posted on January 26, 2005 01:36:34 PM new
Well, Kraft, the definition of the "traditional" family is changing...that's not necesarily bad...it's just changing.
You REALLY want to blame everything on women??...I think we're getting near our sore point.....
Kraft, not all women are rich enough to stay at home with their children.
Not all women have a partner who will support them ......
why don't you blame non-supportive "fathers" , dead-beat dads, men who beat their wives forcing their wives to leave them, men who rape their children forcing their wives to leave them.
Why don't you blame men who can no longer make enough money to support their family. ???
Kraft, people can barely make it on two incomes now and you think one is OK?
Now a big shocker for you and parklame.....DYSFUNCTIONAL families have been around since ..since...families!
Remember Cain and Abel...their mommy stayed at home!
And, I'd sure like to know who park is referring to with
"Then there are the people hell-bent on further destroying marriage for their own selfish agenda. """
HUH!
[ edited by crowfarm on Jan 26, 2005 02:12 PM ]
posted on January 26, 2005 01:59:38 PM new
Kraft: BUT, I do feel the breakdown of the traditional family was a result of women joining the work force when they traditionally stayed at home to raise children.
This could be just one part of the problem. One other contributing factor is the increase in single parent households - either by divorce or by women getting pregant and the father bailing out. How is a single parent supposed to provide the basic loving nuturing home environment for their child at an early age and still hold a job to support the child?
Personally, if the religious conservatives want to preserve the sanctity of marriage they need to do something about the ease at how easy it is to marry and divorce in this country. Until this happens, marriage as they know it will continue to crumble no matter who is allowed to marry. How can you take marriage seriously when you have a drive thru wedding (which do exist in Vegas)? I would like a marriage license with wedding rings and a honeymoon on the side. Oh yeah throw in a set of divorce papers just in case I need them later.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- "Give it up for George W. Bush, the best friend international jihad ever had."
posted on January 26, 2005 02:15:01 PM new
Crowfarm, I didn't say it was a bad thing, just that it changed the traditional marriage role (1 man, 1 woman, 2 kids, 2 dogs, picket fence, happily ever after, etc.) for good.
As for women staying at home, I'm not talking about the ones that can't afford it. But if they can't, then you get into questioning why they have children they can't afford (other than what you've mentioned.) There's too many children being born to people that can't afford them and it can't all be the fault of dead-beat dads, etc. I'm for women Crowfarm, but not for ones that are irresponsible when they haven't planned out how they're going to pay for a child.
posted on January 26, 2005 02:59:45 PM new
Kraft, you can't ever make stupid people smart but no, it's not all the fault of dead beat dads, it's the fault of BOTH sexes. BOTH are responsible for having children, BOTH EQUALLY.
The woman, while certainly paying a bigger price, is NOT soley responsible for getting pregnant.
posted on January 26, 2005 03:13:06 PM new
I agree both sexes are responsible for pregnancy, but there is more responsibility put on the woman as she's the one who has the final say in whether she wants to have sex or not or whether she does or doesn't use birth control.
An example of what I mean would be Amber Frey. She has always been described as a struggling single mom, but then goes and has another child. How stupid is that? Yet nobody blinks and eye and that's just one person.
If men aren't going to be responsible, then a woman has to be, so in this day & age, there's no excuse for women who can't afford children to have them, imo.
posted on January 26, 2005 03:28:33 PM new
Sorry, Kraft, but ""but there is more responsibility put on the woman as she's the one who has the final say in whether she wants to have sex or not or whether she does or doesn't use birth control.""
....just doesn't hold water.
Responsible men can ALSO have the say but why should they if they keep being "excused" from responsible behavior ?
After all, it's so much easier to screw some woman and then blame HER for getting pregnant.
Men know where babies come from and if they don't want one they can avoid sex or use birth control.
If a woman isn't going to be responsible then the man has to be.
And PUHlese don't anyone give me that crap about men having a stronger "urge", "need" or any of that other blather.
posted on January 26, 2005 03:46:16 PM new
I know what you're saying Crowfarm, but can't agree. Men do not have the final say in whether a woman gets pregnant no matter how you word it (rape aside). Saying men shouldn't be excused from responsible behaviour doesn't change reality, so again, it's up to a woman, knowing that a man might not stay or pay, to decide if she wants to get pregnant. Once a woman realizes that men aren't responsible (not all men), then she has to take responsibilty for herself and stop blaming them for her situation.
posted on January 26, 2005 03:55:28 PM new
Kraft says, "Besides, their urge is stronger."
Than who's ??????????????????????????????
Kraft, I'm sorry but that old garbage is just that, garbage. Sex drive varies from human to human...c'mon Kraft, I just don't get it....I'm so much older than you and have so much more modern, progressive views...I'm in the 21st century and you're still back in the 50's !!!...
posted on January 26, 2005 04:46:44 PM new
You said:
"And PUHlese don't anyone give me that crap about men having a stronger "urge", "need" or any of that other blather."
So I said:
"Besides, their urge is stronger."
posted on January 26, 2005 05:08:59 PM newpeople can barely make it on two incomes now and you think one is OK?
While its certainly true that two incomes are needed in many situations, I think the issue about the real need for two incomes isn't talked about deeply enough. IMO, many two income families need the second income in order to maintain a certain materialistic standard that the parents think is important. Gotta have the bigger house, the bigger SUV, the exotic vacations, etc. Then there are the people who use the bulk of the second income to finance daycare or a nanny or something similar. Many people I know could easily survive on a single income if they chose to make it a priority to have a parent at home. I'm not saying its wrong to have two incomes but that the reasons behind having both incomes is in many cases not born of necesity.
If you are a two income family but want to make ends meet on one income after having a family, there are ways to do it. I know because my wife and I made that very choice. We found a cheaper place to live where our money would go farther and as a result maintain the same standard of living we had when we were a two income household.
I actually agree I could have been more precise. You've further refined the problem nicely. The feminists, not females in general, pushed for too much change too rapidly. Our lofty ideals require social refinement in order to mesh properly with the reality of our early development in childhood and hormonal drives.
Just as vegetarianism is fine idealism, but it can kill you deader than a doornail if you don't properly refine your diet.
I agree dysfunctional families are as old as Cain. It is the word that best communicated the concept.
So, Profe, the family problem seems worse than the education problem.
Oh, and 'Then there are the people hell-bent on further destroying marriage for their own selfish agenda' is a slap at the twisted self-serving to hell with reality agenda of militant sexually confused #*!@ for brains. Does that help cowflop? Yes, I took you off ignore, until I can't stand it. (Checks watch)
posted on January 26, 2005 05:39:31 PM newLOL profe....just a little MORE than a little sensitive I'd say....especially coming from one who says his district doesn't even have a union. Taking it so personal when unions are being talked about. We weren't speaking about anything else? So that's what 'lit' your fuse huh?
edited to add: What lit my fuse is your simpleton's view of a profoundly complicated and important topic.
It hurts to say this Linda, but I'm beginning to think some of the things our less delicate posters say about you might just be true. Did you have trouble with reading in school? I didn't say my district didn't have a union. I said :
In my district, only about 30% of the total teaching staff are members of any teaching association or union
edited to add: I also said I had never belonged to either a teacher's union or association. I haven't. My reasons for that are purely my own and none of your business. If your comment above was some sort of veiled accusation of me being a "closet union member", you can cut the #*!@ and and understand that if I were, I would freely admit it. Nice try.
How on god's green earth could you possibly mangle what I really said so badly? I've watched others here accuse you of reading something and twisting it around to fit your own mind set, and I always thought they were being a bit hard on you. Now I can see that it's absolutely the truth.
You've done the same exact thing with the Rand results I've posted, so it's pointless to respond to your utter lack of understanding the data, and your inane conclusion about them. As it is right now, I think I'll just stop trying to have any discussions with you, and just taunt you instead, like everybody else does. It's probably a hell of a lot more fun than trying to communicate.
____________________________________________
Dick Cheney: "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11..."
[ edited by profe51 on Jan 26, 2005 05:45 PM ]
posted on January 26, 2005 06:24:29 PM new
You better watch it profe now Linda will come back and claim she never said the things you are accussing her of saying. It is just part of Linda's game that she like to play. You caught her.
I am glad there are more out there that are finally seeing Linda's games that she loves to play.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- "Give it up for George W. Bush, the best friend international jihad ever had."
posted on January 26, 2005 09:22:12 PM new
cowdip, why dont you go write your congresswoman a letter? Or go pester NOW and see if they can use any of your ideas? I am sure they'll think you have the most effective strategies for women. Or better yet, go add another shot to that alcoholic beverage thats your constant companion, and see if jackdaniel or whomever can knock you out. You've only been posting to this thread since 5:27 am today!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sure gives new meaning to the term "all day sucka*"
oh ya hello and goodbye from fuggler. Youre just all alone till your frends show up. Keep typing tippie-tap-tap-tap somebody will answer, that is, if you dont pass out on the keyboard first.
posted on January 26, 2005 09:25:03 PM new
LOL profe - I think I'll just stop trying to have any discussions with you, and just taunt you instead...
going to act the age of those you teach now?
taunt away...if you think it will make you feel better in some childish way.
Maybe I don't word my posts as articulately as some here do. But I think my point was pretty clear. You stated you weren't a member of a union. And you're not. But I felt you were acting just a tad bit to sensitive when the teachers UNIONS and ASSOCIATIONS were being discussed. You aren't the lone teach in our country and I don't hold you responsible to defend them. I gave my opinions about what's wrong with the system..just as you did.
And when 60% of the students who are entering junior colleges have to take remedial reading and math, and when over 40% who enter 4 years colleges have to do the same...take the remedial courses....it definately makes a statement that enough teachers AREN'T doing their job.
Take it personal IF YOU choose to. It wasn't meant to be personal to you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on January 26, 2005 09:30:57 PM new
fiset - I totally agree with your last post.
It IS a value decision couples make and does call for some sacrifice to go from two income to one. But well worth the price by being able to raise your own children...not pawn them off on a sitter or daycare. This also allows for more parental involvement in their lives...sports...school..etc.
------------
KD - I agree. It would be better if only people who could afford children were the one's having them. But they have the right to decide that for themselves. I would never want to see any restrictions put on that. But as I've mentioned before....if they have them and can't afford them then I don't feel it's societies responsibility to 'pay' to clean up the mess they've made by their decisions. That's their responsibility, imo.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 26, 2005 09:35 PM ]
posted on January 27, 2005 06:22:14 AM new
Oh, poor, dblfugger9, you sick, senile old freak, please don't get so upset over how much or little anyone posts...it really is a sign YOU don't have too much to do or why would you care ?.
You seem to have a particular obsession with me....c'mon...checking the time of my first post ! Don't YOU have anything to do ?
I can see by your post that you have a strong, unnatural hate for , and fear of, women...very sick, have you ever tried to get help or do you enjoy that feeling ?
Now, you be sure to keep a little chart of when I post...I think that would be cute , don't you ...?
Seriously, all that broiling jealousy and hatred you have for me is going to give you an ulcer so stock up on Tagamet, I hear that works.
Well, you poor pathetic slimey brain dead coward I think I'll watch to see if you ever post anything intelligent but I doubt I'll see the day.
posted on January 27, 2005 11:10:05 AM newIt IS a value decision couples make and does call for some sacrifice to go from two income to one. But well worth the price by being able to raise your own children...not pawn them off on a sitter or daycare. This also allows for more parental involvement in their lives...sports...school..etc.
I am glad you think that. That is what my partner does. He stays home and watches the kids while I work. No different from what other straight couples do.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- "Give it up for George W. Bush, the best friend international jihad ever had."
posted on January 27, 2005 06:51:32 PM new
:h, poor, dblfugger9, you sick, senile old freak, please don't get so upset over how much or little anyone posts...it really is a sign YOU don't have too much to do or why would you care ?::
Thats what wee trolls do, crowfarm. We watch, we note timestamps, we build up a data base of all your menial pissant postings and then we wait. We dont need any intelligent thoughts of our own,WE hAVE YOUR words to make our brillent posting staetements with,,,
oh ya, you got that right on women. Since its MY RESPONsibLity as I DO KNOW WHERE babies /CUM FROM `hows come I have no say in when the bit*c wants to abort a child I was responsible for making???/ oh Ya, but it is MY respson si bilty ionly after its born if i get a choice for it to be born. you got it all sewenup jus right in y our mush pea brain.
Have you heard back from NOW yet? I know they're really working yoru ideas into there femistist proabortion agdenda. Poor, sorry chugladite, you are! too bad for u men are still 80% in charge of the governemnt - but you cant dig that. oh my...chug-a,doug-dug... glut-glut-glut.,,cluck, cluck, cluck, goes the crowfarm ,,, alka seltzer and tagament your household staples eh?
posted on January 27, 2005 06:52:26 PM new
Had to post this as I think it makes my point quite well.
taken from the WSJ today
Zero-Tolerance Watch
The Almaden (Calif.)
Times Weekly reports that "The San Jose Unified School District has started a crackdown on truancy in schools, a move that has many parents of truant students confused, frustrated and questioning the district's motives":
The district loses $39.68 [of state taxpayer money] for each day a student misses school, whether the absence is excused or not. But San Jose Unified School District officials insist the crackdown isn't about money, it's about the kids.
"We're being bombarded right now with 'it's about the money,' " said Nancy Danziger-Brock, an attendance improvement programs administrator for elementary schools at the San Jose Unified School District. "Until about two or three years ago, nobody even brought that up. And for me, when I started this program, which has become my passion, it's about kids getting to school, getting fed, getting health care, getting their vision checked, getting their hearing checked, having counseling, getting their two meals a day and getting their education. . . ."
[and then the statement I agree with 100%]
That list of what "it's about" is quite something. We're glad "getting their education" made the list, though its placement at No. 8 makes us wonder about the SJUSD's priorities.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
posted on January 27, 2005 08:01:43 PM new
Oh logansdad - You're just going to LOVE this. Another young children's tape cut off at the pass. Looks to me like Spelling is going in like gang-busters.
from the Washington Times today.
Spellings wants PBS money back
By George Archibald
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Education Secretary Margaret Spellings has asked the Public Broadcasting Service to refund taxpayer dollars used to create and distribute an episode of a cartoon program that features lesbian parents, saying the subject matter was inappropriate and undermines the show's effort to promote literacy.
The "PBS for Kids" episode of its popular "Postcards From Buster" program, originally scheduled to air Feb. 2 in classrooms across the country, had been pulled for review after some affiliates of PBS complained about its content. It was produced with Education Department grant money from a literacy initiative.
In a letter to PBS President and Chief Executive Officer Pat Mitchell, Mrs. Spellings insisted that all references to Education Department funding and sponsorship be deleted from the program credits and "any materials about the program," such as teacher guides and student workbooks.
"Congress' and the department's purpose in funding this programming certainly was not to introduce this kind of subject matter to children, particularly through the powerful and intimate medium of television," Mrs. Spellings wrote in a letter sent Tuesday.
Spelling's also the one who spoke up about the 40% of students entering college that have to take remedial classes. Not even mentioning all the school dropouts nor the one's who get passed through and can't even read.
I think I'm going to like this new education secretary. Yep....I'm am.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Four More Years....YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 27, 2005 08:06 PM ]
posted on January 27, 2005 08:40:02 PM new
More complaining from the religious rights.
What's next on your agenda Linda, stopping gay couples from raising kids. The cartoon featured lesbian parents......oh no the sky is falling...... It does not say the two lesbians had sex using a turkey baster.
Gay couples are apart of society and do raise children. Keep denying this Linda. Keep denying the fact that kids are stupid. They will start asking questions. I know you dont want your granchild to ask you "Why does little Mary have two mommies?"
Keep protecting your children from the real world. They will be the ones that end up getting pregnant, getting STD's or even HIV.
The Simpsons catoon has a gay character on it. The show has been around for 13+ seasons, where is the religious right about this.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- "Give it up for George W. Bush, the best friend international jihad ever had."
posted on January 27, 2005 08:55:30 PM new
Personally I think that all taxpayer dollars should stop going to PBS. Let contributors who enjoy what they offer support them.
You're funny logansdad - Again...wrong.
My son's are 36 and 34...don't think I need to explain anything about sex to them at this point.
But IF my one of my grandchildren asked me about two moms or two dads...I'd explain it this way. The people involved have different sexual lifestyles than we believe in. I just told my own sons...they're different from most. BUT now that the gay marriage issue is being promoted in our schools....as the 'norm' ....I'd be one of those down at my school district meetings complaining. Just as I did when anything I didn't like was going on at my son's schools. My husband and I attended those meetings to keep abreast of what was happening in their schools. I also was involved in their school functions. We didn't have these issues back then.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Four More Years....YES!!!
h, poor, dblfugger9, you sick, senile old freak, please don't get so upset over how much or little anyone posts...it really is a sign YOU don't have too much to do or why would you care ?::