Dear old friend who's nursing grudge won't let go of pain

DEAR ABBY: When I recently moved to Ohio , I left behind a group of dear friends. Full Story
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Rational

United States

#41 Feb 13, 2008
Maria wrote:
Do we really care in this day and age if a child is a B or illegitamate? Wonder who mentioned it to this kid that he's even wondering (and no, not feeling like spell checking today)
See, I am with you! However, the guy asked a question and deserves an honest answer. We ask questions, sometimes we get answers that we dont like but that doesnt make them any less true. So what if he is!! Its a term thats pretty much meaningless anymore, but he did ask.
Terri

Chicago, IL

#42 Feb 13, 2008
Rational wrote:
<quoted text>
THi Terri, actually all you did was support my argument because he was born out of wedlock. You see, the way it works is he is a B because he was born of a union that was not a married one. It doesnt matter that mommy was married. It matters that mommy wasn't married to his REAL daddy. Thats what makes him a B.
Nope. Doesn't matter. He was born in a married family, therefore legitimate. Legally the husband is now the child's father, unless it names the biological father on the birth certificate. He would be a b.astard if his mother got married after she had him. For fun, I'll see if I can find something to support you or my argument.
Terri

Chicago, IL

#43 Feb 13, 2008
Hey, Rational, guess it depends on the state for goodness sake! Who woulda thought?? Look here (I put the abbreviation for the states b/c it was going to be too long:

Legitimation by subsequent marriage exists also in the following states of the American Union: Maine, Penn., IL, Mich., Ia., Minn., CA, OR, Nev., Wash., N. and S. Dakota, Idaho, Mont. and NM. In Mass., Ver., IL, IN, Wisc., NE, Maryland, VA, WVA, Kent., MO, AK, TX, CO, Idaho, WY, GA, AL, Miss. and AZ, in addition to the marriage the father must recognize or acknowledge the illegitimate child as his. In NH, CT and Louisiana both parents must acknowledge the child, either by an authentic act before marriage or by the contract of marriage. In some states (CA, Nev., N. and S. Dakota and Idaho) if the father of an illegitimate child receives it into his house (with the consent of his wife, if married), and treats it as if it were legitimate, it becomes legitimate for all purposes. In other states (N. Carolina, Tenn., GA and NM) the putative father can legitimize the child by process in court. Those states of the United States which have not been mentioned follow the English common law, which also prevails in Ireland, some of the West Indies and part of Canada.

Whew. Got all that?
Rational

United States

#44 Feb 13, 2008
Terri wrote:
Hey, Rational, guess it depends on the state for goodness sake! Who woulda thought?? Look here (I put the abbreviation for the states b/c it was going to be too long:
Legitimation by subsequent marriage exists also in the following states of the American Union: Maine, Penn., IL, Mich., Ia., Minn., CA, OR, Nev., Wash., N. and S. Dakota, Idaho, Mont. and NM. In Mass., Ver., IL, IN, Wisc., NE, Maryland, VA, WVA, Kent., MO, AK, TX, CO, Idaho, WY, GA, AL, Miss. and AZ, in addition to the marriage the father must recognize or acknowledge the illegitimate child as his. In NH, CT and Louisiana both parents must acknowledge the child, either by an authentic act before marriage or by the contract of marriage. In some states (CA, Nev., N. and S. Dakota and Idaho) if the father of an illegitimate child receives it into his house (with the consent of his wife, if married), and treats it as if it were legitimate, it becomes legitimate for all purposes. In other states (N. Carolina, Tenn., GA and NM) the putative father can legitimize the child by process in court. Those states of the United States which have not been mentioned follow the English common law, which also prevails in Ireland, some of the West Indies and part of Canada.
Whew. Got all that?
Nice work. However, in the grand scheme of things we are talking about what makes you one. Not that you can be one in one place and not one in another. By the origins of the term, a B is what the definition states. It was a way to define a person who was born of a union of two people not married to each other. This seems to be supported by all the definitions. Heck, I even took a survey and sent out an email asking 10 people. Not that this should make any difference but guess what? Every one of them said the kid was a B.

The reason I won't accept what a state says is because thats like saying to a jaguar "Mississipi state law says that you'se a sea turtle! Got that? If you want to be some fancy jaguar thingy you better get yer behind on over them state lines to Alabama"

:)
Suzanne

Chicago, IL

#45 Feb 13, 2008
OK, the real question is the definition of born out of wedlock. Abby assumes that since the mother was married the child was born within wedlock. Rational assumes that since the mother was not married to the biological father the child was born out of wedlock. So we really need to know the definition of wedlock, not the b word.
Anna

Baraboo, WI

#46 Feb 13, 2008
Maria

You said: "I don't go to church, nor does my husband. But the Godfather was a very serious churchgoet to that church and even asked the priest. he said absolutely not. Ultimately had her baptized at home by a methodist minister. It was the best baptizm ever. "

I understand why the Catholic Church didn't want to baptize your child. Baptism is a sacrament, and both you and the godparents promise to raise the child Catholic,(and it's hard to raise a child Catholic, unless you are one also.)

I'm sorry that you got your feelings hurt, but I agree with the priest's choice about not doing it.
EEE

Westmont, IL

#47 Feb 13, 2008
Rational wrote:
<quoted text>
THi Terri, actually all you did was support my argument because he was born out of wedlock. You see, the way it works is he is a B because he was born of a union that was not a married one. It doesnt matter that mommy was married. It matters that mommy wasn't married to his REAL daddy. Thats what makes him a B.
I know a lot of people who would take offense at that.

A good friend of mine's parents divorced when he was five and his mother remarried three years later.

He considers his mother's second husband, the man who loved and raised him, to be his REAL father.
EEE

Westmont, IL

#48 Feb 13, 2008
My sister never married her children's father (thank goodness that rat b*st*rd is out of their lives!)

I legitimately love both my niece and my nephew.
Maria

Chicago, IL

#49 Feb 13, 2008
Anna wrote:
Maria
You said: "I don't go to church, nor does my husband. But the Godfather was a very serious churchgoet to that church and even asked the priest. he said absolutely not. Ultimately had her baptized at home by a methodist minister. It was the best baptizm ever. "
I understand why the Catholic Church didn't want to baptize your child. Baptism is a sacrament, and both you and the godparents promise to raise the child Catholic,(and it's hard to raise a child Catholic, unless you are one also.)
I'm sorry that you got your feelings hurt, but I agree with the priest's choice about not doing it.
Oh I understand it. I also never said I wasn't Catholic. I just said I didn't go to Church. But I believe strongly in baptism. My feelings weren't hurt at all. The reaction of the priest simply confirmed WHY I don't go to Church. Essentially, he was punishing the child for the "sins" of the parent. But that's ok. My daughter is still awesome. With or without the Catholics. They have every right to not baptize a child into their faith. No biggie.
Teresa

Chicago, IL

#50 Feb 13, 2008
someone wrote:
we had several unmarried parent in our class....I think my husband and I were in the minority
we also had one without a dad who came in with his mom, grandma and granddad
and umm......dont think we paid anything. At the actual mass we gave an offering but to get baptised, nothing
we did have a disturbingly young hottie priest though
I agree, I've known a lot of unmarried parents who have had their children baptized in a Catholic Church. There's a whole "not visiting the sins of the parents on the children" thing, however, I have known the Church to require that the parents and godparents attend pre-Baptism classes, which has made parents change their minds.

Also, that disturbingly young hottie priest? Widely known as a "Father What-A-Waste"
Teresa

Chicago, IL

#51 Feb 13, 2008
Sorry, Maria, missed your latest post, yes, generally one of the requirements is that you be a practicing Catholic, and a lot of parishes require that you provide evidence that you (the parents and godparents) are Catholics in good standing (like a letter from your home parish)
D Kalas

Hollis, NH

#52 Feb 13, 2008
Dear Abby,
Am I a "fill in the blank"?
Signed,
Confused

Dear Confused,
Yes.
Abby
someone

United States

#53 Feb 14, 2008
Teresa wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree, I've known a lot of unmarried parents who have had their children baptized in a Catholic Church. There's a whole "not visiting the sins of the parents on the children" thing, however, I have known the Church to require that the parents and godparents attend pre-Baptism classes, which has made parents change their minds.
Also, that disturbingly young hottie priest? Widely known as a "Father What-A-Waste"
Wow? There is a name for it?

Seriously the man was drop dead hot to the point where my 60+ confirmed hetero likes-the-marilyn-monroe-body- type-women mentioned that he was a handsome young man

I mean, that is a calling to the priesthood and serving god because in the secular world this guy (regardless of his orientation) could have easily relied on someone taking care of him for the rest of his life.

We took lots of pictures that day
Maria

Chicago, IL

#54 Feb 14, 2008
Teresa wrote:
Sorry, Maria, missed your latest post, yes, generally one of the requirements is that you be a practicing Catholic, and a lot of parishes require that you provide evidence that you (the parents and godparents) are Catholics in good standing (like a letter from your home parish)
Honestly, it wasn't that big of a deal. We had an amazing baptizm at home in front of the fireplace. If the Catholic's didn't want her (which again, is totally fine) then the Methodists got her. Ironically, she goes to a Catholic Church most Sundays with her friend - how ironic.
Maria

Chicago, IL

#56 Feb 19, 2008
uncle Buck wrote:
<quoted text>
Maria, please make love to me. Forget all those other people. come to me.
omg, I loved that movie Uncle Buck with John Candy. Hmm, think I'm going to watch it!
Steve Bognar

Longmeadow, MA

#57 Jul 26, 2013
http://books.google.com/books...

Assistant anthropology professor Nicholas De Genova said at an antiwar teach-in Wednesday night that he would like to see "a million more Mogadishus," according to one of the event's organizers.

He was referring to the Somali capital where 18 American soldiers were killed in 1993. The incident, the focus of the book and movie "Black Hawk Down," prompted the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the peacekeeping mission in Somalia.

De Genova also said that the American flag stands for imperialism and that it is impossible to be a patriotic American without also being an imperialist.

The university issued a statement saying De Genova "was speaking as an individual at a teach-in. He was exercising his right to free speech. His statement does not in any way represent the views of Columbia University."

Eric Foner, a history professor at Columbia who helped organize the teach-in, said Genova's statements were "reprehensible" and represented neither the views of the event's organizers nor the antiwar movement as a whole.

Freshman Philip Cartelli, one of the students who attended the teach-in, said there were small cheers after some of De Genova's controversial remarks. But he added that about half of the students "were rolling their eyes."

About 3,000 students, faculty and community members passed through the university's Low Library rotunda to hear roughly 30 professors speak there during the six-hour teach-in, Foner said.

The next day, Cartelli and a group of approximately students 50 students tried to deliver a letter to Lee C. Bollinger, Columbia's president, asking him to issue an official statement opposing the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

The students at that time were denied access to the Low Library building, which houses the offices of the president, but were permitted to later meet with Robert Kasdin, senior vice president at the university.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Xenia Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 7 hr Cry Baby 19,374
Where's all the old threads? 16 hr The Duke of Hazard 2
SOS - PLEASE HELP!! Crowd Funding - 4 - GREECE... 18 hr Bro 3
Our recommendation: Springboro voters should sa... (Feb '08) 18 hr Doug Wiedeman 31,300
cheeks club 18 hr Bro 10
The Dayton Oasis, the Dayton Stoop, the DDN mes... (Jan '09) 19 hr masterofconcretep... 5
Review: Wilmington Apartments (May '09) 19 hr Carlea Pearman 68
Xenia Dating
Find my Match

Xenia Jobs

Xenia People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Xenia News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Xenia

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]