If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Who has the ultimate right to choose?
"Chris" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Ray Fischer" wrote in message ... teachrmama wrote: "Ray Fischer" wrote in message teachrmama wrote: "Ray Fischer" wrote in message Relayer wrote: Really, bottom line is if the guy doesn't want to be a father, the LEAST he can do is use a condom. A classic anti-abortion argument. Not 100% but still better than nothing. However, most guys dont like them. But some will like being a father a LOT less..... If he didn't use a condom, then too bad. "If she wore a short skirt then she deserved to be raped." Same logic. Oh come on, Ray. A man who does not want to be a father but does want to engage in sexual intercourse could at least have the common sense to protect himself. The classic anti-abortion argument. It's HIS sperm--he should at least try to keep the little fellers corralled. And her egg. But more importantly, whether to have a child is still entirely her choice. All the more reason for the man to protect himself--seeing as how at this point in time the system is going to enrich the woman at the expense of both the man and the child. Certainly there is nobody else out there protecting you. Time to change the system. Not that I expect it to happen soon because most women are more interested in protecting their priviledges than they are in equality. I agree. But, until then, you'd best be protecting yourself, right? Double-edged sword. Are there immediate benefits to protecting yourself? Yes. However, if the vast majority of men "protect" themselves, then the chances of the system changing approaches zero. Why? Because this problem will be virtually non-existent; no complaints, crusades, etc.. Remember, the squeaky wheel gets the grease; or at least has a chance to get the grease. No squeak, no grease. Surely, surely you are not suggesting that men go out and impregnate every possible female so the "squeak" will be louder, Chris! I am apalled at your suggestion!! So now we have a NEW problem; that of men shouldering the irresponsible woman's responsibility. But wait, they're already doing that. Besides, how will the human race continue with men protecting themselves? Last I checked, parthenogenesis in humans does not exist. What do you care how irresponsible the woman is if you are taking responsibility for YOUR sexual behavior? The problem men are faced with is not unlike the problem that a woman utilizing an empty laundromat late at night faces. When she gets raped while doing her children's laundry, could you imagine the public outcry if it was suggested that she somehow deserved it because she did not "protect" herself? But yet, apply the SAME example to a man (regarding unprotected sex), and it's commonly accepted that he deserved it. Go figure. Sticking clothes in a wahing machine to get them clean is not exactly the same as sticking you ______ in a ____ to give yourself pleasure, Chris. I guess you could say that no benefit is without its risks. But the man should NOT be forced to share a risk without the accompanying benefit! Hey, you know perfectly well how I feel about 50/50 shared custody, each parent pays their own way. Btu what does stupidly feeding yourself to a merciless system have to do with overcoming the evils of that system? Protect yourself, and fight for justice. You don't have to be a victim to fight. To my knowledge, being a parent isn't a crime; at least it's not if you are a woman. But if you are a man, you get fined with TWO DECADES of payments or prison, even if you were FORCED into parenthood. And if you know that will be the result, why would you be foolish enought NOT to protect yourself? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Who has the ultimate right to choose?
"teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Ray Fischer" wrote in message ... teachrmama wrote: "Ray Fischer" wrote in message teachrmama wrote: "Ray Fischer" wrote in message Relayer wrote: Really, bottom line is if the guy doesn't want to be a father, the LEAST he can do is use a condom. A classic anti-abortion argument. Not 100% but still better than nothing. However, most guys dont like them. But some will like being a father a LOT less..... If he didn't use a condom, then too bad. "If she wore a short skirt then she deserved to be raped." Same logic. Oh come on, Ray. A man who does not want to be a father but does want to engage in sexual intercourse could at least have the common sense to protect himself. The classic anti-abortion argument. It's HIS sperm--he should at least try to keep the little fellers corralled. And her egg. But more importantly, whether to have a child is still entirely her choice. All the more reason for the man to protect himself--seeing as how at this point in time the system is going to enrich the woman at the expense of both the man and the child. Certainly there is nobody else out there protecting you. Time to change the system. Not that I expect it to happen soon because most women are more interested in protecting their priviledges than they are in equality. I agree. But, until then, you'd best be protecting yourself, right? Double-edged sword. Are there immediate benefits to protecting yourself? Yes. However, if the vast majority of men "protect" themselves, then the chances of the system changing approaches zero. Why? Because this problem will be virtually non-existent; no complaints, crusades, etc.. Remember, the squeaky wheel gets the grease; or at least has a chance to get the grease. No squeak, no grease. Surely, surely you are not suggesting that men go out and impregnate every possible female so the "squeak" will be louder, Chris! I am apalled at your suggestion!! I made no such suggestion. I only stated a fact. So now we have a NEW problem; that of men shouldering the irresponsible woman's responsibility. But wait, they're already doing that. Besides, how will the human race continue with men protecting themselves? Last I checked, parthenogenesis in humans does not exist. What do you care how irresponsible the woman is if you are taking responsibility for YOUR sexual behavior? Since the woman is the final arbiter of whether or not she will bear children, the man doesn't have much of a responsibility regarding this, does he. The problem men are faced with is not unlike the problem that a woman utilizing an empty laundromat late at night faces. When she gets raped while doing her children's laundry, could you imagine the public outcry if it was suggested that she somehow deserved it because she did not "protect" herself? But yet, apply the SAME example to a man (regarding unprotected sex), and it's commonly accepted that he deserved it. Go figure. Sticking clothes in a wahing machine to get them clean is not exactly the same as sticking you ______ in a ____ to give yourself pleasure, Chris. No it's not. Apparently, my analogy has escaped you.. I guess you could say that no benefit is without its risks. But the man should NOT be forced to share a risk without the accompanying benefit! Hey, you know perfectly well how I feel about 50/50 shared custody, each parent pays their own way. Btu what does stupidly feeding yourself to a merciless system have to do with overcoming the evils of that system? Protect yourself, and fight for justice. You don't have to be a victim to fight. No, but without a victim there is nothing to fight. Again, if EVERY man "protects" himself, what will happen to the human race? I always thought that the process of procreation was designed perfectly. However, there are some who would disagree. Parthenogenesis is more to their liking. Lesbians, feminazis, etc. come to mind. Problem is their procedure won't work. Consensual sex is a basic human right; and last I checked, human rights are undeserving of punishment. But just like you, I too agree in 505/50 equality across the board. So, if you're gonna punish the man for having sex, then so too shall the woman be punished. To my knowledge, being a parent isn't a crime; at least it's not if you are a woman. But if you are a man, you get fined with TWO DECADES of payments or prison, even if you were FORCED into parenthood. And if you know that will be the result, why would you be foolish enought NOT to protect yourself? I guess for the same reason the laundromat woman was foolish enough to not protect herself. You see, no one can predict (know) the future; and as far as I know, it is NOT a crime to be foolish. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Who has the ultimate right to choose?
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 10:04:32 -0700, "Chris" wrote:
What do you care how irresponsible the woman is if you are taking responsibility for YOUR sexual behavior? Since the woman is the final arbiter of whether or not she will bear children, the man doesn't have much of a responsibility regarding this, does he. Yep, he can make damn sure it's not his children. Have the cords clipped, then use a condom to avoid getting a STD. Stupid ******* that gets a STD deserves it. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Who has the ultimate right to choose?
"Chris" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Ray Fischer" wrote in message ... teachrmama wrote: "Ray Fischer" wrote in message teachrmama wrote: "Ray Fischer" wrote in message Relayer wrote: Really, bottom line is if the guy doesn't want to be a father, the LEAST he can do is use a condom. A classic anti-abortion argument. Not 100% but still better than nothing. However, most guys dont like them. But some will like being a father a LOT less..... If he didn't use a condom, then too bad. "If she wore a short skirt then she deserved to be raped." Same logic. Oh come on, Ray. A man who does not want to be a father but does want to engage in sexual intercourse could at least have the common sense to protect himself. The classic anti-abortion argument. It's HIS sperm--he should at least try to keep the little fellers corralled. And her egg. But more importantly, whether to have a child is still entirely her choice. All the more reason for the man to protect himself--seeing as how at this point in time the system is going to enrich the woman at the expense of both the man and the child. Certainly there is nobody else out there protecting you. Time to change the system. Not that I expect it to happen soon because most women are more interested in protecting their priviledges than they are in equality. I agree. But, until then, you'd best be protecting yourself, right? Double-edged sword. Are there immediate benefits to protecting yourself? Yes. However, if the vast majority of men "protect" themselves, then the chances of the system changing approaches zero. Why? Because this problem will be virtually non-existent; no complaints, crusades, etc.. Remember, the squeaky wheel gets the grease; or at least has a chance to get the grease. No squeak, no grease. Surely, surely you are not suggesting that men go out and impregnate every possible female so the "squeak" will be louder, Chris! I am apalled at your suggestion!! I made no such suggestion. I only stated a fact. So now we have a NEW problem; that of men shouldering the irresponsible woman's responsibility. But wait, they're already doing that. Besides, how will the human race continue with men protecting themselves? Last I checked, parthenogenesis in humans does not exist. What do you care how irresponsible the woman is if you are taking responsibility for YOUR sexual behavior? Since the woman is the final arbiter of whether or not she will bear children, the man doesn't have much of a responsibility regarding this, does he. The problem men are faced with is not unlike the problem that a woman utilizing an empty laundromat late at night faces. When she gets raped while doing her children's laundry, could you imagine the public outcry if it was suggested that she somehow deserved it because she did not "protect" herself? But yet, apply the SAME example to a man (regarding unprotected sex), and it's commonly accepted that he deserved it. Go figure. Sticking clothes in a wahing machine to get them clean is not exactly the same as sticking you ______ in a ____ to give yourself pleasure, Chris. No it's not. Apparently, my analogy has escaped you.. There is a railroad track running just outside little town. We get 2 trains through per day--one in the middle of the night, and one at about 2 in the afternoon. Because of the low traffic on the road, there are not protective arms coming down to keep folks from crossing at the wrong time, although there are the flashing lights and bells. It is perfectly legal to walk along the country road and across therailroad tracks. But I would be a big fool were I to try to display my right to walk there just as a train was coming through. The train would win--every time. My "rights" will NOT protect me from the train. I guess you could say that no benefit is without its risks. But the man should NOT be forced to share a risk without the accompanying benefit! Hey, you know perfectly well how I feel about 50/50 shared custody, each parent pays their own way. Btu what does stupidly feeding yourself to a merciless system have to do with overcoming the evils of that system? Protect yourself, and fight for justice. You don't have to be a victim to fight. No, but without a victim there is nothing to fight. Again, if EVERY man "protects" himself, what will happen to the human race? I always thought that the process of procreation was designed perfectly. Do yoyu intend to procreate every time you have sex, Chris? If so, you have nothing to complain about because you do, indeed, intend to be a father. If you do not wish to be a father every time you have sex, have the common sense to not walk across the tracks when the train is coming. However, there are some who would disagree. Parthenogenesis is more to their liking. Lesbians, feminazis, etc. come to mind. Problem is their procedure won't work. Consensual sex is a basic human right; and last I checked, human rights are undeserving of punishment. But just like you, I too agree in 505/50 equality across the board. So, if you're gonna punish the man for having sex, then so too shall the woman be punished. Rather that "punish"--how about if we hold both parties equally responsible to care for the child and to financially support the child. Raising a child is NOT a punishment. Paying for a child that you do not get the pleasure of raising could be considered punishment. To my knowledge, being a parent isn't a crime; at least it's not if you are a woman. But if you are a man, you get fined with TWO DECADES of payments or prison, even if you were FORCED into parenthood. And if you know that will be the result, why would you be foolish enought NOT to protect yourself? I guess for the same reason the laundromat woman was foolish enough to not protect herself. You see, no one can predict (know) the future; and as far as I know, it is NOT a crime to be foolish. Ah, but, Chris, at this point in time it IS illegal to father a child and not pay the ordered support. THAT is the part that you consider wrong, isn't it? The woman in the laundromat unprotected late at night is foolish but not criminal. The man who fathers an unwanted child and refuses to pay CS is both foolish and criminal, according to today's laws. The wise man will protect himself. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Who has the ultimate right to choose?
"Robert" wrote in message ... On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 10:04:32 -0700, "Chris" wrote: What do you care how irresponsible the woman is if you are taking responsibility for YOUR sexual behavior? Since the woman is the final arbiter of whether or not she will bear children, the man doesn't have much of a responsibility regarding this, does he. Yep, he can make damn sure it's not his children. Indeed he can, but not a prerequisite. Whether the children she decides to bring into the world are fathered by him or not does not change his lack of responsibility. It is impossible for him to be responsible for her SOLE choice to bear children. Have the cords clipped, then use a condom to avoid getting a STD. Stupid ******* that gets a STD deserves it. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Who has the ultimate right to choose?
On Apr 15, 2:32�am, "Chris" wrote:
"Robert" wrote in message ... On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 10:04:32 -0700, "Chris" wrote: What do you care how irresponsible the woman is if you are taking responsibility for YOUR sexual behavior? Since the woman is the final arbiter of whether or not she will bear children, the man doesn't have much of a responsibility regarding this, does he. * Yep, he can make damn sure it's not his children. Indeed he can, but not a prerequisite. Whether the children she decides to bring into the world are fathered by him or not does not change his lack of responsibility. It is impossible for him to be responsible for her SOLE choice to bear children. Have the cords clipped, then use a condom to avoid getting a STD. Stupid ******* that gets a STD deserves it. -- Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Goddamn it, put on a rubber. If you decide to forgo that, gorw up and be a man. Birth control is a two way street. If you want to be reckless and not cap the bishop, then stop bitching and grow up. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Who has the ultimate right to choose?
Robert wrote:
Whether or not she has a child is none of his business, as long as it's not his child. If he ****'s up, and she has his child he has a obligation to support that child. Why? Any ******* that refuses to support his child, needs to be horse whipped, and castrated. Don't let logic and reason get in your way when you want to cling to unthinking hatred. Don't want a woman to have your child, don't have unprotected sex with her. Your notion that women are irresponsible bimbos that must be taken care of by men is sexist and outdated. A man has the absolute responsibility to support his offspring. Just because you say so. -- Ray Fischer |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Who has the ultimate right to choose?
On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 00:32:02 -0700, "Chris" wrote:
"Robert" wrote in message .. . On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 10:04:32 -0700, "Chris" wrote: What do you care how irresponsible the woman is if you are taking responsibility for YOUR sexual behavior? Since the woman is the final arbiter of whether or not she will bear children, the man doesn't have much of a responsibility regarding this, does he. Yep, he can make damn sure it's not his children. Indeed he can, but not a prerequisite. Whether the children she decides to bring into the world are fathered by him or not does not change his lack of responsibility. It is impossible for him to be responsible for her SOLE choice to bear children. Whether or not she has a child is none of his business, as long as it's not his child. If he ****'s up, and she has his child he has a obligation to support that child. Any ******* that refuses to support his child, needs to be horse whipped, and castrated. Don't want a woman to have your child, don't have unprotected sex with her. A man has the absolute responsibility to support his offspring. Just as a woman has a right to choose to abort. Have the cords clipped, then use a condom to avoid getting a STD. Stupid ******* that gets a STD deserves it. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Who has the ultimate right to choose?
"Robert" wrote in message ... On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 00:32:02 -0700, "Chris" wrote: "Robert" wrote in message . .. On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 10:04:32 -0700, "Chris" wrote: What do you care how irresponsible the woman is if you are taking responsibility for YOUR sexual behavior? Since the woman is the final arbiter of whether or not she will bear children, the man doesn't have much of a responsibility regarding this, does he. Yep, he can make damn sure it's not his children. Indeed he can, but not a prerequisite. Whether the children she decides to bring into the world are fathered by him or not does not change his lack of responsibility. It is impossible for him to be responsible for her SOLE choice to bear children. Whether or not she has a child is none of his business, as long as it's not his child. If he ****'s up, and she has his child he has a obligation to support that child. Any ******* that refuses to support his child, needs to be horse whipped, and castrated. Don't want a woman to have your child, don't have unprotected sex with her. A man has the absolute responsibility to support his offspring. You keep forgetting a VERY IMPORTANT part, Robert. It is HIS CHILD! He has the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to parent that child. He should have that child with him 50% of the time. And the mother should be forced to provide 50% of the financial support of the child, just as the father is. FORCED LABOR if necessary! You keep leaving that part out. I'm not sure why. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Who has the ultimate right to choose?
"teachrmama" wrote "Robert" wrote ........................... If he ****'s up, and she has his child he has a obligation to support that child. Any ******* that refuses to support his child, needs to be horse whipped, and castrated. Don't want a woman to have your child, don't have unprotected sex with her. A man has the absolute responsibility to support his offspring. You keep forgetting a VERY IMPORTANT part, Robert. It is HIS CHILD! He has the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to parent that child. He should have that child with him 50% of the time. And the mother should be forced to provide 50% of the financial support of the child, just as the father is. FORCED LABOR if necessary! You keep leaving that part out. I'm not sure why. == It's because only mothers have children and only fathers pay. Sheesh! it's *so* obvious |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Who has the ultimate right to choose? | Chris | Child Support | 295 | April 25th 07 04:19 PM |
Who has the ultimate right to choose? | Chris | Child Support | 0 | April 4th 07 06:37 PM |
World Ultimate Fighting | [email protected] | General | 0 | February 28th 07 07:34 AM |
Ultimate Mom's Day out! | [email protected] | General | 0 | September 4th 06 04:16 PM |
Execution--the ultimate child abuse! | Fern5827 | Spanking | 6 | February 8th 04 07:30 AM |