From: yasu@ll.mit.edu (Alan Yasutovich)
Subject: Re: You can't (financially) rape the willing
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 12:42:48 GMT

In article <kk7RPB2w165w@dogear.spk.wa.us> bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us (Bob Kirkpatrick) writes:
>jcr@milton.u.washington.edu (Mr. EuStress) writes:
>
>->   Oh yea, I forgot, Bob (a.k.a. "Let's have more kids") 
>->   is also a "forced family" benefactor -- because, for him, 
>->   it's a choice and not slavery.
>-> 
>->   You can't (financially) rape the willing.
>->   Bob reasons: "If I don't THINK I'm a slave then I'm not one."
>->   and "Damned be anyone who chooses an `alternate' lifestyle."
>
>Mr. Relf, it is pretty silly to send me messages in the mail which
>you're going to post anyway. 
>
>I'm surprised to read your accusation, considering that you repeatedly
>came to me for advice on terminating your parental rights/responsibility,
>and got as much help as I could give. I spent time at the law library
>for you making sure how to see to it that an agreement made in Utah
>could be binding here. Looking up OSE policies on out of state termina-
>tions to ensure that they too would honor the stipulated order. I even
>drafted the texts for communications between you and your ex's lawyer,
>a brief, and a couple of different drafts of the actual order/agreement
>for you to use as examples.
>
>I repeatedly suggested that you get a lawyer instead of representing
>yourself, both because I'm NOT a lawyer and can only suggest, but also
>to ensure that you would have a reasonably ironclad order at the end of
>it all.
>
>For you to make the bullshit statement above only serves to ratify my
>decision to disengage from helping you any longer. When you chose to
>abandon the process when it was 90% of the way done, in order to be a
>belligerent to the court, your ex and her lawyer, I suspected that you
>weren't interested in what you claimed was your goal; instead, your wish
>is to antagonize those around you until they have no choice but to hand
>you your walking papers, or in your ex's case, throw the book at you.
>
>---
>
>As a side note to Alan Yasutovitch: This, Alan, is why people don't
>like to volunteer info, do research, or make effort for net.people.
>You can be pretty sure that I won't try again. Some people just don't
>get it that some of us may have different opinions on what we think is
>right, but are willing to accept a different point of view, and even
>try to help 'the opposing view' get what they want for themselves. What
>we manifest in our various debates here has little to do with how we
>will react to specific circumstances.
>
>
>---
>Bob Kirkpatrick, Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA
>bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us

	I see this whole thing as such a suprise that there are several
	levels of "conclusions" all rolled up into one, and I'm a bit
	overwhelmed.
		1) I *do* have to agree with the statement that you
	are a "willing" participant, with regard to the slavery question.
	I think that you see it more as an issue of "right vs. wrong"
	in the support category.  I think Mr. Eustress sees it as
	simple personal rights.

		2) I was not aware that you had actually done work for
	him on this matter, nor of any of the subsequent stuff associated
	with that.
		
		3) As far as doing this type of thing, I think that I
	am hearing that you feel slighted in some way.  I accept your
	comment about how people feel, but I want to make it clear that
	it has never been a problem/question in my mind about people
	actually going to lok up things.  *My* problem has been people
	who could potentially have enough knowledge to say, "It could
	be "1", "2", or "3", etc. ", giving a person who is in complete
	ignorance of how a situation might turn out a clue as to the
	possibilities, will always give some kind of <standard disclaimer>
	instead.


	It seems to me that people who are actually knowledgable should
	be able to give some thoughfull alternatives when various
	questions are asked.

	I've lived with this in my profession.  People often think
	of questions in a "multiple choice" fashion.  They assume that
	people know what choices "A-E" are, and are being asked what
	the right one is.  Very often the *REAL* question is, 
	"What *are* options "A-E"?"  I think that knowledgable people
	can provide this type of info without a bunch of horseshit about
	giving free legal advice.

	It's that simple.


	I never said people should go to the library for anyone.  Cause
	the question is usually "What are my options", rather than
	"go look up the right one".

-- 
	Alan Yasutovich
	"inquiring  (and nosey) minds WANT TO KNOW!!!"
	I can remember when "safe sex" meant having a padded headboard!!
	Tick Tock.....Tick Tock......Tick Tock .....Tick Tock......
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,alt.child-support,alt.dads-rights,alt.abortion.ine