It doesn't pay to be a "good girl" (children, 2015)
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.
You shared your personal standards , however, they are not the moral standards to which we are all held accountable to . Mod cut.
I am the way God made me... I figure he knows what he is doing. If you want to second guess Him that's your thing. Do you have a piece of paper or something where God assigned you as his spokesperson?
Perhaps being concerned with hubris might serve you better than worrying about other peoples sex lives.
I knew a woman once who found herself in a very bad place. She had 3 kids under the age of 10. Her husband had abandoned them. Winter was coming. Since she had been a SAHM she basically had no work experiance. They were getting very close to being homeless. To make a long story short,she had the opportunity to make quite a bit of $$ over a weekend or 2 as a umum..hostess. She didnt really want to do it. But she felt she didnt have alot of choices. So she did. She was able to pay 3 months of rent and groceries. So 000.7. Which is the better set of morals? Giving up a little vajajay? Or letting your kids be homeless and hungry? I find no fault in what she did. And I dont see how anyone else who isnt in her shoes can judge. Or are you going to tell us that your God thinks it more moral that kids should go hungry,homeless and cold than for thier mother to use one of her assets to take care of her kids?
It might not pay off to be a good girl...a good girl in the end is seeking a good man - and good men are rare...May as well jump into the swamp of debachery and be a bad girl and date bad guys and get married and suffer a very bad divorce then look for another bad guy...who you can perhaps marry and have another bad relationship with.....sarcasim.
You do realize, don't you...that the only cases they have knowledge of, are the ones who are actually being treated by a physician, right? I'm not finding anything more current than this....but will keep checking!
[LEFT]Updated: 2009-07-17 22:02:03 CST Category: Sexually Transmitted Diseases [/LEFT] by Laurent Castellucci
[LEFT]After several years of improvements in the sexual health of young Americans, the positive trends have flattened or even reversed recently, according to new analysis of the data by the Center for Disease Control.
Gathering and analyzing previously available data from a number of national health statistics sources on the sexual health of Americans 10-24 years old, the CDC found that the rates of STDs had gone up for many populations within that group.
AIDS cases among 15-24 year old males had gone up from 1997 to 2006, and for males aged 15-19 the number has almost doubled, according to the data.
Less severe diseases have also become more common as well. Syphilis cases among teens and young adults have increased in both males and females in recent years.
[/LEFT]
Pretty alarming to say the least.
I listened to a radio broadcast recently where a Doctor says he is seeing a surge in Teen Boys that acquire throat and neck cancer from HPV genital- infected girls/women http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...r-tobacco.html.
I wonder when the U.S. populace is going to wake up to the relentless spread of dangerous STD's instead of trying to sweep it under the carpet by asserting its on a downward slope and calling concerned people 'Alarmists' (?) .
I listened to a radio broadcast recently where a Doctor says he is seeing a surge in Teen Boys that acquire throat and neck cancer from HPV genital- infected girls/women . I wonder when the U.S. populace is going to wake up to the relentless spread of dangerous STD's instead of trying to sweep it under the carpet by asserting its on a downward slope .
Me? I wonder when folks are going to wake up to the fact that this is a serious health issue and not some ridiculous argument made by "holier than thous"? It has far less to do with so-called morality and a whole lot more to do with safety!! If adults model "head in the sand" attitudes about this stuff, what are we teaching our children!? Oh sure, if you can afford "treatment" for these things, or you're able to apply for public health and have taxpayers pay for your treatment, I suppose some folks can take a ho hum approach to their cure (the ones that ARE curable). What about the people who go, for YEARS, not knowing, because they are asymptomatic, only finding out much later, when severe damage has occurred and they've spread it to 200 others, that they were infected?
I knew a woman once who found herself in a very bad place. She had 3 kids under the age of 10. Her husband had abandoned them. Winter was coming. Since she had been a SAHM she basically had no work experiance. They were getting very close to being homeless. To make a long story short,she had the opportunity to make quite a bit of $$ over a weekend or 2 as a umum..hostess. She didnt really want to do it. But she felt she didnt have alot of choices. So she did. She was able to pay 3 months of rent and groceries. So 000.7. Which is the better set of morals? Giving up a little vajajay? Or letting your kids be homeless and hungry? I find no fault in what she did. And I dont see how anyone else who isnt in her shoes can judge. Or are you going to tell us that your God thinks it more moral that kids should go hungry,homeless and cold than for thier mother to use one of her assets to take care of her kids?
I knew a woman once who found herself in a very bad place. She had 3 kids under the age of 10. Her husband had abandoned them. Winter was coming. Since she had been a SAHM she basically had no work experiance. They were getting very close to being homeless. To make a long story short,she had the opportunity to make quite a bit of $$ over a weekend or 2 as a umum..hostess. She didnt really want to do it. But she felt she didnt have alot of choices. So she did. She was able to pay 3 months of rent and groceries. So 000.7. Which is the better set of morals? Giving up a little vajajay? Or letting your kids be homeless and hungry? I find no fault in what she did. And I dont see how anyone else who isnt in her shoes can judge. Or are you going to tell us that your God thinks it more moral that kids should go hungry,homeless and cold than for thier mother to use one of her assets to take care of her kids?
That is heartwrenching. She did what she felt she had to do to protect her children. I would not judge her, that's for sure.
In pondering this situation...If I found myself facing this exact dilemna, I can not say, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that I would not do the same thing, in order to protect my children. I would beg work....housecleaning, yard work....anything I could think of, first, but in my heart, I know...that if that was the only thing that would keep my babies off the street and keep them from starving...I'd probably do the same thing. When you care for your children, far more than you'd care for yourself, you'd go to almost any length to protect them.
Hi Ms. Amanda. Nice to meet you. Its really a tough choice she had to make. I just dont see how others can judge her as being "immoral." Amothers instinct must certainly be to take care of her children. Someone elses "morals" be damned IMO.
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.