A federal judge in California has knocked down the state's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, ruling Wednesday that the state's controversial Proposition 8 violates the U.S. Constitution.Full Story
“What Goes Around, Comes Around”
Since: Mar 07
Kansas City, MO.
#130675 Feb 28, 2012
Polygamy, plural marriage.....whatever you want to call it.....GO FOR IT! It's YOUR baby! It will NEVER EVER be the same as SSM! NOBODY gives a rats azz!!!!!! If 3 gay men want to marry take them with you on your quest! Report back when you are DONE!
BACK TO TOPIC
#130677 Feb 28, 2012
No, I said that YOU as a WHITE MALE must have been an idiot since you could not figure out how to get out of going the Vietnam.
At the height of the war (1965-69) black men, who formed 11 percent of the American population, made up 12.6 percent of the soldiers in Vietnam.
The MAJORITY of these were in the infantry and the percentage of black combat fatalities in that period was (a staggering) 14.9 percent.
I could make a pretty good case for most current combat soldiers coming from poverty, being under educated and having few options besides joining the military.
#130678 Feb 28, 2012
Yes, you always assume bad dads and good moms. You hate men.
So its a woman's choice to have the baby on her own and have the PUBLIC fund it? That's your position? Have you ever been anywhere where PUBLIC assistance is considered a payday? If not you should get out more. My little sister (from big brothers big sisters) and all of her family sisters had more kids for more public assistance money. They used to cheer pregnancies for that reason. No Joke!
Same as you put the onus on the FATHER to find out if she is pro life, so should SHE find out the father's intentions if pregnant. IF HE IS PRO-LIFE.
Every bit of it you try to put on men is applicable to the woman.
Her choice was to " establishing a long term, mutually committed relationship BEFORE you have sex in the first place."
You write like all men are predators and all women are saints.
"women that use men as unwitting sperm donors with the resources to do so generally do take full responsibility."
So its okay for them to use the man and throw him away..hey its a woman's CHOICE right?
Why do men not have this same option?
Why can they not have the baby and toss ole mom once she pops and foot the entire bill?
The baby is in the mom's body, but she consenting to carrying it by consenting to intercourse (the act of reproducing)!
All I am saying is if we are to have equal rights, the rights need to be EQUAL. You obviously disagree and think we should have an equal right for a woman to have the choice and the man to have the bill.
Put another way, If daddy opts for abortion and mommy ignores, daddy should be off the hook and vice versa. Either way it has to be one rule that applies to both sexes EQUALLY.
A "woman's right to choose" is chauvinism. Either the parents are in it together or they are not.
#130679 Feb 28, 2012
Newer models offer tear-gas.
#130681 Feb 28, 2012
oh boy...how do you not see that you do to polygamist exactly what they do to gays.
to them Polygamy is a calling from god...
yes they do. You cite all the same reason against polygamy that you call hate when cited against gays. Polygamy as a marriage right itself is instructive in a conversation about marriage rights as well as a strong indicator of hypocrisy.
So you assume polygamy is a choice like so many gay rights opposers who say gay is a choice...that had to feel funny for you to write knowing I would throw it back at you.
You know gay is a calling from birth, but THEY say its a choice. How did you feel saying polygamy is a choice? Like a bigot?
I don't think you hate anyone as I don't hate anyone. I am only showing that gays calling opposition hate is the same as me calling you a hater of polygamy by analogy as I understand you are not really a hater. There is no logical connection on either count. Thats my point!
#130682 Feb 28, 2012
Technically...I am not so sure polygamy should be illegal.
I think it's a crazy idea myself, as one woman is plenty trouble enough if you pick them like I do, but illegal?
#130683 Feb 28, 2012
"Domestic partnership, gay marriage....whatever you want to call it.....GO FOR IT! It's YOUR baby! It will NEVER EVER be the same as straight marriage! NOBODY gives a rats azz!!!!!!"
See how that works?
#130686 Feb 28, 2012
SpamOlater also removes RUST.
#130687 Feb 28, 2012
I often make comments about crappy mothers. So do you have a reading comprehension problem? Or do you just not bother to read the reply's to your increasingly long winded rants?
It's not my position it's the law. My position, since you asked is that a woman who decides to keep a child she can not support physically or emotionally is nine times out of ten incompetent to parent. However that does not mean that we as society should turn our backs on the child. However I also think that subsequent pregnancies (except in cases of rape or incest) should NOT be subsidized by additional benefits.
And actually, this makes a pretty good case against polygamy since the (well documented) social costs of polygamy are quite high. Domestic battering, forced marriages and sexual abuse of minor girls, welfare fraud and tax fraud and lack of educational opportunities are rampant in polygamist communities.
One of my biggest issues with polygamist having children. Widespread reliance on welfare and the unusually high levels of CHILD POVERTY.
The TV series "Big Love" aside, according to the 1997 U.S. Census there are areas in Utah EVERY school-age child is living below the poverty level, The legal wife is declares on a mans taxes but the other wives as "single mothers" ofter get benefits including cash assistance, food stamps and free medical care for them selves and multiple children. Medicaid pays for more than 1/3 of the babies born in Utah.
Oh dear, it looks like I just built a pretty strong case, at least where CHILDREN are concerned for there being a "compelling government interest" to justify existing laws against polygamy.
But Frank, you can still have all the husbands and wives you want as long as you agree not to breed.
#130688 Feb 28, 2012
One of my biggest issues with polygamist having children. is the widespread reliance on welfare and the unusually high levels of CHILD POVERTY.
The TV series "Big Love" aside, according to the 1997 U.S. Census there are areas in Utah EVERY school-age child is living below the poverty level, Assuming he even work, the legal wife is declared on a man's taxes but the other wives as "single mothers" often get benefits including cash assistance, food stamps and free medical care for them selves and multiple children. Medicaid pays for more than 1/3 of the babies born in Utah.
We have a larger that average family and we support our children without any assistance. IMO if a man want eight wives and 32 kids, he needs to be able to support eight wives and 32 kids.
No one has a right to expect taxpayers to pay the cost of their religious convictions.
#130690 Feb 28, 2012
I don't need to try again because I don't give a crap how many husbands and wives you have in you dreams.
I have already made a pretty good case against you idiotic off topic argument.
And you have become tiresome and repetitive.
#130691 Feb 28, 2012
Except the case I was making, that high rates of social service fraud, resource abuse and child poverty is very well documented among polygamist in Utah.
The same case CAN NOT be made for same sex marriage so your "argument" is untenable.
Care to try again?
“What Goes Around, Comes Around”
Since: Mar 07
Kansas City, MO.
#130692 Feb 28, 2012
Jokes on you ....we have it!ROTFL
#130693 Feb 28, 2012
Your kidding right? I was just acknowledging your right to marry as many men and women as will have you, which at last count was ZERO.
PS: You could not write posts as articulate has "Reality" has of your life depended on it.
#130694 Feb 28, 2012
So YOU have been posting here pretty much non-stop for the past few day because You don't give a rat's azz? OK then...
#130696 Feb 28, 2012
Then they should be responsible enough to not bring children into a world of POVERTY by making sure they can SUPPORT the children they make the same way I support the child I made.
#130698 Feb 28, 2012
Um...Do try to keep up with your own comments!
#130702 Feb 28, 2012
Oopsey daisy! LOL,It seems ratzo rizzo's posts go POOF! Praise and hallelujah! It seems even the Moderators agree that all his posts are off topic B.S.? Yuk,yuk,yuk,yuk,yuk!!! Now,any bets as to when the stay on prop 8 in California is lifted? It's only a matter of time!
#130703 Feb 28, 2012
Let me preface the following by stating that I am a medical professional. I have positioned myself, occasionally, to testify as an expert witness. I have first hand knowledge of how both the legal and medical professions work.
As a practitioner I am often called upon to make decisions in seconds that may have an impact on the rest of a patient's life.
In the legal system the rate of progress is exceeded by leaps and bounds by the speed of smell. I have performed examinations on patients that have had court dates scheduled a few months later. Thanks to the efforts of the latest judge I've been appearing before these cases get streamlined in that by the time I appear all parties have to have their ducks in a row, so to speak. In the past it wasn't unusual for me to make three separate appearances over a period of months on the same case because someone hadn't arranged for a public defender or a lawyer asked for a case to be continued or a defendant begged a jury trial.
Gestation takes 9 months. Finding out one is pregnant may take a little time. One would think a month sans menses would make a woman curious enough to investigate. But that doesn't always ring true.
So a woman gets pregnant and decides she wants to abort. Her boyfriend disagrees and it gets to the point that lawyers are called in. One would hope it didn't come to this, but as we're at an impasse who ya gonna call? Ghost busters? Nope, an attorney.
A day in court is scheduled. All the boyfriend's lawyer needs to do to "win" is to stall until it is too late. Right off the bat it isn't hard to predict that the lawyers won't be contacted until the second month is up, at least. Now we need a hearing. The dockets are full so we'll watch another month pass.
I don't think this is out of the realm of possibility in our litigious society.
There is a built in problem when the legal system becomes intertwined with the practice of medicine while a medical case is in progress.
So, how are you going to make the decision? Who gets final say in a 50/50 dispute. Should a woman be forced, against her will, to bear nine months of pregnancy, parturition, and post partum medical issues?
#130704 Feb 28, 2012
That isn't necessarily a fair assessment about exactly who is ignoring the father role.
Add your comments below
|A Rare Glimpse Inside The Life And Mind Of Orac...||23 hr||Kid_Tomorrow||1|
|Great deal on Disney on Ice Let's Celebrate in ...||Tue||multisportmom||1|
|Border Agents Make Zero-Tolerance Zone (Aug '06)||Tue||roberto||59|
|Palo Alto Shoppers Concerned About Sidewalk Glass||Jan 22||Markjewbook||2|
|Review: Windoor Service||Jan 21||jstrong196||1|
|East Palo Alto takes step toward preserving its...||Jan 7||Thomas C Sanders||1|
|Which cheap and legit site to buy fifa 15 coins?||Dec '14||alex||3|
Find what you want!
Search Redwood City Forum Now
Redwood City News Video
Copyright © 2015 Topix LLC