1 - 10 Next
Both men and women now have to struggle at least into their late 20s to become established enough for a man to be marriage material. PLUS there is no longer any shaming of fornication. That includes for women. So why are men going to get into "serious" relationships (and pay for dates, gifts, etc.) when they have school & work to deal with and when they can can get no-strings-attached sex whenever they want it? Some of these men NEVER want to get married, as they only see it is a big expensive party for women followed by a man legally signing away half or more of all he'll ever earn, with no legal guarantees of anything in return (other than, perhaps, paternity fraud).
In response to:

Do We Hate Kids?

Ken the Playful Walrus Wrote: Apr 30, 2013 11:58 AM
...moral good in having a child. In fact, we're overpopulation and humans are a curse on the planet. Having children means less time, energy, freedom, money, energy, sleep, sex, etc. THAT is the thinking at work here.
In response to:

Do We Hate Kids?

Ken the Playful Walrus Wrote: Apr 30, 2013 11:56 AM
Here's what is going on. We're become narcissistic, hedonistic, AND turned children into liabilities instead of assets. Children used to be inescapable results of sex, but at least they could help out on the farm or other family business. Now they are choices, and child labor is illegal. Instead, we pay all sorts of money to send them to school for 20 years so they can emerge hating us. If the kid breaks something, starts a fire, injures someone, or kills someone, it is YOUR fault. Ah, but they can be taken off campus to have your grandchild sucked into a sink and nobody can even tell you they've had an abortion, as they bleed to death in their bedroom. Since all of life is an accident according to our now official dogma, there's no...
In response to:

Laissez Faire Marriage

Ken the Playful Walrus Wrote: Apr 27, 2013 5:30 PM
But the professional activists are trying to 1) force everyone to celebrate and affirm homosexual behavior as the same as heterosexual behavior, and 2) make people more dependent on the state.
In response to:

Laissez Faire Marriage

Ken the Playful Walrus Wrote: Apr 27, 2013 5:29 PM
The goal of Leftists in this game is to ultimately remove marriage from law, then destroy marriage and familties entirely, in order to make more people dependent on the state (which, of course, is inherently anti-libertarian). Thus the "compromise" of "getting government out of marriage" is a false one, like saying, "Yeah, go ahead, King Solomon... cut the baby in half." Some Leftists, including homosexual Leftists, admit they want to eliminate any preferential treatment for marriage or parents, by removing marriage entirely if they have to. Sure, there are homosexual couples that really just want that stamp of approval from the people (which is kind of strange where it is ordered by a judge in contradiction to the vote of the people)...
HE doesn't want the agreement and SHE does? Well we know what that means: She earns/has more.
That doesn't follow. Look, the state already has default stipulations in place. Why leave it up to strangers?
The Bible teaches, literally from the first book to the last, that marriage unites a bride and groom and that sex is for marriage. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that a marriage exists without a bride or without a groom, and nowhere does it say that sex or sex-like behavior is OK outside of holy matrimony. Don't bother brining up red herrings. I'm talking about the Bible, taken as a whole, in context and seriously studied. If a "Christian" church is going to ignore these clear Biblical teachings, members should no longer feel any obligation to keep attending or to give to the church. After all, what authority will the church be able to cite to tell them they SHOULD attend church and give? They should go to a church that is serious.
Leftism isn't logical. It is based on emotions and feelings. They FEEL like killing an innocent human being is OK, so it is. They FEEL like everyone else's children, once out of the womb, should be under their control. You can't demand consistency and logic from positions based on feelings.
Is Sen. Ricardo Lara also bent on forcing girls to camp with boys and adult men who are attracted to females? If not, why not? There are other scouting organizations and people can always start another one. Why try to force the BSA to conform to their whims? Because it isn't about their freedom. It is about forcing everyone else to applaud and affirm their behaviors.
1 - 10 Next
Wednesday, May 22 | 05:06 AM ET
Wednesday, May 22 | 05:06 AM ET
Wednesday, May 22 | 05:06 AM ET
Wednesday, May 22 | 05:06 AM ET