I think I've found a reason to support Romney/Ryan in November

#51
#51
PKT_VOL said:
Ryan is going to cost Romney votes from women. If I remember correctly, he is already down 15ish points among women.

Why would you nominate the cosponsor of the federal version of embryonic personhood if you wanted any shot at independents or women?
Click to expand...

Because Ryan can explain why they are the right choice to put make the USA prosper AND he (Romney) is serious about being a responsible President.
 
#52
#52
hog88 said:
What??? I think we got our wires crossed here. My parents will be married 44 years here shortly and me and my wife 20. I'll be danged if I apologize for being traditional.
Click to expand...

LOL, I was being facetious and agreeing with you at the same time boss. No grief to you from me! My mom and dad will be married 53 this year. Unfortunately I doubt that my mom will realize it or believe it when we tell her......200 times.
 
#54
#54
Rasputin_Vol said:
Women wouldn't get pregnant if they wouldn't open their legs. Outside of rape, men have to be allowed to enter a woman. Women have the responsibility to make better choices.
Click to expand...

It's that change thing....women have a right to screw anyone anytime anywhere anyhow just like men do. But the man is the bad guy when the uh oh happens and the woman is the victim. I am sorry, but that is harsh, and realistic. Unfortunately our welfare system is set up for them to literally turn out litters of kids to boost that check.
 
#55
#55
I would like for you to explain that statement a little further.

Sorry... I'm saying since most welfare programs are always touted with the general tag line of "think of the children" then basically we are extremely encouraging VERY bad and irresponsible behavior. And the long term effects are huge because basically these people are punching out kids at an alarming rate and the snowball starts, those kids will punch out a ton of bastard welfare babies, who will then punch out the same.


1950s - more fear of nuclear war and annihilation, more subjugation of racial/ethnic minorities and women, more subjugation of homosexuals, more subjugation of religious minorities and atheists/agnostics, more subjugation of political dissidents, etc.; less reports of domestic abuse due to social stigmas (not because they didn't happen but because the stigma of reporting them was stronger and because our legal system was less likely to care even if these incidents did occur), less legal routes for minorities to vote and share a voice in the decisions that also affected their lives, less opportunities for women to support themselves or find a life beyond simply raising children, etc.

You can think I'm ignorant and that's fine. I'm not really going to go back and forth but I believe much of this is overblown by the very same children of the sixties who are desperately trying to justify the absolute putrid lifestyle they want to live guilt free. While not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, the world of the 1950's (outside of racial issues) was a much safer and sane place to live in then today's... by a long shot.
 
#57
#57
OrangeYankee said:
I would like for you to explain that statement a little further.

Sorry... I'm saying since most welfare programs are always touted with the general tag line of "think of the children" then basically we are extremely encouraging VERY bad and irresponsible behavior. And the long term effects are huge because basically these people are punching out kids at an alarming rate and the snowball starts, those kids will punch out a ton of bastard welfare babies, who will then punch out the same.


1950s - more fear of nuclear war and annihilation, more subjugation of racial/ethnic minorities and women, more subjugation of homosexuals, more subjugation of religious minorities and atheists/agnostics, more subjugation of political dissidents, etc.; less reports of domestic abuse due to social stigmas (not because they didn't happen but because the stigma of reporting them was stronger and because our legal system was less likely to care even if these incidents did occur), less legal routes for minorities to vote and share a voice in the decisions that also affected their lives, less opportunities for women to support themselves or find a life beyond simply raising children, etc.

You can think I'm ignorant and that's fine. I'm not really going to go back and forth but I believe much of this is overblown by the very same children of the sixties who are desperately trying to justify the absolute putrid lifestyle they want to live guilt free. While not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, the world of the 1950's (outside of racial issues) was a much safer and sane place to live in then today's... by a long shot.
Click to expand...

While I say I probably disagree with you on quite a few social issues, I will concede that our current welfare system does frequently (though not always) award poor behavior and poor family planning (if it can be called that). My mother works with a welfare to work program, and she would be the first to attest that many of these women are simply rooking the system. However, that is not to say that our society, generally speaking, is set up for women to succeed as much as men.

And no, I do not think you're ignorant. I appreciate every chance I get on here to communicate with people about real issues. So thank you for the dialogue, and I mean that in all honesty.
 
Last edited:
#58
#58
TNGlen said:
It's that change thing....women have a right to screw anyone anytime anywhere anyhow just like men do. But the man is the bad guy when the uh oh happens and the woman is the victim. I am sorry, but that is harsh, and realistic. Unfortunately our welfare system is set up for them to literally turn out litters of kids to boost that check.
Click to expand...
Basically:

"Her choice. Her body. Someone else's responsibility."

That somebody else can either be the man or the govt. But she has no responsibility at all in the choice that she made with who enters her body.
 
#59
#59
volprof said:
I'm 27. And I agree with you that the more I learn the less I feel like I know about the world. I will say this, though, I used to think a lot differently about the world than I do today, particularly when it came time to how other people lived their lives. This was due, in large part, to my social upbringing. That cost me a lot of worry, grief, and anguish about things I simply had no control over and things that simply weren't going to go away no matter what I did. This is not to say that anyone should idly sit by and not defend what they believe in, but it is to say, in my opinion, that when it comes time to what other people do with themselves, we might as well just move on and get on with it. It's fine to disagree with that though if anyone chooses.
Click to expand...

It's not that I would disagree with your statement, it's simply that if a human being can get something without having to work for it they will. Even if the behavior is destructive, they will do it anyway. If bad behavior is condoned by those they perceive to be "leaders" or have power and those people give them a reason to justify that behavior, it will never change. You don't change people, you change the system that they live in. That is a basic difference in a liberal and a conservative. A liberal will tell you it isn't your fault and then want to force the community to help that person. A conservative will tell you if you f up it is your responsibility. And then turn around and help you if they think you are trying to help yourself. A libertarian (me in actuality) would just do away with the system.
 
#60
#60
Realistically speaking, how many American women do we think actually are willing to falsely lead a man to impregnate them (without his cognizance) just so they can receive additional welfare?
 
#61
#61
TNGlen said:
It's not that I would disagree with your statement, it's simply that if a human being can get something without having to work for it they will. Even if the behavior is destructive, they will do it anyway. If bad behavior is condoned by those they perceive to be "leaders" or have power and those people give them a reason to justify that behavior, it will never change. You don't change people, you change the system that they live in. That is a basic difference in a liberal and a conservative. A liberal will tell you it isn't your fault and then want to force the community to help that person. A conservative will tell you if you f up it is your responsibility. And then turn around and help you if they think you are trying to help yourself. A libertarian (me in actuality) would just do away with the system.
Click to expand...

Agree.
 
#62
#62
volprof said:
While I say I probably disagree with you on quite a few social issues, I will concede that our current welfare system does frequently (though not always) award poor behavior and poor family planning (if it can be called that). My mother works with a welfare to work program, and she would be the first to attest that many of these women are simply rooking the system. However, that is not to say that our society, generally speaking, is set up for women to succeed as much as men.

And no, I do not think you're ignorant. I appreciate every chance I get on here to communicate with people about real issues. So thank you for the dialogue, and I mean that in all honesty.
Click to expand...

I can almost say we most likely don't BUT I will say this much NONE of what I ranted about are things I think the Government should swoop in and dictate to society at large. I just wish we as a society would quit being so weak kneed and realize there are some moral norms that need to be celebrated. I'm not referencing homosexuality or anything like that. I'm really talking about the strong two parent families with good work ethic etc.

And really to refer to the original point of this thread: I love Ryan's budget because entitlements are spiraling out of control and have been for quite some time and it's high time we started taking a hatchet to it. The only problem is, in typical Republican intellectual dishonesty they leave defense alone which is deserving of a hatchet job too. We are spending WAY too much money and it ALL needs to be cut, drastically.
 
#63
#63
volprof said:
So, by this logic, all of America's ills can be traced back to our black citizens and communities?
Click to expand...

That is an incorrect leap to make from what he said. The statement made is that this behavior was first present in the black community and has spread to other communities. Reference my above post for why. It is the systems fault for providing the necessary psychological backing to promote the behavior. It's that change that you keep talking about accepting. The current gov systems not only accept it, but promote it.
 
#64
#64
volprof said:
Realistically speaking, how many American women do we think actually are willing to falsely lead a man to impregnate them (without his cognizance) just so they can receive additional welfare?
Click to expand...

You just didn't grow up during the right time period in this country. It is hard to answer without just getting downright rude and I save that for the FB forums!
 
#65
#65
TNGlen said:
It's not that I would disagree with your statement, it's simply that if a human being can get something without having to work for it they will. Even if the behavior is destructive, they will do it anyway. If bad behavior is condoned by those they perceive to be "leaders" or have power and those people give them a reason to justify that behavior, it will never change. You don't change people, you change the system that they live in. That is a basic difference in a liberal and a conservative. A liberal will tell you it isn't your fault and then want to force the community to help that person. A conservative will tell you if you f up it is your responsibility. And then turn around and help you if they think you are trying to help yourself. A libertarian (me in actuality) would just do away with the system.
Click to expand...

TNGlen, you came to my defense once a couple months ago when I was attacked for being, ostensibly, a "North Carolina fan" (even though I was born in that state and was raised a UNC fan for 22 years until I matriculated at UT). I appreciated your help then, and I still do. Although I disagree with your stance here, I'm not going to argue with you any further. You make some valid points, and I'll leave it at that.
 
#66
#66
OrangeYankee said:
I can almost say we most likely don't BUT I will say this much NONE of what I ranted about are things I think the Government should swoop in and dictate to society at large. I just wish we as a society would quit being so weak kneed and realize there are some moral norms that need to be celebrated. I'm not referencing homosexuality or anything like that. I'm really talking about the strong two parent families with good work ethic etc.

And really to refer to the original point of this thread: I love Ryan's budget because entitlements are spiraling out of control and have been for quite some time and it's high time we started taking a hatchet to it. The only problem is, in typical Republican intellectual dishonesty they leave defense alone which is deserving of a hatchet job too. We are spending WAY too much money and it ALL needs to be cut, drastically.
Click to expand...

Well, I could argue with you on some points here, but you also make some very good points too. I don't think we're completely at odds.
 
#67
#67
volprof said:
Realistically speaking, how many American women do we think actually are willing to falsely lead a man to impregnate them (without his cognizance) just so they can receive additional welfare?
Click to expand...

I know at least 3. Not sure the man didn't know, but they only see baby daddys about every 2 months.
 
#68
#68
volprof said:
TNGlen, you came to my defense once a couple months ago when I was attacked for being, ostensibly, a "North Carolina fan" (even though I was born in that state and was raised a UNC fan for 22 years until I matriculated at UT). I appreciated your help then, and I still do. Although I disagree with your stance here, I'm not going to argue with you any further. You make some valid points, and I'll leave it at that.
Click to expand...

In answer to your question, probably 50% of the love children produce in the NFL system are kids from women that just want to get pregnant. There is a kid that lives in Knoxville that is the offspring of a VERY famous B-Ball player. I know for a fact that her aim was to have that love child.
 
#69
#69
YorkVol said:
I know at least 3. Not sure the man didn't know, but they only see baby daddys about every 2 months.
Click to expand...

So these men didn't use condoms regardless of what the woman told them? You don't have to answer that, because I know that might be a personal question (not saying you are involved personally here), but I don't think it's an unfair one. Condoms, gentleman, condoms. Even if a woman tells you she's on the pill....condoms.
 
#70
#70
TNGlen said:
In answer to your question, probably 50% of the love children produce in the NFL system are kids from women that just want to get pregnant. There is a kid that lives in Knoxville that is the offspring of a VERY famous B-Ball player. I know for a fact that her aim was to have that love child.
Click to expand...

I'm going to leave it be after this post, but the "NFL system" you speak of probably only accounts for like .1% or our welfare budget, if even that. I don't have any statistics to back my claim here (who does?), but just using my common sense I'd say that's probably the case.
 
#71
#71
volprof said:
Well, if you believe it, at least own up to it, which is what you just did apparently. Good for you. I'm just curious, why do you go by the moniker, "RasputinVol"?
Click to expand...

The data that this woman posted in her article only broke it down along gender lines. I bet you dollars to doughnuts that if you looked at the data of all of the women along racial lines, blacks will probably be disproportionately represented in all categories.

That is all I will say.
 
#73
#73
Rasputin_Vol said:
Here's how you solve that. Women need to be married (with a man) before they have children. Boooom... now you have the traditional family re-established in this country and you've reduced the tax burden at the same time.
Click to expand...

What should happen to the woman that does marry has 2 children then her husband starts drinking, going home drunk and beats the shat out of the woman?
 
#74
#74
Gramps said:
What should happen to the woman that does marry has 2 children then her husband starts drinking, going home drunk and beats the shat out of the woman?
Click to expand...

Best to be very involved in a good community, especially a church. It discourages this behavior and provides help if the behavior does occur. But hey, how would that be relying on the gubment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#75
#75
lawgator1 said:
I think women are disproportionately represented, particularly in Medicaid, due to the fact that in the single parent situation they tend to be the only child caregiver. They end up qualifying for a lot of programs that men might not.
Click to expand...

This is unprecedented
has never happened before
and probably never will again





I agree with LG1
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top