Judge Orders Man to Speak English @Home - Page 2

Japher · October 15, 2003, 11:48

Quote:

I'm interested in learning what he's basing his ruling upon.

How about a mother's request. I see no harm in her learning spanish, but may the mother does. Her reasoning is not for the judge or anyone to decide. This drug felon should be lucky he's allowed to see his kid at all and respect the wishes of the mother.

chequita guevara · October 15, 2003, 12:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Japher
Judge Ronald E. Reagan

why do I like everyone named Ronald Reagan?

Cuz yer an idiot?

chequita guevara · October 15, 2003, 12:16

Wait, I just caught this. "That does not mean that you can't instruct and teach her the Hispanic language." WTF is "the Hispanic language?" Ignorant dumbasses shouldn't be allowed to be judges.

Jack_www · October 15, 2003, 12:27

I dont see what the harm would be for the father to speak Spanish to the girl the few times he see her. It sounds like the mother has full custody, and the girl most likely spends most of her time around people that speak English. This is just stupid. The children that age can pick up many laungues, and if the father speaks spanish it will most likely help her to learn Spanish as well as English. Even people who come to this country and dont speak a word of English, their children often learn English when they are little as well as. I dont see how this will harm the Child.

MichaeltheGreat · October 15, 2003, 12:28

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Why? The mother's wishes count for nothing?

Also,
To become a U.S. citizen, a prime requirement is to be able to communicate fully in English.

The mother's wishes count for nothing in view of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

All you have to do wrt the naturalization tests is pass the tests in English. There are no further requirements, and there can be no further requirements, in view of that little blurb about "no law abridging freedom of speech"

MichaeltheGreat · October 15, 2003, 12:35

Quote:

Originally posted by DinoDoc
How so? Providing the mother is clean, it seems like a valid reason for her to limit the child's access to her father.

On-going use is, just like alcohol.

Past use is generally not considered an issue.

Then again, there's that whole hypocrisy of the War on Drugs^TM. Smoke four packs a day of Pall Malls and drink cheap bourbon until your liver explodes, and that's fine, because those are the drugs of choice of all the self-righteous jackasses in the legislative branches. Smoke a joint or toot a line of coke, and it's off to the slammer, because, my God, man, look at the harm to society! *hic* *coouuuuuggggghhhhhh* *wheeze* Damn druggies anyway, enough to make you have another drink.

MichaeltheGreat · October 15, 2003, 12:35

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Wait, I just caught this. "That does not mean that you can't instruct and teach her the Hispanic language." WTF is "the Hispanic language?" Ignorant dumbasses shouldn't be allowed to be judges.

Maybe he's a pocho and only speaks Spanglish.

oedo · October 15, 2003, 12:54

Quote:

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
I think it's quite funny that the judge's name is Ronald Reagan.

exactly his name is Ronald E. Reagan. I would find Ronald W. Reagan funnier, though.

hasta luego.

MrFun · October 15, 2003, 12:54

Quote:

Originally posted by Japher

Uh, Sava, I mean, MrFun, I may be an SOB but I'm not ignorant... whatever that means

How dare you confuse me with Sava.

Theben · October 15, 2003, 14:39

Like the kid won't learn English from her peers, mother, and school.
What a stupid judge.

Japher · October 15, 2003, 16:00

Quote:

What a stupid judge

Don't shoot the messenger. It's the mother's fault not Reagans!

chequita guevara · October 15, 2003, 16:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Japher
Don't shoot the messenger. It's the mother's fault not Reagans!

It's the judge's fault because he issued the ruling in contradiction to the 1st Amendment.

Sprayber · October 15, 2003, 16:20

This is a story about absolutely nothing and everyone has switched into hissy mode. It sounds like the judge took a round about way of ruling that nothing has changed. He says the man can't speak Spanish to his child but says he can instruct her in it if he chooses. It seems to be that nothing has changed.

The mom probably isnt too proud of the fact that she has a daughter from a hispanic man and wants to limit contact with that part of her childs heritage. Her daugther speaking spanish would be a reminder of that. If she had her way he problaby wouldnt have any contact with her at all.

Oerdin · October 15, 2003, 16:32

This seems to be a case where mom and dad are pissed off at each other so mom's sueing dad and is attempting to use the child as a weapon to get back at her ex-husband/ex-boyfriend. Both of these losers should be sterilized to prevent further contamination of the species.

Japher · October 15, 2003, 16:36

It sounded to me that for this man to see his kid that he needed to agree to mom's guidelines of which one, for some unknown reason, was that he not speak spanish to her, only.

How is the judge making this criminal uphold to the agreement a violation of the 1st Amend.?

Kropotkin · October 15, 2003, 16:41

It's one thing that people like you are spending some of your free time on this issue. That's OK. It's another that such a stupid case as this takes up time in a court.

Japher · October 15, 2003, 16:50

Well, Kropotkin, thanks for wasting a few minutes of your oh so precious time for that very insightful comment

Language as a part of customs or culture is, IMO, a very important and interesting topic of conversation. For sometime I have wondered why language translates to custom, and I have never really got a definitive answer. Yet, those who hold that such a relation between the two exist will see this court ruling as a judicial suppression of cultral diversity... Something that I think is huge and not as big a waste of time as one might think.

Kropotkin · October 15, 2003, 16:51

A few minutes? A type a hell of a lot faster than that!

Japher · October 15, 2003, 16:54

And, your back!

Did you read any of this thread? Did that take you any time? Or are you a speed reader too Mr. I. Typefast?

Kropotkin · October 15, 2003, 16:55

And, yes, I can agree with you, to quite an extent, that language is an important part of any culture. I'm not sure that's the real issue here though. It's people showing their ugly side when they take out their personal diffrences over their child and the court system.

Caligastia · October 15, 2003, 17:00

I don't understand why the language this guy speaks to his daughter is the concern of the court.

Japher · October 15, 2003, 17:04

It's not a concern of the court. It's a concern of the mother.

The mother set guidelines by which he could see her daughter - speak English.

He violated these guidelines.

The court really could care less about what anybody wants, but when someone agrees to do something and they don't, then the court comes into play. That is what happened, the guy violated his visitation guidelines that were set by the mother, not the court.

Caligastia · October 15, 2003, 17:17

Surely there must be some kind of limit to the guidelines that the mother can demand. I mean, she could say that he can visit his daughter on the condition that he wear a pink tutu with a dildo strapped to his head and say the word "sasquatch" every 10 seconds.

Japher · October 15, 2003, 17:19

Yeah, well, I think she held all the cards on this one seeing as she got custody of the child because he was in jail... I probably would of made him do something degrading too.

chequita guevara · October 15, 2003, 17:28

I think she got custody by default because they were never married. It doesn't say in the article that they were divorced. In that situation, custody issues should either be solved amicably between the parents or by a judge in a lawsuit.

Verto · October 15, 2003, 17:31

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
By forbidding the man to speak Spanish to her, he is limiting her ability to learn the language and interfering with this man's right to teach his daughter Spanish effectively.

Where is anyone guaranteed this as a right?

yavoon · October 15, 2003, 17:35

kinda big for a troll thread.

chequita guevara · October 15, 2003, 17:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Verto
Where is anyone guaranteed this as a right?

Amendment 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America.

Verto · October 15, 2003, 17:41

Quote:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...

I don't see how the freedom of speech guaranteed here, applies to a right to speak a foreign language to another person, much less teach it to them.

chequita guevara · October 15, 2003, 17:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Verto
I don't see how the freedom of speech guaranteed here, applies to a right to speak a foreign language to another person, much less teach it to them.

Do you not understand the concept of speech? It's the noise that comes out of the mouths of people when they attempt to communicate with one another. Speech comes in many forms, including some 5,000 different languages. The 1st Amendment prohbits the goverment from abridging, i.e., limiting, free speech. That means the government is forbidden from telling you what you can or can't say, which includes words, phrases, and sentences from the Spanish language.