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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-13-2013, 09:28 AM
 
1,730 posts, read 1,357,810 times
Reputation: 760

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter View Post
This is why abortion needs to be legal up until the 20th trimester.
20th trimester? The kid would be in school by then lol
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-13-2013, 10:01 AM
 
14,893 posts, read 8,509,702 times
Reputation: 7322
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547 View Post
Whoa Slick! Hold on a second. I take it you didn't bother to read a word that I said. I said I dislike her. I agree that she was VERY selfish to write that post--it was pretty terrible. I agree that she should have never had kids, no matter if her husband was pressuring her. I agree that this entire thing is pretty awful on every side. My point is that SHE DID tell the truth about one thing--she hates being a mother--no matter how awful and inappropriate the way she went about it was, and no matter how it should have never, ever been said for the sake of her children. And that brings up my point--she's not alone. When people say they don't want kids, we need to believe them and not try to convince them otherwise. Don't look down on people who don't want kids and call them "selfish," because it's a whole lot more selfish to have them when they're unwanted. That's all I'm trying to say here, because whether you want to believe it or not, there's a big segment of the population that attacks women who are childless as being selfish, and there's another big segment that doesn't like children and shouldn't have them. My point is that they should remain childless for the good of everyone if that's what they want, and that's the LEAST selfish thing they could do.
I think you're missing my point, and the issue I'm taking with the idea of her being "honest". And I'm trying to find an appropriate analogy that might illuminate that for you .... but I can find no better one than the case we're discussing ... so let me try again ...

This women blames her misery on her children ... even going so far as to refer to them as parasites, consuming her time and feeding off her without giving anything back in return. You said she was at least being honest, to which I disagree. And the reason I disagree is because one would first have to agree that it is even possible for a child to be a parasite, and that I do not agree with, AT ALL. In fact, I find the idea repugnant.

There are many potential causes for this woman's misery, none of which includes her children. Based only on what I know from the essay ... I would say that the "honest" cause of her misery is that huge gaping hole she has in the area where most people's soul resides, which is the source of our love and compassion and empathy for others, leaving her to navigate life purely from the perspective of her ego, which is the seat of such dominate selfishness.

Now, I don't know if you read the the essay in it's entirety, but I did, and there is a specific reason why I say that she is not being honest, and that includes being honest with herself. This woman's misery will continue until she is honest with herself. Given that her 31 year old daughter has been stricken with MS, and is now bedridden and requiring full care for the rest of her life, leaving the mother and father with the job of long term maintenance, this might be the motivating factor for this woman's revelation going public at this time, since what she deemed to inflict such harm to her life and happiness in raising these children, has now become a "PERMANENT" situation, until her daughter dies. Given the feelings already communicated, I dare say that she'll be looking forward to that day when her daughter passes and the maintenance ends. This is guaranteed to extend the misery this women suffers indefinitely, long beyond that moment in which her daughter's life ends, or until such time that Mom reassesses the real cause of her misery, and reaches a more "honest" conclusion about the source of it.

You see, nowhere in that essay did I find one sliver of compassion from the Mom for the fate her daughter suffers, even though it is the daughter who is the one that has lost any semblance of a normal life at such a tragically young age. Not one sliver of empathy or compassion .... the entire focus is on the continued "hardship" the mother must continue to suffer. She, as the mother doesn't even seem to possess the empathy a perfect stranger might feel for the plight of that young woman. THAT IS THE SOURCE of this woman's misery ... because that is a sick and miserable way to look at life in general, and a continuance of past patterns of blaming the children for that emptiness inside of her.

The moment she can reconnect that lost communication between her soul or higher self and her ego, (which I contend is the honest source of her difficulties), she might begin to feel less put upon or inconvenienced by this tragic situation, and begin to see this time not as a continued burden and source of misery, but more as the "opportunity" to spend the remaining days of her daughter's life, reconnecting with the love and compassion she's spent decades without experiencing. Then, the maintenance of her daughter will become less a source of misery, and more a source of enlightenment to the lessons she's miserably failed to learn, so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547 View Post
If I misunderstood what you were saying, then my apologies, but that's not what you said, and you went on a pretty major rant. I think there are LOTS of parents whose children annoy them more than anything else, and it's always been that way. It ranges from the parents who completely neglect their kids, to the over medicated and often drunk mothers that weren't uncommon when I was a kid. The good news is that if you don't want to have kids now, you don't have to. Thirty years ago it was another story--
Excuse me .... but I think we've known where babies come from for a lot longer time than just 30 years ago

And I'll make no apology for harshly judging poor parents, because regardless of the child being a planned event or an accident ... unless your name is Mary, and you can claim no participation in the conception, the obligation is just as valid, and the responsibility yours. Blaming the child is simply the refusal to accept personal responsibility.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547 View Post
if you didn't get married and have a family--especially if you were a woman--most people and society in general thought there was something really really wrong with you. It's a very good thing that women have more freedom to make their own choices now, because there are a lot of moms and dads out there who, given the option, would have remained childless. My husband and I adore our children, but we know a number of families who don't feel that way. It's not pretty, but it's real.
It's only real, and become more real as time continues to move forward, because of our willingness to consider such attitudes as an expression of freedom, when it is nothing more than an expression of selfishness, and a lack of concern for others. When the supposed expression of that "freedom" includes terminating a pregnancy for convenience, such attitudes mirror the underlying attitude expressed by the woman who views her own children as parasites.

These attitudes are not expressions of "freedom" ... they are the expression of one's disregard for the value of life, and the inability to express empathy and compassion ... which, by the way, is the clinical definition of a sociopath.

For Reference Purposes:

This is a parasite:


This is not a parasite:

Last edited by GuyNTexas; 04-13-2013 at 10:20 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2013, 12:18 PM
 
14,893 posts, read 8,509,702 times
Reputation: 7322
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547 View Post
I think in the past there was a lot of pressure for couples to have children just because that was what you were supposed to do, and that's where some of that attitude is coming from. They never wanted to be parents to begin with. It's hard to understand it when you DO love and want your own children, but it's out there. It's as obnoxious for those folks to call people who love and enjoy their kids liars, as it is for people who think parenting was worth it to condemn others for being childless.
While you may be coming from a place of open mindedness, willing to consider both sides, which is commendable, what if there is more than two sides to the story?

You see, I could not disagree more with the insinuation that such childless desires were prevalent, succumbing only to peer pressures of the past which exist less today .... quite the opposite is truly the case. The pressures to not have children are what I see taking place, which is a modern manifestation, and totally contrary to the history of humanity for thousands of years running. Certainly, if you could go back in time to any period, you'd surely find examples of women who might have preferred not to be mothers, and did .... but the dominant theme throughout time has been driven by biological instinct. References to such, like the "ticking biological clock" most women are familiar with, is rooted in reality, not peer pressure. This is an instinctual thing coded into your DNA, and the urges to produce offspring is helped along by the pleasure of the mechanism of action which accomplishes the task. If it were not instinctual, and an unpleasant thing, people would have stopped doing it, and we would not be here now.

I don't know how old you are, but this shift has taken place within my lifetime, and for those of us old enough to remember how things used to be, compared with how things are today, that dramatic shift is UNDENIABlE.

As I mentioned before, it is predominant among most species to procreate and to defend their offspring at all costs, to include self sacrifice. This too has long been the instinct for humans. That is the natural instinct, while the promotion and even celebration of the right to terminate one's offspring before birth is TOTALLY a modern behavior, that must overcome that natural instinct, with behavior totally contrary to it.

This is the other side of the story that you may be unaware of, and therefore haven't considered. But it's true, and well documented, that a very long but deliberate process of conditioning has been ongoing since the late 1950's to the early 1960's, to supplant that natural instinct to reproduce, for the express purpose of population control and the social reengineering of society. All such complimentary attitudes of abortion on demand being the Hallmark of feminist sponsored freedom, to the focus on carer, to the peer pressure and lower status assigned to women who choose to be stay at home moms .... all of these things are modern developments.

Last edited by GuyNTexas; 04-13-2013 at 12:59 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2013, 02:54 PM
 
5,261 posts, read 4,142,303 times
Reputation: 2264
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
While you may be coming from a place of open mindedness, willing to consider both sides, which is commendable, what if there is more than two sides to the story?

You see, I could not disagree more with the insinuation that such childless desires were prevalent, succumbing only to peer pressures of the past which exist less today .... quite the opposite is truly the case. The pressures to not have children are what I see taking place, which is a modern manifestation, and totally contrary to the history of humanity for thousands of years running. Certainly, if you could go back in time to any period, you'd surely find examples of women who might have preferred not to be mothers, and did .... but the dominant theme throughout time has been driven by biological instinct. References to such, like the "ticking biological clock" most women are familiar with, is rooted in reality, not peer pressure. This is an instinctual thing coded into your DNA, and the urges to produce offspring is helped along by the pleasure of the mechanism of action which accomplishes the task. If it were not instinctual, and an unpleasant thing, people would have stopped doing it, and we would not be here now.

I don't know how old you are, but this shift has taken place within my lifetime, and for those of us old enough to remember how things used to be, compared with how things are today, that dramatic shift is UNDENIABlE.

As I mentioned before, it is predominant among most species to procreate and to defend their offspring at all costs, to include self sacrifice. This too has long been the instinct for humans. That is the natural instinct, while the promotion and even celebration of the right to terminate one's offspring before birth is TOTALLY a modern behavior, that must overcome that natural instinct, with behavior totally contrary to it.

This is the other side of the story that you may be unaware of, and therefore haven't considered. But it's true, and well documented, that a very long but deliberate process of conditioning has been ongoing since the late 1950's to the early 1960's, to supplant that natural instinct to reproduce, for the express purpose of population control and the social reengineering of society. All such complimentary attitudes of abortion on demand being the Hallmark of feminist sponsored freedom, to the focus on carer, to the peer pressure and lower status assigned to women who choose to be stay at home moms .... all of these things are modern developments.
Do you have any evidence of this instinct? I can understand someone asserting that there is an instinct to have sex. I have yet to see evidence that there is an "instinct" to reproduce among humans.

You assertion that termination of pregnancies prior to giving birth being a modern invention is nonsense and a simple Google search will render many sources disproving your assertion.

Would you care to tell me about the last individual you encountered who "celebrates" abortion. Now you're just throwing up silly strawmen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2013, 08:31 PM
 
14,893 posts, read 8,509,702 times
Reputation: 7322
Quote:
Originally Posted by cometclear View Post
Do you have any evidence of this instinct? I can understand someone asserting that there is an instinct to have sex. I have yet to see evidence that there is an "instinct" to reproduce among humans.
Yes, the evidence is that the instinct to have sex IS the instinct to reproduce!!! Sex wasn't inbuilt into biological life in order to satisfy the urges of frat boys after a few beers, since the rest of the animal kingdom doesn't attend college.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cometclear View Post
You assertion that termination of pregnancies prior to giving birth being a modern invention is nonsense and a simple Google search will render many sources disproving your assertion.
Why then did you not present one example from your googling?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cometclear View Post
Would you care to tell me about the last individual you encountered who "celebrates" abortion. Now you're just throwing up silly strawmen.
I'd like to tell you a lot of things ... but I know you wouldn't understand any of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2013, 08:35 PM
 
Location: Suffolk, Va
3,027 posts, read 2,508,944 times
Reputation: 1964
The worst thing this woman did was to identify herself and her children, though they are grown now. She cannot help the way she felt, but even most adults would be hurt to learn that they were not loved or wanted as a child. I think the fact that she didn't do this anonymously says more about her selfishness than what she actually said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2013, 09:23 PM
 
Location: Florida
33,507 posts, read 18,020,880 times
Reputation: 15498
As liberals support abortions there will be more conservative parents. That is why they have to indoctrinate the kids at school to make them think like a progressive. Abortion most likely aborts the kids of liberal thinkers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2013, 10:41 AM
 
3,448 posts, read 3,122,640 times
Reputation: 478
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1 View Post
You make absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Long before I was a mother ~ I was a fabulous aunt to my young nephew. I loved to take him places, to the pool, to the park . . . he loved going with me and I gave his mother a much-needed break. It gave me a chance to spend time caring for a young child; before I was ready to have a child of my own. At the time, I had no idea if I would have kids or not. We are still close today.

Your reasoning . . . . well, never mind.
Most remotely normal people read the entries in a thread, that way it reduce's the potential of being exposed for being dumb or not paying attention. Good luck with the new approach if this assistance can be applied.

Last edited by stargazzer; 04-14-2013 at 10:51 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2013, 01:50 PM
 
5,261 posts, read 4,142,303 times
Reputation: 2264
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
Yes, the evidence is that the instinct to have sex IS the instinct to reproduce!!! Sex wasn't inbuilt into biological life in order to satisfy the urges of frat boys after a few beers, since the rest of the animal kingdom doesn't attend college.
You have a number of assumptions here for which you have evidence to support them. For instance, you assume that sex was "inbuilt." That assumes that someone or something "built" it. Would you care to validate that? Second, you fail to separate the act of sex from reproduction. You have provided exactly zero evidence that there is any instinct to reproduce. Given the subject matter, there should be a wealth of evidence of such an instinct.

Quote:
Why then did you not present one example from your googling?
https://www.google.com/search?q=anci...hrome&ie=UTF-8

There are many interest groups that are disproportionately populated by dunces. In my several decades of life, not one sinks as low as the so-called "pro-life" movement. I have yet to meet someone who believes that rights should be conferred upon conception who is not an idiot.

Quote:
I'd like to tell you a lot of things ... but I know you wouldn't understand any of it.
Now, see, if I were one of the fragile creatures, I'd go crying to the teacher about this horribly, horribly hurtful personal attack. I'm wounded.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2013, 01:56 PM
 
Location: Lost in Texas
9,827 posts, read 6,911,284 times
Reputation: 3415
Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter View Post
This is why abortion needs to be legal up until the 20th trimester.
Why not move it up to age 40? Or even higher??
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

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