 | | Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
Hello. As some of you may or may not know, I am in a relationship where my girlfriend's guardians do not like me much, they have false accusations against me, and even filed a police report against me because they do not like me, the police report (...) (23 years ago, 1-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Dear Aby...with a difference (was: Girlfriends Guardians!!!)
|
|
(...) Do they know you? What don't they like? Maybe they're just not ready for their sweet little honey-kins to be growing up. Have you asked them what their problem is (I'd recommend phrasing it a bit differently)? (...) Hey, I drove before it was (...) (23 years ago, 1-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dear Aby...with a difference (was: Girlfriends Guardians!!!)
|
|
(...) They have met me once or twice when I picked her up for youth group before we got real serious, and any other information was supplied by their son, who despises me. Goes out of his way to insult me in hall.. :-\. I have been advised to write (...) (23 years ago, 1-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
(...) My advice to you would be to "tread lightly." If you have a serious relationship that could last long-term, then with some patience and discretion you should be able to last until you are both 18 and she is free to chose whom to see. Trying to (...) (23 years ago, 1-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
(...) I was thinking of posting about being leery of age of consent issues myself, but you have hit it on the head, James... The age of consent in Michigan is 16. Unless you're both 16 or older you are in a world of trouble if they want to *make* (...) (23 years ago, 1-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
(...) She is 18, I am 16... So she is probably old enough to decide that stuff. Rick (23 years ago, 1-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
(...) We are both over age 16. She is 18, turned that today did she. :) (...) She is 18, as I said before, and if i understand what you and James are saying this makes her an adult and willing to do as she pleases. And my parents love her, I just (...) (23 years ago, 1-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
(...) Just noticed this thread while trying to find info on clones, but anyway. I am an attorney in Washington State. It sounds like you would be safe from any criminal prosecutions if you had sexual relations (although she would not necessarily (...) (23 years ago, 1-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
This doesn't really apply to the root question anymore, but... (...) I've wondered about that as well. On one hand, if a medically demonstrable risk continues to exist that an individual will commit a crime again, is it not in the public's interest (...) (23 years ago, 1-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
The subject line made me think, at first, that we were talking about Paradisa mecha. ;) (...) Yes, but as long as she's under her guardians' (they're not her parents?) roof, they have the ability to monitor and modify her behaviour. Her other (...) (23 years ago, 1-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
(...) Yes. (...) Yes. (...) But why should the rest of society have to live with the possibility that the offender's behavior may not be controlled? Or the possibility that the offender may decide not to show up for his Depo Provera treatment (or (...) (23 years ago, 1-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
(...) When I said "that" I was referring to someone being tagged as a sex offender (for statutory rape if both parties "consent", that is, no violence was involved, and both parties are under age. (yes they might be below the age of consent...)) for (...) (23 years ago, 2-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
Well, here's my take on the whole thing... First you have to decide if your girl and you are truly serious about each other -- sometimes it seems really serious because of hormones, youthful exuberance, etc. These are REAL phenomena -- you can feel (...) (23 years ago, 2-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
(...) I don't think so. But only because I think that they should remain in treatment until they do not pose a credible threat. (...) They need more help than punishment if that's what you you both mean. (...) What's the difference between them and (...) (23 years ago, 2-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dear Aby...with a difference (was: Girlfriends Guardians!!!)
|
|
(...) I guess the first thing that I'd do is consult with your girlfriend and her brother about what's going on and see if you 'kids' can work it out. Even if he doesn't like you, why would he want to make his sister unhappy? (...) To the parents or (...) (23 years ago, 2-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
(...) Do you allow for life-long treatment, even if that treatment necessitates incarceration? I ask because if there's an organic flaw in the brain chemistry, then the individual is realistically a threat forever. (...) By "stringent controls" I (...) (23 years ago, 2-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dear Abby...with a difference (was: Girlfriends Guardians!!!)
|
|
(...) Sounds like basic the basic sister:brother dyad to me. (...) Or, for that matter, why her brother matters in the equation. If she lives at home and is still supported by the guardians, it's not inappropriate for them to impose some rules, even (...) (23 years ago, 2-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
(...) Only if you accept that "any real spiritual sense" exists. Atheism can entail a disbelief in exactly that. Likewise, if one holds a faith-based belief in a particular god, then that person's "real spiritual sense" makes sense to that person, (...) (23 years ago, 2-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
(...) I think so. I mean, if they're a threat, then we can't very well let them just hang out and hurt people. If we can fix them, then obviously we do. But in most cases I think psychiatry is a waiting game until they just get over it...if they (...) (23 years ago, 2-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Girlfriends Guardians!!!
|
|
Hi Rick This makes a change from Lar & Scott's continual bickering. ;) My opinions: 1. Whatever decision you make should be in complete agreement with your GF & should have the effect of improving your relationship. Think about what you want & why (...) (23 years ago, 3-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | No evil people
|
|
(...) Care to elaborate on that? I've said in the past that most people are good, but I do acknowledge that there may be some that are not. It sounds like you think that no matter how much evil a person does, no matter how remorseless their actions, (...) (23 years ago, 3-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No evil people
|
|
Larry Pieniazek <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GM853y.CJE@lugnet.com... (...) good, (...) you (...) remorseless (...) Yes thanks. I do not deny the existence of evil. IMO evil is a description of an action. I believe there are (...) (23 years ago, 3-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No evil people
|
|
(...) I think that there ARE evil people. Here are a few candidates for you to consider: Pol Pot. Joseph McCarthy. Joseph Stalin. Jeffrey Dahmer. (that last one, some will argue is a mentally ill person, but I'm not sure one way or the other... it's (...) (23 years ago, 3-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No evil people
|
|
Larry Pieniazek <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GM87Jw.Iry@lugnet.com... (...) IMO all those people performed evil acts. How do you define an 'evil person'? How do you define evil? Can someone perform evil acts & not be an evil (...) (23 years ago, 3-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No evil people
|
|
(...) Candidate definition: Someone who consistently performs evil acts, knowing that under objective morality they are evil. (...) Well, I guess I'd want to hear your definition, since you presumably have one since you agreed with me on the (...) (23 years ago, 3-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
