From: Bill Lucy 

In article <39123a9b$1{at}w3.nls.net>, billy-m{at}pacbell.net says...

> That a child belongs to his surviving parent makes for a nice simplistic
> sound-bite because it is so intuitevly obvious... but not ALWAYS true. For
> example, if that child's surviving parent were a child abuser, it would not
> be outrageous for society to remove the child to a more protective
> environment.

Perhaps it is because you are incapable of complex thought involving the
potential for exploring mitigating circumstances.

> He is now on our shores and his mother lost her life to get him here

It's possible that he is on our shores because she was smitten with a man
who had made the trip a number of times. She was selfish. She didn't care
about the father of her child.

Just a thought, every bit as good as your "radar".

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5