gretta or jennifer????
Dern
Mark
> who is hotter? i say gretta
Gretta, by a long shot.
Nat
in fact.
"Mark" <h_cla...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:20d9a8c4.02031...@posting.google.com...
Jerry
>
>
>
Jerry
zorrorn
Jennifer is cute. but to innocent looking.
"Dern" <duncan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:yzOj8.17349$Og7.3...@news.webusenet.com...
Marilee317
Agreed. Greta is more attractive.
Mare
Karin
"Marilee317" <maril...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020314123307...@mb-fl.aol.com...
Yes! Definitely Greta!!! Not only is she more attractive, but she is funny
and plays a great drunk.
Karin
Pence234
Greta is prettier, smarter and richer. So why are Brandon, Jack and Colin all
panting after Jennifer when Greta can't even get a date? The writers blew it
big time on this one.
amanda
Pence234 wrote:
Jennifer used to be the prettiest girl on the show, way back when I first started
watching, but now, there is something innately unattractive about her. I can't
put my finger on it, maybe the way the character is written or her absolute lack
of ... "grace" (for lack of a better term).
amanda
Pence234
>Jennifer used to be the prettiest girl on the show, way back when I first
>started
>watching, but now, there is something innately unattractive about her. I
>can't
>put my finger on it, maybe the way the character is written or her absolute
>lack
>of ... "grace" (for lack of a better term).
>
>amanda
I agree. Can't define it either---except that she seems to be looking for a
male to solve all of her problems with life--at the same time, she's like a cat
in heat wandering about Salem and doing nothing of value (doesn't even seem to
spend time with her child.) Guess that's why she's lost my sympathy. She and
Jack need to solve a murder mystery and have some good bedroom scenes together.
Nat
I don't know about what she looks like now, but when she was younger she was
quite attractive.
Is Greta the swamp girl us Australian veiwers are just starting to get to
know?
Far out! We are so far behind you guys. We are watching
scene's when Stefano had some mind controlling device installed into Vivians
mouth. (For heavens sake)!!!
We haven't seen Jack, Jen, Abbey, or Laura for what seems like neally 6
months now. But Billie is blaming
Hope for the loss of her Daughter, Gorgea? Mike is
just about to made "Cheif of staff", Oh, and for the first time this week,
we met the darstardly Dr Craig Wesley's
fat Mrs, whats her name again?
Yep, we are how many years behind do you think? LOL
--
Love Nat: **An eye for an eye
makes the whole world blind**
~~~~~~~~~~~
"Karin" <ka...@company.net> wrote in message
news:%X6k8.9118$tP2.8...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Nat
writers and whoever else might have a different opinion all together, ever
thought of that?
"Pence234" <penc...@aol.comwhomp> wrote in message
news:20020314170112...@mb-mv.aol.com...
Dale3&8
"Karin" <ka...@company.net> wrote in message
news:%X6k8.9118$tP2.8...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
Pence234
>writers and whoever else might have a different opinion all together, ever
>thought of that?
Yes. But I don't agree with them. The writers screw up an interesting new
character (it might have been fun to see Greta and Sami stranded on an island
together---watch Swamp Girl know how to survive and Sami totally freak!)
However, ain't my story to write, just hate.
Cheers.
TresBonBon
>character (it might have been fun to see Greta and Sami stranded on an island
>together---watch Swamp Girl know how to survive and Sami totally freak!)
>
>However, ain't my story to write, just hate.
>
>Cheers.
>
After seeing Fear Factor, I'd put all my money on Sami! :o)
~ ~ Bonbon ~ ~
Marilee317
had ever seen a show give a loser (she didn't make the time) a second
(cockroach) and then a third chance (worms). The only reason they did it was
because she is a network gal and they were promoting the show with her as the
star.
Mare
Marla Singer
>On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 20:09:40 +1000, "Nat" <har...@shops.com> wrote:
>
>>Is Greta the swamp girl us Australian veiwers are just starting to get to
>>know?
>
>Those were the good old days with Greta. Now she's tedious.
>
>
Greta should be able to build herself a boyfriend out of some bamboo,
a few leaves, a gob of mud, and a hairpin, right?
Marla (talking to myself, curiously, time to up the caffiene ;)
Nat
things they make you you though.
Like lay in a covered coffin-like box with 10 snakes crawling all over you
for 5 minutes or so? Please!!
I think I'd pass on that
--
Love Nat: **An eye for an eye
makes the whole world blind**
~~~~~~~~~~~.
"Marilee317" <maril...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020315153816...@mb-fe.aol.com...
Spanglebaby
Nat, I think you've gotta' sign a contract before you go on the show
that says you won't sue Fear Factor if something funky happens to you
unexpectedly. However, I seriously doubt those were posinous snakes. The
propensity for one to bite you with all of the screaming, talking, and
Fear Factor commotion going on would just be too damned high.
I kinda' wish that Jennifer would get a snake bite on DOOL. One that
would change her and get her quit being so friggin' annoying! I can't
stand how she's trying to be Greta's best friend. This is a woman who's
admitted to having a huuuuuge crush on her ex husband. That's just too
damned wierd how they are bestest buddies now, Jen never sees Hope any
more, and Greta is still friends with Jack, whom Jennifer doesn't trust.
The whole storyline needs to be poisoned, tanked, or else revamped
entirely!!!!
JN
Spanglebaby
Well said. Also it was for Charity and hers was The California Highway
Patrol Widows and Orphans Fund. Rogan knew full well that if she won the
$$$ would help out some needy and well deserving little kids. (Ever
since 9/11 people are a lot more cognizant of kids who are partially or
fully parentless. It's opened the country's eyes. We're also more aware
and respectful of civil servants who die in the line of duty, like cops,
firemen, squad detectives who do drug busts, etc.)
He'd *NEVER* have allowed a regular contestant to have a second and
third chance that way if it meant just keeping the $$$ for themselves.
He looked at her and thought of the little kids.
If you ask me, Ali Sweeney was the biggest wimp that show's ever seen.
When he *OFFERED* her a second chance with the roach, *SHE* tried to
change the whole set-up, and replied "Dude, can I just like eat a worm
instead?". Baldwin and Richardson started laughing and had a cow when
she tried that idea on for size, so Joe said she had to eat three worms.
No one's *EVER* been so haughty as to try to change the rules on the
host of the show since Fear Factor began.
She slipped on the building with her big, unfeminine clown feet,
screamed and fretted like a little girl, and tried to change the rules.
She's a big baby!!!! I'm not saying she didn't give it her all or do
somewhat well, but she *SURELY* didn't take it in stride in the process
of arriving there. She came in 2nd, but not with any type of
professional and mature grace.
JN
Spanglebaby
I think Jennifer's prettier than Greta, actually. Greta's pretty, but
when she smiles, her laugh lines are really deep and they bug the Hell
outta' me.
JN
Spanglebaby
You're seeing the Vivian visits Dr. Wu episodes!!! Oh, how I miss Dr.
Wu. He was cool as Hell. I loved that crazy little dude and his little
red hat.
JN
Nat
talking about someone else?
:o)
"Spanglebaby" <Spangl...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:3C941F...@lycos.com...
Jonny Klingvall
expects to be super rich but's he's actually pretty much homeless. Ha ha
Vivian! Or Vivvy-Wivvy like he calls her.
Laura
Spanglebaby skrev i meddelandet <3C941F...@lycos.com>...
Nat
Johnsey is dead he died from a heart attack while making love to Vivian, (I
don't blame him), but NO, he wasn't thios DR Wu you're talking bout.
"Jonny Klingvall" <rally...@chello.se> wrote in message
news:0r1l8.157$%k.66...@news01.chello.se...
Nat
However we haven't seen Greta yet. Unless she is the swamp girl?? Yes?
"Spanglebaby" <Spangl...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:3C941E...@lycos.com...
Spanglebaby
Dr. Wu is Viv's herbal medicine guy. He's Asian.
JN
Spanglebaby
Dr. Wu is an Asian Herbalist dude. He was awesome.
JN
Spanglebaby
Dr. Rolfe implanted the tooth with the mind control device, but I think
it was the Asian herbalist Dr. Wu who extracted the tooth later on, Nat.
It was all gross when it came out! Had wires connected to it and blood!
Ewww! That was a gorry scene. Kind of surprised me...
JN
Jonny Klingvall
guy, can't remember the name.
Laura
Spanglebaby skrev i meddelandet <3C96B2...@lycos.com>...
Nat
"Spanglebaby" <Spangl...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:3C96B3...@lycos.com...
Spanglebaby
Home without parental consent? Her dad was out of town, after all, and
her mom threw her out, yet could come back to say that the Bradys had no
right to harbor her daughter without parental consent. I hope that Jan
does not wind up screwing up J.T.'s custody battle. I couldn't believe
that since Bo's a cop he didn't at least check with the Dad (via cell
phone if the dude was out of town?) and inform him that Jan was there
with them. Seemed kind of irresponsible to me...
JN
Pence234
>Could Bo and Hope get busted for allowing Jan to live there at the Brady
>Home without parental consent?
Yup. Jan's mom could make a LOT of stink about this. It won't look good in a
custody battle either---pregnant underage girlfriend of son living in home
without parental permission?
Bye, J.T.!
PennyB
TresBonBon
>a
>custody battle either---pregnant underage girlfriend of son living in home
>without parental permission?
>
>Bye, J.T.!
>
>PennyB
I believe (and I'm sure Mare will correct me if I'm wrong) that a 17-year old
who is pregnant is considered emancipated.
Marilee317
>who is pregnant is considered emancipated.
>
> ~ ~ Bonbon ~ ~
Even Bonbon knows, as she said, I only correct her when she is wrong. I can't
help it that it is fairly often. I haven't checked this one out because it
sounds so off....... what does pregnancy have to do with being emancipated?
Mare
Karin
Good question! I would like to hear an explanation on that as well.
Karin
Marilee317
Ok Karin, here is what I found out. This is in regards to California.
The specific California code, is known as the Emancipation of Minors Law.
The code states:
A person under the age of 18 years is an emancipated minor if any of the
following conditions is satisfied:
(a) The person has entered into a valid marriage, whether or not the marriage
has been dissolved.
(b) The person is on active duty with the armed forces of the United States.
(c) The person has received a declaration of emancipation pursuant to Section
7122 of the California Family Code.
To receive this declaration under Section 7122, a minor must meet all the
following conditions as outlined in Section 7120:
The minor is at least 14 years of age.
The minor willingly lives separate and apart from the minor's parents or
guardian with the consent or acquiescence of the minor's parents or guardian.
The minor demonstrates to the Court that he/she is managing his or her own
financial affairs.
The source of the minor's income is not derived from any activity declared to
be a crime by the laws of this state or the laws of the United States.
A minor who becomes emancipated has the following privileges (among others):
Consent to medical, dental, or psychiatric care, without parental consent,
knowledge, or liability.
Enter into a binding contract (i.e. buy a car, get a loan) or give a delegation
of power (sign a Power of Attorney).
Buy, sell, lease, encumber, exchange, or transfer an interest in real or
personal property, including, but not limited to, shares of stock in a domestic
or foreign corporation or a membership in a nonprofit corporation.
Sue or be sued in his or her own name.
Compromise, settle, arbitrate, or otherwise adjust a claim, action, or
proceeding by or against him or her.
Make or revoke a will.
Establish the minor's own residence.
Apply for a work permit pursuant to Section 49110 of the Education Code without
the request of the minor's parents.
Enroll in a school or college.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Nothing about pregnancy.....
Mare :)
D&H Lambert
maril...@aol.com wrote on 3/21/02 2:51 PM:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> Nothing about pregnancy.....
>
> Mare :)
It must depend on the state, because under Arizona State law, a minor is
infact emancipated when pregnant.
The reason is more than apparent. The teen herself is in the role of having
to be a decision maker for a child--therefore capable of making decisions
for herself.
Karin
Thanks! That was a lot of law to digest. Now we know.
Karin
Karin
"D&H Lambert" <kkj...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:B8BFA827.30D4%kkj...@cox.net...
Sounds just like tax law!!! So many differences in state laws. I need to
retire.
Karin
Marilee317
>>
>> Mare :)
>
>It must depend on the state, because under Arizona State law, a minor is
>infact emancipated when pregnant.
>
>The reason is more than apparent. The teen herself is in the role of having
>to be a decision maker for a child--therefore capable of making decisions
>for herself.
>
>
Arizona has no emancipation law. That means a minor in this state, including
foster kids, must have a legal guardian until he or she reaches the age of 18.
In the few cases where emancipation has been found to exist, it has been
usually a determination by a court based on circumstances that existed at the
time the person was a minor. For example, if a minor buys a car, signs a
contract, and later tries to get out of the contract on the basis of being a
minor, a court can find that the minor was emancipated for purposes of the
contract. That finding would make the contract enforceable by the seller.
Mare :)
D&H Lambert
maril...@aol.com wrote on 3/21/02 3:37 PM:
One of my best friends is an attorney here. You can't just go making up
stories as you go along just to make Bonnie look bad. Even on her bad days,
she looks better than you.
Spanglebaby
Then go hang out with your best friend who's a lawyer and give us all
some peace and quiet at this place, Heather. How's that for an idea?
What a f***ing whiner!!!!
JN
Karin
Most of the state laws pertaining to this subject can be found on the
Internet (check Westlaw Research - the ultimate in legal information). We
have several law firms clients and my sister works for a law firm. I tend
to put more credence in Mare's statement. Just my $.02 cents worth.
Karin
Spanglebaby
Even on her bad days,
> she looks better than you.
You need new glasses, Lambert. Preferrably ones that are not rose
colored this time.
JN
Spanglebaby
Well, since Lambert's first husband is so crooked and spent all of that
time in jail, it's really very hard for me to believe that Heather hangs
with lawyers and they're really tight buddies, to be quite honest. LOL.
Usually a person in that type of profession feels pity and/or shame for
women who have poor enough judgment to impregnate themselves with a
criminal's baby and isn't buddies with them.
Lawyers and people who raise children that are the spawn of prisoners
usually don't swim in the same school of fish when it comes to where
they hang out and who they buddy up with, you know? Kind of like people
who eat Caviar and toast points for Sunday Brunch and people who live in
a one bedroom rental house and eat Grits and Black Eyed Peas. It's a
different world for each.
Heather Lambert is just not cut from that type of cloth. Losers beget
losers, in other words. I no more believe that she hangs with Arizona's
finest and most law abiding than the man in the moon. Her past speaks
for itself. She's a loser who's married to a hippie, goofball
cartoonist. The proof is at her website. She's not Attorney ilk, period.
JN
TresBonBon
>stories as you go along just to make Bonnie look bad. Even on her bad days,
>she looks better than you.
Thanks Heather. I think most people here know that. The difference between us
is that I won't lower myself to correct her many misstatements.
Marilee317
I repeat Arizona has no emancipation laws.
Check it out for yourself.
http://www.lawforkids.org/QA/family/family22.cfm
I don't need to make anyone look bad they do it for themselves.....kind of like
you just did. I stated a fact (BTW, Bonnie told me to correct her if she was
wrong) you are just being rude and classless.
Now if you can show me the legal statute from your lawyer friend I would love
to see it and would more than willingly apologize for my mistake...... you on
the other hand probably will not apologize for your error or for your
unmannered reply.
Mare
D&H Lambert
maril...@aol.com wrote on 3/22/02 10:03 AM:
> I repeat Arizona has no emancipation laws.
> Check it out for yourself.
> http://www.lawforkids.org/QA/family/family22.cfm
> I don't need to make anyone look bad they do it for themselves.....kind of
> like
> you just did. I stated a fact (BTW, Bonnie told me to correct her if she was
> wrong) you are just being rude and classless.
>
>
> Now if you can show me the legal statute from your lawyer friend I would love
> to see it and would more than willingly apologize for my mistake...... you on
> the other hand probably will not apologize for your error or for your
> unmannered reply.
>
> Mare
I apologize, I thought we were talking about teen pregnancy, and not how old
someone has to be to see an R-rated movie--my mistake.
Marilee317
Now you are just sounding more ignorant. That is not what the website says and
any intelligent person that checked it out will see that. The only adult
rights that someone who is a teenager and pregnant can get is healthcare....
for obvious reasons. They are not emancipated because of pregnancy in CA or
AZ..... like the website stated... AZ has no emancipation laws.....which is the
opposite of what you and your lawyer best friend said. So apologize like an
adult or don't apologize at all...... it shows who you are....and it definitely
shows what you are not (mature).
Mare
D&H Lambert
maril...@aol.com wrote on 3/22/02 10:28 AM:
> which is the
> opposite of what you and your lawyer best friend said.
My best friend is not a lawyer, my friend is. This is the same thing you do
to the other people who have your best friend on killfile--you stretch what
they say.
Todd Isaac
Marilee317 wrote:
That link you gave says:
Question #22: Is there a law that prohibits minors from attending R-rated movies?
A: There is no law passed by Arizona or the Federal Government that prohibits
minors from attending R-rated movies. The rating system that you are asking about
is put out by the Motion Picture Association. Theatre owners voluntarily enforce
the guidelines. Currently, about 85% of theatres in the United States subscribe to
this system and will not admit individuals under 17 to R-rated movies without a
parent or guardian present. If you would like more information regarding MPAA and
their rating system, call the MPAA at 220-293-1966 or visit their website
www.mpaa.org
Explain to me how that relates to preganancy or perhaps correct youself and give
the right link.
Marilee317
>> opposite of what you and your lawyer best friend said.
>
>My best friend is not a lawyer, my friend is. This is the same thing you do
>to the other people who have your best friend on killfile--you stretch what
>they say.
>
It is so interesting how some people on this list can't discuss a subject when
they are wrong. They return to trying to demean people and always......yes
always try to tie it into JN. Some people have a real problem with her and
anyone they suspect is linked to her. I feel so sorry for you, Heather. You
are nitpicking instead of apologizing because you are not a big enough person.
Excuse me for calling your friend your best friend...I am sure he or she will
be glad that you clarified it.
Mare
Todd Isaac
Marilee317 wrote:
> >
> >in article 20020322120313...@mb-mn.aol.com, Marilee317 at
> >maril...@aol.com wrote on 3/22/02 10:03 AM:
> >
> >> I repeat Arizona has no emancipation laws.
Arizona state code differs with you. They seem to define emanicaption. Explain to
me how it can be mentioned in the state code but not be a law?
A.R.S. § 25-320 (2001)
EMANCIPATION OF MINOR.
Because § 12-2451 provides that parents owe support to "minor, unemancipated
children," by implication that section
provides that parents do not owe a duty of support to children who are no longer
minors or who have become emancipated,
except in the two special circumstances listed in subsection A of that section.
Guzman v. Guzman, 175 Ariz. 183, 854 P.2d
1169 (Ct. App. 1993).
Child support obligation automatically terminated where child married prior to
graduating from high school; therefore, mother
was required to reimburse father for the monies he paid to her after the child's
marriage to the extent these monies exceeded
what he already owed in child support arrearages. Guzman v. Guzman, 175 Ariz. 183,
854 P.2d 1169 (Ct. App. 1993).
and from
A.R.S. § 25-503 (2001)
M. For the purposes of Subsections I and J of this section, a child is emancipated:
1. On the date of the child's marriage.
2. On the child's eighteenth birthday.
3. When the child is adopted.
4. When the child dies.
5. On the termination of the support obligation if support is extended beyond
the age of majority pursuant to section 25-501,
Subsection A or section 25-320, Subsections B and C.
Marilee317
Thank you for clarifying that, Todd. The original post had the actual
wording...
http://www.lawforkids.org/QA/family/family59.cfm
Question #59: Can foster children petition for emancipated minor status?
Answer: Arizona has no emancipation law. That means a minor in this state,
including foster kids, must have a legal guardian until he or she reaches the
age of 18. In the few cases where emancipation has been found to exist, it has
been usually a determination by a court based on circumstances that existed at
the time the person was a minor. For example, if a minor buys a car, signs a
contract, and later tries to get out of the contract on the basis of being a
minor, a court can find that the minor was emancipated for purposes of the
contract. That finding would make the contract enforceable by the seller.
However, a foster child does have an option other than sitting in foster care
until the age of 18. Child Protective Services (CPS), the legal guardian of
foster kids, has a program called ILS, Independent Living Services. It provides
training in how to manage daily living skills and personal finances for those
foster kids who are eligible for the program. Once the minor completes the
training part, he or she becomes eligible to get a monthly payment to cover
rent and basic living expenses so the minor can learn, while still under the
care of CPS, to manage his or her own life. Talk to your caseworker about your
eligibility for this program.
somehow the link went off.....though the answer is still on that website among
others..........
here is additional info from that site.....
Question #56: I live in Arizona, is there no possibility of me requesting legal
emancipation without parental consent?
Answer: Arizona law makes your parents responsible for your well-being until
you turn 18 years old.
The only exceptions to this are if you are legally married (if you are under
18, parents must approve of you being married) or join the military (parents
must usually give their approval if you join the military before you are 18).
In cases where parents are not providing for your well-being (like cases of
abuse or neglect), the state government can sever a parent's rights. This means
that due to evidence of abuse or neglect of a child, the state declares that a
parent is not fufilling their legal responsibility to provide for a child's
well-being. In cases such as this, a parent's rights over a child may be
severed.
This is not emancipation though, as the child is taken care of by the Arizona
foster care system until they are 18.
Again, Todd, thank you for being mature enough to tell me the err. I am sorry
if my post led to confusion.
Mare
Karin
"Todd Isaac" <to...@grapevine.net> wrote in message
news:3C9B6F94...@grapevine.net...
Try this one - it's from the law site:
http://www.lawforkids.org/QA/family/family39.cfm
*Question #39*: Is it true once you become pregnant you are emancipated?
Answer: No. Your parents are responsible for you until you are 18 years old
even if you become pregnant and have a child of your own.
In Arizona it is very hard to become emancipated. In fact, there is no law
telling you how to become emancipated in this state.
However, you may become emancipated if you get married or enlist in the
military.
Emancipation in this area is a question of fact. A court would have to look
at all of the living circumstances before deciding if you were emancipated
or not.
~~~~~~~~
Let's remember that this is a soap, not reality. :)
Karin
Marilee317
Answered in my previous post. As it stated in my previous post Arizona has no
emancipation laws... These are legal laws to deal with support or
contracts..which it mentioned in my other post. That way the state can say who
has to pay what. It isn't truly an emancipation law per se just a financial
responsibility statute. As you can see it says nothing about pregnancy here
either.
Mare
Marilee317
Thank you Karin, I knew an intelligent person could search for the facts if
they were motivated.
Mare
Todd Isaac
Marilee317 wrote:
I wasn't dealing with pregnancy I was dealing with your statement:
"I repeat Arizona has no emancipation laws."
The term emancipation is defined in Arizona code, therefore Arizona does have
emancipation laws. It defines 5 ways in which a child is emancipated.
Saying Arizona has no emancipation laws, implies that there is nothing in the code
that deals with emancipation. Maybe you should learn to state you intent a little
clearer.
Todd Isaac
Marilee317 wrote:
>
>
> Thank you for clarifying that, Todd. The original post had the actual
> wording...
>
> http://www.lawforkids.org/QA/family/family59.cfm
>
Now maybe you should apologize for going off on Heather simply because she read the
orginal link you sent in couldn't figure out what it had to do with pregnancy. Boy
you are so quick to attack.
Marilee317
I repeat......Arizona has no emancipation law.....which is stated repeatedly on
the website. Maybe I was wrong in thinking you were mature here since you
return to insults. Emanication is defined as is many things in legal
code.....does not negate the fact that ARIZONA has no emanication law.
Karin was able to find it, I was able to find it....you clearly are only
motivated to correct me....so be it. I am still in the right here as was
proved again by Karin.
Mare
Marilee317
Todd, you are so off base here. I would not apologize to someone who attacked
me, didn't clarify the error in the link (although she could have found the
correct link as did Karin) and attacked again. Remember she has yet to
apologize to me. She was the one who was quick to attack..... nice onesided
view Todd. Oh forget it......intelligent people can see the answers (Karin and
I am sure others will) ......if you and Heather need people to guide you
through everything that is your problem....I (as did Karin) already led you to
the answer.
Heather is the person who started the attacks but you can overlook that as
easily as you overlook the correct answer to the question.
Mare
Todd Isaac
Marilee317 wrote:
>
> I repeat......Arizona has no emancipation law.....which is stated repeatedly on
> the website. Maybe I was wrong in thinking you were mature here since you
> return to insults. Emanication is defined as is many things in legal
> code.....does not negate the fact that ARIZONA has no emanication law.
> Karin was able to find it, I was able to find it....you clearly are only
> motivated to correct me....so be it. I am still in the right here as was
> proved again by Karin.
>
> Mare
The codifying of the term "emancipation" in state code makes it law. You are right
there is no process in Arizona for defining the process or the legal rights.
Say I went to court and said I no long have to pay child support for my 16 year old
daughter because she is married and therfore emancipated.
According to you the Judge would say - No there is no emancipation laws go away.
According to Arizona State code the Judge would say - Yes State law defines a
person emanicpated on the day of their marriage.
You see the judge needs the "law" to back him up on his decision. As in "Guzman v.
Guzman".
Todd Isaac
Marilee317 wrote:
Oh I love how you make excuses for your own mistakes. It is not my fault it is the
other persons attitude. Your mistake caused another person to come to the wrong
conclusion, which in turn you attacked her. I myself was confused by the link,
your mistake required me to dig around the site to find the answers.
I love how you have no problem attacking BonBon when she errs, but when you err, it
is everyone else fault. What a poor sport.
Karin
Please remember that Bonnie's original question dealt with *pregnancy*.
Karin
Todd Isaac
Karin wrote:
Yes I know. But then it went to Heather about pregnancy and emanicipation in
Arizona, which then lead to the statement, there are no emanicpation laws in
Arizona. Which is what I am discussing.
D&H Lambert
ka...@company.net wrote on 3/22/02 11:06 AM:
> In Arizona it is very hard to become emancipated. In fact, there is no law
> telling you how to become emancipated in this state.
> However, you may become emancipated if you get married or enlist in the
> military.
>
> Emancipation in this area is a question of fact. A court would have to look
> at all of the living circumstances before deciding if you were emancipated
> or not.
> ~~~~~~~~
> Let's remember that this is a soap, not reality. :)
>
> Karin
Which still says that emancipation before eighteen takes place, which
contradicts Mare's statement.
D&H Lambert
maril...@aol.com wrote on 3/22/02 11:11 AM:
> Answered in my previous post. As it stated in my previous post Arizona has no
> emancipation laws... These are legal laws to deal with support or
> contracts..which it mentioned in my other post. That way the state can say
> who
> has to pay what. It isn't truly an emancipation law per se just a financial
> responsibility statute. As you can see it says nothing about pregnancy here
> either.
>
> Mare
No, it is an emancipation law.
D&H Lambert
maril...@aol.com wrote on 3/22/02 11:27 AM:
> Todd, you are so off base here. I would not apologize to someone who attacked
> me, didn't clarify the error in the link (although she could have found the
> correct link as did Karin) and attacked again. Remember she has yet to
> apologize to me. She was the one who was quick to attack..... nice onesided
> view Todd. Oh forget it......intelligent people can see the answers (Karin
> and
> I am sure others will) ......if you and Heather need people to guide you
> through everything that is your problem....I (as did Karin) already led you to
> the answer.
>
> Heather is the person who started the attacks but you can overlook that as
> easily as you overlook the correct answer to the question.
>
> Mare
No Mare, I am not the person who started the attack. My original post was in
response to your attack on Bonnie. I say that means you started the attack.
Karin
"D&H Lambert" <kkj...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:B8C0D2E3.3197%kkj...@cox.net...
Heather - you left out the first part of my post as follows:
----------
*Question #39*: Is it true once you become pregnant you are emancipated?
Answer: No. Your parents are responsible for you until you are 18 years old
even if you become pregnant and have a child of your own.
---------
The answer is *NO*. The original question by Bonnie referred to *pregnant*.
I agree that Mare initially reflected the incorrect URL; however, she did
get us to the web site/law where I found the above. Actually, what
difference does it make? It's just a soap.
Karin
Karin
"TresBonBon" <tresb...@aol.commotion> wrote in message
news:20020322075600...@mb-mp.aol.com...
"I can see clearly now, the rain is gone".
Marilee317
>> Todd, you are so off base here. I would not apologize to someone who
>attacked
>> me, didn't clarify the error in the link (although she could have found the
>> correct link as did Karin) and attacked again. Remember she has yet to
>> apologize to me. She was the one who was quick to attack..... nice
>onesided
>> view Todd. Oh forget it......intelligent people can see the answers (Karin
>> and
>> I am sure others will) ......if you and Heather need people to guide you
>> through everything that is your problem....I (as did Karin) already led you
>to
>> the answer.
>>
>> Heather is the person who started the attacks but you can overlook that as
>> easily as you overlook the correct answer to the question.
>>
>> Mare
>
>
>No Mare, I am not the person who started the attack. My original post was in
>response to your attack on Bonnie. I say that means you started the attack.
If you want to play that way....then this starts with Bonbon asking me to
correct her if she is wrong. Either that was bait (which is childish) or
seriously interested. Keep up your silly argument if you want.....I am just
telling you 2 things......believe it or not.....there are no emancipation laws
in AZ and pregnancy has nothing to do with emancipation. Keep playing your
games kids......maybe when you can admit to being wrong, for once, people can
have mature discussions with you....until then live in the dark.
Mare
Marilee317
Of course a few posts before this one.....Heather said that she didn't say best
friend.... and I changed her words....thanks bonnie for clearing up another
Heather lie. And again, Bonnie you asked me to correct you if you were
wrong.....if you don't want it don't ask for it.
Mare
TresBonBon
>
>Karin
Please remember that there was NO original question. I simply said
(paraphrased), ...correct me if I'm wrong (and I know that Mare will), I
believe that you become emancipated if you become pregnant when you are 17.
I said "I believe." I'm beginning to believe if I didn't post any opinions
here, Mare wouldn't have anything to write about. :o) I'm glad I have other
things to do with my life besides *trying* to make another person look bad.
Karin
"TresBonBon" <tresb...@aol.commotion> wrote in message
My perception of your post was that you brought up a subject. Then you go
on to say "correct me if I'm wrong, etc........." Consequently, I
interpreted that as a query in that you said you "believed", but wanted
confirmation. It's probably that English is my second language, so the next
time just use German and everything will be crystal clear.
Karin
Spanglebaby
>
> >One of my best friends is an attorney here. You can't just go making up
> >stories as you go along just to make Bonnie look bad. Even on her bad days,
> >she looks better than you.
>
> Thanks Heather. I think most people here know that. The difference between us
> is that I won't lower myself to correct her many misstatements.
>
Mare's "many misstatements" are a figment of your imagination, Old Beady
Eyes. If you'd put down the Jack Daniels for a second and drink
something non-alcoholic, you'd realize that.
JN
Kaare
emancipated from a lot upon death. What a strange code...
K
>Subject: Re: Minor staying with Bradys minus permission
>From: Todd Isaac to...@grapevine.net
>Date: 3/22/02 10:03 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <3C9B7206...@grapevine.net>
Kaare
You truly express yourself beautifully in English. I'm sure you realize this,
but I felt it was worth mentioning..... :)
Kaare
>Subject: OT - Emancipation/Was Minor staying with Bradys minus permission
>From: "Karin" ka...@company.net
>Date: 3/22/02 12:51 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <OPMm8.536$Eb5....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
Spanglebaby
Therefore, Heather lied about her "lawyer friend". I knew it.
JN
Spanglebaby
I myself was confused by the link
You're ALWAYS confused. No surprise there!
JN
Spanglebaby
>
> >> which is the
> >> opposite of what you and your lawyer best friend said.
> >
> >to the other people who have your best friend on killfile--you stretch what
> >they say.
> >
>
> It is so interesting how some people on this list can't discuss a subject when
> they are wrong. They return to trying to demean people and always......yes
> always try to tie it into JN. Some people have a real problem with her and
> anyone they suspect is linked to her. I feel so sorry for you, Heather. You
> are nitpicking instead of apologizing because you are not a big enough person.
> Excuse me for calling your friend your best friend...I am sure he or she will
> be glad that you clarified it.
>
> Mare
I'm a real Sam Spade according to Dana and Co., didn't you know? I have
links, spies, and minions according to Dana and all of her disciples. If
Mecca were a person instead of place, I'm sure that's what they'd call
me. They act like people come from miles to worship at my feet or
something. Minions, spies, and links. I wonder if they realize how nutty
and petrified they all sound, Mare? I control no one, yet Dana and Co.
would have all of the newbies thinking I control 1/4 of the modern world
as we know it with all of my "Spies, Links, and Minions". Talk about a
bunch of freaks.
JN
Spanglebaby
>
> in article 20020322122819...@mb-mn.aol.com, Marilee317 at
> maril...@aol.com wrote on 3/22/02 10:28 AM:
>
> > which is the
> > opposite of what you and your lawyer best friend said.
>
> My best friend is not a lawyer, my friend is. This is the same thing you do
> to the other people who have your best friend on killfile--you stretch what
> they say.
You said "one of my best friends", Heather. If someone called her your
best friend instead of just your friend, it's your own fault due to the
wording of your post. If Mare's best friend is on killfile, I didn't
know he or she posted here. Quit being a smartass.
JN
Spanglebaby
Boy, the clouds must be settling quite low in Kansas today. Get your
head out of them, Todd! You're dreaming if you think these two are ever
going to apologize to one another over anything. LMAO at your preaching.
And thanks for f***ing up my thread. You're really good at that,
Pissbutt.
JN
Spanglebaby
> I wasn't dealing with pregnancy I was dealing with your statement:
Good! I don't want you to ever have to deal with pregnancy. I'd feel too
damned sorry for the unborn child.
JN