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.
It was no collective mindset, it was ME. I was also very clear in saying that I would not push my fantasy on anyone.
Who is this "collective" of my mindset?
Holey sheiss try some reading comprehension.
It may be a toal lack of comprehension of English but I think it looks more like hypnosis....he just keeps repeating the same post despite my having explained it to him a couple of times...
But Hey! At least THAT poster may know the difference between castration and a vasectomy! That would be head and shoulders above those in here who didn't Those nincompoops who think they're so superior to poor people ...LOL!!!
Can we all get a grip and remember that these men are outliers. The black population is in no danger of exploding and engulfing this country in a wave of crime and unrest that will threaten National Security, or your car stereo for that matter. We don't need more jail space, we need more jobs. Not just for black men, but for all men. The economy crashed in 2008 and by 2011 you had OWS. Such was the speed with which white people responded to being fired on in an undeclared escalation of the Class War. Black people have been on the receiving end of class and race victimization since 1865 and have offered no significant push-back to the inequality, race riots in Watts, Compton, Harlem, and elsewhere notwithstanding.
In 2012 the United States, all by itself, could destroy all life on this planet in about 17 minutes. Its taken trillions of dollars and decades of R&D to accomplish but, by gum, we've done it. I wonder if anyone ever thinks about what might have been accomplished by humanity by 2012 if we had turned our mainframe computers loose on the social and medical issues facing us vs the geo-political/military ones... ... Let's see: By 2012 humanity could have had children surgically sterilized shortly after birth in a procedure that was easilyreversible, at will. By 2012 humanity could have organized First World countries such that the raising of children was done communaly rather than the failing nuclear family model that struggles to prevail. By 2012 humanity could have evolved its thinking about life and death so that we could, without recrimination, euthanize terminally ill people that are in acute distress and agony, the way we would a beloved family pet.
Sterilizing the three outlier examples of male irresponsibility should not cause anyone regret. Why has it not been done already?? Summary abortion of the fetuses of any of the 46 women in question beyond those that could be provided with an optimum life should not tie anyone in ethical knots. Why can't we do it? I'm sick of the white ambivalence that pervades history:usurp the land from the Native Americans, No, give them Casino charters; enslave Africans. No, free them at once! Abortion is abomination. No, a woman has a right to choose; we have to provide Welfare for the children of the irresponsible. No, let them starve! Why don't you make up your minds?
What Mormon prophet eventually denounced polygamy and did not practice it?
"The Manifesto" was issued in 1890 by LDS prophet Wilford Woodruff. It was practiced during the administrations of the first four presidents of the church and has not been practiced during the administrations of the next twelve presidents.
For those interested, here is what "The Manifesto" said:
"To Whom It May Concern:"Press dispatches having been sent for political purposes, from Salt Lake City, which have been widely published, to the effect that the Utah Commission, in their recent report to the Secretary of the Interior, allege that plural marriages have been contracted in Utah since last June or during the past year, also that in public discourses the leaders of the Church have taught, encouraged and urged the continuance of the practice of polygamy—"I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner, declare that these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory." One case has been reported, in which the parties allege that the marriage was performed in the Endowment House, in Salt Lake City, in the Spring of 1889, but I have not been able to learn who performed the ceremony; whatever was done in this matter was without my knowledge. In consequence of this alleged occurrence the Endowment House was, by my instructions, taken down without delay."Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I heareby declare my intention to submit to those laws, to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise." There is nothing in my teachings to the Church or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy; and when any Elder of the Church has used language which appeared to convey such teaching, he has been promptly reproved. And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land."
WILFORD WOODRUFF [signed]
"President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints."
Quote:
Do Mormons still believe in polygamy in their "next world?"
As a principle, yes. That doesn't mean that it will be practiced by everyone. After all, during the height of polygamy in Utah in the late nineteenth century, only about 5% of all Mormon men had more than one wife.
Folks may laugh but your right. There needs to be legal repercussions to this type of behavior. If having them nurtured will stop this insanity then let's nurture them. Women should be delt with the same way. These women will be on welfare for the rest of thier lives and teach their children how to survive on it as well. I am sick and tie of paying for worthless scum bags...
Yes,men lie.
But some on here act like men are saints.
Women don't lie? This is not about saintly behavior or not saintly behavior. This is not NYC or NJ... its Tennessee. A man cannot have 22 children with 3 different women or whatever and the other women not know about it. A registry such as that naively posted by EB works at the next higher tier of society than where the three outlier examples of male irresponsibility and their women operate.
And speaking of class... ... well I wasn't going to go there, but: class placement and education in most races usually means an increase in sophistication and worldliness. In the Middle Class where I operate, black women with a LOT of education and its attendant access to financial security and upward mobility are often shockingly illiterate about sexual relations, sexual hygeine, and marriage and family life. The outdated and/or obsolete statutes of some fundamentalist religion are very likely in control of women earning well into six figures. That is simply not the case in the white world.
The heat coming off the angry black women posting in this thread is practically singeing my nose hairs. What some low life black thugs do with ghetto booty has nothing to do with middle class black women. Middle class black women aren't having huge numbers of children out of wedlock. Way too many aren't having children at all. Everybody looked the other way while 3 million black men killed each other or were murdered or incarcerated by white law enforcement. Now there is a shortfall in numbers between black men and women that is so huge the mind can barely get around it. The black men that are left alive or at least not under incarceration are supposed to be REAL (read: financially generous) to women that are, statistically, 4/5th's of the time, at least 50lbs. over their HWP target. Most are not on any birth control and do not have any hobbies or interests beyond basic fashion sense. What about that essential "sense of humor" so valued by white men and women? Do black women have one? How subtle is it? Can you laugh at yourself? Can black men? Not judging, just saying. This is what I have seen for myself, not just what I have overheard in barbershops or hair salons.
I've said it before. City Data is not the place to have these arguments. Certainly not P&OC. Middle Class black men are not dogs. There simply aren't a lot of them. White men don't, as a rule, date overweight women. Or dark skinned ones. But mainly, black women don't find white men physically attractive. It's been years since I've been in those particular trenches but the advice I offered back in the day still holds I think. Going forward my black sisters and brothers have got to learn how to fight fire with fire. Holding on to the "home training" that most of us were raised with has done what exactly? Let it go. Use some common sense and initiative and find your own way in the world. It won't, can't, be exactly like the one your parents took. In many cases its a completely different world. Your parents grew up in one place then moved to another when you were born or while you were a baby and the rules they grew up with simply don't apply in this new place. Scrap the script, if I may be so blunt. And don't hate when you see a sister or brother working it, i.e. following the white model.
The fact is that abortions have always been and always will be and the ONLY way to end abortions is to give all male children a vasectomy at birth. NO one is really advocating this because it just won't happen BUT , if you THINK about it, it IS the only way to keep women from getting pregnant and wanting an abortion.
It points out that it's REALLY the only solution to a problem that has been around since humans have been around....so it shows that abortion always needs to be a safe option.
Yeah, I thought about it, and you're wrong. The only way to keep women from getting pregnant and wanting an abortion is for them to not have sex if they don't want to get pregnant. No sex, no pregnancy. Simple biology.
... The black men that are left alive or at least not under incarceration are supposed to be REAL (read: financially generous) to women that are, statistically, 4/5th's of the time, at least 50lbs. over their HWP target. ...
Just a quick sidebar here, apart from the real issues (for a little interlude) ... uh, the conventional HWP "target" set by contemporary medical and fashion pundits is not a "target" of many black women ... from an op-ed piece in the NYT, written by black author Alice Randall: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/06/op...n-are-fat.html
Yeah, I thought about it, and you're wrong. The only way to keep women from getting pregnant and wanting an abortion is for them to not have sex if they don't want to get pregnant. No sex, no pregnancy. Simple biology.
*sigh*
Actually, not (simple biology). Simple biology is to have sex -- and often as opportunity and desire arise and permit.
The science of revelation in this issue is sociology. As I wrote previously, it's not about sex, it's about parental commitment and participation. And where we homo sapiens have gone off track is by attempting to live in social units larger than our neo-cortex dictates would be the maximum numbers for cohesive unit success. Dunbar's number - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
We are not biologically structured to live as we do. Thus the breakdown in rearing our offspring. People can rant and rail and stamp their feet all they want -- declaring and advocating their conflicting socio-political-religious-philosophical ideologies until they are blue in the face and fall over hyper-ventilating.
Fact is: we have evolved to be no more than hunter-gatherers in tribes of fewer than 150 individuals. You can't make your neo-cortex big enough to accommodate caring, cohesive social units numbering in the millions and hundreds of millions.
*sigh*
Actually, not (simple biology). Simple biology is to have sex -- and often as opportunity and desire arise and permit.
The issue, as written by the poster I responded to, was who, as in which sex, male or female, controlled reproduction. The poster said that the only way to control conception was to sterilize males. I said that women needed to control contraception by choosing not to have sex if they did not want to have children. Sounds like simple biology to me. You don't have to have sex. You can choose not to if you don't want to be a parent.
Quote:
The science of revelation in this issue is sociology. As I wrote previously, it's not about sex, it's about parental commitment and participation. And where we homo sapiens have gone off track is by attempting to live in social units larger than our neo-cortex dictates would be the maximum numbers for cohesive unit success. Dunbar's number - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For those who are not parents, the concepts of parental commitment and participation are not applicable. You are talking about what people should do AFTER becoming parents. I am talking about what people should do if they DON'T want to become parents. We are having two different conversations.
Quote:
We are not biologically structured to live as we do. Thus the breakdown in rearing our offspring. People can rant and rail and stamp their feet all they want -- declaring and advocating their conflicting socio-political-religious-philosophical ideologies until they are blue in the face and fall over hyper-ventilating.
Fact is: we have evolved to be no more than hunter-gatherers in tribes of fewer than 150 individuals. You can't make your neo-cortex big enough to accommodate caring, cohesive social units numbering in the millions and hundreds of millions.
The issue, as written by the poster I responded to, was who, as in which sex, male or female, controlled reproduction. The poster said that the only way to control conception was to sterilize males. I said that women needed to control contraception by choosing not to have sex if they did not want to have children. Sounds like simple biology to me. You don't have to have sex. You can choose not to if you don't want to be a parent.
But no, it is not simple biology "to not have sex" (forgive the triple-negative sentence -- it makes a point). It is simple biology to have sex.
At any rate, biology -- including the desire to engage in sex and reproduce -- will always trump conscious choice when it wants to. You may pride yourself on self-control, but if biology wants to intervene it will laugh at your consciousness. This is how we all got here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucario
For those who are not parents, the concepts of parental commitment and participation are not applicable. You are talking about what people should do AFTER becoming parents. I am talking about what people should do if they DON'T want to become parents. We are having two different conversations.
I don't agree. Among other things, what I am expressly pointing out is that "concepts" wither in the face of true biology.
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.
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.
Those nincompoops who think they're so superior to poor people ...LOL!!!
