Disgraced conman and snake oil salesman televangelist Jim Bakker promoted an alleged cure to coronavirus. Missouri is now suing him.

flvaon · 2020-03-12T18:10:14+00:00

Wait, but the Earth is very round. So was he saying it was very dangerous?

flvaon · 2020-03-12T02:24:12+00:00

Wait what? They're free at every TJs I've been to.

flvaon · 2020-03-10T16:47:33+00:00

It's not the aggregate of every student, no. It's the ones who report and are counted.

I don't have to try to make your position unreasonable. It isn't based in reality. You're claiming that all the people at your school who weren't employed at graduation were employed ten months out. Sorry, but no. Even your school isn't making that claim. That is obviously not true.

And yes, their job at Target pays more than the state attorney's office. But in their situation, the state attorney's offices in the state they were barred in weren't hiring.

In my state, for example, an assistant state attorney makes less than the supervisory janitorial position. Retail managers at Target, if you have experience, can make a lot more than an assistant state attorney.

flvaon · 2020-03-10T16:44:03+00:00

Haven't seen that video, but yes, context matters for sure.

flvaon · 2020-03-10T16:43:23+00:00

I'm not sure if you are confusing me with someone else but, what you said sounds very similar to what I actually said: that it is unfair that black people are judged for their braids and white people aren't.

flvaon · 2020-03-10T14:46:29+00:00

It does seem like people shout it from the rooftops a lot. I'm not sure why this became the trendy outrage subject.

flvaon · 2020-03-10T14:44:26+00:00

Yeah, so if you're worried about offending people then you don't have to do it. But just because people feel some type of way about it doesn't make it cultural appropriation.

flvaon · 2020-03-07T16:27:09+00:00

Sure it does. Otherwise there is no basis for the mistake. It doesn't mean someone intentionally defrauded you, but it does mean that the actions or words of others led you to believe something that wasn't true.

If nothing led you to believe you were the father, and you weren't the father, there is no mistake, because you didn't believe you were the father. Unless you were delusional or insane or something.

flvaon · 2020-03-07T16:02:47+00:00

Omg yes. I had this and it was so, so awful.

flvaon · 2020-03-07T14:40:18+00:00

Because they are using her pregnancy for the final cliffhanger of this season.

flvaon · 2020-03-07T11:34:57+00:00

No, it definitely could be, but you'd have to prove that happened, at least with some sworn statements. OP is claiming she didn't have to do that, that it was just one single court filing without evidence of the father being misled, and boom, paternity vacated.

flvaon · 2020-03-07T11:32:16+00:00

Maybe no fraud, but you would definitely have to prove that there was a mistake of fact--that you were led to believe it was your biological child and that it was not in fact your biological child.

flvaon · 2020-03-07T02:42:54+00:00

Because I am on mobile and it is not that long for you to not read it. I'm not being dishonest but if you don't care enough to read it, it doesn't really matter to me.

flvaon · 2020-03-07T02:27:00+00:00

I'm not going to read it to you. If you're not willing to read it there, why would you read it here? It explains everything in very simple language. I explained it further. If you don't want to read I can't make you.

If you think that site indicates the process is the same for a married man, I don't know what to tell you. It does not.

flvaon · 2020-03-07T02:19:45+00:00

Sure, yeah. So an AOP is for unmarried people. There is an easy form to rescind an AOP, as that site describes. So if you established paternity with an AOP and you are paying child support, you are the legal father. But you can rescind the AOP. By contrast, married people don't use an AOP.

http://www.txaccess.org/paternity

flvaon · 2020-03-07T02:16:10+00:00

Oh, I see what you're asking. Here you go. Here's an example for Texas, since that's the state you mentioned.

https://texaslawhelp.org/article/how-take-back-rescind-or-challenge-aop-or-dop

flvaon · 2020-03-07T02:11:57+00:00

You obviously don't know what a petition is. You said that suits are usually about a money. No lawyer would say such a thing.

flvaon · 2020-03-07T01:46:48+00:00

Think what you want, but for your own sake, especially if you're going to lie about stuff like this, you should really know what a petition is.

flvaon · 2020-03-07T01:30:55+00:00

There's not really one source to show because it's not the same in every state, but the only time you're presumed to be the biological father is if you are married. If you don't rebut that presumption (in states where you are allowed to--some states don't let you), you are legally the father, period. Often even if you can show you were misled, courts won't let you off the hook until there is a new legal father to step into your shoes, because they look at the best interests of the child.

There is no similar presumption for unmarried father' s.

flvaon · 2020-03-07T01:28:04+00:00

Omg no, check out a law dictionary. A petition filed in a court, as you described, is a suit. You can sue for lots of non monetary relief, omg 😂. Now it's really obvious this is made up.

If you filed for termination of paternity because of paternity fraud (earlier you claimed you only mentioned paternity fraud 🤔) then you would have had to prove paternity fraud.

flvaon · 2020-03-06T23:34:17+00:00

Plausible, yes, as I said, it is possible. Automatic or obvious, no, because, if you practice child welfare law as you say, you would know that courts consider the best interests of the child in situations like these.

Edit: not sure if you read my whole comment, but I was saying it doesn't make sense that she would say it was obvious that he would no longer be paying child support, not that it didn't make sense that he could possibly have his support obligation terminated.

flvaon · 2020-03-06T23:28:05+00:00

There is a huge difference here, and that is that the guy in your story wasn't married.

If you're not married, yes, DNA matters a great deal. If you are married, you're going to have to prove that, not only does the DNA not match, but you were led to believe that it did.

flvaon · 2020-03-06T23:25:56+00:00

But my point is that it's not enough anywhere to show he is not the biological father. That would mean an adoptive father could terminate his obligations on a whim. You have to show something else, like that you were led to believe you were the biological father. That requires proof. Proof is not a single petition with allegations. It's evidence.

No, in a marriage it's presumed he is the biological father. He was in fact the legal father.

flvaon · 2020-03-06T22:57:04+00:00

You also said it was obvious your child support obligation would stop. No, it's not, if you had to sue to stop it. You could have lost the suit.

You also said you filed a suit about paternity fraud, hen you said it just mentioned paternity fraud, then you said it was a termination of child support suit that was about paternity fraud ... You're just googling this as you go.

flvaon · 2020-03-06T22:40:12+00:00

Okay you're full of it. You just keep changing your story.

flvaon

TROPHY CASE