Posted on 02/23/2006 1:53:52 PM PST by Quick1
A Missouri couple say they were denied an occupancy permit for their new home because they're not married.
Olivia Shelltrack and Fondray Loving have been together for 13 years and have three children, ages 8, 10 and 15, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports.
The couple are appealing the occupancy permit denial from the Black Jack, Mo., board of adjustment, which requires people living together to have blood, marriage or adoption ties. Loving is not the father of Shelltrack's oldest child.
I was basically told, you can have one child living in your house if you're not married, but more than that, you can't, Shelltrack told the newspaper.
This is about the definition of family, not if they're married or not, Mayor Normal McCourt said. It's what cities do to maintain the housing and to hold down overcrowding.
Yeah. I hear that.
That's what they told me at the gun shop when I went to sell them. Shoulda listened...
I don't know what will happen this weekend, the kid schedule has been totally messed up due to illness and trips. Soon, though, soon...
I hope you get to enjoy it very soon. I'm sorry the kid is sick...I'll say a prayer she (?) feels better soon.
They're OK now. We just had a run of strep and mono.
Thanks, though.
I'm gonna fold for the night. We're going to the railroad museum tomorrow...
Nasty stuff...Cody just got over strep and an ear infection. He has Juvenile Rheumatoid arthritis too...so it's really hard on him when he gets sick.
If this was purely about making sure that everyone living in the house is somehow related, I think the board would have ignored the fact that one of the kids is not related by flood to the man in this case. Their living arrangement is clearly within the spirit of the law.
The board's reaction leads me to believe that this is more of a case of the board members using their power to show their disapproval of the fact that these two are not married.
Certainly, people have the right to morally oppose unmarried cohabitation. But to use government power to keep two property owners from living in their house? That's just asinine.
how is it any of yours or the government's business?
It would be interesting to know where all the income for this "family" comes from.
I have seen more and more people just living with their babies daddy so they can qualify for government goodies.
Again, these people are taking their case to the press and therefore to the public.
Since I am a member of the public, they have made it my business.
They could have kept their private business private, but they took it to the media instead.
I don't see why it makes a difference.
Why can't the gigolo adopt him?
You are hilariously clueless.
Bump!
No one has to go to the press. They chose to. Other people, when they are fighting city hall, hire a lawyer na dput together a suit.
If you talk to a reporter about your personal business, it is no longer your personal business.
Why do you even think it matters?
Because the law in question says "blood, marriage or adoption."
If he adopted the kid, he wouldn't have to go through the lawsuit or the unspeakable indignity of marrying the woman who shares his bed.
Feh. Reading the whole thing is overrated.
If the Law were otherwise, I could get it into my head to adopt one of your kids and you couldn't stop me could you?
You can't possibly be that stupid, so I will be charitable and assume you are utterly blinded by hate and your agenda.
LOL
Incorrect. Parental rights can be terminated without a parent's consent if they neglect the child. A close friend of mine is the adoptive father of his wife's son from a previous relationship. They had the biological father's parental rights terminated over his protests.
Of course, in most cases, the mother would prefer not to challenge the parental rights of the father as long as she has hope that he can enjoined into paying support.
If the Law were otherwise, I could get it into my head to adopt one of your kids and you couldn't stop me could you?
Apparently you aren't aware of what you need to prove in order to adopt a child.
Do you really think anyone can randomly adopt any child even in circumstances where their parents have already forfeited their parental rights?
You can't possibly be that stupid, so I will be charitable and assume you are utterly blinded by hate and your agenda.
LOL! Spoken like a true bleeding heart leftist.
I do know the process as it affected me. In my case it was very simple as the sperm donor (my ex's term) abandoned her mom and her before she was born.
Still without anyone trying to delay the process, it took longer than it would to start one from scratch.
Suppose the biodad in this case is paying support and sees the kid for a few hours a week? He could block any attempt at adoption, couldn't he?
Apparently you aren't aware of what you need to prove in order to adopt a child.
Apparently you are wrong as I have done it.
Do you really think anyone can randomly adopt any child even in circumstances where their parents have already forfeited their parental rights?
Nope. But If I really took it into my head, and had enough patience, and money and a crooked lawyer and/or judge (not that such exist) I could show any bio parent was unsuitable, have their rights terminated, and "prove" that I glowed in the dark as a parent and adopt the kids.
As Will Rogers said, 'No man's life, liberty, or property are safe as long as Congress Court is in session.'
LOL! Spoken like a true bleeding heart leftist.
You clearly don't know me very well, but as I started the name calling, I've lost the high ground here and will let that stand unchallenged...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.