Posted on 05/21/2006 11:55:33 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
So should pregnant miliatry wives whose husbands are killed in Iraq "seriously consider adoption to a loving couple", even when they very much want the baby themselves?
You're the one I would've guessed. ;^)
Why, here's little 1002.1 right here!
Or in the case of rape?
I don't think of the recently widowed as the same as other single women. Let's assume the guy is still around and there's no serious relationship there.
I guess everyone really was on drugs in the 60's.
Excellent satire - because it contains a large dose of truth.
"More unmarried women over the age of 25 are not waiting for Mr. Right."
That's because more umarried men in the 20-35 age category could care less about finding Miss Right. They're having a good time, get sex at will, would rather spend their money on flashy cars and an iPod and have seen what happens to the men in divorce. Why should they marry? The only reason left is to start a family and it appears most just don't give a shiite.
Thank you modern day feminism.
Adoption in the case of rape? What's wrong with that?
Oh, do you think the baby should be killed instead?
I think that makes perfect sense, too. Our laws (rightly) recognize a father's obligation to pay for care/schooling/support of his children.
Other than ruining their life (or making it highly probable to do so).
During the important nurturing years, Mom is working and the kid is warehoused (with Gramma if lucky, with strangers if not). The probability of a kid going to jail is massively higher for those from a single parent home.
And lets not start about the number of parental figures that will probably stomp through the kid's life, and the kid gets attached, then abandoned, attached, then abandoned, until he/she thinks he/she is of no worth.
It is a choice, but it is a selfish one. MMEEE MEEEE MEEEE! Who cares about the child's welfare, this is ALLL ABOOUT MEEEE!
Oh, and please don't hand me that crap about how someone you know did just fine -- some do, most don't.
If the TSA and NSA were on top of things these birth mothers and their resulting offspring would be registered in a national database:
Young miss Herzog could simply and anonamously be know as 1002.1 and her future offspring could then be known as 1002.1.1 and so on.
No more worries of inbreeding and 1,000 new beaureacratic positions are created to pump up the economy.
I agree. I think my friends would have found husbands long ago if so many men weren't concentrating on having fun for as long as their bodies and wallets hold out.
The sad thing is, if my friends were more irresponsible and slept around a bit, maybe they would have become pregnant by accident and at least had a child. But, because they are holding out for marriage, they don't have either one.
bump for later
Well, not exactly.
If, as argued, "gayness" is inherited, and a "can't help it" fact of life, A huge ticking time bomb is being created. The dilemma for real women will only get worse.
I am sure that one of the tests made at these sperm banks for suitability, totally ignores the "gay" gene...
I may be wrong but, given a choice, I believe that most normal human beings today would rather not have gay children.
Some critics are concerned that as this practice becomes more popular, and that with an unknown number of children from the same donor, that two of them might unknowingly hook up.
Sorry to burst your bubble, pal, but this has been going on for years, and not from sperm banks, but sperm doners in neighborhoods all over the country where children don't know who their fathers are...
Mark
You just blew your credibility as an analyst with that second to last sentence. The number of men killed in the current war is miniscule compared to those killed in prior conflicts and to other causes of death. By your logic the automobile is the cause of the fact that these women will have to raise children without fathers. The number of males killed in auto accident exceeds those killed in the "current war" by a factor at least in the 20s. (Less than 1000 deaths per year in Iraq/Afghanistan and more than 40,000 killed in auto accidents annually; divide 40,000 by two -- as approximately half auto-accident victims are male -- and you have the ratio.) Math helps cut through the bogus stuff on this board and allows us to see what is beneath and true.
Oh please, this type of mentality will keep special services teachers and counselors employed for years because they are the ones that actually try and undo what people like this woman do to kids. I have seen way too many children who were conceived and born just as a status symbol for their mothers and I have been given the task to try and undo what these women do (set boundaries for socially acceptable behavior for their children, try and teach the child by doing something the child does not find to his/her liking and therefore not wanting to do it and causing disruptions in the classroom, etc.). Children need fathers, plain and simple.
How do you have 'good parental lineage' without parents? Isn't the 'line" broken (with missing father & marriage)?
Side note: How do teenagers become responsible with condoms???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.