adif understanding

Lancaster, OH

#102 Feb 12, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Ask Thomas Jefferson and the 56 signers of the Declaration about
Did you know that as governor of Virginia, Thomas Jefferson tried to get a law in place that would require anyone convicted of sodomy to be castrated?
1950s Family

Powell, OH

#103 Feb 13, 2013
A man and woman fall in love and get married. Then they have children. Is that considered old-fashioned? Because it describes almost everyone I know. The husband/dad goes to work and the wife/mom stays home to take care of their home and their children. That is not just from the 1950s. It is alive and well here in 2013.

Children are not an accessory. They are a lifelong comittment, not just to the child, but to the other parent. I place my relationship with my husband before my children, because if I lose that, it desrtoys the foundation of my family, one based on love, trust and affection. That's how my children learn what a loving relationship is...they witness it.

I don't necessarily think women in their late 30s -early 40s didn't get married by choice. There is a reason for it. Maybe they were too focused on their career, or maybe they had several failed relationships...who knows. I've never heard a woman say they their first choice for their life is to never get married and have a child with a stranger when they turn 40.

All that being said, if someone wants a child, who am I to say they can't or shouldn't. Go ahead. But having a child should be more than two people meeting on the internet and having a co-parenting agreement in place before they ever have an actual child. A co-parenting agreement is a last resort, not the starting point.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#104 Feb 13, 2013
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
They can't, at least not with each other, but they can adopt, or use a surrogate. And common sense would indicate that someone who was willing to go to "lengths" to have a child would not honor that child any less than someone who "oops" got pregnant.
Careful Tony. Do not attempt to inject logic into this analysis when Tippy claims to have spoken to God and Darwin.

woof
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#105 Feb 13, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
In the absence of an objective moral standard, the slippery slope argument wins the day. And I don't want to live that society.
Then here's the solution:

Either off yourself, move to your own utopia, or stop thinking like a puritan tyrant bent on imposing your own will and so called "morals" upon others.

woof
Antifa

Amelia, OH

#106 Feb 13, 2013
Government is inherently the imposition of morality. Anyone who says differently is a liar or an idiot.

The real choice is between local inposition or totalitarian central imposition of morality.

Progressives and neocons always prefer centralized totalitarian impostion of morality.

The US constitution does not support the progressive or neocon goal of central imposition of morality, but they do lie a lot in their journey to their version of a totalitarian paradise.

The ideology of the left and right in the US is the same: national democracy, Diversity, and crony capitalism. The left pushes it as a domestic policy; the right pushes it as a foreign policy.

Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#107 Feb 13, 2013
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, oh.
RS is using is alcohol points early this week.
according to the filth of society like you.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#108 Feb 13, 2013
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Successes, and failures, can be found in both scenarios, but a married couple is more likely to stay together than an unmarried one, thus lessening the chance of the child ending up with only one parent.
Interesting statement. Of course, it is completely non-responsive to the question it is in reply to.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#109 Feb 13, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage isn't even in the picture here. There is no personal commitment between the parties from the start. For pete's sake, these strangers are one hetero and one h0m0 who shopped online for a random DNA donor whose sole intent was to combine DNA with another random donor to create a token child, who is then forced to balance his/her life between both donors' very different worlds.
All because the hetero didn't have or want a committed partner to help create the child she wants NOW...and all because the h0m0, even if he had a committed partner, CANNOT create the child he wants EVER.
Good lord...their photos are in Webster's next to the definition of "dysfunctional."
One can only imagine the twisted, dark familial structure that created you.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#110 Feb 13, 2013
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
adoption and surrogacy have overcome that limitation.
<quoted text>
I think heteros who have the disease might argue with that characterization.
<quoted text>
Unless you're suggesting that EVERYONE will suddenly become one, I don't think it will affect it at all. Children cannot legally consent to sex.
<quoted text>
I'd bet that you'll not find a single person of any persuasion who would want to live in a society where views he considers wrong or that he thinks will harm him are shoved down our throats while the rights we think are good and normal are denied us. So what to do? No single way will be perfect for everyone, but "live and let live" will be more perfect for most people (of the "non-control freak" variety).
God himself didn't deem to control us (he COULD have designed us that way if he'd wanted)... he gave us free will after all... so where does this right to control each other come from?
1. Adoption and surrogacy have not and cannot overcome the biological limitation on procreation between two same-sex individuals. What are you drinking?

2. That heteros have contracted HIV/AIDS does not disprove the fact that it is a homosexual disease. The CDC asserts that over 64% of all new AIDS/HIV cases annually arise out of the hhmosexual community with homosexual men leading the pack representing about 61% of the total number. Note also that lesbian women are the leading group among women who use psychotropic drugs for mental stability. Now, reflect on the foregoing statistics in light of homosexuals’ status as 1-2% of the total population.

3. Children cannot legally consent to sex...for now. But, then again, what sane American would have imagined an activist movement to normalize pedophilia? Or worse...that the APA would declare there are "no negative sexual effects" stemming from it? Or even that our U.S.Congress would grant pedophiles protected status?

via The Greeley Gazette:

"In 1998 The APA issued a report claiming "that the ‘negative potential’ of adult sex with children was ‘overstated’ and that ‘the vast majority of both men and women reported no negative sexual effects from childhood sexual abuse experiences.”

Pedophilia has already been granted protected status by the Federal Government. The Matthew Shephard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act lists “sexual orientation” as a protected class; however, it does not define the term.

Republicans attempted to add an amendment specifying that “pedophilia is not covered as an orientation;” however, the amendment was defeated by Democrats. Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fl) stated that all alternative sexual lifestyles should be protected under the law.“This bill addresses our resolve to end violence based on prejudice and to guarantee that all Americans, regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability or all of these ‘philias’ and fetishes and ‘isms’ that were put forward need not live in fear because of who they are. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this rule.”"

4. Either way...government legislates morality. The only remaining question is WHICH morality will be legislated? And it seems obvious, particularly from the example in #3, that a "live and let live" morality will result in harm. And harm can only be defined when an objective moral standard exists. A society cannot exist wherein each individual claims to be his own god, determining and living by his own truth standard. That scenario is what we term "chaos."
WiseAmerican

Columbus, OH

#111 Feb 13, 2013
All I can think of is that cute sexy fit white woman, wanting to impregnate herself with a plastic penis (syringe) when she could get a good hour n half total body workout top, back, side, bottom, front, back, top, and back again from WA, with a guarantee of multiple orgasms and natural pregnancy. What has gone error with white women these days? Some of them have totally lost their minds. Shyyyt, all that good soft white ass gone to waist! What a damn shame.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#112 Feb 13, 2013
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."
Only when one person's rights intersects with another's is any law needed, and that law will determine which right is superior.
Secular humanists always miss the "endowed by their Creator" phrase.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#113 Feb 13, 2013
adif understanding wrote:
<quoted text>Did you know that as governor of Virginia, Thomas Jefferson tried to get a law in place that would require anyone convicted of sodomy to be castrated?
Yes...and, in fact, Jefferson was attempting to be merciful, as the then-existing penalty for sodomy was...execution. By the way, his merciful measure failed.

Morality matters.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#114 Feb 13, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
Careful Tony. Do not attempt to inject logic into this analysis when Tippy claims to have spoken to God and Darwin.
woof
Taking into account the proven links between homosexual behaviors and pedophilia -- one unnatural inclination generally leads to others -- logic, like biology, would declare parenthood off limits to practitioners of such behaviors.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#115 Feb 13, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
Then here's the solution:
Either off yourself, move to your own utopia, or stop thinking like a puritan tyrant bent on imposing your own will and so called "morals" upon others.
woof
As you agreed in an earlier post, all law is based on moral absolutes.
Otherwise, why would any human cringe at genocide, cannibalism, or rape?

Perhaps we shouldn't impose laws against such acts.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#116 Feb 13, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
One can only imagine the twisted, dark familial structure that created you.
Translation:

“Hi-Yo Silver! Away!”

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#117 Feb 13, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Every heterosexual marriage reflects the sexual complementarity of men and women, as designed by Nature. That procreation is not always possible is not the equivalent of homosexuals' outright rejection of Nature's laws, where procreation is never possible.
And, blah, blah, blah....with your hate screed.
Never once have I said that I hated homosexuals.
Their behavior is an aberration of Nature, and should not be encouraged, for their sake...and that of society.
Your whole existence is based on hate...it is not a screed, it is self-evident to anyone out here who has a working brain.

But I understand you have to fool yourself in order to be able to sleep at night.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#119 Feb 13, 2013
Kemosahbe wrote:
<quoted text>
Your whole existence is based on hate...it is not a screed, it is self-evident to anyone out here who has a working brain.
But I understand you have to fool yourself in order to be able to sleep at night.
Awww....go to the corner and self-soothe with your thumb, Sterling.
All eight of them.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#120 Feb 13, 2013
1950s Family wrote:
A man and woman fall in love and get married. Then they have children. Is that considered old-fashioned? Because it describes almost everyone I know. The husband/dad goes to work and the wife/mom stays home to take care of their home and their children. That is not just from the 1950s. It is alive and well here in 2013.
It is "alive and well" for some and not for others. Far more common these days for men and women to both be employed outside of their home.

But the notion of two people meeting, falling in love, getting married and raising children together, looking across history, is at best a modern invention, and perhaps a brief anomaly.

Marriages have far more often been arranged (love not being a consideration) for political and other reasons. Marriages have consolidated empires. They have saved the estates of the landed gentry. They have prevented wars. Marriages have provided a cover of propriety for unchaperoned adults of the opposite sex living together. They have given a name to bastards. They have provided farmhands. They have taken widows off their family's economic hands.

Childbearing as well as always included just a bit more creativity than publicly discussed. The wife of a man unable to produce an heir might seek help outside the marriage bed. Up until very recently couples who sought more formal assistance were provided with an insemination but then told to go home and make love so that they might never actually know which little swimmer was the lucky one. The law until very recently recognized any child born with marriage as being the child of the husband and any information linking back to sperm donors held secret or destroyed.

So--if two contemporaries have managed to share a desire for children across the internet, and find sufficient commonality between them to contemplate raising a child together, I say tuck it in among a good many such devices that have been employed across the whole of history.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#121 Feb 13, 2013
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
according to the filth of society like you.
Headache this morning?

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#122 Feb 13, 2013
WiseAmerican wrote:
All I can think of is that cute sexy fit white woman, wanting to impregnate herself with a plastic penis (syringe) when she could get a good hour n half total body workout top, back, side, bottom, front, back, top, and back again from WA, with a guarantee of multiple orgasms and natural pregnancy. What has gone error with white women these days? Some of them have totally lost their minds. Shyyyt, all that good soft white ass gone to waist! What a damn shame.
Well, where on earth were you hiding before I adopted my kids?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Is Barack Obama Doing a Good Job as President? (Aug '13) 30 min White cop 4,937
4 cheetah cubs from 2 moms share first playtime... 36 min race relations 5
Central Ohio filmgoers lining up to see - The I... 41 min race relations 3
African American Male Initiative seeks to help ... 2 hr Big Johnson 9
Everyone have a good Christmas? 3 hr They cannot kill ... 11
Spears from South Side 3 hr Bubba 4
COPS lives MATTER 4 hr Pope Che Reagan C... 199
Columbus Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Columbus People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Columbus News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Columbus

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 10:47 am PST

NBC Sports10:47AM
Browns name Connor Shaw their Week 17 starter
ESPN11:57 AM
Bengals TE Eifert will not return this season
NFL12:07 PM
Browns' Gilbert on ugly rookie season: 'I messed up'
ESPN12:37 PM
Shaw gets start for Browns; Hoyer ruled out
ESPN 1:15 PM
Browns' Gilbert: 'I brought it upon myself'