Hello, way long sorry.....

"lm" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 18:58:17 -0500 (EST), (Bebe
lestrnge) wrote:


Hello, way long sorry.....

Group: alt.support.single-parents Date: Tue, Feb 17, 2004, 2:27pm
(EST+5) From: (lm)

It's not too late for the baby to be given up for adoption.

lm


You are not serious right? Is any of what I am saying making any sense.
I will not ever have my own family abandoned, to be part of another
family like that,,,,,why? I have made it clear I am not built that way,
it is not what my father taught me and that is that. My daughter does
not want that and she is doing a fine job and that is the way it is .
Oh
and Yes should she ever decide she can't be a good mom then yes I will
indeed raise my geanddaughter. In a heartbeat ........

I understand your choice and I'll not mention it again as you've made
your choice clear. However, your comments on adoption (in several of
your posts) compel me to point out that giving up a child for adoption
is not equivalent to abandoning it; it is probably the most selfless
decision someone could possibly make.

lm

It is quite evident that this baby is all about the grandmother's wants
and needs, and NOT what is truely in the best interests of the baby, or it's
mother.

"V" wrote in message
...

"Paul Fritz" wrote in message
...

Child support is the guvmint mandating what ONE parent spends on
their
child, without ANY accounting of how that money is spent by the other
parent. It further sets a different for NCP's vs. ALL other types
of
parents. It is patently unconstitutional,

Then why did the Appellate Court of Florida rule in Bennett v. Bennett?

And that has what bearing on the other 49 states?......whatever the
decision was.


but since it is so PC, it is
allowed to continue. It has also further eroded the stability of
marriage
in this country, as well as encourages out of wedlock births.

You can not blame out of marriage births on child support.

Wanna bet?

How can it erode the stability of marriage?

States that have instituted a default joint physical custody have
experienced a drop in the significant drop in the divorce rate. Combined
with the fact that 70-80% of divorces are the initiated by women. When mom
doesn't get automatic custody and CS, the divorce rate drops.

Assuming one parent can leave and
live off 33% of the other parents salary?

It allows
women to escape financial responsibility for their sole and unilateral
choices.

Most single mothers work and I find that it appauling that you
generalize
women and state that they are eluding responsibility.

Women have the AAA unilateral choices. They can abort, adopt, or abandon
without the approval or consent of the father. Yet they are NOT solely
financially responsible for those sole and unilateral choices they make.
There is no generalizations.....just a statement of FACT.


It irks me when people so blindly accept it as 'the way it should
be'



It irks me when people take what is best for the children and twist it
to
appear like the non custodial parent is going without to support some
gold
diggin' biatch or bassard that he or she injected sperm or casted out an
egg
for.
Come on. Do you really believe this is how it truly is?

You just don't get it do you?


V

"Bebe lestrnge" wrote in message
...

percentage of child support

Group: alt.support.single-parents Date: Tue, Feb 17, 2004, 7:14am From:
(Paul Fritz) wrote:

Child support is the guvmint mandating what ONE parent
spends on their child, without ANY accounting of how that
money is spent by the other parent.

Paul, the "guvment" Heh..... as you so put it, would not be mandating
anything if people would support their kids on their own. Why should
the person paying the support control the way it is spent? As long as
the kids have all of what they need it is none of their business.

snicker how very feminist of you.

AND any other conservatory established by the guvmint is required to
account for all funds expended, except for CP's....

Paul wrote:
It further sets a different for NCP's vs. ALL other types of parents.
It is patently unconstitutional, but since it is so PC, it is
allowed to continue. It has also further eroded the stability of
marriage in this country, as well as encourages out of wedlock births.
It allows women to escape financial responsibility for their sole and
unilateral choices. It irks me when people so blindly accept it as
'the way it should be'

Paul, It is obvious you have a big ole chip on your shoulder.

Don't ASSume what you don't know (apologies to Joelle :-) )

Paying
child support is something both men and women alike are responsible for.

snicker a little short on the facts aren't you?

Furthermore, the government or court system would not have to be
involved if people weren't assholes when it came to supporting their
children properly.

snicker a little short on the facts aren't you.

There is no court monitoring the support I receive
and it is not because my childrens father gives a **** it is because his
wife does and she has been the one that sends it to me not him , not
their father. The small percentage this amounts to is peanuts compared
to what a custodial parent puts out to give the children a decent life.

snicker a little short on the facts aren't you.

The children deserve to have their needs met.

Basic needs only

Why is it so important to
you how the money is used if your children are being properly cared for,
have what they need and maybe just a little of what they "want"

I tell you what, You give me 25/35/45 % of YOUR net income, and I'll
decide how it will be spent, I bet you'd be screaming for an accounting.

If by
chance they are living in a shack with no heat , electric or running
water, eating garbage, then yes I agree with you. THAT parent should
not even have custody and wouldn't if I were the other parent. Yes, some
instances are unfair and wrong and child support is getting a bad rep
because of these cases of abuse. such as a woman getting pregnant
intentionally without discussing this with the "donor" and then going
after child support, and I would agree with you again. There are some
custodial parents that do misuse the money intended to help support the
children I know........but you seem to have this all based around women
being the abusers of the system.

Women compose 90% of CP's, by their choice

I think we are not gonna get along very much and that sucks cause I
really don't like raising my blood pressure.

I don't give a rat's ass about 'getting along'

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Bebe lestrnge wrote in message
...

Hello, way long sorry.....

Group: alt.support.single-parents Date: Tue, Feb 17, 2004, 7:55am
From:
(Tiffany)
Tiffany wrote:
Wow.. they got pregnant on purpose??? Yeah, I think they would be
dealing with this on their own if that were the case.



WOW ! how well do you think you could deal with "this" on your own at
16 ? What kind of parent turns their back on their children like this
?
Not me....

It would be hard to deal with that on your own at 16. BUT THEY WANTED TO
HAVE A BABY! You seem to miss the point again.

Seems to be an ongoing habit of hers.



Tiffany wrote:
The child can be in daycare will the daughter is in school, ect.
Honestly it sounds as though you wanted them to have the baby for all
your reasons. So many grandparents step in and take care of kids that
can be given to adults who are ready for parenthood and the lifelong
commitment. I have seen grandparents who do that end up taking care of
the child for 18 years too. Read what you posted above again. You
should
have gotten a puppy instead.
T

No Tiffany the child is gonna be taken care of by family not strangers
..
No Tiffany We accepted they were pregnant and at that point the baby
was
already a part of our family. Yes I do not believe in abortion to be
used as a form of birth control and If my daughter wanted to give up
the
child I would of asked her to let me adopt the baby because again this
baby was already family and I could not live knowing we gave her away
like that. My grandchildren are as important to me as my children no
matter what sacrifices I have to make. My father instilled a strong
family commitment and I would not let him down either. Nah no puppy
we
have two dogs three cats three doves and a dead fish now. You are
showing your lack of heart girl . Not to mention a strong lack of
life
experience.


Get real, this baby is all about what you want.

That wasn't to hard to figure out ;-)

Probably the baby you can
share with your partner. Kind of be like you and your partners baby??
Sorry
about your loss in the past though. I never said anything about abortion
so
don't bring up **** to me that is irrelevant please. I might be missing
some
life experience, I know I didn't purposely get pregnant at the age of 16
only to let my mommy take responsibility. Yeah, that is life experience
I
can do without. Luckily one my Mom didn't deal with either. I
congratulate
your decision to raise your grandchild and help your daughter and the
father. But you did come here with some 'problems' or complaints as I
recall.

Tiff

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Paul Fritz wrote in message
...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Bebe lestrnge wrote in message
...
snipped other stuff
percentage of child support

Vicky wrote;
There is no choice. Food, Home, Clothing, Lessons,
Academics....shall
I
continue? You are a single parent, you know it takes monetary
support
to
raise children if you do not have a high income.

Bev wrote;
I agree with you on this Vicky, I have received child support
for my
girls for about 15 years now. I have accepted 50.00 per week
per
child
and that has come to 5200.00 a year. Now we all know it cost
way
more
than that to raise two kids. This is not even half of the cost.
When I make around 22,000.00 a year and there is no savings. I
go
without to give my kids what they need and yeah sometimes just
what
they
want . Cause I can. I am not complaining, but it urks my craw
when
people make child support a negative issue. It is not, the
children
deserve it and a whole lot more than they get most of the time
if
they
are getting it at all from both moms or dads. Just my opinion .
Bev


The support isn't meant to pay for ALL your kids needs. $100.00 a
week
for 2
kids..... how much do you think it does cost for 2 kids if $100.00
isn't
enough? And actually your annual income is 27,200 with that
support
you
get.
Alot of folks here get NO financial help btw.

Since CS is after tax income, that equates to closer to 30k in
'income'
dollars.






Good morning Paul..... get spammed lately? BTW... I have been busy
as
hell and not able to answer emails. Busy is good though..... it means
more
money.

You are such a tease!!!!!!


T

"Paul Fritz" wrote in message
...

"V" wrote in message
...

"Paul Fritz" wrote in message
...

Child support is the guvmint mandating what ONE parent spends on
their
child, without ANY accounting of how that money is spent by the other
parent. It further sets a different for NCP's vs. ALL other types
of
parents. It is patently unconstitutional,

Then why did the Appellate Court of Florida rule in Bennett v. Bennett?

And that has what bearing on the other 49 states?......whatever the
decision was.

Usually other states follow other states in these types of decisions.
A factor in child support, which occurs in all states.



but since it is so PC, it is
allowed to continue. It has also further eroded the stability of
marriage
in this country, as well as encourages out of wedlock births.

You can not blame out of marriage births on child support.

Wanna bet?


Sure.

How can it erode the stability of marriage?

States that have instituted a default joint physical custody have
experienced a drop in the significant drop in the divorce rate. Combined
with the fact that 70-80% of divorces are the initiated by women. When mom
doesn't get automatic custody and CS, the divorce rate drops.


And what percentage is because of the male's infidelity? Lies, More lies and
statistics..... The new significant drop has been how long? Other factors
should be correlated with the drop. A tremendous drop can not be determined
without much more study. Was it a covenant marriage state? What were the other
things that would have assisted in the big drop?


Assuming one parent can leave and
live off 33% of the other parents salary?

It allows
women to escape financial responsibility for their sole and unilateral
choices.

Most single mothers work and I find that it appauling that you
generalize
women and state that they are eluding responsibility.

Women have the AAA unilateral choices. They can abort, adopt, or abandon
without the approval or consent of the father. Yet they are NOT solely
financially responsible for those sole and unilateral choices they make.
There is no generalizations.....just a statement of FACT.


We do have choices , we ahem, women....
You sound like you have been burnt seriously and these "unilateral triple
choices" you speak of are a sore spot. Do not generalize women like this and
I won't consider my run in with you as a predetermination that all men are
asswipes.



It irks me when people so blindly accept it as 'the way it should
be'



It irks me when people take what is best for the children and twist it
to
appear like the non custodial parent is going without to support some
gold
diggin' biatch or bassard that he or she injected sperm or casted out an
egg
for.
Come on. Do you really believe this is how it truly is?

You just don't get it do you?


V







Obviously you don't get "it" either. Literally!
I am done with you.
V

Hello, way long sorry.....

Group: alt.support.single-parents Date: Wed, Feb 18, 2004, 12:37am
(EST+5) From: (lm)
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 18:58:17 -0500 (EST), (Bebe
lestrnge) wrote:
Hello, way long sorry.....
Group: alt.support.single-parents Date: Tue, Feb 17, 2004, 2:27pm
(EST+5) From: (lm)


However, your comments on adoption (in several of your posts) compel me
to point out that giving up a child for adoption is not equivalent to
abandoning it; it is probably the most selfless decision someone could
possibly make.
lm

Hello, way long sorry.....

Group: alt.support.single-parents Date: Wed, Feb 18, 2004, 12:37am
(EST+5) From: (lm)
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 18:58:17 -0500 (EST), (Bebe
lestrnge) wrote:
Hello, way long sorry.....
Group: alt.support.single-parents Date: Tue, Feb 17, 2004, 2:27pm
(EST+5) From: (lm)


However, your comments on adoption (in several of your posts) compel me
to point out that giving up a child for adoption is not equivalent to
abandoning it; it is probably the most selfless decision someone could
possibly make.
lm

I am sorry, I honestly did not mean to make it sound that way.
Adoption is so important and I know that. What I mean is that as a
choice for my family I can't give up a child . I can't do it. I keep
thinking how awful I would feel wondeing for the rest of my life , and
worrying too.

percentage of child support

Group: alt.support.single-parents Date: Tue, Feb 17, 2004, 7:19am From:
(Tiffany)

So AGAIN, what do you think it costs to raise 2 kids if $100 is far from
1/2? My point was, as it went far over head, was that support isn't
meant to pay for all the kids needs, only half. You stated it costs WAY
more then $50/week per kid to raise
them but you managed.

Yeah right way over my head......I don't see why you said it in the
first place as if I didn't already know this. What do I think it costs?
Beats the heck out of me, just a lot more and my point was based around
the complaining whiner on this group about the child support system. I
have survived , I work hard to do so. If my childrens survival was based
on both of us paying only 33% of our incomes my kids would have gone
without a lot of what they did have because I put out a lot more . That
includes a college education.

What I mean is that as a
choice for my family I can't give up a child . I can't do it. I keep
thinking how awful I would feel wondeing for the rest of my life , and
worrying too.

Kind of a selfish way to look at it, though, don't you think? Maybe if you saw
from the interests of the child, it would look a little different.

Joelle
The world is a book and those who do not travel read only one page - St
Augustine
Joelle