Comments
101 - 120 of 125 Comments Last updated Feb 12, 2013

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#101
Feb 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

RACE wrote:
(Waves from the sidelines)
I'm good over here dude, you have your fun!
<quoted text>
I try not to pass judgement on anyone until I walk a mile in their shoes, so regardless of whether I view abortion as good or bad is irrelevant, what is important is the "Why" for getting one.
And of course there is my standard gripe about the double standard of women bearing or not of children in general.
If a woman chooses an abortion its "Her body", but if she carries it to term its suddenly "A mans child". I will never agree with that thinking.
I'm with you on that. I think guys should be able to "opt out" and have their parental rights terminated. ALL of them, and that would include their family not having any rights to see or be involved in the child's life as well.
Sam I Am

Huntingdon, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#102
Feb 12, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

1

pde wrote:
<quoted text>
"I might have scored a few times with passed out drunk girls, but I never got an std or one of them pregnant."
http://www.topix.com/forum/chicago/T47S43ST51...
Wow, Mutt, that's quite the moral compass you have there. Nailing a "passed out drunk girl." I mean, I am not surprised, any girl worth having with any sense of pride would have a hard time being in the same room with you, let alone touch you, but seeing as you are suuuuuch a moral guy....

And do you disclose this immorality to girls when you...wait, what am thinking? You never have to worry about disclosure because you never have anyone to disclose anything to.
pde

Schaumburg, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#103
Feb 12, 2013
 
NWmoon wrote:
<quoted text>That can happen and did when women had to get "back alley" abortions. Legal early ones do not have that problem.
From Guttmacher Institute:
Thanks for finding this NWMoon. I knew that there is much scientific evidence out there that details how the risks of pregnancy/delivery are far higher than the risks of abortion, but my brain was refusing to divulge where go to find it today.

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#104
Feb 12, 2013
 
Mimi Seattle wrote:
<quoted text>
It *could* depending on a whole bunch of things. My sister's friend from high school was rendered sterile, but then again she has like 5 abortions. No one yell at me.*I* didn't do it, just someone I knew a really long time ago.
I had fertility problems. They resulted in my ectopic pregnancy. Not from abortion (the only one I had was the therapeutic one to remove the ectopic wad that was killing me)or from any STDs (never had one).
My problems were the result of using an early IUD as contraception. It was one of the first of them in use and then taken off the market entirely because it was causing problems for so many women, not just fertility issues, but also other things.
pde

Schaumburg, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#105
Feb 12, 2013
 

Judged:

2

Sam I Am wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, Mutt, that's quite the moral compass you have there. Nailing a "passed out drunk girl." I mean, I am not surprised, any girl worth having with any sense of pride would have a hard time being in the same room with you, let alone touch you, but seeing as you are suuuuuch a moral guy....
And do you disclose this immorality to girls when you...wait, what am thinking? You never have to worry about disclosure because you never have anyone to disclose anything to.
And I thought this at the time of the conversation, and I think it again today: how does he know that none of the drunk/passed out girls didn't get pregnant?

If they were drunk/passed out, fell pregnant, and had an abortion, that's news that definitely wouldn't be all over the school. And since they were drunk/passed out, they wouldn't know who the baby daddy was to tell him about the abortion anyhow.

“I Am Mine”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#106
Feb 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
WRONG. They absolutely do.
Hows about this. When you get to that point in your relationship, bust out the notepad and write down everything you feel you have a RIGHT to know. And ask. She may be more than willing to give you answers. At the very least, there will be no question as to what you consider deal breakers that have not ever been discussed. One of 2 things will happen.

1) She will tell you she does not want to share that information with you, and you can decide if it is a dealbreaker for you that she does not want to share that

2) She will lie to you and give you the answer you want to here. At least with that, if the truth comes out in the future, you know it was a blatant lie and not simply something you never discussed and she never shared.

You simply cannot just expect that everything in YOU consider "must share" is also on her "must share" list. You think ther is a one size fits all list. There ain't one.

“I Am Mine”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#107
Feb 12, 2013
 
NWmoon wrote:
and that would include their family not having any rights to see or be involved in the child's life as well.
Who are you talking about? Grandparents? They already don't have any RIGHTS. Any interaction between grandparent and grand child, even when the relationship is good, is at the discretion of the parents.
pde

Schaumburg, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#108
Feb 12, 2013
 
Mister Tonka wrote:
<quoted text> Who are you talking about? Grandparents? They already don't have any RIGHTS. Any interaction between grandparent and grand child, even when the relationship is good, is at the discretion of the parents.
Some states keep trying to pass legislation to give grandparents rights, particularly in the case where the relationship between the two parents is broken. I believe the most recent Supreme Court ruling on it says something along the lines of two parents in an intact relationship are assumed to be acting in the child's best interest, thus grandparents can't use the courts to force themselves into the grandchild's life. But, that doesn't address the case of two parents in a broken relationship or no relationship.
Sam I Am

Huntingdon, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#109
Feb 12, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

pde wrote:
<quoted text>
And I thought this at the time of the conversation, and I think it again today: how does he know that none of the drunk/passed out girls didn't get pregnant?
If they were drunk/passed out, fell pregnant, and had an abortion, that's news that definitely wouldn't be all over the school. And since they were drunk/passed out, they wouldn't know who the baby daddy was to tell him about the abortion anyhow.
If there's a God, no woman would be forced to raise a child spawned by Mutt. That should be the third exemption to any propsed ban on abortion that even Republicans should agree to:...except in cases of rape, incest or impregnation by Mutt.

Can you imagine finding out you had his progeny in your belly? It'd be like watching someone suffer the entire gammut of ebola symptoms in about 5 minutes.

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#110
Feb 12, 2013
 
Mister Tonka wrote:
<quoted text> Who are you talking about? Grandparents? They already don't have any RIGHTS. Any interaction between grandparent and grand child, even when the relationship is good, is at the discretion of the parents.
Wrong. In several places they DO have rights and can sue for visitation. It has usually been because of divorce or the parents never having been married in the first place, but it IS a reality is some states.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Braidwood, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#111
Feb 12, 2013
 
Mimi Seattle wrote:
<quoted text>
No, no they don't. Otherwise there would be a law.
There are several. For example, you can be held criminally and civilly liable if you neglect to inform your partner you have an STD, especially if it's an incurable and potentially fatal one.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#112
Feb 12, 2013
 
It's very difficult for grandparents to successfully sue for visitation, and generally there must be extenuating circumstances, including things like, they were actively involved int heir grandchildren's lives, then after the death of the grandkids' parent, the surviving spouse has tried to cut the grandparents out.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Braidwood, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#113
Feb 12, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

pde wrote:
<quoted text>
"I might have scored a few times with passed out drunk girls, but I never got an std or one of them pregnant."
http://www.topix.com/forum/chicago/T47S43ST51...
Oh good lord. That's what we call a "joke."

Joke: Something said or done to evoke laughter or amusement, especially an amusing story with a punch line.

Maybe in another year, you people will think my "joke" about r@pping a midget and molesting a kitten was true, too.

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114
Feb 12, 2013
 

“I Am Mine”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#115
Feb 12, 2013
 
NWmoon wrote:
<quoted text>Wrong. In several places they DO have rights and can sue for visitation. It has usually been because of divorce or the parents never having been married in the first place, but it IS a reality is some states.
Not in MY state(thanks for the link). If i want, i can tell all the g-parents to suck it!

“The two baby belly, please!”

Since: Sep 09

Evanston IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116
Feb 12, 2013
 
Holy sh!t am I glad I wasn't around today.

“What's it to ya?”

Since: Mar 09

Tacoma, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#117
Feb 12, 2013
 
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
There are several. For example, you can be held criminally and civilly liable if you neglect to inform your partner you have an STD, especially if it's an incurable and potentially fatal one.
Source?

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Braidwood, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118
Feb 12, 2013
 
Mimi Seattle wrote:
<quoted text>
Source?
http://www.advicenators.com/qview.php...

"There ARE laws in Ohio regarding HIV:

"Amendment to felonious assault statute criminalizing failure to disclose known HIV-positive status to a sexual partner was not unconstitutionally vague for failure to define "disclosure," where such term was not confusing or unfamiliar outside a courtroom; person of common intelligence, giving term its ordinary meaning, would know that requirement of "disclosure" required person with knowledge of his or her HIV-positive status to tell any sexual partner of that status before engaging in sexual conduct with that partner. Ohio Revised Code 2903.11(B)(1). State v. Gonzalez, 154 Ohio App. 3d 9, 2003 -Ohio-4421, 796 N.E.2d 12 (1st Dist. Hamilton County 2003), appeal not allowed, 2003 -Ohio- 6458 (Ohio 2003)"

" 2903.11. Felonious assault.
(A) No person shall knowingly do either of the following:
(1) Cause serious physical harm to another or to another's unborn;
(2) Cause or attempt to cause physical harm to another or to another's unborn by means of a deadly weapon or dangerous ordnance.

(B) No person, with knowledge that the person has tested positive as a carrier of a virus that causes acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, shall knowingly do any of the following:

(1) Engage in sexual conduct with another person without disclosing that knowledge to the other person prior to engaging in the sexual conduct;

(2) Engage in sexual conduct with a person whom the offender knows or has reasonable cause to believe lacks the mental capacity to appreciate the significance of the knowledge that the offender has tested positive as a carrier of a virus that causes acquired immunodeficiency syndrome;

(3) Engage in sexual conduct with a person under eighteen years of age who is not the spouse of the offender.

(C) The prosecution of a person under this section does not preclude prosecution of that person under section 2907.02 of the Revised Code.

(D) Whoever violates this section is guilty of felonious assault, a felony of the second degree. If the victim of a violation of division (A) of this section is a peace officer, felonious assault is a felony of the first degree. If the victim of the offense is a peace officer, as defined in section 2935.01 of the Revised Code, and if the victim suffered serious physical harm as a result of the commission of the offense, felonious assault is a felony of the first degree, and the court, pursuant to division (F) of section 2929.13 of the Revised Code, shall impose as a mandatory prison term one of the prison terms prescribed for a felony of the first degree.

(E) As used in this section:

(1) "Deadly weapon" and "dangerous ordnance" have the same meanings as in section 2923.11 of the Revised Code.
(2) "Peace officer" has the same meaning as in section 2935.01 of the Revised Code.
(3) "Sexual conduct" has the same meaning as in section 2907.01 of the Revised Code, except that, as used in this section, it does not include the insertion of an instrument, apparatus, or other object that is not a part of the body into the vaginal or anal cavity of another, unless the offender knew at the time of the insertion that the instrument, apparatus, or other object carried the offender's bodily fluid"

"There may be laws in other states or about other STDs but I have not done the research to know. I hope things work out for you and you are able to inform your previous partner that you have contracted an STD and he is at risk as well."

“What's it to ya?”

Since: Mar 09

Tacoma, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#119
Feb 12, 2013
 
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.advicenators.com/qview.php...
"There ARE laws in Ohio regarding HIV:
"Amendment to felonious assault statute criminalizing failure to disclose known HIV-positive status to a sexual partner was not unconstitutionally vague for failure to define "disclosure," where such term was not confusing or unfamiliar outside a courtroom; person of common intelligence, giving term its ordinary meaning, would know that requirement of "disclosure" required person with knowledge of his or her HIV-positive status to tell any sexual partner of that status before engaging in sexual conduct with that partner. Ohio Revised Code 2903.11(B)(1). State v. Gonzalez, 154 Ohio App. 3d 9, 2003 -Ohio-4421, 796 N.E.2d 12 (1st Dist. Hamilton County 2003), appeal not allowed, 2003 -Ohio- 6458 (Ohio 2003)"
" 2903.11. Felonious assault.
(A) No person shall knowingly do either of the following:
(1) Cause serious physical harm to another or to another's unborn;
(2) Cause or attempt to cause physical harm to another or to another's unborn by means of a deadly weapon or dangerous ordnance.
(B) No person, with knowledge that the person has tested positive as a carrier of a virus that causes acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, shall knowingly do any of the following:
(1) Engage in sexual conduct with another person without disclosing that knowledge to the other person prior to engaging in the sexual conduct;
(2) Engage in sexual conduct with a person whom the offender knows or has reasonable cause to believe lacks the mental capacity to appreciate the significance of the knowledge that the offender has tested positive as a carrier of a virus that causes acquired immunodeficiency syndrome;
<snip>

Wow. Will you look at that? I do believe that this is the first time you have been asked to back your sh*t and actually done it.

Good job!

Of course, laws in Ohio don't apply to me unless I'm in Ohio, but at least you provided a source to back you up which is more than I can say I've ever seen you do.

FWIW I agree that if someone is HIV positive, they *should* tell partners, even be required by law to do so because it is potentially a deadly disease they would be passing on, this does not however negate the argument that anything that does not affect a current/future relationship is something one MUST talk about, especially if it is something that happened before the parties even knew each other.

Had an abortion and can never have kids and wanna get married? That's a potential deal breaker and should be discussed. Had an abortion and it has no effect on one's ability to procreate? NUNYA.
Julie

Skokie, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#120
Feb 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

LW1: You feel "Disgusted and betrayed"? Gee--NO WONDER she didn't tell you. It wasn't your baby; it's *not* about you. Schmuck.

LW2: Your husband is a dope. But if this complaint is the worst you have about him, it's not so bad in the general scheme of things.

LW3: Gag.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

80 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 min PDUPONT 1,083,870
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 9 min Eric 68,442
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 18 min TRD 68,061
Review: STS Electric 19 min Paul F 2
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 24 min Terry rigsby 49,015
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 25 min loose cannon 175,148
IL Illinois Governor Recall Amendment (Oct '10) 30 min Rahm Jizzbucket Emanuel 1,870
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 2 hr edogxxx 97,578
•••
•••
Chicago Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••