Poll. Please Vote. Did You Have a Mother & Father in Your Life?

[Silhouette]

You realize that your 'contract' gibberish has nothing to do with the actual law, right?

So....contract law is "gibberish". Well that will settle quite a lot of civil cases very differently...

 

[Skylar]

You realize that your 'contract' gibberish has nothing to do with the actual law, right?

So....contract law is "gibberish". Well that will settle quite a lot of civil cases very differently...

No, the pseudo-legal nonsense you've made up about contract law is gibberish.

And no civil case recognizes the nonsense you've made up. Show us one law or court case that recognizes children as parties to the marriage of their children.

Its just you.......citing you. And your source sucks.

 

[Silhouette]

A typical post from "Skylar" professional LGBT payroll troll..

The pseudo-legal gibberish...The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish.

 

[Skylar]

A typical post from "Skylar" professional LGBT payroll troll..

The pseudo-legal gibberish...The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish.

You're the one making shit up.

For example.....show us the law or court ruling that recognizes that children are implied parties to the marriage of their parents.

 

[Syriusly]

A typical post from "Skylar" professional LGBT payroll troll..

The pseudo-legal gibberish...The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish.....The pseudo-legal gibberish....The pseudo-legal gibberish.

Silhouette is getting testy.

She must be frustrated by having both her lies constantly exposed, as well as her own personal hypocrisy at being a single mom and claiming a gay couple raising a child without a father is child abuse.

 

[Silhouette]

Getting testy? Study projection Syriusly and get back to me. The only ones getting testy around here are those using ad hominems routinely in substitution for actual data. The actual data of the near 100 people who voted on the poll above says 90% of people believe having a father and mother is important to a child.

Now if they try to backtrack and say "no, I meant it was only important to ME", that means that they don't have the ability to empathize with others. So they are either lying to themselves and others, or they are sociopaths. In other words, if you think it is important to yourself that you had a mother and father, then you also believe it's important for other children as well. Or, you only care about yourself. Perhaps that should have been another question on the poll?

 

[Skylar]

Getting testy? Study projection Syriusly and get back to me. The only ones getting testy around here are those using ad hominems routinely in substitution for actual data. The actual data of the near 100 people who voted on the poll above says 90% of people believe having a father and mother is important to a child.

And where is the law or court ruling that recognizes that children are implied parties to the marriage of their parents?

 

[Silhouette]

Getting testy? Study projection Syriusly and get back to me. The only ones getting testy around here are those using ad hominems routinely in substitution for actual data. The actual data of the near 100 people who voted on the poll above says 90% of people believe having a father and mother is important to a child.

And where is the law or court ruling that recognizes that children are implied parties to the marriage of their parents?

Take your choice. I'm sure there are dozens of cases where infants implicitly shared in contracts where an attempt was made to change them to deprive the infant of a necessity and the contract, therefore, was found to be void.

You know how infants and contract law work Skylar.. Or you could read USSC 1982 New York vs Ferber...

 

[Skylar]

Getting testy? Study projection Syriusly and get back to me. The only ones getting testy around here are those using ad hominems routinely in substitution for actual data. The actual data of the near 100 people who voted on the poll above says 90% of people believe having a father and mother is important to a child.

And where is the law or court ruling that recognizes that children are implied parties to the marriage of their parents?

Take your choice. I'm sure there are dozens of cases where infants implicitly shared in contracts where an attempt was made to change them to deprive the infant of a necessity and the contract, therefore, was found to be void.

You know how infants and contract law work Skylar.. Or you could read USSC 1982 New York vs Ferber...

Then show us one case where an infant was recognized as being an implict party in the marriage of their parents.

If there are dozens of such cases, it should be remarkably easy for you to cite one. If you're just making up more pseudo-legal gibberish, it will be considerably more difficult.....with you giving us excuses why you can't.

Gee, I wonder which we'll get.

You know how infants and contract law work Skylar.. Or you could read USSC 1982 New York vs Ferber...

I certainly know how your imagination works. Alas, the courts are bound to what the cases actually say. Not what you imagine they said. And Ferber mentions neither contracts nor marriage.

You made that up.

Now, show us a case where a child is found to be an implied party to the marriage of their parents. Its only been 6 months of perfect failure for you to ever do so.

 

[Syriusly]

Getting testy? Study projection Syriusly and get back to me.

Silhouette is getting testy.

She must be frustrated by having both her lies constantly exposed, as well as her own personal hypocrisy at being a single mom and claiming a gay couple raising a child without a father is child abuse.

 

[Silhouette]

She must be frustrated by having both her lies constantly exposed, as well as her own personal hypocrisy at being a single mom and claiming a gay couple raising a child without a father is child abuse.

Well if it was my own personal issue alone, why do 90% of the people on the poll above feel it's "important" for a child to have both a mother and father?..

 

[Dhara]

It's important for a child to having loving parents. They don't have to be parents in the Ozzie and Harriet model. Some single parents are excellent parents and raise healthy kids. The OP just likes to trash families who happen to have LGBT members.

It's boring.

 

[Syriusly]

She must be frustrated by having both her lies constantly exposed, as well as her own personal hypocrisy at being a single mom and claiming a gay couple raising a child without a father is child abuse.

Well if it was my own personal issue alone, why do 90% of the people on the poll above feel it's "important" for a child to have both a mother and father?..

So you think that those people all condemn your single parenting?

 

[Skylar]

She must be frustrated by having both her lies constantly exposed, as well as her own personal hypocrisy at being a single mom and claiming a gay couple raising a child without a father is child abuse.

Well if it was my own personal issue alone, why do 90% of the people on the poll above feel it's "important" for a child to have both a mother and father?..

So you think that those people all condemn your single parenting?

Per Sil's logic, they probably all consider single parenting child abuse. And would insist that the State take the children of single parents.

 

[Silhouette]

It's important for a child to having loving parents. They don't have to be parents in the Ozzie and Harriet model. Some single parents are excellent parents and raise healthy kids. The OP just likes to trash families who happen to have LGBT members.

Actually, there are more than just 1 person who voted on the poll. I think there were 92 at my last count...possibly more by now. 90% of those people said they themselves believe that having BOTH a mother and father is "IMPORTANT". So it's not just the OP saying that. It's 90% of folks saying that.

 

[Skylar]

It's important for a child to having loving parents. They don't have to be parents in the Ozzie and Harriet model. Some single parents are excellent parents and raise healthy kids. The OP just likes to trash families who happen to have LGBT members.

Actually, there are more than just 1 person who voted on the poll. I think there were 92 at my last count...possibly more by now. 90% of those people said they themselves believe that having BOTH a mother and father is "IMPORTANT". So it's not just the OP saying that. It's 90% of folks saying that.

And none of them voted on same sex marriage....your LGBT 'cult'......transgender bathrooms.......Public Accomidation laws....or any of the other silly shit you imagined.

You're just thumbsucking, Sil. Lying to yourself as a self soothing exercise. You do that every time reality doesn't match what you imagined it would be.

 

[Silhouette]

Per Sil's logic, they probably all consider single parenting child abuse. And would insist that the State take the children of single parents.

Per my logic, discussing contracts and children's share in them re: "necessities", single parenthood is a non sequitur. There is no contract binding a single parent to that status for life. There is binding a child to a gay marriage though. I know you know this legal difference. One is an unfortunate situation that can be remedied, and all hope that it is. The other is a mental prison a child cannot escape from for life.

A child cannot be contractually (legally) bound to the deprivation of a necessity for life. Not even for a week actually.

 

[mdk]

Per Sil's logic, they probably all consider single parenting child abuse. And would insist that the State take the children of single parents.

Per my logic, discussing contracts and children's share in them re: "necessities", single parenthood is a non sequitur. There is no contract binding a single parent to that status for life. There is binding a child to a gay marriage though. I know you know this legal difference. One is an unfortunate situation that can be remedied, and all hope that it is. The other is a mental prison a child cannot escape from for life.

A child cannot be contractually (legally) bound to the deprivation of a necessity for life. Not even for a week actually.

Imagine that! Your standard doesn't apply to you and only towards gay. How delightfully convenient for your narrative.

 

[Skylar]

Per Sil's logic, they probably all consider single parenting child abuse. And would insist that the State take the children of single parents.

Per my logic, discussing contracts and children's share in them re: "necessities", single parenthood is a non sequitur.

And what law or court ruling recognizes that children are implied parties in the marriage of their parents?

 

[Silhouette]

Imagine that! Your standard doesn't apply to you and only towards gay. How delightfully convenient for your narrative.

Deliberately dense are you? The poll shows that no matter what the LGBT media machine manipulates as to public perception, the raw numbers are actually 90% of people who believe it's important that a child have both a mother and father. Since people are smart enough to figure out that single parents can become married, the only thing left to ponder is "can children of gay marriage ever have what is important to them". And of course the answer is "as a matter of binding contract, no".

And that is the formula for the true, deep and actual sentiments of 90% of the folks who voted. Feeling its important for a child to have both a mother and father AND being in support of "gay marriage" cannot exist in the same human mind. Unless that mind is apathic or broken.