Message Boards

Replies to '08/18 'Fighting for My Children''

 
User Mood
Weird

Message Emote
blank
August 18, 2005, 6:52 pm PDT

jadaok

Quote From: jadaok

If she hadn't been up in this married man's face behind his wife's back she wouldn't have to be in a crowd. You want to talk about the safety of a kid.The fathercould go around the corner and buckle the kids in, outside the camera's surrounding Brigetts staged drama performance after she lost custody. How safe are they with her, when a court found that she and her mother lied about the twins being sexually abused by their father. You don't think that's a safety issue up there with seat belts? Besides those big kids should have been getting in and buckling themselves in their seatbelts. That's what most decent mother's teach their kids from birth. Now to address the rest of your post, how do we know that the father denied the kid's from going to church, or wouldn't let them talk to their mother, and really he had, had this woman in the most intimate way, what's the likely truth? She slept with the married man, got pregnant because he was rich, then got pissed because he wouldn't leave his wife and make her a trophy wife with new babies. This is a woman who was a mistress and now you and Dr. Phil think she's a respectable and credible woman? Hello????? Was she going to church when she was with the married man trying to get pregnant so he'd leave his wife? Maybe the cheating baby daddy is too guilty to go to church. This woman pulled out all the stunts, to get her way and you bought it. I thought it was laughable when she said that a man she was fooling around with for years wanted to marry her, but suddenly after she had her twins she suddenly fell out of lust with him and wanted to leave? When this father does speak out, I bet a bunch of people will see that mistresses are coniving, sneaky, and selfish.

I'm not letting the father off, but to lie about a kid being molested because you're about to loose custody, that's one of the lowest and cruelest things a mother can do. Those kids will be scarred forever because of this fact that was proven in court to be true.

One day we'll learn that you can't believe everything that comes out of a woman's mouth just because she is a woman.

In closing if she hadn't been fooling around with a married man she wouldn't be in this situation.

Wonder how much money Bridgett will rake in on that double child support, that she'll likely use to support herself.

I hope the father takes her back to court and gets those girls back. They'd be better raised by a nanny than this vindictive woman. If she weren't a pretty model, no one would have even noticed this mistresses story.

WHATEVER!!! she left him because of abuse to her and was also treaten by him if she did he would take the kids from her exactly what he did hired the most expensive lawyer and went to court and took the kids.As far as her going with a married man yes she did and it takes two to have an affair.as far as i know about the church and not letting her talk to her kids,watch the second part .
 
User Mood
Worried

Message Emote
blank
August 18, 2005, 7:12 pm PDT

HUH?

Quote From: jadaok

If she hadn't been up in this married man's face behind his wife's back she wouldn't have to be in a crowd.  You want to talk about the safety of a kid.  The father could go around the corner and buckle the kids in, outside the camera's surrounding Brigetts staged drama performance after she lost custody.  How safe are they with her, when a court found that she and her mother lied about the twins being sexually abused by their father.  You don't think that's a safety issue up there with seat belts?  Besides those big kids should have been getting in and buckling themselves in their seatbelts.  That's what most decent mother's teach their kids from birth.   Now to address the rest of your post, how do we know that the father denied the kid's from going to church, or wouldn't let them talk to their mother, and really he had, had this woman in the most intimate way, what's the likely truth?  She slept with the married man, got pregnant because he was rich, then got pissed because he wouldn't leave his wife and make her a trophy wife with new babies.  This is a woman who was a mistress and now you and Dr. Phil think she's a respectable and credible woman?  Hello?????  Was she going to church when she was with the married man trying to get pregnant so he'd leave his wife?  Maybe the cheating baby daddy is too guilty to go to church.  This woman pulled out all the stunts, to get her way and you bought it.  I thought it was laughable when she said that a man she was fooling around with for years wanted to marry her, but suddenly after she had her twins she suddenly fell out of lust with him and wanted to leave?  When this father does speak out, I bet a bunch of people will see that mistresses are coniving, sneaky, and selfish.  

   I'm not letting the father off, but to lie about a kid being molested because you're about to loose custody, that's one of the lowest and cruelest things a mother can do.  Those kids will be scarred forever because of this fact that was proven in court to be true.  

    One day we'll learn that you can't believe everything that comes out of a woman's mouth just because she is a woman.   

   In closing if she hadn't been fooling around with a married man she wouldn't be in this situation.    

   Wonder how much money Bridgett will rake in on that double child support, that she'll likely use to support herself.  

    I hope the father takes her back to court and gets those girls back.  They'd be better raised by a nanny than this vindictive woman.  If she weren't a pretty model, no one would have even noticed this mistresses story.  

Since when does it only take one to make a child? And why is it all the woman's fault? And because she was "messing with a married man" does that mean she deserves to lose her children? And just because she is a woman does that mean we should not believe her? These are some of the most arcane statements I have ever read. Maybe we all need to go back in time to the 18th century when women were property and we had no minds and men could beat us and not be punished. Oh yeah that is the answer...... NOT!!!!! Because some appear to think women should be seen and not heard does not mean we will go away. We give life to children and nurture them in their tender years only to have a male judge and male attornies say we cannot provide for our children? Bah Humbug.
 


Return to the Message Board


First Page | Previous Page | 1 | Next Page | Last Page