Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-20-2012, 08:15 AM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,908,074 times
Reputation: 14748

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucidkitty View Post
You do realize that generally people actually discuss the choice on what "they" plan to do before a choice is made don't you?
Sure, that's the way responsible people normally start families, god bless them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-20-2012, 08:17 AM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,813 posts, read 24,534,681 times
Reputation: 8674
Quote:
Originally Posted by chielgirl View Post
You want a forced abortion for women who don't believe in it?
Don't want to pay, don't play.
It's pretty simple.

You're arguing with biology.

So, no matter what, men have control over a woman's body?


You want to have a woman carry a fetus to term and then remove it because you don't want to pay?

Ask your wife how she'd enjoy that happening to her because you won't accept responsibility for yourself?
No I do not.

ONE MORE TIME.

Women get the right to choose. Right or wrong, they get a choice to abort, put the child up for adoption, or to take the child for their own. A man gets no choice, she says "I'm pregnant", and if she can prove the father is the biological father, then he has to pay child support. If she wants an abortion, he gets no choice in that either (I AM NOT SAYING HE SHOULD!!!!), and if the child goes up for adoption the biological father who wants the child is usually in for a fight to adopt his own child.

All I am saying is that, if women get a choice to abort, or whatever, then a man should get a chance to walk away also without having to pay 20% of his income to a child and a woman he has no desire to have contact with for 18 or more years of his life.

Now if the father leaves, the woman has options. Food stamps, housing vouchers, family, etc. She doesn't have to live a life where she can't care for the child, but she will have to work. That is her choice, and she should know that if that is her choice, she will not get any support from a father that decided to walk away.

AGAIN!!!!! I find the practice of abortion to be wrong, for me personally this is my view. I would never tell a woman what she should or shouldn't do with her body, and I wouldn't take that right of choice away from her. But I do see it as an equal rights matter that the man gets no choice, whether to walk away or not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 08:18 AM
 
Location: North America
14,204 posts, read 12,380,688 times
Reputation: 5565
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
Sure, that's the way responsible people normally start families, god bless them.
Yes because responsible people have responsible men to add to the equation and not little boys .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 08:21 AM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,908,074 times
Reputation: 14748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucidkitty View Post
Yes because responsible people have responsible men to add to the equation and not little boys .
Yup.

But unfortunately, women often choose sex partners on the basis of things like coolness and how bad ass a guy seems when he holds his guitar that certain way, rather than his willingness to raise offspring. Difficult for some to believe, but women are not perfectly rational.

And so we must also have rules that are equitable for the lumpenproles of the world, as well as us regular folk who enter into consentual protected sex acts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 08:22 AM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,813 posts, read 24,534,681 times
Reputation: 8674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucidkitty View Post
You hit the nail right on the head by saying paycheck to paycheck. The programs in this country are very basic, and not that generous. And even with working often single parents are forced to choose between bills, and food.
No one said you have to provide three meals a day. Ask any social worker. You are required to give your child two meals a day. While this may seem harsh, Americans and people did this for the first 150 years of our country. Many families got a piece of bread a day, and if you were lucky you'd get some gravy to go along with it.

But on food stamps, a family of two, mother and child, can live quite fine on 300 dollars a month. Great food, no. But it can be done.

We've grown to accustomed to the comforts of life, and to many people think that if you aren't getting a "well rounded" meal three times a day you are living below a standard. Billions of Chinese go daily on nothing but rice, which is very inexpensive, and a good piece of meat during the week maybe twice.

Life is tough, but a woman should go into motherhood whether she should be able to count on a father or not. If you can't support the child without a father, you have options.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 08:23 AM
 
Location: North America
14,204 posts, read 12,380,688 times
Reputation: 5565
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
Yup.

But unfortunately, women often choose sex partners on the basis of things like coolness and how bad ass a guy seems when he holds his guitar that certain way, rather than his willingness to raise offspring.

And so we must also have rules that are equitable for the lumpenproles of the world.
Oh i see of course it's 'HER" fault she doesn't have a crystal ball then ? And we women choose our sex partners for more reasons then you state there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 08:25 AM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,908,074 times
Reputation: 14748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucidkitty View Post
Oh i see of course it's 'HER" fault she doesn't have a crystal ball then
It could be her fault for choosing a bad sex partner.

Or it could be her fault for insisting to have a child with her bad sex partner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 08:27 AM
 
Location: North America
14,204 posts, read 12,380,688 times
Reputation: 5565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
No one said you have to provide three meals a day. Ask any social worker. You are required to give your child two meals a day. While this may seem harsh, Americans and people did this for the first 150 years of our country. Many families got a piece of bread a day, and if you were lucky you'd get some gravy to go along with it.

But on food stamps, a family of two, mother and child, can live quite fine on 300 dollars a month. Great food, no. But it can be done.

We've grown to accustomed to the comforts of life, and to many people think that if you aren't getting a "well rounded" meal three times a day you are living below a standard. Billions of Chinese go daily on nothing but rice, which is very inexpensive, and a good piece of meat during the week maybe twice.

Life is tough, but a woman should go into motherhood whether she should be able to count on a father or not. If you can't support the child without a father, you have options.

Yes and people 150 years ago also had to toil all day for subsistence living as well, that's hardly something we should be aspiring to in this day and age. You are also assuming they are getting 300 dollars a month as well aren't you? I have a friend that gets 100 dollars a month for food.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 08:28 AM
 
Location: North America
14,204 posts, read 12,380,688 times
Reputation: 5565
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
It could be her fault for choosing a bad sex partner.

Or it could be her fault for insisting to have a child with her bad sex partner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2012, 08:29 AM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,813 posts, read 24,534,681 times
Reputation: 8674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucidkitty View Post
Yes and people 150 years ago also had to toil all day for subsistence living as well, that's hardly something we should be aspiring to in this day and age. You are also assuming they are getting 300 dollars a month as well aren't you? I have a friend that gets 100 dollars a month for food.
I didn't say we should. But if a human being can live on that amount of food, then thats about all we should provide with public assistance.

Instead we hand out food stamp cards that can buy cakes, candy bars, potato chips, etc, things with little or no nutritional value, then people say "well they can't survive on that"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top