Have difficulty believing the Bible.

JaniceM

Well-known Member
My experience has been like this so far as court appointed experts goes.
I couldn't have paid anyone to try to support my contact with my child in 1988, under an earlier family law, (one I believe giving fathers like me more protection than the subsequent law afforded in practise).
I believe the court appointed experts who found against me ten years later, under the new family law, sought to protect the " nuclear family", i.e. my ex, her new partner, the man she told them our child saw as her real daddy, and my daughter of course).
Could they be trusted, maybe not, and the woman I mentioned earlier on the thread who compiled reports on fathers/parents, came across as wanting to understand us excluded dads.
However, anyone, and any system basing its arguments upon what they believe is best for the child isn't going to be able to avoid undermining nonresident dads in my view, so the issue starts and ends with the law for me, (whilst that provides weak protection there is no hope!) :(
Not meaning to butt into you guys' argument, but what the heck kind of 'experts' didn't even know what a 'nuclear family' is?!? It doesn't mean 'whomever happens to be there,' and from what you said long ago (unless I missed updates) your ex wasn't even married to the guy!!!

You may have mentioned it before, but if I can ask: what was the child's age when this was going on?
 

grahamg

Old codger
Not meaning to butt into you guys' argument, but what the heck kind of 'experts' didn't even know what a 'nuclear family' is?!? It doesn't mean 'whomever happens to be there,' and from what you said long ago (unless I missed updates) your ex wasn't even married to the guy!!!
You may have mentioned it before, but if I can ask: what was the child's age when this was going on?
Happy enough for you to butt in but I'm struggling to understand your questions!

You say an expert didn't understand what a nuclear family is, (did I say that, where I can't remember doing so?)?

What age of child was "it",(which child and when?)?

However, putting aside those questions for a second, I wish to implant in someone's head the thought that a "child's best interest" is tantamount to something that is "unknowable ", and even if it were knowable I'd argue courts making a decision or call against a decent dad/parent is reaching too far into peoples private lives where there is no question of abuse! :(

Asking a child whether or not they love one of their parents is intrusive, asking a child to publicly attack or criticise a loving parent, "because their views must be listened to and taken seriously" fuels any trouble there might be, and encourages the more manipulative resident parent to play a game where only they are likely to win, (and we know darn well some of these resident parents can truly be, so there's no kidding us here!).

I think I've said enough for now, so back to thread topic whatever that was! :)
 

JaniceM

Well-known Member
Happy enough for you to butt in but I'm struggling to understand your questions!

You say an expert didn't understand what a nuclear family is, (did I say that, where I can't remember doing so?)?

What age of child was "it",(which child and when?)?

However, putting aside those questions for a second, I wish to implant in someone's head the thought that a "child's best interest" is tantamount to something that is "unknowable ", and even if it were knowable I'd argue courts making a decision or call against a decent dad/parent is reaching too far into peoples private lives where there is no question of abuse! :(

Asking a child whether or not they love one of their parents is intrusive, asking a child to publicly attack or criticise a loving parent, "because their views must be listened to and taken seriously" fuels any trouble there might be, and encourages the more manipulative resident parent to play a game where only they are likely to win, (and we know darn well some of these resident parents can truly be, so there's no kidding us here!).

I think I've said enough for now, so back to thread topic whatever that was! :)
My experience has been like this so far as court appointed experts goes.
I couldn't have paid anyone to try to support my contact with my child in 1988, under an earlier family law, (one I believe giving fathers like me more protection than the subsequent law afforded in practise).
I believe the court appointed experts who found against me ten years later, under the new family law, sought to protect the " nuclear family", i.e. my ex, her new partner, the man she told them our child saw as her real daddy, and my daughter of course).
Could they be trusted, maybe not, and the woman I mentioned earlier on the thread who compiled reports on fathers/parents, came across as wanting to understand us excluded dads.
However, anyone, and any system basing its arguments upon what they believe is best for the child isn't going to be able to avoid undermining nonresident dads in my view, so the issue starts and ends with the law for me, (whilst that provides weak protection there is no hope!) :(
Not meaning to butt into you guys' argument, but what the heck kind of 'experts' didn't even know what a 'nuclear family' is?!? It doesn't mean 'whomever happens to be there,' and from what you said long ago (unless I missed updates) your ex wasn't even married to the guy!!!

You may have mentioned it before, but if I can ask: what was the child's age when this was going on?
 

Just Jeff

Member
They get called upon by one or other of the warring parties, so in that case what you think doesn't apply! :)
What does apply ? As noted, 'they' are controlled by the rich/ corporations/ pharmBig and world religion. Just as written.

Government is ruled by big corporate monopolies, so making laws to regulate a products use is determined by the ruthless oligarchs. Without regulation many people are harmed and even die because warnings and regulation is lacking. How can we keep our world safe from these predators?
The world has never been safe from 'these predators', the same rich oligarchs etc who spawned the evil of pharmaBig, world bank, credit debt, corrupted food supply, rampant air pollution 40,000 per day die from, false pandemics for control (the plan for the pand was broadcast several times years ago, years before it was devastating the world) .

Why would you think anyone can or should or would keep the world safe from druglords and oligarchs and so forth ?
 

grahamg

Old codger
Not meaning to butt into you guys' argument, but what the heck kind of 'experts' didn't even know what a 'nuclear family' is?!? It doesn't mean 'whomever happens to be there,' and from what you said long ago (unless I missed updates) your ex wasn't even married to the guy!!!

You may have mentioned it before, but if I can ask: what was the child's age when this was going on?
Didn't I answer well enough for the purposes of this thread?

Do you wish to see any divisions between loving parents and their child made wider by a court process whatever age they are?

Lack of privacy in close personal relationships is an issue, cleverer people than I have said so, do you disagree?

The other aspect is this, you're endorsing the actions of the bullies who wish to destroy others relationships with their children, why should I or any other father married to the mother when their child was born, and not having let their child down in any way have to hear "the real father" is whoever the mother has chosen, (it occurs similarly when fathers who have custody do the same thing to exclude the mother)?

Then there is all this business of all and sundry claiming they only want what's best for the child whilst sticking their noses in, and I'd feel it was creepy, or the person was "virtue signalling" when claiming they have no selfish interests when destroying the nonresident parents relationship with the child, (wouldn't you find it creepy if I stated I was only concerned about your interests?).

Btw if I'm going at you too hard in this post please accept my apologies, but some of the things above needed saying! :)
 

JaniceM

Well-known Member
Didn't I answer well enough for the purposes of this thread?

Do you wish to see any divisions between loving parents and their child made wider by a court process whatever age they are?

Lack of privacy in close personal relationships is an issue, cleverer people than I have said so, do you disagree?

The other aspect is this, you're endorsing the actions of the bullies who wish to destroy others relationships with their children, why should I or any other father married to the mother when their child was born, and not having let their child down in any way have to hear "the real father" is whoever the mother has chosen, (it occurs similarly when fathers who have custody do the same thing to exclude the mother)?

Then there is all this business of all and sundry claiming they only want what's best for the child whilst sticking their noses in, and I'd feel it was creepy, or the person was "virtue signalling" when claiming they have no selfish interests when destroying the nonresident parents relationship with the child, (wouldn't you find it creepy if I stated I was only concerned about your interests?).

Btw if I'm going at you too hard in this post please accept my apologies, but some of the things above needed saying! :)
Somehow you entirely reversed everything I said.. I asked two questions on your topic- specifically from the post I quoted- and have no idea where you came up with anything you said in this last post.
 

grahamg

Old codger
Break
"You may have mentioned it before, but if I can ask: what was the child's age when this was going on?"
Age was child, let me see now, I think there was a two and a one, but not three, (2+1=3!), so it could have been twenty one, no, no wait a minute twelve maybe,...., "let's just say somewhere between one and twenty one then we've covered all the possible bases as to when authorities might wish to stick their noses in and start asking whether or no they love their dear old da, (or ma!)"!!!! :)
 

Judycat

Well-known Member
Location
Pennsylvania
I don't think the Bible is something you believe. To me it's something you read for comfort during trying times. I had some very tough times where no one could say anything that would make me feel less bad. Picking up the Bible and asking God to help me out with a chapter or more gave me great comfort. Very little came from the New Testament though. Most of it came from the Psalms, Proverbs, and the Prophets. It spoke to something inside of me that no other human being had the words to describe. I think reading the Bible for proof of God's existence is a fool's errand, you have to let it speak to you personally. I think it's the way it's meant to be understood. Yes I know, other writings can do the same thing. Whatever floats your boat. I'm not here to debate. I hate that. I'm old enough to know what's good for me, so go fly a kite.
 

grahamg

Old codger
I don't think the Bible is something you believe. To me it's something you read for comfort during trying times. I had some very tough times where no one could say anything that would make me feel less bad. Picking up the Bible and asking God to help me out with a chapter or more gave me great comfort. Very little came from the New Testament though. Most of it came from the Psalms, Proverbs, and the Prophets. It spoke to something inside of me that no other human being had the words to describe. I think reading the Bible for proof of God's existence is a fool's errand, you have to let it speak to you personally. I think it's the way it's meant to be understood. Yes I know, other writings can do the same thing. Whatever floats your boat. I'm not here to debate. I hate that. I'm old enough to know what's good for me, so go fly a kite.
I once heard Saint Luke's gospel recited by a guy who had been an actor of some note once to a group of women prisoners.
The man said he wanted to use, or make the most of his ability to remember lines, and of course his religious beliefs, and allow everyone to feel the benefit in this way!
My feeling I must say was, much as we were all impressed by his ability to remember such a long text, and of course no one had anything negative to say about his effort, the thought had to be considered, "whatever benefit their might be from listening to this gospel", hadn't those women prisoners suffered enough?!! :)
 

Top