her life
to support any of her children.

You don't believe that raising children is work per se?

What do you do, lie on the couch eating bonbons as your
own neglected spawn rot in their own urine and feces?

We had two children--the number we knew we could afford.

You didn't know that. He didn't know that. You lie.

You're now complaining that you can't afford it.

You made the mistake. Don't beg for sympathy.

decisions were made by others that deprived her of a father.

Obviously the father cut out. He'll do it to you, too.

Uh--I don't think you really understand the accounting practices that
create
a monthly late payment

Actually, I'm well qualified in accounting.

You beat that system (intentionality notwithstanding)
with one well-timed advance payment.

If you're too arithmetically impaired to figure that out,
I hope your kids can find someone else from whom to
learn well enough to become numerate.

...Any payment made outside
the wage garnishment would not be counted as current CS

Try learning about the contractual nature of check memos.

He could be better off settling the arrearage via financing,
but considering that your temporary spouse hasn't the mental
tackle to manage basic birth control, that may be beyond him.

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:14:35 -0800, "garbageteachr"
wrote:
...
does not give a rat's tookus if other children are forced into poverty by
their methods ...

Yes, you don't care that your 'methods' cause your own
children to suffer. You can't control yourself.

... the payments garnished from my husband's wages are NOT COUNTED
as paid on time ...

If you weren't really stupid, you could've solved that 'problem'
a long time ago, with but one extra properly-timed payment.

Those as unintelligent as you and your temporary 'partner'
shouldn't be permitted to procreate, actually.

* US * wrote in message ...

...you don't.

I do.

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.
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. 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. 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.
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.

* US * wrote in message news
...We know ...

You know nothing.

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.
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.
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.

* US * wrote in message ...

It's a fact.

Untrue.

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.
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.
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.
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.

* US * wrote in message ...

You...

I'm still not the subject.

...idiot...

Describes you well.

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.
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.
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.
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.

* US * wrote in message ...

...stupidity...

Describes you well.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 19:43:16 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

..."Andrea Yates" or "Susan Smith". That being the
case...

You'd **** them without using birth control, wouldn't you.

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.
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 19:43:16 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

..."Andrea Yates" or "Susan Smith". That being the
case...

You'd **** them without using birth control, wouldn't you.

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.
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 19:43:16 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

..."Andrea Yates" or "Susan Smith". That being the
case...

You'd **** them without using birth control, wouldn't you.

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.
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 19:43:16 -0800, "Chris" wrote:

..."Andrea Yates" or "Susan Smith". That being the
case...

You'd **** them without using birth control, wouldn't you.

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.

* US * wrote in message ...

Men don't give birth.

Yet fatherhood is chosen..... got it.

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.