Teen charged with murder in baby's bathroom death

[Go DFL]

This is what happens when the republicans cut welfare and aid to these poor mothers. For all of you that say this is the mother's fault, you reap what you sow. I guess that is what we should expect from two faced Republicans, cut government and blame others. Seems to fit the MO of all Repubicans.

[Just Facts]

School is 44.4% latino and 19.6% black.

[Consistent]

Madman wrote:

<quoted text>
I will do that in my "spare time." It should be easy, in that I don't recall anyone blaming the male for the murder -- just the impregnation. He was not in the girls' room at the time.
Regarding the male responsibility for pregnancy, I get your point that it is totally unfair for the male to be held solely accountable for any child resulting from those reproductive behaviors. Since, unfair or not, that IS the case, wouldn't you say it would be prudent -- even conservative -- to ensure the resulting liability does not occur? We know that protestations fall upon deaf ears of black-robed mullahs!

I would say that it is the attitudes of too many in our society that have caused the culture to degrade to a level that killing a child through abortion is seen as a fundamental,(and/or legal) "Right" of a female.
(And that killing a child 9 months and 15 minutes to late, has become excusable because of this degradation of the culture.)
It is the fundamental right of a female to keep her baby and receive support from the male she chose to breed with.
It is a fundamental right of a female to receive support from the Taxpayer if she cannot identify the father.
It is a fundamental right of the female to be provided with housing is she decides against killing her baby through abortion.
It is a fundamental right of the female to have the full force of LAW go after the male for support if she is able to identify him.
It is a fundamental right of the female to be considered the "Best" person (by the government) to raise the baby if she decides against killing it through abortion.
It is a fundamental right to receive daycare subsidies if she keeps her baby.
It is a fundamental right of the female to be accommodated by the public schools to continue her education while the schools provide daycare for her baby.
It is a fundamental right for a female to maximize dollars from the taxpayers by having the "optimum" number of children.
It is a fundamental right to insert semen by any means available to inseminate herself....thus becoming eligible for many of the previously stated fundamental rights.

I am sure I have missed one or ten, of our cultural/legal fundamental rights given to females as we seek an "EQUAL" Society.

So.....

I did the "diggin", there were 51 posts in this thread that referenced the male (which was often used to minimize the murdering females responsibility and at a minium attempted to "share" responsibility with some Male, unknown to all of us posters).
The distortion of the point of the thread started with post # 12, and really took off with the postings of some of your fellow travelers.

Why does it matter?
Because the corruption of our culture and the perpetuation of the distortion is best illustrated by the attitudes of the posters.

Saying the male was responsible for her choice to kill is a canard set up to distract from the fact that it is the abortion culture that has grown out of the confused notions of "Equality", that has naturaly evolved into killing children at 9 months and 15 minutes.

Perhaps this girl is just defective as a human being. But given the attitudes displayed by the 51 posters, I believe the "Death" culture is a result of the distortion of thought, founded by the Leftist Feminist Politics, that allows America to accept the slaughter of 30 MILLION+ unborn babies, and to attempt to make excuses for or deflect from the murdering females killing.

[City woman]

Again, acknowledging that the boy was present at conception (duh, biological fact) does not in any way imply that he has any responsibility for her choice to murder her child. Similarly, implying that either/both should have used birth control or not had sex in the first place does not remove an ounce of responsibility from her.

You keep attempting to say that people are claiming he's responsible - I think if you look back at the posts, you'll see people are in agreement that he's only partly responsible for the pregnancy, not for what happened after that. There may have been 51 posts that mentioned the male in some way (some of them yours)- but I challenge you to show us where they said he was responsible in any way for the death (other than just talking about birth control or teen pregnancy in general). I remember only 2-3 that implied he should be held accountable for the death in any way.

I know you can cut/paste - please paste in those 51 posts that claim he's partly responsible for the DEATH, not for the conception. Mentioning him generally, or only as a partner in the conception, does not count as blaming him for the death, as much as your agenda wants you to think so.

[Dissident]

Go DFL wrote:

....For all of you that say this is the mother's fault, you reap what you sow.....

"You reap what you sow"

A child is twice as likely to be a juvenile delinquent if raised in a single-parent home where the father is absent; 75 percent of juvenile murderers were raised by single mothers; 70 percent of "violent rapists" come from female-headed homes ... The list goes on and on, but i guess you reap what you sow, right?...including some mothers.

[Consistent]

City woman wrote:

Again, acknowledging that the boy was present at conception (duh, biological fact) does not in any way imply that he has any responsibility for her choice to murder her child. Similarly, implying that either/both should have used birth control or not had sex in the first place does not remove an ounce of responsibility from her.
You keep attempting to say that people are claiming he's responsible - I think if you look back at the posts, you'll see people are in agreement that he's only partly responsible for the pregnancy, not for what happened after that. There may have been 51 posts that mentioned the male in some way (some of them yours)- but I challenge you to show us where they said he was responsible in any way for the death (other than just talking about birth control or teen pregnancy in general). I remember only 2-3 that implied he should be held accountable for the death in any way.
I know you can cut/paste - please paste in those 51 posts that claim he's partly responsible for the DEATH, not for the conception. Mentioning him generally, or only as a partner in the conception, does not count as blaming him for the death, as much as your agenda wants you to think so.

Typicaly you ignored the items I listed as "Fundemental" rights, and instead focused on the Leftist defense....."Ya well you!!"

There is not one item I listed as a Fundemental right that can be disputed.
There is not any doubt that we got here from the politics of the Leftist Democrats in general....and Feminist Politics specificaly.

Go ahead and "duck and cover".

PS....some of the posts that went the farthest in pointing at male responsibilty are from You and Ms Zen.
PSS...your words "partly responsible" do not mask who you are and what you feel.

[Anbreen]

Suburban Mom wrote:

<quoted text>
Consistent lost credibility months ago. He's a one-track woman-baiter, woman-hater who's decided he was wronged on the day he was circumcised (must have been a female doctor) and whose ex-wife must have cut off anything he had left.

Is his name Bobbitt?

[Anbreen]

Madman wrote:

<quoted text>
I will do that in my "spare time." It should be easy, in that I don't recall anyone blaming the male for the murder -- just the impregnation. He was not in the girls' room at the time.
Regarding the male responsibility for pregnancy, I get your point that it is totally unfair for the male to be held solely accountable for any child resulting from those reproductive behaviors. Since, unfair or not, that IS the case, wouldn't you say it would be prudent -- even conservative -- to ensure the resulting liability does not occur? We know that protestations fall upon deaf ears of black-robed mullahs!

My vote is responsibility for the murder-- the girl, 100%

For the pregnancy-- 50/50

[Sad]

It kills me to hear stories like this. How and way would people do this.

[ZenBirdist]

Consistent wrote:

<quoted text>
PS....some of the posts that went the farthest in pointing at male responsibilty are from You and Ms Zen.
PSS...your words "partly responsible" do not mask who you are and what you feel.

1. Can you please direct me to these posts which go the farthest in pointing at male responsibility?

2. Do tell, who am I and what do I really feel?

[Consistent]

Yes I can....and no I wont....

I am responding to Madman and his spin on the breakdown.
I dont have any desire to keep this going.
You can resolve in your own way,(with much obfuscation), the degradation of the thread you started at the beginning, with Posts #16 and #18.

[ZenBirdist]

Consistent wrote:

Yes I can....and no I wont....
I am responding to Madman and his spin on the breakdown.
I dont have any desire to keep this going.
You can resolve in your own way,(with much obfuscation), the degradation of the thread you started at the beginning, with Posts #16 and #18.

No, actually, I quoted you from a comment you wrote to City Woman, not to Madman, in which you mentioned me as one of the two with whom you most disagreed. Is that fair to say?

Regarding posts #16 and #18, not at all sure what part of either of those posts could make you so hoppin' mad. I wonder if it even matters what City or I write, you will throw your virtual arms in the air and decry our audacity at having opinions that differ from yours.

Your posts are becoming a trainwreck that I for one can't take my eyes off. You start out with a rational thought and then start chug-chuggin' down the track and go on auto-pilot while you mindlessly chant your mantras (leftists, progressives, and womyn - oh, my!). If you'd kindly pull your head out of your caboose, you'd see that all your chanting has led you straight into a brick wall.

I'd love to read a post from you that doesn't reduce what you're trying to convey to us, down to the same pitiful little words you use in nearly every post. That includes casting doubt on people's sincerity (i.e. "phonies!") and implying you know approximately everything there is to know about the discussion at hand.

Here ends my lecture!

[ZenBirdist]

Consistent wrote:

<quoted text>
One of the problems with responding to a response from a responder that responded, is that the original context of the original response, although generaly ignored by the Leftist the response was responded too, is that the subsequent responders have no context for responding to the original response.
The unresponsiveness of the original responder often results int he "morphing" of the original response based on the non-responsive original non-responder.
That is the case here. I am not claiming that all non-responders are all Progressive Leftist Democrat Victims Party adherents.....although it tends to be a condition of the "emotional midgets" on the Left to obfuscate and or ignore.
My response was to post #233, written by TRUISM.
Not only did she completely ignore the post (Un-comfortable truth).....but another Leftist morphed my context, and subsequent Leftists continued with, and furher distorted my point.
So your respone here is really not to my post, but to responses from my original response to anothers post.

Just wanted to point out the irony of you accusing everyone else of this:

Obfuscation, in general, describes a practice that is used to intentionally make something more difficult to understand.(whatis.com)

Obfuscate: To make so confused or opaque as to be difficult to perceive or understand (The Free Dictionary)

[Consistent]

ZenBirdist wrote:

<quoted text>
No, actually, I quoted you from a comment you wrote to City Woman, not to Madman, in which you mentioned me as one of the two with whom you most disagreed. Is that fair to say?
Regarding posts #16 and #18, not at all sure what part of either of those posts could make you so hoppin' mad. I wonder if it even matters what City or I write, you will throw your virtual arms in the air and decry our audacity at having opinions that differ from yours.
Your posts are becoming a trainwreck that I for one can't take my eyes off. You start out with a rational thought and then start chug-chuggin' down the track and go on auto-pilot while you mindlessly chant your mantras (leftists, progressives, and womyn - oh, my!). If you'd kindly pull your head out of your caboose, you'd see that all your chanting has led you straight into a brick wall.
I'd love to read a post from you that doesn't reduce what you're trying to convey to us, down to the same pitiful little words you use in nearly every post. That includes casting doubt on people's sincerity (i.e. "phonies!") and implying you know approximately everything there is to know about the discussion at hand.
Here ends my lecture!

I guess I have been told.......again!

[ZenBirdist]

Spiritual Eyes wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry Dissident, I forgot to answer your 1st question,.... about GOD's laws.
One answer stands out..." The 10 commandments! " Found in the Book of GENESIS chapter 20. OK?

Is this the same Spiritual Eyes who claims to be a "True Christian" (as opposed to the other kind), a Born-Again who lives by the word of Jesus? I ask because Genesis seems an odd reference for you, I would think something from the New Testament would be more appropriate.

[Single Parent Mother]

Former Stamford Resident wrote:

This story is just so unbelievable. What the hell is happening in this country. I am at a loss for words, and that is unbelievable in itself.God help us.

Was this another product of a single parent mother?? That is what is happening to our society, our country. Thank You judges, attorneys, Guardian ad Litems, social workers, and all of the rest of the parasites of Family Law.

[City woman]

Consistent wrote:

<quoted text>
Typicaly you ignored the items I listed as "Fundemental" rights, and instead focused on the Leftist defense....."Ya well you!!"
There is not one item I listed as a Fundemental right that can be disputed.
There is not any doubt that we got here from the politics of the Leftist Democrats in general....and Feminist Politics specificaly.
Go ahead and "duck and cover".
PS....some of the posts that went the farthest in pointing at male responsibilty are from You and Ms Zen.
PSS...your words "partly responsible" do not mask who you are and what you feel.

Actually, I'm still waiting for you to back up your accusations from the other night. Please, feel free to paste in the posts where I said anything about male responsibility for this death. I've said that both the boy and girl are responsible for the pregnancy - true - but I've never said anything to imply that he's in any way responsible for her decision to kill her child. In fact, I've said exactly the opposite, very clearly and repeatedly. The murder is all on her shoulders - the pregnancy took two, though. If you can provide evidence to back up your accusations against me, though, I'd love to see it. Until you can do that, you're just talking out of your a** again.

On your other points - those are your opinions, and you're entitled to them. But you're not entitled to your own facts. If you want to call those things "fundamental rights," go right ahead. Some of them have some truth to them, some have less so (i.e. welfare laws changed years ago so that there's no additional money for more kids), but you're entitled to draw whatever conclusions from them that you like.

[City woman]

ZenBirdist wrote:

<quoted text>
Just wanted to point out the irony of you accusing everyone else of this:
Obfuscation, in general, describes a practice that is used to intentionally make something more difficult to understand.(whatis.com)
Obfuscate: To make so confused or opaque as to be difficult to perceive or understand (The Free Dictionary)

Irony is lost on some people.

I read back and saw the infamous posts 16 and 18 that Consistent is using as evidence of your complicity in the vast feminist conspiracy to blame men for this crime. You had the audacity to ask "where's the father," and then to explain your reason for asking. At no point did you imply he had anything to do with the murder - presumably you were asking because you were surprised that nobody else knew she was pregnant (parents, boyfriend, friends, teachers, relatives, etc). How dare you? Acknowledging that a boy must have been involved when she got pregnant, even though he's not responsible for the murder?!? That's crazy feminist talk!

[Consistent]

Still working the defense mechanisms?

Cool....go nuts.
You and Zen can obsess together.

[City woman]

Consistent wrote:

Still working the defense mechanisms?
Cool....go nuts.
You and Zen can obsess together.

Nice dodge. Attack, accuse, evade and run. Then repeat. What little credibility you may have ever had is now gone.