TOTALLY GEEKED!

Tinydancer · Guru

RE: The kid is like 4. It's too late, now, but...

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

huskerbb wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Could you please show me where I wrote that? I have no memory of writing that.
I do remember writing that mom needs to loose custody of the kid, face a fine for breaking the contract and possibly jail time for kidnapping. . .
Which is exactly what I said in my first post--but you proceeded to disagree with me the entire thread.

No, the only thing we said that was differe t is I said dad is immature as well. (And I even said I retract that statement if the kid does in fact have a medical issue) YOU are thenone who has been blathering nonsense about what I think on the situation, so no, you are not reading my posts.

Basically, you are arguing with a figment of your imagination.

Tinydancer · Guru

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Could you please show me where I wrote that? I have no memory of writing that.
I do remember writing that mom needs to loose custody of the kid, face a fine for breaking the contract and possibly jail time for kidnapping. . .
Which is exactly what I said in my first post--but you proceeded to disagree with me the entire thread.
No, the only thing we said that was differe t is I said dad is immature as well. (And I even said I retract that statement if the kid does in fact have a medical issue) YOU are thenone who has been blathering nonsense about what I think on the situation, so no, you are not reading my posts.
Basically, you are arguing with a figment of your imagination.

huskerbb · Guru

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Could you please show me where I wrote that? I have no memory of writing that.
I do remember writing that mom needs to loose custody of the kid, face a fine for breaking the contract and possibly jail time for kidnapping. . .
Which is exactly what I said in my first post--but you proceeded to disagree with me the entire thread.
No, the only thing we said that was differe t is I said dad is immature as well. (And I even said I retract that statement if the kid does in fact have a medical issue) YOU are thenone who has been blathering nonsense about what I think on the situation, so no, you are not reading my posts.
Basically, you are arguing with a figment of your imagination.

No. You said several times that dad should "drop it"--which means his ex would get away with doing what she did with no repercussions.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Sorry, husker, but you are just wrong.

huskerbb · Guru

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Mom and dad are both too immature to have kids. For shame.
What has dad done here that is so "immature"? He simply wants his ex to abide by a legal document that she AGREED to.
Because what is the point of getting the kid snipped now? Dad should have taken the high road and dropped it a long time ago.
Also, if you need a legal document to determine the fate if your kids genitals--no, you should not be having kids. This whole thing is stupid.

No, I'm not. Here is a quote from YOU that says "dad should have dropped it a long time ago".

You can't even keep track of the nonsense you post.

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

Dona, I hear every word you said but I learned a long time ago there are certain times it's better to just keep your mouth shut.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

And when I clarified later, I specifically said mom needed to lose custody of her kid, and face charges for breach of contract and taking off with the boy. . . so, the only thing dad needed to 'drop' was forcing the kid through surgery.
Sorry, you are still wrong.

huskerbb · Guru

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
And when I clarified later, I specifically said mom needed to lose custody of her kid, and face charges for breach of contract and taking off with the boy. . . so, the only thing dad needed to 'drop' was forcing the kid through surgery.
Sorry, you are still wrong.

LOL!!!

You said that I was "wrong" that you said dad should "drop it".

I DIRECTLY QUOTED you where you did EXACTLY that.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

huskerbb wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
And when I clarified later, I specifically said mom needed to lose custody of her kid, and face charges for breach of contract and taking off with the boy. . . so, the only thing dad needed to 'drop' was forcing the kid through surgery.
Sorry, you are still wrong.
LOL!!!

You said that I was "wrong" that you said dad should "drop it".

I DIRECTLY QUOTED you where you did EXACTLY that.

And wrong again! Come on, husker, you have lost your touch. It is more fun when LL was playing--at least she knows how to read.

huskerbb · Guru

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
And when I clarified later, I specifically said mom needed to lose custody of her kid, and face charges for breach of contract and taking off with the boy. . . so, the only thing dad needed to 'drop' was forcing the kid through surgery.
Sorry, you are still wrong.
LOL!!!

You said that I was "wrong" that you said dad should "drop it".

I DIRECTLY QUOTED you where you did EXACTLY that.
And wrong again! Come on, husker, you have lost your touch. It is more fun when LL was playing--at least she knows how to read.

How am I wrong? Was that not your quote? Of course it is--yet you denied saying that.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

No, I did not deny using the phrase 'drop it'. For heaven's sake, I even used it again later! I know exactly what I have been posting, you are the only one confused here.

huskerbb · Guru

LOL!!!!

I said this:

"You said several times that dad should drop it."

You responded with this:

"Sorry husker, but you are just wrong."

Therefore, you DID deny saying he should drop it, and I then quoted you to show you where you did.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

No. You said several times that dad should "drop it"--which means his ex would get away with doing what she did with no repercussions.

See that last little bit there? The bit where you jumped to conclusions about what I meant? A conclusion at direct odds with what I said many times throughout the thread? Yeah, that is the bit where you are wrong. And you just keep being wrong. I haven't denied saying anything I have said, I haven't drastically changed my mind multiple times throughout the discussion, or whatever nonsense you are going to accuse me of next.
This is entertaining. When did your reading skills become so poor?

huskerbb · Guru

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
No. You said several times that dad should "drop it"--which means his ex would get away with doing what she did with no repercussions.

See that last little bit there? The bit where you jumped to conclusions about what I meant? A conclusion at direct odds with what I said many times throughout the thread? Yeah, that is the bit where you are wrong. And you just keep being wrong. I haven't denied saying anything I have said, I haven't drastically changed my mind multiple times throughout the discussion, or whatever nonsense you are going to accuse me of next.
This is entertaining. When did your reading skills become so poor?

What you "meant" is irrelevant. It's what you SAID. Plus, again, if he drops it, then the ex WOULD, in fact, get away with no repercussions.

You are dead wrong--and can't even keep track of the nonsense you post.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Obviously, I need to clarify (again. Despite the fact you are the only one that can't wrap your head around it.)

'Drop it' means he should drop the court order to get the kid snipped. That is it.
It does not mean anything else.
For an example, it does NOT mean mom should retain custody of their son.
It does NOT mean he should not sue for breach of contract.
It does NOT mean mom should not be charged with kidnappings his child, and refusing him any contact with said child.
In short, 'drop it means' dad should stop trying to circumcise his son, because at four, it will be traumatic.
That is it. I do not understand why that is so confusing.

huskerbb · Guru

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Obviously, I need to clarify (again. Despite the fact you are the only one that can't wrap your head around it.)

'Drop it' means he should drop the court order to get the kid snipped. That is it.
It does not mean anything else.
For an example, it does NOT mean mom should retain custody of their son.
It does NOT mean he should not sue for breach of contract.
It does NOT mean mom should not be charged with kidnappings his child, and refusing him any contact with said child.
short, 'drop it means' dad should stop trying to circumcise his son, because at four, it will be traumatic.
11That is it. I do not understand why that is so confusing.

LOL!!!

If he drops THIS court case, then she will get away with this.

If you are advocating he drops THIS court case--then you are advocating that she get away with it because that will be what, in fact, happens.

Once he drops THIS court case, then the court will no longer be involved and she will keep custody and have ZERO consequences for her actions.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Perhaps I am putting too much faith in our justice system, as it seems a court would look at a person's willful disobedience of a court document and the kidnapping of a child separately from the terms of the document.
It seems to me that dad certainly ought to be able to charge her with violating his visitation rights by taking the child to an unknown location and denying him access. . . and I have certainly heard of situations where the offending parent was charged with kidnapping and lost custody of the child involved.
Also it seems like if dad went before a judge and said he believed it was no longer in his son's best I the rest to be circumcised, but wanted to sue mom for breach of contract for not doing it when the kid was younger, he should be able to.

So no, mom shouldn't face any consequences beyond a heavy fine, jail time, and losing her kid.

huskerbb · Guru

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Perhaps I am putting too much faith in our justice system, as it seems a court would look at a person's willful disobedience of a court document and the kidnapping of a child separately from the terms of the document.
It seems to me that dad certainly ought to be able to charge her with violating his visitation rights by taking the child to an unknown location and denying him access. . . and I have certainly heard of situations where the offending parent was charged with kidnapping and lost custody of the child involved.
Also it seems like if dad went before a judge and said he believed it was no longer in his son's best I the rest to be circumcised, but wanted to sue mom for breach of contract for not doing it when the kid was younger, he should be able to.

So no, mom shouldn't face any consequences beyond a heavy fine, jail time, and losing her kid.

He can sue for custody in a separate action--and he might get it--but as far as the contempt of court and any real consequences for her actions, those would disappear if he would drop the case.

If he drops it, there is nothing at that point to be in "contempt" about.

Plus, breach of contract would only apply if there is some sort of remedy for the breach--and the remedy in this case is getting the kid circumcised.

Now, whether he actually goes through with it is another matter--but he needs to keep it in the court so that he has that leverage to get her back with the kid.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

I am having a lot of trouble with the concept that the ONLY way to get any sort of justice is to get the kid circumcised.
What about the whole disappearing with the kid? What, is everyone just not going to care about that?
It seems like even if he dropped the case about snipping, he could still get full custody of his son based on that alone.

huskerbb · Guru

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I am having a lot of trouble with the concept that the ONLY way to get any sort of justice is to get the kid circumcised.
What about the whole disappearing with the kid? What, is everyone just not going to care about that?
It seems like even if he dropped the case about snipping, he could still get full custody of his son based on that alone.

He can probably get full custody in another court case--but the consequences of her evading the first court order would be little to nothing if he drops it.

I know what to do_sometimes · Frozen Sucks!

huskerbb wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
I am having a lot of trouble with the concept that the ONLY way to get any sort of justice is to get the kid circumcised.
What about the whole disappearing with the kid? What, is everyone just not going to care about that?
It seems like even if he dropped the case about snipping, he could still get full custody of his son based on that alone.
He can probably get full custody in another court case--but the consequences of her evading the first court order would be little to nothing if he drops it.

This exactly. If he drops the case and so resolved then the mother will not be proven in violation of anything and he won't be able to use her actions against her in another court.