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 are responsible for your offspring
I am not responsible for your offspring.
Surely you love Trump. Why doesn't he advocate abolishing all government welfare? Let individuals and the private groups worry about the poor. That way, if you think poor people are not worthy of help, don't give them a dime of your money or a can of food. Giving them anthing may make more of what little money they have available for the liquor store, street drugs and the casino.
So a law should be passed that all poor mothers must give their children up for adoption to parents that can afford to take care of them?
Women should fear being with the wrong man. In the case where I agree with feminists is that men should also fear. If you father children, you pay.
Who is passing the laws here? One that I agree with is fathers having to pay support. However if the father has no money or is a criminal then what? We pick it up? How long will this go on? Bad things have to happen or it will continue to happen. Eventually we will end up with an Idiocracy and nature's law will take effect. No consequences means it will never enter the selection process. Smart people will never out breed stupid ones. Seem like leftist and Christians agree that there are many mansions . Too bad they are either figments of ones imagination or they are heavenly ones.
Hmm yeah which is way sex involves using reproductive organs. You are not merely your conscious mind or what you intend.
The basic problem is feminism and their idiotic idea of unleashing their sexual freedom. Like someone bidding on a house, they figure only they will apply for a cheap loan and not another person bidding against them. The affects are easy to predict. Aging feminists having to compete with young women is causing back lash. They do not dare directly go after the sisterhood, but they are clearly looking towards the burka , female modesty as a "body image" issue as well as attempting to attack male sexuality for responding to female assets. However young women have to compete with each other for male attention as well, at least for the ones they want.
What makes it even worse is sex is an equilibrium of indirect communication were even a simple manner of dress is meant to advertise availability or not. In one culture it could be showing ankles. In another it could be showing cleavage. In multicultural societies, its chaos. A Muslim man looking at a Western women more or less grew up thinking she is adverting sex. If woman wears a burka she can forgot about Western men because that will be interpreted as off the market. Even conservative dress might cause lack of attention . Women have no way to know how or what to signal.
How hilarious, feminists created a female open market , with not only no rules, but no cultural norms in multiculturalism. The lumpenproletariat among them is unhappy both in premature obsolescence when they are old and in having to offer sex to out compete another woman when they are young. What did ya think would happen feminist morons?
so much wrong with this post there is no reply to the mixed up thinking.
feminists are as individual as each and every woman. so is the way we deal with our own reproduction. don't want an abortion great, feminist support you. it's called choice.
mind your own uterus or sperm and I will take care of my own.
Apparently they can't help themselves like dogs dry humping the air around another one in heat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tipsywicket
When the purpose of intercourse, at its MOST BASIC level is to procreate, then yes, every time you engage in sexual intercourse, regardless of YOUR intention, you are inherently agreeing to pregnancy, regardless of your attempts to thwart the natura
l purpose of the act itself.
Sorry, but to think otherwise is to be a science denier. When you play Russian roulette, you can't whine when you end up with a bullet through your head.
Eating at its most basic level is to sustain life, yet we as humans indulge in such culinary delicacies often in over abundance. Why do we all not consume enough of just the raw, healthy types of food needed to sustain our bodies at optimal levels?
Humans like some other mammals such as primates, some of the large cats, and even bears, find great pleasure in sexual intercourse. This is evident in our desire to engage in sexual activity that would be impossible for procreation like oral sex and indulging with the same sex partner.
So yes basically we cant help ourselves as we are driven by biological and psychological forces.
We, mankind, have discovered and perfected ways to thwart pregnancy so we do not have to agree to pregnancy as a result of sexual intercourse. Great isnt it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer
I know of someone (coworker) that uses the morning after pill like BC.
So she just takes the morning after pill every month or every time she has sex. One would think it would be cheaper to use an alternative form as that pill can cost between 25 and 65 bucks a pop plus the potential side effects. Sounds like your co-worker could use a bit of counseling from PP.
Please explain the logic. You have a group of individuals that want abortion to be illegal. They want planned parenthood (birth control to low income) to stop being funded, and the same group, are the first to tell a single mom that should not have had kids, she could not afford.
Life does not work that way. You can't take away someone's ability to prevent an issue, but then blame them when they have an issue.
Seriously, someone please explain the thought process because it really makes no sense.
They don't care about the unborn, they only care about women not having sex.
That's all.
They also deny the fact that sex is a natural thing for humans to have the urge to do and removing access to abortion and birth control will only lead to increases of those parents and children being served by social welfare programs.
This is why government shouldn't be involved in reproductive medicine. It is none of anyone else's business who someone else has sex with.
And, don't forget, not only do they want birth control gone, abortion and contraception gone... they also want to make sure that young people are not taught about reproduction. It will be all well and good - until they or their child needs one of those things.
But when they are born, they want no part in feeding, or educating
the life they thought was so precious. They want no part in seeing that the child has
health care or adequate housing.
In other words they say they care about life, but they don't.
^If they did they would also care about the poor babies and children and their families that are refugees in need
of sanctuary.
They would care about the people who might die if they have their health care taken away from them.
They would care about the children being poisoned still today,by the drinking water in Flint.
It's not the federal government's or the taxpayer's responsibility to make sure the child has housing and healthcare. It should be the parent's responsibility to provide for their children.
If they don't want children, don't have sex.
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.
