"Lee" wrote in message
m...
"Tiffany" wrote in message
...
"Lee" wrote in message
m...
"Tiffany" wrote in message
...
That is an ancient argument.

Still valid, as well.

If that were the case, everyone could say to
those paying tons of support to greedy women that THEY asked for is
also
as
they had sex with the greedy women.

This is a Red Herring.
The logical result of any fertile heterosexual couple having serial
unprotected sex is going to be a pregnancy.

Therefore she chose poorly, as the result *will always be* a
pregnancy.

She choose poorly, he choose poorly.

His poor choice was to get married. To anyone. In the current legal
and political climate.

Human nature also dictates that no
human is perfect, therefor not perfect in its choses.

True, however current law makes marriage a very very bad business
decision for Anglo-men. There was always the risk of not succeeding.
What has changed is now the man is viewed as a wallet and sperm donor.
This attitude was not prevalent prior to 1965.

So don't get married and don't produce children. Thjis is a new generation,
educate men so they know what can happen.



The logical result of any fertile heterosexual couple marrying is
*not* tons of support to greedy women. This result is due to the
currect C$ laws in the mostly Anglo-West. This can change. Human
biology cannot.

Human biology doesn't need to change, the way couples act when faced
with
disicions that should be based on the needs of children DO NEED TO
CHANGE.

The laws that curently favor women need to change.

No the way two humans treat each other need to change. Though I don't agree
with the laws and have said so, individuals need to make change by being
humane. The total blame can't be placed on the laws.




The result *will not always be* a divorce and CPS CS payments.
Laws and sexist attitudes make it so, not a man's poor choice.

When a divorce happens, it is the act of one of those persons to use the
law
to the best of interests. IF one isn't greedy, they won't feel the need
to
use those laws.

Fascinating. You equate best of interests to greed.

For some women, THAT is what is in the best interest of the children. I know
some women are greedy in their demands while some need the law in order to
get SOMETHING. Not all men want to continue to help children. Not all men
care about what is good for the kids. Its not always the women who is the
bad person.





In 1940 (100b.c., etc...) the logical result of any fertile
heterosexual couple having serial unprotected sex was going to be a
pregnancy.

In 1940 (100b.c., etc...) the logical result of any fertile
heterosexual couple marrying *was not* tons of support to greedy
women.

The laws have changed since 1970. Human biology has not.

You assume female greed when a man pays CS. Interesting assumption,
coming from a(n apparent) woman.

I assume nothing, I am basing that statement on the millions of posts on
this newsgroup about greedy women.

Behavior which current divorce laws enable.
Change the law, and women will stop behaving so poorly.

Yes, only women behave poorly. This gets old you know.

T