PDA

View Full Version : For the Sake of the Children?



Jess
08-14-2011, 10:10 AM
I'm currently engaged in a real-life (yes, I found out it does exist) debate/discussion/argument about whether the health and/or well-being of minor children is affected by an adult of the opposite gender moving in with one of their biological parents.

Will it do so much damage to their little minds that they cannot function appropriately in their adult life? Are the moral and psychological repercussions too great to imagine? Is their parent being selfish and trading their own present happiness for their kids' long-term happiness?

The adults in question are not financially dependent on each other, agree on child-rearing, core religious values/issues, basic politics and most everything else, neither is wanted by the police or has ever been on COPS, Cheaters, Montel, Maury Povich or the Jerry Springer Show. ;)


What are your thoughts/ideas/opinions and how did you come by them? Just your religious/moral beliefs? Do you have personal experience?

SassyLady
08-14-2011, 06:35 PM
I think each situation should be assessed on its own merits. Different children will react differently. It's not something that has a black and white answer. Some children will welcome the person that makes their parent happy and joins the family dynamics without controlling them or changing them much. Other children don't want any competition for their parent's attention.

For me it has nothing to do with religious beliefs .. it has to do with what makes everyone in the family happy so that a cohesive, healthy family life can be achieved.

Abbey
08-20-2011, 07:40 PM
My traditional gut tells me that if the two adults are not committed enough to marry, they probably shouldn't be living together in the house with the kid(s).

Kathianne
08-20-2011, 07:42 PM
My traditional gut tells me that if the two adults are not committed enough to marry, they probably shouldn't be living together in the house with the kid(s).

That was always my take. I could date, but I always came home alone. Now? I live alone.

ConHog
08-20-2011, 08:52 PM
I'm currently engaged in a real-life (yes, I found out it does exist) debate/discussion/argument about whether the health and/or well-being of minor children is affected by an adult of the opposite gender moving in with one of their biological parents.

Will it do so much damage to their little minds that they cannot function appropriately in their adult life? Are the moral and psychological repercussions too great to imagine? Is their parent being selfish and trading their own present happiness for their kids' long-term happiness?

The adults in question are not financially dependent on each other, agree on child-rearing, core religious values/issues, basic politics and most everything else, neither is wanted by the police or has ever been on COPS, Cheaters, Montel, Maury Povich or the Jerry Springer Show. ;)


What are your thoughts/ideas/opinions and how did you come by them? Just your religious/moral beliefs? Do you have personal experience?

I think it's not a good idea when children are younger, but if they are old enough to understand that one of the adults is not their parent then it's okay IMO.

J.T
08-20-2011, 09:08 PM
I'm currently engaged in a real-life (yes, I found out it does exist) debate/discussion/argument about whether the health and/or well-being of minor children is affected by an adult of the opposite gender moving in with one of their biological parents.

Yes, their piece of shit father moving back in would be extremely detrimental in a great number of situations I've seen...


Will it do so much damage to their little minds that they cannot function appropriately in their adult life? Are the moral and psychological repercussions too great to imagine? Is their parent being selfish and trading their own present happiness for their kids' long-term happiness?


It really depends on whether the guy moving in is a good father figure/male model or not. There are numerous benefits to a two-caregiver household, especially if the individual moving in provides a strong positive role model where one is absent.


What are your thoughts/ideas/opinions and how did you come by them?
The people objecting are fucking retards who are basing their judgements on their (willful) ignorance of the parties involved and their own arrogant self-righteousness and aren't actually considering what's really best for the children.

I reached this conclusion because it's the truth.


Just your religious/moral beliefs?
:lol:


if they are old enough to understand that one of the adults is not their parent

Why does it matter if they're not the genetic parent and whether the child knows this immediately? Should we not adopt out children too young to know they've been adopted? What's the difference here?

ConHog
08-20-2011, 09:34 PM
Yes, their piece of shit father moving back in would be extremely detrimental in a great number of situations I've seen...

It really depends on whether the guy moving in is a good father figure/male model or not. There are numerous benefits to a two-caregiver household, especially if the individual moving in provides a strong positive role model where one is absent.

The people objecting are fucking retards who are basing their judgements on their (willful) ignorance of the parties involved and their own arrogant self-righteousness and aren't actually considering what's really best for the children.

I reached this conclusion because it's the truth.
:lol:



Why does it matter if they're not the genetic parent and whether the child knows this immediately? Should we not adopt out children too young to know they've been adopted? What's the difference here?


I'm assuming a situation where mom , or dad, is still in the picture even though they don't live with the family anymore. I've too often see situations where moms (mostly) have moved a new guy into the house when young kids are still trying to figure out how to cope with a divorce and then on top of that mom suddenly wants this new guy to replace dad not only in HER life, but in the kid's life as well. Now an older child of course has the cognitive ability to understand that dad is still around and that the while mom is mad at dad and wants the new guy to be "daddy" the fact remains that the child already has a dad. But little children don't , and can't possibly, understand this.

J.T
08-20-2011, 10:13 PM
I've seen it work before. Dad was Dad and Clint was Clint, mom's new boyfriend. The boys spent time with both and both men served as male role models. If the children asked why Dad didn't live with Mom and Clint did, the answer was something along the lines of 'Mommy likes Clint a lot and Mommy and Daddy, while they still care for eachother very much and love you as much as ever, are happy living apart, Eventually, Daddy got a new girlfriend, too and the boys knew her name (though she wasn't as involved with their lives). (In time, the children came to think of and call both Clint and their father 'Dad'). If a woman tried to force a child to call the new man 'dad' (or a man tries to force the child to call a new woman 'mom'), then there's clearly a problem, but I see no reason to think there's any inherent harm in Clint or Alice living with Mom or Dad and being a part of the children's lives so long as they are good people and provide a good role model and play a positive role in the children's lives as another adult and caregiver and any issues between them and the other parent are left behind-the-scenes or in private-- and not waged in front of the children, as some unscrupulous POS 'parents' do.

It's not so unlike a more communal or extended family -like setting. It can work. It doesn't always, though nor do all marriages or mother-father families and homes. It depends on all parties involved.

From the rumours I've been making up about the hypothetical situation Jess is talking about (which, it will be rumoured, is about those people with the pool down the street), the children involved have benefitted quite a bit from having a good male role model around where one has been absent, they call him by his first name and know Father is Father and Tom is Tom. They know Tom and Mom love eachother, they've adapted to Mom and Father being apart and seem to be rather fond of Tom and enjoy having him around to fill a role in their life that has been left unfilled for far too long.

In such a situation, and in many others, the presence of the new person is in many ways a huge positive change for the children. Of course, this is not always the case and sometimes the new person can be a negative influence on the home, but that's why I stress that it depends on all parties involved. Hard rules would be impossible to lay down as it is entirely dependent on the people and circumstances of a given case. I've seen very unhealthy homes that were terrible for children with a couple that's been married and faithful for ages. I've seen happy and well-adjusted children from positive households with polyamorous adults where more than one person was called 'Mom' or 'Dad'- biological parentage wasn't all that important outside of medical information, because dna has absolutely nothing to do with being a mom or a dad and there is no reason to demand a child draw artificial distinctions if there is more than one person who fills that role and is as a mom or a dad to that child. Mom is Mom. Dad is Dad. Tom might be called Dad some day if the children come to view Tom as Dad- even as a second Dad. Sometimes, that's the best thing that can happen in the child's life.

ConHog
08-20-2011, 10:29 PM
I've seen it work before. Dad was Dad and Clint was Clint, mom's new boyfriend. The boys spent time with both and both men served as male role models. If the children asked why Dad didn't live with Mom and Clint did, the answer was something along the lines of 'Mommy likes Clint a lot and Mommy and Daddy, while they still care for eachother very much and love you as much as ever, are happy living apart, Eventually, Daddy got a new girlfriend, too and the boys knew her name (though she wasn't as involved with their lives). (In time, the children came to think of and call both Clint and their father 'Dad'). If a woman tried to force a child to call the new man 'dad' (or a man tries to force the child to call a new woman 'mom'), then there's clearly a problem, but I see no reason to think there's any inherent harm in Clint or Alice living with Mom or Dad and being a part of the children's lives so long as they are good people and provide a good role model and play a positive role in the children's lives as another adult and caregiver and any issues between them and the other parent are left behind-the-scenes or in private-- and not waged in front of the children, as some unscrupulous POS 'parents' do.

It's not so unlike a more communal or extended family -like setting. It can work. It doesn't always, though nor do all marriages or mother-father families and homes. It depends on all parties involved.

From the rumours I've been making up about the hypothetical situation Jess is talking about (which, it will be rumoured, is about those people with the pool down the street), the children involved have benefitted quite a bit from having a good male role model around where one has been absent, they call him by his first name and know Father is Father and Tom is Tom. They know Tom and Mom love eachother, they've adapted to Mom and Father being apart and seem to be rather fond of Tom and enjoy having him around to fill a role in their life that has been left unfilled for far too long.

In such a situation, and in many others, the presence of the new person is in many ways a huge positive change for the children. Of course, this is not always the case and sometimes the new person can be a negative influence on the home, but that's why I stress that it depends on all parties involved. Hard rules would be impossible to lay down as it is entirely dependent on the people and circumstances of a given case. I've seen very unhealthy homes that were terrible for children with a couple that's been married and faithful for ages. I've seen happy and well-adjusted children from positive households with polyamorous adults where more than one person was called 'Mom' or 'Dad'- biological parentage wasn't all that important outside of medical information, because dna has absolutely nothing to do with being a mom or a dad and there is no reason to demand a child draw artificial distinctions if there is more than one person who fills that role and is as a mom or a dad to that child. Mom is Mom. Dad is Dad. Tom might be called Dad some day if the children come to view Tom as Dad- even as a second Dad. Sometimes, that's the best thing that can happen in the child's life.



Sure it can work, you're kid could also thrive eating nothing but dog shit. That doesn't mean it is the best approach , or good for the kid.

J.T
08-20-2011, 10:39 PM
Sure it can work, you're kid could also thrive eating nothing but dog shit. That doesn't mean it is the best approach , or good for the kid.

You're comparing allowing a good role model and caregiver into your children's lives where one is missing to feeding your child dog shit?

I've seen you post some really stupid things before, but that one just goes to prove my point about you being too stupid to be allowed to reproduce. I hope to hell you haven't condemned any children to having you as a father. I can only plead that you promptly remove your testicles before further contaminating the world, lest such mental deficiency prove to have a genetic component and you perpetuate the problem.

I'm not bothering with you anymore. Either you're just plain fucking trolling or you're simply to damn stupid to bother with.

/ignore

ConHog
08-20-2011, 10:42 PM
You're comparing allowing a good role model and caregiver into your children's lives where one is missing to feeding your child dog shit?

I've seen you post some really stupid things before, but that one just goes to prove my point about you being too stupid to be allowed to reproduce. I hope to hell you haven't condemned any children to having you as a father. I can only plead that you promptly remove your testicles before further contaminating the world, lest such mental deficiency prove to have a genetic component and you perpetuate the problem.

I'm not bothering with you anymore. Either you're just plain fucking trolling or you're simply to damn stupid to bother with.

/ignore

LOL @ JT accusing ANYONE of trolling.

gabosaurus
08-21-2011, 01:30 AM
It's a bad move at any age. Unfortunately, it is getting more common.
Younger kids don't understand what is happening. It is bad enough that they are dealing with the loss of a parent (to divorce, death or whatever else). No they have to deal with someone coming in to replace their parent.
Older kids often build a hostile resentment. This is especially true if the newcomer brings in their own kids. Blended families are one of the worst situations a kid has to deal with.

It is a bad idea. If you can avoid it, do so.

Gunny
08-21-2011, 08:40 AM
My traditional gut tells me that if the two adults are not committed enough to marry, they probably shouldn't be living together in the house with the kid(s).

Interesting. Define "marriage".

Are you referring to a legal document between a man, woman and the state of their choosing?

Or a relationship between a man, woman and God?

Last I checked, in my opinion, God doesn't need the state's permission nor endorsement.

On one hand, we are told that same sex marriages are normal and will have no affect on the children. On the other hand, because a man and woman do not have a legal contract with the state the little tikes' psyches and moral compasses will explode out of their heads.

IMO, what is n the best interest of the children AND the adults has to come first. Whether or not it is ordained by the government is irrelevant.

Gunny
08-21-2011, 08:49 AM
I'm assuming a situation where mom , or dad, is still in the picture even though they don't live with the family anymore. I've too often see situations where moms (mostly) have moved a new guy into the house when young kids are still trying to figure out how to cope with a divorce and then on top of that mom suddenly wants this new guy to replace dad not only in HER life, but in the kid's life as well. Now an older child of course has the cognitive ability to understand that dad is still around and that the while mom is mad at dad and wants the new guy to be "daddy" the fact remains that the child already has a dad. But little children don't , and can't possibly, understand this.I disagree. I liked and still like my stepfather WAY more than I ever will my biological father. I was 6 when my parents divorced and I didn't have any trouble understanding the situation. And I was glad the MFer was gone.Your premise that "this new guy replace dad" is wrong from the get go, and I can see why you would think that wouldn't work. On the other hand, if the children got no attention or only bad attention and broken promises from dad and they got attention, time and promises kept by "the new guy", things can only go up for the children.
Sure it can work, you're kid could also thrive eating nothing but dog shit. That doesn't mean it is the best approach , or good for the kid.Nor does it make your absolute the only nor best approach. You presented pretty-much nothing but a negative scenario as if it was the only way the situation ever occurs.Such is not the case. The same aforementioned stepfather I like? My brother couldn't stand him and almost caused their split more than once. So three people should suffer for the spoiled rotten selfishness of one momma's boy? I think not.
It's a bad move at any age. Unfortunately, it is getting more common.Younger kids don't understand what is happening. It is bad enough that they are dealing with the loss of a parent (to divorce, death or whatever else). No they have to deal with someone coming in to replace their parent.Older kids often build a hostile resentment. This is especially true if the newcomer brings in their own kids. Blended families are one of the worst situations a kid has to deal with. It is a bad idea. If you can avoid it, do so.One can but wonder where some of you people come from and where your heads are .....

Jess
08-21-2011, 11:31 AM
I'm assuming a situation where mom , or dad, is still in the picture even though they don't live with the family anymore. I've too often see situations where moms (mostly) have moved a new guy into the house when young kids are still trying to figure out how to cope with a divorce and then on top of that mom suddenly wants this new guy to replace dad not only in HER life, but in the kid's life as well. Now an older child of course has the cognitive ability to understand that dad is still around and that the while mom is mad at dad and wants the new guy to be "daddy" the fact remains that the child already has a dad. But little children don't , and can't possibly, understand this.

Assume that the divorce has been a while - over a year for the kids to adjust to the differences in their life, so that point isn't as valid, if at all. Next assume that Mom/Dad makes it very clear that this new person is not trying to take the place of the other parent and that new person make the same clear. Also assume that there is not blatant animosity between the parents and at least the parent in question makes a point of not badmouthing the other parent to or even in front of the child/children.

Factor in that the other bio parent is not a good influence on the kids and the new adult in the household is.

Does that help muddy the waters some? :D

ConHog
08-21-2011, 02:43 PM
I disagree. I liked and still like my stepfather WAY more than I ever will my biological father. I was 6 when my parents divorced and I didn't have any trouble understanding the situation. And I was glad the MFer was gone.

Your premise that "this new guy replace dad" is wrong from the get go, and I can see why you would think that wouldn't work. On the other hand, if the children got no attention or only bad attention and broken promises from dad and they got attention, time and promises kept by "the new guy", things can only go up for the children.


I completely concede that there are situations like yours where new "dad" is better than "old" dad.

My own son's situation was similar, he was 12 when I married my current wife. He didn't even know his mom though, and we never badmouthed her because she wasn't even in the picture. He accepted new "mom" just fine. Who knows how it would have played out if mom would have been around though.

So I concede that every situation is different, I was just talking about the norm which seems to be new guy comes in and he and mom both try to get kids to accept him as dad even though the real dad is still in the picture and wants to be a good dad.

DragonStryk72
08-21-2011, 02:52 PM
I'm currently engaged in a real-life (yes, I found out it does exist) debate/discussion/argument about whether the health and/or well-being of minor children is affected by an adult of the opposite gender moving in with one of their biological parents.

Will it do so much damage to their little minds that they cannot function appropriately in their adult life? Are the moral and psychological repercussions too great to imagine? Is their parent being selfish and trading their own present happiness for their kids' long-term happiness?

The adults in question are not financially dependent on each other, agree on child-rearing, core religious values/issues, basic politics and most everything else, neither is wanted by the police or has ever been on COPS, Cheaters, Montel, Maury Povich or the Jerry Springer Show. ;)


What are your thoughts/ideas/opinions and how did you come by them? Just your religious/moral beliefs? Do you have personal experience?

We used to have a guy, Tyrone Eddie, who lived at our house for several years when he first joined my dad's AA group. We never had any issue with it, and it was pretty cool having a dj live at the house. All in all, people put too much pressure on kids, and make them out to be the most fragile things in the world, and really, they're not. they can adapt to almost they're in, because that's what childhood is all about, learning how their world works. If you believe children to be weak, then you are going to make them weak, whether you want to or not.

J.T
08-21-2011, 05:35 PM
Blended families are one of the worst situations a kid has to deal with.

That you cannot even imagine someone being able to love their spouse's children as their own says a lot about of- and none of it good

Poke
09-15-2011, 07:57 PM
I'm currently engaged in a real-life (yes, I found out it does exist) debate/discussion/argument about whether the health and/or well-being of minor children is affected by an adult of the opposite gender moving in with one of their biological parents.
Of course it is affected. I am guessing that you know that already and that is the reason for your post.


Will it do so much damage to their little minds that they cannot function appropriately in their adult life? Are the moral and psychological repercussions too great to imagine? Is their parent being selfish and trading their own present happiness for their kids' long-term happiness?
"So much damage" and some damage are entirely different things. A selfish parent is damaging regardless of the situation you present.


The adults in question are not financially dependent on each other, agree on child-rearing, core religious values/issues, basic politics and most everything else, neither is wanted by the police or has ever been on COPS, Cheaters, Montel, Maury Povich or the Jerry Springer Show. ;)
But at least one is concerned about the situation and potential decision. Perhaps those questions in your mind deserve answers before you move forward.



What are your thoughts/ideas/opinions and how did you come by them? Just your religious/moral beliefs? Do you have personal experience?
I have experience as a parent, married and single. I have experience in morals. My religion is questionable.
Best of luck to you, Jess.

Jess
09-30-2011, 07:18 PM
Of course it is affected. I am guessing that you know that already and that is the reason for your post.


"So much damage" and some damage are entirely different things. A selfish parent is damaging regardless of the situation you present.


But at least one is concerned about the situation and potential decision. Perhaps those questions in your mind deserve answers before you move forward.



I have experience as a parent, married and single. I have experience in morals. My religion is questionable.
Best of luck to you, Jess.

I've got my opinion/belief figured out already. It was a discussion in progress and I thought it might return some interesting other opinions.

Thanks for your answer, Poke. :)

Poke
09-30-2011, 09:58 PM
I've got my opinion/belief figured out already.
I think you asked the question because you were unsure about your decision.
People that are confident with their decision don't ask for the opinion of random internet associations.


It was a discussion in progress and I thought it might return some interesting other opinions.
It was a discussion posted on this board by you. I am unaware of the "in progress" part.


IThanks for your answer, Poke. :)
You are most welcome.

Jess
09-30-2011, 10:19 PM
I think you asked the question because you were unsure about your decision.
People that are confident with their decision don't ask for the opinion of random internet associations.

Quite to the contrary. I often ask the opinions/perceptions/experiences of others out of curiosity. It is intriguing to see how or what others think about a given subject.



It was a discussion posted on this board by you. I am unaware of the "in progress" part.


I would not expect you to be aware of the "in progress" part outside of this internet post because I don't know you IRL.

Poke
09-30-2011, 10:33 PM
Quite to the contrary. I often ask the opinions/perceptions/experiences of others out of curiosity. It is intriguing to see how or what others think about a given subject.




I would not expect you to be aware of the "in progress" part outside of this internet post because I don't know you IRL.

Ok
and
Ok

chloe
09-30-2011, 10:44 PM
I've been married and divorced two times. The first marriage I never had children. I didn't really want to divorce the second time because we did have kids and I just loved being married and I wanted to try and fix the marriage, but he didn't want to, he had a girlfriend already and he was a divorce attorney so we divorced.

years later his law practice was failing and he had no girlfriends to help him out with a place to stay and I let him live in my basement for a year rent free until he could get himself together mentally.

Anyway our daughters said thank god you and dad divorced it would have been awful for us if you two had stayed married. We are friends now but we are better as friends then a romantic couple.:laugh2:

Gunny
10-03-2011, 11:26 AM
I've been married and divorced two times. The first marriage I never had children. I didn't really want to divorce the second time because we did have kids and I just loved being married and I wanted to try and fix the marriage, but he didn't want to, he had a girlfriend already and he was a divorce attorney so we divorced.

years later his law practice was failing and he had no girlfriends to help him out with a place to stay and I let him live in my basement for a year rent free until he could get himself together mentally.

Anyway our daughters said thank god you and dad divorced it would have been awful for us if you two had stayed married. We are friends now but we are better as friends then a romantic couple.:laugh2:

A valid point. My parents were divorced, then remarried "for the sake of the children." What a nightmare. They eventually ended up divorced again and there are STILL hard feelings all the way around.

I don't believe there is a pat answer to the question. Each answer would be unique based on circumstance. While personal morals DO play a part, we all have different values.

What I always find interesting are the overly-moral types who look aghast when you say "living together without being married". I always thought marriage was in the eyes of the Lord. Yet people will used Christianity as their reasoning for being against people who have not been legally contractually bound together by the state living together. For all their religious and moral zeal, they cannot seem to separate God from Man's laws. I must've missed the Sunday School class where it says one must be married by Man's law to be married in the eyes of the Lord.

Noir
10-03-2011, 11:39 AM
Can't possibly awe what the problem could be. Aslong as the new person moving in is readY to commit to being a quasi-parent.

Gunny
10-03-2011, 11:58 AM
Can't possibly awe what the problem could be. Aslong as the new person moving in is readY to commit to being a quasi-parent.

It comes down to differences in opinion. By itself, no big deal. Agree to disagree and move on.

When the person disagreeing ACTIVELY attempts to bring about the failure of the other party by various means, it becomes an entirely different matter. Especially when that person cannot actually support his stance with a valid, logical argument.

Then, WHO is actually hurting the children? The person who has accepted the children as part of the package? Or the person using the children as an excuse in attempting to control the parent?

Noir
10-03-2011, 12:19 PM
It comes down to differences in opinion. By itself, no big deal. Agree to disagree and move on.

When the person disagreeing ACTIVELY attempts to bring about the failure of the other party by various means, it becomes an entirely different matter. Especially when that person cannot actually support his stance with a valid, logical argument.

Then, WHO is actually hurting the children? The person who has accepted the children as part of the package? Or the person using the children as an excuse in attempting to control the parent?

Im sorry, but I've no idea what you're talking about lol.

Gunny
10-03-2011, 12:23 PM
Im sorry, but I've no idea what you're talking about lol.

I gathered that with your first post as a member here.

Noir
10-03-2011, 12:43 PM
I gathered that with your first post as a member here.

Okay this makes even less sense 0,o

Gunny
10-09-2011, 06:52 AM
Okay this makes even less sense 0,o

Great. I get an answer from the "I wish I was educated" dumbf-k. My argument is perfectly logical. You aren't. Math, anyone? You want to try playing semantics with me, boy, you got a tough row to hoe.

red states rule
10-09-2011, 07:01 AM
I've been married and divorced two times. The first marriage I never had children. I didn't really want to divorce the second time because we did have kids and I just loved being married and I wanted to try and fix the marriage, but he didn't want to, he had a girlfriend already and he was a divorce attorney so we divorced.

years later his law practice was failing and he had no girlfriends to help him out with a place to stay and I let him live in my basement for a year rent free until he could get himself together mentally.

Anyway our daughters said thank god you and dad divorced it would have been awful for us if you two had stayed married. We are friends now but we are better as friends then a romantic couple.:laugh2:


Wow, you really are something else Chloe. I do not know to many ex's who would do that for their former spouse.

They broke the mold when they made you girl

Noir
10-09-2011, 08:40 AM
Great. I get an answer from the "I wish I was educated" dumbf-k. My argument is perfectly logical. You aren't. Math, anyone? You want to try playing semantics with me, boy, you got a tough row to hoe.

Forget the English lessons, something more along the lines of a politeness and etiquette class would be time better spent (: (and while such etiquette is not English as such i guess that too would adhere to a common British stereotype...)

But anyways my point in this thread was a simple one. If say a man with two children from another relationship meets a woman and forms a close relationship with her, and she is prepared to take on the role of a quasi-parent then their should be nothing stopping them moving in together.

DragonStryk72
10-09-2011, 09:16 AM
Forget the English lessons, something more along the lines of a politeness and etiquette class would be time better spent (: (and while such etiquette is not English as such i guess that too would adhere to a common British stereotype...)

But anyways my point in this thread was a simple one. If say a man with two children from another relationship meets a woman and forms a close relationship with her, and she is prepared to take on the role of a quasi-parent then their should be nothing stopping them moving in together.

Wait, is there something stopping them from doing it over in England? Cause the only that would stop two people from doing that over here is lack of space in the house, and/or no moving van/vehicle.

Noir
10-09-2011, 09:26 AM
Wait, is there something stopping them from doing it over in England? Cause the only that would stop two people from doing that over here is lack of space in the house, and/or no moving van/vehicle.

Nopes. Nothing stopping anyone moving in with anyone, my post was just in response to the OP "I'm currently engaged in a real-life (yes, I found out it does exist) debate/discussion/argument about whether the health and/or well-being of minor children is affected by an adult of the opposite gender moving in with one of their biological parents...what are you're thoughts..."

Gunny
10-09-2011, 11:09 AM
Forget the English lessons, something more along the lines of a politeness and etiquette class would be time better spent (: (and while such etiquette is not English as such i guess that too would adhere to a common British stereotype...)

But anyways my point in this thread was a simple one. If say a man with two children from another relationship meets a woman and forms a close relationship with her, and she is prepared to take on the role of a quasi-parent then their should be nothing stopping them moving in together.

Cool. Here's your etiquette and politeness class: Fuck off.

Questions?

Gunny
10-09-2011, 11:12 AM
Wait, is there something stopping them from doing it over in England? Cause the only that would stop two people from doing that over here is lack of space in the house, and/or no moving van/vehicle.

Well, I can rent my 1 ton pickup out if that's your only obstacle. But I get to drive ......:laugh:

Noir
10-09-2011, 11:15 AM
Cool. Here's your etiquette and politeness class: Fuck off.

Questions?

If you don't mind my asking, are you a grown adult?

Gunny
10-13-2011, 06:51 PM
If you don't mind my asking, are you a grown adult?

I'm old enough to be your dad and big and bad enough to stomp your ass into jelly.

Noir
10-13-2011, 06:57 PM
I'm old enough to be your dad and big and bad enough to stomp your ass into jelly.

Indeedy, i also just realised you're a mod which makes this all even more delightfully silly ^,^ good day.

Gunny
10-13-2011, 07:04 PM
Indeedy, i also just realised you're a mod which makes this all even more delightfully silly ^,^ good day.

What does me being a mod have to do with anything? You're a dumbass, and no one has to be a mod to figure that one out.

Noir
10-13-2011, 07:09 PM
What does me being a mod have to do with anything? You're a dumbass, and no one has to be a mod to figure that one out.

Well people needlessly flaming others is silly enough in itself, but its all the funnier when its a mod doing it imo

Gunny
10-13-2011, 07:19 PM
Well people needlessly flaming others is silly enough in itself, but its all the funnier when its a mod doing it imo

People derailing thread with inane prattling is stupid.

Me being a mod has nothing to do with this thread, douche, but if you push that issue you're just going to lose. Unless you want to show where in this thread I have posted ANYTHING in the official capacity of a moderator. Oh, you can't. I've posted my opinion and when you got lost in the sauce and your little brain shut down, you resorted to nothing but stupid comments that had nothing to do with the topic in this thread.

Just in case your "brilliant" mind has missed the point, the issue is personal and I have made nothing but logical responses until your dumb ass decided to show up and prove the topic is beyond your ability to reason. And when in doubt, let's call me a ... Oh my God ... "moderator".

Shut up, punk. Stick to supporting the Wall Street protesters and wanting to see Michael Moore.

DragonStryk72
10-13-2011, 07:25 PM
Nopes. Nothing stopping anyone moving in with anyone, my post was just in response to the OP "I'm currently engaged in a real-life (yes, I found out it does exist) debate/discussion/argument about whether the health and/or well-being of minor children is affected by an adult of the opposite gender moving in with one of their biological parents...what are you're thoughts..."

For the sake of the children, we need to stop worrying so much about the sake of the children. Kids adapt, they're in a natural state of it from the time of birth. Assuming there are any central moors in a kid's life, they will generally work out what the situation is.

Growing up, I had someone staying at the house, and AA buddy of my dad's who needed a place to live while he got his life rebuilt. It never seemed odd to me, and I am not adversely affected in any way from it.

ConHog
10-13-2011, 07:25 PM
Well people needlessly flaming others is silly enough in itself, but its all the funnier when its a mod doing it imo



So wait. Am I to understand that moderators aren't allowed to flame douchebags who deserve to be flamed?


Jim , I respectfully withdraw my application . Flaming fucktards is fun, whether you're a mod or not.

Noir
10-13-2011, 07:29 PM
So wait. Am I to understand that moderators aren't allowed to flame douchebags who deserve to be flamed?

Jim , I respectfully withdraw my application . Flaming fucktards is fun, whether you're a mod or not.

Exceptions are made for us eurofags, you can flame us regardless (:

Gunny
10-13-2011, 07:30 PM
For the sake of the children, we need to stop worrying so much about the sake of the children. Kids adapt, they're in a natural state of it from the time of birth. Assuming there are any central moors in a kid's life, they will generally work out what the situation is.

Growing up, I had someone staying at the house, and AA buddy of my dad's who needed a place to live while he got his life rebuilt. It never seemed odd to me, and I am not adversely affected in any way from it.

If you read back, it isn't really a worry, and time has proven the naysayers wrong. Jess likes to pose the occasional question to gauge reaction.

You have to admit though, in this age of always blaming everything bad on everyone else, it's a valid question.

Gunny
10-13-2011, 07:34 PM
Exceptions are made for us eurofags, you can flame us regardless (:

I could care less where you are from. Although, I WILL say you fit the stereotype of today's European. You're so busy trying to say what's correct according to indoctrination you don't think for yourself. Your dumbass remark about the Wall Street protesters is a perfect example. Because they sound like you Euro's, you think they're right and try to attack. In reality, they SHOULD be in Europe. They'd protest THAT as well, but then they'd be YOUR problem.

ConHog
10-13-2011, 07:45 PM
I could care less where you are from. Although, I WILL say you fit the stereotype of today's European. You're so busy trying to say what's correct according to indoctrination you don't think for yourself. Your dumbass remark about the Wall Street protesters is a perfect example. Because they sound like you Euro's, you think they're right and try to attack. In reality, they SHOULD be in Europe. They'd protest THAT as well, but then they'd be YOUR problem.


The phrase is COULD NOT care less you stupid mother fucker AYEEEEEEEE:laugh2:


okay sarcasm off. Someone else be grammar nazi.

Gunny
10-13-2011, 07:48 PM
The phrase is COULD NOT care less you stupid mother fucker AYEEEEEEEE:laugh2:


okay sarcasm off. Someone else be grammar nazi.

I could drink more.

I couldn't drink more.

Who's the wuss?:laugh:

ConHog
10-13-2011, 07:52 PM
I could drink more.

I couldn't drink more.

Who's the wuss?:laugh:

Oh, don't get me started on who the wusses are. :laugh:

And I have NEVER in my life known a Marine to say "I couldn't drink another drink" Not EVER. Stupid jarheads will be laying on the floor covered in a mixture of beer and their own piss,vomit, and blood and if someone offered them a beer they'd drink it. :laugh2:

Gunny
10-13-2011, 07:55 PM
Oh, don't get me started on who the wusses are. :laugh:

And I have NEVER in my life known a Marine to say "I couldn't drink another drink" Not EVER. Stupid jarheads will be laying on the floor covered in a mixture of beer and their own piss,vomit, and blood and if someone offered them a beer they'd drink it. :laugh2:

What's your point?:cheers2:

ConHog
10-13-2011, 07:58 PM
What's your point?:cheers2:



I don't have one. Just blathering on about drunken Marines.:2up:

Gunny
10-13-2011, 08:09 PM
I don't have one. Just blathering on about drunken Marines.:2up:

I've known many. They're okay unless you say I'm a squid and can kick your ass.

ConHog
10-13-2011, 08:16 PM
I've known many. They're okay unless you say I'm a squid and can kick your ass.



I've known a few in my day as well. I've also known some squids that would kick the shit out of some jar heads LOL.

intraservice rivalries, gotta love it. One thing we all have in common is that we can make fun of the Coasties. :laugh2:

Gunny
10-18-2011, 06:37 AM
I've known a few in my day as well. I've also known some squids that would kick the shit out of some jar heads LOL.

intraservice rivalries, gotta love it. One thing we all have in common is that we can make fun of the Coasties. :laugh2:

Apparently, I never met that squid ... IF that mythical being actually even exists. Matter of fact (where's noid the grammar Nazi) I've got one on my "fixin' to" list as we speak.:laugh:

ConHog
10-18-2011, 04:18 PM
Apparently, I never met that squid ... IF that mythical being actually even exists. Matter of fact (where's noid the grammar Nazi) I've got one on my "fixin' to" list as we speak.:laugh:

SEAL Team Six would disagree with your categorizing them as mythical. :laugh:

DragonStryk72
10-18-2011, 09:51 PM
If you read back, it isn't really a worry, and time has proven the naysayers wrong. Jess likes to pose the occasional question to gauge reaction.

You have to admit though, in this age of always blaming everything bad on everyone else, it's a valid question.

Problem is though, that these days, people take that question seriously. I have seen playgrounds these days with tighter security than my local bank branch, complete with non-scalable fences, and cameras covering all angles. My local bank? Not a security guy in site, sure there are cameras, but just one back behind the counter, and nothing to get in the way of a robber on the way in or out.

Gunny
11-01-2011, 10:15 PM
SEAL Team Six would disagree with your categorizing them as mythical. :laugh:

I used to play basketball with them. Your point? They hurt themselves more than anyone else.

ConHog
11-01-2011, 11:25 PM
I used to play basketball with them. Your point? They hurt themselves more than anyone else.


Of course they hurt themselves more than anyone else. Because no one else CAN hurt them. :laugh2:

Seriously though I know you're aware of how bad they are, all good.