20 year goes clubbing - leaves 3 babies alone

[Ravi]

Help me out, Corndog...where did Ravi say that a man should be CRIMINALLY LIABLE for leaving his kids?

Did you even bother to read the thread, or just decide to attack me? Obviously you didn't read it, this is her first post

The father(s) should be in jail, too. Did they not also abandon the kids?

Which she still continues to defend.

I did not see that line.

OMG! Ravi...what a despicable human being!!!

You forgot to call me a ******.

 

[ConHog]

Maybe. But if an actual child is born the woman is not free to abandon it or she risks arrest. The man, not so much.

Bullshit

If I left my kids alone to go out drinking, I'd be risking arrest just as much as any woman.

So if your wife ran off (abandoned her family) she is absolved of all responsibility in the matter? Why?

She certainly shouldn't go to jail. Why? Because she broke no laws, you moron.

 

[xotoxi]

Maybe. But if an actual child is born the woman is not free to abandon it or she risks arrest. The man, not so much.

Bullshit

If I left my kids alone to go out drinking, I'd be risking arrest just as much as any woman.

So if your wife ran off (abandoned her family) she is absolved of all responsibility in the matter? Why?

That is similar to saying that someone should be found guilty for murder because they purchased the first beer at their friend's 21st birthday, which started their friend on a 10 year path of alcoholism, which cluminated in a drunken driving homicide.

If someone abandons their family, sure they are a sleezebag, but it doesn't make them criminally or civily responsible for their child's caregiver going out clubbing one night.

 

[xotoxi]

Did you even bother to read the thread, or just decide to attack me? Obviously you didn't read it, this is her first post




Which she still continues to defend.

I did not see that line.

OMG! Ravi...what a despicable human being!!!

You forgot to call me a ******.

******.

 

[ConHog]

Bullshit

If I left my kids alone to go out drinking, I'd be risking arrest just as much as any woman.

So if your wife ran off (abandoned her family) she is absolved of all responsibility in the matter? Why?

That is similar to saying that someone should be found guilty for murder because they purchased the first beer at their friend's 21st birthday, which started their friend on a 10 year path of alcoholism, which cluminated in a drunken driving homicide.

If someone abandons their family, sure they are a sleezebag, but it doesn't make them criminally or civily responsible for their child's caregiver going out clubbing one night.

So you now agree that yes Ravi did say she wants the father(s) held criminally responsible and that that is an idiotic statement?

Nice analogy by the way, very appropriate.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Did you even bother to read the thread, or just decide to attack me? Obviously you didn't read it, this is her first post




Which she still continues to defend.

I did not see that line.

OMG! Ravi...what a despicable human being!!!

You forgot to call me a ******.

you should be pissed on, have your arm broken in two places, and then be gunned down from a machine gun nest.

 

[Ravi]

Bullshit

If I left my kids alone to go out drinking, I'd be risking arrest just as much as any woman.

So if your wife ran off (abandoned her family) she is absolved of all responsibility in the matter? Why?

That is similar to saying that someone should be found guilty for murder because they purchased the first beer at their friend's 21st birthday, which started their friend on a 10 year path of alcoholism, which cluminated in a drunken driving homicide.

If someone abandons their family, sure they are a sleezebag, but it doesn't make them criminally or civily responsible for their child's caregiver going out clubbing one night.

I'm not saying they are responsible for their child's caregiver's behavior. I'm saying they are responsible for their own behavior to a child that he or she is a parent to...unless they have contractually given up their rights, of course. Or unless they know their child's caregiver is a dangerous fruitloop.

 

[Ravi]

I did not see that line.

OMG! Ravi...what a despicable human being!!!

You forgot to call me a ******.

you should be pissed on, have your arm broken in two places, and then be gunned down from a machine gun nest.

heh...don't think someone on this board doesn't dream that dream.

 

[ConHog]

So if your wife ran off (abandoned her family) she is absolved of all responsibility in the matter? Why?

That is similar to saying that someone should be found guilty for murder because they purchased the first beer at their friend's 21st birthday, which started their friend on a 10 year path of alcoholism, which cluminated in a drunken driving homicide.

If someone abandons their family, sure they are a sleezebag, but it doesn't make them criminally or civily responsible for their child's caregiver going out clubbing one night.

I'm not saying they are responsible for their child's caregiver's behavior. I'm saying they are responsible for their own behavior to a child that he or she is a parent to...unless they have contractually given up their rights, of course. Or unless they know their child's caregiver is a dangerous fruitloop.

No Ravi, your first position was that the fathers of THIS woman's kids should be in jail, because she left them alone, you are now trying to back off that position, but it isn't going to fly

 

[xotoxi]

So if your wife ran off (abandoned her family) she is absolved of all responsibility in the matter? Why?

That is similar to saying that someone should be found guilty for murder because they purchased the first beer at their friend's 21st birthday, which started their friend on a 10 year path of alcoholism, which cluminated in a drunken driving homicide.

If someone abandons their family, sure they are a sleezebag, but it doesn't make them criminally or civily responsible for their child's caregiver going out clubbing one night.

I'm not saying they are responsible for their child's caregiver's behavior. I'm saying they are responsible for their own behavior to a child that he or she is a parent to...unless they have contractually given up their rights, of course. Or unless they know their child's caregiver is a dangerous fruitloop.

You think that they should be criminally responsible?

 

[xotoxi]

So if your wife ran off (abandoned her family) she is absolved of all responsibility in the matter? Why?

That is similar to saying that someone should be found guilty for murder because they purchased the first beer at their friend's 21st birthday, which started their friend on a 10 year path of alcoholism, which cluminated in a drunken driving homicide.

If someone abandons their family, sure they are a sleezebag, but it doesn't make them criminally or civily responsible for their child's caregiver going out clubbing one night.

So you now agree that yes Ravi did say she wants the father(s) held criminally responsible and that that is an idiotic statement?

Nice analogy by the way, very appropriate.

I'd have to say that I disagree with her statement. But Ravi is a pretty intelligent poster...she may just need to clarify.

But if she truly believes this, then I'd have to say that our opinions differ.

 

[Ravi]

That is similar to saying that someone should be found guilty for murder because they purchased the first beer at their friend's 21st birthday, which started their friend on a 10 year path of alcoholism, which cluminated in a drunken driving homicide.

If someone abandons their family, sure they are a sleezebag, but it doesn't make them criminally or civily responsible for their child's caregiver going out clubbing one night.

I'm not saying they are responsible for their child's caregiver's behavior. I'm saying they are responsible for their own behavior to a child that he or she is a parent to...unless they have contractually given up their rights, of course. Or unless they know their child's caregiver is a dangerous fruitloop.

You think that they should be criminally responsible?

No...a few nights in jail would suffice more than likely. Detain them until they can prove they are not irresponsible. Kind of like detaining illegal immigrants until their status is determined.

 

[ConHog]

That is similar to saying that someone should be found guilty for murder because they purchased the first beer at their friend's 21st birthday, which started their friend on a 10 year path of alcoholism, which cluminated in a drunken driving homicide.

If someone abandons their family, sure they are a sleezebag, but it doesn't make them criminally or civily responsible for their child's caregiver going out clubbing one night.

So you now agree that yes Ravi did say she wants the father(s) held criminally responsible and that that is an idiotic statement?

Nice analogy by the way, very appropriate.

I'd have to say that I disagree with her statement. But Ravi is a pretty intelligent poster...she may just need to clarify.

But if she truly believes this, then I'd have to say that our opinions differ.

No she isn't . She is incapable of accepting facts, she is incapable of saying "oh I was wrong" and she is a liar. Last week we had a 5 page thread on sanctuary cities, I proved 38 lies by her in those 5 pages , her response? nothing, she just left the thread. Not once did she even have the honesty to say "ok I wasn't trying to lie there, but obviously I was wrong since you just showed me actual constitutional law which proves I'm wrong" or anything like that. That isn't a smart poster.

The week before that we had a 40 page thread by Ravi entitled "Arizona Governer caught in Web of lies" in 40 pages when pressed by many posters , including myself, Ravi could not prove the woman told a single lie. Her response? She just deflected and then left the thread.

In EVERY thread her response is the same, deny everything and throw out the racism card. That isn't a smart poster. That is a child who can't debate.

 

[ConHog]

I'm not saying they are responsible for their child's caregiver's behavior. I'm saying they are responsible for their own behavior to a child that he or she is a parent to...unless they have contractually given up their rights, of course. Or unless they know their child's caregiver is a dangerous fruitloop.

You think that they should be criminally responsible?

No...a few nights in jail would suffice more than likely. Detain them until they can prove they are not irresponsible. Kind of like detaining illegal immigrants until their status is determined.

In this country, ONLY criminals are put in jail, so yes you are saying they should be held criminally responsible. Why are you so dishonest Ravi, just admit you want fathers in prison.

 

[Ravi]

You were wrong in that thread, too. Claiming you were right and claiming you proved anything is meaningless.

There is no federal law that forbids a city from being a sanctuary city and there is no requirement for a city to use their employees to enforce federal immigration law.

 

[manifold]

Maybe. But if an actual child is born the woman is not free to abandon it or she risks arrest. The man, not so much.

Bullshit

If I left my kids alone to go out drinking, I'd be risking arrest just as much as any woman.

So if your wife ran off (abandoned her family) she is absolved of all responsibility in the matter? Why?

Because that's life.

Just like the fact that the father has no say in a woman's decision to carry or terminate a pregnancy.

 

[xotoxi]

So you now agree that yes Ravi did say she wants the father(s) held criminally responsible and that that is an idiotic statement?

Nice analogy by the way, very appropriate.

I'd have to say that I disagree with her statement. But Ravi is a pretty intelligent poster...she may just need to clarify.

But if she truly believes this, then I'd have to say that our opinions differ.

No she isn't . She is incapable of accepting facts, she is incapable of saying "oh I was wrong" and she is a liar. Last week we had a 5 page thread on sanctuary cities, I proved 38 lies by her in those 5 pages , her response? nothing, she just left the thread. Not once did she even have the honesty to say "ok I wasn't trying to lie there, but obviously I was wrong since you just showed me actual constitutional law which proves I'm wrong" or anything like that. That isn't a smart poster.

The week before that we had a 40 page thread by Ravi entitled "Arizona Governer caught in Web of lies" in 40 pages when pressed by many posters , including myself, Ravi could not prove the woman told a single lie. Her response? She just deflected and then left the thread.

In EVERY thread her response is the same, deny everything and throw out the racism card. That isn't a smart poster. That is a child who can't debate.

And you respond with ad hominems?

 

[xotoxi]

I'm not saying they are responsible for their child's caregiver's behavior. I'm saying they are responsible for their own behavior to a child that he or she is a parent to...unless they have contractually given up their rights, of course. Or unless they know their child's caregiver is a dangerous fruitloop.

You think that they should be criminally responsible?

No...a few nights in jail would suffice more than likely. Detain them until they can prove they are not irresponsible. Kind of like detaining illegal immigrants until their status is determined.

Most of these absentee parents are nowhere to be found as it is.

 

[ConHog]

You were wrong in that thread, too. Claiming you were right and claiming you proved anything is meaningless.

There is no federal law that forbids a city from being a sanctuary city and there is no requirement for a city to use their employees to enforce federal immigration law.

Ravi, I showed you right in the fucking COTUS where it says that US FEDERAL law reigns supreme and that no jurisdiction within US borders may ignore or contradict US law. It's in the fucking document that makes us the country we are you ignorant bitch. Are you that incapable of admitting defeat?

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

How old are you? about fucking 5? No , my 5 year old niece can even admit when she is in error.

You're sheer stupidity is astounding.

 

[Father Time]

You think that they should be criminally responsible?

No...a few nights in jail would suffice more than likely. Detain them until they can prove they are not irresponsible. Kind of like detaining illegal immigrants until their status is determined.

In this country, ONLY criminals are put in jail,

Not true, if you are awaiting trial for certain crimes they can keep you in jail until the trial starts.