Guiding Light - MESSAGE BOARDS

Yes to all of that!!!

Getting out of hand?? No way, you need to go to some of the ones that do indeed get out of hand and end up getting closed.. This is a great board with different opinions, nothing nasty being said at all, everyone entitled to what they think without someone getting nasty and mean. You just have to be able to read opinions that are different from yours and not be upset about any of it...these posts are what people truly feel and we are all entitled to that. Sorry if anyone feels that it is not a fair board, we won't have these active story lines much longer, we should enjoy them while we do...thanks

My father was he one who eventually moved. His wife didn't care for me and as a result he took a step back. Oddly enough she now talks to me more then he does.

As for liv not being a step parent I would Warguethat longtime cohabitation (which is what they are planning) is nearly the same barring legal rifts the emotional attachment remains. I'm fairly certain that were they able to get married, they would. Hell, if you're all that sore about it, send up here to Canada. At least then liv would get some rights to the kid she's about to raise as her own.

And, here in Canada, step parents do have legal rights to their stepchildren. They can file for custody or can be found to be required to pay child support. SO in terms of legalities, if Nat and O were to live in Canada, they could legally marry. Nat and O would then become steparents and would both have legal rights and responsibilites regarding the care of the children.

Obviously it's all relative but if O is going to be there from day 1, there is no reason she shouldn't be considered a full parent.

*apologies for the typos on the earlier post, I was going from my ipod and the touch screen and I apparently don't get along.

What about all the BIO dads who never pay a nickel towards child support, and are drug addicts and junkies? You mean to tell me because they are the biological parent, they should still have rights in the upbringing of the children they abandon? Here, we have 3 parents that we know will be loving and caring, but apparently thats still not enough for some people. Nobody is pushing Frank out of anywhere. Hopefully by the time the child is older, this bigotry wont exist anymore, because like it or not, this is what it is all coming down to. A lot of posters dont like the idea of a lesbian couple raising a child. Just admit it and be done with it. Lots of bio parents I'd like to put in a cage and lock the door. That's why there are so many children living in orphanages . Cause the BIO parents dont give a rats ass about them. plain and simple. Please just end the bigotry. It's disgusting.

I'm sorry, what do drug addicts and junkies have to do with a story line and discussion about Frank and Natalies baby? We have veered a tad off line here. When we talk about Frank you are certainly not talking about a drug abuser or someone that does not deserve to be in their baby's life full time, you can pretty much count on him to be there and I just do not see him letting Olivia bully him around where his child is concerned..

LMAO No Nuke! Why is it when you try to defend a parents rights you have to hear stuff that has no place there!!(Treester if Frank was a druggie I would understand your logic but he's not and by the way there are just as many women who don't pay their child support too(my st. son calls her the egg doner)also for all the dead beats their are just as many wonderful fathers(and mothers) out there who get pushed aside because their babies mama thinks they own the child and can do as they please!
And why would Olivia need legal rights to the baby? If anything were to happen to Natalia the baby should be with her Father or do you not see it that way either? Just because Natalia is choosing this life for herself, theres no reason to make O more than she should be. Mommys girlfriend.

First, my comparison of my country's law with yours is meant to illustrate that law can be relative. O's rights to the baby can vary from even one state to the next. What this was meant to show is that different countries have different views on blended families. I'd rather not get into a pissing contest about who is better than whom, I was merely showing that the US version of the law is not the only one that exists.

Second, you classify O as some kind of demon. I don't think anyone in Springfield can throw that can kind of stone, considering the debauchery that runs rampant through the town. Even the glorious Frank Cooper (who used to run a chop shop) raised a daughter who was willing to plant drugs on a social worker to make sure her case went well. (Fine parenting at its best I'm certain). Arguably, so far, Emma is the best adjusted child in Springfield and she has been raised almost exclusively by Olivia alone or coparented with Natalia.

Third, in Rafe's case, where O has little to no influence in his parenting, I agree, Olivia will be Natalia's partner. However, in the case where the child will grow up under her roof, be nurtured, cared for and protected by Olivia (as a full parent), she will not be 'Mommy's girlfriend' she will be 'Mom'.

After reading this thread from the start several times, I have decided that this is all for naught, the getting upset, the taking of sides, because I truly cannot see Olivia staying in this relationship very long. ....does not mean I am against her and Nat at all because I simply do NOT care, but just do not see it lasting due to her past history..I know, I know maybe it was because she was always with men, and this time with Natalie it will last a lifetime, but that is so not Olivia..they can be together forever and always but just do not cheat Frank out of raising his baby, and no worry because he will not allow that to happen I am sure.....so happy ending I guess..