Next Supreme Court Justice
Quote: AZDuffmanThey are only a health risk to themselves. And it is more than "religious psychos." It is kids of people who weigh the safety of the vaccination vs. catching a disease that lasts a week. Their bodies, their choice!
Just curious, would you force new legal immigrants to vaccinate their children?
Quote: Mission146I would argue that some religious groups are less tolerant, mostly those who say it’s a sin against God that will result in eternal damnation to do the wrong thing with your genitals. I don’t think most of the Liberals are trying to inform behavior with threats of eternal suffering.
It is not about religion. Aversion to homosexuality is anthropological and pops up in pretty much every society. Little kids will ask "why are those two guys kissing?" They know something is off. I'll concede that religious groups amp it up, but they do not at all.
Quote:Also, I really think you’re focusing on the most vocal liberals. Like you said, at worst I’ll just not eat somewhere. More likely than not, I don’t care what a CEO’s political opinion are, though I do understand that other people will express their opinions about him and his opinions. If he’s running for Congress, or something, then I’ll be a little more concerned.
The most vocal are always at the head of the group, that is how you get to the head. I will tell you what I have told Babs. We are having a general conversation here. I am not going thru the phone book name by name, thinking what each individual says. I am going by how the group acts.
Quote:Apparently, many Liberals don’t either, check out this Gallup page:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
"Many" might not. But most liberals want to ban guns totally. Have since the 1960s when it first became an issue. Don't ask for a quote, as they do not say it directly in public. But get them alone and they will say it.
Quote:California school district says parents can’t pull kids from new LGBT sex ed
One school district? You’re going to take what one school district did and extrapolate that to reflect the views of most/all Liberals? Just, no.
It is not just one, it is just one example. I am not a paid researcher, we are on a forum. But it is getting more widespread and in places like CA you cannot pull your kids. This has been a long process and goal of the gay movement, to get them as kids. Parent's views be damned.
Quote:Wait, are the kids doing the choosing? I’m confused. I didn’t realize toddlers were capable of deciding their own medical treatment in an informed way, my mistake.
OK, I will modify, My kid, my choice! Fair enough?
Quote:One link, at least 11 states ban it.
Move to one of the 39 that don’t, if you find yourself so situated. I thought you guys were big on the Tenth Amendment?
Why should they have to move? Are you OK with people having to move to get an abortion? Big on the 10th. And the 10th gives to the states "OR THE PEOPLE.:" Bigger on personal freedom. Includes freedom to help your kid walk away from being gay if that is what you want.
Quote:Of course, now we have you making blanket generalizations about Liberal women. Nice. I almost don’t have to argue, I can just sit back and let you talk. “Women don’t know what they want because they can’t think in abstract terms,” is that basically what you’re saying?
I am not getting what you are asking. What I am saying is women are generally more worried what people think of them than men are. So when the media pushes that it is a good idea to let men in the ladies room they are more likely to say "yes" when around others, but when it is down to just them and their girlfriends they will gab about how really, they don't want men in there.
Quote:Hell does that have to do with anything?
It has to do with it as women are often for something until it affects them personally, either having to pay for something or otherwise. Then all of the sudden they get less shall we say "liberal" on things. Listen to some Tom Leykis for examples, he points it out all the time. Older women are less like this because they have had something backfire and get more cautious.
Quote: rxwineJust curious, would you force new legal immigrants to vaccinate their children?
No, I would give them a choice of quarantine for some period of time to be sure they are not carrying anything in.
I would also go back to the no admission for HIV Positive people.
Quote: AZDuffmanIt is not about religion. Aversion to homosexuality is anthropological and pops up in pretty much every society. Little kids will ask "why are those two guys kissing?" They know something is off. I'll concede that religious groups amp it up, but they do not at all.
What should aversion and rights have to do with one another? I don't really care if someone is personally averse to homosexuality or not, like I said, guys can marry guys without a single guy having to marry a guy if he doesn't want to. If someone's religion, or anything else, says homosexuality is a no-no, then just try not to be a homosexual. Someone can do the aversion therapy if they really have to.
Do you think the concern was really that the legality of gay marriage could lead to a more general societal acceptance which would, therefore, make being a homosexual easier? Do you think maybe some of the religious orders aren't concerned about the societal acceptance of homosexuality? It seems like it would be easier to deter someone from homosexual acts, which they most certainly want to do, if society tends to frown upon homosexuality, in general.
Oh, no! The once seemingly unbreakable power of the religious hierarchy is threatened and society, as a whole, may no longer feel compelled to acquiesce to the moral codes that religion provides. Codes such as hatred, shame and intolerance.
Cry me a river.
Quote:The most vocal are always at the head of the group, that is how you get to the head. I will tell you what I have told Babs. We are having a general conversation here. I am not going thru the phone book name by name, thinking what each individual says. I am going by how the group acts.
Well, the numbers either support you or they don't, I suppose. I might look for polls on different things, I might not. When you have 28% of Americans saying they would ban handguns outright, I'm not even sure you have half the, 'Liberals,' there. You certainly have a non-zero amount of self-described Republicans, Independents and Other in that.
Quote:"Many" might not. But most liberals want to ban guns totally. Have since the 1960s when it first became an issue. Don't ask for a quote, as they do not say it directly in public. But get them alone and they will say it.
Like, all guns? Some of the polling from the 60's seems to indicate that certain polls reflected a greater desire to ban all guns (at least handguns) then than there is now. Anyway, I don't think it's, "Most," liberals. Maybe close to half, so what? That's why everybody gets to vote on ballot measures and elected representatives.
Quote:It is not just one, it is just one example. I am not a paid researcher, we are on a forum. But it is getting more widespread and in places like CA you cannot pull your kids. This has been a long process and goal of the gay movement, to get them as kids. Parent's views be damned.
Honestly, first I've heard of it. I'm obviously not in favor, but I don't know where you draw the line on what you're NOT allowed to teach the kids if the parents don't want it taught to them. I guess my advice then is pay to send them to a religious private school. But, for what you're saying, I don't think kids should be exposed to that sexual sort of stuff if the parents don't want them exposed to it.
Quote:
OK, I will modify, My kid, my choice! Fair enough?
Yes, no, not always? I guess it depends on whether you view it as falling under the umbrella of child protection. I mean, can I leave my two kids in the car and go run coin on video poker making the argument, "My kid, my choice?" No, at a certain point, parents have legal obligations as relates the welfare of children.
Quote:
Why should they have to move? Are you OK with people having to move to get an abortion? Big on the 10th. And the 10th gives to the states "OR THE PEOPLE.:" Bigger on personal freedom. Includes freedom to help your kid walk away from being gay if that is what you want.
If the SCOTUS made abortion a states rights issue? Sure, I'm fine with every state throwing abortion up there as a ballot measure. The women who would want an abortion wouldn't have to move, per se, they'd just have to travel to one of the states that would have legalized abortion. I imagine over half of them would.
Like I said, absent an actual crime, whatever the churchies want to do within the confines of their cults is up to them.
Quote:I am not getting what you are asking. What I am saying is women are generally more worried what people think of them than men are. So when the media pushes that it is a good idea to let men in the ladies room they are more likely to say "yes" when around others, but when it is down to just them and their girlfriends they will gab about how really, they don't want men in there.
I mean, just put it to a statewide ballot measure and whatever happens happens. Nobody is going to know how an individual woman voted in the ballot box, and she can lie if she wants to, anyway.
Quote:It has to do with it as women are often for something until it affects them personally, either having to pay for something or otherwise. Then all of the sudden they get less shall we say "liberal" on things. Listen to some Tom Leykis for examples, he points it out all the time. Older women are less like this because they have had something backfire and get more cautious.
Yeah, like, is that a trait that is only true of women? I guess that's what I'm asking. Are there no men that exhibit such a trait?
If Tom Leykis is one to make generalizations about women, I really have no need to ever listen to him.
Quote: Mission146What should aversion and rights have to do with one another? I don't really care if someone is personally averse to homosexuality or not, like I said, guys can marry guys without a single guy having to marry a guy if he doesn't want to. If someone's religion, or anything else, says homosexuality is a no-no, then just try not to be a homosexual. Someone can do the aversion therapy if they really have to.
Do you think the concern was really that the legality of gay marriage could lead to a more general societal acceptance which would, therefore, make being a homosexual easier? Do you think maybe some of the religious orders aren't concerned about the societal acceptance of homosexuality? It seems like it would be easier to deter someone from homosexual acts, which they most certainly want to do, if society tends to frown upon homosexuality, in general.
My point is the aversion is not caused by religion but anthropology. I am against gay marriage because I believe marriage is about one male and one female. I do not believe we should be encouraging homosexuality for many reasons. I believe that by letting same-sex couples get married you change marriage into just a legal protection and not about building a stable society.
Quote:Well, the numbers either support you or they don't, I suppose. I might look for polls on different things, I might not. When you have 28% of Americans saying they would ban handguns outright, I'm not even sure you have half the, 'Liberals,' there. You certainly have a non-zero amount of self-described Republicans, Independents and Other in that.
Of the 28%, I would estimate 90% are liberal. Wikipedia is not the end-all source, but it states that 20% of the population considers themselves liberal. So I think there are well over half of the liberals in that group. The ones that do not want an outright ban are surely mostly for "common sense control measures" which always end up in a ban worldwide as each gun incident brings more cries to "do something!"
Quote:Honestly, first I've heard of it. I'm obviously not in favor, but I don't know where you draw the line on what you're NOT allowed to teach the kids if the parents don't want it taught to them. I guess my advice then is pay to send them to a religious private school. But, for what you're saying, I don't think kids should be exposed to that sexual sort of stuff if the parents don't want them exposed to it.
That's fine, we all follow our own news. Just be aware that gays want more and more pro-gay education younger and younger. I don't know the exact line myself, but teaching about gay sex is way on the side of "should be allowed to opt-out."
Quote:Yes, no, not always? I guess it depends on whether you view it as falling under the umbrella of child protection. I mean, can I leave my two kids in the car and go run coin on video poker making the argument, "My kid, my choice?" No, at a certain point, parents have legal obligations as relates the welfare of children.
And protecting against side effects of vaccinations is about welfare of children.
Quote:Yeah, like, is that a trait that is only true of women? I guess that's what I'm asking. Are there no men that exhibit such a trait?
If Tom Leykis is one to make generalizations about women, I really have no need to ever listen to him.
Life is about generalizations. And it is more general in women. Women generally (generally---shudder!) want to be more fair than men, are more about equal outcome. Men are more about equal opportunity, and if you end up worse off or better that is how it is. I at least partly attribute this to men are more into sports than women, clear winner and loser. And to women being more maternal.
That being said, the best example is men and women eating in a group when the check comes. Men usually flip a $20 or whatever and split it equally or just get it close enough. Women will calculate it down to the cent for each of them. Despite being more for equality in general, when it comes out of the woman's own purse all that changes.
Another way is if you work with a liberal woman and she gets a bonus check where the top tax rate is taken out because it is a bonus. They go nuts!
Quote: AZDuffmanMy point is the aversion is not caused by religion but anthropology. I am against gay marriage because I believe marriage is about one male and one female. I do not believe we should be encouraging homosexuality for many reasons. I believe that by letting same-sex couples get married you change marriage into just a legal protection and not about building a stable society.
If you have it drilled into your head that a thing is fundamentally wrong and will result in your eternal damnation for, I don’t know, your entire childhood, I’m going to guess that can create or exacerbate any extant feelings of aversion.
Why is it about one male and one female?
In my opinion, marriage is nothing more than a legal protection, and that’s prior to gay marriage being legalized. So, it’s just equal treatment to me. What was your stance on, “Civil Unions,” back when that was a thing?
Quote:Of the 28%, I would estimate 90% are liberal. Wikipedia is not the end-all source, but it states that 20% of the population considers themselves liberal. So I think there are well over half of the liberals in that group. The ones that do not want an outright ban are surely mostly for "common sense control measures" which always end up in a ban worldwide as each gun incident brings more cries to "do something!"
If 90% of the 28% were liberal, they’d represent 25.2% of that 28% which is more than the 20% you’re saying self-identifies as Liberal in the first place, so that doesn’t work. Either way, that’s why there’s a political process. I think you’re going to have a gun-friendly SCOTUS, so you shouldn’t have much to worry about.
Quote:
That's fine, we all follow our own news. Just be aware that gays want more and more pro-gay education younger and younger. I don't know the exact line myself, but teaching about gay sex is way on the side of "should be allowed to opt-out."
Sure, we agree on that.
Quote:And protecting against side effects of vaccinations is about welfare of children.
What about the side effects of other treatments, such as some that might be necessary to continue to live?
Quote:That being said, the best example is men and women eating in a group when the check comes. Men usually flip a $20 or whatever and split it equally or just get it close enough. Women will calculate it down to the cent for each of them. Despite being more for equality in general, when it comes out of the woman's own purse all that changes.
Another way is if you work with a liberal woman and she gets a bonus check where the top tax rate is taken out because it is a bonus. They go nuts!
You may be right, I’ve never paid attention.
Quote: AZDuffmanI don't know the exact line myself, but teaching about gay sex is way on the side of "should be allowed to opt-out."
Hasn't seem to have done you any damage, except all your complaining about it.
Quote: rxwineHasn't seem to have done you any damage, except all your complaining about it.
We were not indoctrinated in my day. Because of that we did not turn out like this.
Quote: Mission146
Why is it about one male and one female?
Because that is what is both biologically correct and has historically been shown to be the most stable for society.
Quote:In my opinion, marriage is nothing more than a legal protection, and that’s prior to gay marriage being legalized. So, it’s just equal treatment to me. What was your stance on, “Civil Unions,” back when that was a thing?
And it was my opinion that gays were not "being discriminated against" as they could just marry someone of the opposite sex if they wanted marriage. My stance was that gays would never settle for Civil Unions and would just keep demanding full marriage. Also my stance was they were unneeded as all the legal protections could be made without them via POA, deed language, etc.
Quote:If 90% of the 28% were liberal, they’d represent 25.2% of that 28% which is more than the 20% you’re saying self-identifies as Liberal in the first place, so that doesn’t work. Either way, that’s why there’s a political process. I think you’re going to have a gun-friendly SCOTUS, so you shouldn’t have much to worry about.
I really do not want to play numbers games here. I am pointing out that most liberals prefer to ban all guns. In your neck of the woods it may be less and skewing your perception. Just realize, when you vote liberal this is what you are voting for. BTW: I shouldn't need a "gun friendly" SCOTUS to protect my rights, we should not have pols wanting to take guns away in the first place.
Quote:What about the side effects of other treatments, such as some that might be necessary to continue to live?
Case by case basis. Right to privacy. But liberals do not believe in a right to privacy on vaccinations in my experience.
Quote:You may be right, I’ve never paid attention.
I am very right here. Ever notice the difference in reaction to an honest error in a paycheck between men and women? Men just ask it be fixed. Women ask it be fixed then sulk and think that the employer was trying to rip them off intentionally. I once told an older manager this, guy was part my mentor, and he thought about it and realized how correct I was.
Quote: AZDuffmanWe were not indoctrinated in my day.
lol @ thinking you weren't indoctrinated.
Quote: M146
If Tom Leykis is one to make generalizations about women, I really have no need to ever listen to him.
He is, and thank you so much for that.
Quote: AZD
Life is about generalizations. And it is more general in women. Women generally (generally---shudder!)
This undercuts most of your arguments. You make false generalizations and see everything as absolutes, but the vast majority of people are somewhere in the middle. You cite a single example or two, then use that to justify your generalizations.
I'm a woman. I'm pro-gun ownership. Also pro-sensible regulations on same. I'm pro-choice, but only because I would NEVER presume to make that decision for another woman. ALL women currently have the option to NOT have an abortion. That's how it should be. I'm straight and pro-LGBT only because I would not PRESUME to tell someone else who to marry or love.
Generalize THAT if you must, because that's where the majority of women stand on those things and issues like them. We want the right to decide for ourselves how we will live our lives. And we are generous, or fair enough, if you will, to want everyone to have the same opportunities to live theirs.
Quote: AZDuffmanBecause that is what is both biologically correct and has historically been shown to be the most stable for society.
You can't argue a categorical imperative with a categorical imperative. What does, "Biologically correct," mean? Even if, "Biologically correct," has meaning, why should you care if another person is not, "Biologically correct," should you not only care whether or not you are, "Biologically correct?"
I'm going to put this question to you really simply: What does two ladies or two dudes getting married to one another do to you personally? What does a woman having an abortion do to you personally?
Quote:And it was my opinion that gays were not "being discriminated against" as they could just marry someone of the opposite sex if they wanted marriage. My stance was that gays would never settle for Civil Unions and would just keep demanding full marriage. Also my stance was they were unneeded as all the legal protections could be made without them via POA, deed language, etc.
Let me ask you a question: If we said that blacks could only marry blacks, would you say that blacks were not being, "Discriminated against," because they could just marry black people if they wanted marriage?
I'm sorry, dude, but your argument is trash on this one.
Also, I don't think deed language is going to result in either tax benefits or the inherent right to place your spouse on your health insurance as a secondarily covered person.
Quote:I really do not want to play numbers games here. I am pointing out that most liberals prefer to ban all guns. In your neck of the woods it may be less and skewing your perception. Just realize, when you vote liberal this is what you are voting for. BTW: I shouldn't need a "gun friendly" SCOTUS to protect my rights, we should not have pols wanting to take guns away in the first place.
I mean, I voted for Gary Johnson in the last POTUS election, so I'd hardly call that, "Voting liberal." I consider myself fairly liberal, but I still vote for the candidate I think would be best for office or the ballot measure I think is best.
All guns? I just want to see numbers. Is that all guns including single-shot muzzle loading shotguns and pistols? See, those are the types of guns that existed when the Second Amendment was written. I don't think anyone in their right mind would call for a ban on single-shot muzzle loading pistols.
For my part, I think it would be an absurd overreach to ban handguns.
Ideally, the SCOTUS exists to protect everyone's rights, so we do kind of need them to do that.
Quote:Case by case basis. Right to privacy. But liberals do not believe in a right to privacy on vaccinations in my experience.
Case-by-case? So, you want to put together a Legislative Medical Board, by state, to analyze every possible ailment, side effect and treatment to determine whether or not it should be incumbent on parents to provide said treatment?
Okay, what about blood transfusions? Should whackjob Jehovah's Witnesses be permitted to allow their children to die because they don't believe in blood transfusions?
(If there are any Jehovah's Witnesses on here: 1. That's not meant as an insult against you personally. 2. I understand a few Jehovah's Witnesses would, if necessary, go against the tenets of their faith and allow children a blood transfusion of their own accord. 3. You are not supposed to be gambling.)
Quote:I am very right here. Ever notice the difference in reaction to an honest error in a paycheck between men and women? Men just ask it be fixed. Women ask it be fixed then sulk and think that the employer was trying to rip them off intentionally. I once told an older manager this, guy was part my mentor, and he thought about it and realized how correct I was.
Maybe you are. I just assume individual actions are individual actions and I don't have a, "Gender compartment," in my mind where I store gender-based statistics of every action that I have ever witnessed. I'm not going to go all SJW with something like, "I don't see gender," so I do see it, I just never really think about it.
Quote: beachbumbabsHe is, and thank you so much for that.
This undercuts most of your arguments. You make false generalizations and see everything as absolutes, but the vast majority of people are somewhere in the middle. You cite a single example or two, then use that to justify your generalizations.
I'm a woman. I'm pro-gun ownership. Also pro-sensible regulations on same. I'm pro-choice, but only because I would NEVER presume to make that decision for another woman. ALL women currently have the option to NOT have an abortion. That's how it should be. I'm straight and pro-LGBT only because I would not PRESUME to tell someone else who to marry or love.
Generalize THAT if you must, because that's where the majority of women stand on those things and issues like them. We want the right to decide for ourselves how we will live our lives. And we are generous, or fair enough, if you will, to want everyone to have the same opportunities to live theirs.
In one post a complaint that I generalize, then a generalized statement in the last paragraph?
Quote: AZDuffmanIn one post a complaint that I generalize, then a generalized statement in the last paragraph?
Despite years of arguing with you (and EB ) about generalizations, it hasn't made a dent. So I thought it would be "helpful" and "fair" to offer you one that's backed up by statistical polling re:majority stances. I'm a "woman". That's what I "do". Trying to speak your language, walk in your moccasins, even for a few steps.
Quote: Mission146You can't argue a categorical imperative with a categorical imperative. What does, "Biologically correct," mean? Even if, "Biologically correct," has meaning, why should you care if another person is not, "Biologically correct," should you not only care whether or not you are, "Biologically correct?"
I'm going to put this question to you really simply: What does two ladies or two dudes getting married to one another do to you personally? What does a woman having an abortion do to you personally?
Biologically correct means just what it says. Mating is only done by one of each sex. This is how species pair up. Save me the examples of monkeys or giraffes from the zoo as humans are the only species that has sex for recreation, in nature it is only about reproduction. Changing marriage from what is natural to what we have today weakens society in general. Rampant homosexuality. and its acceptance is a classic sign of a society in decline.
I have not mentioned abortion much at all. My biggest gripe is women demanding I and every other taxpayer pay for it.
Quote:Let me ask you a question: If we said that blacks could only marry blacks, would you say that blacks were not being, "Discriminated against," because they could just marry black people if they wanted marriage?
I do not see what this has to do with homosexual marriage.
Quote:Also, I don't think deed language is going to result in either tax benefits or the inherent right to place your spouse on your health insurance as a secondarily covered person.
Sure it will. Joint Tenants With Right of Suvivorship lets property pass to the surviving owner. Most any health insurance I have seen for 20 years now lets you add any covered person.
Quote:All guns? I just want to see numbers. Is that all guns including single-shot muzzle loading shotguns and pistols? See, those are the types of guns that existed when the Second Amendment was written. I don't think anyone in their right mind would call for a ban on single-shot muzzle loading pistols.
For my part, I think it would be an absurd overreach to ban handguns.
Yes, they want to ban all guns. Just get them talking. I do not think you realize just how radical the left has become. Again, I put that to your living in a generally more conservative area. But a ban is what they want, even if they have to get it one "sensible regulation" at a time.
Quote:Case-by-case? So, you want to put together a Legislative Medical Board, by state, to analyze every possible ailment, side effect and treatment to determine whether or not it should be incumbent on parents to provide said treatment?
No, I want parents to have the decision. Their kid, their choice.
Quote:Okay, what about blood transfusions? Should whackjob Jehovah's Witnesses be permitted to allow their children to die because they don't believe in blood transfusions?
That is the dark side of freedom, still their kids and their choice.
Quote:Maybe you are. I just assume individual actions are individual actions and I don't have a, "Gender compartment," in my mind where I store gender-based statistics of every action that I have ever witnessed. I'm not going to go all SJW with something like, "I don't see gender," so I do see it, I just never really think about it.
I think it is more you have not managed women at a job AFIK. I did for years, and you see the differences between women and men when you do. IMHO it is a huge problem in the world today trying to treat everything as "genderless." Men and women are different. Their minds work different. And different things are important to them. One of my sayings there is a woman gives a guy a tool or appliance for Christmas had he can't be happier. he gives her the same and she will be mad until New Years.
Now, I know the reaction of some here is, "I know a woman who likes tools wah wah wah, wah wah wah wah........" I don't care if someone knows an exception, I am saying how it generally is.
Quote: AZDuffmanBiologically correct means just what it says. Mating is only done by one of each sex. This is how species pair up. Save me the examples of monkeys or giraffes from the zoo as humans are the only species that has sex for recreation, in nature it is only about reproduction. Changing marriage from what is natural to what we have today weakens society in general. Rampant homosexuality. and its acceptance is a classic sign of a society in decline.
Okay, let me try to ask this question again: What does two ladies or two dudes marrying one another do to you personally?
Are people who are, for one reason or another, incapable of having children, "Biologically incorrect?" Should they also not be allowed to marry anyone because they will be unable to, "Mate," for the purposes of producing children?
Why is producing children a goal in and of itself?
Okay, so you posit that humans have sex for recreation. Good. I agree. Why should two mutually consenting humans not be permitted to have recreational sex with one another regardless of their genders? What does two human males who are not, as you put it, "Biologically correct," having sex with one another do to you personally?
The concept of, "Marriage," has nothing whatsoever to do with nature, so there is no, "...what is natural," when it comes to marriage. Marriage exists as both a religious and a legal concept that requires language in order to define and, thereby, give meaning to.
To wit, I could, "Mate," with many women in the way you use the term, if I wanted to.
Anyway, you said it all with your claim that it, "Weakens society." It doesn't, "Weaken society," it gives the religious hierarchy less control over what society is or is not permitted to do.
Quote:
I have not mentioned abortion much at all. My biggest gripe is women demanding I and every other taxpayer pay for it.
We've danced this dance before. We don't need to repeat the conversation. My stance is abortions are cheaper than children, I know your counterargument, you know my counterargument to that...etc.
Quote:I do not see what this has to do with homosexual marriage.
That both things are discrimination.
Quote:
Sure it will. Joint Tenants With Right of Suvivorship lets property pass to the surviving owner. Most any health insurance I have seen for 20 years now lets you add any covered person.
Tax breaks? Equal parental rights? Right to adopt?
Just say you're fine with Civil Unions that bestow upon a gay couple all of the rights that marriage carries, and we're done with this aspect of the conversation. I just care about equal rights, I don't care if one is called, "Marriage," and the other is called, "Civil Union." The semantics of it don't concern me, the effect does.
Quote:Yes, they want to ban all guns. Just get them talking. I do not think you realize just how radical the left has become. Again, I put that to your living in a generally more conservative area. But a ban is what they want, even if they have to get it one "sensible regulation" at a time.
Oh, I know they're plenty radical. Too radical for my liking, sometimes, and that's saying something. But, no, I don't think that the majority of Leftists/Liberals/Democrats want to ban ALL guns. I do think many of them don't even know what a muzzleloader is.
Quote:No, I want parents to have the decision. Their kid, their choice.
You should be fine with abortion, then. Even partial birth abortion. Their kid, their choice.
Quote:I think it is more you have not managed women at a job AFIK. I did for years, and you see the differences between women and men when you do. IMHO it is a huge problem in the world today trying to treat everything as "genderless." Men and women are different. Their minds work different. And different things are important to them. One of my sayings there is a woman gives a guy a tool or appliance for Christmas had he can't be happier. he gives her the same and she will be mad until New Years.
Now, I know the reaction of some here is, "I know a woman who likes tools wah wah wah, wah wah wah wah........" I don't care if someone knows an exception, I am saying how it generally is.
I have managed many women at multiple places of employment. I would suggest that I have managed as many as perhaps 100 different women in my life considering all the jobs that I have worked.
Yeah, again, generalizations. There are women who like to work with tools. There are men who do not like to work with tools. Some people like some tools, but not other tools.
Quote: Mission146The good news is: If I know you well enough to be Christmas shopping for you, I already know whether or not you like tools regardless of your gender.
If I can only expect tools, please remove me from your Christmas list.
Quote: Mission146Okay, let me try to ask this question again: What does two ladies or two dudes marrying one another do to you personally?
Are people who are, for one reason or another, incapable of having children, "Biologically incorrect?" Should they also not be allowed to marry anyone because they will be unable to, "Mate," for the purposes of producing children?
Why is producing children a goal in and of itself?
Okay, so you posit that humans have sex for recreation. Good. I agree. Why should two mutually consenting humans not be permitted to have recreational sex with one another regardless of their genders? What does two human males who are not, as you put it, "Biologically correct," having sex with one another do to you personally?
I have already answered all of this. Just because it "does not affect me personally" does not mean I cannot think it is a bad thing. Any individual person shooting heroin does not affect me personally. The heroin epidemic is still a bad thing. I am not going to keep debating it. I am not into the gay thing and never will be. I find the gay movement to be filled with the most intolerant people in society today. I don't want kids being told "it's normal" at young ages. And I want gay males separated from boys the same way straight men are from girls of the same age. Nothing anyone says will back me off these positions.
Quote:Tax breaks? Equal parental rights? Right to adopt?
What tax breaks? Look up the marriage penalty. Two gays cannot have a kid, so that does not matter.
Quote:Oh, I know they're plenty radical. Too radical for my liking, sometimes, and that's saying something. But, no, I don't think that the majority of Leftists/Liberals/Democrats want to ban ALL guns. I do think many of them don't even know what a muzzleloader is.
You do not think they do, I do think they do. I am sure they do not know what a muzzleloader is. Some elected liberal pols do not know that you reload the cartridge in your semi-auto pistol so they think by banning "high capacity" ones they will shortly be used up. And that is the danger. They are so ignorant of firearms that they buy any "reasonable regulation" as they just think it is, reasonable. Meanwhile your 2A rights get chipped away bit by bit.
Quote:You should be fine with abortion, then. Even partial birth abortion. Their kid, their choice.
When murder is legalized then I will be OK with partial birth abortion. Until then I say only a totally sick person would support it. And I say that the bigger problem with abortion is it is another sign of a society in decline.
Quote:I have managed many women at multiple places of employment. I would suggest that I have managed as many as perhaps 100 different women in my life considering all the jobs that I have worked.
Yeah, again, generalizations. There are women who like to work with tools. There are men who do not like to work with tools. Some people like some tools, but not other tools.
wah wah wah wah wah.........
I did not say "work with tools." I said "tools as a gift." Yes, a generalization, because it is generally true.
Quote: AZDuffmanJust because it "does not affect me personally" does not mean I cannot think it is a bad thing.
Quote:I am not into the gay thing and never will be.
Quote:And I want gay males separated from boys the same way straight men are from girls of the same age. Nothing anyone says will back me off these positions.
AND:
Quote:I find the gay movement to be filled with the most intolerant people in society today.
Yes, clearly.
Quote:I don't want kids being told "it's normal" at young ages. And I want gay males separated from boys the same way straight men are from girls of the same age. Nothing anyone says will back me off these positions.
What are you talking about? When I did field day this school year, my group was all girls, and I'm a guy. I'm also the President of the PTO.
You know, an upbringing in which genders are differentiated from one another and taught that they are fundamentally very different leads to an indoctrination and continued belief, into adulthood, that the genders are fundamentally different and should be separated. The same can be said about race and sexual preference.
#Brainwashing
Quote:What tax breaks? Look up the marriage penalty. Two gays cannot have a kid, so that does not matter.
Sometimes it is advantageous to file jointly as a married couple, sometimes it's not. Two gays should be allowed to adopt a kid because a straight married couple can, but you think gay people shouldn't even be allowed around kids, so I guess not.
Quote:You do not think they do, I do think they do. I am sure they do not know what a muzzleloader is. Some elected liberal pols do not know that you reload the cartridge in your semi-auto pistol so they think by banning "high capacity" ones they will shortly be used up. And that is the danger. They are so ignorant of firearms that they buy any "reasonable regulation" as they just think it is, reasonable. Meanwhile your 2A rights get chipped away bit by bit.
Well, perhaps it would benefit your side to explain the differences between different types of guns to people rather than categorically accusing them of trying to infringe upon your rights.
Quote:When murder is legalized then I will be OK with partial birth abortion. Until then I say only a totally sick person would support it. And I say that the bigger problem with abortion is it is another sign of a society in decline.
If a religious nut refuses a life-saving blood transfusion for his/her ACTUALLY FULLY BORN child, that's murder, in my book.
Quote:
wah wah wah wah wah.........
I did not say "work with tools." I said "tools as a gift." Yes, a generalization, because it is generally true.
I mean, if I, "Like to work with tools," that seems to infer to me that I at least wouldn't mind receiving tools as a gift. I like going out to eat, so I find that compatible with wanting to receive gift cards to restaurants as a gift.
P.S. I am still not voting for you in some hypothetical future election.
While I agree with all of my views 100%, I would never vote to put myself in charge of anything more important than the PTO of a public elementary school, so no offense taken.
internet error. I am not re-writing my post.
Quote: Mission146
You know, an upbringing in which genders are differentiated from one another and taught that they are fundamentally very different leads to an indoctrination and continued belief, into adulthood, that the genders are fundamentally different and should be separated. The same can be said about race and sexual preference.
The genders are different. What on earth is wrong with acknowledging this? There are difference is race as well, sorry to say. And if we are told gays are "born this way" then there are differences in sexual preference.
Saying "we are all the same" is the brainwashing to me. Men are stronger than women. Men and women reason differently. Women pick up details better than men. Women see color far better than men.
I could make the same case on race but with different examples. Of course, I would be told about "exceptions" as if that disproves it. Generally (shudder!) my points will all hold up.
"1984" and "Brave New World" were two works showing men and women to be the same. Not the kind of thing I want to emulate.
Quote: AZDuffman
The genders are different. What on earth is wrong with acknowledging this? There are difference is race as well, sorry to say. And if we are told gays are "born this way" then there are differences in sexual preference.
Categorical generalizations do not apply to everyone in that category. What on earth is wrong with acknowledging this?
Quote:Saying "we are all the same" is the brainwashing to me. Men are stronger than women. Men and women reason differently. Women pick up details better than men. Women see color far better than men.
I'm saying that we're all different. I'm saying that if something is true of, "Most women," or most of anyone else, I'm not going to assume that it is true of an individual woman or any other individual person. So, I'm not saying we're the same, I'm saying we should all have the same rights.
Quote:I could make the same case on race but with different examples. Of course, I would be told about "exceptions" as if that disproves it. Generally (shudder!) my points will all hold up.
Okay, what does that have to do with individual rights?
Quote:
"1984" and "Brave New World" were two works showing men and women to be the same. Not the kind of thing I want to emulate.
That's what you got from those books? I guess there really is something in the classics for everyone.
Quote: Mission146
Categorical generalizations do not apply to everyone in that category. What on earth is wrong with acknowledging this?
What is wrong is it is foolish. I have a 2 story deck on my home. I could see 9 people jump off and break their ankle. Now you show up. I tell you that if you try, you will break your ankle. Now, maybe you are a fireman or something with training in this and will not do it. Chances are you are not. Chances are you will break your ankle.
So we tell little girls that they are "the same as the boys." We have done this for 30 or so years now. And we have a ton of miserable women out there. Plus a lot of men who do not know how to act manly. Millions are acting in some kind of gender-neutral way, because they were taught to do that. The result is a generation of kids growing up with no father around for one. Confused relations for another. Women thinking they are somehow useless if they like raising the kids. Men playing video games in their parent's basements.
Quote:I'm saying that we're all different. I'm saying that if something is true of, "Most women," or most of anyone else, I'm not going to assume that it is true of an individual woman or any other individual person. So, I'm not saying we're the same, I'm saying we should all have the same rights.
We do have the same rights. But you said:
Quote: MissionYou know, an upbringing in which genders are differentiated from one another and taught that they are fundamentally very different leads to an indoctrination and continued belief, into adulthood, that the genders are fundamentally different and should be separated.
This reads to me quite a bit as if you are saying we are all the same. Unless I misread very different = indoctrination.
Quote:That's what you got from those books? I guess there really is something in the classics for everyone.
It is a major theme in the aforesaid books. They are scary in how well they predicted things.
Quote: AZDuffmanSaying "we are all the same" is the brainwashing to me. Men are stronger than women. Men and women reason differently. Women pick up details better than men. Women see color far better than men.
.
All you have to do to realize women
are different is just live with one for
awhile. They are frequently run by
their hormones, they seem to be an
emotional wreck half the time. I saw
it over and over in the women I dated
and in my wife. This is why women
were never trusted to run anything,
men thought they were crazy. Go back
and look at mental hospitals in the late
19th century, they were 90% women
inmates.
I had a woman Uber driver last week.
We were talking about health and she
started to tell a story about her mom.
I had to constantly guide her back on
topic because she would wander off and it
was only a 12 min ride. She couldn't stay
focused. Dr Laura would always tell
women callers to please get to their
point almost immediately and not give
their entire life story getting there.
Even after telling them that, Laura frequently
had to tell them to shut up and ask their
question, or they would go on for 20 min
about how they met their husband. Men
don't do that, we tend to think in a more
linear fashion, that's why we're better at
problem solving. Women seem to need
a committee before that can get anything
done.
Quote: EvenBobAll you have to do to realize women
are different is just live with one for
awhile. They are frequently run by
their hormones, they seem to be an
emotional wreck half the time. I saw
it over and over in the women I dated
and in my wife. This is why women
were never trusted to run anything,
men thought they were crazy. Go back
and look at mental hospitals in the late
19th century, they were 90% women
inmates.
I have met a few COs in my day that worked both male and female prisons. Now, the thought is a male screw would love working the women's unit. Uh uh. They hated it But the female COs hated the women's prison just as much. Any prison show or survival book I have read said the same, 100 times the little mind games going on in the female unit.
Quote: AZDuffmanSave me the examples of monkeys or giraffes from the zoo as humans are the only species that has sex for recreation, in nature it is only about reproduction.
I doubt if any animals actually can connect the sex act to the result so how can they be doing it for knowingly for reproduction? Please explain.
Quote: rxwineI doubt if any animals actually can connect the sex act to the result so how can they be doing it for knowingly for reproduction? Please explain.
Did you take biology in school?
The male will know when the female is in cycle. The female does as well. This will be the only time the female allows the male to engage in a sex act. The one possible exception I have heard of is dolphins.
Animals have sex on instinct. Seriously, this is about 7th grade science.
Quote: AZDuffmanDid you take biology in school?
The male will know when the female is in cycle. The female does as well. This will be the only time the female allows the male to engage in a sex act. The one possible exception I have heard of is dolphins.
Animals have sex on instinct. Seriously, this is about 7th grade science.
So, you believe if you performed the same operation on a male dog that we do on human males they would stop trying to screw the female?
Quote: AZDuffmanWhat is wrong is it is foolish. I have a 2 story deck on my home. I could see 9 people jump off and break their ankle. Now you show up. I tell you that if you try, you will break your ankle. Now, maybe you are a fireman or something with training in this and will not do it. Chances are you are not. Chances are you will break your ankle.
False equivocate, much?
I can say that most men are sexually attracted to women and that will be true. If I see a dude, I can assume that he is sexually attracted to women, and I will be correct more than 50% of the time. That doesn't mean they all are, which is the subject matter of this conversation, in part.
Quote:So we tell little girls that they are "the same as the boys." We have done this for 30 or so years now. And we have a ton of miserable women out there. Plus a lot of men who do not know how to act manly. Millions are acting in some kind of gender-neutral way, because they were taught to do that. The result is a generation of kids growing up with no father around for one. Confused relations for another. Women thinking they are somehow useless if they like raising the kids. Men playing video games in their parent's basements.
Honestly, you're the one bemoaning the downfall and ripping of the fabric of society, so I tend to get the impression that you might be miserable.
Nobody taught me to act, "Gender-neutral." I drink copious amounts of alcohol, I watch football, I cuss and I scratch my balls. All the same, I believe everyone should have the same fundamental rights. Perhaps most importantly, I don't let anything anyone does that does not personally affect me bother me. Or, when it does bother me, (like organized religion) I don't question their right to do whatever they want in their own houses/meeting places.
Who says women who are raising kids are useless? What world do you live in? If a woman would like to be a housewife and raise kids, then she should do that and nobody should judge her for it. If a woman does not want to have children, then she should not, and nobody should judge her for that.
Quote:We do have the same rights. But you said:
This reads to me quite a bit as if you are saying we are all the same. Unless I misread very different = indoctrination.
No, I'm saying that when a child has something slammed into his/her head during the formative years, that child is going to tend to believe that well into adulthood.
Take something like, "A woman's place is in the home," if you're taught that as a child, you're more likely to believe that as an adult. I guess I'm saying we're all kind of the same in that regard, that we're likely to believe what we are taught as children.
Quote:
It is a major theme in the aforesaid books. They are scary in how well they predicted things.
The societies in both books were about strict control and the Governments in both books controlled you via severe restriction of your rights as an individual. The societies in both books wanted to control what people could say, think and do.
I DON'T believe a society should try to control any of those things to any extent greater than what is absolutely necessary for the physical health and well-being of all involved. I think people should have equal rights.
I think gay people should be allowed to get married, but I don't think that anyone should be allowed to tell you that you are not allowed to say or think to the contrary of that. Of course you should be allowed to think/say that you do not believe gay people should get married. I'm going to try to convince you that my opinion on the matter is better than yours, but I would never say you do not have a right to disagree with me and voice said disagreement.
That's what I'm talking about when I say some Liberals take it way too far. Beyond attempting to entertain a civil discussion, I don't think people should be shunned for having contrary beliefs to the prevailing liberal philosophies and stating same. If you want to express that you don't believe in gay marriage without resorting to insulting terms (and I don't believe you have used any insulting terms) I don't think you should lose your job for publicly expressing that in your off work hours.
I think everyone should be free to say/think what they want, ALWAYS, as long as the words themselves do not break any laws meant to promote the public safety.
Besides that, we're winning! So, people like me don't need to rub it in the face of people like you by trying to overreach and say that you are not allowed to say certain things publicly. Who cares? We have gay marriage and we have abortion.
Truth is, once enough of the extremist religious old guard have died, preferably of natural causes, we will have won once and for all and we will be pretty much fully in control, anyway. I know a majority of Americans identify as one type of religion or another, but most of those aren't extremists.
Pretty soon an overwhelming majority of the people left, regardless of whether or not they believe in God, will at least not be religious extremists and will, at a minimum, have respect for the rights of other people to not share their moral values. They will respect personal choices.
More importantly, that same overwhelming majority will be willing to, "Live and let live," to such an extent that they will not care what other people do as long as what they do does not affect them personally.
Most importantly, at that time, we will have a society where, for the most part, people can pursue whatever it is that they think will make them happy.
So, the Jehovah's Witnesses can knock at my door all they like and I know that I can allow another man to commit fellatio upon me if I want to, even though I don't. I am a heterosexual male in a monogamous relationship of just over four years with a heterosexual female and I couldn't be happier about that aspect of my life, at least, she's my best friend. But, unlike some people, I don't care what other people are doing with their pee-pees.
Quote: EvenBobAll you have to do to realize women
are different is just live with one for
awhile. They are frequently run by
their hormones, they seem to be an
emotional wreck half the time. I saw
it over and over in the women I dated
and in my wife. This is why women
were never trusted to run anything,
men thought they were crazy. Go back
and look at mental hospitals in the late
19th century, they were 90% women
inmates.
I don't even know where to start, so I won't.
Quote:I had a woman Uber driver last week.
We were talking about health and she
started to tell a story about her mom.
I had to constantly guide her back on
topic because she would wander off and it
was only a 12 min ride. She couldn't stay
focused. Dr Laura would always tell
women callers to please get to their
point almost immediately and not give
their entire life story getting there.
Oh my God, somebody wanted to convey their feelings and concerns about an immediate relative to another human being. That's terrible!
Quote:Even after telling them that, Laura frequently
had to tell them to shut up and ask their
question, or they would go on for 20 min
about how they met their husband. Men
don't do that, we tend to think in a more
linear fashion, that's why we're better at
problem solving. Women seem to need
a committee before that can get anything
done.
I don't want to get too inappropriate here...but I'm starting to think I understand why multiple women have engaged in sexual congress with me without financial compensation. I actually view them as people and listen to them as such, sometimes for longer than twenty minutes. (I'm not saying you have ever paid for sex, because I doubt you have.)
Quote: Mission146Oh my God, somebody wanted to convey their feelings and concerns about an immediate relative to another human being.
My point was, in telling her story
she wandered off into the weeds
time and again and I had to get
her back to topic or we would
have run out of time. Her story
was, she sued a hospital and lost
because the surgery was not
considered life threatening.
But to get to that, I had to hear her
mom's life story, her medical history,
on and on. This is very typical, my
wife will get so carried away with
meaningless details she'll forget
what her point was. Men typically
don't do this, we don't think in
circles.
Quote:I actually view them as people
I used to listen women a lot more
in my 20's. Then I realized I was
bored silly and they were wasting
huge hunks of my time. So I learned
how to hustle them along to the point.
Quote: AZDuffmanI have already answered all of this. Just because it "does not affect me personally" does not mean I cannot think it is a bad thing. Any individual person shooting heroin does not affect me personally. The heroin epidemic is still a bad thing. I am not going to keep debating it. I am not into the gay thing and never will be. I find the gay movement to be filled with the most intolerant people in society today. I don't want kids being told "it's normal" at young ages. And I want gay males separated from boys the same way straight men are from girls of the same age. Nothing anyone says will back me off these positions.
People didn't suddenly start becoming gay because it's more socially acceptable. They are just less secretive about it because they probably aren't going to have a lynch mob chasing them due to their sexual preference.
Separating gay males from straight males at a young age??? How exactly do you intend to test the gayness of a child. I have some bad news for you .... you likely shared a locker room in your youth with another male who was gay or ended up being gay as they matured. Realistically, we all probably have. But I'm not spontaneously and uncontrollably grabbing weiners because of it.
Quote: Mission146..but I'm starting to think I understand why multiple women have engaged in sexual congress with me without financial compensation. I actually view them as people and listen to them as such, sometimes for longer than twenty minutes.
I like this quote from the book "The Marrying Age"
"Women should marry young, because woman is at her best in youth. It is an absolute fact that life, knowledge, and education do not enhance a woman's charm. Quite the contrary."
Quote: DRichI like this quote from the book "The Marrying Age"
"Women should marry young, because woman is at her best in youth. It is an absolute fact that life, knowledge, and education do not enhance a woman's charm. Quite the contrary."
Was it Helen Gurley Brown who
said, in her 20's a women needs
to depend on her looks. In her 30's
she needs to depend on her education.
After that, she needs to depend on money.
Or something to that effect.
Quote: EvenBobMy point was, in telling her story
she wandered off into the weeds
time and again and I had to get
her back to topic or we would
have run out of time. Her story
was, she sued a hospital and lost
because the surgery was not
considered life threatening.
But to get to that, I had to hear her
mom's life story, her medical history,
on and on. This is very typical, my
wife will get so carried away with
meaningless details she'll forget
what her point was. Men typically
don't do this, we don't think in
circles.
We would have handled that situation differently and taken different things away from it. It's cool.
Quote:
I used to listen women a lot more
in my 20's. Then I realized I was
bored silly and they were wasting
huge hunks of my time. So I learned
how to hustle them along to the point.
If that's the way you look at it, that's fine.
Quote: DRichI like this quote from the book "The Marrying Age"
"Women should marry young, because woman is at her best in youth. It is an absolute fact that life, knowledge, and education do not enhance a woman's charm. Quite the contrary."
Wow.
Okay, you like that quote. I respect your right as a separate human being from me to like that quote.
I tend to value the life, knowledge and education of any person, regardless of gender. Maybe you don't. That's fine. I reiterate that I am sexually attracted to women, exclusively, and my ability to conduct a knowledgeable and educated conversation with a woman greatly increases my sexual attraction to that woman moreso than youth does. If that makes me less of a, "Man," I'm willing to accept that as a consequence.
Quote: DRichI like this quote from the book "The Marrying Age"
"Women should marry young, because woman is at her best in youth. It is an absolute fact that life, knowledge, and education do not enhance a woman's charm. Quite the contrary."
Well, that certainly changes who I thought you were.
What a lousy quote.
Goes right up there with how the Taliban thinks. Sharia law. And "Keep em stupid, barefoot, and pregnant."
Always found it pretty ironic that the same clods who keep em barefoot and pregnant are the ones fussing about " ragheads" and "camel jockeys" trying to impose Sharia law in this country.
Guess they can't stand the competition.
I mean, if we mutually enjoy each other both inside and outside, that's fine...don't get me wrong. I'm just saying that someone who I only enjoy the presence of inside the sheets isn't enough for me and never will be.
Quote: Mission146If that's the way you look at it, that's fine.
Life is too short, that's why professional
help was invented. Let them talk to a
shrink, I don't have time anymore.
Quote: beachbumbabsWell, that certainly changes who I thought you were.
What a lousy quote.
Goes right up there with how the Taliban thinks. Sharia law. And "Keep em stupid, barefoot, and pregnant."
Always found it pretty ironic that the same clods who keep em barefoot and pregnant are the ones fussing about " ragheads" and "camel jockeys" trying to impose Sharia law in this country.
Guess they can't stand the competition.
Drich likes a quote so he's a card carrying member of the Taliban now? Good grief.
Quote: beachbumbabsWell, that certainly changes who I thought you were.
What a lousy quote.
Maybe. But ever notice that older
men with money tend to marry
beautiful women decades younger
than them? Why is that.
Quote: Mission146what I prioritize in a partner is someone who can keep me interested outside of the bedsheets.
You're still really young. I want to
hear what you say when you're 50.
We all change.
Quote: EvenBobYou're still really young. I want to
hear what you say when you're 50.
We all change.
I hope for nothing more than to be with the same woman when I am fifty, who will also be near fifty, at that time.
Quote: Mission146I hope for nothing more than to be with the same woman when I am fifty, who will also be near fifty, at that time.
Hope is all you got, because reality is
usually something far different.
Quote: EvenBobMaybe. But ever notice that older
men with money tend to marry
beautiful women decades younger
than them? Why is that.
Because they can?
Men are visual people. It's supposedly 85% of their interest in women, what she looks like, though there are huge differences in what they find attractive.
They (most men) also are able to impregnate women all their lives, while female fertility declines precipitously after about age 35. So hormones are another factor, and the instinctual imperative to reproduce.
My issue is with that quote is not that youth in women is an attractor. It absolutely is, pre-programmed, biological. The second sentence, though. It's devaluing her as anything beyond a sperm receptacle that's so rude and drew my response. I mean, really. Object would be a step up. Companion, friend, partner completely out of the question.
Some people are perfectly happy with brainless boobs of either sex, prefer it that way. Not my cup of tea, I'm with Mission above in liking the whole package. Hell, I know people who are married who don't even speak the same language, and have been together for many years.
But claiming that kind of relationship as (paraphrasing) FACTUALLY SUPERIOR TO A woman with a brain or education is just garbage. Like the Taliban shooting Malala in the head for daring to go to school.
Own it, both DRich and RogerKint, if that's what you think, because that's what the Taliban thinks.
I can tell you two, if you think you're agreeing with EvenBob on this, I know FOR A FACT and thousands of posts, he likes women who are smart and educated. His criticism of the Uber driver is that she was NOT bright enough to make her point in a few words. The part we disagree on is generalizing that to include ALL women.
