Religious beliefs
Desiree:
Good evening. Gabriel showed me an email you just sent him. I think there might be some misunderstanding regarding the Court's position in religious beliefs. The Court stated that neither parent may disparage the beliefs of the other parent in the presence of the child. That is all.
P.S. You also seem a little misguided about the outcome of yesterday's hearing. The requests were denied based on procedural law, not substantive law. You should learn the difference before you act cocky.
Fox:
I heard what the judge said. If I had any questions regarding it, I would request the minutes. As I explained to Gabriel, if you think you are correct about my requirements to follow his demands, you are more then welcome to file another emergency motion with the court.
That is all.
Desiree:
I just read his email. I don't see any "demands". I just see him being courteous and letting you know ahead of time, the things he will not be able to do; and requesting that if you did intend to provide him any Christmas presents that you provide them as Chanukah presents instead. Is that a demand?
Are you suggesting I should file another ex parte request? If I do, it will just be deferred to the March hearing just like the two requests from yesterday and the Court will get annoyed. I think the better approach would be to do as I've been doing and keep detailed records of these types of things and file it all before the March hearing to make sure the evaluator has them at that time, or to file additional OSCs like I will do with the request to relocate.
Now, if I understand it correctly, it seems to be that what you're saying is that you don't care about his religious beliefs and would rather cause him to commit a sin, as long as you get what you want. Is that about right?
You seem to be a little smug on that whole "file another emergency motion" thing. You do realize that the requests yesterday were only denied as "ex parte" requests, right? I can, and will, refile then as normal OSC requests. I'm sure you think you "won" something yesterday, but the Court only said they won't consider them as "ex parte" requests. As I pointed out earlier the requests were not denied on the merits and the denial was without prejudice. Before being smug you should probably understand what it is you're talking about, else you look the fool.
Anyway, do you believe that by forcing Gabriel to go to Arizona against his will, and by forcing him to violate his religious beliefs that that will somehow bring you guys closer together? Do you think he will respect you more? I don't think he can respect you much less, at this point, though. Do you even care? I really don't think you do.
You can keep a very clear record that what I am saying is that I am not Jewish and neither is my household. We follow different beliefs and views. In my home we are tolerant of all religions and that requires Gabriel to be tolerant of the different beliefs in my home as much as we will be tolerant if his. I will not blatantly push any form of religion on him while he's here but he will participate in family events. I agree that you would get nowhere by requesting otherwise from the court but not for the reasons you specify. Rather because I am correct in how the court views joint custody when it comes to differing religions in the homes.
Desiree:
I shall address each point, in turn, inline below:
That's fine.
Also fine.
Not if you're forcing a Jewish person to actively participate in the observance of Christian celebrations and rituals, you're not. Christmas is a Christian celebration. No other religion observes of acknowledges it.
He is. He is not trying to push Judaism on any of you. He doesn't expect you to participate in Rosh Hashana or Chanukah. he did not ask you for Chanukah presents. He said IF you were planning on getting him Christmas presents then would you be able to present them as Chanukah presents because it would violate the commandments for him to accept Christmas present (because Christmas is a Christian observance).
But you are NOT tolerant of his. That's established above. You are intending to force him to participate in Christian rituals and observances. How is that being tolerant of his beliefs? And how is that not forcing your Christian traditions and beliefs on him?
Are you serious? How is forcing him to participate in Christmas not blatantly pushing another religion on him? The fact that you're not religious but celebrate Christmas may make you hypocritical but it doesn't make Christmas any less the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ, which would be a Christian observance. No Jewish person has anything to do with Christmas. You know why? Because it's a Christian holiday!!!
Okay, the fact that your family engages in the observance of a Christian holiday does not make that holiday any less Christian.
Do you have ANY case law to support your claim? I highly doubt it. To begin with, you are athiest (according to what Gabriel told me that you told him) which means you have no religious beliefs. So there is no conflict. And the State Courts will generally stay out of issues of religion because they fall under federal jurisdiction.
Please try to formulate more coherent arguments.
Fox
You don't understand, I have nothing more to say on the matter.
Exactly! Because when you get right down to it, you had nothing to say right from the beginning (unless you consider your incoherent and repeatedly contradictory rant "something to say").
So, shall I take this to mean that you acknowledge you are wrong?
About what?
That by forcing Gabriel to participate in "family events" which are occurring solely because of the celebration of Christmas you are forcing him to participate, against his will, in the observance of another religion - a religion which you, by the way, do not follow.
As for the legal stuff: I'd rather you go ahead and believe you're right.
Regarding "the record", there is now a record of you talking to Gabriel about the legal proceedings and Court orders, which the Court order explicitly prohibits. Not once, not twice, but at least three separate emails.