On Sep 20, 1:30 pm, kfw1...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Sep 20, 12:14 pm, Pilgrim wrote:
>
> > > No one is forbidding ...s from living together and raising kids
> > > together, but wants are not rights, and when people demand new legal
> > > rights, the burden of proof is on them to show that granting those
> > > rights would benefit the community.
>
> > You mean "human rights are a privilege"? We must live in different
> > countries.
>
> "Human rights" undefined and uncontextualized as in that sentence, is
> propaganda, no more. The issue here is complicated, as this thread
> makes clear. As I was saying, you guys go for the rhetorical
> oversimplification whenever you can.
>
> > > > Since most ... men, the overwhelming majority, don't have children,
> > > > what is the problem?
>
> > > So we shouldn't protect the weakest members of our society from a
> > > particular, possible threat because relatively few are at risk?
>
> > Whoa! The ... fathers I know are not harming their kids! I'd focus
> > on real issues, Ken.
>
> Dodge.
Oh sure, and what you're doing isn't a transparent emotional ploy?
>
> > > Research shows that kids do best in intact families. I sympathize with
> > > those guys, but that isn't the issue.
>
> > People are not statistics.
>
> People are not anecdotal evidence either. That's why we have to look
> at the statistics.
Without knowledge of why the statistics are the way they are, they're
fairly useless. You keep combining
>
> > I notice you deleted these:
>
> >http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07161/792979-51.stm
>
> >http://www.fremontdads.com/
>
> >http://...fathers.blogspot.com/
>
> I deleted them because you can't prove a rule from a few cases. I have
> personally known a couple of ... couples with kids, and I admired the
> parents. No one that I know is saying ... won't care about their kids
> and can never make good parents. The question for me is how many ...
> marriages will last, and what arrangement is best for kids in the
> first place. Good intentions and cute pictures don't show, contra to
> what evidence now suggests, that ... couples won't split up at higher
> frequencies than straight couples and that two mothers are as good for
> a kid as a mother and a father.
The problem with your statistics is that they're not measuring the
actual lives these people live. Most ... men are not going to have
children. To get a clear picture, we have to do studies of ... men
who adopt or have surrogate children. The statistics you're tossing
out are useless until that happens and you're mixing up studies that
have nothing at all to do with ... issues and claiming that they are
somehow relevant. Showing real life situations goes a long way to
helping people understand that ... people with kids are pretty much
like straight people with kids.
There are also major psychological issues that ... people have to
battle - coming from people like you who argue against equal
treatment. Quite a large number are rejected by their own parents
when they come out. They are also rejected by their churches and by
their communities. This is especially true for ... men and until that
stops, there will be a lot of traumatized people whose lives suffer
because of it.
>
> > Single motherhood happens for any number of reasons, Ken.
>
> Of course it does. Let's not add one more reason.
I'm not adding any new reasons. These reasons already exist. I'm
simply being realistic about it.
>
> > > Do you really think it isn't traumatic for a kid to go from living
> > > with its biological parents to living with only one of them?
>
> > I've never said it wasn't traumatic. In my case, it reduced the
> > trauma, and I don't think I'm the only one.
>
> Sure, there are times couple should spit for the kids' sake. But
> you're comparing the effects on kids of marriages with one ... partner
> to marriages with one alcoholic partner. Does being married to a ...
> person turn a straight one into a virtual alcoholic behavior-wise, or
> is it the ... who turns that way? Obviously the comparison is invalid.
Wha? You're imagination is fascinating. I'm not comparing anything.
Both my parents were straight, btw. The comparison is invalid because
it was only in your head. I just provided a personal example of a
situation involving single parenting.
>
> > > > > > The difference between ... male
> > > > > > relationships and straight relationships is the recognition of open
> > > > > > relationships
>
> > > > > You can call it what you want, it doesn't work.
>
> > > > It works for some people. The level of honesty, equality and respect
> > > > in the relationship is imortant.
>
> > > That's like saying that if human beings on average had much better
> > > character, we wouldn't need so many restrictive laws. That's true, but
> > > it's also fantasy.
>
> > No, it just means that I don't believe I should dictate how other
> > people live their relationships.
>
> What it means to you is that want to "dictate," if you must think in
> those terms, to society that they have to treat a same-. arrangement
> the same as an opposite-. one. What it means is that you want to put
> kids in relatively untried arrangements for the sake of _the parents_.
The kids are already in "untried arrangements", but now you're getting
clearer about what your real issue is. You don't want to let the
coloreds drink from the same fountain as the whites or go to the same
schools!
> That's backwards. Again, no one is stopping ...s from being parents.
> The issue is whether the state should sanction that arrangement,
> treating is as one that is equally good for kids as traditional
> marriage.
Back to the kids again...
If most ... people don't have kids, it's a moot issue for most ...
relationships. Those that do will have them anyhow. What you want to
do is keep these families "illigitimate". That will certainly affect
those children.
> And -- for the last time, because unless you have something
> new, I'm bowing out here -- we don't have the data to show that this
> is true.
Ok, all I have is more web sites showing real life situations.
>
> > It seems to me that you are trying to work towards an ideal that I
> > think is a fantasy and I'm more interested in working with things the
> > way they are and improving the situation from there.
>
> > > Why do you think open marriages fell out of style
> > > after the 60'?
>
> > People made their own decisions about what worked for them instead of
> > following what was in vogue?
>
> Right, and what didn't work was open marriages. Why repeat the
> experiment when we have mounds of data saying it failed?
I'm not sure where you get the idea that I'm wishing for society to
experiment with open marriage. All I'm saying is that there are
people who practice it. If it works for them, I think it's fine. If
it doesn't work for them, I think they should try another way.
|