posted on May, 21 2013 @ 12:02 PM
Originally posted by markosity1973
Your point being? You do realise that divorce is only granted after a period of separation. My parents finally got divorced after 3 years of
being apart for instance. So the date of the divorce means nothing in relation to the length of time they have been together.
Yes I do...I have had one myself. I also know that unless they had a document prior to the divorce finalizing saying they were released from
eachother legally that she committed adultery.
She only has no rights because there is no legal recogntion for gay relationships. This does not mean that she is not a fit parent nor does it
mean that she was necessarily the reason the marriage ended in the first place. Make sure you have all your facts in order before jumping to
No....she has no rights because the children are not her children. It has nothing to do with being gay. Regardless of whether or not she is ever
married to this woman she will never have any rights to the children. Make sure you get the facts right before trying to make a point.
So because she is gay you believe her relationship with Ms Compton is make believe and therefore invalid. We have a word to describe this
I never said anything of the sort. She has a relationship and her relationship is with the mother of the children this debate is about. It has
nothing to do with her wants or thoughts....it has to do with laws. There is no term for what she is doing other than trying to bring the gay issue
into this debate when it is about kids....not gays. She is emotionally upset....let me know when you can cry your way out of a court hearing for the
well being of children based on legal paper signed by both parties.
It's quite possible she is doing this for her partner because said partner is distraught and cant do it herself right now. That's what a
loving partner does; share the load when it is too much for you to carry on your own.
That is great she is doing it for her...cheers. Doesn't change the fact the court could care less who she is because she is not in any part of a
legal document having anything to do with the kids from her partner's previous marriage nor should she have any part in it....she isn't their mom.
It was the husband that started this and now the wife's partner is doing something about it. Maybe she is staying quiet because the 'morality
clause' that the judge just invented at his own discretion prevents her from saying anything or she loses the kids. Did you ever consider that
The judge didn't invent it. It was in the document she SIGNED for a divorce. She is ignorant and her claim is baseless. She is using the "gay"
excuse to rally troops. It could have been a man for all I care...she still would have been wrong and stupid for not understanding what she signed
when she was divorced. Did you ever consider the possibility that she is just ignorant and didn't even read her divorce docs to see what stipulations
were in it?
Have you not also given consideration to the fact that despite the judges very odd decision to put in a clause that raises a lot of questions
as to how and why he gave custody to the mother over the father?
This partner you so vehemently oppose can't be a worse option that giving the kids to the father after all.........
Really? So...please site me the percentage of fathers that get custody. And out of the custody they get, which part of the custody? Since you are
so well versed in divorce then you should know there are multiple levels of custody and decision making areas that are granted to each parent in
certain aspects of a child's life, such as decisions on healthcare and religion and whatnot. What if they were religious Christians and raised their
children as such before she up and moved in with another woman and now he wants his child to go to church but maybe the church is not pro-gay? I
don't know anymore than you do on this case yet you seem to state what a woman, who is upset, typed on Facebook as all truth. And how do you know she
is not a worse option? All you have is a story SHE put out there to garner support and claims SHE is making to get headlines.
edit on 5/21/13
by Vasa Croe because: (no reason given)
edit on 5/21/13 by Vasa Croe because: (no reason given)