[Home By Dark]

=>He answered your question in the only way it was possible to answer it in a rational manner.

Your question was tantamount to, "Where in the Constitution does it say that husbands can't beat their wives?"

Uh, no. If you read the constitution, you will note that it has nothing to do with state/local courts, which deal with divorce/child support issues. To keep droning on about the constitution when it does not apply is irrational.

And when asked what kind of local laws he would put in place as fair, I got childishness.

[Don Joe]

"Your question was tantamount to, 'Where in the Constitution does it say that husbands can't beat their wives?'"

"Uh, no. If you read the constitution, you will note that it has nothing to do with state/local courts, which deal with divorce/child support issues. To keep droning on about the constitution when it does not apply is irrational."

Spin, spin, spin.

The issues was the Constitutionality or lack thereof of what is done to fathers. I eviscerated the attempt to reframe that issue, and now you cry foul?

Put some ice on it.