23 Oct 07
We discriminate based on age in all sorts of ways in our society. We don't let children drive cars, or vote, or drink alcohol, or join the military or own a gun. We have a clear rational basis to set these rules in place, largely for their own protection: children simply don't have the developmental maturity to practice these freedoms or exercise them in an intelligent way. If we allowed children to have sex, we'd be opening them up to all sorts of exploitation, because in many cases they lack the judgment to act in their own self-interest.
Are you trying to turn this into a gay marriage thread, and suggest that allowing gay marriage somehow obliges us to allow man-boy marriage? It doesn't. We can demonstrate a rational basis for denying children the same rights and privileges as a adults; we can't demonstrate a rational basis for treating same-sex couples differently than opposite-sex couples before the law.
23 Oct 07
Originally posted by darvlayNo, kids used to be home at night supervised by their parent(s). There weren't always packs of teens succumbing to pack mentality and thus raping, assulting, robbing, etc.
"This is why many a quaint English market town transforms after dusk into a desolate dystopia preyed on by packs of 14-year olds. "
Hasn't it always been this way? Haven't kids always been trouble-makers?
23 Oct 07
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterYou forgot MEN -- as in MEN and women unable to make correct or even responsible decisions about whether or not to have children. The leading cause of parenthood is sex. If a man has unprotected sex, he is choosing to be a father just as much as a women who isn't on birth control is choosing to be a mother.
The decline of marriage is a very bad thing for society which I attribute to the rise of the welfare state. As the state has assumed the role of surrogate parent for women unable to make correct or even responsible decisions about whether or not to have children, the result has been a rise in violence against women, unplanned pregnancies, abortio ...[text shortened]... manage child welfare agencies or the subsequent emasculation of men...it's far too depressing.
24 Oct 07
1 edit
Originally posted by MacSwainWhat I didn't get from all those statistics was the number of adult people in steady relationships whether married or defacto. I ask the question because it would seem that regardless of the social construct or the allowance or non allowance for gay couples, the majority still tends to settle down into long term heterosexual monogamous relationships. Sure you can describe that as serial monogamy but that would be no different to married partners going through their seven year itch phase or having le affair.
The norm is no longer normal.
DISCUSS:
Legally there is a difference between married and de facto, but when most countries will support a split of assets over a reasonably short period of time of living together, then what has really changed in the living arrangements of the larger society?
I would argue not much. We probably think it as having changed a lot only because those with a tendency against the norm are not being repressed and oppressed the way they have been to conform, so whatever level of coupled participation we find these days, probably just reflects the normal variance within any society: ie totally normal.
24 Oct 07
Originally posted by darthmixthere is a reason to treat M/F and other couples differently
We discriminate based on age in all sorts of ways in our society. We don't let children drive cars, or vote, or drink alcohol, or join the military or own a gun. We have a clear rational basis to set these rules in place, largely for their own protection: children simply don't have the developmental maturity to practice these freedoms or exercise them in an ...[text shortened]... l basis for treating same-sex couples differently than opposite-sex couples before the law.
it's just not pc to do so....
24 Oct 07
Originally posted by pawnhandlerIt is much more subtle than that - try reading 'Sperm Wars'
You forgot MEN -- as in MEN and women unable to make correct or even responsible decisions about whether or not to have children. The leading cause of parenthood is sex. If a man has unprotected sex, he is choosing to be a father just as much as a women who isn't on birth control is choosing to be a mother.
24 Oct 07
1 edit
Originally posted by MacSwainA family is a team and keeping a team together requires work. For me the word 'homemaker' is revealing -- I think it was usually the women who did the most to keep families together with work, love, and psychology. There were always good moms and bad moms, just like there were always good and bad fathers, but that was mom's full-time job.
[b]Pete McMartin
It is not that the family is changing, the family is dying. 27% of Canadian households have just one person in them – which is three times as many households as those of five or more - 8.7%. ‘Five or more” sounds crowded but, in fact, it’s Mom, Dad and three kids – or what in the despised conformist Fifties would have been called accepted the sociological designation of “alternative families.” For good or ill?
DISCUSS:[/b]
Now, most women work regular jobs just like men. They don't have time to fulfill the old homemaker role. Fathers lend some of their time, but most are not really wired for it. So the traditional role of 'homemaker' goes unfulfilled.
Society also unexpectedly weakened the expectation on people to stay together. That just evaporated overnight sometime in July, 1968.
A team with weaker glue holding it together is more likely to crack under pressure.
The good or ill of it is as follows: why teach kids in school about how important teamwork is, about how to be part of a team, and then allow the first Team they ever experience to break apart without making any effort to save it?
Counterproductive, it seems to me.
24 Oct 07
Originally posted by snowinscotlandGive me the short version, because I see lots of men enjoying the benefits of sex while pretending the consequences don't apply to them for various reasons. For every single mother there's a single father.
It is much more subtle than that - try reading 'Sperm Wars'
26 Oct 07
Originally posted by pawnhandlerThere is no short version I'm afraid.
I don't understand what you're saying. Are you saying you're not ready for fatherhood? Good for you, knowing that! I hope you take precautions accordingly 🙂
It's a complex issue and enjoyment of sex is pretty much in the middle there.....
If you have an interest in the subject I would suggest you read it; especially if you are male...
26 Oct 07
Originally posted by snowinscotlandBedroom politics and pillow talk 101. It will get you every time. It would be like doing a course at uni where every assignment you handed in was marked absent fail. And dont think that simply agreeing will help anymore either.😀
There is no short version I'm afraid.
It's a complex issue and enjoyment of sex is pretty much in the middle there.....
If you have an interest in the subject I would suggest you read it; especially if you are male...