..

Nonso23... Superb points


You should know our ladies only see their own right as paramount.

Astute observation on cococandy's posts going this way or that..

I will have thought she will be happy that the man can now be with the love of his life and the judge made the best decisions in the interest of the kids

Except she is now saying judges make mistakes in mostly awarding kids to their mums

Nonso23:
I could recall that transgender thread how they rallied together to establish the superiority of the women rights over LGBT rights. I was too amused to reply meaningfully.

The emboldened. Same with me. Unless anything that violates women rights is now a crime

You can never catch these peeps
They are slippery


There's a thread about male teachers of nursery school kids....

Very interesting debate

Our NL equality advocates were against it surprisingly considering they spout abolition of gender roles up n down.

Have u seen it...


When they get the kids...all is well and the judge did it in the best interests of the kids

Otherwise...the judge is biased

Nonso23


https://www.nairaland.com/1920015/having-being-male-nursery-teacher

I guess everyone is getting off on antagonizing cococandy today.

When you decide to be not mischievous,you can bring a quote from any post of mine that spcifically goes against whatever I've typed here today.

But you won't because you know I'll still prove how you've deliberately choosen to misunderstand it.

pickabeau1: Nonso23... Superb points


You should know our ladies only see their own right as paramount.

Astute observation on cococandy's posts going this way or that..

I will have thought she will be happy that the man can now be with the love of his life and the judge made the best decisions in the interest of the kids

Except she is now saying judges make mistakes in mostly awarding kids to their mums

Bceause it should be pretty obvious to someone with sense that a someone who grew up as a man will be an unfair match to someone who grew up as a woman.

So like I ALWAYs say. And like y'all ALWAYS mischieously choose to ignore,rights are no rights when they affect someone else negatively.

Eesh.

I think that will do.

Nonso23:
I could recall that transgender thread how they rallied together to establish the superiority of the women rights over LGBT rights. I was too amused to reply meaningfully.

The emboldened. Same with me. Unless anything that violates women rights is now a crime

cococandy:
I guess everyone is getting off on antagonizing cococandy today.

When you decide to be not mischievous,you can bring a quote from any post of mine that spcifically goes against whatever I've typed here today.

But you won't because you know I'll still prove how you've deliberately choosen to misunderstand it.

No one is getting off on you..

Its your metamorphic ability to be seen as standing for all n nothing at the same time with your live and let live mantra.

I hope u realize that the writer of the article is a bigot and thus is biased against gay marriages which are equal to heterosexual marriage

Remember the children's best interests r considered by the judge

Remember your views on being true to yourself
This man lived a lie to blend into society
He decided enough was enough
He left
Live m let live

If this was a man speaking..you would narry spare a tear for him

From d blog

My children and I have suffered great losses because of my former husband’s decision to identify as a gay man and throw away his life with us. Time is revealing the depth of those wounds, but I will not allow them to destroy me and my children. I refuse to lose my faith and hope. [b]I believe so much more passionately in the power of the marriage covenant between one man and one woman today than when I was married. There is another way for those with same-sex attractions. [/b]Destruction is not the only option—it cannot be. Our children deserve far better from us.

This type of devastation should never happen to another spouse or child. Please, I plead with you: defend marriage as being between one man and one woman. We must stand for marriage—and for the precious lives that marriage creates.

Janna Darnelle is a mother, writer, and an advocate for upholding marriage between one man and one woman. She mentors others whose families have been impacted by homosexuality.

She is biased
Her personal opinions don't matter
The law is clear
Homosexual marriage is legal

cococandy: Bceause it should be pretty obvious to someone with sense that a someone who grew up as a man will be an unfair match to someone who grew up as a woman.

So like I ALWAYs say. And like y'all ALWAYS mischieously choose to ignore,rights are no rights when they affect someone else negatively.

Eesh.

I think that will do.

You still decide to keep one track
The transgender is a woman n the law recognises her as a woman
The mma licensed her to fight

Why should ur opinion count when the law is clear

Nonso23:
Nope it's suppose to rattle you. It did. I compared her outbursts to that resounding in the hearts of many men. My proposition is simple. If the hurt these men endure is considered as acceptable then no one should feel sympathy for this woman.

and you think this particular response you gave is not based on sentiments? lol this is a battle between women and men this is about ensuring the best interests of a child are protected.

Children have rights but certain rights of theirs are the primary responsibilities of their guardian for enforcement. It is believed by law that the administration of certain of these rights lie with the discretion of the guardian(s). They don't get to choose a lot of times. BTW that is the account of an agrieved woman. It bears little weight.

Any straight couple that would;
-take its underage children to bars
-display provocative "art" of men or women.
- take their children to film festivals that will definitely not suitable for minors (especially where one in heterosexual but is still forced to hang around homosexuals)

Could be deemed unfit and improper to legal guardians. No excuses should be made for same-sex couples either.

I don't see how the publicity is negative. In their society, homosexual campaigns are regarded as positive publicity and the children are only contributing their quota to a just cause.
Her account never stated that the kids showed any form of recognisable resistance or objection to their father's lifestyle too. It was based on assumptions on behalf of the children. Unless the kids are deaf, or paralysed it is not tenable.

if you understand english at all here is the part she claimed that it was also against the kids will to be part of the first ceremony.

Their first ceremony took place before our state redefined marriage. After it created same-sex marriage, they chose to have a repeat performance. In both cases, my children were forced—against my will and theirs—to participate.

You are assuming a lot of things. As far as the law is concerned he was totally faithful. Deductions should be backed with substantial evidence.

so the sexxual activities he engaged in with his male lover from the time he left his matrimonial home till he finalized his divorce is what we call being "totally faithful" nowadays

That is her account still. Permit me to tow your line of thought. It is safe to also conclude that straight couples are also forcing their sexual orientation on their children.
I reiterate, children don't get to make a lot of choices till the become 18.

Sane heterosexual couples don't take their UNDERAGE to bars, gay parties and certain film festivals ( which I'm pretty sure will involve a whole lot of things not suitable for underage children)

The freedom of association and choice of those children are expanded as they get to relate with a broad variety of humans with various sexual orientations. Choice gets better with variety, you'll agree. I say they have better variety now.
Being gay is now regarded as an acceptable lifestyle and is not considered as psychologically detrimental to children.

it is psychologically detrimental when it is imposed on heterosexual people, the same way it is not fair for heterosexual people to impose their lifestyle on people who choose to be gay!

So standing for all in this case would be supporting the judge who gave custody of the kids to the partner who wronged the other?

No one says his marriage is illegal.

Even if it was a woman who just stood up and left for no reason or wrong doing on the man's part,as long the man didn't do anything to warrant his kids being stripped from him,they get JOINT custody.

Even as a woman is the primary care giver at the younger ages.
I'll never support a man to be denied his kids for NO REASON.

Bring a quote of mine to prove me otherwise

If he was abusive or is a danger to them then it is different.

At least a fair judgement here would be joint custody if all happened according to the woman's account.
And unless there's a good reason for the kids not to be with their mother,then the judge was biased.

Admit that you're being mischievous.
Simple.

pickabeau1:

No one is getting off on you..

Its your metamorphic ability to be seen as standing for all n nothing at the same time with your live and let live mantra.

I hope u realize that the writer of the article is a bigot and thus is biased against gay marriages which are equal to heterosexual marriage

Remember the children's best interests r considered by the judge

Remember your views on being true to yourself
This man lived a lie to blend into society
He decided enough was enough
He left
Live m let live

If this was a man speaking..you would narry spare a tear for him

From d blog



She is biased
Her personal opinions don't matter
The law is clear
Homosexual marriage is legal

If a straight man/woman's infidelity during her/his marriage can influence whether he/she gets custody of the children or not after divorce, the law should not be any lenient on homosexuals either.

cococandy: So standing for all in this case would be supporting the judge who gave custody of the kids to the partner who wronged the other?

No one says his marriage is illegal.

Even if it was a woman who just stood up and left for no reason or wrong doing on the man's part,as long the man didn't do anything to warrant his kids being stripped from him,they get JOINT custody.

Even as a woman is the primary care giver at the younger ages.
I'll never support a man to be denied his kids for NO REASON.

Bring a quote of mine to prove me otherwise

If he was abusive or is a danger to them then it is different.

At least a fair judgement here would be joint custody if all happened according to the woman's account.
And unless there's a good reason for the kids not to be with their mother,then the judge was biased.

Admit that you're being mischievous.
Simple.

Still u persist in this path ....now its me being mischievous....

When will u start correcting my grammar since u have no points

What do u mean by full custody

They had joint custody only that the father had primary custody
She can see her kids whenever she wants subject to the court ordered arrangements

Why do u do this...coco why

These days u just argue n u don't even read d full story...

Try as I might to save our marriage, there was no stopping my husband. Our divorce was not settled in mediation or with lawyers. No, it went all the way to trial. My husband wanted primary custody of our children.

Is it my opinion that he is stronger or is that a fact?

pickabeau1:


You still decide to keep one track
The transgender is a woman n the law recognises her as a woman
The mma licensed her to fight

Why should ur opinion count when the law is clear

Mondisweets: If a straight man/woman's infidelity during her/his marriage can influence whether he/she gets custody of the children or not after divorce, the law should not be any lenient on homosexuals either.

Where in d post did u read he was unfaithful

pickabeau1:

Still u persist in this path ....now its me being mischievous....

When will u start correcting my grammar since u have no points

What do u mean by full custody

They had joint custody only that the father had primary custody
She can see her kids whenever she wants subject to the court ordered arrangements

Why do u do this...coco why

Full custody is when one parent gets the kid and the other can visit per supervised court arrangement.

Shared custody is when the kids are allowed to stay with each parent alternatively with same ratio or more less same ratio based on school schedule.

If they had joint custody,she wouldn't be complaining.


You're the one with no point.
But classic you thinks you do.

pickabeau1:

Where in d post did u read he was unfaithful

so u think he left his wife to be with a gay lover he has never been intimately involved with before? Lets use ordinary common sense here, why do u think they are called homoSEXUALS and heteroSEXUALS

pickabeau1:

Still u persist in this path ....now its me being mischievous....

When will u start correcting my grammar since u have no points

What do u mean by full custody

They had joint custody only that the father had primary custody
She can see her kids whenever she wants subject to the court ordered arrangements

Why do u do this...coco why

These days u just argue n u don't even read d full story...

please enlighten use on the difference between full custody and primary custody

cococandy: Is it my opinion that he is stronger or is that a fact?

You need to read up...coco.n stop calling other peoples views mischievous since they don't tally with yours

Your opinion.. No research backs your claim which is just Beer parlor gist

Even the Olympic committee is on board n u come here saying stuff

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4918835


Fundamentally, though, it shows a lack of awareness of the current medical thought on the issue of transgender athletes. The overwhelming consensus is that after some period of time on hormone replacement therapy (HRT), transgender individuals should be allowed to compete in accordance with their legal gender.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) settled the issue of transgender athletes in 2004, when they released the rules for them to compete. The IOC rules boil down to three basic points:

They must have had gender reassignment surgery.
They must have legal recognition of their assigned gender.
They must have at least two years of hormone therapy.
Given these conditions, the IOC does not consider being transgender an unfair advantage.

Mondisweets: so u think he left his wife to be with a gay lover he has never been intimately involved with before? Lets use ordinary common sense here, why do u think they are called homoSEXUALS and heteroSEXUALS

Your common sense is not common yo all
As a lawyer that u never fail to disclose here.. You of all should know that facts are sacrusanct not theories or obtuse spouting...

You can define the custody for us..

Nonso23:
Which a qualified court has deliberated upon and passed an unbiased judgment.

there is a reason why there are appeal and reviews because judges don't always make unbiased judgement in all their decisions

Thank you. But since we can't tell the sexuality of a child just from looking at their face nor the sexual orientation of the home they will be born or grow up in there is little we can do.

My son is now a maturing teen, and he is very interested in girls. But how will he learn how to deal with that interest when he is surrounded by men who seek sexual gratification from other men?

Parents can't stop being gay because they have kids just as straight parents do not have to stop being straight because they have kids. There is no imposition here.

No one said he shouldn't be gay but imposing a gay lifestyle on UNDERAGE CHILDREN (by taking them to gay bars and parties, gay film festivals and dressing inappropriate in their presence) who are straight, is not what any fit and proper parent would do!

You had to make me wait all day to hear this line
I expected it eons ago. It tells me one thing though - you are out of points.

no it simply explains why you are so sentimental about this

cococandy:

Full custody is when one parent gets the kid and the other can visit per supervised court arrangement.

Shared custody is when the kids are allowed to stay with each parent alternatively with same ratio or more less same ratio based on school schedule.

If they had joint custody,she wouldn't be complaining.


You're the one with no point.
But classic you thinks you do.

And they tell you that parents with joint custody don't complain

You actually believe what u write...

Even in joint custody..the parent with primary custody makes all d calls

Read up..coco

Joint child custody is typically the preferred custody arrangement in most courts. A joint custody or shared custody arrangement allows parents to share physical custody of the child. In addition, the court may also order parents to share legal custody of the child or it may grant legal custody to one parent. In general, it is the court's view that a joint custody arrangement serves the best interests of the child. However, parents must also be prepared to work through the disadvantages of joint child custody, such as:

http://singleparents.about.com/od/jointcustody/a/joint-child-custody-disadvantages.htm

cococandy:

Full custody is when one parent gets the kid and the other can visit per supervised court arrangement.

Shared custody is when the kids are allowed to stay with each parent alternatively with same ratio or more less same ratio based on school schedule.

If they had joint custody,she wouldn't be complaining.


You're the one with no point.
But classic you thinks you do.

my dear some things are best ignored. Just agree to disagree full custody and primary custody are not the same thing

pickabeau1:


Your common sense is not common yo all
As a lawyer that u never fail to disclose here.. You of all should know that facts are sacrusanct not theories or obtuse spouting...

You can define the custody for us..

i will define custody for you, after u tell me why they are called homosexuals and heterosexuals first

And another research shows that when this gender reassigment sugery if done after puberty,it is not the same as one done before then. Because the hormone therapy may give you outward feminine features but will not undo what has been done internally before.
If so they should be growing wombs too. The female hormones given to them should be able to change them that much. But it doesn't.

So is it generally accepted science?
No.

Do I understand why the board agrees?
Yes. To avoid LGBT promoters having one on them in the law court.
Since they can now provide some study that backs their claims.



I don't call you mischievious because of your different opinion.
I call you that for reasons you know well.

Like claiming I shift goal posts when you can't bring a post to prove that.

Or suddenly becoming an LGBT activist because you like the idea that a woman was bashed that time.
Or becoming an incesst rights promoter because you thought it would make you have over gay folks.

Erm who was even shifting goal posts again?
You prolly have as many colors as the rainbow.

pickabeau1:

You need to read up...coco.n stop calling other peoples views mischievous since they don't tally with yours

Your opinion.. No research backs your claim which is just Beer parlor gist

Even the Olympic committee is on board n u come here saying stuff

What did you type that I didn't write?
Ok
Full custody, primary custody and shared/joint custody are one and the same thing.

Happy?

I said joint custody is usually the way unless one parent is seen as unfit to be with the kids unsupervised.
I said too that she would not have been complaining if they got joint custody.

Now you u bring a text saying the same thing to use and try 'disagree' with me?

I give up

pickabeau1:

And they tell you that parents with joint custody don't complain

You actually believe what u write...

Even in joint custody..the parent with primary custody makes all d calls

Read up..coco


http://singleparents.about.com/od/jointcustody/a/joint-child-custody-disadvantages.htm

cococandy: And another research shows that when this gender reassigment sugery if done after puberty,it is not the same as one done before then. Because the hormone therapy may give you outward feminine features but will not undo what has been done internally before.
If so they should be growing wombs too. The female hormones given to them should be able to change them that much. But it doesn't.

So is it generally accepted science?
No.

Do I understand why the board agrees?
Yes. To avoid LGBT promoters having one on them in the law court.
Since they can now provide some study that backs their claims.



I don't call you mischievious because of your different opinion.
I call you that for reasons you know well.

Like claiming I shift goal posts when you can't bring a post to prove that.

Or suddenly becoming an LGBT activist because you like the idea that a woman was bashed that time.
Or becoming an incesst rights promoter because you thought it would make you have over gay folks.

Erm who was even shifting goal posts again?
You prolly have as many colors as the rainbow.

Again I. Ask u what is your opinion on. Homosexuality

You. Still don't get it...

Thee same reasons that granted them rights ensure that in 20 y...incestous marriage will be allowed

On the beating...I'm not a woman beater

I'm not interested in gay folks or gettin likes from them


Science says they can't help who they are
Rather its selective bigots like you who r the dangerous ones.


They feel like a woman who was unfortunately born as a man
Its a science

Read up coco



You allocate rights based on your feelings or want to sterilise them because it feels iffy to u..

However if I had gender disorder n could change my sex and I love MMA
I will fight women.. Simple

Its not sentiments...all what u've been saying is just sentiments

cococandy: What did you type that I didn't write?
Ok
Full custody, primary custody and shared/joint custody are one and the same thing.

Happy?

I said joint custody is usually the way unless one parent is seen as unfit to be with the kids unsupervised.
I said too that she would not have been complaining if they got joint custody.

Now you u bring a text saying the same thing to use and try 'disagree' with me?

I give up

Don't give up

If she got joint custody but the man had primary custody.. Why is she complaining

After all thousands of men get joint custody but thee woman gets primary custody and are expected to suck it up


Why do u say d judge is this case is biased.. Coco?