Tremendous cd, just lovely!!!!!<P> <P>------------------<BR>Imagine....

Thanks for your kind words. Today I am in need of them. <P>My whole point is not to "change anybody's mind" by forcing my opinions on them. But when somebody is searching for the truth, I feel compelled to try and assist them in their quest to discern right from wrong. I don't think that there is anything wrong in debating the topics here that we disagree on. Even if anow never agrees with what I have to say, she will be enlightened as to my perspective, and I to hers. That brings us one step closer to resolution. If that were not the case, conversation in general would serve no purpose.<P>If I am not willing to tackle the subjects that hurt the most with anow, how can I ever hope to make an impression on others? You all probably think that I am nuts when I say that someday (years from now when my kids are all in school) I plan to go on to law school and make a difference in the child support and custody laws that govern us. But I know it all starts with one person. With me. With you. It starts here. It starts now.<P>When a key government official stumbles upon this website (by accident, by divine intervention, who knows, but it could happen) I want him to see clear logical reasoning. I want him to see well-defined and indisputable arguments in favor of the marital union. I want to make an impact with what I say and how I say it. I want him to be unable to dismiss what I say, to be unable to get it out of his thoughts, to be compelled to act.<P>If we do not take full advantage of these opportunities, if we shut out those with opposing viewpoints just because it pains us to hear what they say, we do ourselves a great disservice.<P>Well, I'm done for now. The sound you will hear shortly is me hitting the ground as I get off of my high horse. Ha, ha!<P>-cd<BR>P.S. Catnip, I don't ever want to hear you say again that you take exception to being called "self-serving". Take pride in it. God demands that you concentrate solely on yourselves in the marriage. "Selfishness" has gotten an ill-deserved reputation of always being a "bad thing" but there are many times when it is our duty to be selfish, when being "selfish" is the only right thing to do.

Wow! <P>I'm applauding CD, as I write. I absoluetly loved how you verbalized forgiving and accepting your husband back into the marriage doesn't at all automatically assume the OC comes with that decision. It is in itself a seperate decision between the H and the W. Lovely... just lovely.<P>Now for the quote that caught me....<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I'm more or less scared to cut the ties because I am scared of losing my friend.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>That's exactly what my XOW said to me the other night. I had to polietley explain to her that I am NOT sharing my husband with her. He is no longer her "friend". He and I made the decision to have him be a visiting daddy to her child. This includes absolutely NO obligation to her. I am fully aware they will speak when WE go pick up and drop off the OC. But they WILL NOT be chatting idly on the phone about anything other than the well being of that child. If in fact he ever chooses to "be her friend" again, I will consider it a breech of our agreement and marriage.<P>So what I say to you anOW... soooo sorry you miss your friend. But there is NO sympathy coming from this Zebra. If you valued him as a friend that much you should have kept your relationship platonic, befriended his wife, and you might be over a couple times a week eating dinner with their family and enjoying THEIR company like real friends do! But no, you had to satisfy your needs at all costs... so now you sleep in the dirty sheets you created! <P>You reep what you sow!<P>Fairwell,<P>------------------<BR>Zebra Baby ...<P>Lord, give me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.

once again, someone always has to get nasty:<BR>But no, you had to satisfy your needs at all costs... so now you sleep in the dirty sheets you created! No, HE satisfied my needs and now HE"S sleeping in the "dirty sheets" WE created. I don't want your sympathy and my only regret is coming to this site. Peace.<BR>

anow,<BR>I am wondering why you are choosing to respond only to the things you perceive as nasty.<BR>How about a well-thought-out response to the other posts? I don't mean just mine, either. Quite a few people put a lot into what they replied to you. <BR>So are you done here? Because if you are, I feel like I have wasted a lot of time and effort.<BR>-cd

anOw, I was going to respond.... but I decided to just say this one thing....<P>IF YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT YOU HEAR OR READ... LEAVE. <P>Obviously our opinions are not what you want, so go find some that better suit your needs.<P><P>------------------<BR>Zebra Baby ...<P>Lord, give me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.

no, I do like cd's post and some of the others but people like YOU zebra I do not value your opinion AT ALL because you just want to be mean and nasty and that is not what I came here for. Geez.

anow,<BR>Come on, you're not going to leave me thinking that my arguments are just so compelling and logical that you simply can't respond, are you?<P>My poor ol' head will swell so much I won't be able to get through the kitchen door.<BR>-cd

well, cd,<BR>your arguements are well thought out and I do value your opinion. However, this is not the only site that I have been to and though your views and opinions seem to be the same views on this board, everyone does not believe the same way that you guys do. I am talking about other married women as well. They do not believe that it is right for a child to be neglected by a biological father in order to put a marriage back on track. 17 year old boys go out and make babies and if they choose to ignore the child and go to college and go on with THEIR future, they are labeled a dead beat dad. If a couple get divorced and are therefore no longer married, if the father turns his back on those children and doesn't do anyhting for them, he is labeled a dead beat dad. If a man has a child and for whatever reason cannot find a job and cannot support that child, he is labeled a dead beat dad. Why then, if society holds the 17 year old Kid responsible for his child, the divorced/unmarried father responsible for his child, and the unemployed father responsible for his child, why then, should it be okay for a man who has had an EMR and produced a child not to be responsible for his child? Being a 17 year old kid having a child may jeopardize that kids future education and employment options but he is still held responsible for that child. A MM having a child with an OW may jeopardize his family but he should still be held responsible. It should not be okay for that man to be able to close his eyes and pretend like that child never happened because it pacifies the W and other children. Just because someone is married it does not excuse them from other responsibilites they have created.

anOW, <BR>If you read closely most of the men want nothing to do with ow kid. All of them have to pay support to much I think. flowerseed<p>[This message has been edited by flowerseed (edited February 28, 2001).]

I understand that most of your husbands want nothing to do with a child they created be it out of love or be it unplanned. I still thinks it is sad and it shows that a man is still of low character to want nothing to do with his own flesh and blood. Aside from the fact that the child didn't come from his wife, that child is still half of him just like the children he had with a wife and it is sad that a man would choose to turn his back on his own seed. Now I know there are OW that do lie and say they are on the pill when they are not or they don't take them as they should or they say that it is impossible to have children because they are sterile but that doesn't excuse the man from being responsible for taking care of HIMSELF and protecting his marriage by not bringing in an oc. There is no law that says if a woman says she's on the pill that a man can't still use a condom. Your husbands didn't get tricked by the other woman they got tricked by their desire to have sex without a condom.No one has the right to say, "She got herself pregnant" or "He got me pregnant" It Takes two so the blame should lie with both and the responsibility should lie with both.

Anow,<BR>Of course there are other women who disagree with me. That is what make us all individuals. There are many women HERE ALONE who do not agree with me on this, and on the father feeling/not feeling a need to nurture the child.<P>However, I see it all as a matter of putting things in order.<BR>1. If a 17 year old boy fathers a child, that child is his primary obligation. He had no other obligations that preceded that child. No other obligations come first.<BR>2. If a father has children then gets divorced, his obligations to wife have ended, but his obligations to children have not. Therefore, they are his primary obligation. No other obligations come first.<BR>3. If a father is unemployed, he is still obligated to provide for them. They are his primary obligation, therefore he must work to support them.<BR>4. If a man is married his wife and children are his primary obligation. If he has an affair that results in the birth of an illegitimate child, that does not change the fact that his wife and children are still the PRIMARY obligation. Any support, financial or emotional, due to the oc is secondary in importance.<P>Anyway you look at it, and especially if you look at it from a Christian perspective, the needs of the primal family comes first.<P>You talk a lot about how the men should be held accountable for their acts. Hypothetically speaking, shouldn't a woman be held accountable for her choice to bear and keep a child that the father does not want? <P>I don't think that there are many people here who think that the oc should get NO money at all. We just question what the guidelines specify is a reasonable amount, because our own children are not factored into the equation.<P>-cd

Just a question:<BR>Your MM used a condom to protect himself from pregnancy, right? Didn't do him much good. Are you willing to say that he is not responsible for the creation of your child because he took precautions against it?<P>I'm just pointing out that your last argument didn't make any sense. <BR>cd

an oh yeah, it some cases (as in mine) it takes more than a condom. I now realize the value of foams and gel in addition to a condom and will not go without ever again.

nope I'm not willing to say that he his not responsible at all. (we seem to be posting at the same time). If any man wants to make SURE that he doesn't have a child with any woman, be it wife, girlfriend, friend, or whatever, the only way to do that is to not sleep with her. And since we made the choice as two consenting adults, we are both responsible.

OK. But if they are both EQUALLY responsible for the pregnancy, shouldn't they have EQUAL say in how to handle the pregnancy - be it keep the baby, abort the baby, give the baby up for adoption, etc.?<BR>-cd

anOW,<P>I concure with CD about the protection situation. You did state that MM used a condom, and he was taking that precaution. What were you doing about protecting yourself? If looked at that way, it is your fault that you got pregnant.<P>I also agree with the fact that you do seem to only respond to posts where we are supposedly ripping you apart. I don't think you know what help is, or what those of us have to say, who aren't trying to rip you apart, has hit you the way it should, and you see the error in your ways. In so doing, you fail to respond to those posts, because you are afraid to actually state that one of us may be right in what we have said.<P>I've said it once before, I will say it again, I have been in just about every situation that has come up in these posts(being a birth mother, a betrayed spouse, and a wayward spouse expecting another man's child) I think that I have every right to tell you that you need to think of what is best for this unborn child, not your own personal feelings. This MM's wife and children have been, are, and will be deprived of the life that they deserve if you continue to force yourself into their lives. Even if all you do is sue for child support. It is unfair to his already existing family to take the majority of money away from them, which is what will happen if you do sue for CS! If you truly believe that both parties should "pay" for this mistake, and you were telling the truth about being able to support this child on your own, then do it. You can still have the MM come over for visitation, but don't take away from those who were there first.<P>Enough said.<P>Tigger

anow,<BR>My H wanted to take responsibility for oc. He wanted ow to put it up for adoption because that would have been best for the child. OW would not hear of it. She wanted to keep it.<BR>So what you are telling me is that the only way a mm can take responsibility for oc is if he does what ow wants him to do even if he does not agree with it.<BR>As far as my H is concerned he is no more responsible for that child than if ow had gone to a sperm bank. He tried to have some input into the oc's future but was told his opinion and wishes don't count.<P>Jtigger

anOW,<P>I do have a question, what if you had wanted an abortion, or thought that the child should be up for adoption. Would you want the mm telling you that you couldn't get an abortion, or you could not put the child up for adoption. I don't think you would. I too have a problem with thinking that both are responsible. If that is true than the man should have equal say. I mean if you are going to say equal responsibility, that it should also be equal decisions. If the man wants you to have an abortion or adoption, and you say no. Than they shouldn't be held responsible.. I know that my husband told her to do both, but she wanted the child. She now has two kids and is living quite well. There are men who are sperm donors and there are legitimate children that are theirs, no one holds them accountable. <P>If you sleep with a mm you know the chances are high if you keep the child there might not be a dad. You can control not getting pregnant. I have been pregnant only once, and that is when I wanted to be pregnant. There is birth control. If you are the one that will be pregnant and make the decisions for both your life and the child's, then no one can complain about the way things turned out. <P>Genetics don't mean anything. What about those men who live with their flesh and blood and molest them? Or those who live with their flesh and blood and murder them. Genetics means nothing. It is who wants the job of daddy. The mm might have the first interview, it doesn't mean they will take the job if it is offered, or force fed to them.<P>babstr.

anow,<BR>I only have a few questions for you. You say if a man doesn't try to have a relationship with a child he is a dead beat dad. What kind of dad can a man be when he only sees a child for a couple hours a week? In my case we live 300 miles from oc and there is no way to live closer. How is it fair to the oc to see his "dad" a couple hours a month? How can a child be expected to bond with this person they never see? I have been the child who was raised by mom and step dad and I'm glad I was never forced to have a relationship with a man I could only see once a month. My step dad was the only person I ever called Daddy and I thank my Mom that she gave him to me.<BR>