Why would that be though?

For example, in the case of this Texas law, it is 6 weeks pregnant - not six weeks from discovering she is pregnant, not even six weeks from conception, but six weeks from the fiat day of the last period.

Are you saying that the costs associated with pregnancy only begin to accrue once the woman learns she is pregnant? This is definitely not true.

Under what circumstances do you get a monthly stipend for child bearing?! We definitely do not have that in the States, unless it is part of the public assistance (welfare) program, which is strictly means-tested, generally varies by state, and does not “kick in” while pregnant.

Also, maternity care is often covered separately than other health care by insurance. And when it is included, resulting policies are/had been more expensive for women of child bearing age. That is why we used to say that “being female is a pre-existing condition.” And even when it IS covered by insurance and the policy is not more expensive, there are still copays, monthly premiums, the deductible, and potential lifetime/annual cap to pay for and/or worry about.

...and preventing a relationship with their very close in age (perceived) siblings, too.

Even if they do, the First Unitarian Church of Dallas is also suing for the same reasons. They are a Unitarian Universalist member church, which is a relatively large, well-funded and well-established religion. Since several presidents, First Ladies, founding fathers/mothers, congress people, and writers/artists/luminaries have been or are currently members, it would be really hard to argue against that one.

Examples: Both Presidents Adams, Abigail Adams, President Fillmore, President Jefferson, President Taft, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Clara Barton, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Susan B. Anthony, Ray Bradbury, Isaac Newton, Herman Melville, Paul Revere, Sylvia Plath, Beatrix Potter, Kurt Vonnegut, Keith Olbermann, Gary Guygax, and Christopher Reeve.

You try telling Superman is religion isn’t real, you know?

Why? What would have happened had she know ?

Info: you believe in divorce but not sex before marriage?! That seems a little weird. You’ve waited eight years. Was a week more really going to kill you?!

She’s ten. She doesn’t get a choice. This is a family thing. And honestly if you allow her to stay home, she will hold it against you when she is older. NTA.

I dunno about that. Citizens United was literally about Hillary Clinton. She was the subject of the documentary in question in the case.

She got 79% of the vote in NYS.

She did. She spoke about it constantly. In every appearance, debate, town hall and campaign speech. Hell, she devoted entire talks entirely to the Supreme Court issue.

In fact, her Supreme Court policy speech in WI was considered one of the strongest of her campaign . It was substantial, nuanced, thoughtful, informed, and highly detailed. She talked about potential risks, presidential responsibilities, her philosophy on the court, and what would guide her in choosing nominees. She talked about the importance of the court, and how its decisions affect our every day lives, and how we need to be mindful of how the justices are chosen. She talked about the very crisis we currently find ourselves in.

I think that the problem really wasn’t that she wasn’t speaking about it. It is that people simply weren’t paying attention.

Literally Hillary Clinton did. She was Secretary of State, after all. She considered the possibility of a pandemic to be a national security issue. She testified in front of congress FIFTEEN YEARS ago about the effects of a pandemic on the US. In it, and the paper she and her committee drafted, they even predicted the possibility of masking and social distancing non compliance. She participated in international pandemic “war games”. During her 2016 campaign, she conceptualized and then got committed support - including Republican support - for a permanently funded pandemic relief fund that the CDC could immediately access without having to go through congress. She was already all over that shit.

Yeah: that’s insane. That shit is not happening.

Thank god I work in Tech.

Also majority democratic.

Yes, she most assuredly does. If they were not family but roommates, it absolutely would be her obligation, just as it was and would have been their obligation to inform her about adding another roommate, among other things. People have obligations to each other, especially people with whom you are attempting to maintain any sort of relationship.

NTA. You roommate knows exactly what she did. Her “oh, I thought it was a gift” is BS she is spewing because you got so (justifiably!) upset. Who the hell eats food they think is a gift for them without asking anyone else in the house if it is theirs or trying to find out who sent the gift?! Ask her why she didn’t ask you if it was yours. I guarantee you that whatever her answer is, it will be damning.

She owes you AT LEAST a replacement meal.

No, don’t get me wrong: she is not an AH for moving out. She doesn’t need to live with anyone she doesn’t wish to, and she isn’t obligated to provide financial support to her parents, especially since these were not the provisions under which she committed to stay initially. She has every right to be angry with them for their dishonesty, lack of consideration, and failure to solicit her opinion on the addition of what is essentially a new roommate. She had every right to find alternate accommodations.

Where she messed up was in not communicating with her parents about her intentions when and by her own account because they didn’t communicate with her about theirs.

In short: Their fuck up doesn’t make her fuck up okay.

Plus, it doesn’t matter if her communicating further in advance would have made the remainder of her stay “less pleasant” for her. It would have been the right thing to do. (I will note that OP has given them at least some notice as I am reading it as she isn’t moving out until October when nephew moves in).

No one showed anyone any consideration here at all.

NTA!

Your custody agreement should have ironed all of this out. It is very standard in my state to have clauses saying that only the divorcing mother can be called “mommy” and/or “mom” and only the divorcing dad can be called “daddy” and/or “dad”, and working out the social media policies under which you will both be operating, as well as a physical custody/visitation arrangement, and agreement about other adults living with either former partner. Why does Chris spend only one day per week with dad anyway? Is it because he is still so little?

It is perfectly fine for her to want to take and post photos of your child, given her role in his life, but certainly not for her to attempt to tell you what YOU can and can’t do, and certainly not okay for her to represent herself as his (real) mother, and not without dad’s AND your knowledge/permission (not “or”, it should be “and”). It is not fine for her to try to get the child to call her mommy. It is not fine for her to criticize your choices in what you purchase for your son, provided of course that they are safe and appropriate. But it doesn’t sound like that’s where her issue is - it sounds like she just has a problem with their perceived “cheapness.” If she cares so much, she can purchase herself and gift him with whatever she feels is “superior” and then STFU. She is MAJORLY overstepping some boundaries here that if they aren’t already written, should be formally agreed to ASAP with your ex and yourself, without her. And where the hell is dad in all of this anyway? You should not be in a position where you have to argue with your ex’s girlfriend about this. That’s absurd, and totally inappropriate of them to put you in that position.

On a completely separate note, it isn’t her fault that her parents spelled her name stupidly. Some of us just have weird parents.

This was a failure of communication on everyone’s part, frankly.

You should have communicated your expectations and desires to them upon agreeing to stay, and you should have told them that your nephew moving in was a deal breaker for you before you started looking for apartments, so that they would have had the chance to make a different decision. As it stands, they didn’t necessarily know it was a problem for you until you announced you were leaving.

They should have consulted with you before unilaterally deciding to move your cousin in, and they definitely should have been honest with you about the reasons they wanted you to stay at home in the first place. Clearly, it was not ONLY to save you money, but also to help them out financially. They should not expect you to upend your life for their benefit or that of the unknown nephew.

They should treat you like the adult you are, and give you the appropriate consideration. You should do the same for them. It isn’t exactly the same, of course, but would either of you do any of this to a roommate?

You aren’t really AHs, any of you, but none of you handled this well. You all fucked up. Reluctant ESH.

Are you serious? Disagreeing? Maybe not. But fighting like this? Absolutely. It is awkward as hell, and embarrassing for everyone who has to witness it. It puts everyone in a really uncomfortable spot. It makes everyone feel weird and bad and makes both OP and wife look a little nutty (wife clearly more so). It forces the family to either leave so as not to be sucked into the drama or to get involved. It’s rude of OP and of his wife, too.

She shouldn’t have said what she said at all. OP shouldn’t have said what he said in the manner and place that he said it. And then, when he did, wife shouldn’t have escalated (by asking him to leave). They subjected her entire family to their dirty laundry without giving them much of a choice in the matter and it was weird and gross.

It definitely fucks up the evening.

NTA - my sister in law named her daughter almost exactly the same thing as I named my (considerably older) daughter - with literally one letter difference. Think something like Sara and Tara.

It didn’t bother me. In fact, I thought it was pretty cute. The only two granddaughters in the family with rhyming, similar names? I was envisioning a sort of tradition. Maybe something that would bring them close together even though there is such a large age gap between them!? I was sort of flattered that she chose a name so close to the one I had chosen, even.

But it drives my daughter absolutely insane. Especially because my in laws constantly call each girl by the other’s name. The little one is too little to notice, but my poor kid is actively insulted every time, especially as sister in law told my daughter that she hated her name. (Who TF tells their niece that?)

Anyway, I am living the with the consequences of a too-similar name right now, and even the in laws have said that they are sort of starting to feel like it is annoying. And sister in law keeps on getting upset when her mom calls the little one by my daughter’s name.

It is a bit of a mess, honestly.

Push back hard on the nickname thing. In my family, the girls’ names are too short for them, giving my daughter a new nickname at this point would be weird, and SIL is adamantly against a nickname anyway, so there is nothing to be done now. I wish I had foreseen the grief and protested when my niece was born instead of thinking it was sweet and no big deal.

It’s too late for me. Save yourself.

I do. I really like my coworkers. I like that I am learning new things all the time. And my favorite part is that I am never bored. Always new people, projects, and challenges. Boredom is death.

The ONLY way he could have saved this, and the only way it could have been an actual funny joke, is if he had had the real ring in his pocket and whipped it out right afterwards while he was still down on one knee.

Or if he had pulled it out after she said “it better be with that ring” and said something like “How about with this one instead?”

But this reads like he just has no intention of marrying her at all, like the very notion of him proposing is a joke. That’s just sad.

Poor girl: I really want to give her a hug.

The Episcopal Church is also vehemently against any legislation restricting abortion access. The life and health of the mother is considered to be more important.

Religiously speaking, the question isn’t really if it is “alive” per se, is more if it is “ensouled.” According to scripture, it doesn’t gain a soul and therefore isn’t a human person until either quickening (when the mother first feels it kicking, around 18 weeks) or upon its first breath - the “breath of life” as it were. Many traditions specifically believe that a human soul cannot inhabit a body until it becomes fully human in shape and form.