Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 05/26/2002 2:17:07 PM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: RogerFGay
I actually knew a couple of guys in California who turned gay, not because they were attracted to men, but because they were completely terrified of women. One guy put it this way, "I'd rather get AIDS and die my own death than be looted and pillaged by some woman, only to have her turn my own kids against me!" In fact, they came up with their own term for women - "Male Harvesting Combines".

Of course, now we are at war, so all of us men are supposed to go out and fight and die and do all of that messy stuff. Hey, I've got an idea! Why not let G.I. Jane go out and fight this one? Us stupid males are too lazy and worthless to be any good on the battlefield anyway, just look at how we are portrayed on TV and in the media!

Besides, if Islam wins and this country is turned into an Islamic theocracy just imagine what will happen to the feminists.

It really makes one think about what we are supposed to be fighting for.

2 posted on 05/26/2002 2:33:06 PM PDT by Billy_bob_bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RogerFGay
Most men are actually more family oriented than women.Women tend to run from responsibility more often and much faster than men.Everyone likes to claim the"fathers"ran off,NOT SO,the mothers alienate fathers from their children and the COURTS RUN THEM OFF!
3 posted on 05/26/2002 2:36:45 PM PDT by INSENSITIVE GUY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RogerFGay
Not to suggest that fathers aren't treated unfairly by the government, but the Democrats are on record that they are targeting "Office Park Dads"-- or "Soccer Dads" this year. They are interested in a "strong military," low interest rates (a long-term optimism about the health of the economy), affordable college tuitions and adequate training for people "willing to work."

On a related note, this is why John Sununu is so formidable against Jeanne Shaheen in NH this year-- he comes off as one of these voters (so he gets some of the soccer mom vote (who like soccer dads since they married them) and the soccer dad vote-- along with loyal Republicans-- as his winning coalition). Bill Simon should focus his efforts to portray himself similarly.

4 posted on 05/26/2002 2:37:33 PM PDT by GraniteStateConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RogerFGay
BTTT
7 posted on 05/26/2002 3:58:15 PM PDT by Fiddlstix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RogerFGay
"The system of collecting child support is no longer one of requiring men to take responsibility for their offspring, as most people believe. The combination of 'no fault' divorce and the new enforcement law has created a system that pays mothers to divorce their husbands and remove children from fathers."

This engineering is working well in New Zealand too to break down family units. Men are becoming the new underclass. In many cases their assets are stripped and they are broken by very tight access arrangements to their children. The Family Court is closed, so not everyone is aware of the scale of this process.

8 posted on 05/26/2002 4:00:45 PM PDT by Calvert Cliffs Cafe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RogerFGay
In response, Republicans "want to send the strongest possible message that parents cannot walk away from their children."

And this is a bad thing because ............... ?
13 posted on 05/29/2002 1:17:36 PM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RogerFGay
Sorry but this is a large pile of horse hockey. Sure some deadbeat dads have been forced into bad situations by psychotic ex-wives and wierd courts, but the majority are just no good scumbags too damn full of themselves to pay a measly 100 or so buck a month to keep their kids in things like food and clothes. To call them fathers is an insult to the men that actually care about their children.
23 posted on 05/29/2002 3:07:58 PM PDT by discostu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RogerFGay
Sunday Tasmanian
26 May 2002, Page 11


Nowadays the vow is not to tie the knot
By Gerard McManus


Australian men are avoiding marriage because of the financial ruin marital break-ups bring.

New figures show that a quarter of all women will never be proposed to as men opt for no-strings-attached casual relationships.

Today 29 per cent of men are likely never to marry and the trend is rising.

And recent Family Court rulings which force men to pay for child support for children that are not their own have only reinforced widespread perceptions of anti-male bias by the court.

There are now more than two million Australian men and women in the lonely hearts club - those 45 years and under who have never married. On current trends the club is likely to double over the next 15 years.

Men are opting for relationships where there is no commitment, no offspring and most of all no danger of long-term financial loss from divorce.

And statistics also show that if a woman wants to marry the worst thing she can do is get a university degree, which pushes out the marriage age and lengthens the odds of never marrying.

University degrees produce the most old maids (almost twice as many women with university degrees are not married at 45 compared with women with no qualifications at all).

Women with diplomas fare almost as badly, ahead of women with basic certificates and those with no qualifications at all.

Women with trade certificates appear to have the best prospects of getting married. Just 5 per cent of tradeswomen aged 45 are not married.

"I think it is wonderful that men are starting to wake up," family law reform campaigner Sylvia Smith said last week. "Why would a young man with a lucrative career risk losing 70 to 80 per cent of his assets by getting married?

"Property settlements are meant to be 50/50 but in the vast majority of cases the result is more like 80/20 towards women."

The Full Bench of the Family Court recently ruled that it had no power to force the Child Support Agency to refund $4290 in overpayments to a Victorian man who discovered by DNA tests that he was not the father of his wife's child.

In another case currently before the Family Court, also in Victoria, a man is seeking repayment of about $40,000 in child support payments after he also discovered that two of the three children he had been supporting for 8-1/2 years turned out through DNA testing not to be his.

The Child Support Agency insists it has no power to refund the money, and Children and Youth Affairs Minister Larry Anthony says he is seeking advice on the matter.

The Family Law Act of 1975 ushered in not only the era of no-fault divorce and high dissolution rates (currently running 46 per cent), but a corresponding trend of an increasing reluctance to marry.

Since 1975 there has been a five-fold growth in the number of men who have never married.

In 1975, 4 per cent or about one in 25 women had never married by the time they reached 45 years of age.

According to the 1996 Census (the 2001 Census figures are due to be released soon), more than one in four women had never married by the age of 45, and this figure is continuing to rise.

Between 1986 and 1996 there was a rise in the number of women living in de facto relationships from 7 per cent to 12 per cent in the 25- to 29-year age group.

However, the proportion of married women fell by 15 per cent so that the proportion of women in 1996 who were coupled in any type of live-in union fell from 67 per cent to 57 per cent. The number of people getting married is also falling, despite the increasing population. In 2000 there was a decrease of 900 marriages compared with the previous year.

Men and women are also delaying getting married, with the average age of men getting married now 30, and women almost 28.

In 1971 an extraordinary 62 per cent of women aged between 20 and 24 were married. By 1997 this figure had fallen to 13 per cent.

29 posted on 05/29/2002 3:56:57 PM PDT by Nick Danger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RogerFGay
More Child Support System Corruption Exposed
50 posted on 05/30/2002 7:32:10 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All

On NOW at RadioFR!

6pm PDT/9pm EDT- Listen to Radio FreeRepublic live tonight, as Luis Gonzales interviews G. Edward Griffin and discusses his book 'The Creature From Jekyll Island. A Second Look At The Federal Reserve'. Find out the true nature of our monetary system and how it affects you!

Click HERE to listen LIVE while you FReep!


80 posted on 05/30/2002 5:56:40 PM PDT by Bob J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RogerFGay

STEPHEN BASKERVILLE'S ARTICLE AVAILABLE ONLINE (PDF File Format

The Myth of Deadbeat Dads
99 posted on 05/31/2002 3:41:05 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: RogerFGay
http://www.abanet.org/media/factbooks/cht4.html

Legal status of JPC in the USA by State. It seems that JPC is already either "authorized" (don't know what that means) or is the presumptive in the majority states.

140 posted on 05/31/2002 6:41:29 PM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson