I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
Nice.
(.)(.)
Nice.
(.)(.)
Welcome to Jeebusland, where women are enslaved.
Welcome to Jeebusland, where women are enslaved.
Freedom is Marching Away....
Freedom is Marching Away....
Startin' off the New Year's Religious Morality Brigade March with a bang!!!
Startin' off the New Year's Religious Morality Brigade March with a bang!!!
I suppose no one noticed the MSNBC piece about the 20-odd states that are creating a new category of marriage that will make it MUCH harder to file for divorce.
I always thought it was interesting and quaint that ancient Rome had multiple categories of marriage. It looks like we will, soon, too.
Marriage between free individuals and bondage marriage.
I suppose no one noticed the MSNBC piece about the 20-odd states that are creating a new category of marriage that will make it MUCH harder to file for divorce.
I always thought it was interesting and quaint that ancient Rome had multiple categories of marriage. It looks like we will, soon, too.
Marriage between free individuals and bondage marriage.
I see Haloscan didn't get the 2005 post eating memo.
I see Haloscan didn't get the 2005 post eating memo.
And then the judge went home and pounded his gavel.
Fortunately, for me at least, I did not resolve to do less blogwhoring in 2005. Enjoy our recipes...Doug Feith's Muslim Surprise sounds like a good freedom marching dish.
And then the judge went home and pounded his gavel.
Fortunately, for me at least, I did not resolve to do less blogwhoring in 2005. Enjoy our recipes...Doug Feith's Muslim Surprise sounds like a good freedom marching dish.
Hey wait a minute......
You BLOGWHORED on the last thread.
And speaking of returning to previous centuries: Don't miss the article about James Dobson in today's Washington Post. He has announced he will be altering the face of the U.S. Senate in 2006. I only hope his favorite book is correct in saying "Pride goeth before a fall."
Hey wait a minute......
You BLOGWHORED on the last thread.
And speaking of returning to previous centuries: Don't miss the article about James Dobson in today's Washington Post. He has announced he will be altering the face of the U.S. Senate in 2006. I only hope his favorite book is correct in saying "Pride goeth before a fall."
correction: Dobson article is in the NY Times.
correction: Dobson article is in the NY Times.
Don't miss the article about James Dobson in today's Washington Post. He has announced he will be altering the face of the U.S. Senate in 2006. I only hope his favorite book is correct in saying "Pride goeth before a fall."
He's going to load the Senate Up with Dachshunds who listen to him!
Don't miss the article about James Dobson in today's Washington Post. He has announced he will be altering the face of the U.S. Senate in 2006. I only hope his favorite book is correct in saying "Pride goeth before a fall."
He's going to load the Senate Up with Dachshunds who listen to him!
Oh, and CNN has apparently been hounded by people writing in demanding that they stop showing pictures of the dead South Asian children.
Their beautiful minds, their beautiful minds.
Now if only the SCLM would show pictures of dead Iraqi children...
Oh, and CNN has apparently been hounded by people writing in demanding that they stop showing pictures of the dead South Asian children.
Their beautiful minds, their beautiful minds.
Now if only the SCLM would show pictures of dead Iraqi children...
Welcome to 2005, you must stay married to the men who beat you, the men we jail for beating you. Because we wouldn't want your child to be a "bastard" now would we. Jeez. 75% of men who beat their wives go on to beat the children stupid.
Welcome to 2005, you must stay married to the men who beat you, the men we jail for beating you. Because we wouldn't want your child to be a "bastard" now would we. Jeez. 75% of men who beat their wives go on to beat the children stupid.
I KNOW this is gonna get appealed, (since it's completely and utterly without any sort of legitimate legal precedent,) but still the fact that a judge could even make this ruling in the first place, is just further proof to me, of how ugly the slow takeover of America by the very UnChristian Right is. It also reinforces my desire to leave the country after graduation, not simply because I wanna do environmental/humanitarian work abroad, but because while I love my hometown Pittsburgh and have all kinds of family ties here, I hate the direction the U.S.A is heading, and really feel it's better to leave now. Maybe I'm being paranoid, but I feel like I'm one of the leftist intellectuals in Iran, just before the Ayatollahs came to power.Blue state women like me, will have it REALLY bad, in this country pretty soon...but I hate to leave behind all my family and friends, and my beloved hometown hills and rivers. Damn it.
I KNOW this is gonna get appealed, (since it's completely and utterly without any sort of legitimate legal precedent,) but still the fact that a judge could even make this ruling in the first place, is just further proof to me, of how ugly the slow takeover of America by the very UnChristian Right is. It also reinforces my desire to leave the country after graduation, not simply because I wanna do environmental/humanitarian work abroad, but because while I love my hometown Pittsburgh and have all kinds of family ties here, I hate the direction the U.S.A is heading, and really feel it's better to leave now. Maybe I'm being paranoid, but I feel like I'm one of the leftist intellectuals in Iran, just before the Ayatollahs came to power.Blue state women like me, will have it REALLY bad, in this country pretty soon...but I hate to leave behind all my family and friends, and my beloved hometown hills and rivers. Damn it.
Calling Margaret Atwood...
Calling Margaret Atwood...
Because we wouldn't want your child to be a "bastard" now would we.
Hey, I call "no fair!" Our current administration consists entirely of bastards.
Because we wouldn't want your child to be a "bastard" now would we.
Hey, I call "no fair!" Our current administration consists entirely of bastards.
Bizzarro world.
Moral values= supporting wifebeaters...
Bizzarro world.
Moral values= supporting wifebeaters...
But they were born in wedlock were they not? Our current adminstration had to earn their bastardliness, this child would just have it given to her and that wouldn't be fair now would it?
But they were born in wedlock were they not? Our current adminstration had to earn their bastardliness, this child would just have it given to her and that wouldn't be fair now would it?
Good morning and Happy New Year, gang. Now... where do I line up to give that judge a thump in the head?
Good morning and Happy New Year, gang. Now... where do I line up to give that judge a thump in the head?
the rights of the unborn child in this type of case trump a woman's right to divorce
In this type of case. Soon, the law will be expanded to refuse divorce where the woman is pregnant and is 3 days late in paying her cable bill.
the rights of the unborn child in this type of case trump a woman's right to divorce
In this type of case. Soon, the law will be expanded to refuse divorce where the woman is pregnant and is 3 days late in paying her cable bill.
filkertom,
a sock filled with oranges will do in a pinch.
filkertom,
a sock filled with oranges will do in a pinch.
Secede
that should be the word of 2005!
I dont understand why more progressives are not asking for secession: we cannot get through to fatih-brainwashed-stupidity
a point for this post:
THE BIBLE WAS WRITTEN BY MEN 2000 YEARS AGO - OF COURSE IT WILL SAY THAT WOMEN MUST OBEY THEIR MEN!!!
people believe in faith and god and religion because they are too dumb to understand and too fearful to comprehend - that is all - religion is the opiate of the masses.
Secede
that should be the word of 2005!
I dont understand why more progressives are not asking for secession: we cannot get through to fatih-brainwashed-stupidity
a point for this post:
THE BIBLE WAS WRITTEN BY MEN 2000 YEARS AGO - OF COURSE IT WILL SAY THAT WOMEN MUST OBEY THEIR MEN!!!
people believe in faith and god and religion because they are too dumb to understand and too fearful to comprehend - that is all - religion is the opiate of the masses.
How do we express our outrage like the 10 commandment commandos?
How do we express our outrage like the 10 commandment commandos?
watertiger -- I can work with that. Actually, it's to the judge's benefit. Most of the women I hang out with are really dirty knife-fighters.
watertiger -- I can work with that. Actually, it's to the judge's benefit. Most of the women I hang out with are really dirty knife-fighters.
Y'know, my parents thought they were married, but the minister didn't file their wedding license and then he died while they were on their honeymoon. They didn't regularize their status until I was 36 years old and the only reason they did it was for the sake of Social Security. The regularization came in the form of a "certificate of informal partnership", not a marriage license. I don't see that my parents' marital status made any difference in my life.
Frankly, there are worse things to be than a bastard. I suppose being this judge is one of them.
Y'know, my parents thought they were married, but the minister didn't file their wedding license and then he died while they were on their honeymoon. They didn't regularize their status until I was 36 years old and the only reason they did it was for the sake of Social Security. The regularization came in the form of a "certificate of informal partnership", not a marriage license. I don't see that my parents' marital status made any difference in my life.
Frankly, there are worse things to be than a bastard. I suppose being this judge is one of them.
Judge Bastine still beats his wife, right?
Judge Bastine still beats his wife, right?
DnL -- a slight correction, if I may. The Bible was written by illiterate goat-herders 3000 years ago.
And I saw a fantastic comment on the Yahoo boards the other day: "Religion is humanity's binkie".
DnL -- a slight correction, if I may. The Bible was written by illiterate goat-herders 3000 years ago.
And I saw a fantastic comment on the Yahoo boards the other day: "Religion is humanity's binkie".
the rights of the unborn child in this type of case trump a woman's right to divorcelife
So...when do the honour killings begin?
the rights of the unborn child in this type of case trump a woman's right to divorcelife
So...when do the honour killings begin?
Probably, or at the least is an emotionally abusive scumsucking joke of a husband. That is if she didn't just divorce him after years of staying together for the sake of the children, ie if you leave I will take the kids from you, I am the Judge after all.
Jerk.
Probably, or at the least is an emotionally abusive scumsucking joke of a husband. That is if she didn't just divorce him after years of staying together for the sake of the children, ie if you leave I will take the kids from you, I am the Judge after all.
Jerk.
Well, the judge would have granted the divorce, but the woman refused to undergo the test of bitter waters (drinking water filled with dust from the temple floor), and likewise refuse any of the other biblical tests called for such as searing of the flesh or rubbing dirt into open wounds.
Since she wasn't willing to follow the black-letter law as laid out in Numbers, Deuteronomy, Leviticus or any of the other foundational books of law, he had no choice but to not grant the divorce. (All that nonsense written by state legislatures, well, that's just the law of men and should be ignored when it proves inconvenient.)
Well, the judge would have granted the divorce, but the woman refused to undergo the test of bitter waters (drinking water filled with dust from the temple floor), and likewise refuse any of the other biblical tests called for such as searing of the flesh or rubbing dirt into open wounds.
Since she wasn't willing to follow the black-letter law as laid out in Numbers, Deuteronomy, Leviticus or any of the other foundational books of law, he had no choice but to not grant the divorce. (All that nonsense written by state legislatures, well, that's just the law of men and should be ignored when it proves inconvenient.)
Who owns your body you or the state? I love "limited government" Republicans who want to micro manage lives like this
Who owns your body you or the state? I love "limited government" Republicans who want to micro manage lives like this
This story was so shocking to me I did a little research on this judge. Something else is going on here - I think it's about child support laws. The timing is fishy - holiday weekend plus it seems to have happened in Nov near as I can tell. Also the judge is retiring. Here is a quote I found in a story about this case:
Breean Beggs, the executive director of the Center for Justice, maintains that Judge Bastine definitely is not anti-woman--quite the contrary. "He has served on task forces and encouraged private attorneys to take on more pro bono cases for women who need access to lawyers but cannot afford them." According to Beggs, Bastine has been a champion of low-income people, especially women, in Spokane County. He has a reputation of fairness and sympathy for the state's poor. "There's only so much you can do as a judge, but Judge Bastine has done everything he can to help poor women."
Sorry, I mostly lurk here because I am shy. But lets not destroy a good person's reputation like the other side does. It sounds like he is restricted by the support laws (which obviously need to be changed).
This story was so shocking to me I did a little research on this judge. Something else is going on here - I think it's about child support laws. The timing is fishy - holiday weekend plus it seems to have happened in Nov near as I can tell. Also the judge is retiring. Here is a quote I found in a story about this case:
Breean Beggs, the executive director of the Center for Justice, maintains that Judge Bastine definitely is not anti-woman--quite the contrary. "He has served on task forces and encouraged private attorneys to take on more pro bono cases for women who need access to lawyers but cannot afford them." According to Beggs, Bastine has been a champion of low-income people, especially women, in Spokane County. He has a reputation of fairness and sympathy for the state's poor. "There's only so much you can do as a judge, but Judge Bastine has done everything he can to help poor women."
Sorry, I mostly lurk here because I am shy. But lets not destroy a good person's reputation like the other side does. It sounds like he is restricted by the support laws (which obviously need to be changed).
An obvious candidate for the Supreme Court.
An obvious candidate for the Supreme Court.
Strict constructionist judges indeed.
This is the kind of shit Dobson and his taliban hoard want. They want judges who will make decisions based on biblical law and act as if it's 1000BC, not 2005AD.
Although I will admit the lady was a dumbass for not getting the divorce sooner, her stupidity is now being used to punish the unborn child due to the actions of a complete numbnut of a judge who is abusing his authority.
This kind of shit simply reinforces the beliefs of moderates and liberals that courts run by conservative judges have no authority over them and should not be adhered to. This kind of ruling simply creates anarchy in the long run.
My suggestion is that the lady needs to move to another state or county.
MYOB'
.
Strict constructionist judges indeed.
This is the kind of shit Dobson and his taliban hoard want. They want judges who will make decisions based on biblical law and act as if it's 1000BC, not 2005AD.
Although I will admit the lady was a dumbass for not getting the divorce sooner, her stupidity is now being used to punish the unborn child due to the actions of a complete numbnut of a judge who is abusing his authority.
This kind of shit simply reinforces the beliefs of moderates and liberals that courts run by conservative judges have no authority over them and should not be adhered to. This kind of ruling simply creates anarchy in the long run.
My suggestion is that the lady needs to move to another state or county.
MYOB'
.
My older daughter was born in Italy, 1979. We could not register her birth as an American born abroad (so she could run for president if we ever run a woman) until we presented the embassy with a marriage license. Otherwise they were going to list under father "unknown." So for six weeks, until we got the paperwork from the states she was basically a stateless person. I was reading "Winds of War" at the time and had nightmares about getting caught up in WWIII.
My older daughter was born in Italy, 1979. We could not register her birth as an American born abroad (so she could run for president if we ever run a woman) until we presented the embassy with a marriage license. Otherwise they were going to list under father "unknown." So for six weeks, until we got the paperwork from the states she was basically a stateless person. I was reading "Winds of War" at the time and had nightmares about getting caught up in WWIII.
Willow -- welccome. That's interesting, and potentially very useful. Do you have some links?
Willow -- welccome. That's interesting, and potentially very useful. Do you have some links?
I apologize for my tipying misteaks this morning -- keyboard is stiff, back is stiff, joints are stiff, everything else is jelly....
I apologize for my tipying misteaks this morning -- keyboard is stiff, back is stiff, joints are stiff, everything else is jelly....
All of the articles about this case seem to originate from and article in thestranger.com (I'm afraid of links as I don't know how to make them small). That's where the quote is too. I googled the judge's name to find out he's retiring and the woman's name to find the stranger article. Also - the husband is in jail so at least she is safe for now.
All of the articles about this case seem to originate from and article in thestranger.com (I'm afraid of links as I don't know how to make them small). That's where the quote is too. I googled the judge's name to find out he's retiring and the woman's name to find the stranger article. Also - the husband is in jail so at least she is safe for now.
shouldn't that be "Spokane County Radical Cleric Paul Bastine"?
barndog - when does attaturk not blogwhore?(insert winking smiley here)
shouldn't that be "Spokane County Radical Cleric Paul Bastine"?
barndog - when does attaturk not blogwhore?(insert winking smiley here)
On my mother's birth certificate (from Georgia in the 40's) there is a checkbox for legitimate/illegitimate. I could see wanting a child from carrying that around the rest of their lives. I doubt Washington State today has that sort of stigmatization of illegitimacy.
Also, shouldn't he be trying to make sure that she gets divorced now, so that she can marry the father of her baby before it is born? IANAL, but from what I understand, trying later to get someone other than your husband named the legal father of your child is a mess.
On my mother's birth certificate (from Georgia in the 40's) there is a checkbox for legitimate/illegitimate. I could see wanting a child from carrying that around the rest of their lives. I doubt Washington State today has that sort of stigmatization of illegitimacy.
Also, shouldn't he be trying to make sure that she gets divorced now, so that she can marry the father of her baby before it is born? IANAL, but from what I understand, trying later to get someone other than your husband named the legal father of your child is a mess.
Who is Bobo?
Who is Bobo?
Paul -- NYT columnist/hackmeister David Brooks. It's a long story.
Paul -- NYT columnist/hackmeister David Brooks. It's a long story.
The Other Daughter,
Leave while you're still young. It's much easier at this stage in your life. That doesn't mean that you can't return in the future. The brain drain you'll exemplify will eventually force business to crack down on the theocons, and they might be the only ones with enough power to do it.
The Other Daughter,
Leave while you're still young. It's much easier at this stage in your life. That doesn't mean that you can't return in the future. The brain drain you'll exemplify will eventually force business to crack down on the theocons, and they might be the only ones with enough power to do it.
filkertom-
Got it, thanks.
filkertom-
Got it, thanks.
How f&cking bizzarre that legitimate/illegitimate is ever a judicial issue or that words like bastard still have some kind of legal meaning.
15th Century England indeed.
--Stu
How f&cking bizzarre that legitimate/illegitimate is ever a judicial issue or that words like bastard still have some kind of legal meaning.
15th Century England indeed.
--Stu
Thanks, Willow. I'll check it out. That's thestranger.com. 
Thanks, Willow. I'll check it out. That's thestranger.com.
My suggestion is that the lady needs to move to another state or county.
I don't think she can, besides being pregnant she's already got two small children at home and she's out of work. Meanwhile, the judge is forcing her to stay married to an abusive asswipe currently in jail on felony drug charges.
How's that for "family values"?
Sheesh.
My suggestion is that the lady needs to move to another state or county.
I don't think she can, besides being pregnant she's already got two small children at home and she's out of work. Meanwhile, the judge is forcing her to stay married to an abusive asswipe currently in jail on felony drug charges.
How's that for "family values"?
Sheesh.
In most states a child born during a marriage is presumed to be that of the husband. Here in Ohio, and probably in at least some other states a child born within 300 days of the end of a marriage is presumed to be the husband's. This is rebuttable by DNA tests. Most important is that a child born during a marriage is NOT made a bastard by termination of the marriage. This judge is full of shit legally as well as factually.
In most states a child born during a marriage is presumed to be that of the husband. Here in Ohio, and probably in at least some other states a child born within 300 days of the end of a marriage is presumed to be the husband's. This is rebuttable by DNA tests. Most important is that a child born during a marriage is NOT made a bastard by termination of the marriage. This judge is full of shit legally as well as factually.
Here's the url for the article in The Stranger. Apparently in some counties in Washington, judges find conflict between 2 state laws about parentage and divorce, and rule on the side of the former. Note that this is not, in fact, a red state or red county.
MKK
Here's the url for the article in The Stranger. Apparently in some counties in Washington, judges find conflict between 2 state laws about parentage and divorce, and rule on the side of the former. Note that this is not, in fact, a red state or red county.
MKK
Why, hello, Mary Kay! Happy New Year. How are you? How's Jordin?
Why, hello, Mary Kay! Happy New Year. How are you? How's Jordin?
Sorry, I mostly lurk here because I am shy. But lets not destroy a good person's reputation like the other side does. It sounds like he is restricted by the support laws (which obviously need to be changed).
Willow
The judge is concerned that "children not be illegitamized", but that's not a very valid argument when the woman has been estranged from her husband for years because he's been in jail, and the father of the child is not the woman's current husband.
Also, how much support do you suppose a guy currently in jail on felony drug charges is going to provide to a child?
Sorry, I mostly lurk here because I am shy. But lets not destroy a good person's reputation like the other side does. It sounds like he is restricted by the support laws (which obviously need to be changed).
Willow
The judge is concerned that "children not be illegitamized", but that's not a very valid argument when the woman has been estranged from her husband for years because he's been in jail, and the father of the child is not the woman's current husband.
Also, how much support do you suppose a guy currently in jail on felony drug charges is going to provide to a child?
OK, the judge's ruling was absolutely ludicrous, but just as bizarre is all the judging in this forum. Do you know his case-law motivation or his political affiliation? Is he part of the red, right-wing, neo-con, pseudo-fascist, proselytizing, woman-hating death cult or the blue, traitor-bating, US-hating, Commie, Pinko, welfare-mommy-loving libruls? I do not think anyone here really knows. Yes, the deciscion was remarkably stupid, and seems to be motivated by religio-insanity, but until that is actually proven, the judgements passed here are no more refined. You are all acting like a bunch of uninformed, red state loonies. Yes, my differing opinion now classifies me as a troll. How refined we all are!
OK, the judge's ruling was absolutely ludicrous, but just as bizarre is all the judging in this forum. Do you know his case-law motivation or his political affiliation? Is he part of the red, right-wing, neo-con, pseudo-fascist, proselytizing, woman-hating death cult or the blue, traitor-bating, US-hating, Commie, Pinko, welfare-mommy-loving libruls? I do not think anyone here really knows. Yes, the deciscion was remarkably stupid, and seems to be motivated by religio-insanity, but until that is actually proven, the judgements passed here are no more refined. You are all acting like a bunch of uninformed, red state loonies. Yes, my differing opinion now classifies me as a troll. How refined we all are!
Ummm... Judge Not? First of all, we're all having gut reactions to a ruling you yourself say is ludicrous. Second, if you'll notice the last ten or so posts, starting with the first by Willow, we're looking into extenuating circumstances of conflicting laws. Third, it's your first post on the thread. We haven't had the chance to classify you as a troll.
Kindly dial it down for a second, okay? Some of us haven't recovered from yesterday (and I don't mean hangovers).
Ummm... Judge Not? First of all, we're all having gut reactions to a ruling you yourself say is ludicrous. Second, if you'll notice the last ten or so posts, starting with the first by Willow, we're looking into extenuating circumstances of conflicting laws. Third, it's your first post on the thread. We haven't had the chance to classify you as a troll.
Kindly dial it down for a second, okay? Some of us haven't recovered from yesterday (and I don't mean hangovers).
So, do you still beat your spouse then?
So, do you still beat your spouse then?
I work with felony Domestic Violence victims in a prosecutors office. This really is just another example of the courts revictimizing the victim. I am horrified. She had the strength to follow through on charges, which is not easy, file for divorce and move on with her life, and for a judge to require her to stay married to a man who was convicted of beating her is unheard of, even in my deep red state of Texas. I see judges do things I don't agree with frequently, but this is beyond the pale, really it is.
I work with felony Domestic Violence victims in a prosecutors office. This really is just another example of the courts revictimizing the victim. I am horrified. She had the strength to follow through on charges, which is not easy, file for divorce and move on with her life, and for a judge to require her to stay married to a man who was convicted of beating her is unheard of, even in my deep red state of Texas. I see judges do things I don't agree with frequently, but this is beyond the pale, really it is.
Two small children at home. an estranged, asshole of a husband in jail. No job. She gets pregnant again? Judgey is an idiot, but her elevator appears stuck between floors, too. It looks like the good people of the state of Washington get to pay for his prison time, her legal woes, and all three children. Excellent choices.
Two small children at home. an estranged, asshole of a husband in jail. No job. She gets pregnant again? Judgey is an idiot, but her elevator appears stuck between floors, too. It looks like the good people of the state of Washington get to pay for his prison time, her legal woes, and all three children. Excellent choices.
Jeez. 75% of men who beat their wives go on to beat the children stupid.
But dontcha see, in Bobo's world women and children don't count. It's protecting the property rights of men that is of the utmost importance. And you thought when they talk about the "ownership society" it was just about dismantling Social Security and health care benefits! 
Jeez. 75% of men who beat their wives go on to beat the children stupid.
But dontcha see, in Bobo's world women and children don't count. It's protecting the property rights of men that is of the utmost importance. And you thought when they talk about the "ownership society" it was just about dismantling Social Security and health care benefits!
I was taught in law school that there is no such thing as an illegitimate child. And I think that's exactly the way things are. All children are legitimate.
In Texas, one of the things that must be included in a no-fault divorce prove-up is whether or not the woman is pregnant. That is because there are child support issues if she is. There is nothing on the books in Texas to prevent a pregnant woman from getting divorce and I've never encountered a situation in which a judge refused to grant a divorce under similar circumstances. And to claim that it is to prevent the child from being "illegitimized" is just nuts.
I was taught in law school that there is no such thing as an illegitimate child. And I think that's exactly the way things are. All children are legitimate.
In Texas, one of the things that must be included in a no-fault divorce prove-up is whether or not the woman is pregnant. That is because there are child support issues if she is. There is nothing on the books in Texas to prevent a pregnant woman from getting divorce and I've never encountered a situation in which a judge refused to grant a divorce under similar circumstances. And to claim that it is to prevent the child from being "illegitimized" is just nuts.
It sounds like he is restricted by the support laws (which obviously need to be changed).
Willow
Willow (welcome aboard BTW, relax, you're among friends) that was my second thought too when I saw this story.
I mean, the "husband" in this case has been in jail for two friggin' years. The odds of him being the father of the child due in March would seem low. And given the offense for which he was incarcerated (and most places you have to reall beat the crap out of somebody to get 2+ years in the slam) he seems undeserving of the honor of fatherhood anyway.
Sounds to me like the intent of the law here is to keep bad sperm donors from skipping out on their duty to support their progeny rather than to enforce some sort of Talibanic women-as-breeding-stock property theory.
Of course this ties in with two of my other pet causes:
1) If you want to cut down on divorce and make people take the institution more seriously, marriage licenses should cost $5000 and divorce should cost ten bucks.
2) Matriarchy. All women keep the names they have now, and upon marriage the man, if he chooses, takes that name. Children take the mother's surname in all cases.
The whole subject of "illegitimacy" goes where it belongs, into oblivion as a biological absurdity.
Of course I also think we should experiment with men being forbidden to vote for a couple of hundred years, but I guess that's OT.
It sounds like he is restricted by the support laws (which obviously need to be changed).
Willow
Willow (welcome aboard BTW, relax, you're among friends) that was my second thought too when I saw this story.
I mean, the "husband" in this case has been in jail for two friggin' years. The odds of him being the father of the child due in March would seem low. And given the offense for which he was incarcerated (and most places you have to reall beat the crap out of somebody to get 2+ years in the slam) he seems undeserving of the honor of fatherhood anyway.
Sounds to me like the intent of the law here is to keep bad sperm donors from skipping out on their duty to support their progeny rather than to enforce some sort of Talibanic women-as-breeding-stock property theory.
Of course this ties in with two of my other pet causes:
1) If you want to cut down on divorce and make people take the institution more seriously, marriage licenses should cost $5000 and divorce should cost ten bucks.
2) Matriarchy. All women keep the names they have now, and upon marriage the man, if he chooses, takes that name. Children take the mother's surname in all cases.
The whole subject of "illegitimacy" goes where it belongs, into oblivion as a biological absurdity.
Of course I also think we should experiment with men being forbidden to vote for a couple of hundred years, but I guess that's OT.
Dial it down? Take your own advice, please. Your opinions make you no better than those you despise. I have seen people lambasted quickly on these forums for one dissenting opinion. Using the pronoun we to coalesce yourself within a group while you are sitting alone anonymously typing words into a computer is disingenuous, at best.
Dial it down? Take your own advice, please. Your opinions make you no better than those you despise. I have seen people lambasted quickly on these forums for one dissenting opinion. Using the pronoun we to coalesce yourself within a group while you are sitting alone anonymously typing words into a computer is disingenuous, at best.
Xan- Of course I also think we should experiment with men being forbidden to vote for a couple of hundred years, but I guess that's OT.
heh. Turnabout is fair play, no?
Xan- Of course I also think we should experiment with men being forbidden to vote for a couple of hundred years, but I guess that's OT.
heh. Turnabout is fair play, no?
Oh crap - I hate hate hate the "holier than thou" trolls. Most obnoxious, boring, pretentious trolls on the net.
Oh crap - I hate hate hate the "holier than thou" trolls. Most obnoxious, boring, pretentious trolls on the net.
When will people begin to see that heterosexual marriage is unnatural and a threat to everything we hold dear?
When will people begin to see that heterosexual marriage is unnatural and a threat to everything we hold dear?
So, people on her want to remove the rights from men that have been denied women for centuries, and I am a holier-than-thou troll. Thank you for proving my point. You are all as sick and judgemental as those you hate.
So, people on her want to remove the rights from men that have been denied women for centuries, and I am a holier-than-thou troll. Thank you for proving my point. You are all as sick and judgemental as those you hate.
Where's the Right decrying "activist judges"?
Oh, that's right. They only complain when the judges expand freedom and opportunity.
Idiotas.
Where's the Right decrying "activist judges"?
Oh, that's right. They only complain when the judges expand freedom and opportunity.
Idiotas.
Yep, most obnoxious, boring, pretentious trolls on the net.
Absolutely.
Yep, most obnoxious, boring, pretentious trolls on the net.
Absolutely.
Just drank Kool Aid. Must apologize. Agree with everything everyone has posted here. Heterosexual men...bad. Only women and gay men are right. Must apologize for Bible I don't believe and bad things I have never done. No longer a troll. Thank you wise halo scanners for allowing your lonliness to set me free.....
Just drank Kool Aid. Must apologize. Agree with everything everyone has posted here. Heterosexual men...bad. Only women and gay men are right. Must apologize for Bible I don't believe and bad things I have never done. No longer a troll. Thank you wise halo scanners for allowing your lonliness to set me free.....
Good Fuckin' Christ.
What the hell is wrong with you, JN? And what the hell is wrong with the ones we've had like you lately, who come in, yell at us, and then when we say, "WTF...?" yell at us again?
You want to be verbally attacked, boyo, trust me, you're going about it the right way.
Good Fuckin' Christ.
What the hell is wrong with you, JN? And what the hell is wrong with the ones we've had like you lately, who come in, yell at us, and then when we say, "WTF...?" yell at us again?
You want to be verbally attacked, boyo, trust me, you're going about it the right way.
No one yelled at you, you hyper-sensitive twit. There's nothing wrong with me. I judged no one without facts. Unlike you. Get over yourself. The trolls are on the bridge today.
No one yelled at you, you hyper-sensitive twit. There's nothing wrong with me. I judged no one without facts. Unlike you. Get over yourself. The trolls are on the bridge today.
The illegitimate thing is just not a real issue. A child conceived during the marriage is a child of that marriage, whether or not it was born while that marriage existed or after the marriage is over.
Although I have seen judges who refuse to give women divorces when they were pregnanat that was years ago, at least in Ohio and in the very rural counties I practice in. I am amazed to see this going on in Washington.
I would agree that there seems to be something else here, although God knows what.
The illegitimate thing is just not a real issue. A child conceived during the marriage is a child of that marriage, whether or not it was born while that marriage existed or after the marriage is over.
Although I have seen judges who refuse to give women divorces when they were pregnanat that was years ago, at least in Ohio and in the very rural counties I practice in. I am amazed to see this going on in Washington.
I would agree that there seems to be something else here, although God knows what.
Oh, zand I'm leaving now. Breathe a collective sigh of relief, as dissent here is as welcome as a three syllable word in a PDB.
Oh, zand I'm leaving now. Breathe a collective sigh of relief, as dissent here is as welcome as a three syllable word in a PDB.
He must be one of those 'activist' judges that Bu$shCo despises so much - oh, wait ...
He must be one of those 'activist' judges that Bu$shCo despises so much - oh, wait ...
No one yelled at you, you hyper-sensitive twit. There's nothing wrong with me. I judged no one without facts. Unlike you. Get over yourself. The trolls are on the bridge today.
Judge Not | Email | Homepage | 01.01.05 - 11:42 am
---
...
...
...Hah??
---
OK, the judge's ruling was absolutely ludicrous, but just as bizarre is all the judging in this forum. Do you know his case-law motivation or his political affiliation? Is he part of the red, right-wing, neo-con, pseudo-fascist, proselytizing, woman-hating death cult or the blue, traitor-bating, US-hating, Commie, Pinko, welfare-mommy-loving libruls? I do not think anyone here really knows. Yes, the deciscion was remarkably stupid, and seems to be motivated by religio-insanity, but until that is actually proven, the judgements passed here are no more refined. You are all acting like a bunch of uninformed, red state loonies. Yes, my differing opinion now classifies me as a troll. How refined we all are!
Judge Not | Email | Homepage | 01.01.05 - 11:14 am
Dial it down? Take your own advice, please. Your opinions make you no better than those you despise. I have seen people lambasted quickly on these forums for one dissenting opinion. Using the pronoun we to coalesce yourself within a group while you are sitting alone anonymously typing words into a computer is disingenuous, at best.
Judge Not | Email | Homepage | 01.01.05 - 11:28 am
If that ain't yelling at us, I don't know what it.
No one yelled at you, you hyper-sensitive twit. There's nothing wrong with me. I judged no one without facts. Unlike you. Get over yourself. The trolls are on the bridge today.
Judge Not | Email | Homepage | 01.01.05 - 11:42 am
---
...
...
...Hah??
---
OK, the judge's ruling was absolutely ludicrous, but just as bizarre is all the judging in this forum. Do you know his case-law motivation or his political affiliation? Is he part of the red, right-wing, neo-con, pseudo-fascist, proselytizing, woman-hating death cult or the blue, traitor-bating, US-hating, Commie, Pinko, welfare-mommy-loving libruls? I do not think anyone here really knows. Yes, the deciscion was remarkably stupid, and seems to be motivated by religio-insanity, but until that is actually proven, the judgements passed here are no more refined. You are all acting like a bunch of uninformed, red state loonies. Yes, my differing opinion now classifies me as a troll. How refined we all are!
Judge Not | Email | Homepage | 01.01.05 - 11:14 am
Dial it down? Take your own advice, please. Your opinions make you no better than those you despise. I have seen people lambasted quickly on these forums for one dissenting opinion. Using the pronoun we to coalesce yourself within a group while you are sitting alone anonymously typing words into a computer is disingenuous, at best.
Judge Not | Email | Homepage | 01.01.05 - 11:28 am
If that ain't yelling at us, I don't know what it.
Oh, zand I'm leaving now. Breathe a collective sigh of relief, as dissent here is as welcome as a three syllable word in a PDB.
Judge Not | Email | Homepage | 01.01.05 - 11:45 am
[rolls eyes] Buh-bye.
Oh, zand I'm leaving now. Breathe a collective sigh of relief, as dissent here is as welcome as a three syllable word in a PDB.
Judge Not | Email | Homepage | 01.01.05 - 11:45 am
[rolls eyes] Buh-bye.
*sigh*
jackass.
*sigh*
jackass.
Heck with him. How you doin', Tena?
Heck with him. How you doin', Tena?
lawguy - I agree with you - and judges being what they are, when I was doing domestic relations stuff (under duress because I hate that area of practice,) I told my female divorce clients that it would be very much for the best if they weren't pregnant.
You never know what a judge is going to do. There are things a lawyer can do if the judge doesn't follow the law, but that just complicates and delays everything. In no-fault divorce cases, the last thing you want is a complication or a delay.
If a judge doesn't feel like granting a divorce, there isn't much a lawyer can do about it right at that moment.
lawguy - I agree with you - and judges being what they are, when I was doing domestic relations stuff (under duress because I hate that area of practice,) I told my female divorce clients that it would be very much for the best if they weren't pregnant.
You never know what a judge is going to do. There are things a lawyer can do if the judge doesn't follow the law, but that just complicates and delays everything. In no-fault divorce cases, the last thing you want is a complication or a delay.
If a judge doesn't feel like granting a divorce, there isn't much a lawyer can do about it right at that moment.
filkertom - I'm doing ok. Hope you are. I need to go get dressed because Mr. Tena and I are off to the hospital to see his mom.
I"ll check in later today.
Have fun.
Kick some self-righteous ass, will ya?
filkertom - I'm doing ok. Hope you are. I need to go get dressed because Mr. Tena and I are off to the hospital to see his mom.
I"ll check in later today.
Have fun.
Kick some self-righteous ass, will ya?
Yawn. A troll comes on the board, agrees wholeheartedly with a general opinion but takes exception to how and why people arrived at the opinion. Troll becomes critical and starts getting extremely cocky and unpleasant, begins maligning everyone for being "intolerant" and unable to listen to a dissenting opinion. Troll gets haughty and leaves.
This one trick pony graces us, what, only at least twice an hour?
Sigh.
Yawn. A troll comes on the board, agrees wholeheartedly with a general opinion but takes exception to how and why people arrived at the opinion. Troll becomes critical and starts getting extremely cocky and unpleasant, begins maligning everyone for being "intolerant" and unable to listen to a dissenting opinion. Troll gets haughty and leaves.
This one trick pony graces us, what, only at least twice an hour?
Sigh.
To play devil's advocates judge not does have one slight point. We don't know if this guy is simply trying to obey what he thinks is established law or something along those lines, or if he's just being some christ-fascist thug imposing his values on someone else.
Personally, I'm mixxed on the subject.
But we can clear all this by having someone look up his past rulings and confirm if the rules he claims to be complying with are of such a nature as to demand that he either comply with them or play it loose.
Other than that we shouldn't be too quick to jump on this issue this quickly without first knowing at least a little bit more background.
Let'er rip.
MYOB'
.
To play devil's advocates judge not does have one slight point. We don't know if this guy is simply trying to obey what he thinks is established law or something along those lines, or if he's just being some christ-fascist thug imposing his values on someone else.
Personally, I'm mixxed on the subject.
But we can clear all this by having someone look up his past rulings and confirm if the rules he claims to be complying with are of such a nature as to demand that he either comply with them or play it loose.
Other than that we shouldn't be too quick to jump on this issue this quickly without first knowing at least a little bit more background.
Let'er rip.
MYOB'
.
Tena -- will do. Hope you m-i-l is getting better, and hugs all around. As for me, I'm... dealing. We can talk about it privately later, if you like, but that sums it up as cogently as I care to go into here.
Stinky -- it is getting kinda crazy, innit? I'm beginning to worry. Some of them are sounding like Buddy who grew up to be Syndrome in The Incredibles, and, probability being what it is, at least one of 'em can build a death-ray. :-/
Tena -- will do. Hope you m-i-l is getting better, and hugs all around. As for me, I'm... dealing. We can talk about it privately later, if you like, but that sums it up as cogently as I care to go into here.
Stinky -- it is getting kinda crazy, innit? I'm beginning to worry. Some of them are sounding like Buddy who grew up to be Syndrome in The Incredibles, and, probability being what it is, at least one of 'em can build a death-ray. :-/
lawguy - I agree with you - and judges being what they are, when I was doing domestic relations stuff (under duress because I hate that area of practice,) I told my female divorce clients that it would be very much for the best if they weren't pregnant.
20 years ago, my pregnant sister was unable to apply for a bank loan in Idaho, there was (probably still is) a law saying that pregnant women cannot be trusted to be rational enough to enter into financial contracts.
I wish I were kidding.
lawguy - I agree with you - and judges being what they are, when I was doing domestic relations stuff (under duress because I hate that area of practice,) I told my female divorce clients that it would be very much for the best if they weren't pregnant.
20 years ago, my pregnant sister was unable to apply for a bank loan in Idaho, there was (probably still is) a law saying that pregnant women cannot be trusted to be rational enough to enter into financial contracts.
I wish I were kidding.
Judge Not,
For what it's worth, I am with you on this one, even though everything on the surface of this stinks to high heaven. In fact it stinks so much it seems like there must be eomething more to the story, although I can't imagine what it could possibly be. I am guessing that is what you are thinking too. On the other hand, statements like "you are all as sick and judgmental as those you hate" is along the same lines as the "we" that you correctly decried a moment ago. Also, some of the trolls that come through here are horrific human beings. People get pretty heated in response.
Judge Not,
For what it's worth, I am with you on this one, even though everything on the surface of this stinks to high heaven. In fact it stinks so much it seems like there must be eomething more to the story, although I can't imagine what it could possibly be. I am guessing that is what you are thinking too. On the other hand, statements like "you are all as sick and judgmental as those you hate" is along the same lines as the "we" that you correctly decried a moment ago. Also, some of the trolls that come through here are horrific human beings. People get pretty heated in response.
I know the usual rule is "don't feed the trolls". But it is amusing to see the veneer (of a rational dissenting view) break down so quickly.
Amusing but not very satisfying intellectually.
I know the usual rule is "don't feed the trolls". But it is amusing to see the veneer (of a rational dissenting view) break down so quickly.
Amusing but not very satisfying intellectually.
Judge Not is judging us based on our perceived attitudes. OK. In other news: Irony saw Judge Not approaching and ran away screaming.
Judge Not is judging us based on our perceived attitudes. OK. In other news: Irony saw Judge Not approaching and ran away screaming.
MYOB -- absolutely. As I tried to point out to JN, we were just starting to look into conflicting laws, and the specifics of this case and the legal personalities behind it are not yet known. I think it's perfectly natural to spend an hour or so snarling about the general look-and-feel of the thing before we start asking deeper questions, and then to focus on those.
What got me was that he basically said, You're all looking at this wrong, you suck, I must be a troll for saying so... all in his first post. And then kept hammering on how much we suck for thinking he was a troll.
Anyway, if he is actually gone -- or, bluntly, JN, even if you're still here -- the issues he raised are legitimate. And we should check 'em out at the first opportunity.
MYOB -- absolutely. As I tried to point out to JN, we were just starting to look into conflicting laws, and the specifics of this case and the legal personalities behind it are not yet known. I think it's perfectly natural to spend an hour or so snarling about the general look-and-feel of the thing before we start asking deeper questions, and then to focus on those.
What got me was that he basically said, You're all looking at this wrong, you suck, I must be a troll for saying so... all in his first post. And then kept hammering on how much we suck for thinking he was a troll.
Anyway, if he is actually gone -- or, bluntly, JN, even if you're still here -- the issues he raised are legitimate. And we should check 'em out at the first opportunity.
However, Stinky's last post is also a beutifully precise definition.
However, Stinky's last post is also a beutifully precise definition.
The judge in this case worships me, and hopes to use the child, once it is born, in a grotesque human sacrifice, and he feels that a "legitimate" child makes a better sacrifice. At least that theory explains all of the phenomena that have been reported.
The judge in this case worships me, and hopes to use the child, once it is born, in a grotesque human sacrifice, and he feels that a "legitimate" child makes a better sacrifice. At least that theory explains all of the phenomena that have been reported.
That's our Ba'al!
(Wahp-wahp-wahp-waaaaaa)
That's our Ba'al!
(Wahp-wahp-wahp-waaaaaa)
Hey now... I'm from Spokane. Even though it's Red country, I don't think anyone up there will let this one go by silently. This is one wacky court judge who will quickly be reprimanded, and the right decision will be produced. Having lived there for a long time, I can honestly say that the majority of Spokanites are sensible people - just don't go to Spokane Valley.
Hey now... I'm from Spokane. Even though it's Red country, I don't think anyone up there will let this one go by silently. This is one wacky court judge who will quickly be reprimanded, and the right decision will be produced. Having lived there for a long time, I can honestly say that the majority of Spokanites are sensible people - just don't go to Spokane Valley.
What got me was that he basically said, You're all looking at this wrong, you suck, I must be a troll for saying so... all in his first post. And then kept hammering on how much we suck for thinking he was a troll.
Anyway, if he is actually gone -- or, bluntly, JN, even if you're still here -- the issues he raised are legitimate. And we should check 'em out at the first opportunity.
filkertom
Still, filkertom, my reading on the patience thermometer is zero for these types of assholes. Right or wrong, legitimte issues or not, the piety is a turn off. I scroll on by.
What got me was that he basically said, You're all looking at this wrong, you suck, I must be a troll for saying so... all in his first post. And then kept hammering on how much we suck for thinking he was a troll.
Anyway, if he is actually gone -- or, bluntly, JN, even if you're still here -- the issues he raised are legitimate. And we should check 'em out at the first opportunity.
filkertom
Still, filkertom, my reading on the patience thermometer is zero for these types of assholes. Right or wrong, legitimte issues or not, the piety is a turn off. I scroll on by.
Filkerton, we are of agreement on this.
As far as I'm concerned 'judge not' had no right to judge everyone without first experiencing the overall tendency of this board's regular posters on varying subjects.
As you noted, we all made our initial 'gut-reacting' observation posts, but then we calmed down long enough to start being objective. Even I made my own normally sarcastic post.
I can only say for the hundreth time that this method of communication is extremely limited.
Absent any body language or otherwise personal charisma to aid in our efforts, expressing an opinion or trying to express a sarcastic gut reaction-like post will always attract both the best and worst from passerbys who aren't hip to the whole of the board's overall nature.
*sigh*
MYOB'
.
Filkerton, we are of agreement on this.
As far as I'm concerned 'judge not' had no right to judge everyone without first experiencing the overall tendency of this board's regular posters on varying subjects.
As you noted, we all made our initial 'gut-reacting' observation posts, but then we calmed down long enough to start being objective. Even I made my own normally sarcastic post.
I can only say for the hundreth time that this method of communication is extremely limited.
Absent any body language or otherwise personal charisma to aid in our efforts, expressing an opinion or trying to express a sarcastic gut reaction-like post will always attract both the best and worst from passerbys who aren't hip to the whole of the board's overall nature.
*sigh*
MYOB'
.
As quick as we are to note how the words of liberal persons are often misquoted or taken out of context can we be sure the judge in this case wasn't also misquoted? Did his ruling go on for several paragraphs only to have our sensationalist media quote the inflamatory parts he knows will cause the most controversy? We know this sh*t happens so if someone can get a transcript or something else which has his complete final statement on the case then we might be able to better gauge the attitude that was driving it.
MYOB'
.
As quick as we are to note how the words of liberal persons are often misquoted or taken out of context can we be sure the judge in this case wasn't also misquoted? Did his ruling go on for several paragraphs only to have our sensationalist media quote the inflamatory parts he knows will cause the most controversy? We know this sh*t happens so if someone can get a transcript or something else which has his complete final statement on the case then we might be able to better gauge the attitude that was driving it.
MYOB'
.
Vicki -- good morning, dear. And, I understand. As you well know, I've been having a hard time suffering twits lately, and I'm doing my best not to be one myself.
MYOB -- yeah, *sigh* sums it up nicely. Snark is not easy to express in text alone, or even with a few smilies. On the other hand, the bandwidth necessary for AtriosVideoIRC might bankrupt us all....
Vicki -- good morning, dear. And, I understand. As you well know, I've been having a hard time suffering twits lately, and I'm doing my best not to be one myself.
MYOB -- yeah, *sigh* sums it up nicely. Snark is not easy to express in text alone, or even with a few smilies. On the other hand, the bandwidth necessary for AtriosVideoIRC might bankrupt us all....
good morning, dear. And, I understand. As you well know, I've been having a hard time suffering twits lately, and I'm doing my best not to be one myself.
You are a truly good soul. I'm not as nice as you.
good morning, dear. And, I understand. As you well know, I've been having a hard time suffering twits lately, and I'm doing my best not to be one myself.
You are a truly good soul. I'm not as nice as you.
So...when do the honour killings begin?
and will there be a beard vendor 20 cubits from the stoning selling fake facial hair to women?
So...when do the honour killings begin?
and will there be a beard vendor 20 cubits from the stoning selling fake facial hair to women?
Drop a dime: (509) 477-5790
Send a letter:
Court Department 8:
Judge Paul A. Bastine
Superior Court
1116 West Broadway Avenue, County Courthouse
3rd & 4th Floors, Spokane, WA, 99260
Send an email: dept8@spokanecounty.org
Drop a dime: (509) 477-5790
Send a letter:
Court Department 8:
Judge Paul A. Bastine
Superior Court
1116 West Broadway Avenue, County Courthouse
3rd & 4th Floors, Spokane, WA, 99260
Send an email: dept8@spokanecounty.org
weblackey -- bwaha! I think that's my second favorite scene in Life of Brian, first being "Yes! We're all individuals!" and third being Biggus Dickus.
weblackey -- bwaha! I think that's my second favorite scene in Life of Brian, first being "Yes! We're all individuals!" and third being Biggus Dickus.
Vicki -- thanks kindly. I've made many stupid mistakes in my life, and I try not to make too many these days. There's a Lois McMaster Bujold quote about honor being what you know about yourself and reputation being what others know about you, and how things can get awful when those two conflict. So I do my best to keep the two in synch as much as possible.
Vicki -- thanks kindly. I've made many stupid mistakes in my life, and I try not to make too many these days. There's a Lois McMaster Bujold quote about honor being what you know about yourself and reputation being what others know about you, and how things can get awful when those two conflict. So I do my best to keep the two in synch as much as possible.
It seems to me this is excellent opportunity to create case law for women's rights, since it is such an absured ruling. If the woman appeals, she will win, that's for sure. Maybe Tina and other law experts here can comment on this?
It seems to me this is excellent opportunity to create case law for women's rights, since it is such an absured ruling. If the woman appeals, she will win, that's for sure. Maybe Tina and other law experts here can comment on this?
2005. I don't like it. I was just getting used to 2004. oh well
2005. I don't like it. I was just getting used to 2004. oh well
This is absolutely outrageous.
There needs to be a recall movement started...to remove that judge from the bench. He's a disgrace.
Show me where American marriage licenses state that a male OWNS a woman!
This is absolutely outrageous.
There needs to be a recall movement started...to remove that judge from the bench. He's a disgrace.
Show me where American marriage licenses state that a male OWNS a woman!
"20 years ago, my pregnant sister was unable to apply for a bank loan in Idaho, there was (probably still is) a law saying that pregnant women cannot be trusted to be rational enough to enter into financial contracts."
And who can forget the "good old days" when a woman had to ask her husband's permission to have a tubal ligation?
If they succeed in making divorces harder to obtain, there will be fewer and fewer people willing to get married.
This country really sucks anymore and I have never been more ashamed to be an American!
"20 years ago, my pregnant sister was unable to apply for a bank loan in Idaho, there was (probably still is) a law saying that pregnant women cannot be trusted to be rational enough to enter into financial contracts."
And who can forget the "good old days" when a woman had to ask her husband's permission to have a tubal ligation?
If they succeed in making divorces harder to obtain, there will be fewer and fewer people willing to get married.
This country really sucks anymore and I have never been more ashamed to be an American!
Tena..you get called some names...I've noticed that the last couple of days....what's that all about? Way to take it with grace.
Yes, filkertom, I need to get these movies again. Holy Grail and Life of Brian. It's one of my resolutions to break down this year and join the DVD revolution...I always join late...and get those two on DVD.
BTW...Are there any women here?
Tena..you get called some names...I've noticed that the last couple of days....what's that all about? Way to take it with grace.
Yes, filkertom, I need to get these movies again. Holy Grail and Life of Brian. It's one of my resolutions to break down this year and join the DVD revolution...I always join late...and get those two on DVD.
BTW...Are there any women here?
As I surf blogland, this judge is attacked by both left and right wing bloggers. But this series of comments is revealing. As a libertarian (what liberals used to be before they became socialists) I can see in these comments the reason the dem.s lost. Most of you have gone into a fantasy land of your own creation, driving away many of us.
As I surf blogland, this judge is attacked by both left and right wing bloggers. But this series of comments is revealing. As a libertarian (what liberals used to be before they became socialists) I can see in these comments the reason the dem.s lost. Most of you have gone into a fantasy land of your own creation, driving away many of us.
"Using the pronoun we to coalesce yourself within a group while you are sitting alone anonymously typing words into a computer is disingenuous, at best.
Judge Not "
No - the trolls do that. The one who crow that "WE won the election" - when they have "won" squat!
The ones who say "We are going to round you up and put you in camps."
The ones who say "We are going to bootstomp you", ad nauseam.
I always wonder what the "we" BS is about - do they fancy themselves royalty...or are they simply referring to the voices in their heads?
"Using the pronoun we to coalesce yourself within a group while you are sitting alone anonymously typing words into a computer is disingenuous, at best.
Judge Not "
No - the trolls do that. The one who crow that "WE won the election" - when they have "won" squat!
The ones who say "We are going to round you up and put you in camps."
The ones who say "We are going to bootstomp you", ad nauseam.
I always wonder what the "we" BS is about - do they fancy themselves royalty...or are they simply referring to the voices in their heads?
Late to the thread, but I have one even better than Bobo.
One of my former co-workers was unable to get a divorce for just about this same reason. She left the husband, started living with another guy, got pregnant by him. Difference? Her husband all but killed one of their older children during one of their custodial visits shortly after she learned she was pregnant. He took two small children onto a boat on a lake, didn't give them life preservers (against the law here in Texas), started drinking beer and didn't notice when the 5 year old fell overboard until it was too late. No charges filed. NONE. But if she had done that, the legal system would have thrown the book at her.
His neglect and stupidity killed their child in May 2003. In December 2003, the state of Texas still hadn't given her a divorce by the time her child was born. She didn't go back to the husband--nice try, Texas. She put the real father's name on the birth certificate--DUH, Texas. She's didn't stop living in sin with the father of her child--so much for the sanctity of marriage, Texas.
Stupid, stupid politicians.
Late to the thread, but I have one even better than Bobo.
One of my former co-workers was unable to get a divorce for just about this same reason. She left the husband, started living with another guy, got pregnant by him. Difference? Her husband all but killed one of their older children during one of their custodial visits shortly after she learned she was pregnant. He took two small children onto a boat on a lake, didn't give them life preservers (against the law here in Texas), started drinking beer and didn't notice when the 5 year old fell overboard until it was too late. No charges filed. NONE. But if she had done that, the legal system would have thrown the book at her.
His neglect and stupidity killed their child in May 2003. In December 2003, the state of Texas still hadn't given her a divorce by the time her child was born. She didn't go back to the husband--nice try, Texas. She put the real father's name on the birth certificate--DUH, Texas. She's didn't stop living in sin with the father of her child--so much for the sanctity of marriage, Texas.
Stupid, stupid politicians.
"BTW...Are there any women here?
weblackey"
Right here, web!
"BTW...Are there any women here?
weblackey"
Right here, web!
And who can forget the "good old days" when a woman had to ask her husband's permission to have a tubal ligation?
What good old days? I had to do that in 1992!
And who can forget the "good old days" when a woman had to ask her husband's permission to have a tubal ligation?
What good old days? I had to do that in 1992!
"As a libertarian (what liberals used to be before they became socialists) I can see in these comments the reason the dem.s lost. Most of you have gone into a fantasy land of your own creation, driving away many of us."
Socialists?
That's a BAD thing to be?
"As a libertarian (what liberals used to be before they became socialists) I can see in these comments the reason the dem.s lost. Most of you have gone into a fantasy land of your own creation, driving away many of us."
Socialists?
That's a BAD thing to be?
"And who can forget the "good old days" when a woman had to ask her husband's permission to have a tubal ligation?
What good old days? I had to do that in 1992!
LJ "
You're kidding!
Did you threaten to sorry their sorry asses?
"And who can forget the "good old days" when a woman had to ask her husband's permission to have a tubal ligation?
What good old days? I had to do that in 1992!
LJ "
You're kidding!
Did you threaten to sorry their sorry asses?
I'm sorry - I meant to type:
Did you threaten to SUE their sorry asses?
I would have!
I'm sorry - I meant to type:
Did you threaten to SUE their sorry asses?
I would have!
AYATOLLAH Paul Bastine.
AYATOLLAH Paul Bastine.
Kinda off topic but... Wow does she suck at picking boyfriends.
Hughes has stated in court records that the father is her boyfriend, Chauncey Jacques, who pleaded guilty to a gang-related shooting in 1998 that blinded an elderly man.
Seems kind of an unnecessary item in the article - I mean, it's about the divorce not the criminal record of the new boyfriend.
Kinda off topic but... Wow does she suck at picking boyfriends.
Hughes has stated in court records that the father is her boyfriend, Chauncey Jacques, who pleaded guilty to a gang-related shooting in 1998 that blinded an elderly man.
Seems kind of an unnecessary item in the article - I mean, it's about the divorce not the criminal record of the new boyfriend.
If its true that this judge has a liberal record, maybe he's acting from some misguided paternalistic attempt to protect this poor woman from herself. The father of the child is a gang banger who has been convicted of shooting and blinding an elderly man. Maybe he feels that if she has some time to cool off while bad choice number one is still in jail for beating her she'll reconsider marrying bad choice number two.
If its true that this judge has a liberal record, maybe he's acting from some misguided paternalistic attempt to protect this poor woman from herself. The father of the child is a gang banger who has been convicted of shooting and blinding an elderly man. Maybe he feels that if she has some time to cool off while bad choice number one is still in jail for beating her she'll reconsider marrying bad choice number two.
Just drank Kool Aid. Must apologize. Agree with everything everyone has posted here. Heterosexual men...bad. Only women and gay men are right. Must apologize for Bible I don't believe and bad things I have never done. No longer a troll. Thank you wise halo scanners for allowing your lonliness to set me free.....
Judge Not - 11:38 am
Damn, I'm glad JN finally got it together-- he's Of the Body now, fer sure.
It is funny, albeit irritating in a way that one prefers to do without: Way before I discovered Billmon, the metaphor of comments board (guestbook, chat room, discussion forum) as public house had occurred to me. So here "we" are-- and virtual we-ness exists, however ephemeral and problematic it may be-- sitting on our stools or in booths, knocking back a few and chatting away in our usual meandering, chaotic, fitful way about whatever's just been pinned to the bulletin board. Or we're flirting, or blogwhoring, or offering pet updates or personal news or whatever...
Then suddenly, "BANG!" The door is flung open, and some drink of water strides in, pointing its foreclaw in everyone's face and hissing forth some polemic invariably peppering bits of lucid dissent with scathing general denouncements of the abominable tenor of the discussion and the intellectual and ethical shortcomings of its participants ("us').
Then the Banger, apparently seeing itself as a swooping bird of prey or a striking snake who has successfully annihilated its prey with a blindingly quick precision strike, BANGS out as quickly as it banged in. And then, after a moment in which people recover and begin to mutter things like, "What the fuck was that?" or merely "Good riddance, jerkoff!", BANG goes the door again, and in leaps the Banger.
This time, the Banger begins its tirade with "A HA! Did someone here call me a jerkoff! This is merely a rhetorical device to enable the Banger to enhance his previous scathing denunciations with additional trenchant criticisms, e.g. you're all a bunch of half-witted, intellectually and spiritually bankrupt phonies and posers pathologically mired in cultish groupthink, and your typically shabby treatment of me, an honest Banger who just stepped in to this supposedly open and free forum proves it!
And so the passive-aggressive intruder is set to swing upon the door for hours, showing us the error of our ways. Only the handles change.
To summarize, this play from the Troll Playbook dates from the era when comment boards were executed in cunieform writing on wet clay tablets. I can't say that I never get tired of seeing it.
Just drank Kool Aid. Must apologize. Agree with everything everyone has posted here. Heterosexual men...bad. Only women and gay men are right. Must apologize for Bible I don't believe and bad things I have never done. No longer a troll. Thank you wise halo scanners for allowing your lonliness to set me free.....
Judge Not - 11:38 am
Damn, I'm glad JN finally got it together-- he's Of the Body now, fer sure.
It is funny, albeit irritating in a way that one prefers to do without: Way before I discovered Billmon, the metaphor of comments board (guestbook, chat room, discussion forum) as public house had occurred to me. So here "we" are-- and virtual we-ness exists, however ephemeral and problematic it may be-- sitting on our stools or in booths, knocking back a few and chatting away in our usual meandering, chaotic, fitful way about whatever's just been pinned to the bulletin board. Or we're flirting, or blogwhoring, or offering pet updates or personal news or whatever...
Then suddenly, "BANG!" The door is flung open, and some drink of water strides in, pointing its foreclaw in everyone's face and hissing forth some polemic invariably peppering bits of lucid dissent with scathing general denouncements of the abominable tenor of the discussion and the intellectual and ethical shortcomings of its participants ("us').
Then the Banger, apparently seeing itself as a swooping bird of prey or a striking snake who has successfully annihilated its prey with a blindingly quick precision strike, BANGS out as quickly as it banged in. And then, after a moment in which people recover and begin to mutter things like, "What the fuck was that?" or merely "Good riddance, jerkoff!", BANG goes the door again, and in leaps the Banger.
This time, the Banger begins its tirade with "A HA! Did someone here call me a jerkoff! This is merely a rhetorical device to enable the Banger to enhance his previous scathing denunciations with additional trenchant criticisms, e.g. you're all a bunch of half-witted, intellectually and spiritually bankrupt phonies and posers pathologically mired in cultish groupthink, and your typically shabby treatment of me, an honest Banger who just stepped in to this supposedly open and free forum proves it!
And so the passive-aggressive intruder is set to swing upon the door for hours, showing us the error of our ways. Only the handles change.
To summarize, this play from the Troll Playbook dates from the era when comment boards were executed in cunieform writing on wet clay tablets. I can't say that I never get tired of seeing it.
just in case anyone has lost track, this is Tom Foley's former congressional district, currently represented by the irredeemable George Nethercutt, just across the Idaho line from the Land of the Aryan Nations.
Supposedly in a "blue state".
Need I say more?
just in case anyone has lost track, this is Tom Foley's former congressional district, currently represented by the irredeemable George Nethercutt, just across the Idaho line from the Land of the Aryan Nations.
Supposedly in a "blue state".
Need I say more?
I don't mean to brag. Oh yes I do. I had this story a week ago and it was kind of old news then.
I don't mean to brag. Oh yes I do. I had this story a week ago and it was kind of old news then.
"As a libertarian (what liberals used to be before they became socialists) I can see in these comments the reason the dem.s lost. Most of you have gone into a fantasy land of your own creation, driving away many of us."
Libertarians are just whacko conservatives who don't realize there is a world out there beyond their own.
MYOB'
.
"As a libertarian (what liberals used to be before they became socialists) I can see in these comments the reason the dem.s lost. Most of you have gone into a fantasy land of your own creation, driving away many of us."
Libertarians are just whacko conservatives who don't realize there is a world out there beyond their own.
MYOB'
.
Fınally,
A Judge who recognızes that all lıfe ıs valuable...not just CONVENIENT lıfe.
You fuckwads suck.
Fınally,
A Judge who recognızes that all lıfe ıs valuable...not just CONVENIENT lıfe.
You fuckwads suck.
Fınally,
A Judge who recognızes that all lıfe ıs valuable...not just CONVENIENT lıfe.
You fuckwads suck.
Susan Sontag | Email | Homepage | 01.01.05 - 1:56 pm | #
Your right!
Where would we ever be without you?!
You may feel free to return to the white house with your objectives completed.
Happy trip!
No need for you to return. We'll be inspired for years to come in following your wisdom.
MYOB'
.
Fınally,
A Judge who recognızes that all lıfe ıs valuable...not just CONVENIENT lıfe.
You fuckwads suck.
Susan Sontag | Email | Homepage | 01.01.05 - 1:56 pm | #
Your right!
Where would we ever be without you?!
You may feel free to return to the white house with your objectives completed.
Happy trip!
No need for you to return. We'll be inspired for years to come in following your wisdom.
MYOB'
.
SS
How does the decision affect life? The baby will be born no matter what the judge says.
I suggest that you hold off on commenting until you are over the hangover.
SS
How does the decision affect life? The baby will be born no matter what the judge says.
I suggest that you hold off on commenting until you are over the hangover.
OK dumbasses, I'm only goıng to explaın thıs once...so lısten up.
Chıldren complete the junıor and adolescent years more well-adjusted when they have a mommy and daddy.
Thıs judge recognızes that.
He also understandsd that women get all 'hıggledy-pıggledy' when they're pregnant.
If she sleeps on ıt, she'll proabably change her mınd tommorrow. That's what we women do.
OK dumbasses, I'm only goıng to explaın thıs once...so lısten up.
Chıldren complete the junıor and adolescent years more well-adjusted when they have a mommy and daddy.
Thıs judge recognızes that.
He also understandsd that women get all 'hıggledy-pıggledy' when they're pregnant.
If she sleeps on ıt, she'll proabably change her mınd tommorrow. That's what we women do.
A Judge who recognızes that all lıfe ıs valuable...not just CONVENIENT lıfe.
You fuckwads suck.
ok, in the spirit of good will and brotherhood at the outset of a new year, we'll assume you came here and posted this bit of nonsense because you want to engage in an intelligent discussion, not (as is usually the case) just because you wanted to leave your big, greasy, steaming, turdlike opinion as a totem of your rage.
Are we to assume that you think this child whose life you supposedly hold so precious would be better off in a marital household irredeemably headed for divorce, in which the husband - who is not the child's father - has already been convicted as a wifebeater?
I can conceive of only two possibilities here. Either you are a inscrutable, bizarre would-be parody, or you are truly one of the very stupidest people it has ever been my lot to encounter, which, I can assure you, places you in what we might call "distinguished company".
You confused, conceited, ignorant ape.
A Judge who recognızes that all lıfe ıs valuable...not just CONVENIENT lıfe.
You fuckwads suck.
ok, in the spirit of good will and brotherhood at the outset of a new year, we'll assume you came here and posted this bit of nonsense because you want to engage in an intelligent discussion, not (as is usually the case) just because you wanted to leave your big, greasy, steaming, turdlike opinion as a totem of your rage.
Are we to assume that you think this child whose life you supposedly hold so precious would be better off in a marital household irredeemably headed for divorce, in which the husband - who is not the child's father - has already been convicted as a wifebeater?
I can conceive of only two possibilities here. Either you are a inscrutable, bizarre would-be parody, or you are truly one of the very stupidest people it has ever been my lot to encounter, which, I can assure you, places you in what we might call "distinguished company".
You confused, conceited, ignorant ape.
Actually had a case like this when I was practicing family law in Texas.
Mom & Dad separated, with two kids, and filed for divorce. Mom got a boyfriend, and got pregnant, while the divorce was pending. Under Texas law, the husband was the presumptive father of the child if it was born during wedlock. Mom was ready to give birth long before the divorce was ready to conclude. The legal issue was, how to overcome that presumption, one everyone agreed was not correct.
But in Austin, we had judges who were intelligent. It didn't crimp the divorce proceedings at all, just created a headache for the lawyers as to how to do it decently and in good order.
I can't imagine a judge who would make another man legally responsible for a child not his own. This is, on the face of the post by Atrios, completely whacked out.
Actually had a case like this when I was practicing family law in Texas.
Mom & Dad separated, with two kids, and filed for divorce. Mom got a boyfriend, and got pregnant, while the divorce was pending. Under Texas law, the husband was the presumptive father of the child if it was born during wedlock. Mom was ready to give birth long before the divorce was ready to conclude. The legal issue was, how to overcome that presumption, one everyone agreed was not correct.
But in Austin, we had judges who were intelligent. It didn't crimp the divorce proceedings at all, just created a headache for the lawyers as to how to do it decently and in good order.
I can't imagine a judge who would make another man legally responsible for a child not his own. This is, on the face of the post by Atrios, completely whacked out.
Chıldren complete the junıor and adolescent years more well-adjusted when they have a mommy and daddy.
And when Daddy is beating Mommy, and goes to jail for it? Why doesn't the judge recognize that?
Don't know of a judge in Austin, when I was practicing, who wouldn't have thought that issue more important than the child having two parents.
He also understandsd that women get all 'hıggledy-pıggledy' when they're pregnant.
If she sleeps on ıt, she'll proabably change her mınd tommorrow. That's what we women do.
Ah, yes, judges who decide cases based not on law, but on childish insult to adults. Great legal reasoning.
I'm thankful you are not a judge in any court of law in the land.
Chıldren complete the junıor and adolescent years more well-adjusted when they have a mommy and daddy.
And when Daddy is beating Mommy, and goes to jail for it? Why doesn't the judge recognize that?
Don't know of a judge in Austin, when I was practicing, who wouldn't have thought that issue more important than the child having two parents.
He also understandsd that women get all 'hıggledy-pıggledy' when they're pregnant.
If she sleeps on ıt, she'll proabably change her mınd tommorrow. That's what we women do.
Ah, yes, judges who decide cases based not on law, but on childish insult to adults. Great legal reasoning.
I'm thankful you are not a judge in any court of law in the land.
"It's not the child's fault that mom got pregnant," Bastine said. "The answer is, you don't go around doing that when you're not divorced."
Not exactly within the jurisdiction of the family court since, oh, 1940 or so.
In comments submitted to Bastine, Hughes said: "If this court vacates my divorce and requires me to stay married to a man I have no desire ever to have a relationship with and who has brought significant physical harm to me over the years, I would be emotionally devastated. If the court vacates my divorce and stays it until the birth of my child, it will prevent me from marrying the father of my child prior to her birth."
Gilliard calls it "Pure idiocy," and he is right. If Mom divorces not-father of child, and marries father-of-child before birth, no adoption procedures will be necessary. In fact, father-of-child will be responsible for the child born during wedlock.
This judge is, on this record, incompetent to rule in family law matters.
"It's not the child's fault that mom got pregnant," Bastine said. "The answer is, you don't go around doing that when you're not divorced."
Not exactly within the jurisdiction of the family court since, oh, 1940 or so.
In comments submitted to Bastine, Hughes said: "If this court vacates my divorce and requires me to stay married to a man I have no desire ever to have a relationship with and who has brought significant physical harm to me over the years, I would be emotionally devastated. If the court vacates my divorce and stays it until the birth of my child, it will prevent me from marrying the father of my child prior to her birth."
Gilliard calls it "Pure idiocy," and he is right. If Mom divorces not-father of child, and marries father-of-child before birth, no adoption procedures will be necessary. In fact, father-of-child will be responsible for the child born during wedlock.
This judge is, on this record, incompetent to rule in family law matters.
Not exactly within the jurisdiction of the family court since, oh, 1940 or so.
I don't know about texas, but the thing I find really amusing about this is that all grounds for divorce in Washington State are no-fault. This decision cannot possibly withstand appeal.
Not exactly within the jurisdiction of the family court since, oh, 1940 or so.
I don't know about texas, but the thing I find really amusing about this is that all grounds for divorce in Washington State are no-fault. This decision cannot possibly withstand appeal.
Hello! Husband in jail for beating her! Not his kid anyway!
What the hell is this judge smoking?
PS: So that's where the prison-bitch next to me came from.
Hello! Husband in jail for beating her! Not his kid anyway!
What the hell is this judge smoking?
PS: So that's where the prison-bitch next to me came from.
theodoric--
I'm trying to imagine a judge in Texas dumb enough to issue this kind of ruling. Actually, that's not hard. But no, it would not withstand appeal in Texas, either.
The problem for the mother is, it creates massive complications. She will have to terminate the husband's presumed parental rights (always an uphill fight, and usually rightly so), and then the new husband will have to go through adoption proceedings. This judge has simply made a simple matter that would require no court interdiction, a complex one that will involve the courts in ways that should be unnecessary.
So it violates the concept of judicial economy, too. The man is unfit to sit on the bench if he can't understand this.
theodoric--
I'm trying to imagine a judge in Texas dumb enough to issue this kind of ruling. Actually, that's not hard. But no, it would not withstand appeal in Texas, either.
The problem for the mother is, it creates massive complications. She will have to terminate the husband's presumed parental rights (always an uphill fight, and usually rightly so), and then the new husband will have to go through adoption proceedings. This judge has simply made a simple matter that would require no court interdiction, a complex one that will involve the courts in ways that should be unnecessary.
So it violates the concept of judicial economy, too. The man is unfit to sit on the bench if he can't understand this.
What the hell is this judge smoking?
hadn't thought of it in that light. This is pretty obviously an advanced case of Jeefer Madness (tm).
What the hell is this judge smoking?
hadn't thought of it in that light. This is pretty obviously an advanced case of Jeefer Madness (tm).
The man is unfit to sit on the bench if he can't understand this.
As I said upthread, George Nethercutt's district.
Even the last Democratic congressman from this district was stupid enough to sue his own constituents when they denied him the opportunity to run for a sixteenth term by passing a term limit initiative. (Granted, he was also Speaker of the House at the time, but I think the intervening years have shown that that's no longer a great testament to one's probity.)
The man is unfit to sit on the bench if he can't understand this.
As I said upthread, George Nethercutt's district.
Even the last Democratic congressman from this district was stupid enough to sue his own constituents when they denied him the opportunity to run for a sixteenth term by passing a term limit initiative. (Granted, he was also Speaker of the House at the time, but I think the intervening years have shown that that's no longer a great testament to one's probity.)
So it appears the judge is arguing labels start at birth and not at conception.
So it appears the judge is arguing labels start at birth and not at conception.
"Libertarians are just whacko conservatives who don't realize there is a world out there beyond their own."
I beg your pardon. Speaking as someone with deep libertarian sympathies on a number of issues, they are not "whacko conservatives". Granted, some of them take the mainstays of their political philosophy (emphasis on personal responsibility) much further than I would, but there's quite a bit of valid thought in the platform.
"Libertarians are just whacko conservatives who don't realize there is a world out there beyond their own."
I beg your pardon. Speaking as someone with deep libertarian sympathies on a number of issues, they are not "whacko conservatives". Granted, some of them take the mainstays of their political philosophy (emphasis on personal responsibility) much further than I would, but there's quite a bit of valid thought in the platform.
So I'm reading the post and all the commenting on the absurdity of some of our family law while listening to the extremely saccharine and nauseating commenting on the Rose Parade - whose theme this year is "families". I was kinda surpised James Dobson wasn't grand marshall instead of Mickey.
So I'm reading the post and all the commenting on the absurdity of some of our family law while listening to the extremely saccharine and nauseating commenting on the Rose Parade - whose theme this year is "families". I was kinda surpised James Dobson wasn't grand marshall instead of Mickey.
$350M = 1 1/2 days in Iraq.
$350M = 1 1/2 days in Iraq.
BYW, Washington state may be blue, but eastern Washington where Spokane is located is RED. MaryC
BYW, Washington state may be blue, but eastern Washington where Spokane is located is RED. MaryC
Two small children...asshole of a husband in jail. No job. She gets pregnant again?...Excellent choices.
Smart choices - 11:20 am
Dammit.
Maybe the condom broke.
Maybe she was on antibiotics and her pills failed.
Maybe she forgot.
Maybe he's allergic to latex and the skin condom failed.
Maybe he/she/they were overcome with passion.
Maybe he/she/they had too much to drink.
Maybe he/she/they are irresponsible twits.
So, dammit, what?
Here we have sex that ended in pregnancy.
Usually doesn't.
Pregnancy occurred in the female.
Usually does.
Women don't get pregnant alone.
Women are no better and no worse than men in controlling their sexual behavior.
No more and no less responsible.
The only damn difference is that women get pregnant when they have sex.
Men don't.
Until women are allowed to be as smart, dumb, responsible, irresponsible, moral, immoral, outstanding, mediocre as any man we are not equal.
Every time I see a remark like this I am reminded of how far we have to go.
/rant
Sigh.
Happy New Year.
Two small children...asshole of a husband in jail. No job. She gets pregnant again?...Excellent choices.
Smart choices - 11:20 am
Dammit.
Maybe the condom broke.
Maybe she was on antibiotics and her pills failed.
Maybe she forgot.
Maybe he's allergic to latex and the skin condom failed.
Maybe he/she/they were overcome with passion.
Maybe he/she/they had too much to drink.
Maybe he/she/they are irresponsible twits.
So, dammit, what?
Here we have sex that ended in pregnancy.
Usually doesn't.
Pregnancy occurred in the female.
Usually does.
Women don't get pregnant alone.
Women are no better and no worse than men in controlling their sexual behavior.
No more and no less responsible.
The only damn difference is that women get pregnant when they have sex.
Men don't.
Until women are allowed to be as smart, dumb, responsible, irresponsible, moral, immoral, outstanding, mediocre as any man we are not equal.
Every time I see a remark like this I am reminded of how far we have to go.
/rant
Sigh.
Happy New Year.
I'm a Texas divorce lawyer, and at least where I practice, women are not allowed to get a divorce finalized while they are pregnant. It's an "unwritten law." In the age of pre-natal DNA testing, it's also an archaic absurdity.
I'm a Texas divorce lawyer, and at least where I practice, women are not allowed to get a divorce finalized while they are pregnant. It's an "unwritten law." In the age of pre-natal DNA testing, it's also an archaic absurdity.
As anyone who has ever gotten divorced knows, determining the custody and support issues of the children is a major part of the decree. Providing false information on pregnancy, as this women did, caused the divorce to have to be reconsidered to determine child rights issues. Rant all you want about how this is oppressive and indicative of how right wing the country is (and god knows it is right wing) but I will take a government that cares about children enough to wait for a paternity test before issuing a decree. Best to find another issue on which to fault the right. You won't have to work hard to do that.
As anyone who has ever gotten divorced knows, determining the custody and support issues of the children is a major part of the decree. Providing false information on pregnancy, as this women did, caused the divorce to have to be reconsidered to determine child rights issues. Rant all you want about how this is oppressive and indicative of how right wing the country is (and god knows it is right wing) but I will take a government that cares about children enough to wait for a paternity test before issuing a decree. Best to find another issue on which to fault the right. You won't have to work hard to do that.
RE: "...women are not allowed to get a divorce finalized while they are pregnant.
HERE IS THE DEAL, when a woman has a baby when married the husband is assumed the father [even if DNA proves he is not] and is liable for child-support. It seems to me that the judge wants to be sure that the state has someone [anyone] on the hook for child-support.
RE: "...women are not allowed to get a divorce finalized while they are pregnant.
HERE IS THE DEAL, when a woman has a baby when married the husband is assumed the father [even if DNA proves he is not] and is liable for child-support. It seems to me that the judge wants to be sure that the state has someone [anyone] on the hook for child-support.
If I may play devil's advocate here yet again, it appears to me that a great deal of the judge's opinion might rest on the fact the plaintiff didn't bother to get the divorce until it was an issue with her current relationship. I don't know how it was handled. Did Shawnna Hughes try to get the paperwork going right after her husband Carlos was convicted 2 years earlier? Apparantly not, but if someone can show that she did then the issue's dead in the water cause it showed that she tried to take care of it.
But from all speculation based on the current bits of information Shawnna Hughes didn't do shit until it was inconvenient.
Whether the judge was legally bound to prevent the divorce prevents me from judging him any further until someone can show me the facts contradicting the judge's stated reasons for his judgement.
The fact Hughes chose to continue being married when she had all the time in the world to get the paperwork filed shows that perhaps Shawnna Hughes is probably one of the dumbest idiots in the state of Washington.
As Robert has stated though, the judge hasn't really made things any easier for all involved. In fact it simply made things more complicated.
I think this is a case where all involved are a bunch of damned morons.
MYOB'
.
If I may play devil's advocate here yet again, it appears to me that a great deal of the judge's opinion might rest on the fact the plaintiff didn't bother to get the divorce until it was an issue with her current relationship. I don't know how it was handled. Did Shawnna Hughes try to get the paperwork going right after her husband Carlos was convicted 2 years earlier? Apparantly not, but if someone can show that she did then the issue's dead in the water cause it showed that she tried to take care of it.
But from all speculation based on the current bits of information Shawnna Hughes didn't do shit until it was inconvenient.
Whether the judge was legally bound to prevent the divorce prevents me from judging him any further until someone can show me the facts contradicting the judge's stated reasons for his judgement.
The fact Hughes chose to continue being married when she had all the time in the world to get the paperwork filed shows that perhaps Shawnna Hughes is probably one of the dumbest idiots in the state of Washington.
As Robert has stated though, the judge hasn't really made things any easier for all involved. In fact it simply made things more complicated.
I think this is a case where all involved are a bunch of damned morons.
MYOB'
.
"So I'm reading the post and all the commenting on the absurdity of some of our family law while listening to the extremely saccharine and nauseating commenting on the Rose Parade - whose theme this year is "families". I was kinda surpised James Dobson wasn't grand marshall instead of Mickey.
flory"
Since when has THAT part of California ever been cognizant of the REAL world?
"So I'm reading the post and all the commenting on the absurdity of some of our family law while listening to the extremely saccharine and nauseating commenting on the Rose Parade - whose theme this year is "families". I was kinda surpised James Dobson wasn't grand marshall instead of Mickey.
flory"
Since when has THAT part of California ever been cognizant of the REAL world?
I will take a government that cares about children enough to wait for a paternity test before issuing a decree.
Oh, I see. A fetus has more rights than a woman.
God bless MURKA.
I will take a government that cares about children enough to wait for a paternity test before issuing a decree.
Oh, I see. A fetus has more rights than a woman.
God bless MURKA.
Hm. The timing's weird; if she filed for divorce in April, the divorce should have been final by July (court date very shortly after a 3 month waiting period). At that point she probably wouldn't even know she was pregnant yet so the papers wouldn't have been amended and this whole problem wouldn't have come up.
That was the timeline for my divorce in Seattle; I can't fathom the reason for the delay.
However, the ruling is strange indeed.
Hm. The timing's weird; if she filed for divorce in April, the divorce should have been final by July (court date very shortly after a 3 month waiting period). At that point she probably wouldn't even know she was pregnant yet so the papers wouldn't have been amended and this whole problem wouldn't have come up.
That was the timeline for my divorce in Seattle; I can't fathom the reason for the delay.
However, the ruling is strange indeed.
"He also understandsd that women get all 'hıggledy-pıggledy' when they're pregnant.
If she sleeps on ıt, she'll proabably change her mınd tommorrow. That's what we women do."
Sexist jerkoff!
"He also understandsd that women get all 'hıggledy-pıggledy' when they're pregnant.
If she sleeps on ıt, she'll proabably change her mınd tommorrow. That's what we women do."
Sexist jerkoff!
America,
2005 going on 1505
America,
2005 going on 1505
Terry:
Since when has THAT part of California ever been cognizant of the REAL world?
True - and they did make Disneyland official co-sponsor this year.
Terry:
Since when has THAT part of California ever been cognizant of the REAL world?
True - and they did make Disneyland official co-sponsor this year.
Welcome to Dark Ages II: The Rise of Idiocy.
Welcome to Dark Ages II: The Rise of Idiocy.
Horray for the "defence" of "marriage".
Maybe this explains whay all those wifebeater fuckers voted for that shit-stain Bush - so their domestic slaves couldn't get all uppity and backsassy and leavin'.
What's next? A return to "honour" killin' as a defence against murderin' your wife?
Fucking. Bastards.
.
Horray for the "defence" of "marriage".
Maybe this explains whay all those wifebeater fuckers voted for that shit-stain Bush - so their domestic slaves couldn't get all uppity and backsassy and leavin'.
What's next? A return to "honour" killin' as a defence against murderin' your wife?
Fucking. Bastards.
.
America,
2005 going on 1505
scott mcarthur | Email | Homepage | 01.01.05 - 5:45 pm | #
Why does everyone think we have to go back 500+ years to find when these kinds of rulings were handed down?
They were doing it this way pretty much the whole way till the 1960's, and even then there were still states that kept it going into the 1980's.
For crying out loud! They had blue laws until only a few years ago in some states. I know the Dallas area had one in 1979 cause I was living in Plano at the time. We had a neighbor who couldn't buy diapers for her kid who was pissing shit all day long. Can you imagine that? Not being able to buy lousy freaking diapers cause it might offend god?????
So this notion of having to go back to the dark ages isn't correct(not that I'm trying to single you out Scott as Hughes lawyer also makes a similar remark in the link)
MYOB'
.
America,
2005 going on 1505
scott mcarthur | Email | Homepage | 01.01.05 - 5:45 pm | #
Why does everyone think we have to go back 500+ years to find when these kinds of rulings were handed down?
They were doing it this way pretty much the whole way till the 1960's, and even then there were still states that kept it going into the 1980's.
For crying out loud! They had blue laws until only a few years ago in some states. I know the Dallas area had one in 1979 cause I was living in Plano at the time. We had a neighbor who couldn't buy diapers for her kid who was pissing shit all day long. Can you imagine that? Not being able to buy lousy freaking diapers cause it might offend god?????
So this notion of having to go back to the dark ages isn't correct(not that I'm trying to single you out Scott as Hughes lawyer also makes a similar remark in the link)
MYOB'
.
filkertom,
Anyone who quotes from the Miles and friends and the works of Lois McMaster Bujold is aces in my book!
Just added your blog to my reading list.
Didja all notice the difference between the response to Willow and Judge Not? Both posted ideas that went against the tone of the first few comments, but Willow was not only welcomed, but encouraged. Willow helped remind people that we need to remember that things are not always as they appear on first glance. She did research and then gave the group a gentle nudge. The majority of the group responded well. It was good info, it was well said and it moved the conversation forward.
If this conversation was a contest (which it is not) she would have "won". But it is a discussion and her ideas were more pursuavive. Judge Not, on the other hand choice a 'hectoring' tone that pissed people off. He might have also made some good points, but because of his style of writing, his assumptions of who was posting and why his ideas were not instantly accepted. Instead people felt attacked and responded in kind. What ever good ideas that Judge Not had were held back by his hectoring tone and sense of pre-emptive persecution.
Who moved minds to an expanded point of view? I submit Willow did, based on the follow up comments.
Judge Not may leave this forum with the percieved views that "those damn libs" don't listen to any decent, when in fact there is an example in this very thread there was some, but he might not have recognized it as such because it didn't follow the pattern that he demanded that it follow based on his world view of how forum posts are suppose to work.
As a communicator, Willow did a better job in the short term and maybe the long term. For people like Judge Not, who care about "winning" a conversation they have failed, but I don't expect a level of self awareness that will allow them to see this. The pattern is to rail against the system that didn't act the way they wanted.
By the way, I'm guessing at the gender of Willow and Judge Not. But if Willow is a man, he is a very effective male communicatior. If Judge Not is a woman I'll eat my pointy ears.
filkertom,
Anyone who quotes from the Miles and friends and the works of Lois McMaster Bujold is aces in my book!
Just added your blog to my reading list.
Didja all notice the difference between the response to Willow and Judge Not? Both posted ideas that went against the tone of the first few comments, but Willow was not only welcomed, but encouraged. Willow helped remind people that we need to remember that things are not always as they appear on first glance. She did research and then gave the group a gentle nudge. The majority of the group responded well. It was good info, it was well said and it moved the conversation forward.
If this conversation was a contest (which it is not) she would have "won". But it is a discussion and her ideas were more pursuavive. Judge Not, on the other hand choice a 'hectoring' tone that pissed people off. He might have also made some good points, but because of his style of writing, his assumptions of who was posting and why his ideas were not instantly accepted. Instead people felt attacked and responded in kind. What ever good ideas that Judge Not had were held back by his hectoring tone and sense of pre-emptive persecution.
Who moved minds to an expanded point of view? I submit Willow did, based on the follow up comments.
Judge Not may leave this forum with the percieved views that "those damn libs" don't listen to any decent, when in fact there is an example in this very thread there was some, but he might not have recognized it as such because it didn't follow the pattern that he demanded that it follow based on his world view of how forum posts are suppose to work.
As a communicator, Willow did a better job in the short term and maybe the long term. For people like Judge Not, who care about "winning" a conversation they have failed, but I don't expect a level of self awareness that will allow them to see this. The pattern is to rail against the system that didn't act the way they wanted.
By the way, I'm guessing at the gender of Willow and Judge Not. But if Willow is a man, he is a very effective male communicatior. If Judge Not is a woman I'll eat my pointy ears.
Advise the lawyer handling this case
that The Rule In Queen Anne's Case
provides that a pregnant woman can
get a divorce and have her child
recognized as "legitimate" if the
biological father acknowledges paternity.
Common law rule (not necessarily
applicable in Washington State, but
persuasive) is there is a PRESUMPTION
of paternity by the spouse, but this
can be overcome by a showing of lack of "access," coupled with admission of paternity by biological father.
Not usually necessary to do a DNA test
in utero on fetus.
But of course, with this particular judge, one may need to display a burning bush on a hillside or something similar.
Advise the lawyer handling this case
that The Rule In Queen Anne's Case
provides that a pregnant woman can
get a divorce and have her child
recognized as "legitimate" if the
biological father acknowledges paternity.
Common law rule (not necessarily
applicable in Washington State, but
persuasive) is there is a PRESUMPTION
of paternity by the spouse, but this
can be overcome by a showing of lack of "access," coupled with admission of paternity by biological father.
Not usually necessary to do a DNA test
in utero on fetus.
But of course, with this particular judge, one may need to display a burning bush on a hillside or something similar.
Thank you, clio. Well said. We'll never be equal until either men are held as accountable as we are for children or we're allowed to be as irresponsible as they are. Sure, men have to pay child support, but then again they don't have anyone regulating their bodies.
"There's a lot of case law that says it is important in this state that children not be illegitamized,"
I'm reading a lot about case law and unwritten laws (Texas) regarding divorce when the woman is pregnant. But still, this isn't "black letter law" is it? Surely women could fight it if they wanted to?
Thank you, clio. Well said. We'll never be equal until either men are held as accountable as we are for children or we're allowed to be as irresponsible as they are. Sure, men have to pay child support, but then again they don't have anyone regulating their bodies.
"There's a lot of case law that says it is important in this state that children not be illegitamized,"
I'm reading a lot about case law and unwritten laws (Texas) regarding divorce when the woman is pregnant. But still, this isn't "black letter law" is it? Surely women could fight it if they wanted to?
"...just across the Idaho line from the Land of the Aryan Nations."
The good people of Idaho bankrupted them [the A.N.] in court for their behavior and took away their hideout. Idaho is not as red as you think.
"...just across the Idaho line from the Land of the Aryan Nations."
The good people of Idaho bankrupted them [the A.N.] in court for their behavior and took away their hideout. Idaho is not as red as you think.
I'm getting really tired of this crap.
I'm getting really tired of this crap.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if the Right want's to "protect" the family and children, it should loudly and proudly ban divorce.
And the mission creep has begun!
Do we have a soundbite from CWA, yet?
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if the Right want's to "protect" the family and children, it should loudly and proudly ban divorce.
And the mission creep has begun!
Do we have a soundbite from CWA, yet?
I didn't even know that you needed a judge to get a divorce. I thought it was just a matter of paper work
I didn't even know that you needed a judge to get a divorce. I thought it was just a matter of paper work
Wow, thanks Spocko. I will try to be less shy around here from now on. You are correct about my gender btw. And I do think the situation is horrendous, I just hope the focus stays on the unjust system rather than an apparently woman friendly judge being dragged through the mud. We simply don't have enough information to draw any conclusions.
Wow, thanks Spocko. I will try to be less shy around here from now on. You are correct about my gender btw. And I do think the situation is horrendous, I just hope the focus stays on the unjust system rather than an apparently woman friendly judge being dragged through the mud. We simply don't have enough information to draw any conclusions.
I know this is really late on the thread but it has to be pointed out, this woman got her divorce, and the judge recinded it after it was granted.
It was an unwanted and unasked for divorce mulligan.
(What is it with Washington and mulligans? Dino Rossi wants one in the governor's election with a revote.)
NO MULLIGANS!
Tow
I know this is really late on the thread but it has to be pointed out, this woman got her divorce, and the judge recinded it after it was granted.
It was an unwanted and unasked for divorce mulligan.
(What is it with Washington and mulligans? Dino Rossi wants one in the governor's election with a revote.)
NO MULLIGANS!
Tow
You are most welcome Willow. I plan to use your story and your post to illustrate the power of effective posting on blogs when my new book comes out in the Fall of 2009 "Blog This! Or How Blogs brought down the Bush White House in 5 easy steps"
Seriously, well done. Stop by my blog some time and post. I'd be honored to have you as a reader.
Spocko. Author of
Spocko's Brain, the blog that is sweeping the nation. Now with 6 readers!
You are most welcome Willow. I plan to use your story and your post to illustrate the power of effective posting on blogs when my new book comes out in the Fall of 2009 "Blog This! Or How Blogs brought down the Bush White House in 5 easy steps"
Seriously, well done. Stop by my blog some time and post. I'd be honored to have you as a reader.
Spocko. Author of
Spocko's Brain, the blog that is sweeping the nation. Now with 6 readers!
There's a lot of case law that says it is important in this state that children not be illegitamized
Which is an argument for another case.
The woman is carrying a fetus; as of yet, there are no children involved in this matter.
That judge is a neanderthal who needs to be removed from the bench.
There's a lot of case law that says it is important in this state that children not be illegitamized
Which is an argument for another case.
The woman is carrying a fetus; as of yet, there are no children involved in this matter.
That judge is a neanderthal who needs to be removed from the bench.
Back in Iraq, Sunni militants are promising to attack the US "homeland." They seem unimpressed with the wisdom of our electorate. Here are a few excerpts from Canada's National Post:
"We address you after you finished celebrating the new year, hoping that you are no longer drunk.... We will give American civilians a taste of what civilians in our country go through," said the statement, presented as a "message to the American people."
The statement, which described Americans as "uncivilized" and "ignorant," claimed that "the whole world" hates the United States.
"Are you aware that the number of those who support striking America on its own turf has greatly increased?" it said.
"Last year was a picnic for your soldiers [in Iraq]. The year 2005 will witness a quantitative and qualitative change in the operations against your army, which will go down in history," the statement said.
--snip--(I wish Haloscan had one of those little scissors graphics)
"Those who participate in this dirty farce will not be sheltered from the blows of the mujahedeen," the statement said.
http://tinyurl.com/3t5zq
Back in Iraq, Sunni militants are promising to attack the US "homeland." They seem unimpressed with the wisdom of our electorate. Here are a few excerpts from Canada's National Post:
"We address you after you finished celebrating the new year, hoping that you are no longer drunk.... We will give American civilians a taste of what civilians in our country go through," said the statement, presented as a "message to the American people."
The statement, which described Americans as "uncivilized" and "ignorant," claimed that "the whole world" hates the United States.
"Are you aware that the number of those who support striking America on its own turf has greatly increased?" it said.
"Last year was a picnic for your soldiers [in Iraq]. The year 2005 will witness a quantitative and qualitative change in the operations against your army, which will go down in history," the statement said.
--snip--(I wish Haloscan had one of those little scissors graphics)
"Those who participate in this dirty farce will not be sheltered from the blows of the mujahedeen," the statement said.
http://tinyurl.com/3t5zq
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
