If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(AZCentral)   Cops investigate a nudists mom and stepdad for being naked at home with her sons around. "I think it's a real slippery slope when the government wants to dictate to a parent that they can't be nude in their own home."   (azcentral.com) divider line 118
    More: Interesting, sexual misconduct, Child Protective Services, county attorney, Maricopa County, stepfathers, mothers  
•       •       •

8801 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 May 2010 at 4:33 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



118 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-05-08 01:45:53 PM
God help them if they let their kids run around the house naked. Someone will claim that's child abuse.
 
2010-05-08 01:55:33 PM
If I was the dad, I wouldn't be happy that my ex-wife's new husband was walking around naked in front of my sons. No way.

Criminal? No. Reason to loose custody? Yes.
 
2010-05-08 02:05:30 PM
smileynyc: Reason to loose custody? Yes.

Why?
 
2010-05-08 02:06:40 PM
We really need an Arizona tag.
 
2010-05-08 02:09:51 PM
Occam's Chainsaw: smileynyc: Reason to loose custody? Yes.

Why?


parents disagree with the standards to raise the children when there is joint custody therefore a judge will decide.

this is what you get when you get divorced, someone else raising your children.
dont like that? dont get divorced or dont have kids.

and, the kids have said they DONT like it/feel comfortable/what not.

things would be different if the kids were raised that way from the start and it was "normal"

/man, I wish I got to decide. raise your kids to believe in god? that's a loss of parental rights!
 
2010-05-08 02:11:52 PM
namatad: parents disagree with the standards to raise the children when there is joint custody therefore a judge will decide.

Can a countersuit be filed arguing that the judge suffered from bias due to his/her own mores?

namatad: and, the kids have said they DONT like it/feel comfortable/what not.

That's the reduced custody red flag.
 
2010-05-08 02:19:54 PM
namatad: Occam's Chainsaw: smileynyc: Reason to loose custody? Yes.

Why?

parents disagree with the standards to raise the children when there is joint custody therefore a judge will decide.

this is what you get when you get divorced, someone else raising your children.
dont like that? dont get divorced or dont have kids.

and, the kids have said they DONT like it/feel comfortable/what not.

things would be different if the kids were raised that way from the start and it was "normal"

/man, I wish I got to decide. raise your kids to believe in god? that's a loss of parental rights!


It doesn't say the kids spoke to their mother & stepfather, only that they told their father. And, instead of being reasonable and calling his ex-wife to tell her to knock it off, does what any asshat ex w/kids involved does: sees leverage for custody & calls the police.

If the kids were raised this way, it wouldn't be an issue, as you said. But they weren't, so mom & stepdad really should have done the smart thing & not prance around the house naked. However, in TFA, they said the kids only caught them by accident, so it's kinda hard to say. Dad could have easily coached the kids ("C'mon--I'll buy you a dirtbike if you say you saw them all the time!") or mom & stepdad could be lying to cover their asses (heh). Who knows?

But you shouldn't NOT have kids just because you MIGHT get divorced. And if you're divorced & share custody, you really have to be extra careful in how you act because the other party may use it against you.

/Just to clarify, all divorced parents are not asshats. The father in TFA definitely is.
 
2010-05-08 02:49:09 PM
Well, at least the Attorney General or whatever gave the correct response - not charging them. That is WAY too slippery a slope to start down.

Are they start going to arrest and charge parents who smoke, have bad life styles, or drink with kids?
 
2010-05-08 02:55:52 PM
Occam's Chainsaw: namatad: parents disagree with the standards to raise the children when there is joint custody therefore a judge will decide.

Can a countersuit be filed arguing that the judge suffered from bias due to his/her own mores?
.


no
when divorced couple enter into a concent agreement over custody, they typically agree to having a court decide when they are unable to agree.
it is the ONLY way to solve issues like these.

I want my child raised lutheran. NO, I want my child raised Catholic. one parent forces the issue before the court, and the loser complains about it being unfair.

hahahahahaah

/personally, I think the parent who is paying child support should get to decide. PERIOD.
 
2010-05-08 02:59:37 PM
namatad: when divorced couple enter into a concent agreement over custody, they typically agree to having a court decide when they are unable to agree.

But it is assumed that the arbiter designated by the courts will be impartial, and rule based upon the facts presented, and not their personal mores. Otherwise there is a fundamental flaw in family court law.
 
2010-05-08 03:04:19 PM
Occam's Chainsaw: But it is assumed that the arbiter designated by the courts will be impartial, and rule based upon the facts presented, and not their personal mores. Otherwise there is a fundamental flaw in family court law.

nope, not a flaw.
given that the parents cannot decide on their own, someone else will decide. family court decides. they do the BEST that they can.
which is the best anyone can do. they pick the majority. the majority of families wear clothes. so tada, that is the decision.

it isnt a moral decision, it is a decision that they are FORCED to make because the farktard parents cant agree to act like adults in the first place.

you KID IS UNCOMFORTABLE with you walking around the house naked?
grow the fark up and put some pants on.
being a parent is about sacrificing our personal desires while be responsible for raising the child. duh.

there is no right or wrong choice. no moral or immoral choice.
someone else gets to decide because the two parents have failed.
sigh
 
2010-05-08 03:12:11 PM
namatad: given that the parents cannot decide on their own, someone else will decide. family court decides.

But that decider must be impartial and judge the case on its merits, and not on said decider's mores and beliefs, correct? Would you be comfortable with a family court judge declaring that a female minor must get a clitoridectomy and wear a hijab because the female parent objected to the risqué clothing the male parent was allowing her to wear?
 
2010-05-08 03:18:05 PM
Occam's Chainsaw: namatad: given that the parents cannot decide on their own, someone else will decide. family court decides.

But that decider must be impartial and judge the case on its merits, and not on said decider's mores and beliefs, correct? Would you be comfortable with a family court judge declaring that a female minor must get a clitoridectomy and wear a hijab because the female parent objected to the risqué clothing the male parent was allowing her to wear?


no the decider just needs to decide.
they try to be impartial
they try to not let their mores into the decision.
but that is not what is required of them.
they are required to make a decision in the best interest of the child.

a fmaily court which went down the path that you have suggested has NEVER happened in the US. and that judgement would immediately be stated by the next judge you talked to.

the decision is almost always in favor of one parent or the other, NOT a 3rd choice which both parents would disagree with.
of course, that was solomon's solution to this kind of bullshiat.
:D
 
2010-05-08 03:20:47 PM
namatad: no the decider just needs to decide.

So to clarify, you're 100% cool with a family court judge declaring that a female minor must get a clitoridectomy and wear a hijab because the female parent objected to the risqué clothing the male parent was allowing her to wear?
 
2010-05-08 03:37:13 PM
Occam's Chainsaw: namatad: no the decider just needs to decide.

So to clarify, you're 100% cool with a family court judge declaring that a female minor must get a clitoridectomy and wear a hijab because the female parent objected to the risqué clothing the male parent was allowing her to wear?


FTW are you talking about?
the judge would take the child from both parents if the parents wanted the child to get a clitoridectomy.

if the judge ordered the child to get a clitoridectomy he would be thrown off the bench and beaten with sticks.

you are just being a troll her? nice job.
why on earth would you even waste your time putting words into my mouth?

you eveidently are in favor of clitoridectomy. god knows why.
can you cite a single case where ANYTHING even close to against the wishes of BOTH parents was forced by the courts?
in cases other than a clear danger to the child?

didnt think so
 
2010-05-08 04:06:33 PM
Arizona, WTF is going on down there? You guys have been flip-tits crazy lately.
 
2010-05-08 04:36:29 PM
Is she hot?
 
2010-05-08 04:39:07 PM

brigid_fitch


And, instead of being reasonable and calling his ex-wife to tell her to knock it off, does what any asshat ex w/kids involved does: sees leverage for custody & calls the police.


His words carry no weight and are not enforceable. The police's words and the judge's words do carry weight and are quite enforceable.

If the two people were capable of working out issues maturely and via conversation they probably would not be divorced.
 
2010-05-08 04:41:27 PM
nudity isn't abnormal and it shouldn't be against the law. IT is against good taste but that doesn't get you locked up.
 
2010-05-08 04:42:10 PM
smileynyc: If I was the dad, I wouldn't be happy that my ex-wife's new husband was walking around naked in front of my sons. No way.

Criminal? No. Reason to loose custody? Yes.



Why? His peener bigger than yours?
 
2010-05-08 04:43:25 PM
Thisbymaster: nudity isn't abnormal and it shouldn't be against the law. IT is against good taste but that doesn't get you locked up.

Agree. No legal action other than someone needs to tell the parents to grow the fark up.
 
2010-05-08 04:43:31 PM
jaytkay

Is she hot?


I came here to ask this
 
2010-05-08 04:48:55 PM
Thisbymaster: nudity isn't abnormal and it shouldn't be against the law. IT is against good taste if you are fat/ugly but that doesn't get you locked up.


FTFY
 
2010-05-08 04:49:36 PM
namatad: you KID IS UNCOMFORTABLE with you walking around the house naked?
grow the fark up and put some pants on.


My kids are also uncomfortable with my talking to their friends, but I'll be damned if I don't find out more about jus' who my rugrats are associating with.

If the sight of a tit causes you to lose your shiat, you're not the kind of person that ought to be judgin' folks like this, anyway...

/ ...and boy, any extended trip to Europe would fark you up...
 
2010-05-08 04:50:17 PM
smileynyc: If I was the dad, I wouldn't be happy that my ex-wife's new husband was walking around naked in front of my sons. No way.

Criminal? No. Reason to loose custody? Yes.


Is this akin to "loosening the custody restrictions?", or outright loss of custody?

I bet those kids had friends that always wanted to come over (especially when the step-dad was at work)
 
2010-05-08 04:50:48 PM
Cops investigate a nudists mom and stepdad for being naked at home with her sons around.

So there was a nudist who had a mother and a stepdad, and the mother and the stepdad were naked at home with "her" sons around. Which means the nudist must have been a woman, and so it was the grandmother and step grandfather who were naked, not the nudist.

Did I get that right?
 
2010-05-08 04:52:29 PM
at least it wasn't chair fraud
 
2010-05-08 04:55:01 PM
Doctor Funkenstein: Arizona, WTF is going on down there? You guys have been flip-tits crazy lately.

It makes me cringe how many times I've seen AZ on Fark lately. I guess where there's smoke there's fire.

/Florida has got to be feeling pretty good about itself these days
 
2010-05-08 04:55:19 PM
farking puritan bullshiat
 
2010-05-08 04:57:57 PM
I wonder if these people have "their papers"?
 
2010-05-08 04:58:25 PM
i50.tinypic.com

/hot like Lois' ass
 
2010-05-08 04:59:51 PM
The 13-year-old said the couple continued to be nude in the home even though he told them he and his 11-year-old brother were unhappy with it.

This is the problem.
 
2010-05-08 05:01:06 PM
Occam's Chainsaw: namatad: given that the parents cannot decide on their own, someone else will decide. family court decides.

But that decider must be impartial and judge the case on its merits, and not on said decider's mores and beliefs, correct? Would you be comfortable with a family court judge declaring that a female minor must get a clitoridectomy and wear a hijab because the female parent objected to the risqué clothing the male parent was allowing her to wear?


I certainly wouldn't want namatad to judge anything. That's some Puritanical crazy messed up on all that biatch.
 
2010-05-08 05:01:19 PM
Man, the US is effed up. It's so ironic that so many people can be such tight-a$$ed prudes and still have more porn servers than the rest of the world combined.

/rtfa not
 
2010-05-08 05:01:49 PM
The 13-year-old said the couple continued to be nude in the home even though he told them he and his 11-year-old brother were unhappy with it.

This is the problem.


that is _their_ problem. as in, none of the law's business.
 
2010-05-08 05:02:11 PM
they did not regularly practice a nudist lifestyle and that the boys had only seen them nude by accident.

Yeah, everyone involved should STFU.
 
2010-05-08 05:04:29 PM
phartman: more porn servers than the rest of the world combined

You know all those anti-smoking campaigns? They're paid for by the tobacco industry. Think about that for a bit.
 
2010-05-08 05:09:49 PM
OregonVet: Occam's Chainsaw: namatad: given that the parents cannot decide on their own, someone else will decide. family court decides.

But that decider must be impartial and judge the case on its merits, and not on said decider's mores and beliefs, correct? Would you be comfortable with a family court judge declaring that a female minor must get a clitoridectomy and wear a hijab because the female parent objected to the risqué clothing the male parent was allowing her to wear?

I certainly wouldn't want namatad to judge anything. That's some Puritanical crazy messed up on all that biatch.


what are you talking about?
all I am saying is that the judge will decide because the parents disagree.

how does this get into my morals (or complete lack of)?
 
2010-05-08 05:10:36 PM
anti-cripes:
that is _their_ problem. as in, none of the law's business.


I don't think that anything is "the law's business" but disregarding your children's preferences regarding nudity in the house is disgraceful.
 
2010-05-08 05:11:32 PM
anti-cripes: The 13-year-old said the couple continued to be nude in the home even though he told them he and his 11-year-old brother were unhappy with it.

This is the problem.


that is _their_ problem. as in, none of the law's business.



Not a criminal matter, but it is the business of family court and the Mom's custody agreement. No charges should be filed, but I don't have a problem with the police investigating on the father behalf and documenting for him.
 
2010-05-08 05:13:03 PM
Creepy ....yes
Illegal..........no
 
2010-05-08 05:34:03 PM
Having once been a 13 year old boy I think being forced to watch my mom run around naked all weekend would lead to some issues I'd rather not have dealt with.

That's a custody issue between the parents though, nothing for the police to get involved in.
 
2010-05-08 05:42:23 PM
Failing_Junk: The 13-year-old said the couple continued to be nude in the home even though he told them he and his 11-year-old brother were unhappy with it.

This is the problem.


Why is that a problem? "The 13-year-old said the couple failed to order pizza every day even though he told them he and his 11-year-old brother were unhappy with it."
 
2010-05-08 05:42:48 PM
namatad:


you KID IS UNCOMFORTABLE with you walking around the house naked?
grow the fark up and put some pants on.
being a parent is about sacrificing our personal desires while be responsible for raising the child. duh.



Heh, I was uncomfortable with my dad walking around in his underwear, I don't want to imagine naked...
 
2010-05-08 05:46:34 PM
Hmm...


The NaSkAr [TotalFark] Quote 2010-01-22 01:18:17 AM
Poppa Boner: Oh take it easy. It's all in fun.

you can't keep doing this shiat thinking the mods are ok with it. It's going to bite you in the ass one day and I will be stomping on your grave when it does.
 
2010-05-08 05:47:56 PM
FTA:

Most indecent-exposure cases involve strangers. Someone drops his pants near a park or is naked in his home but stands in front of an open window as children walk by. The El Mirage case was unusual.

Guess only dudes can be pervs and get charged with indecent exposure. Huh.
 
2010-05-08 05:48:48 PM
DO YOU PEOPLE KNOW WHO I AM?! I'M POPPA FREAKIN' BONER DAMMITZ!!!!

I OWN YOU!!!
 
2010-05-08 05:51:22 PM
At the opposite extreme, I wonder if it's at all farked up to have never seen your parents naked, even for a second by accident.
/never did
 
2010-05-08 06:01:05 PM
Link (new window)
 
2010-05-08 06:12:51 PM
Criminal? Probably not.
The kids both said they want nothing to do with it and the parent & step-parent keep doing so in front of the kids. That is a problem. At that point it borders on abusive but I really am not sure at what level. Sounds like something where family court ordered counseling might be a good idea. If the parents are ignoring the kids requests to not have to put up with this and they continue to mentally scar them it sounds like some large judgment issues going on.
 
Displayed 50 of 118 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report