PDA

View Full Version : UPDATE: Women have a RIGHT to FREE contraception.




Gary4Liberty
02-15-2012, 05:37 PM
Seriously? WTF is wrong with this world??? Thats like saying. MEN have a right to FREE gym memberships! Men have a right to FREE viagra! Free Cellphones. RIGHTS!! This is disgusting. Isnt this where ron paul flies in with his cape and his pen and vetos this unconstitutional crap?!??!

SL89
02-15-2012, 05:41 PM
Link? But, yeah... the whole f'ing world is out of there ever loving minds.

Pauls' Revere
02-15-2012, 05:42 PM
Then, I want a refund for all the condoms I've purchased over the years.

dannno
02-15-2012, 05:45 PM
I think their justification is that they figure most women wouldn't mind paying into a pool for free contraception and they drag the men into it because they get the benefit of having sex without the same consequences of getting pregnant and that isn't fair so they should have to pay too.

Of course they don't take into account that not everybody, male or female, desires contraception in the same amounts and might not want to pay into the pool. They also don't take into account that this would raise the price of contraception just like government intervention increases the price of regular health care.

Gary4Liberty
02-15-2012, 05:46 PM
Then, I want a refund for all the condoms I've purchased over the years. I saw it on FOX. They said women have a right to contraception and free also. False, and False. and then they have a big push now for employers to pay for it even if it violates the employers relligious beliefs??!!

MikeStanart
02-15-2012, 06:43 PM
If women think they have a "right" to contraception, then I think men should have a "right" to unlimited video games. Both prove to be an excellent form of birth control.

emazur
02-15-2012, 06:48 PM
Peter Schiff has been has been ranting against this for a week now, including on today's show with a liberal guest.
Youtube from a few days ago:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U73xKgbXh68

IPSecure
02-15-2012, 06:56 PM
Do Ron Paul supporters have a right to free Gold?

eduardo89
02-15-2012, 06:58 PM
So let me get this straight, I'm morally opposed to contraception, but I have to pay for other peoples' right to have it for free, just like I'm forced to subsidize women who murder their unborn children because they failed to use the free contraceptives?

Gary4Liberty
02-15-2012, 07:02 PM
So let me get this straight, I'm morally opposed to contraception, but I have to pay for other peoples' right to have it for free, just like I'm forced to subsidize women who murder their unborn children because they failed to use the free contraceptives? those kind of women are a such a societal liability and the dumbass men that enable them.

eduardo89
02-15-2012, 07:05 PM
women are a such a societal liability

Oh, women shouldn’t learn to read and write
They should just have babies morning, noon and night
And if they say they want careers
We should round them up like steers
And lock them in their kitchens good and tight

Oh, women shouldn’t have the right to vote
I’d rather hear opinions from a goat
They’re clearly all insane
We should just remove their brain
Then send them out to sea and sink the boat

Oh, women shouldn’t be allowed to talk
We should seal their lips with strong adhesive caulk
And if they try to write things down
We should drag them outta town
And anesthetize their legs so they can’t walk

Gary4Liberty
02-15-2012, 07:06 PM
Oh, women shouldn’t learn to read and write
They should just have babies morning, noon and night
And if they say they want careers
We should round them up like steers
And lock them in their kitchens good and tight

Oh, women shouldn’t have the right to vote
I’d rather hear opinions from a goat
They’re clearly all insane
We should just remove their brain
Then send them out to sea and sink the boat

Oh, women shouldn’t be allowed to talk
We should seal their lips with strong adhesive caulk
And if they try to write things down
We should drag them outta town
And anesthetize their legs so they can’t walk

hey eduardo.. ... i think you might be a sexist. haha

eduardo89
02-15-2012, 07:09 PM
hey eduardo.. ... i think you might be a sexist. haha

Shhh! That's supposed to be kept a secret!!!

flightlesskiwi
02-15-2012, 07:11 PM
well, they have a right to pursue happiness.

and birth control is a tool for that pursuit.

so birth control is a right.




man, i feel dizzy!!

flightlesskiwi
02-15-2012, 07:12 PM
eduardo is a misogynist. and a misandrist.

so, yes, you spoke true.


hey eduardo.. ... i think you might be a sexist. haha

Sunstruck-Eden
02-15-2012, 07:13 PM
Oh, women shouldn’t learn to read and write
They should just have babies morning, noon and night
And if they say they want careers
We should round them up like steers
And lock them in their kitchens good and tight

Oh, women shouldn’t have the right to vote
I’d rather hear opinions from a goat
They’re clearly all insane
We should just remove their brain
Then send them out to sea and sink the boat

Oh, women shouldn’t be allowed to talk
We should seal their lips with strong adhesive caulk
And if they try to write things down
We should drag them outta town
And anesthetize their legs so they can’t walk

Can't tell if serious or sarcastic...

dannno
02-15-2012, 07:14 PM
Oh, women shouldn’t learn to read and write
They should just have babies morning, noon and night
And if they say they want careers
We should round them up like steers
And lock them in their kitchens good and tight

Oh, women shouldn’t have the right to vote
I’d rather hear opinions from a goat
They’re clearly all insane
We should just remove their brain
Then send them out to sea and sink the boat

Oh, women shouldn’t be allowed to talk
We should seal their lips with strong adhesive caulk
And if they try to write things down
We should drag them outta town
And anesthetize their legs so they can’t walk

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lyw1kyDgAv1qa6iz5o1_100.png

"Caulk..... Yummy delicious caulk...."

Gary4Liberty
02-15-2012, 07:14 PM
well, they have a right to pursue happiness.

and birth control is a tool for that pursuit.

so birth control is a right.




man, i feel dizzy!!

well a corvette is a tool to my pursuit of happiness so Ill have the green one. I want it for free. Its my right.

flightlesskiwi
02-15-2012, 07:16 PM
well a corvette is a tool to my pursuit of happiness so Ill have the green one. I want it for free. Its my right.

hear hear!! all in favor of corvettes for men say "aye"!

eduardo89
02-15-2012, 07:17 PM
eduardo is a misogynist. and a misandrist.

so, yes, you spoke true.

I'm more of a misandrist because I blame men for feminism.

eduardo89
02-15-2012, 07:19 PM
http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lyw1kyDgAv1qa6iz5o1_100.png

"Caulk..... Yummy delicious caulk...."

Is there anything homer doesn't find delicious?


Can't tell if serious or sarcastic...

Sarcastic, I don't actually want to chop women's legs off and I believe literacy is important for both men and women.

John F Kennedy III
02-15-2012, 07:20 PM
No they don't.

eduardo89
02-15-2012, 07:20 PM
well, they have a right to pursue happiness.

and birth control is a tool for that pursuit.

so birth control is a right.

man, i feel dizzy!!

You're working your brain too hard, dear. You're a woman, your brain isn't equipped for that.

flightlesskiwi
02-15-2012, 07:23 PM
case in point:


You're working your brain too hard, dear. You're a woman, your brain isn't equipped for that.

r3volution
02-15-2012, 07:24 PM
have the right to make me a sammich

flightlesskiwi
02-15-2012, 07:29 PM
have the right to make me a sammich

only if it's a free sammich.

LBennett76
02-15-2012, 07:33 PM
I'm a single mom who works 2 jobs to make $20k a year. I had to purchase my own health insurance because I don't qualify for the government kind. Anyway, because I'm poor I can only afford high deductible insurance and it DOESN'T COVER BIRTH CONTROL. And that's perfectly fine because it only costs $20. Seriously? People can't pull 20 bucks outta their own damn pockets? I can do it, so bet your sweet ass these people crying over it can too. They just want big nanny government to take the money from other peoples' pockets because they're socialists who want the US run like Europe. I know people (mostly women) who want nothing more than for us to turn into France.

PaulConventionWV
02-15-2012, 08:32 PM
I think their justification is that they figure most women wouldn't mind paying into a pool for free contraception and they drag the men into it because they get the benefit of having sex without the same consequences of getting pregnant and that isn't fair so they should have to pay too.

Of course they don't take into account that not everybody, male or female, desires contraception in the same amounts and might not want to pay into the pool. They also don't take into account that this would raise the price of contraception just like government intervention increases the price of regular health care.

How could someone be so ignorant that they don't even know there are people who don't want to pay for their contraception? How ignorant does one have to be to think everyone desires that?

DamianTV
02-15-2012, 08:47 PM
A Right that takes something from someone else away is NOT a Right.

A person has the Right to CHOOSE to use Birth Control. A person does NOT have the Right to force their Neighbor (or anyone else, even the Govt) to pay for it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpUXGOqO1r0

PaulConventionWV
02-15-2012, 08:48 PM
case in point:

Have you lost the ability to detect sarcasm?

DamianTV
02-15-2012, 09:00 PM
Have you lost the ability to detect sarcasm?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y72tsHP2LR0&feature=related

Simple
02-15-2012, 09:31 PM
This is what I don't get, if you subscribe to the idea that the government is here to do what we can't do as an individual, then why:

Do we need federal programs for something you can pick up at any corner pharmacy?
Do we need federal mail delivery?
I'll stop here </rant>

oyarde
02-16-2012, 10:18 AM
What about free breast implants , free beer , free gasoline etc etc

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 10:29 AM
What about free breast implants , free beer , free gasoline etc etc

I'd be willing for my tax dollars to go towards the first.

Ronulus
02-16-2012, 10:37 AM
You guys, birth control is a health care issue. Beer, gasoline, and implants are not :rolleyes:. ;)


What I find really fucking bizaroo about this is.... A) Why does something that is already so fucking cheap need to be free?
B) Why the fuck aren't they talking about making things free for people with medical conditions? For instance free insulin? I have to pay around 500-600 dollars a month to stay alive. Hell I don't even want it for free, but I would love if the government instead got out of the fucking way and allowed companies to reduce the costs so I didn't have to spend so damn much on products they inflate (also by destroying our dollar).

All these whiny liberals and dumbasses that think they are doing something good for the world with free birth control? Fuck yourself with a .22 mag and pull the trigger. It's so damn annoying that something so cheap and already readily accessible and free (planned parenthood, some schools etc) is getting this many peoples attention, yet getting the government to reduce the cost of vital life saving medicine is of no concern to these fuckers.

To 'wrap' it all up, condoms cost me about 10$ a month. Medicine about 500-600$ a month. Fuck the people that want to reduce the cost (by making others pay) of the already cheap product.

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 10:51 AM
You guys, birth control is a health care issue. Beer, gasoline, and implants are not :rolleyes:. ;) .

Implants can be a mental health issue. I hear many women suffer low self esteem and other psychological issues due to small breast syndrome.

seeker4sho
02-16-2012, 11:00 AM
Seriously? WTF is wrong with this world??? Thats like saying. MEN have a right to FREE gym memberships! Men have a right to FREE viagra! Free Cellphones. RIGHTS!! This is disgusting. Isnt this where ron paul flies in with his cape and his pen and vetos this unconstitutional crap?!??!

I have to agree with the OP to a degree, women can have free contraception by crossing their legs and saying NO!

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 11:14 AM
I have to agree with the OP to a degree, women can have free contraception by crossing their legs and saying NO!

http://tshirtdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/Abstinence_99_percent_effective_tshirt.gif

The Free Hornet
02-16-2012, 12:12 PM
I'm a single mom who works 2 jobs to make $20k a year. I had to purchase my own health insurance because I don't qualify for the government kind. Anyway, because I'm poor I can only afford high deductible insurance and it DOESN'T COVER BIRTH CONTROL. And that's perfectly fine because it only costs $20. Seriously? People can't pull 20 bucks outta their own damn pockets? I can do it, so bet your sweet ass these people crying over it can too. They just want big nanny government to take the money from other peoples' pockets because they're socialists who want the US run like Europe. I know people (mostly women) who want nothing more than for us to turn into France.

+1 This is the ticket. Insurance ought not cover predictable expenses. If my auto insurance was forced to pay for oil rags, you would start to see lots of oil rags around my house in lieu of paper towels. Since insurance implies paying a premium over expected outcomes (to cover insurance expenses, overhead, profit margin, sales comissions, advertising, legal expenses), it is a sure bet that mandating insurance in any field will raise costs 20-40% or more.

Not that I advocate this, but if the government were looking out for us - in the busybody kind of way - then they would outlaw all forms of insurance. This is not just because insurance is a form of gambling (Ned Flanders (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Neddy#Plot)), but due to the perverse incentives of being "covered". Now people drive with less caution and with more expensive vehicles. People who wouldn't walk around with $50,000 in cash on them will drive around with that much just waiting to get destroyed.

Don't bother to heed your doctor's advice because he has "free" pills for people that ignore the risks of obesity.

xFiFtyOnE
02-16-2012, 12:31 PM
Unless condoms grow on trees and you happen to own one of the said "condom trees" you don't have a right to crap. This is just more population control BS in the guise of womens rights.

JuicyG
02-16-2012, 12:40 PM
http://tshirtdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/Abstinence_99_percent_effective_tshirt.gif

Haha, the virgin Marry myth. Hope you know that "virgin" was bad translation as original source mentioned "young woman".

That being said, why should women receive free contraceptives. Give it to men also. Throw some lube and some toys to go with it. Don`t we deserve those too?

Todd
02-16-2012, 12:42 PM
Implants can be a mental health issue. I hear many women suffer low self esteem and other psychological issues due to small breast syndrome.

some guys have "small" syndrome as well

I want a federal program to help dudes out with that.

nasaal
02-16-2012, 01:00 PM
No one has a right to free medical anything. It is a service, you pay for it. If a doctor chooses to be like Paul and take care of people out of his own pocket, that is great. But forcing it is silly.

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 01:01 PM
Haha, the virgin Marry myth. Hope you know that "virgin" was bad translation as original source mentioned "young woman".

Thank you JuicyG, the all knowing troll.

And what was "conceived through act of the Holy Spirit" a mistranslation of?

dannno
02-16-2012, 01:07 PM
I have to agree with the OP to a degree, women can have free contraception by crossing their legs and saying NO!

That sounds really boring.

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 01:08 PM
That sounds really boring.

Well then she can get married and enjoy all the sex she wants with her husband.

nasaal
02-16-2012, 01:13 PM
This forum is very interesting. You see the religious, and non religious side debate these minor issues. I find it fascinating. I'm a relatively religious person, but I find myself generally siding with the secular side of the debates. I find threads like these truly fascinating.

dannno
02-16-2012, 01:13 PM
Poor people don't have very much to live for. They often have to work very hard jobs, they have poor diets and live in confined, small and relatively uncomfortable spaces. They have little in the way of recreation and entertainment.

Fortunately, the most pleasurable experience known to man is sex, and that is something that is free to participate in for anybody who can find somebody else who wants to do it with them.

Thus, poor people have a lot of sex.

heavenlyboy34
02-16-2012, 01:14 PM
Where be my free food? I have a right to it!!!111!! ;)

dannno
02-16-2012, 01:14 PM
Well then she can get married and enjoy all the sex she wants with her husband.

Does she have to do that so she doesn't get spanked by God for being a bad girl?

heavenlyboy34
02-16-2012, 01:17 PM
Poor people don't have very much to live for. They often have to work very hard jobs, they have poor diets and live in confined, small and relatively uncomfortable spaces. They have little in the way of recreation and entertainment.

Fortunately, the most pleasurable experience known to man is sex, and that is something that is free to participate in for anybody who can find somebody else who wants to do it with them.

Thus, poor people have a lot of sex.
Reminds me of "Idiocracy". lolz

gunnysmith
02-16-2012, 01:22 PM
Women have the right to park their knees under their arm pits or keep them close together.
Personal responsibility comes with the position she choses.
No other rights are implied.

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 01:23 PM
Does she have to do that so she doesn't get spanked by God for being a bad girl?

Dannno I really like you, but your problem is sex is your idol.

2young2vote
02-16-2012, 01:26 PM
Women have the right to free abstinence. Men do too. If they are worried about getting pregnant then they shouldn't be having sex.

odamn
02-16-2012, 01:32 PM
They already have free contraception. It's called keeping your legs shut.

Nirvikalpa
02-16-2012, 01:46 PM
Well then she can get married and enjoy all the sex she wants with her husband.

Hey eduardo, are you married, curiously?

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 01:48 PM
Hey eduardo, are you married, curiously?

No, I'm not. But I haven't had sex out of wedlock since I became a Christian again.

I don't see what that has to do with this thread though, you're not really my type anyway.

cheapseats
02-16-2012, 01:57 PM
UPDATE: Women have a RIGHT to FREE contraception.

This is CAT NIP to Control Freaks of all "spiritual" stripes, masquerading as OUTTA CONTROL SPENDING.

FREE CONTRACEPTION is a fuckin' BARGAIN compared to supporting people for the rest of their lives. Look no further than China's BILLION-plus people to know that, economically speaking, we are not ill-advised to offer free sterilization. PAY the type that WOULD do it for the money. I am A-OKAY with some genes dying off from the pool.

MOREOVER, if we DON'T want to pay for contraception, it is EASILY put to the necessary cost-cutting blade WITHOUT resorting to denigrating women. As with other IT SOUNDS GOOD propositions, where does it END? Toothpaste & soap? NECESSARY, in my view.

I don't hear the uproar about Medicare covering LIMP DICK TREATMENTS, which it DOES.

UPDATE: Women have a RIGHT to FREE contraception. is to get the #Evangelical feathers ruffled, as per usual, and to coax-more-like-invite HOSTILITY TOWARD WOMEN to predictably rear its head.

Which drives the Disenchanted/Undecided/Centrist/Independent Female Vote back toward the Side with the D.

Which doesn't MATTER, if all this online resolve to RESIST TYRANNY is tantamount to LETTERS YOU NEVER SEND. Those are not without therapeutic value.

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 01:59 PM
some guys have "small" syndrome as well

I want a federal program to help dudes out with that.

I demand federal funding until there's a cure!!!

I mean...uh...i don't suffer from that...

The Free Hornet
02-16-2012, 02:17 PM
I don't hear the uproar about Medicare covering LIMP DICK TREATMENTS, which it DOES.

Then you are not listening (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6941445/ns/politics-tom_curry/t/house-members-protest-medicare-viagra-bill/).

The outrage subsides once a population grows accustom to their government cheese and it becomes more costly, poltically, to take away.


FREE CONTRACEPTION is a fuckin' BARGAIN compared to supporting people for the rest of their lives.

Wrong. We are being asked to do both. Further, I expect government population control to be as effective as all their other initiatives. Are you assuming they can get this right?

idiom
02-16-2012, 02:25 PM
In New Zealand we have state subsidized contraceptives. They are bottom of the range but $3 gets you the pill for three months or 144 condoms.

If you want the good ones you pay full price.

But these are direct state subsidies. There is zero reason whatsoever to have insurance companies do it except for pure graft.

In New Zealand if you don't have health insurance you can still get subsidized contraceptives.

The US government ISNT OFFERING FREE CONTRACEPTION. They are offering a mandatory increase to your insurance premiums.

xFiFtyOnE
02-16-2012, 02:26 PM
Does she have to do that so she doesn't get spanked by God for being a bad girl?

I'm pretty sure God made those rules for a reason, he wasn't just trying to be a prick to liberals. Marriage is meant to help build and maintain civilization...which is true whether you believe in God or not.

nasaal
02-16-2012, 02:47 PM
I'm pretty sure God made those rules for a reason, he wasn't just trying to be a prick to liberals. Marriage is meant to help build and maintain civilization...which is true whether you believe in God or not.
Marriage as a concept has traditionally be a property contract. Marriage is a great thing, but rules of not having sex before marriage are a bit out date IMO. I don't see how religious belief should come into the discussion when related to this topic. Something is ok socially or isn't. Just my 2 cents. My 2 cents aren't worth very much with the flooding of the currency.

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 02:48 PM
Marriage as a concept has traditionally be a property contract. Marriage is a great thing, but rules of not having sex before marriage are a bit out date IMO. I don't see how religious belief should come into the discussion when related to this topic. Something is ok socially or isn't. Just my 2 cents. My 2 cents aren't worth very much with the flooding of the currency.

Marriage traditionally has not been a contract. Christianity dictates that marriage is a covenant, not a contract.

Whether something is socially acceptable does not mean it is morally acceptable.

xFiFtyOnE
02-16-2012, 02:58 PM
Marriage as a concept has traditionally be a property contract. Marriage is a great thing, but rules of not having sex before marriage are a bit out date IMO. I don't see how religious belief should come into the discussion when related to this topic. Something is ok socially or isn't. Just my 2 cents. My 2 cents aren't worth very much with the flooding of the currency.

I wasn't trying to make it a religious arguement but the guy had to equate anyone who believes in marriage or not having sex before marriage to religion and then mocks that religion. You don't have to be religious to know the value of marriage. Simply being well versed in history or sociology would be sufficient.

nasaal
02-16-2012, 03:46 PM
Marriage traditionally has not been a contract. Christianity dictates that marriage is a covenant, not a contract.

Whether something is socially acceptable does not mean it is morally acceptable.
History is older than christianity. And even then in history is was a husband and father agreeing, not so much the woman. Let's not twist it as anything else. Regardless, it isn't really a religious discussion.

QuickZ06
02-16-2012, 03:49 PM
http://i998.photobucket.com/albums/af107/QuickZ06/130470237753006.jpg

otherone
02-16-2012, 04:16 PM
Marriage is meant to help build and maintain civilization...which is true whether you believe in God or not.

You've never been through an acrimonious divorce, I gather......

Nirvikalpa
02-16-2012, 05:42 PM
No, I'm not. But I haven't had sex out of wedlock since I became a Christian again.

I don't see what that has to do with this thread though, you're not really my type anyway.

I wouldn't even take a gander in your direction, Eduardo. Feeling is mutual.

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 05:48 PM
I wouldn't even take a gander in your direction, Eduardo. Feeling is mutual.

The fact that you replied says that deep down, it does bug you ;)

dannno
02-16-2012, 05:52 PM
I'm pretty sure God made those rules for a reason, he wasn't just trying to be a prick to liberals. Marriage is meant to help build and maintain civilization...which is true whether you believe in God or not.

I'm pretty sure that marriage came about in order to stabilize civilization in an environment where there was no good means of birth control. It makes sense that a woman should be sure that the man she is going to have sex with, and thus conceive, will stick around and support her and their children. Otherwise the woman's family has to take responsibility which creates bitter feelings among those who didn't get to have sex, but now they have to provide for and take care of the end result.

Societies that pushed these values flourished more.

Now we have birth control. Now those values that were established over a time period of tens of thousands of years under a set of circumstances where birth control didn't exist are pretty much useless.

Nirvikalpa
02-16-2012, 05:59 PM
The fact that you replied says that deep down, it does bug you ;)

I replied because I saw you edited it. That's not what it originally said.

And I have a significant other, for the record.

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 06:08 PM
I replied because I saw you edited it. That's not what it originally said.

And I have a significant other, for the record.

So you re-read my posts? I think you're proving my point all on your own ;)

LibertyRevolution
02-16-2012, 06:33 PM
Seriously? WTF is wrong with this world??? Thats like saying. MEN have a right to FREE gym memberships! Men have a right to FREE viagra! Free Cellphones. RIGHTS!! This is disgusting. Isnt this where ron paul flies in with his cape and his pen and vetos this unconstitutional crap?!??!

Poor have had free contraception for years at planned parenthood... got be fair to everyone right?
Poor have free cell phones now too also. (not joking)


Marriage is a contract.. a bad contract totally lopsided to the woman.
As it stands now, its just a way for a women to leech off you for years, then take half your stuff and leave.
If women had to honor obey their husband.. and that was enforceable.. then maybe it be worth getting married.

Nirvikalpa
02-16-2012, 06:54 PM
Poor have had free contraception for years at planned parenthood... got be fair to everyone right?
Poor have free cell phones now too also. (not joking)


Marriage is a contract.. a bad contract totally lopsided to the woman.
As it stands now, its just a way for a women to leech off you for years, then take half your stuff and leave.
If women had to honor obey their husband.. and that was enforceable.. then maybe it be worth getting married.

*sigh*

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 07:02 PM
Poor have had free contraception for years at planned parenthood... got be fair to everyone right?
Poor have free cell phones now too also. (not joking)


Marriage is a contract.. a bad contract totally lopsided to the woman.
As it stands now, its just a way for a women to leech off you for years, then take half your stuff and leave.
If women had to honor obey their husband.. and that was enforceable.. then maybe it be worth getting married.

Marriage isn't a contract. And it's not only the woman's fault. Yes a woman must honor, respect and submit to her husband, but a husband must be respectable, loving and a good provider. Both need to learn to repent their sins towards one another and to forgive, only then can they reconcile.

idiom
02-16-2012, 07:05 PM
Poor have had free contraception for years at planned parenthood... got be fair to everyone right?
Poor have free cell phones now too also. (not joking)


Marriage is a contract.. a bad contract totally lopsided to the woman.
As it stands now, its just a way for a women to leech off you for years, then take half your stuff and leave.
If women had to honor obey their husband.. and that was enforceable.. then maybe it be worth getting married.

Because men can't be gold diggers.

Do women never earn more than men where you live?

JuicyG
02-16-2012, 07:11 PM
Poor have had free contraception for years at planned parenthood... got be fair to everyone right?
Poor have free cell phones now too also. (not joking)


Marriage is a contract.. a bad contract totally lopsided to the woman.
As it stands now, its just a way for a women to leech off you for years, then take half your stuff and leave.
If women had to honor obey their husband.. and that was enforceable.. then maybe it be worth getting married.

It was basically some religious convention but also a practical way of uniting families and wealth. It has become less of a religious act these days but more of a Hollywood fantasy and social ritual. You`re right to some degree. Some women look to marry into money, same as certain men.

I think, however, marriage is extremely outdated concept, something people do for the sake of ritual and vetting these days, there`s of course the religious component that still weighs heavily in some parts.

The French got the right idea about marriage, as they have "en concubinage" in France as alternative to marriage. You benefit of all the being married legal perks but without the unnecessary burden marriage brings.




The number of unmarried couples in France has quadrupled to around 2m in the last two decades (among Europeans only the Swedes are less keen on marriage). It’s estimated that 40 to 50 per cent of couples who get married have already cohabited for up to two years. Many couples don’t bother to get married and simply live together, but French law distinguishes between partners living together ‘unofficially’ ( en union libre) and ‘officially’ ( en concubinage).

Those living together en concubinage have some of the same privileges in law as married couples, including social security. To qualify for these, you may need to obtain a (free) certificate from your town hall testifying that you’re living together ‘as man and wife’ (take identification, proof of address and two witnesses), although town halls aren’t obliged to issue them, in which case you can both sign a ‘sworn declaration’ ( attestation sur l’honneur) that you live together.

Out of curiosity, I`ve asked several friends who got married why they did it and have received each time pretty stupid answers such as: "I did for the status. Now I can say I`m a married woman.", other one was "Everyone does it and parents were pushing for it.", "She was stressing me out about marriage so I said f... it and just did it" and my favorite was "Marriage gives you stability" said a friend scared of losing his woman as she cheated on him in the past.

I think marriage gives you at best a false sense of security which is not real at all. Divorce is always a very real possibility and if some paper and vow is only thing holding your relationship together, you might as well end it. Statistics show that divorce is pretty high among rich people that can afford it, because most end up despising each other after too much cohabitation and stepping on each other`s toes.

Hospitaller
02-16-2012, 07:12 PM
*sigh*

Are you able to argue against his point in anyway?
What benefits are there for the man?

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 07:14 PM
Are you able to argue against his point in anyway?
What benefits are there for the man?

Because a man needs a woman. God created woman because man was alone.


Genesis 2
18 Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him."

This is a very good reasoning (written by a woman) about why men and women need each other


It was not good for man to be alone. God created us to be man's helper, to meet his every need, body mind and soul, that we might grow together in spirit and in truth, that we might encourage one another and spur one another on in all things. And that we might more fully in our finite minds understand the inner workings of God and His role in our lives. In women, we see humanity in its weak form, easily misled and beguiled, in man; we see God's strength and unswerving authority. We need man's headship and guidance to keep ourselves from falling away, and man needs God's headship and guidance to show them how to lead us in all truth and righteousness. A good king needs compassion, understanding, respect, wisdom and authority and a servants heart. In the union of man and woman we see all these components brought together and knit in harmony for the happiness of the kingdom: their home. If a woman does her part to meet the needs of her husband, thereby freeing him to do the Lord's work, she is being used of God to love and serve him physically the way God loves and serves him spiritually. Our husbands, free to hear the Lord speaking to them, are able to instruct us in the ways of the Lord. They are able to provide for us physically and love us not just from the heart but in all they do for us. They are being used of the Lord to love and serve us physically on His behalf. Perfect harmony and unity in home only comes from the authority structure given of God and from having Christ as the center of your home.

http://www.intothelight.org/why-create-woman.asp

AFPVet
02-16-2012, 07:16 PM
well, they have a right to pursue happiness.

and birth control is a tool for that pursuit.

so birth control is a right.

man, i feel dizzy!!

LOL... that last part was actually "property", but was later changed to "pursuit of happiness" in the DOI; however, the inalienable rights remained life, liberty, and property.

Nirvikalpa
02-16-2012, 08:04 PM
Are you able to argue against his point in anyway?
What benefits are there for the man?

Do you think men are the only ones in this place and time who are "breadwinners?"

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 08:25 PM
Do you think men are the only ones in this place and time who are "breadwinners?"

No, but it doesn't change the fact that it's not right.


“If your wife is working, you are a selfish bastard. How dare you make her shoulder her half of the curse and part of yours as well!”

-Mark Driscoll

otherone
02-16-2012, 08:27 PM
Marriage is a contract.. a bad contract totally lopsided to the woman.


Traditionally, marriage is a social contract, a union of two families. Until relatively recently, women have been a commodity whose purpose has been procreation to ensure lineage, inheritance, or family labor. Religion is only significant in regards to the culture present. State-sanctioned marriage (as we have now) is mostly totalitarianism.

wannaberocker
02-16-2012, 08:34 PM
Hey guys i was having a discussion with a leftist guy i know recently about this issue and the catholic universities and hospitals. I was saying that the govt does not have the right to force these institutions to do something that goes against their beliefs. He said "that would be true in any other case, but in case of universities and hospitals that take federal funding. The govt then has a right to require certain standards".

Now anyone know how much on average Uni's and Hospitals take in fed funding?

JuicyG
02-16-2012, 08:36 PM
No, but it doesn't change the fact that it's not right.
That`s sexist. Women can be providers same as men.

A woman who has no source of income is very dependent on the man, and that`s not very wise. Very often this brings them depression, isolation and abuse. They have no means to fight abuse without a source of income. It basically puts them in a corner, in a place from which they can`t fight back. They can`t even divorce as they have no income of their own, so they have to put up or shut up. A woman who who enters this type of existence is a (edit: potential)victim of her own making.

flightlesskiwi
02-16-2012, 08:41 PM
well, JuicyG, you can consider me a very happy victim!!! i have a wonderful, loving husband who provides for his family and cherishes his kids and I. and we have a Christ-centered marriage and family and it works quite well.

furthermore: i absolutely love being a homemaker and i wouldn't change it for the world.


That`s sexist. Women can be providers same as men.

A woman who has no source of income is very dependent on the man, and that`s not very wise. Very often this brings them depression, isolation and abuse. They have no means to fight abuse without a source of income. It basically puts them in a corner, in a place from which they can`t fight back. They can`t even divorce as they have no income of their own, so they have to put up or shut up. A woman who who enters this type of existence is a victim of her own making.

wannaberocker
02-16-2012, 08:47 PM
well, JuicyG, you can consider me a very happy victim!!! i have a wonderful, loving husband who provides for his family and cherishes his kids and I. and we have a Christ-centered marriage and family and it works quite well.

furthermore: i absolutely love being a homemaker and i wouldn't change it for the world.

Exactly, a homemaker dosnt always equal being a victim and being abused. Some women love it and some dont, some working women are victims of abuse too. Abusers dont care if a woman works or not.

JuicyG
02-16-2012, 08:48 PM
well, JuicyG, you can consider me a very happy victim!!! i have a wonderful, loving husband who provides for his family and cherishes his kids and I. and we have a Christ-centered marriage and family and it works quite well.

furthermore: i absolutely love being a homemaker and i wouldn't change it for the world.

I hope your luck won`t change. Many are not as lucky as husbands cheat or get violent `n such. Women have no resort to fall back on.
In many such cases the man, who`s the provider, manages the money which brings a high level of frustration to the wife as she has to beg for money when she wants to buy this and that.

I didn`t say though there aren`t happy cases just that ... things change.

otherone
02-16-2012, 08:51 PM
I hope your luck won`t change for the worse. Many are not as lucky as husbands cheat or get violent `n such. Women have no resort to fall back on.


A lot of stereotypes here. Let's just agree that the best marriages are true domestic 'partnerships'. :p

wannaberocker
02-16-2012, 08:53 PM
I hope your luck won`t change. Many are not as lucky as husbands cheat or get violent `n such. Women have no resort to fall back on.
Also in many such cases the man, who`s the provider, manages the money which brings a high level of frustration to the wife as she has to beg for money when she wants to buy this and that.

I didn`t say though there aren`t happy cases just that ... things change.

I dont buy into your worst case situation. Iv known women whos husbands were abusive and these women worked. THe point im trying to make is that you cannot say that "if person xyz had a job, she would not be abused" and you cant say "she was abused by her husband because she didnt have a job". Abuse is a much deeper issue and often the victim's have a hard time getting out of the relationship even if they have a job.

flightlesskiwi
02-16-2012, 08:56 PM
i was responding to the notion that a woman who stays home and doesn't work is a "victim of her own making."

i can think of other things that make women such, and being a homemaker is very low on the list.


That's awesome Kiwi, I think the point was simply if women are told not to work, as a whole, or restrained from doing so, they have no options in life but to depend on men to care for them. Back to the whole get married or be destitute concept. Your life would actually depend on how pretty and pleasing you could make yourself appear to men. Talk about hell.

Choosing as a wife to stay home is fine. Why not if you want to and can afford it? But saying it's wrong for women to work, as I believe someone else mentioned earlier, that just makes no sense.

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 09:00 PM
I hope your luck won`t change. Many are not as lucky as husbands cheat or get violent `n such. Women have no resort to fall back on.
In many such cases the man, who`s the provider, manages the money which brings a high level of frustration to the wife as she has to beg for money when she wants to buy this and that.

I didn`t say though there aren`t happy cases just that ... things change.

The type of person you describe is not a man who lives his life by the word of God. He is not much of a man at all actually. A woman who marries that kind of "man" is a victim of her own making.

How to Honor Your Wife (http://theresurgence.com/2011/06/01/how-to-honor-your-wife)

JuicyG
02-16-2012, 09:04 PM
I dont buy into your worst case situation. Iv known women whos husbands were abusive and these women worked. THe point im trying to make is that you cannot say that "if person xyz had a job, she would not be abused" and you cant say "she was abused by her husband because she didnt have a job". Abuse is a much deeper issue and often the victim's have a hard time getting out of the relationship even if they have a job.

Guess you failed to see my point. I`ve said women without an income have no resort to fall back on in case marriage or relationship turns sour.
Just read my posts again.

A woman who works will have the ability to leave the man and/or get a divorce and not be forced to stay in an abusive relationship. She will have an alternative if things go bad. In many of these cases if push comes to shove, getting a job without certain qualifications or beyond certain age threshold is not really an option for a house wife.

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 09:05 PM
That's awesome Kiwi, I think the point was simply if women are told not to work, as a whole, or restrained from doing so, they have no options in life but to depend on men to care for them. Back to the whole get married or be destitute concept. Your life would actually depend on how pretty and pleasing you could make yourself appear to men. Talk about hell.

Choosing as a wife to stay home is fine. Why not if you want to and can afford it? But saying it's wrong for women to work, as I believe someone else mentioned earlier, that just makes no sense.

I didn't say it's wrong for a woman to work, I said it's wrong for a man not to provide for his family and make his wife have to work. A man who makes his wife work is a selfish bastard as the quote I posted says. One of the ways a husband honors his wife is financially.

wannaberocker
02-16-2012, 09:06 PM
The type of person you describe is not a man who lives his life by the word of God. He is not much of a man at all actually. A woman who marries that kind of "man" is a victim of her own making.

How to Honor Your Wife (http://theresurgence.com/2011/06/01/how-to-honor-your-wife)

Thats a really nice read the "how to honor your wife" blog. Thanks for sharing.

JuicyG
02-16-2012, 09:11 PM
The type of person you describe is not a man who lives his life by the word of God. He is not much of a man at all actually. A woman who marries that kind of "man" is a victim of her own making.

How to Honor Your Wife (http://theresurgence.com/2011/06/01/how-to-honor-your-wife)

World is full of alcoholic church goers who beat their house wives and after Sunday confession their slate is wiped clean.

Very often women or man have no clue who they`re marrying exactly and you know, people do change in time.

A traumatic event can turn perfectly good prince charming into some alcohol addict and wife beater or same prince charming can fall madly in love with several women and have affairs while house wive would just have to sit there `n take it while man comes home smelling of several women.

wannaberocker
02-16-2012, 09:12 PM
Guess you failed to see my point. I`ve said women without an income have no resort to fall back on in case marriage or relationship turns sour.
Just read my posts again.

A woman who works will have the ability to leave the man and/or get a divorce and not be forced to stay in an abusive relationship. She will have an alternative if things go bad. In many of these cases if push comes to shove, getting a job without certain qualifications or beyond certain age threshold is not really an option for a house wife.

But see i think the mindset you present about a wife working could eventually hurt a marriage. Now i dont disagree that working provides an option for a woman whos abused. But if a woman goes into marriage thinking "oh i need to get a job because if my lloving husbands starts to abuse me, ill get out because ill have a job" then i dont see that marriage surviving very long.

So to me that mindset is a mindset that says "i dont trust the person im marrying". A marriage without trust will not be very much fun or wont last very long. The truth is that giving up trust puts us in an odd situations where we have a higher chance of getting hurt. But without trust we might be able to protect ourselves if things turn bad, but we are also not giving the marriage a chance "To work".

eduardo89
02-16-2012, 09:13 PM
World is full of alcoholic church goers who beat their house wives and after Sunday confession their slate is wiped clean.

Very often women or man have no clue who they`re marrying exactly and you know, people do change in time.

A traumatic event can turn perfectly good prince charming into some alcohol addict and wife beater or same prince charming can fall madly in love with several women and have affairs while house wive would just have to sit there `n take it while man comes home smelling of several women.

None of what you just wrote describes a Christian man.

Confession without repentance and reconciliation does nothing to forgive any sin.

JuicyG
02-16-2012, 09:15 PM
But see i think the mindset you present about a wife working could eventually hurt a marriage. Now i dont disagree that working provides an option for a woman whos abused. But if a woman goes into marriage thinking "oh i need to get a job because if my lloving husbands starts to abuse me, ill get out because ill have a job" then i dont see that marriage surviving very long.

So to me that mindset is a mindset that says "i dont trust the person im marrying". A marriage without trust will not be very much fun or wont last very long. The truth is that giving up trust puts us in an odd situations where we have a higher chance of getting hurt. But without trust we might be able to protect ourselves if things turn bad, but we are also not giving the marriage a chance "To work".

Hope for the best and prepare for the worst. ;) You can see it as an insurance policy. You can`t blindly trust that everything will work out perfectly. Life is full of surprises.

wannaberocker
02-16-2012, 09:20 PM
Hope for the best and prepare for the worst. ;) You can see it as an insurance policy. You can`t blindly trust that everything will work out perfectly. Life is full of surprises.

It is full of surprises. Which is why trust is earned not automatically given. I dont automatically trust women, the woman i end up with would have earned my trust. But i also understand that once i give her my trust, i would be vulnerable to being hurt by her. That is a chance ill be willing to take because without trust you cant enjoy life or a marriage.

JuicyG
02-16-2012, 09:25 PM
None of what you just wrote describes a Christian man.

Confession without repentance and reconciliation does nothing to forgive any sin.

Since you like Jack Nicholson, here is good scene which fits our current topic.

House wife abused by alcoholic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n47U-v3v1-Q

awake
02-16-2012, 09:30 PM
Sure, women have a right to buy contraception with their own money out of their own pockets.

wannaberocker
02-16-2012, 09:31 PM
Since you like Jack Nicholson, here is good scene which fits our current topic.

House wife abused by alcoholic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n47U-v3v1-Q

She hit him with a baseball bat. WOuldnt that make her the abuser and him the victim?

BTW you seem very much set about what men are like. It sort of seems like you speak from past experience.

JuicyG
02-16-2012, 09:41 PM
She hit him with a baseball bat. WOuldnt that make her the abuser and him the victim?
I thought someone would mention it as a joke, but you`re not joking are you? :)

BTW you seem very much set about what men are like. It sort of seems like you speak from past experience.

I`m not a woman, sorry to disappoint. I`ve seen friends`n families going on through all sorts of issues, same as most people have. You probably have too. Everyone has.

wannaberocker
02-16-2012, 09:47 PM
I`m not a woman, sorry to disappoint. I`ve seen friends`n families going on through all sorts of issues, same as most people have. You probably have too. Everyone has.

Your not a woman yet you seem to present men as some vile creatures who cannot help but abuse helpless women. Truth is yes iv known women who were abused by their husbands. But iv also known husbands who were put through hell by their wives and yet these men stuck around. Crazy thing is i knew a guy who's wife got her 3 brothers to beat the living daylights out of her husband. Abusive women also have ways.

Generally speaking women are not some helpless doves and men are not vile creatures.

wannaberocker
02-16-2012, 09:54 PM
I thought someone would mention it as a joke, but you`re not joking are you? :)

.

I was joking yes. forgot to type LOL at the end.

iGGz
02-16-2012, 11:20 PM
[}{]

eduardo89
02-17-2012, 05:58 AM
You find me one of those and I'll give ya 50 bucks

I think some of you live in a fantasy world

No one is free from sin, but I know plenty of married men who have never beat or physically abused their wives, who strive to live by the word of God and when they sin against their wife they repent and seek her forgiveness as well as the forgiveness of Christ.

DamianTV
02-17-2012, 06:25 AM
You find me one of those and I'll give ya 50 bucks

I think some of you live in a fantasy world

Try India. I think these people do exist, but largely not in the US. India for example, as well as many middle eastern countries, have practically zero respect for women. If anyone has been watching any sort of news in the last year, remember their big protests about having Women Driving? How do we think they get treated at home?

donnay
02-17-2012, 06:54 AM
That`s sexist. Women can be providers same as men.

A woman who has no source of income is very dependent on the man, and that`s not very wise. Very often this brings them depression, isolation and abuse. They have no means to fight abuse without a source of income. It basically puts them in a corner, in a place from which they can`t fight back. They can`t even divorce as they have no income of their own, so they have to put up or shut up. A woman who who enters this type of existence is a (edit: potential)victim of her own making.

Color me victim #2. I too, have a wonderful husband who provides well for his family. Our house is built on rock, and a solid foundation with Christ at our core.

I always aspired to be a homemaker--that is my job and I do it well.

Juicy my dear, you have been duped by the Rockefeller Foundation's propaganda agenda. It was this very foundation that gave us the feminists movements, not because they wanted to foster independence for women, but because they wanted another income to tax and to break up the family unit. That's how the elites divide and conquer.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN05DHO9bJw

speciallyblend
02-17-2012, 07:45 AM
women have a choice when the cage is open. They can sit in the cage or go outside of the gage .some perfer to close the door to the gage and sit inside even if the door is open. women are equal to men as individuals are equal!

JuicyG
02-17-2012, 07:58 AM
Try India. I think these people do exist, but largely not in the US. India for example, as well as many middle eastern countries, have practically zero respect for women. If anyone has been watching any sort of news in the last year, remember their big protests about having Women Driving? How do we think they get treated at home?

You misinterpreted his post. He was saying you won`t find people who fit that ideal scenario Eduardo described and that you have to live in a fantasy world to believe it.


Color me victim #2. I too, have a wonderful husband who provides well for his family. Our house is built on rock, and a solid foundation with Christ at our core.

I always aspired to be a homemaker--that is my job and I do it well.

Juicy my dear, you have been duped by the Rockefeller Foundation's propaganda agenda. It was this very foundation that gave us the feminists movements, not because they wanted to foster independence for women, but because they wanted another income to tax and to break up the family unit. That's how the elites divide and conquer.


Let me ask you this. What do you do when you want to buy something? You go ask your husband for approval? Do you get a fixed allowance or how does that work exactly?

donnay
02-17-2012, 08:04 AM
women have a choice when the cage is open. They can sit in the cage or go outside of the gage .some perfer to close the door to the gage and sit inside even if the door is open. women are equal to men as individuals are equal!

We are equal in the sense we are human and we need air to breath, food and water to live. The only cage around us is government, if you allow government to lock you in, it's by your choice not anyone else.

otherone
02-17-2012, 08:10 AM
Let me ask you this. What do you do when you want to buy something? You go ask your husband for approval? Do you get a fixed allowance or how does that work exactly?

You've never been married, obviously.

JuicyG
02-17-2012, 08:16 AM
You've never been married, obviously.
I`m not and never will get married. I don`t believe in marriage.

I`m in a relationship for more than 10 years actually, but we both make our own money and we don`t ask each other for approval when it comes to buying something. This is the beauty of having financial independence. If my girlfriend wants to go on a perfume shopping spree or cleaning products or hell knows what else, I can`t stop her, same as she can`t stop me if I want put my income aside and invest it or buy whatever stuff.

flightlesskiwi
02-17-2012, 08:16 AM
You misinterpreted his post. He was saying you won`t find people who fit that ideal scenario Eduardo described and that you have to live in a fantasy world to believe it.



Let me ask you this. What do you do when you want to buy something? You go ask your husband for approval? Do you get a fixed allowance or how does that work exactly?

i'll answer this one: i'm better at budgeting and keeping track of our finances, so i do all that, which is an agreed-upon arrangement. my husband and i have also both agreed upon a budget together. we also have agreed upon a set amount that if we stay under it, we don't need to seek the others opinion and are free to make the purchase. and *gasp* it works.

probably because this, and everything in my marriage is based upon trust and mutual respect which has at its center love.

and someone owes eduardo $50. i do not claim that my husband is perfect, no man is. we sometimes sin against each other in word/thought/deed, and quickly seek reconciliation (he is faster at seeking reconciliation than i, which inspires me). anyway, he has a love for Christ that cannot be shaken and it permeates every aspect of his being-- including his love and care for me.

specsaregood
02-17-2012, 08:26 AM
I`m not and never will get married. I don`t believe in marriage.

I`m in a relationship for more than 10 years actually, but we both make our own money and we don`t ask each other for approval when it comes to buying something. This is the beauty of having financial independence. If my girlfriend wants to go on a perfume shopping spree or cleaning products or hell knows what else, I can`t stop her, same as she can`t stop me if I want put my income aside and invest it or buy whatever stuff.

Don't look now but I think you are already in a marriage.
http://www.google.com/#q=definition+common+law+marriage

I think all liberty lovers should avoid govt marriages.

donnay
02-17-2012, 08:28 AM
Let me ask you this. What do you do when you want to buy something? You go ask your husband for approval? Do you get a fixed allowance or how does that work exactly?

It depends on what it is I want to buy. If it's a large ticket item like a car or house I would certainly talk it over with my husband. I do not need his approval, nor does he need mine. It's a mutual respect, and personal responsibility that is key here. I emphatically trust my husband. He is my best friend, I can talk to him about anything, and vise-versa. Marriage is not something to take lightly--it's a commitment; it's a bond; it's a united front. I have never wanted for anything. His job is to work for someone to acquire FRN's and my job is to hold down the homefront and provide him with the comforts of home, and sanity from the outside world.

Oh, one more important aspect is, neither of us are shallow, materialistic or vain.

JuicyG
02-17-2012, 08:34 AM
Don't look now but I think you are already in a marriage.
http://www.google.com/#q=definition+common+law+marriage

I think all liberty lovers should avoid govt marriages.

In France, for example, people have a second option "en concubinage"(about same legal benefits as being married but without the strings attached) and even a third legal option.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?361249-UPDATE-Women-have-a-RIGHT-to-FREE-contraception.&p=4188724&viewfull=1#post4188724

wannaberocker
02-17-2012, 09:12 AM
Let me ask you this. What do you do when you want to buy something? You go ask your husband for approval? Do you get a fixed allowance or how does that work exactly?

Well my mother worked, then she took a few years of from working and then she started working again. Bottom line my folks talk to each other before they buy anything major. My father never baught something without talking to my mother about it (even though some some years he was the only one working and my mother was not). My mother and father have a joint account and each of them have a debt card to that account. When either one of them decides to buy something that cost alot of money, they discuss it with each other first.

Your ideas of a homemaker seem more rooted in a generally abusive society where women are not valued at all. But the reality is not that at all.

wannaberocker
02-17-2012, 09:19 AM
I`m not and never will get married. I don`t believe in marriage.

I`m in a relationship for more than 10 years actually, but we both make our own money and we don`t ask each other for approval when it comes to buying something. This is the beauty of having financial independence. If my girlfriend wants to go on a perfume shopping spree or cleaning products or hell knows what else, I can`t stop her, same as she can`t stop me if I want put my income aside and invest it or buy whatever stuff.

Where is the care and love ? My brother makes a whole lot of more money than me, But if hes about to make a bad investment. Ill tell him so, not because i want to take his freedom away. But because hes my brother and i love him and i dont want him to lose money he worked so hard for.

I dont know you or your gf, but what you present as your relationship seems so void of love , respect, trust and care. It seems like 2 people going about their own lives and then using each other to satisfy their sexual needs.

JuicyG
02-17-2012, 09:40 AM
Well my mother worked, then she took a few years of from working and then she started working again. Bottom line my folks talk to each other before they buy anything major. My father never baught something without talking to my mother about it (even though some some years he was the only one working and my mother was not). My mother and father have a joint account and each of them have a debt card to that account. When either one of them decides to buy something that cost alot of money, they discuss it with each other first.

Your ideas of a homemaker seem more rooted in a generally abusive society where women are not valued at all. But the reality is not that at all.

Last posters kept mentioning consulting each other about major purchases. Real beef comes to small things each purchases not the big stuff. A lip ststick here, a perfume there, some this and that and there`s a fight going on. When money is put together, usually fights are unavoidable. You can`t find 2 people on this earth who want the same thing. Of course, in the end it comes down to compromise but too much compromise ends up in frustration.
People who don`t want to recognize this are deluding themselves. They just want to paint this rosy picture to make themselves look good and perfect because most people yearn for outside appreciation, respect and other people`s envy.


Where is the care and love ? My brother makes a whole lot of more money than me, But if hes about to make a bad investment. Ill tell him so, not because i want to take his freedom away. But because hes my brother and i love him and i dont want him to lose money he worked so hard for.

I dont know you or your gf, but what you present as your relationship seems so void of love , respect, trust and care. It seems like 2 people going about their own lives and then using each other to satisfy their sexual needs.

Wow. And where did you draw all these BS conclusions from? You won`t stay with someone for 10 years if you don`t have all of the above.

vechorik
02-17-2012, 09:47 AM
Poor have had free contraception for years at planned parenthood...


Even in the 1970's, state health clinics provided birth control based on income (condoms, birth control pills, etc). For many, it was free.

KingNothing
02-17-2012, 09:49 AM
Do women who are not sexually active or in need of contraception for another reason have a right to the money required to finance the "rights" of the other women?

KingNothing
02-17-2012, 09:52 AM
I dont know you or your gf, but what you present as your relationship seems so void of love , respect, trust and care. It seems like 2 people going about their own lives and then using each other to satisfy their sexual needs.

Or it's two people so in love, so respectful of one another, so trusting and so caring, that they allow their better half the freedom to make decisions as an individual, confident and secure in the knowledge that those decisions will not bring harm to the relationship.

wannaberocker
02-17-2012, 10:26 AM
Last posters kept mentioning consulting each other about major purchases. Real beef comes to small things each purchases not the big stuff. A lip ststick here, a perfume there, some this and that and there`s a fight going on. When money is put together, usually fights are unavoidable. You can`t find 2 people on this earth who want the same thing. Of course, in the end it comes down to compromise but too much compromise ends up in frustration.
People who don`t want to recognize this are deluding themselves. They just want to paint this rosy picture to make themselves look good and perfect because most people yearn for outside appreciation, respect and other people`s envy.



Wow. And where did you draw all these BS conclusions from? You won`t stay with someone for 10 years if you don`t have all of the above.

Well my folks have been married for 31 years and clearly their ideas of discussing things with each other have worked.

Well my conclusions are based on the information you presented. You paint the picture of a relationship where each does everything independently without discussion or sharing because "its your money " and "its her money". Now that to me suggests that you allow her and she allows you to make even bad choices financially because "its her money". As you said if she goes on a shopping spree and spends all her money, your mindset is "oh its her money she can do whatever she wants".

Now one of the biggest aspects of caring for someone is the fact that you dont want to see that person hurt in any way shape or form. That includes financially, but based on what you said. I would conclude that you will not question her even if you know an investment shes making is bound to fail.

So yeah you can call my conclusions BS, but im simply going on what you presented.

jtstellar
02-17-2012, 10:31 AM
you don't need gender warfare in paul movement.. waste of time and energy.. the ones aiming to freeload generally don't belong to this movement in the first place

wannaberocker
02-17-2012, 10:33 AM
Or it's two people so in love, so respectful of one another, so trusting and so caring, that they allow their better half the freedom to make decisions as an individual, confident and secure in the knowledge that those decisions will not bring harm to the relationship.

sure. But when there is no discussion about financial matters and the relationship is set up as "well its her money" and i cant question her decision because "its her money". Keeping that in mind and also keeping in mind that we all make financial mistakes. I ask the question how can a loving man or woman, stand by and allow their loved one to be hurt financially even if they have advanced information that could provent financial harm?

See like the example i mentioned before. My brother makes alot more money than me and he makes all his own decisions. But, if hes making an investment and i know its a fail. Then i wont shy away from telling him so. The fact that its his money wouldnt stop me from saying to him "hey man, this is a bad investment". I simply cant imagine loving and caring for a person and then allowing them to fail financially simply because "well its her money , i cant say anything".

JK/SEA
02-17-2012, 11:29 AM
well, if we ended these wars, and slashed military spending by a trillion, i would be ok with free birth control.

donnay
02-17-2012, 11:51 AM
Last posters kept mentioning consulting each other about major purchases. Real beef comes to small things each purchases not the big stuff. A lip ststick here, a perfume there, some this and that and there`s a fight going on. When money is put together, usually fights are unavoidable. You can`t find 2 people on this earth who want the same thing. Of course, in the end it comes down to compromise but too much compromise ends up in frustration.
People who don`t want to recognize this are deluding themselves. They just want to paint this rosy picture to make themselves look good and perfect because most people yearn for outside appreciation, respect and other people`s envy.

Wow, you are really clueless. I am not here making myself look good or anyone else for that matter. You're so hung up with thinking materialism equates liberty. :rolleyes: There is no beef to your diatribe.

xFiFtyOnE
02-17-2012, 12:09 PM
I'm pretty sure that marriage came about in order to stabilize civilization in an environment where there was no good means of birth control. It makes sense that a woman should be sure that the man she is going to have sex with, and thus conceive, will stick around and support her and their children. Otherwise the woman's family has to take responsibility which creates bitter feelings among those who didn't get to have sex, but now they have to provide for and take care of the end result.

Societies that pushed these values flourished more.

Now we have birth control. Now those values that were established over a time period of tens of thousands of years under a set of circumstances where birth control didn't exist are pretty much useless.

So your arguement is that marriage came along so married people didn't have to raise their kids kids...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/b8/Al_Bundy.jpg/289px-Al_Bundy.jpg

No marriage = no family = no one to raise your child for you.

dannno
02-17-2012, 01:26 PM
So your arguement is that marriage came along so married people didn't have to raise their kids kids...

No marriage = no family = no one to raise your child for you.

Thanks for helping make my point. What happens when the grandparents raise their grandkid and they have kids and their parents still don't have their shit together?

Obviously that is happening today as it has happened throughout time, however today people have the choice of using contraception.

KingNothing
02-17-2012, 01:49 PM
sure. But when there is no discussion about financial matters and the relationship is set up as "well its her money" and i cant question her decision because "its her money". Keeping that in mind and also keeping in mind that we all make financial mistakes. I ask the question how can a loving man or woman, stand by and allow their loved one to be hurt financially even if they have advanced information that could provent financial harm?

See like the example i mentioned before. My brother makes alot more money than me and he makes all his own decisions. But, if hes making an investment and i know its a fail. Then i wont shy away from telling him so. The fact that its his money wouldnt stop me from saying to him "hey man, this is a bad investment". I simply cant imagine loving and caring for a person and then allowing them to fail financially simply because "well its her money , i cant say anything".


The scenario you're creating is complicated, and probably more complicated than it has to be. I like to think that my presence in a situation will foster better decision-making than what you're suggesting, so much so that I would never need to tell my girlfriend or brother NOT to do something that would endanger them in any way, and that if they were unsure of the ramifications of an action, they would consult an expert on the matter.

If I were their best option for input -and that is a scary proposition because I'm not an expert on anything- and they asked my opinion, I would offer it honestly and respectfully. If they did NOT ask my opinion, I might ask them about their impending actions.... but only because I'd be interested to learn their justification and thought-process. I respect my significant-other and my brother enough to know that they wouldn't waste their wealth or the life. If they've made a serious decision that does not involve me, I have faith in their ability to do so wisely and without my involvement.

But that might just be a difference between you and I, or how we're framing the discussion.

wannaberocker
02-17-2012, 02:25 PM
The scenario you're creating is complicated, and probably more complicated than it has to be. I like to think that my presence in a situation will foster better decision-making than what you're suggesting, so much so that I would never need to tell my girlfriend or brother NOT to do something that would endanger them in any way, and that if they were unsure of the ramifications of an action, they would consult an expert on the matter.

If I were their best option for input -and that is a scary proposition because I'm not an expert on anything- and they asked my opinion, I would offer it honestly and respectfully. If they did NOT ask my opinion, I might ask them about their impending actions.... but only because I'd be interested to learn their justification and thought-process. I respect my significant-other and my brother enough to know that they wouldn't waste their wealth or the life. If they've made a serious decision that does not involve me, I have faith in their ability to do so wisely and without my involvement.

But that might just be a difference between you and I, or how we're framing the discussion.

The bottom line is simple. When we put up barriers in a close relationship that say "oh its their money" then we are in turn holding back our input, concern and responsibility. In a way if your bf /gf screws up with money, your not responsible because "hey its their money and they messed up". What im saying is that we all mess up financially that is a given. However, we often depend on our family n significant other to watch our back. Ill bring back my brother into this, last year he had a friend investing some money into a company and pushing my brother to do the same. One day my brother mentioned that he was gonna invest in that particular company. Well turns out i went to college with a guy who was mid level management in that company and would share how badly that company was run. So i told my brother dont do it, that company is not very well run. So my brother held out and didnt invest in that company, long stories short that company is currently struggling to stay alive. My brother didnt have to ask me if he should or shouldnt invest in that company, I gave him the info i had without him having to ask. Thats because me and my brother dont have the "oh its his money" barrier in our relationship. Now i could have stood by and thought "well he didnt ask for my input" but why would i care if he asked for it or not, when i know the decision hes made is wrong and will cost him.

Truth is iv let people screw up financially and i have put up the "oh its their money" barrier up before and these were people i didnt really love or care for. People you dont care for , you let um screw up. But its hard to watch people you love screw up.

KingNothing
02-17-2012, 02:57 PM
The bottom line is simple. When we put up barriers in a close relationship that say "oh its their money" then we are in turn holding back our input, concern and responsibility.


Who am I to tell anyone else that they're being stupid with their money? On the same note, I am free to disassociate myself from people who take part in actions that I disapprove of. I've been blessed with a family that is moral and intelligent. I've found a woman who fits that description as well, and the same could be said for my closest friends.



In a way if your bf /gf screws up with money, your not responsible because "hey its their money and they messed up".


Correct. Ultimately, an individual is responsible for his own actions.



What im saying is that we all mess up financially that is a given.


I never have. My girlfriend never has. My brother never has.



However, we often depend on our family n significant other to watch our back. Ill bring back my brother into this, last year he had a friend investing some money into a company and pushing my brother to do the same. One day my brother mentioned that he was gonna invest in that particular company. Well turns out i went to college with a guy who was mid level management in that company and would share how badly that company was run. So i told my brother dont do it, that company is not very well run. So my brother held out and didnt invest in that company, long stories short that company is currently struggling to stay alive. My brother didnt have to ask me if he should or shouldnt invest in that company, I gave him the info i had without him having to ask. Thats because me and my brother dont have the "oh its his money" barrier in our relationship. Now i could have stood by and thought "well he didnt ask for my input" but why would i care if he asked for it or not, when i know the decision hes made is wrong and will cost him.



I never suggested that you refrain from sharing information in casual conversation. All I'm saying is that unwanted advice rarely does any good. In your situation, the advice was hardly unwanted. Seems perfectly fine to do what you did, and I don't think anyone here would disagree.

idiom
02-18-2012, 04:00 AM
In New Zealand if you live together for 3 years then straight or gay you are automatically married and own half of each others stuff.

dillo
02-18-2012, 04:08 AM
Of all the violations of civil liberties going on in this country, tax money going to birth control is irrelevant.

dillo
02-18-2012, 04:15 AM
Well then she can get married and enjoy all the sex she wants with her husband.

isnt sex with contraception a sin

eduardo89
02-18-2012, 07:09 AM
isnt sex with contraception a sin

"Birth control" per se is not a sin as there are many methods. With regards to the pill: there is not one but rather three purposes for birth control pills.

First, the pill exists to inhibit ovulation, which is its primary means of birth control. Second, the pill thickens the cervical mucus with the effect that it becomes more difficult for sperm to travel to the egg. Third, the pill thins and shrivels the lining of the uterus so that it is unable or less able to facilitate the implantation of the newly fertilized egg.

The bottom line is this, the first two purposes for birth control pills are contraceptive in nature and therefore acceptable for use by a Christian couple. However, the third use of birth control pills is potentially abortive in that it seeks to disrupt the ongoing life of a fertilized egg. That potentiality is incredibly controversial; thus, faithful Christians who are staunchly pro-life and believe that life begins at conception are divided over the issue.

Even Focus on the Family and the Christian Medical and Dental Associations (CMDA) are undecided on the issue. Therefore, whether or not a Christian couple should use birth control pills is a very complicated issue on which faithful pro-life Christians and doctors disagree.

As a result, it seems legalistic and inappropriate to declare that use of the pill is sinful. Yet, at the same time it seems that Christian couples need to be informed of the potential abortive nature of birth control pills so that they can study the matter further and prayerfully come to an informed decision according to their own conscience and the leading of God the Holy Spirit.

eduardo89
02-18-2012, 07:16 AM
In New Zealand if you live together for 3 years then straight or gay you are automatically married and own half of each others stuff.

That's not true. New Zealand does not legally recognize gay "marriage". They have civil unions, however.

speciallyblend
02-18-2012, 07:21 AM
We are equal in the sense we are human and we need air to breath, food and water to live. The only cage around us is government, if you allow government to lock you in, it's by your choice not anyone else.

in many cases the only cages i see are women putting the cages around them nothing to do with gov.

anewvoice
02-18-2012, 07:23 AM
Where was this from orignially OP?

idiom
02-18-2012, 02:35 PM
That's not true. New Zealand does not legally recognize gay "marriage". They have civil unions, however.

Ah, branding is big for you?

eduardo89
02-18-2012, 02:42 PM
Ah, branding is big for you?

Just pointing out that what you said is false. Also in common law marriage it's only the thing you acquire after that point that generally become joint assets

onlyrp
02-18-2012, 03:37 PM
Seriously? WTF is wrong with this world??? Thats like saying. MEN have a right to FREE gym memberships! Men have a right to FREE viagra! Free Cellphones. RIGHTS!! This is disgusting. Isnt this where ron paul flies in with his cape and his pen and vetos this unconstitutional crap?!??!

more like condoms...

onlyrp
02-18-2012, 03:38 PM
Ah, branding is big for you?

when denying gays the equal rights outright fails, they resort to branding, if that fails, they'll say "you still can't force me to call it what it is not".

donnay
02-19-2012, 09:05 AM
in many cases the only cages i see are women putting the cages around them nothing to do with gov.

Of course on the surface that is exactly what it appears to look like to most. But deep down it was designed by government (Intelligent Manipulation) to cause a gender warfare, get the women to pay taxes and take them away from the home and divide the country.

Edward Bernays (nephew of Sigmund Freud) started this ball rolling in the 1920s and '30s, with the Torch of Freedom parade.

matt0611
02-19-2012, 09:26 AM
isnt sex with contraception a sin

Many sects of Christianity believe that within the context of a marriage birth control is completely fine. So it depends.

Danke
02-19-2012, 09:37 AM
It depends on what it is I want to buy. If it's a large ticket item like a car or house I would certainly talk it over with my husband. I do not need his approval, nor does he need mine. It's a mutual respect, and personal responsibility that is key here. I emphatically trust my husband.


That explains the frequent ventures to Walmart when he get back from his long boat rides with the boys.

donnay
02-19-2012, 10:13 AM
That explains the frequent ventures to Walmart when he get back from his long boat rides with the boys.


He goes just to hear Janet talk:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Czoww2l1xdw

:D

onlyrp
02-19-2012, 01:32 PM
Wow, you are really clueless. I am not here making myself look good or anyone else for that matter. You're so hung up with thinking materialism equates liberty. :rolleyes: There is no beef to your diatribe.

If materialism isnt liberty, why isnt poverty a virtue?

Invicta
02-20-2012, 12:19 AM
There is nothing free and without cost wherever government is found.

KingNothing
02-20-2012, 06:56 AM
Of course on the surface that is exactly what it appears to look like to most. But deep down it was designed by government (Intelligent Manipulation) to cause a gender warfare, get the women to pay taxes and take them away from the home and divide the country.

Edward Bernays (nephew of Sigmund Freud) started this ball rolling in the 1920s and '30s, with the Torch of Freedom parade.


All Bernays wanted to do was make more money for his client.

And, this line of posts reminds me of something from Mad Men...



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQM8UKgt3Qs

"You make the lie. You invent want. You're for them. Not us."
"I hate to break it to you, but there is no big lie. There is no system. The universe is indifferent."

donnay
02-20-2012, 10:01 AM
All Bernays wanted to do was make more money for his client.

And, this line of posts reminds me of something from Mad Men...



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQM8UKgt3Qs

"You make the lie. You invent want. You're for them. Not us."
"I hate to break it to you, but there is no big lie. There is no system. The universe is indifferent."

1285

Guess you are not familiar with Edward Bernays' book-- in his own words he talks about manipulating peoples minds.
http://minglecity.com/group/knowledgeisking/forum/topics/the-father-of-spin-and-propaganda-edward-l-bernays-free-your-mind



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhxfArTAcfM&feature=player_embedded&list=PL26B1645A4F7A74FD#!

JuicyG
02-20-2012, 11:47 AM
Originally Posted by KingNothing View Post
All Bernays wanted to do was make more money for his client.

And, this line of posts reminds me of something from Mad Men...

1285

Guess you are not familiar with Edward Bernays' book-- in his own words he talks about manipulating peoples minds.
http://minglecity.com/group/knowledgeisking/forum/topics/the-father-of-spin-and-propaganda-edward-l-bernays-free-your-mind

I`ve seen this documentary a while back. Not sure how you see this fitting into our equation.

Yes, guy worked for US gov same as he worked for private companies. Both gov and corporations have something they want to sell you. Either a concept or idea or something that in the end might prove lucrative. Government is often in bed with certain big corporations, so it`s basically just taxpayer paid advertising if you will, to help certain corporate interest.

Corporations needed to generate growth to please shareholders, so in turn they needed bigger market. Psychologists such as this guy were employed to help them create that market. From where people only bought 1 pair of shoes that would last them a lifetime, they`ve started buying dozens of shoes to match their personality, various events, trends, etc.

Yes, was manufactured consent if you will. But it`s not in any way different than how church does it. Church used same techniques to manufacture consent(see for eg tickets to heaven (http://www.articlesbase.com/religion-articles/ticket-to-heaven-money-making-scam-set-up-by-the-early-roman-catholic-church-4073690.html)) by providing for certain afflictions such as loneliness, fear of death, lack of purpose etc. Church just filled a market for these needs, same as corporations filled a market for dozens pair of shoes and various products. I`ve seen several people, these past few years, trying out different churches to see which one fits them best, just like trying out shoes in a store. It`s same thing actually. It`s just the market trying to sell you a product.

"...there is no big lie. There is no system. The universe is indifferent."

LibertyRevolution
02-20-2012, 12:34 PM
Because men can't be gold diggers.

Do women never earn more than men where you live?

Sure, but the courts will side with the woman more than the man when it comes to divorce settlements.
It is usually the woman that gets the house, the kids, the car.
If your really unlucky she will even take your dog too...

KingNothing
02-20-2012, 02:21 PM
1285

Guess you are not familiar with Edward Bernays' book-- in his own words he talks about manipulating peoples minds.



I know exactly who he is, and I appreciate your intellectual snobbery. I'll go out on a limb and say that I'm more familiar with him than you are, and that I saw The Century of Self before you did. His own words do nothing but support my original claim - he was just working for his employer. All he was trying to do was tap into a new market. He wasn't some sinister, whisker-twisting villain. He was a real guy. Just like the rest of us. Except he was in tune with the human subconscious more than rest.

otherone
02-20-2012, 02:38 PM
the courts will side with the woman more than the man when it comes to divorce settlements.
.

If women weren't guaranteed a financial safety-net, they might exercise greater discretion when choosing a mate. On the other hand, prescience of the terrors of divorce court is mostly ignored by men in the selection process.
(Translation: Stupid outta hurt)

playboymommy
02-20-2012, 03:27 PM
Marriage is a contract.. a bad contract totally lopsided to the woman.
As it stands now, its just a way for a women to leech off you for years, then take half your stuff and leave.
If women had to honor obey their husband.. and that was enforceable.. then maybe it be worth getting married.

you can keep the house
and the bank accounts
'cause boys I bring home the bacon

donnay
02-20-2012, 05:38 PM
I know exactly who he is, and I appreciate your intellectual snobbery. I'll go out on a limb and say that I'm more familiar with him than you are, and that I saw The Century of Self before you did. His own words do nothing but support my original claim - he was just working for his employer. All he was trying to do was tap into a new market. He wasn't some sinister, whisker-twisting villain. He was a real guy. Just like the rest of us. Except he was in tune with the human subconscious more than rest.

Using mass mind control on people is sinister--sorry, he doesn't get a pass by me!

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.

We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society.

Our invisible governors are, in many cases, unaware of the identity of their fellow members in the inner cabinet.”

~Edward Bernays, Propaganda

KingNothing
02-20-2012, 10:34 PM
Using mass mind control on people is sinister--sorry, he doesn't get a pass by me!

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.

We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society.

Our invisible governors are, in many cases, unaware of the identity of their fellow members in the inner cabinet.”

~Edward Bernays, Propaganda


It's like you missed the entire point of everything Bernays did, and the documentary Adam Curtis made.

Bernays did what many before him and many after him attempted to do - connect with peoples' desires and push them in a position that was to his advantage. He just happened to be better at it than anyone else.

I hate to break it to you, but there is no big lie. There is no system. The universe is indifferent.

You need to keep that line in mind when you're thinking through this stuff. The "invisible governors" Bernays mentions aren't whisker-twisting super villains. They're the men and women who have risen to the top of their respective fields, people who drive advancement, discourse, and opinion. They're "unaware of the identity of their fellow members in the inner cabinet" because there is no "inner cabinet" in the sense you believe there to be. It isn't a secret cabal. It's individuals pursuing their own best interest, based on their own value system that they developed to cope with our indifferent universe.

Danke
02-20-2012, 11:23 PM
I hate to break it to you, but there is no big lie. There is no system. The universe is indifferent.


Yes of course. Buying up all the major newspapers to control information around the turn of the century and then all media is just coincidence. And that goes for public education too! As is the central banking system. And of course "non-profit" organizations and NGOs, etc. Silly Reece Commission.

onlyrp
02-20-2012, 11:46 PM
Yes of course. Buying up all the major newspapers to control information around the turn of the century and then all media is just coincidence. And that goes for public education too! As is the central banking system. And of course "non-profit" organizations and NGOs, etc. Silly Reece Commission.

that's your problem, you think there's only 2 options, either your version of conspiracy, or its coincidence. Could it partial of both or some other plan where you got the details wrong? It's a pretty crappy conspiracy if you exposed it, isn't it?

Danke
02-21-2012, 12:00 AM
that's your problem, you think there's only 2 options, either your version of conspiracy, or its coincidence. Could it partial of both or some other plan where you got the details wrong? It's a pretty crappy conspiracy if you exposed it, isn't it?

No, your problem is you're just a past banned troll, repeatedly. I see shades of grey, you haven't a clue, but pretend you do. Your shallow and don't do the research. Just chuck the spears.

NidStyles
02-21-2012, 12:18 AM
I just wonder how they expect to keep the Ponzi-scheme going if they shrink the population. Without debtors and tax payer's increasing at the same rate of their Inflation the debt will continue to grow exponentially faster than it can be paid off. The lack of significant population increase is what killed the Fiat experiment in the first place.

onlyrp
02-21-2012, 01:18 AM
No, your problem is you're just a past banned troll, repeatedly. I see shades of grey, you haven't a clue, but pretend you do. Your shallow and don't do the research. Just chuck the spears.

if you see shades of grey, you shouldn't resort to saying "oh, then it's just coincidence" when somebody doesn't believe your conspiracy.

Danke
02-21-2012, 01:29 AM
if you see shades of grey, you shouldn't resort to saying "oh, then it's just coincidence" when somebody doesn't believe your conspiracy.

And I don't. I have been looking into these subjects for a long time. RPFs has been here almost 5 years now and these subjects have been gone over with a fine tooth comb many times already.

Just bump old threads to see discussions from very enlighten and articulate individuals, many who do not participate anymore...fatigue? I may have become rather flippant when seeing the same tired old shit rehashed by "new" members (probably old banned ones, like you).

Yeah, it is easy to just reply to any topic and be a spear chucker from the stands. I should go back to ignoring your posts, as I now you feed upon responses to your nonsense.

rockerrockstar
02-21-2012, 02:05 AM
People complaining about birth control then also complaining about welfare are being oxymorons. Just think if people used birth control there would be less welfare going out. I am just saying it is probably cheaper to pay for birth control then pay for welfare for babies/kids. So maybe you should consider the cost of this political stance.

onlyrp
02-21-2012, 02:11 AM
And I don't. I have been looking into these subjects for a long time. RPFs has been here almost 5 years now and these subjects have been gone over with a fine tooth comb many times already.

Just bump old threads to see discussions from very enlighten and articulate individuals, many who do not participate anymore...fatigue? I may have become rather flippant when seeing the same tired old shit rehashed by "new" members (probably old banned ones, like you).

Yeah, it is easy to just reply to any topic and be a spear chucker from the stands. I should go back to ignoring your posts, as I now you feed upon responses to your nonsense.

I don't question whether you've studied what you claim. But you said this, how else was I going to read it other than "if you don't believe there's a big lie, a system, and a conspiracy, then you must believe it's coincidence" , what part of what you said here shows you see a gray area?

Yes of course. Buying up all the major newspapers to control information around the turn of the century and then all media is just coincidence. And that goes for public education too! As is the central banking system. And of course "non-profit" organizations and NGOs, etc. Silly Reece Commission.

I'm not going to bump old threads unless I find them first, and I wouldn't quite know where to start.

Danke
02-21-2012, 02:32 AM
I don't question whether you've studied what you claim. But you said this, how else was I going to read it other than "if you don't believe there's a big lie, a system, and a conspiracy, then you must believe it's coincidence" , what part of what you said here shows you see a gray area?

Yes of course. Buying up all the major newspapers to control information around the turn of the century and then all media is just coincidence. And that goes for public education too! As is the central banking system. And of course "non-profit" organizations and NGOs, etc. Silly Reece Commission.

I'm not going to bump old threads unless I find them first, and I wouldn't quite know where to start.

OK, so you just stumbled upon RPFs? Never been here before Jan 2012?

How did you find out about this place?

Lishy
02-21-2012, 02:40 AM
I'm all for contraception, but they want me to pay for someone else's? REALLY? Now that's messed up!

Damn dirty arse hoes...

KingNothing
02-21-2012, 06:48 AM
Yes of course. Buying up all the major newspapers to control information around the turn of the century and then all media is just coincidence. And that goes for public education too! As is the central banking system. And of course "non-profit" organizations and NGOs, etc. Silly Reece Commission.

Who said it was coincidence? There's a huge jump between saying that titans of industry work within and manipulate the rule of law to their benefit, and claiming that there is an overarching cabal, monitoring all industries and pulling strings in each of them like a puppeteer.

There is no big lie. There are, on the other hand, billions of small ones that every individual engages in while striving to fulfill his conscious and sub-conscious desires. To check those small lies -lies that are a consequence of our human nature- people have created traditions, religion, morality, distractions and laws. Some people (and maybe every Ron Paul supporter) have seen beyond most or all of those trivialities that society has foisted upon us to keep us on the straight and narrow. We understand a greater morality and don't need all or most of those things to behave appropriately. That does not mean, however, that anyone who has not or does not want to brush aside all or most of those things is stupid or ignorant, and it does not mean that anyone who knows the game and takes advantage of it is evil. They're all just people doing what they need to do to make it through a day, and an overwhelming majority of them are kind at heart and would never knowingly harm anyone else.

You know, before the stock market crash a culture of materialism and consumerism was growing in America. People were being pushed into purchasing things that they really didn't need. Were the ad men who offered corporations a way to emotionally connect a product to an individual evil, or were they just giving people with disposable income a manner to fulfill subconscious desires? This, I think, is one of the reasons that a series like Mad Men is so amazing. It shows how ad men operated in the post-war era, when Americans had oodles of disposable income to spend on things they didn't need. Corporations competed for those dollars that American families found superfluous, and they turned to ad men like Bernays or David Ogilvy for help. They weren't the masterminds of some big lie. They were individuals, selling other individuals a way to connect a product to a third group of people. All of their interests intersected at that point. It wasn't a secret cabal that produced a phallic car for Joe Average to buy, it was an automotive company created, staffed and managed by individuals acting in their own self-interest. It wasn't a secret cabal that convinced Joe Average that the automobile would allow him to express himself in a certain way or that it would make him happier. It was an advertising agency, created, staffed and managed by individuals acting in their own self-interest.

I hate to break it to you, but there is no big lie. There is no system. The universe is indifferent.

Sometimes people will cheat, and steal, and hurt others to get ahead. Sometimes they will work with others to get ahead. Sometimes that work will be in secret, sometimes it will be open to the public. It's just the way people operate.

It's convenient to view the world in a completely non-nuanced fashion and to believe that a family of bankers struck it rich during the Napoleonic Wars and has been guiding the world since then, or that the Vatican has been calling the shots in secret for 1500 years, or that everything you see on television was funded by George Soros. ...but real life is much scarier than that. There is no one at the helm. No hand is guiding us. We're at the whims of conscious and sub-conscious desires and luck. THAT'S how indifferent the universe is.

donnay
02-21-2012, 08:06 AM
It's like you missed the entire point of everything Bernays did, and the documentary Adam Curtis made.

Bernays did what many before him and many after him attempted to do - connect with peoples' desires and push them in a position that was to his advantage. He just happened to be better at it than anyone else.

I hate to break it to you, but there is no big lie. There is no system. The universe is indifferent.

You need to keep that line in mind when you're thinking through this stuff. The "invisible governors" Bernays mentions aren't whisker-twisting super villains. They're the men and women who have risen to the top of their respective fields, people who drive advancement, discourse, and opinion. They're "unaware of the identity of their fellow members in the inner cabinet" because there is no "inner cabinet" in the sense you believe there to be. It isn't a secret cabal. It's individuals pursuing their own best interest, based on their own value system that they developed to cope with our indifferent universe.

How about this LIE?

Edward Bernays and the Fluoride Deception

An excerpt from "The Fluoride Deception"

A discussion with journalist Chris Bryson about Edward Bernays' role in the promotion of water fluoridation.


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4127471896206528068&q=Edward+Bernays

KingNothing
02-21-2012, 09:04 AM
How about this LIE?

Edward Bernays and the Fluoride Deception

An excerpt from "The Fluoride Deception"

A discussion with journalist Chris Bryson about Edward Bernays' role in the promotion of water fluoridation.


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4127471896206528068&q=Edward+Bernays

Yeah. So? It's not the big lie that Draper was referencing. It's not a plot by whisker-twisting super villains.

Many people believed then, like many people believe now, that fluoride is good for your teeth. Other people have an interest in selling it or using it. It's a convergence of interests. Why wouldn't people within the related professions and industries want to convince others of its importance? Why wouldn't they want to hire the best in the business to push their view point? And it should be noted that cavities are almost non-existent now and dental-health is better than it has ever been at any point in human history.

EDIT: This is not to say that I endorse the fluoridation of water. On philosophical grounds I oppose it, just as I would almost any form of government intervention and the potential risks far outweight, in my opinion, the potential rewards.

EDIT 2: FWIW, I grew up in the town Philip Sadtler did his Fluoride research in.

donnay
02-21-2012, 09:42 AM
Yeah. So? It's not the big lie that Draper was referencing. It's not a plot by whisker-twisting super villains.

Many people believed then, like many people believe now, that fluoride is good for your teeth. Why wouldn't people of that persuasion want to convince others of its importance? Why wouldn't they want to hire the best in the business to push their view point? And it should be noted that cavities are almost non-existent now and dental-health is better than it has ever been at any point in human history.

EDIT: This is not to say that I endorse the fluoridation of water. On philosophical grounds I oppose it, just as I would almost any form of government intervention.

Many people were manipulated to "think" fluoride is good for them.

http://web.archive.org/web/20000823211848/http:/enteract.com/~mgfree/Medical/Fluorine/FluorineApathy.html

"The first occurrence of fluoridated drinking water was found in Germany's Nazi prison camps, which were maintained partly by I.G. Farben. The Gestapo had little concern about fluoride's supposed effect on children's teeth; their alleged reason for mass-medicating water with sodium fluoride was to sterilize humans and force them into calm submission." (Ref. book: "The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben" by Joseph Borkin.

1950's comment by Edward L. Bernays, nephew of Sigmund Freud and PR man for the fluoridation project under Oscar Ewing:

"... the most direct way to reach the mind of the HERD is through the leaders. ... Public Health Officers cannot afford the professional modesty professed by physicians. A redefinition of ethics is necessary.... and the subject matter of the propaganda need not necessarily be true." (Book: Crystallizing Public Opinion, by E. L. Bernays.)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dZPOJ4p1DM&feature=related


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VX1qiQoASlw&feature=related


The Case Against Fluoride by Paul Connett and James Beck
http://www.westonaprice.org/thumbs-up-reviews/the-case-against-fluoride-by-paul-connett-and-james-beck

Forgotten tooth decay cure : heal your cavities and prevent root canals
http://nourishedmagazine.com.au/blog/articles/forgotten-tooth-decay-cure-heal-your-cavities-and-prevent-root-canals-2

Charlie's Story
http://www.westonaprice.org/soy-alert/charlies-story

WESTON A PRICE BROCHURE
http://www.rejoiceinlife.com/mediaFliers/WAPBrochure.php

Weston Price, The World's Greatest Dentist
http://www.curetoothdecay.com/Dentistry/weston_price_dentist.htm

How I Healed My Child’s Cavity
http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/how-i-healed-my-childs-cavity/

specsaregood
02-21-2012, 09:46 AM
People complaining about birth control then also complaining about welfare are being oxymorons. Just think if people used birth control there would be less welfare going out. I am just saying it is probably cheaper to pay for birth control then pay for welfare for babies/kids. So maybe you should consider the cost of this political stance.

Even better is we should implement mandatory sterilization for those making poverty level wages. That'd fix the problem right up.

ZenBowman
02-21-2012, 09:47 AM
People complaining about birth control then also complaining about welfare are being oxymorons. Just think if people used birth control there would be less welfare going out. I am just saying it is probably cheaper to pay for birth control then pay for welfare for babies/kids. So maybe you should consider the cost of this political stance.

Agreed, a major cost savings in the long run. Think of the big picture.

KingNothing
02-21-2012, 09:51 AM
Many people were manipulated to "think" fluoride is good for them.



I can't watch Youtube videos at work, but I imagine I've already seen everything you've linked me to. I am familiar with fluoride, fluoride science and it's history. I've never rejected the claims that it is harmful to you. All I reject -and I haven't even done so yet- is that it is A Plot By the Man To Keep Us Down, and docile, and without children, and stupid.

Child birth rates in westernized places that have not banned fluoridation are no lower than westernized areas that have. How about IQs and violent crime? Think there's any difference there? I don't. If fluoride has been added to our water to influence our behavior The Illuminati have failed miserably. Foiled again, by those darn kids! And they didn't even have to use their darn internets to do it!

A more likely scenario is that interested parties worked to add fluoride to water because they honestly believed it to help Joe Average more than it harmed Joe Average. Whether that it does or not is up for plenty of debate at this point.

KingNothing
02-21-2012, 09:54 AM
People complaining about birth control then also complaining about welfare are being oxymorons. Just think if people used birth control there would be less welfare going out. I am just saying it is probably cheaper to pay for birth control then pay for welfare for babies/kids. So maybe you should consider the cost of this political stance.


That's a terrible way to view human life. Let's fix the economy, cure the disease of dependency and work as individuals to set a good example for others to follow that includes healthy, safe and intelligent reproductive practices. "Birth control saves us monies" is a narrow, short-sighted solution for our problems.

EDIT: That's not to say that this particular issue amounts to a hill of beans. It really doesn't, when compared to wars in the middle east, the Federal Reserve, the erosion of civil liberties, and our unfunded liabilities. But the mentality matters. With the right mentality and the proper thought process, we can solve ALL of these problems. THAT is why Ron Paul rules.

HigherVision
02-21-2012, 10:06 AM
Critical Theory i.e. Cultural Marxism promotes the notion that women are the eternal victims of men. It's what they used to subvert our culture from individualism and capitalism to collectivism and socialism. They recognized that Americans' family based social structure was preventing the working class from embracing Marxism so they started pushing this stuff heavy in the universities in the 60's.

donnay
02-21-2012, 10:11 AM
I can't watch Youtube videos at work, but I imagine I've already seen everything you've linked me to. I am familiar with fluoride, fluoride science and it's history. I've never rejected the claims that it is harmful to you. All I reject -and I haven't even done so yet- is that it is A Plot By the Man To Keep Us Down, and docile, and without children, and stupid.

Child birth rates in westernized places that have not banned fluoridation are no lower than westernized areas that have. How about IQs and violent crime? Think there's any difference there? I don't. If fluoride has been added to our water to influence our behavior The Illuminati have failed miserably. Foiled again, by those darn kids! And they didn't even have to use their darn internets to do it!

A more likely scenario is that interested parties worked to add fluoride to water because they honestly believed it to help Joe Average more than it harmed Joe Average. Whether that it does or not is up for plenty of debate at this point.

The interested parties? You mean the manipulators who manipulated people's trust into thinking fluoride is good for fighting tooth decay? There was never any real proof given.


You just said not more than two posts ago:

"Many people believed then, like many people believe now, that fluoride is good for your teeth. Other people have an interest in selling it or using it. It's a convergence of interests. Why wouldn't people within the related professions and industries want to convince others of its importance? Why wouldn't they want to hire the best in the business to push their view point? And it should be noted that cavities are almost non-existent now and dental-health is better than it has ever been at any point in human history."

Weston Price and Marion Pottenger spent years studying indigenous people, and what causes tooth decay. It is the lack of nutrition, vitamins and minerals! Sodium Fluoride is USELESS against tooth decay, has never been proven to work AT ALL, and is a known poison that impairs intelligence.

http://www.curetoothdecay.com/Tooth_Decay/healthy_people_healthy_teeth.htm

Fluoride and Fluoridation: Wide Range of Serious Health Problems Including Thyroid Disorder

In 2005, eleven unions within the EPA publicly called for a ban of water fluoridation, over concerns that it may cause bone cancer. And in 2006, the American Dental Association warned mothers about using fluoridated water to mix their powdered baby formula. Now, finally, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is developing software to try to assess just how much fluoride you’re ingesting, citing new findings that cumulative fluoride intake might lead to painful skeletal fluorosisMedical Professionals and Scientists are warning that water fluoridation has dangerous long-term consequences to health. For over 50 years, the U.S. government and media have trumpeted fluoride as a safe and effective means of reducing cavities, especially in children. But fluoride is not the benevolent and innocuous substance the public has been led to believe. Chronic doses of fluoride, like arsenic and lead, accumulate in our bodies causing a blockage in the way cells breathe and leads to the malformation of collagen. Cancer, diabetes, thyroid and neurological disorders, hormonal imbalances, heart disease, arthritis and osteoporosis have all been linked to chronic fluoride ingestion. We are now exposed to increasing doses of fluoride from toothpaste, rinses, water, food, medicines, showering, bathing, and even the air that we breathe. Our environment has become a literal fluoride dumping ground.

http://www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/fluoride.htm

Research, learn and understand, you, like many others have been manipulated!!

KingNothing
02-21-2012, 10:26 AM
Research, learn and understand, you, like many others have been manipulated!!

Would you please cut it with this arrogant, holier than thou slop, Enlightened One? I already know everything you've mentioned so far, and I've said multiple times now that I'm against the fluoridation of water. Disagreeing with you on the context of an issue does not mean I've "been manipulated" and it does not mean that I'm not capable of joining the same elite vanguard, dedicated to the protection of all things Sacred, Good, And American that you believe you're part of. And it doesn't mean that I hate kittens, or that I want Liberty to go down the memory hole. It just means we disagree on the consequences of water fluoridation, Buck.

You completely dodged the logical conclusion that THEY failed in THEIR attempts to manipulate human behavior by fluoridating water. It's had almost no net effect, positive or negative, on humanity that it's silly to claim it's part of the Big Lie hell-bent on depopulating the earth.

Why are you inventing this strawman argument, and discounting the logic laid out here? http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?361249-UPDATE-Women-have-a-RIGHT-to-FREE-contraception.&p=4201633&viewfull=1#post4201633

donnay
02-21-2012, 10:50 AM
Would you please cut it with this arrogant, holier than thou slop, Enlightened One? I already know everything you've mentioned so far, and I've said multiple times now that I'm against the fluoridation of water. Disagreeing with you on the context of an issue does not mean I've "been manipulated" and it does not mean that I'm not capable of joining the same elite vanguard, dedicated to the protection of all things Sacred, Good, And American that you believe you're part of. And it doesn't mean that I hate kittens, or that I want Liberty to go down the memory hole. It just means we disagree on the consequences of water fluoridation, Buck.

You completely dodged the logical conclusion that THEY failed in THEIR attempts to manipulate human behavior by fluoridating water. It's had almost no net effect, positive or negative, on humanity that it's silly to claim it's part of the Big Lie hell-bent on depopulating the earth.

Why are you inventing this strawman argument, and discounting the logic laid out here? http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?361249-UPDATE-Women-have-a-RIGHT-to-FREE-contraception.&p=4201633&viewfull=1#post4201633

It's not a holier than thou attitude, it is a well researched, well studied attitude. The Manhattan Project is at the core of this. The documents from Hitler and Stalin have been exposed and duly noted. You would think Edward Bernays would know enough about those two men, and what they did to his people, not to want to do the same things to Americans with sodium fluoride. However, since Bernays was such a good manipulator, fluoride has been thought to fight tooth decay for decades. Meanwhile it has been slowly poisoning the American people!!


Again, if you tell a lie long enough people will begin to think it is true...

oyarde
02-21-2012, 12:48 PM
You guys, birth control is a health care issue. Beer, gasoline, and implants are not :rolleyes:. ;)


What I find really fucking bizaroo about this is.... A) Why does something that is already so fucking cheap need to be free?
B) Why the fuck aren't they talking about making things free for people with medical conditions? For instance free insulin? I have to pay around 500-600 dollars a month to stay alive. Hell I don't even want it for free, but I would love if the government instead got out of the fucking way and allowed companies to reduce the costs so I didn't have to spend so damn much on products they inflate (also by destroying our dollar).

All these whiny liberals and dumbasses that think they are doing something good for the world with free birth control? Fuck yourself with a .22 mag and pull the trigger. It's so damn annoying that something so cheap and already readily accessible and free (planned parenthood, some schools etc) is getting this many peoples attention, yet getting the government to reduce the cost of vital life saving medicine is of no concern to these fuckers.

To 'wrap' it all up, condoms cost me about 10$ a month. Medicine about 500-600$ a month. Fuck the people that want to reduce the cost (by making others pay) of the already cheap product.You need to learn to think like one of those progressive Dems .Need gasoline to get to health care , beer and boobs needed for proper mental health to continue to work and pay taxes for UnConstititional stuff for others :)

KingNothing
02-21-2012, 01:52 PM
It's not a holier than thou attitude, it is a well researched, well studied attitude. The Manhattan Project is at the core of this. The documents from Hitler and Stalin have been exposed and duly noted. You would think Edward Bernays would know enough about those two men, and what they did to his people, not to want to do the same things to Americans with sodium fluoride. However, since Bernays was such a good manipulator, fluoride has been thought to fight tooth decay for decades. Meanwhile it has been slowly poisoning the American people!!


Again, if you tell a lie long enough people will begin to think it is true...


Still nothing on the Alex Jonesian take of fluoridation and how THEY failed to really bring about any change to the population through it?

And no opinion of how my stance, detailed here - http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?361249-UPDATE-Women-have-a-RIGHT-to-FREE-contraception.&p=4201633&viewfull=1#post4201633 - converges so nicely with reality?

onlyrp
02-21-2012, 07:28 PM
OK, so you just stumbled upon RPFs? Never been here before Jan 2012?

How did you find out about this place?

I've never been a registered user on here until I did. I've read the forum in the past, probably since 2010. I heard of it Googling Ron Paul discussion, or Ron Paul talk, that was over a year ago, so that's what I remember.

onlyrp
02-21-2012, 07:29 PM
Still nothing on the Alex Jonesian take of fluoridation and how THEY failed to really bring about any change to the population through it?

And no opinion of how my stance, detailed here - http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?361249-UPDATE-Women-have-a-RIGHT-to-FREE-contraception.&p=4201633&viewfull=1#post4201633 - converges so nicely with reality?

If you deny a conspiracy, you're either part of it, a coincidence theorist or the brainwashed hopeless victim of it. You can't possibly be a critical thinker or have reason to not believe the conspiracy.

onlyrp
02-21-2012, 07:33 PM
People complaining about birth control then also complaining about welfare are being oxymorons. Just think if people used birth control there would be less welfare going out. I am just saying it is probably cheaper to pay for birth control then pay for welfare for babies/kids. So maybe you should consider the cost of this political stance.

Agreed! They're all about "who are we to judge" when it's about somebody's child, but when it comes to feeding their child, they have no problem saying "it's not my job to help you". It's a FACT that birth control, even late term abortions, are cheaper than feeding a child, this is even if you exclude labor for caring, entertainment, clothing and other "necessities" of a healthy and happy child.

tttppp
02-21-2012, 07:34 PM
Seriously? WTF is wrong with this world??? Thats like saying. MEN have a right to FREE gym memberships! Men have a right to FREE viagra! Free Cellphones. RIGHTS!! This is disgusting. Isnt this where ron paul flies in with his cape and his pen and vetos this unconstitutional crap?!??!

I'll bet you if candidate said he'd eliminate the free market and have the government provide everything for you, that that candidate would be elected. Communism is very popular these days, which is why Obama was elected.

onlyrp
02-21-2012, 07:57 PM
I'll bet you if candidate said he'd eliminate the free market and have the government provide everything for you, that that candidate would be elected. Communism is very popular these days, which is why Obama was elected.

I'm with you there. People will never ask "where does that money come from". And the rich or educated who oppose it will be victims of angry mobs, because they "hate the poor".

Danke
02-21-2012, 08:00 PM
I hate to break it to you, but there is no big lie. There is no system. The universe is indifferent.



Whoa, thanks for breaking that to me.

Did I say such a thing?

People (rich and connected ones) do collaborate together and influence politicians and their legislation. It has been shown many times, even here on RPFs. If you don't see that, you are blind.

Show me a regulation, and I can show you a advocacy group behind it for their own self interest, not at all altruistic. Almost always impeding self reliance and fair competition.

helmuth_hubener
02-21-2012, 08:07 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO2eh6f5Go0

You want free health care? Birth control? You have come to the right place!

gunnysmith
02-21-2012, 08:30 PM
The 2nd Amendment prevents the government from infringing on my right to keep and bear arms.
It is a God given right for the defense of self, family, state and country.
OK, where's my free gun.
Sorry, just a simple analogy, from a basic libertarian

onlyrp
02-21-2012, 08:33 PM
The 2nd Amendment prevents the government from infringing on my right to keep and bear arms.
It is a God given right for the defense of self, family, state and country.
OK, where's my free gun.
Sorry, just a simple analogy, from a basic libertarian

I was just about to ask you where is your source for "its a god given right"

Danke
02-21-2012, 08:40 PM
I was just about to ask you where is your source for "its a god given right"

Do you have a source that says it is not my right?

donnay
02-21-2012, 08:48 PM
If you deny a conspiracy, you're either part of it, a coincidence theorist or the brainwashed hopeless victim of it. You can't possibly be a critical thinker or have reason to not believe the conspiracy.

You cannot be in denial about a conspiracy to poison people and make them docile and be a critical thinker. There is enough documentation out there for people to connect the dots conclusively.

KingNothing
02-21-2012, 09:21 PM
You cannot be in denial about a conspiracy to poison people and make them docile and be a critical thinker. There is enough documentation out there for people to connect the dots conclusively.

Yeah, Americans are one docile bunch. Not nearly as much violent crime here as there is in other countr.... oh wait a minute.

You guys play so fast and loose with facts and logic that it discredits the valid arguments we can present. A great microcosm of that happens in one of the fluoride documentaries you posted. The host shows a glass of water, and a toothbrush with toothpaste on it and claims each has the same amount fluoride, and that if you swallow what's on the toothbrush you're to call poison control. That is absolutely absurd, but it's emblematic of the style employed by these guys. What a shame that is, too -- there's plenty wrong with society today that we don' need hyperbole and bombastic claims to strengthen our case.

onlyrp
02-21-2012, 09:34 PM
You cannot be in denial about a conspiracy to poison people and make them docile and be a critical thinker. There is enough documentation out there for people to connect the dots conclusively.

any of it not coming from Alex Jones type websites?

onlyrp
02-21-2012, 09:35 PM
Yeah, Americans are one docile bunch. Not nearly as much violent crime here as there is in other countr.... oh wait a minute.



Is violence a sign of docile or intelligence?

onlyrp
02-21-2012, 09:40 PM
that if you swallow what's on the toothbrush you're to call poison control. That is absolutely absurd, but it's emblematic of the style employed by these guys.

Imagine if I called poison control after my kid swallowed toothpaste, the poison control asks me what happened, I said 'OMFG! He swallowed toothpaste!' He responds 'I doubt it's enough to worry, but I'll come over, or you can bring him over'. When I take him to the ER, they do blood, saliva, whatever tests, even force my kid to throw up to be safe.

What will they conclude? "Sir, your child did swallow toothpaste, but I can't notice anything in him that isn't acquired by a normal person drinking flouridated water" Oh no! Poison control is SO in on it! He even gave me a "safe to swallow" toothpaste with no warning label!

KingNothing
02-21-2012, 09:42 PM
Whoa, thanks for breaking that to me.

Did I say such a thing?



Yes, at least once. Hence my post in response to you. If I somehow misrepresented you, sorry and I'm happy to learn you aren't a Trutherist Who Thinks the Rothschild's Are Poisoning Us With Fluoride.



People (rich and connected ones) do collaborate together and influence politicians and their legislation. It has been shown many times, even here on RPFs. If you don't see that, you are blind.

Show me a regulation, and I can show you a advocacy group behind it for their own self interest, not at all altruistic. Almost always impeding self reliance and fair competition.


I do see that. In fact, it was in the opening sentence of my response to you, I think.

Danke
02-21-2012, 09:43 PM
Yes, at least once. Hence my post in response to you.


Quote me then.

gunnysmith
02-21-2012, 09:55 PM
Is violence a sign of docile or intelligence?
Docile, under what conditions is that imposed, training, natural, or chemical.
It would make the question easier to answer:)

KingNothing
02-21-2012, 10:17 PM
Quote me then.

You said it in response to the "big lie" line when I first brought it up, and I responded here:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?361249-UPDATE-Women-have-a-RIGHT-to-FREE-contraception.&p=4201633&viewfull=1#post4201633

Gary4Liberty
02-21-2012, 10:18 PM
not providing women with FREE birth control = war against women.

KingNothing
02-21-2012, 10:20 PM
Imagine if I called poison control after my kid swallowed toothpaste, the poison control asks me what happened, I said 'OMFG! He swallowed toothpaste!' He responds 'I doubt it's enough to worry, but I'll come over, or you can bring him over'. When I take him to the ER, they do blood, saliva, whatever tests, even force my kid to throw up to be safe.

What will they conclude? "Sir, your child did swallow toothpaste, but I can't notice anything in him that isn't acquired by a normal person drinking flouridated water" Oh no! Poison control is SO in on it! He even gave me a "safe to swallow" toothpaste with no warning label!

You have to swallow a significant amount of toothpaste for it to be a problem. The warning label even says that you should call if you swallow an abnormal amount, not the pea-sized serving they had dotted on their toothbrush.
It's that sort of silly hyperbole that makes the entire argument hard to take.

And I don't even think water should be fluoridated. Bombastic claims do not help our cause.

gunnysmith
02-21-2012, 10:29 PM
not providing women with FREE birth control = war against women.
Then where is my free gun?
I have rights too.LOL

gunnysmith
02-21-2012, 10:35 PM
Conspiracy Theories are cleverly designed to ask questions to which there is no evidence available to support truth.
It's the dulling effect to Occam's razor.

NidStyles
02-22-2012, 01:33 AM
Conspiracy Theories are cleverly designed to ask questions to which there is no evidence available to support truth.
It's the dulling effect to Occam's razor.

Occam's Razor hasn't been so sharp since the failure of the Unifying Theory, which never panned out to be as simple as Occam's Razor demanded. Too many people misapply Occam's Razor, as it require the full dataset and every variable to be known to be properly applied. It states that right in the original thesis that,"...all thing's being equal", which nothing is truly equal if you do not have all of the variables at hand.

I continually see people fall back on Empiricism as if it were the end all of Human intellectual discovery. They never pay attention that the greatest breakthroughs of scientific discovery have always been done through rationalization. Forbid anyone ever mention that though.

What is even more disturbing is that this site is based on a Libertarian style political figure. Libertarianism is a rational Philosophy, so Occam's Razor is rather inconsistent with the Principles that this site is intending to promote.

As for the Evil Whisker Twisting Villians, well let's just say history is filled with examples of such men. We can start with Genghis and move our way up Hitler Lenin, Mao and then onto a little guy named Kim for examples. The American populace is not exceptional, and therefore will obviously have these sort of characters as well. The Existence of the CFR and the Bilderburg group is proof of this. Human's do not fall into either yes or no situations, and they do not act rationally, nor empirically. Empiricism is flawed in that it requires solid hard evidence, when most of the time Motive and Ability are really that is needed to prove anything in court.

I guess what I'm trying to say that anyone that says the Universe is Indifferent, is not grounded in reality. Human's are not the Universe, and they do not act in ways predictable by any sort of Math that can be applied rationally.

gunnysmith
02-22-2012, 02:06 AM
Occam's Razor hasn't been so sharp since the failure of the Unifying Theory, which never panned out to be as simple as Occam's Razor demanded. Too many people misapply Occam's Razor, as it require the full dataset and every variable to be known to be properly applied. It states that right in the original thesis that,"...all thing's being equal", which nothing is truly equal if you do not have all of the variables at hand.

I continually see people fall back on Empiricism as if it were the end all of Human intellectual discovery. They never pay attention that the greatest breakthroughs of scientific discovery have always been done through rationalization. Forbid anyone ever mention that though.

What is even more disturbing is that this site is based on a Libertarian style political figure. Libertarianism is a rational Philosophy, so Occam's Razor is rather inconsistent with the Principles that this site is intending to promote.

As for the Evil Whisker Twisting Villians, well let's just say history is filled with examples of such men. We can start with Genghis and move our way up Hitler Lenin, Mao and then onto a little guy named Kim for examples. The American populace is not exceptional, and therefore will obviously have these sort of characters as well. The Existence of the CFR and the Bilderburg group is proof of this. Human's do not fall into either yes or no situations, and they do not act rationally, nor empirically. Empiricism is flawed in that it requires solid hard evidence, when most of the time Motive and Ability are really that is needed to prove anything in court.

I guess what I'm trying to say that anyone that says the Universe is Indifferent, is not grounded in reality. Human's are not the Universe, and they do not act in ways predictable by any sort of Math that can be applied rationally.

EAch of those things you mention have some basis in fact. That was never the object of the statement.
Todays scientific investigators have a way of drawing conclusions while using only the facts which support those conclustions and ignoring all others.
Thus the dulling statement.

However I do believe in the non-universal theory of neutrinos create the applied force which we interpret as gravity.
All movement in nature requires "push" Not "pull"

NidStyles
02-22-2012, 03:19 AM
EAch of those things you mention have some basis in fact. That was never the object of the statement.
Todays scientific investigators have a way of drawing conclusions while using only the facts which support those conclustions and ignoring all others.
Thus the dulling statement.

However I do believe in the non-universal theory of neutrinos create the applied force which we interpret as gravity.
All movement in nature requires "push" Not "pull"

The statement was more directed at another individual that keep's pushing the Empirical argument in this thread. You just happened to be the last one to push such an argument. Although yours applies far better than the other, which was just a nonsensical comment. Most Science these day's is done by the state, and they have a vested interest in specific results, thusly the situation you mentioned.


It's just as likely that gravity is a result of thermal expansion into entropy with some sort of application of reverse wave theory. The math supports it, but there is no actual way of experimenting with such a method without leaving Earth. In reality it's not likely we will ever know, as the more totalitarian the world becomes the slower actual scientific progress will proceed.

Danke
02-22-2012, 05:53 AM
You said it in response to the "big lie" line when I first brought it up, and I responded here:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?361249-UPDATE-Women-have-a-RIGHT-to-FREE-contraception.&p=4201633&viewfull=1#post4201633

I still don't see where I said there is a "big lie. There is a system."

KingNothing
02-22-2012, 06:29 AM
I still don't see where I said there is a "big lie. There is a system."


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?361249-UPDATE-Women-have-a-RIGHT-to-FREE-contraception.&p=4201160&viewfull=1#post4201160
Sorry. The sarcastic tone of your post implied to me that you disagreed with my statement.

dvalukis
02-22-2012, 07:33 AM
If pregnant women are not a threat to U.S. Security then I see no reason why FREE contraception should exist. It's just another issue they want people to get wrapped up in so that politicians don't talk about what really matters.

NidStyles
02-22-2012, 08:07 AM
If pregnant women are not a threat to U.S. Security then I see no reason why FREE contraception should exist. It's just another issue they want people to get wrapped up in so that politicians don't talk about what really matters.

So you are willing to spend my money for me then? You have no obligations with taking my money from me by the threat of force and giving it to another person?

donnay
02-22-2012, 08:32 AM
Is violence a sign of docile or intelligence?

You ever heard about Prozac? Prozac (and similar drugs) can cause people to become violent and crazy. Prozac is a fluorinated drug called "fluoxetine". Prozac is 94% fluoride.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfgewAieQW4


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9m3c2L_r4rM&feature=related


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUIslPT2G1Y&feature=related


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZBDAChKWZM&feature=related

http://www.antidepressantsfacts.com/2003-08-Prozac-Paxil-Fluorophenyl.htm

Prozac is a fluorinated drug called "fluoxetine".

Paxil is a fluorinated drug called "paroxetine" (also called Seroxat, Aropax). These drugs are designed to inhibit the reuptake of serotonin (serotonin reuptake inhibitors - SSRIs) and hence interfere with the biological actions of serotonin, a neurotransmitter.

Both drugs contain fluorine and chloride. Fluoride is present as a '4-fluorophenyl' compound, part of the 'active' ingredient.

Fluorophenyl compounds are found as major metabolites in the human organism from Paxil and Prozac, as well as from pesticides as Flusilazole (Anderson et al, 1999), Fluorbenside; FOE 5043 (Christenson et al, 1996), other drugs such as dexfenfluramine ("Redux"; "Fen-Phen" - now withdrawn) (Kalin et al, 2000); Fluvastatin (Top 200 drugs) (Dain et al, 1993); Flutrimazole (skin cream) (Conte et al, 1992); AD-5423 (an anti-psychotic) (Oka et al, 1993), Bay U 3405 (Braun et al, 1990); Cisapride (also now withdrawn from US market), Leflunamide (Arava) etc...

Fluorophenyl compounds have shown to disturb thyroid hormone activity in several ways, specifically in the liver and at the hypothalamus-pituitary-thyroid (HPT) axis.

Observations

In depressed patients receiving paroxetine the T4 level was reduced by 11. 2% (Konig et al, 2000).

In animals chronic administration of fluoxetine results in a decrease in both T4 and T3 levels. The authors reported that the major effect of the drug “seems to be stimulation of TSH synthesis and release via the inhibition of T4-mediated thyroid-pituitary feedback” (Golstein et al, 1983).

In rat brain, fluoxetine has also been shown to interfere with local T3 metabolism (Eravci et al, 2000; Baumgartner et al, 1994).

Liver

In the 1930s is was first observed that all fluoride compounds, organic and inorganic ones, inhibit thyroid hormones. This was first established in the 1930s by experiments conducted by Prof. Kurt Kraft who exposed tadpoles (bufo vulgaris, rana temporaria) to fluoride compounds including sodium fluoride, fluorotyrosine and fluorobenzoic acid (Kraft, 1937). Numerous fluoride compounds were used subsequently as the first line of treatment for hyperthyroidism in various countries, for several decades.

1940s experiments on animals were conducted by Euler et al. which showed that all fluoride compounds acted upon liver glycogen, the difference being a matter of amplitude (Euler et al, 1949). Some organic compounds caused identical effects in bone and teeth as inorganic fluorides (Euler et al, 1942).

In 1996, Christensen et al. tested the experimental herbicide FOE 5043 (4-fluorophenyl-containing) specifically on thyroid hormone function in the liver, after earlier tests had suggested that the observed reduced circulating serum T4 levels were due to extrathyroidal activity.

"In the liver, the actvity of hepatitic uridine glucoronosyl transferase, a major pathway of thyroid hormone biotransformation in the rat, increased in a statistically significant and dose-dependent manner, conversely hepatitic 5-monodeiodinase [D1] trended downward with dose. Bile flow and bilary excretion of T4 were increased. These data suggests that the functional status of the thyroid and pituitary glands has not been altered by treatment with FOE 5043 and that reductions in circulating levels of T4 are being mediated indirectly through an increase in the biotransformation and excretion of thyroid hormone in the liver."

Urichuk et al (1997) showed that levels of fluorophenyl metabolites after fluoxetine administration were 10-fold higher in the liver of rats than in brain.

CNS

In the 1940s numerous investigators were of the opinion that - besides being active in liver - organic fluorides could also be causing disturbances at the hypothalamus-pituitary (HP) axis, due to their high affinity for the central nervous system (CNS) (Litzka, 1937, May, 1950).

Later investigations into such compounds as fluoxetine confirmed those suspicions (Jackson et al, 1998; Baumgartner et al, 1994; Golstein et al, 1983).

In humans fluoxetine treatment reduced TRH-induced TSH release in both normal and obese women (Pijl et al, 1993). In a hypothalamic neuronal culture system fluoxetine decreased TRH levels (Jackson et al, 1998). In other tissue (rabbits - colon) it has shown to enhance TRH activity (Horita & Carino, 1982).

In humans, fluvoxamine (Luvox) also causes a decreased TSH response in the TRH test, indicating disturbances in the hypothalamus-pituitary-thyroid (HPT) axis. It caused decreased basal TSH levels (De Mendonca et al, 1997).

Fluoxetine has been found to inhibit D2 and D3 deiodinase activities in the rat brain (Eravci et al, 2000; Baumgartner et al, 1994).

These deiodinases - of which there are three (D1, D2 and D3) - are responsible for T4 to T3 conversion. While D1 is mainly expressed in the liver, kidney and the thyroid, D2 is found in the central nervous system, the pituitary, skeletal muscle and adipose tissue. D3 is responsible for the production of reverse T3 (rT3).

P450 System

Fluorophenyl compounds are potent inhibitors of the cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzyme system in the liver.

Prolonged inhibition of P450 leads to thyroid hormone reduction. Thyroid hormones, in turn, modulate the levels of P450 in the liver, where the majority of thyroid hormone synthesis occurs (T4 ->T3).

Drug Interactions

Fluoxetine is a known inhibitor of multiple P450 isoenzymes, thus interfering with the metabolism of other substances (Thompson et al, 1997; 2003).

Fluoxetine thus may potentiate the effects of other drugs manyfold (Daniel et al, 1999a, 1999b). Fluoxetine potently increased (up to 13 times) the concentrations of thioridazine and its metabolites in the plasma (Daniel et al, 1999), due to synergistic pharmacodynamic effects and the influence of fluoxetine on the bioavailability of such compounds.

Selenoproteins

Studies in rat liver slices showed intracellular glutathione levels decreased and fluoride ion levels increased in a time and concentration-dependent manner by fluoxetine (Thompson et al, 1997).

Like the deiodinases, glutathione peroxidase is another selenoprotein-containing enzyme which further modulates iodine metabolism.

Glutathione peroxidase levels are considered a diagnostic tool in fluoride poisoning - discriminating between mild and severe chronic fluorosis (Guan, 1983).

Several animal studies show that fluoxetine causes a decline in T3 levels and affects T3 production in various tissue, including brain (Eravci et al, 2000; Lin et al, 1999; Baumgartner et al, 1994; Shelton et al, 1993). .

Because of their vast effects on the thyroid hormone system, it is of great importance that anybody wishing to get off such medications as Paxil, Prozac, Luvox etc. does so very gradually.

Other Assorted Prozac Facts

Infants who were breastfed by mothers taking fluoxetine demonstrated a growth curve significantly below that of infants who were breastfed by mothers who did not take the drug (Chambers et al, 1999). Newborn mouse pups exposed to paroxetine were more likely to have low birthweights (Rayburn et al, 2000). Low birth weight is related to thyroid status of the mother.

Fluoxetine has been shown to cause severe liver dysfunction such as hepatitis (Cai et al, 1999; Johnston & Wheeler, 1997; Mars et al, 1991; Friedenberg & Rothstein, 1996).

Fluoxetine has also been shown to cause secondary hyperthyroidism - originating from pituitary dysfunction (Martinez & Ortiz, 1999).

Visual hallucinations have been found associated with use of fluoxetine (Bourgeois et al, 1998).

Dyskinesia has been reported with use of fluoxetine. (Duborvski & Thomas, 1996).

Fluoxetine showed tumor-promoting activity in rat liver , as did fenfluramine, another fluorophenyl-containing fluoride compound (Lin et al, 1999). [Ed: as does PFOS - "Scotchgard")].

Like other, inorganic fluoride compounds, 4-fluorophenyl shows activity upon TXA2/PGA2 receptors (Marcin et al. 1999).


http://ssristories.com/index.php
http://www.somatropinonline.com/PRG-196/prozac-depression-ocd-bulimia-nervosa.htm
http://www.livestrong.com/article/256742-dangers-of-fluoride-prescription-drugs/


You know you and KingNothing accuse me of a holier than thou attitude when all it takes is some precious time from your daily lives to get educated. There is literally thousands of articles and scientific studies out there, proving these facts and the conspiracy is in plain view. You need to learn to research reliable sources and cross reference them and critically think about the issues presented before dismissing them out of hand due to ignorance.

donnay
02-22-2012, 08:48 AM
You have to swallow a significant amount of toothpaste for it to be a problem. The warning label even says that you should call if you swallow an abnormal amount, not the pea-sized serving they had dotted on their toothbrush.
It's that sort of silly hyperbole that makes the entire argument hard to take.

And I don't even think water should be fluoridated. Bombastic claims do not help our cause.

Bombastic? silly Hyperbole?

When you are inundated with sodium fluoride from water, products in supermarkets and drugs, how much is too much, you think? :rolleyes: hyperbole? If your drinking water has sodium fluoride then the showers you take have it too. You skin will soak up a lot of fluoride, not to mention, you are breathing in the steam vapors.

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1622648953090&id=cfed1009b9dc80c7f6d5acaf212c62e1&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.indybay.org%2fuploads%2f2011% 2f02%2f22%2ffluoride-warning.jpg

KingNothing
02-22-2012, 10:19 AM
Bombastic? silly Hyperbole?

When you are inundated with sodium fluoride from water, products in supermarkets and drugs, how much is too much, you think? :rolleyes: hyperbole? If your drinking water has sodium fluoride then the showers you take have it too. You skin will soak up a lot of fluoride, not to mention, you are breathing in the steam vapors.


And yet, fluoridated Americans are more violent than other westernized people and would have life-spans longer than almost every other nation if we just stopped killing ourselves. Funny how that worked out, in spite of deadly fluoride harming us all, dumbing us down, and numbing our emotions. Saying we're being slow-killed, made docile, made dumb, made sterilized, whatever is hyperbole. There's absolutely no proof to support the claim.

Is fluoride harmful? Yes. Is it harmful in our water supply? Probably. Should it be removed from our water? Yes. Is fluoridation of our water part of a Big Lie to bring about the End of America? C'mon, man.

onlyrp
02-22-2012, 03:37 PM
lmao. Anybody with an intro class of chemistry in college can tell you, you dont get steam of salt or its anions. If fluorIDE is added as a salt, its never becoming fluorINE gas any time soon without electrolysis. Unless NaF decomposes in w hot water into F gas ? So no, you cannot breath in either fluorINE gas or any fluorIDE salt, anions if its added in water as a salt component. You must be thinking of HCN :p


Bombastic? silly Hyperbole?

When you are inundated with sodium fluoride from water, products in supermarkets and drugs, how much is too much, you think? :rolleyes: hyperbole? If your drinking water has sodium fluoride then the showers you take have it too. You skin will soak up a lot of fluoride, not to mention, you are breathing in the steam vapors.

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1622648953090&id=cfed1009b9dc80c7f6d5acaf212c62e1&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.indybay.org%2fuploads%2f2011% 2f02%2f22%2ffluoride-warning.jpg

NidStyles
02-22-2012, 04:08 PM
lmao. Anybody with an intro class of chemistry in college can tell you, you dont get steam of salt or its anions. If fluorIDE is added as a salt, its never becoming fluorINE gas any time soon without electrolysis. Unless NaF decomposes in w hot water into F gas ? So no, you cannot breath in either fluorINE gas or any fluorIDE salt, anions if its added in water as a salt component. You must be thinking of HCN :p

Except that the Fluoride is suspended around the water molecules that make up the steam, so yes you are inhaling it. It doesn't have to make the phase change to be inhaled when it's suspended in the medium that is being inhaled. Yes, I did learn this in chemistry, but at the High School level. The College level taught me how to measure the PPM of the salts within the liquid. The water doesn't just lose it's properties or contaminates when it undergoes a phase change, because in reality it's still a liquid, it's just in smaller molecule clusters than when it was a larger amorphous liquid. Water is relatively unique in this aspect. Enough Mr. Wizard though.

onlyrp
02-22-2012, 05:43 PM
Except that the Fluoride is suspended around the water molecules that make up the steam, so yes you are inhaling it. It doesn't have to make the phase change to be inhaled when it's suspended in the medium that is being inhaled. Yes, I did learn this in chemistry, but at the High School level. The College level taught me how to measure the PPM of the salts within the liquid. The water doesn't just lose it's properties or contaminates when it undergoes a phase change, because in reality it's still a liquid, it's just in smaller molecule clusters than when it was a larger amorphous liquid. Water is relatively unique in this aspect. Enough Mr. Wizard though.

Solutes can travel with solvent when evaporated ? I didnt know that.