Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
So you would alright with someone taking your child to a church you don't approve of?Sounds like a judge that needs a new job off the bench and as bad as a judge who would give one parent no visitation rights whatsoever because the parent was not of the same religious cult as he was. In most states these judges do come up for re-election every two or four years.
I don't care if it is the girl's father, being a father doesn't automatically make you trustworthy.
But the Dad has an absolute right to see his child. So whether Mom trusts him or not is a moot point.
Never said he didn't, just said he should be supervised.
I don't care if it is the girl's father, being a father doesn't automatically make you trustworthy.
But the Dad has an absolute right to see his child. So whether Mom trusts him or not is a moot point.
Never said he didn't, just said he should be supervised.
So he takes his daughter to church and you think he shouldn't be allowed to have unsupervised visits.
WOW!
I knew you were an extreme feminist, but damn Ravi, that shit's just fuct!
YOu have to trust the people you leave your child with.
And the FATHER of the child taking her to church is cause for distrust... exactly why?
She has custody and is raising the child according to her religious views.
He sneaks the child off and has her baptised a Catholic.
And he still practiced Catholicism after he converted to Judiasm.
What a phony.
I have no sympathy for him. He shouldn't go to jail but he should loose some visitation rights.
I imagine you'd all be singing a different tune if he snuck her off and enrolled her in an Islamic religion.
Gee, it must be great to to so perfect that you have never made a mistake. And that you are more concerned with some form of punishment for the father that you're happy to see his kids suffer - because when you stop access between parent and child, it is the child who suffers most. Contrary to popular female belief, are not the property of a mother. They are people in their own right.
It is when I read posts like yours that I understand why lefties see abortion as acceptable. They don't care about the child after its born, so no wonder it's a struggle to care before it is.
I find it fascinating how many Americans are not in the slightest bit interested in the rights of others.
You have obviously never gone through a custody battle.
This man is playing games, and the only reason why he baptized that child was to get at her mom and you know it. I also think his visitations should be limited, because like you said it is the child who is going to suffer because her father is acting like a child himself.
If you are the primary care giver for the child/full custody it is up to you how that child is raised, and the father should only have some input.
YOu have to trust the people you leave your child with.
And the FATHER of the child taking her to church is cause for distrust... exactly why?
He took the child to church, knowing full well he was breaking the law. Why would I trust my child with someone who has no respect for a court order?
Never said he didn't, just said he should be supervised.
She has custody and is raising the child according to her religious views.
He sneaks the child off and has her baptised a Catholic.
And he still practiced Catholicism after he converted to Judiasm.
What a phony.
I have no sympathy for him. He shouldn't go to jail but he should loose some visitation rights.
I imagine you'd all be singing a different tune if he snuck her off and enrolled her in an Islamic religion.
Gee, it must be great to to so perfect that you have never made a mistake. And that you are more concerned with some form of punishment for the father that you're happy to see his kids suffer - because when you stop access between parent and child, it is the child who suffers most. Contrary to popular female belief, are not the property of a mother. They are people in their own right.
It is when I read posts like yours that I understand why lefties see abortion as acceptable. They don't care about the child after its born, so no wonder it's a struggle to care before it is.
I find it fascinating how many Americans are not in the slightest bit interested in the rights of others.The mother has custody, end of story. If the father had custody he would have the same right to pick which religion to raise the girl in. He is apparently using the child as a tool.
YOu have to trust the people you leave your child with.
And the FATHER of the child taking her to church is cause for distrust... exactly why?
He took the child to church, knowing full well he was breaking the law. Why would I trust my child with someone who has no respect for a court order?
But the Dad has an absolute right to see his child. So whether Mom trusts him or not is a moot point.
Never said he didn't, just said he should be supervised.
Why?
He's done absolutely nothing to endanger his daugher. Nothing.
Never said he didn't, just said he should be supervised.
Why?
He's done absolutely nothing to endanger his daugher. Nothing.
He broke the law and could be facing jail time, he is also making choices for the child without discussing it with the mother.
Why?
He's done absolutely nothing to endanger his daugher. Nothing.
He broke the law and could be facing jail time, he is also making choices for the child without discussing it with the mother.
So if you have ever gotten a speeding ticket, you should have to have supervised visitationas well.
After all if you have no respect for the law, you cannot be trusted with your own kids.
So you would alright with someone taking your child to a church you don't approve of?
Since when has a father been classified as 'someone'. It's his child too. Mothers do not have ownership of children - custody is not ownership. Kids ain't cars.
If you have full custody that means you are providing the majority of the care, and should have the last say in how the child is raised.
You have obviously never gone through a custody battle.
This man is playing games, and the only reason why he baptized that child was to get at her mom and you know it. I also think his visitations should be limited, because like you said it is the child who is going to suffer because her father is acting like a child himself.
If you are the primary care giver for the child/full custody it is up to you how that child is raised, and the father should only have some input.
Gee, don't you think that mom is doing the same thing? Mom is just as guilty of using the little girl as dad is.
Personally, I think that dad turned his back on Christ. He converted to Judaism in order to get the piece of as... er tail he wanted, but it was not a heart felt conversion. I don't believe that he is as faithful as he claims in the story. If he was, then he would not have converted.
It seems to me that both parents are using the little girl to hurt the other parent.
This is a very sad case and the one who will suffer the most is the little girl.
Immie
They decided to raise the child jewish, the child was going to a jewish daycare, the father knew the mother didn't want the child being raised catholic. He then had the child baptized, I don't think the mother is playing games at all. She is protecting her child from an idiot, who is putting himself before the child. Notice how the mom was not interviewed?
Gee, it must be great to to so perfect that you have never made a mistake. And that you are more concerned with some form of punishment for the father that you're happy to see his kids suffer - because when you stop access between parent and child, it is the child who suffers most. Contrary to popular female belief, are not the property of a mother. They are people in their own right.
It is when I read posts like yours that I understand why lefties see abortion as acceptable. They don't care about the child after its born, so no wonder it's a struggle to care before it is.
I find it fascinating how many Americans are not in the slightest bit interested in the rights of others.
You have obviously never gone through a custody battle.
This man is playing games, and the only reason why he baptized that child was to get at her mom and you know it. I also think his visitations should be limited, because like you said it is the child who is going to suffer because her father is acting like a child himself.
If you are the primary care giver for the child/full custody it is up to you how that child is raised, and the father should only have some input.
FACTUALLY AND LEGALLY WRONG. Once again dumb ass the non custodial parent has the LEGAL right to take their children to THEIR religious services when they have visitation. THAT includes Baptizing them in their church. You are a FUCKING DUMB FUCK.
She might be, but how do you get that idea from this story? The mother is raising the child according to her religious customs, the customs the father agreed to when he converted to Judiasm.You have obviously never gone through a custody battle.
This man is playing games, and the only reason why he baptized that child was to get at her mom and you know it. I also think his visitations should be limited, because like you said it is the child who is going to suffer because her father is acting like a child himself.
If you are the primary care giver for the child/full custody it is up to you how that child is raised, and the father should only have some input.
Gee, don't you think that mom is doing the same thing? Mom is just as guilty of using the little girl as dad is.
Personally, I think that dad turned his back on Christ. He converted to Judaism in order to get the piece of as... er tail he wanted, but it was not a heart felt conversion. I don't believe that he is as faithful as he claims in the story. If he was, then he would not have converted.
It seems to me that both parents are using the little girl to hurt the other parent.
This is a very sad case and the one who will suffer the most is the little girl.
Immie
You have obviously never gone through a custody battle.
This man is playing games, and the only reason why he baptized that child was to get at her mom and you know it. I also think his visitations should be limited, because like you said it is the child who is going to suffer because her father is acting like a child himself.
If you are the primary care giver for the child/full custody it is up to you how that child is raised, and the father should only have some input.
FACTUALLY AND LEGALLY WRONG. Once again dumb ass the non custodial parent has the LEGAL right to take their children to THEIR religious services when they have visitation. THAT includes Baptizing them in their church. You are a FUCKING DUMB FUCK.
Of course RGS has to come in calling name, while most everyone else has been respectful.
He was told not to take the child to church, Crimson already pointed out that the judge had the right to do so. It was also a temporary ruling, if you had any clue you would know it was not the judge's final decision.
