Althouse: "When the judge gave him standing to sue for custody, I thought, 'What's happening?'"

२ नोव्हेंबर, २००९

"When the judge gave him standing to sue for custody, I thought, 'What's happening?'"

"'She voided the marriage, she knows he is a woman.' It's ludicrous."

१४ टिप्पण्या:

Salamandyr म्हणाले...: For some reason, this reminds me of the judges who order continued child support payments for men after they have been proven to not actually be the father.

It seems that on occasion, judges believe they can will reality into being.; २/११/०९, ९:२१ AM
TerriW म्हणाले...: I am reminded of my father's glib comment that he sure hopes gay marriage becomes legal throughout the nation because the resulting "gay divorce court" afternoon shows would be unbeatable.; २/११/०९, ९:५५ AM
traditionalguy म्हणाले...: The Creator is at fault here. He forgot to make more than males and females. He was not a very good marketer like cerial brand maeketers that allow hundreds of combinations for every sex style that people can fantasize.; २/११/०९, १०:१९ AM
hombre म्हणाले...: Is there any branch of government not populated by PC loons?; २/११/०९, १०:३९ AM
J म्हणाले...: When you think about that period, there's no question "That's My Mama" was the better series. Does anybody seriously think Rerun was a better character than Junior?; २/११/०९, १०:४१ AM
The Drill SGT म्हणाले...: I see the future...; २/११/०९, १०:४७ AM
The Drill SGT म्हणाले...: Salamandyr said...
For some reason, this reminds me of the judges who order continued child support payments for men after they have been proven to not actually be the father.

Yeah, that really irritates me no end as well...

Somebody's got to pay. Why not the guy with deep pockets, after all, it was the wife that was screwing around, its for the children...; २/११/०९, १०:४९ AM
traditionalguy म्हणाले...: Drill Sgt...Marriage has consequences. Most states say a child born in wedlock is forever presumed to be the child of the husband. The non wed girl friends cannot do that to a man. So chose carefully who you marry.; २/११/०९, १०:५६ AM
Freeman Hunt म्हणाले...: If you trick the state into marrying you and stay married a long time while raising a child, you cannot then cry foul when the state thinks that your ex has some claim to custody or visitation of the child you raised together.; २/११/०९, ११:३९ AM
Michael Haz म्हणाले...: Freeman Hunt ^^^ has it exactly right.

Melanie says she is straight and didn't even know Sam was a woman until the relationship got serious.

And the insemination occurred when, before the relationship got serious? Give me a break.; २/११/०९, १२:०० PM
Beth म्हणाले...: Agreed, Freeman. That's the crux.

I feel sorry for this kid whose parents are throwing around abuse accusations. If either or both are abusive, then the kid's in real trouble. If neither is, then the kid's stuck with people who will scorch the earth rather than come to an agreement to love and cherish their child, even if they can no longer do so for each other.; २/११/०९, १२:५६ PM
Synova म्हणाले...: Salamandyr is right. Freeman is right.

These are the rules and they are generally anti-man rules. This is not *convoluted* at all. The child has a father that is the other adult the child bonded to from birth. And if you raised a baby from birth to six would "you're not a blood relation" mean anything much?

Every now and then we hear of a woman who doesn't automatically get custody crying about how unfair this is. Not often a transgender couple, but on account of she's the *mother* even if the custody is figured on the basis of who had the primary responsibility for child-care from infancy.

The article made it sound like when they broke up the "mother" moved out leaving the kid and the "father" applied for custody first. There is a lot to consider beyond which person gave birth.; २/११/०९, १:११ PM
Gahrie म्हणाले...: Traditional Guy:

Marriage has consequences. Most states say a child born in wedlock is forever presumed to be the child of the husband. The non wed girl friends cannot do that to a man

This is simply wrong. There are documented cases where a male was raped by a female and forced to pay child support, and where a woman saved sperm from oral sex, inseminated herself and sued for and won child support.

http://gahrie.blogspot.com/2006/03/roe-v-wade-for-men.html; २/११/०९, ६:३० PM
AST म्हणाले...: I decided to comment here because there were only 12 comments and I knew that nobody would read what I thought on the ones with 200 comments, but dang! This is interesting!

It seems that on occasion, judges believe they can will reality into being.

And so do the advocates of gay marriage and transgendering surgery. What ever happened to "You can't always get what you want."

"Somebody's got to pay." That seems to be behind most custody fights: the ex-husband seeks custody mostly to get the ex-wife to drop support payment demands.

Too bad they didn't sign a prealam (wv).

If it were me, I'd put the child up for adoption by some normal people.; २/११/०९, ७:३९ PM