Do you believe in equality under the law for women, children and gays?

[Votto]

Do you believe in equality under the law for women, children and gays?


I do for gays but not for women and children.


When it comes to women and children, I think men are duty bound to put family duty and responsibilities above themselves and thus men should not consider themselves as equal to women and children. Men should put the needs of women and children ahead of their own.


Think in terms of the good logic of the law of the sea and it being applied to land.


It is said by many that the courts favor women in most divorce cases. Given that almost 50% of all household are maned by single women, are our courts thinking more as I do and does that make them dishonest in terms of equality under the law?


Thoughts?


Regards

DL

The laws in the US favor those of color.

Therefore, darky should get the job before whitey.

News to me. But that seems fair, given that otherwise, whitey would not do the right thing.

Whitey does not elevate his own women and children to where they should be so is not likely going to care for non-whiteys.

Regards
DL

You have heard of Affirmative Action, right?

I think the LGTB community wants something similar for themselves.

Yeah- as in exactly equal.

The Christian community keeps insisting though that they don't have to obey the law that everyone else is obligated to obey.

Now are you getting Christianity confused with the Obama administration again?

 

[GreatestIam]

`
`
I don't know about the law but equality can be enforced by the iron fist of the orc.

It cannot be in all locations.

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

[

You have heard of Affirmative Action, right?

I think the LGTB community wants something similar for themselves.[/QUOTE]

That is news to me, but if they suffer workplace discrimination without a just cause, they should have it.

Call it a teaching tool to bring those who discriminate without a just cause into line.

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

[

Well men are duty bound to take care of their families but what does that have to do with civil rights? Just because a man tends to the needs of his family doesn't mean that they are less than he is under the law.
As for the welfare state, that is a different matter. I do tend to agree with you that the pendulum has swung a bit too far the other way but this should not preclude civil rights.

I did not indicate that men who tend to the needs of their family are less than they are under the law. I think you read me wrong on this.

The law says they are equal, and I say that women and children should, if anything, be above men and not bellow them. The reverse I think of what you indicated I put.

Regards
DL

But...doesn't that create the same argument in reverse? Why put any group above another in law?[/QUOTE]

In this case, to follow natural law.

Do you see the females going against a predator to protect their young? Yes, but only when the males are not around.

Nature protects the young and the wombs that produce them more than the males who sire them.

We are natural animals and should act like it. No?

Further, ever note who the heroes usually are?
Usually males and not females, because we are more immune to danger than women and children. That is why mostly men go to make war and women stay home.

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

Why are u putting women and kids in the same category?

Because I agree with the law of the sea that does and think I am seeing our divorce courts do it as well when children are in play.

I have even known childless men complain about how well women are treated by the courts as compared to men.

Regards
DL

How about an example?

The problem is that the kid is a person and not some property you can split n half .

If dad works all crazy hours , how can the kid be with him 1/2 time ? He's going to take him to work?

Women have been known to take their children to work. I have never heard of a father doing so.

As to examples. I have nothing but anecdotal renderings for you which are kind of useless when statistics are what are required.

You are correct that children are people and the courts seem to think they will do better with their mothers and not their fathers. I tend to agree just on my anecdotal experience and from those people I have known.

The statistics for these women alone raised children are already horrendous in terms of their end and I think that if men did more of the child rearing, things would be even worse.

Regards
DL

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Do you believe in equality under the law for women, children and gays?


I do for gays but not for women and children.


When it comes to women and children, I think men are duty bound to put family duty and responsibilities above themselves and thus men should not consider themselves as equal to women and children. Men should put the needs of women and children ahead of their own.


Think in terms of the good logic of the law of the sea and it being applied to land.


It is said by many that the courts favor women in most divorce cases. Given that almost 50% of all household are maned by single women, are our courts thinking more as I do and does that make them dishonest in terms of equality under the law?


Thoughts?


Regards

DL

The laws in the US favor those of color.

Therefore, darky should get the job before whitey.

That's why cops shoot them in the back all the time.

right?

We need a separate forum for the truly thinking impaired racist assholes like you, steve McSlime, shoots at pee-ers, tanked ...............


OP - Yes.

Complete and unequivocal equality.

Period.

 

[Timmy]

Why are u putting women and kids in the same category?

Because I agree with the law of the sea that does and think I am seeing our divorce courts do it as well when children are in play.

I have even known childless men complain about how well women are treated by the courts as compared to men.

Regards
DL

How about an example?

The problem is that the kid is a person and not some property you can split n half .

If dad works all crazy hours , how can the kid be with him 1/2 time ? He's going to take him to work?

Women have been known to take their children to work. I have never heard of a father doing so.

As to examples. I have nothing but anecdotal renderings for you which are kind of useless when statistics are what are required.

You are correct that children are people and the courts seem to think they will do better with their mothers and not their fathers. I tend to agree just on my anecdotal experience and from those people I have known.

The statistics for these women alone raised children are already horrendous in terms of their end and I think that if men did more of the child rearing, things would be even worse.

Regards
DL

Because that's how the kids were living . Mom as the caretaker , dad at work .

You get these idiot husbands who demand the wife stay at home with the kid . When u divorce guess what? You created a jobless monster! Now you own it .

 

[GreatestIam]

[QUOTE="Syriusly, post: 18271741, member: 51902
[/QUOTE]

Odd argument.

Men and women should be treated equally.
They should each be held responsible for their children.[/QUOTE]

I agree with your last but not the rest.

Please see the last two posts and see if I have dealt with your concerns.

Regards
DL

 

[LoneLaugher]

Do you believe in equality under the law for women, children and gays?


I do for gays but not for women and children.


When it comes to women and children, I think men are duty bound to put family duty and responsibilities above themselves and thus men should not consider themselves as equal to women and children. Men should put the needs of women and children ahead of their own.


Think in terms of the good logic of the law of the sea and it being applied to land.


It is said by many that the courts favor women in most divorce cases. Given that almost 50% of all household are maned by single women, are our courts thinking more as I do and does that make them dishonest in terms of equality under the law?


Thoughts?


Regards

DL

The laws in the US favor those of color.

Therefore, darky should get the job before whitey.

Man! You sure have become more open with your bigotry. What happened? Did someone falsely accuse you of being a racist and turn you into one? So sad.

 

[GreatestIam]

OP - Yes.

Complete and unequivocal equality.

Period.

I agree except for my caveat on women and the duty men should give them freely and happily so as to do what I think is our duty.

A man should take the bullet for his woman and children. His manly pride, if nothing else, should insure his not hiding behind them.

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

Why are u putting women and kids in the same category?

Because I agree with the law of the sea that does and think I am seeing our divorce courts do it as well when children are in play.

I have even known childless men complain about how well women are treated by the courts as compared to men.

Regards
DL

How about an example?

The problem is that the kid is a person and not some property you can split n half .

If dad works all crazy hours , how can the kid be with him 1/2 time ? He's going to take him to work?

Women have been known to take their children to work. I have never heard of a father doing so.

As to examples. I have nothing but anecdotal renderings for you which are kind of useless when statistics are what are required.

You are correct that children are people and the courts seem to think they will do better with their mothers and not their fathers. I tend to agree just on my anecdotal experience and from those people I have known.

The statistics for these women alone raised children are already horrendous in terms of their end and I think that if men did more of the child rearing, things would be even worse.

Regards
DL

Because that's how the kids were living . Mom as the caretaker , dad at work .

You get these idiot husbands who demand the wife stay at home with the kid . When u divorce guess what? You created a jobless monster! Now you own it .

I think we are on the same page.

But if the guy has enough cash, that is the way to go and is intelligent and not idiotic.

I think that that would gain the best end for the child. That may be why the courts try for that blend and why we have so many deadbeat dads who do not care enough about their children to make that effort.

In older times, the idea was that a new husband would come into the woman's and her children's life and a new wife and kids into the ex husband's life and things worked out.

That does not seem to happen as much today because the selection of males is so poor. That is why the single parent/female household is at 50%.

The deadbeat dads are just moving back into their parents basements.

Our young boys and men are not learning to be responsible citizens.

If you have the time ---- this is an eye opener.



Regards
DL

 

[xotoxi]

When it comes to women and children, I think men are duty bound to put family duty and responsibilities above themselves and thus men should not consider themselves as equal to women and children. Men should put the needs of women and children ahead of their own.


Think in terms of the good logic of the law of the sea and it being applied to land.


It is said by many that the courts favor women in most divorce cases. Given that almost 50% of all household are maned by single women, are our courts thinking more as I do and does that make them dishonest in terms of equality under the law?


Thoughts?


Regards

DL

I think that households head by a single women should be illegal. A single mother should be required to find a male head-of-household within 6 months or the government will appoint one for her.

Ah the good old days.......when men could have mistresses and illegitimate children, but wives could be divorced and stripped of her kids just for a rumor......

Makin' America Great Again!