Move over JPC - Meet super-duper deadbeat

J

JPC, Sr.

Guest
The Wizard!

somd whisper said:
JPC with all due respect.... :buttkick:

What about the sanction of marriage? Without question children can be a blessing but with that blessing the parents should bring up the children in a loving and healthy environment. What sort of example does this give to the children to have their father to behave in such a way?
I admit that there is abundance of resources that are available out there but do you think that shucks off the responsibility of the parents?

Do you think that the parents have no responsibility?

I just do not understand what you are trying to say, are you saying it is okay to go out and have children with whomever you feel like, and let welfare take care of the children? Or did I miss something?
:larry: There is no reason to assume the children are going to be on welfare. It is 7 females with 7 different children so one child each and that the females want the children and one child does not eat much and does not need much. Just because the alpha male is on welfare does not mean that the females are on welfare too, or that all 7 will stay that way even if they are. People are jumping to judgemental conclutions from some inflamatory news story that does not even tell half of the whole story. Seven women and one man is seven to one so he is not even half of the story. These people think they are better then others by this cheap jumping to condemnation of others and others circumstances based totally on an inflamatory incomplete story. I want to be a leader and not join in to that kind of self righteous sheep mentality.

What are we to do with the alpha male? make laws that turn him into a criminal? put him in jail because the ladies want his babies? then this guy might start impregnating the female security guards at the jail as apparently he is hot.

Shall we demand some outrageous child support payment so that he can never get off of welfare? plus the children are all fine and the children are all gifts from God so why the hell are these self righteous thinking that having babies is a sin or some wrong doing. Plus this man and females might raise these children well and he might stay in close contact with them all. When people look for negative then they always find negative. King Solomon had 500 wives but almighty Christians call Solomon the wisest of men. For me hypocracy stinks.

If we as a government want to sanction marriage as it use to be under religion then we would need to stop sanctioning divorces at anyone's pleasure, do not that make sence?
:whistle:
 

jazz lady

~*~ Rara Avis ~*~
PREMO Member
Oops...he did it again.

JPC said:
What are we to do with the alpha male? make laws that turn him into a criminal? put him in jail because the ladies want his babies? then this guy might start impregnating the female security guards at the jail as apparently he is hot.

:jet: :killingme
 

camily

Peace
JPC said:
:larry: .... one child each and that the females want the children and one child does not eat much and does not need much.....
:whistle:
One child doesn't eat that much and does not need much????? OMFG!!!! You are soooo clueless.
 

Tinkerbell

Baby blues
JPC said:
:larry: Children are a big blessing, the children are not some thing wrong. Except in the dirty opinions of some self righteous that want to tell others how to live, but they did nothing wrong. Plus this is a rich world with plenty of supplies going around. The children will have all their needs provided and much more. And if the children want to them with only a little effort they can probably each get into college too. There are many avenues.

The self righteous shots at the man and his seven concubines is just bigotry and intolerance and misguided.
:whistle:


:doh: Unbelievable.


I must agree with Vrai, though, you do make me laugh (in disbelief) almost every day!
 

somd whisper

New Member
JPC said:
:larry: There is no reason to assume the children are going to be on welfare. It is 7 females with 7 different children so one child each and that the females want the children and one child does not eat much and does not need much. Just because the alpha male is on welfare does not mean that the females are on welfare too, or that all 7 will stay that way even if they are. People are jumping to judgemental conclutions from some inflamatory news story that does not even tell half of the whole story. Seven women and one man is seven to one so he is not even half of the story. These people think they are better then others by this cheap jumping to condemnation of others and others circumstances based totally on an inflamatory incomplete story. I want to be a leader and not join in to that kind of self righteous sheep mentality.

What are we to do with the alpha male? make laws that turn him into a criminal? put him in jail because the ladies want his babies? then this guy might start impregnating the female security guards at the jail as apparently he is hot.

Shall we demand some outrageous child support payment so that he can never get off of welfare? plus the children are all fine and the children are all gifts from God so why the hell are these self righteous thinking that having babies is a sin or some wrong doing. Plus this man and females might raise these children well and he might stay in close contact with them all. When people look for negative then they always find negative. King Solomon had 500 wives but almighty Christians call Solomon the wisest of men. For me hypocracy stinks.

If we as a government want to sanction marriage as it use to be under religion then we would need to stop sanctioning divorces at anyone's pleasure, do not that make sence?
:whistle:


Without child support you should take into consideration that that the standard of living for the person with custody of a child(ren), is usually reduced and may experience a difficult time financially.

With or without welfare, these families may still have to struggle much harder than two-parent families to make ends meet.

Child support can have a great impact and make a positive difference in managing food, shelter, clothing, medical, and dental expenses. Having or not having these necessities does have a powerful role in the development of children.

There has been research that shows that income from child support may be more beneficial to children than other sources of family income.

JPC did you know that studies are showing that regular child support is linked to more years of school attendance, increases in grade point averages, and reductions in behavior problems it shows that the mother is not the only one providing for the child and that the dad does care.

My point, one that sometimes get lost in debate over payment of an obligation, is that children need the emotional and financial support and the involvement of both parents in their lives.

Children need to know that both parents love them and care for them and those children who receive this support are better off financially as well as many other ways.

Child support strengthens families to being strong, healthy, and supportive to one another. With financial support from both parents families can be empowered to increase their economic independence and productivity and their social well being.

All Children need the emotional; financial support and the involvement from both parents. Making babies and leaving to go make more while living off welfare just does make any sense.

Also, to make people stay married when they clearly should not is just plain crazy.

It would have more negative impacts than positive.
 
Last edited:

Toxick

Splat
JPC said:
Here is a powerful verse from the Bible so read it and weap, or else read it and see the connection to this thread topic.



I read the verse three times to make sure.

I didn't see the phrase "alpha male" at all.


Just so you know, I'm not arguing with you or debating your point. I have decided that I'm done arguing with you altogether. Take comfort in the fact that you've worn me down, in much the same way that arguing with a toadstool would wear me down.

I finally realized that I have more productive things to do, like jam straightened out paperclips through my eyelids.



I'm merely pointing out your misuse of the phrase "alpha male".




Of course, that's probably a useless exercise as well.




And I would kindly ask you to refrain from quoting biblical verses to me, should we ever discuss anything in the future. I find your abuse and misrepresentation of my central religious text to be offensive, even if its moderately amusing at times.

Thanks in advance.
 
B

Bronwyn

Guest
Pete said:
YOU ARE CORRECT! Being the blessings that they are they deserve the emotional AND financial support of BOTH parents. Letting them squeak by on whatever the custodial parent can dig up or get in the form of state or federal aid is loathsome.

Right! Try telling a four year old living with a drug addict mother... no father... mom's abusive boyfriend.... that he/she is a blessing. Hopefully some of these children live past the age four! Some people should not have these... blessings.
 
J

JPC, Sr.

Guest
The Preacher!

Bronwyn said:
Right! Try telling a four year old living with a drug addict mother... no father... mom's abusive boyfriend.... that he/she is a blessing. Hopefully some of these children live past the age four! Some people should not have these... blessings.
:larry: Those words are only condemning the child, and even saying the child is no blessing and saying the blessing need not have been born.

I stick to the knowledge that all children are blessings. :whistle:
 
J

JPC, Sr.

Guest
The Preacher!

somd whisper said:
Without child support you should take into consideration that that the standard of living for the person with custody of a child(ren), is usually reduced and may experience a difficult time financially.
:larry: I am not really against both parents helping to care and provide for their own children. I am saying that I am big time against the unjust child support system that we have now. It does not work and it has in essance failed and now we have deadbroke parents in jail just for being poor.

Even if some people and some children do prosper from their child support it surely does not justify the cruelty and injustices that are forced onto so many other families.
:whistle:
 

hvp05

Methodically disorganized
camily said:
I wish he would learn to spell. It makes him look dumb.
He is not "dumb"; he is mentally handicapped! He will call down the fire and brimstone for your slander! :jameo: :whistle:
 
J

JPC, Sr.

Guest
The Preacher!

Sharon said:
Man Fathers 7 Children From 7 Women In 7 Years :shocking:
Can we get him to join the forum? Surely they have libraries with internet hook up don't they? :jerry:
:larry: The separated parents have not committed any crime (no wrong doing) excluding contempt of Court because the Court deserves contempt when it persecutes parents for no crime.

The separated parents have taken nothing, has hurt no one. There is no victim, no violence, no criminal act, no crime. Plus in child support there is no real debt, no money had been exchanged, no contract, no services provided, nothing paid, nothing to pay back, nothing owed and no real debt and no real need, and our child support system puts parents in jail for nothing.
:wench:
 

somd whisper

New Member
JPC said:
:larry: The separated parents have not committed any crime (no wrong doing) excluding contempt of Court because the Court deserves contempt when it persecutes parents for no crime.

The separated parents have taken nothing, has hurt no one. There is no victim, no violence, no criminal act, no crime. Plus in child support there is no real debt, no money had been exchanged, no contract, no services provided, nothing paid, nothing to pay back, nothing owed and no real debt and no real need, and our child support system puts parents in jail for nothing.
:wench:

JPC,

This post does not make any sense. Can you please explain to me what you are trying to say? Child support does not have real debt? No serivces provided for?
No real need? What about the childs need? You think the mother or whomever has custody along with the government should provide for the children, everyone but the non-custodial parent???
 
J

JPC, Sr.

Guest
The Preacher!

somd whisper said:
JPC,

This post does not make any sense. Can you please explain to me what you are trying to say? Child support does not have real debt? No serivces provided for?
No real need? What about the childs need? You think the mother or whomever has custody along with the government should provide for the children, everyone but the non-custodial parent???
:larry: I am saying that as a government trying to impose law and order then we must stop putting separated parents into jail just because the custodial wants more and the children already have their basic needs met.

Child support is like a law that orders parents to give the children more then the child needs - thus we have "spoil the children" laws that order the children to get more then they need. This might be a big reason that we are getting more and more spoiled brats. Extras and extra money are to be at the parental discretion and not by government enforced public laws that put parents in jail because the custodial wants hundred dollar sneakers onto the child.
:whistle:
 

somd whisper

New Member
JPC said:
:larry: I am saying that as a government trying to impose law and order then we must stop putting separated parents into jail just because the custodial wants more and the children already have their basic needs met.

Child support is like a law that orders parents to give the children more then the child needs - thus we have "spoil the children" laws that order the children to get more then they need. This might be a big reason that we are getting more and more spoiled brats. Extras and extra money are to be at the parental discretion and not by government enforced public laws that put parents in jail because the custodial wants hundred dollar sneakers onto the child.
:whistle:


I think that the child support laws need to be reformed and that child support should be held accountable by the custodial parent meaning that just having custody does not entitle you to a check without showing some type of record keeping that the funds are going to the best interest of the children.

Both parents have to pay for a house, utilities, food and so and that should be taken into account. I also agree that the non custodial parent loses out when their visitation is limited or dictated by the courts. But that is about it. It took both parents to create the child and both parents should have equal parts in raising the child. That also can vary with special circumstances but you get what I mean.
 
Top