Men who marry Single Mothers are Chumps !

"Zoey" wrote in message
. ..

"Seth" wrote in message
news
On 15 Aug 2004 11:40:26 -0000, Manfred Acker
wrote:

"Autobodygal" wrote in message
. rr.com...
I think that a lot of people would agree with me when I say that you
are a
simple minded idiot! Single mothers are not losers.

Yes they are. They're too stupid to keep from being stuck raising a kid
by themselves.

There are a lot of
different reasons why a woman may be a single mother. The losers are
the men
that can not be man enough to support the children that they have
created.

At least they're smart enough to not be stuck with the brat. That
doesn't
change the fact that they should have their nuts cut off and fed to
them.

Single mothers should be applauded.

Single mothers should be laughed at and then forcibly sterilized before
they bring more little welfare piglets into the world.


I tend to agree. The only way those types can feed her self is by
spreading her legs. The average family in north america is one woman
and 1.7 kids and this is of the governments making. The government
makes single men fathers by proxy and punishes them for the selective
custody choices the government has made (ie. child tax credit went
from 32 a month to 322, it's a real ****er).

Is your brain completely mush or do you have some control over the
nonsense you spew?

He apparently does not have any such control -- only enough control to post
under different names to make it appear as though he has support for his
idiocy.


--
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
-----------------------------
Byron "Barn" Canfield

"Byron Canfield" wrote in message news:GsVTc.17555$mD.12870@attbi_s02...
"Seth" wrote in message
news
On 15 Aug 2004 11:40:26 -0000, Manfred Acker
wrote:

"Autobodygal" wrote in message
. rr.com...
I think that a lot of people would agree with me when I say that you
are a
simple minded idiot! Single mothers are not losers.

Yes they are. They're too stupid to keep from being stuck raising a kid
by themselves.

There are a lot of
different reasons why a woman may be a single mother. The losers are
the men
that can not be man enough to support the children that they have
created.

At least they're smart enough to not be stuck with the brat. That doesn't
change the fact that they should have their nuts cut off and fed to them.

Single mothers should be applauded.

Single mothers should be laughed at and then forcibly sterilized before
they bring more little welfare piglets into the world.


I tend to agree. The only way those types can feed her self is by
spreading her legs. The average family in north america is one woman
and 1.7 kids and this is of the governments making. The government
makes single men fathers by proxy and punishes them for the selective
custody choices the government has made (ie. child tax credit went
from 32 a month to 322, it's a real ****er).


Reading willing and able. Waiting

How is it that you cannot grasp the concept that it is not necessarily a
single mother's fault that she is single?

Perhaps because your own relationship went sour?

I've known quite a number of single mothers -- some were were so because
their former husbands, like you, were complete assholes; others were single
mothers because the fathers renegged on what was perceived by the women as a
comittment (no doubt foolish on their part to have been so trusting, but
hardly qualifying as "losers") and left them when they became pregnant.

Ah, so there are two possible reasons why a mother could is single:
A: The mother is a saint, and the father was an asshole and left.
B: The mother is a saint, and the father was an asshole and left.

This presents three problems:
A. Why is the woman having childern with an asshole?
B. Why is the woman having childern with an asshole?
C. Why is the woman having childern with an asshole?

"hvatum" wrote in message
om...
Ah, so there are two possible reasons why a mother could is single:
A: The mother is a saint, and the father was an asshole and left.
B: The mother is a saint, and the father was an asshole and left.

You seem to think that because people don't subscribe to YOUR all-or-nothing
scenario that they, too, are insisting on an all-or-nothing scenario. That
is the hallmark of an asshole -- you have no frame of reference to consider
the many possibilities.

This presents three problems:
A. Why is the woman having childern with an asshole?
Answer: He disguised his true nature until after he made her presumably
dependent on him.

B. Why is the woman having childern with an asshole?
Answer: He was a latent asshole and the tendencies didn't make themselves
known until AFTER the children were born.

C. Why is the woman having childern with an asshole?
Answer: She thought she might be able to change him (this, and only this, of
the three, qualifies as being a reason without merit -- an asshole will
never change into anything else).


--
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
-----------------------------
Byron "Barn" Canfield

You seem to think that because people don't subscribe to YOUR all-or-nothing
scenario that they, too, are insisting on an all-or-nothing scenario. That
is the hallmark of an asshole...

Drumroll please...

I've known quite a number of single mothers -- some were were so because
their former husbands, like you, were complete assholes; others were single
mothers because the fathers renegged on what was perceived by the women as a
comittment (no doubt foolish on their part to have been so trusting, but
hardly qualifying as "losers") and left them when they became pregnant.

And here is your all-or-nothing scenrario! (You think that men are
assholes, and women are always innocent of any blame, right?).

I'm not presenting an all or one scenario, simply showing that it goes
both ways.

"hvatum" wrote in message
om...
You seem to think that because people don't subscribe to YOUR
all-or-nothing
scenario that they, too, are insisting on an all-or-nothing scenario.
That
is the hallmark of an asshole...

Drumroll please...

I've known quite a number of single mothers -- some were were so because
their former husbands, like you, were complete assholes; others were
single
mothers because the fathers renegged on what was perceived by the women
as a
comittment (no doubt foolish on their part to have been so trusting, but
hardly qualifying as "losers") and left them when they became pregnant.

And here is your all-or-nothing scenrario! (You think that men are
assholes, and women are always innocent of any blame, right?).

I'm not presenting an all or one scenario, simply showing that it goes
both ways.

No, that's what others were showing -- that the premise of the thread, being
all-inclusive, was false. You have now changed your story, where previously,
you were trying to support the original premise, that the single mothers
were all losers. Again, you try to foist your all-or-nothing scenario on
others. Ain't gonnna wash.


--
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
-----------------------------
Byron "Barn" Canfield

"Byron Canfield" wrote in message news:7zAXc.317353$a24.110918@attbi_s03...
"hvatum" wrote in message
om...
You seem to think that because people don't subscribe to YOUR
all-or-nothing
scenario that they, too, are insisting on an all-or-nothing scenario.
That
is the hallmark of an asshole...

Drumroll please...

I've known quite a number of single mothers -- some were were so because
their former husbands, like you, were complete assholes; others were
single
mothers because the fathers renegged on what was perceived by the women
as a
comittment (no doubt foolish on their part to have been so trusting, but
hardly qualifying as "losers") and left them when they became pregnant.

And here is your all-or-nothing scenrario! (You think that men are
assholes, and women are always innocent of any blame, right?).

I'm not presenting an all or one scenario, simply showing that it goes
both ways.

No, that's what others were showing -- that the premise of the thread, being
all-inclusive, was false. You have now changed your story, where previously,
you were trying to support the original premise, that the single mothers
were all losers. Again, you try to foist your all-or-nothing scenario on
others. Ain't gonnna wash.


Sorry you interpreted it that way. I was just offering other
possibilities in contrast to your all-or-nothing scenario. I was not
intending to back up the original premise of the thread.

"hvatum" wrote in message
om...
"Byron Canfield" wrote in message
news:7zAXc.317353$a24.110918@attbi_s03...
"hvatum" wrote in message
om...
You seem to think that because people don't subscribe to YOUR
all-or-nothing
scenario that they, too, are insisting on an all-or-nothing
scenario.
That
is the hallmark of an asshole...

Drumroll please...

I've known quite a number of single mothers -- some were were so
because
their former husbands, like you, were complete assholes; others were
single
mothers because the fathers renegged on what was perceived by the
women
as a
comittment (no doubt foolish on their part to have been so trusting,
but
hardly qualifying as "losers") and left them when they became
pregnant.

And here is your all-or-nothing scenrario! (You think that men are
assholes, and women are always innocent of any blame, right?).

I'm not presenting an all or one scenario, simply showing that it goes
both ways.

No, that's what others were showing -- that the premise of the thread,
being
all-inclusive, was false. You have now changed your story, where
previously,
you were trying to support the original premise, that the single mothers
were all losers. Again, you try to foist your all-or-nothing scenario on
others. Ain't gonnna wash.


Sorry you interpreted it that way. I was just offering other
possibilities in contrast to your all-or-nothing scenario. I was not
intending to back up the original premise of the thread.

I never proposed an all-or nothing scenario. That was the doing of the
original poster, whose all-or-nothing scenario was severely debunked -- and
YOU came to his defense, and by doing so, took the stand of supporting his
all-or-nothing scenario. You can deny it all you want, but the thread
contains the record of your nonsense.


--
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
-----------------------------
Byron "Barn" Canfield