marriage and government

Quote from tikipoki:

Ok let me ask you this, why would >you< not allow your daughter to be a prostitute?

Tiki
More...

Hey, someone else who never sleeps!

All I can say is: have any of you guys ever worked with kids?

Ask one of your friends who is a teacher if they would rather teach a class with 32 kids from a stable, traditional home life or if they'd rather teach a group of kids from the opposite? Unless they're masochistic, you know the answer!

Of course, not every kid that comes from an unstable home life turns out bad - I'm not saying that. But I am saying that you're making your odds much more difficult - that's what the stats show.

My response: you want prosititution in your neighborhood and family - fine. Go to Nevada. And guess what? Most everyone (in the US) agrees with me - why isn't there prostitution in every state over here?
 
Quote from tikipoki:

Ok let me ask you this, why would >you< not allow your daughter to be a prostitute?

Tiki
More...

R you guys serious asking this question??? please dont have children....
 
Know what this reminds me of? This reminds me of people arguing for increased national government. Socialism has struggled terribly around the globe and people are still arguing about how fantastic it is. If you want to believe socialism is great - fine. But don't expect the rest of the world to embrace it cuzz it hasn't worked.

Maybe I shouldn't have brought politics into this, but here's my point: for whatever reason, you may want to think it's great for families to engage in many marriages, multiple marriages, prostitution, etc. But guess what? What you think doesn't matter. It doesn't work! The more unstable the home the more problems your kids will have with school, drugs, etc., etc. That's what the stats show!

C'mon people! That's one of the reasons the Sexual Revolution died so quickly: it's an unsustainable lifestyle for many reaons, but most notably it's VERY hard on families...
 
I could not read this whole thread so sorry if this point has been made in the last 10 pages.

But Gordon needs to read feminist and communist thought on this subject which I think has a great deal of merit.

When you take God and the bible out of the equationn, We have marriage, so that males are not cuckholded. Men would not be good hunters and gathers or fathers for the little males and females in the tribe if they thought they were supporting somones elses boys who might someday take their place, or not feed them when they were old. According to some solid thought we have marriage because males wanted to be sure who was having their children.


You see Gordon it has been the males way to keep the females in line. (now I do not necesarily endorse this line of thinking, but I do think it has more merit than your shoot from the groin type thought)
 
Did you ever stop to think how remarkable the longevity of the Sexual Revolution was? It went like a fire across the entire U.S. in less than a decade. And then less than a decade later was almost completely dead!

Why? The only ones who wanted the Sexual Revolution are 20 year old horn dogs (and maybe Gracie Slick). But for the rest of America that wanted a decent home life and kids that stood a reasonable chance, they flushed the 60's down the toilet...
 
Quote from jem:


When you take God and the bible out of the equationn, We have marriage, so that males are not cuckholded. Men would not be good hunters and gathers or fathers for the little males and females in the tribe if they thought they were supporting somones elses boys who might someday take their place, or not feed them when they were old. According to some solid thought we have marriage because males wanted to be sure who was having their children.
More...

What?? C'mon!

I've worked with kids all my life and I've worked with adults who have worked with kids all my life. Noone I know thinks anything like this.

Any half way decent adult homo sapiens that I know wants the best for a child and does not feel the least bit threatened by one of the little guys!
 
And that's classic by the way: let's don't spend any time figuring out what's best for kids and our communites. Instead the communists and feminists spend their time trying to figure out why all the studs even bother supporting a family at all. Let's all be thankful they do anything for kids, right? It's a miracle these hunters even want to mess with the little varmints!
 
Maybe I can explain it this way. Let's take the Roman Empire. Few regimes have persecuted Christians so strongly, yet I have to admit in many ways they were admirable. The original Roman Empire was built on strong families and a strong body of political and philosophical thought.

I don't see that coming from the modern day humanist movement. Here's my label for modern humanism: simple-minded hedonism. Someone please refute me. I don't want to stereotype, but so far I have no evidence to believe otherwise...

Again, show me all the great body of humanist thought that is going to enlighten society, families and our nation.

Based on what I've seen: humanists can't even decide whether or not to let their daughter go into prostitution!
 
Same thing with the mafioso: they were moral pigs in many ways. But you had to respect them: they guarded their families and they protected their own "community"...

If you'd asked one of them if they would allow their daughter to be a prositute, the would have let you swim with Jimmy in six feet of concrete...
 
Quote from ARogueTrader:

Aside from the moral issues, how about health and risk of physical abuse?

Really, would you want some big sweaty guy porking your daughter?
More...

Well hey thats the difference between a hooker with brains who doesnt get poked by a museum of VD and a stupid one who does...

Tiki
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top