|
Post by ♥Ms J®♥ on Oct 12, 2006 11:18:47 GMT -5
This will piss a lot of people off im sure.I am not 100% against abortion…. The way it is now:If the mother wants to keep the child, the father is forced to pay for that child until the child is at least 18 years old. If she wants to abort the child, she can do so without the father even knowing. The way I think it should be:I believe the father should have a say as to what happens to his child. If the father wants to take care of the child, he should be able to do so. If the mother wants nothing to do with the child then she gives up all rights to child. Forever. To make it fair, the father should be allowed to force the mother to abort the child if he doesn’t want anything to do with it. If the mother doesn’t want to abort then she should have to raise the child on her own with no help from the father. Bottom line:It takes two to fuck. You know, you would so get along great with my boyfriend. That's what he says. I don't think that you should ever be able to force someone to abort a child. I think that the father of said child should be informed about any action taken in that matter. If the father doesn't want anything to do with it, there should be ways that he can give up every right and not have to pay the support for 18 years, and vice versa, if the mother doesn't want the baby but the father does, I think that she should have to carry out the pregnancy and give up every right to that child. Touchy subject though, and when it all comes down to it, it's the woman who is doing all the work in all reality, all the guy had to do was shoot some white stuff up there...not that hard. So it will probably always stay her choice, and the man doesn't really matter what he wants. Come on now girls ALWAYS get their way ;D why would we change it for something that GUYS want.....guys don't matter
|
|
|
Post by tetherednchained on Oct 12, 2006 11:29:36 GMT -5
This will piss a lot of people off im sure.I am not 100% against abortion…. The way it is now:If the mother wants to keep the child, the father is forced to pay for that child until the child is at least 18 years old. If she wants to abort the child, she can do so without the father even knowing. The way I think it should be:I believe the father should have a say as to what happens to his child. If the father wants to take care of the child, he should be able to do so. If the mother wants nothing to do with the child then she gives up all rights to child. Forever. To make it fair, the father should be allowed to force the mother to abort the child if he doesn’t want anything to do with it. If the mother doesn’t want to abort then she should have to raise the child on her own with no help from the father. Bottom line:It takes two to fuck. You know, you would so get along great with my boyfriend. That's what he says. I don't think that you should ever be able to force someone to abort a child. I think that the father of said child should be informed about any action taken in that matter. If the father doesn't want anything to do with it, there should be ways that he can give up every right and not have to pay the support for 18 years, and vice versa, if the mother doesn't want the baby but the father does, I think that she should have to carry out the pregnancy and give up every right to that child. Touchy subject though, and when it all comes down to it, it's the woman who is doing all the work in all reality, all the guy had to do was shoot some white stuff up there...not that hard. So it will probably always stay her choice, and the man doesn't really matter what he wants. Come on now girls ALWAYS get their way ;D why would we change it for something that GUYS want.....guys don't matter Yep I was going to the extreme I know but that was just to help drive my point home. Of course no man should ever make a woman get an abortion if she doesn't want one.
|
|
|
Post by honeybee on Oct 30, 2006 13:37:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ♥Ms J®♥ on Oct 30, 2006 14:51:22 GMT -5
that's so sad I just wish that we had a government that doesn't have a say in what you do in the privacy of your own home, as long as you aren't hurting anyone. It just really gets to me the fact that our government tells us what to do, and that we have people in the USA that think the government is looking out for "our" best interest....no they are looking our for the interest of their bank accounts....
|
|
|
Post by honeybee on Oct 30, 2006 15:06:51 GMT -5
Re-election should not exist. especially when you have a demagogic candidate running for Presidency of your nation. it so impressive how people can not see the difference between what is the right and what is wrong for the future of your Country... probably that is what a "Republiqueta" deserves... tsc tsc tsc... anyway...
|
|
|
Post by bdcold on Nov 6, 2006 13:37:38 GMT -5
Bush Advisor Says President Has Legal Power to Torture Children Mathaba Net | January 9 2006 John Yoo publicly argued there is no law that could prevent the President from ordering the torture of a child of a suspect in custody – including by crushing that child’s testicles. This came out in response to a question in a December 1st debate in Chicago with Notre Dame professor and international human rights scholar Doug Cassel. What is particularly chilling and revealing about this is that John Yoo was a key architect post-9/11 Bush Administration legal policy. As a deputy assistant to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, John Yoo authored a number of legal memos arguing for unlimited presidential powers to order torture of captive suspects, and to declare war anytime, any where, and on anyone the President deemed a threat. It has now come out Yoo also had a hand in providing legal reasoning for the President to conduct unauthorized wiretaps of U.S. citizens. Georgetown Law Professor David Cole wrote, "Few lawyers have had more influence on President Bush’s legal policies in the 'war on terror’ than John Yoo." This part of the exchange during the debate with Doug Cassel, reveals the logic of Yoo’s theories, adopted by the Administration as bedrock principles, in the real world. Cassel: If the President deems that he’s got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person’s child, there is no law that can stop him? Yoo: No treaty. Cassel: Also no law by Congress. That is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo. Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that. www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2006/090106torturechildren.htm
|
|
|
Post by ♥Ms J®♥ on Nov 6, 2006 14:07:25 GMT -5
Another reason why I am swaying to the Libertarian Party more and more every day
|
|
|
Post by tetherednchained on Nov 6, 2006 14:38:47 GMT -5
George Bush doesn't care about black people.
And he has the right to crush your child's testicles.
|
|
|
Post by BTweety04 on Nov 6, 2006 23:39:11 GMT -5
Bush Advisor Says President Has Legal Power to Torture Children Mathaba Net | January 9 2006 John Yoo publicly argued there is no law that could prevent the President from ordering the torture of a child of a suspect in custody – including by crushing that child’s testicles. This came out in response to a question in a December 1st debate in Chicago with Notre Dame professor and international human rights scholar Doug Cassel. What is particularly chilling and revealing about this is that John Yoo was a key architect post-9/11 Bush Administration legal policy. As a deputy assistant to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, John Yoo authored a number of legal memos arguing for unlimited presidential powers to order torture of captive suspects, and to declare war anytime, any where, and on anyone the President deemed a threat. It has now come out Yoo also had a hand in providing legal reasoning for the President to conduct unauthorized wiretaps of U.S. citizens. Georgetown Law Professor David Cole wrote, "Few lawyers have had more influence on President Bush’s legal policies in the 'war on terror’ than John Yoo." This part of the exchange during the debate with Doug Cassel, reveals the logic of Yoo’s theories, adopted by the Administration as bedrock principles, in the real world. Cassel: If the President deems that he’s got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person’s child, there is no law that can stop him? Yoo: No treaty. Cassel: Also no law by Congress. That is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo. Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that. www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2006/090106torturechildren.htmwtf is this crap?
|
|
|
Post by bdcold on Nov 7, 2006 13:31:50 GMT -5
Unfortunately, it seems to be "Your Government At Work".
|
|
|
Post by tetherednchained on Nov 7, 2006 14:32:50 GMT -5
Do people actually believe something like that would ever happen? I don't want people that put any credibility in that article running the show either.
|
|
|
Post by ♥Ms J®♥ on Nov 7, 2006 15:58:45 GMT -5
you know the sad thing is Yes, they really do
|
|
|
Post by Madame Shimmy on Nov 9, 2006 7:46:38 GMT -5
Mike I'm with you on that one. I don't think there is really someone waiting to crush a childs testicles. The website this came from is SOOOOO ridiculous. Has anyone read any of the other stories on it.
It amazes me how a some jouralists can write an article and make the sun appear to be the enemy (Not a real article) and thousands of people will agree.
The site has a space called Matrix propaganda not for the sheep followers. If that doesn't scream EXTREME LIBERAL than shoot me now.
|
|
|
Post by BTweety04 on Nov 9, 2006 16:40:14 GMT -5
Exactly my sentiment. That is all a bunch of BS.
|
|
|
Post by ♥Ms J®♥ on Nov 10, 2006 10:20:59 GMT -5
the one thing that I do love about all this....is that we are able to trash on our government, and they cannot do shit about it... That makes me happy
|
|
|
Post by bdcold on Nov 12, 2006 0:39:06 GMT -5
The real story is that the the architect of our government's policy to abuse prisoners did not deny the President had the legal authority to torture children.
He only questioned the need.
Unfortunately, we have learned that our government has in fact tortured prisoners by using waterboarding. An act we previously considered so hideous we prosecuted the Japanese when they did it to our own soldiers in WWII.
Is it truly a stretch to question a government that permits torture regarding the extent they will exercise their brutality?
|
|
|
Post by Madame Shimmy on Nov 13, 2006 8:46:13 GMT -5
Your alarm goes off, you hit the snooze and sleep for another 10 minutes. [glow=red,2,300]He stays up for days on end.[/glow]
You take a warm shower to help you wake up. [glow=red,2,300]He goes days or weeks without running water.[/glow]
You complain of a "headache", and call in sick. [glow=red,2,300]He gets shot at as others are hit, and keeps moving forward.[/glow]
You put on your anti war/don't support the troops shirt, and go meet up with your friends. [glow=red,2,300]He still fights for your right to wear that shirt.[/glow]
You make sure you're cell phone is in your pocket. [glow=red,2,300]He clutches the cross hanging on his chain next to his dog tags.[/glow]
You talk trash about your "buddies" that aren't with you. [glow=red,2,300]He knows he may not see some of his buddies again.[/glow]
You walk down the beach, staring at all the pretty girls. [glow=red,2,300]He walks the streets, searching for insurgents and terrorists.[/glow]
You complain about how hot it is. [glow=red,2,300]He wears his heavy gear, not daring to take off his helmet to wipe his brow.[/glow]
You go out to lunch, and complain because the restaurant got your order wrong. [glow=red,2,300]He doesn't get to eat today.[/glow]
Your maid makes your bed and washes your clothes. [glow=red,2,300]He wears the same things for weeks, but makes sure his weapons are clean.[/glow]
You go to the mall and get your hair redone. [glow=red,2,300]He doesn't have time to brush his teeth today.[/glow]
You're angry because your class ran 5 minutes over. [glow=red,2,300]He's told he will be held over an extra 2 months.[/glow]
You call your girlfriend and set a date for tonight. [glow=red,2,300]He waits for the mail to see if there is a letter from home.[/glow]
You hug and kiss your girlfriend, like you do everyday. [glow=red,2,300]He holds his letter close and smells his love's perfume.[/glow]
You roll your eyes as a baby cries. [glow=red,2,300]He gets a letter with pictures of his new child, and wonders if they'll ever meet.[/glow]
You criticize your government, and say that war never solves anything. [glow=red,2,300]He sees the innocent tortured and killed by their own people and remembers why he is fighting.[/glow]
You hear the jokes about the war, and make fun of men like him. [glow=red,2,300]He hears the gunfire, bombs and screams of the wounded.[/glow]
You see only what the media wants you to see. [glow=red,2,300]He sees the broken bodies lying around him.[/glow]
You are asked to go to the store by your parents. You don't. [glow=red,2,300]He does exactly what he is told.[/glow]
You stay at home and watch TV. [glow=red,2,300]He takes whatever time he is given to call, write home, sleep, and eat.[/glow]
You crawl into your soft bed, with down pillows, and get comfortable. [glow=red,2,300]He crawls under a tank for shade and a 5 minute nap, only to be woken by gunfire.[/glow]
You sit there and judge him, saying the world is probably a worse place because of men like him. [glow=red,2,300]If only there were more men like him![/glow]
[glow=red,2,300]Thank you Servicemen & Veterans!!!!![/glow]
|
|
|
Post by Jen on Nov 13, 2006 15:30:40 GMT -5
This will piss a lot of people off im sure.I am not 100% against abortion…. The way it is now:If the mother wants to keep the child, the father is forced to pay for that child until the child is at least 18 years old. If she wants to abort the child, she can do so without the father even knowing. The way I think it should be:I believe the father should have a say as to what happens to his child. If the father wants to take care of the child, he should be able to do so. If the mother wants nothing to do with the child then she gives up all rights to child. Forever. To make it fair, the father should be allowed to force the mother to abort the child if he doesn’t want anything to do with it. If the mother doesn’t want to abort then she should have to raise the child on her own with no help from the father. Bottom line:It takes two to fuck. TNC - if a woman has a child and the father wants nothing to do with it, it's called - GIVING UP YOUR RIGHTS. It's already in motion. There's no need for anyone to force the mother into an abortion.
|
|
|
Post by Jen on Nov 13, 2006 15:31:52 GMT -5
that's so sad I just wish that we had a government that doesn't have a say in what you do in the privacy of your own home, as long as you aren't hurting anyone. It just really gets to me the fact that our government tells us what to do, and that we have people in the USA that think the government is looking out for "our" best interest....no they are looking our for the interest of their bank accounts.... Jenna (I'm a Jenna too haha) - that's why I'm a Libertarian.
|
|
|
Post by Jen on Nov 13, 2006 15:35:07 GMT -5
shimmylicious - that was beautiful, thank you.
It's one thing to be against the war. Or any war. It's another to be against the men and women who have made us safe, and protected our rights since this country started.
I just don't get people who don't support our soldiers. I just don't. (Supporting war and supporting the soldiers aren't the same thing).
|
|