| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"JaBrIoL" |
| Date: |
16 Oct 2003 09:09:51 AM |
| Object: |
Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
ArcaMax Off the Wall, Wednesday October 8, 2003
State and local law-enforcement officials met in Salt Lake City in
August to discuss the growing and seemingly intractable problem of the
radical, Mormon-based polygamist community that reaches from Hildale,
Utah, to Colorado City, Ariz., and which has been denounced by
mainstream Mormons. Issues included not just religious freedom and
forced marriage for young girls, but the $5 million annually in
federal benefits that go to polygamist wives who say they are "single"
mothers on their welfare applications. [KSL-TV (Salt Lake City),
8-21-03, 8-22-03]
.
|
|
| User: "father of peace" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
19 Oct 2003 02:24:31 AM |
|
|
Issues included not just religious freedom and
forced marriage for young girls, but the $5 million annually in
federal benefits that go to polygamist wives who say they are "single"
mothers on their welfare applications. [KSL-TV (Salt Lake City),
8-21-03, 8-22-03]
It is the government that makes the definition that
polygamous wives are 'single mothers'. If the
government is going to oppress the polygamist women,
and claim that they are single mothers, then the
government should pay the price for oppressing
them. And it is more than fair that the general
Utah population pays the taxes to support those
single women, because the LdS church which
runs the Utah government it politically active
trying to define marriage as ONE male and
ONE female.
If you do the math dividing the $5 million among 60,000
polygamists it amounts to $83/year per polygamist.
Love,
Absalom
--
http://absalom.com/mormon/home.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Confusious" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
19 Oct 2003 04:12:42 AM |
|
|
father of peace wrote:
It is the government that makes the definition that
polygamous wives are 'single mothers'. If the
government is going to oppress the polygamist women,
and claim that they are single mothers, then the
government should pay the price for oppressing
them. And it is more than fair that the general
Utah population pays the taxes to support those
single women, because the LdS church which
runs the Utah government it politically active
trying to define marriage as ONE male and
ONE female.
If the polygamist 'husband' can't support all of his 'wives' properly,
then he should keep it in his pants.
If you do the math dividing the $5 million among 60,000
polygamists it amounts to $83/year per polygamist.
That is $83/year too much.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
19 Oct 2003 03:57:02 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 09:12:42 GMT, Confusious <confusious@nomail.com>
wrote:
If the polygamist 'husband' can't support all of his 'wives' properly,
then he should keep it in his pants.
Polygamists in Utah are discriminated against in housing and
employment. In his book, "I Wed Three Wives", Roy Potter describes
several years of being unable to find anyone willing to hire him,
after he was fired from the Murray Police Department for practicing
polygamy.
Tom Green was working as a paralegal, when some neighbors tried to
persuade one of his wives to leave. When that failed, they got the
family evicted from the park. The only place he could find that he
could move his trailers to was a plot of land 200 miles out in the
desert. Selling magazine subscriptions was the best they could now do
for income.
Their main house was split in two when a fire marshall, driving drunk,
passed out and plowed into it. Six months later, a windstorm
completed it's destruction.
Old wiring caused the cabin they were staying in, while developing the
property, to burn down. A three-year-old son was killed, and all
their possessions were destroyed.
When they had finally gotten on their feet financially, Mr. Green
tried to arrange repayment of the assistance the family had received
while facing two years of hardship. Instead of a payment schedule, he
received charges for criminal nonsupport.
If you do the math dividing the $5 million among 60,000
polygamists it amounts to $83/year per polygamist.
That is $83/year too much.
Then people should be denied the same humanitarian assistance that the
rest of society may receive, for the "crime" of being part of a
persecuted minority religion?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lee Paulson" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
20 Oct 2003 07:33:50 AM |
|
|
"Gary" <garym21doesnotwantspam@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:kus5pvokkltg8fjd5q0ammd831koftb1ub@4ax.com...
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 09:12:42 GMT, Confusious <confusious@nomail.com>
wrote:
If the polygamist 'husband' can't support all of his 'wives' properly,
then he should keep it in his pants.
Polygamists in Utah are discriminated against in housing and
employment. In his book, "I Wed Three Wives", Roy Potter describes
several years of being unable to find anyone willing to hire him,
after he was fired from the Murray Police Department for practicing
polygamy.
snip
Then people should be denied the same humanitarian assistance that the
rest of society may receive, for the "crime" of being part of a
persecuted minority religion?
It is not discrimination or persecution to choose not to associate with or
hire people known to be violating laws. If Tom Greene et al. chose to break
laws (and polygamy is a legal violation), he brought about many of his own
end results.
That said, everyone eligible should receive the same benefits.
--
Regards,
Lee the James, uM, feminist
The deepest sin against the human mind is to believe things without
evidence--Thomas H. Huxley
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kevin Aylward" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
20 Oct 2003 08:26:27 AM |
|
|
Lee Paulson wrote:
"Gary" <garym21doesnotwantspam@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:kus5pvokkltg8fjd5q0ammd831koftb1ub@4ax.com...
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 09:12:42 GMT, Confusious <confusious@nomail.com>
wrote:
If the polygamist 'husband' can't support all of his 'wives'
properly, then he should keep it in his pants.
Polygamists in Utah are discriminated against in housing and
employment. In his book, "I Wed Three Wives", Roy Potter describes
several years of being unable to find anyone willing to hire him,
after he was fired from the Murray Police Department for practicing
polygamy.
snip
Then people should be denied the same humanitarian assistance that
the rest of society may receive, for the "crime" of being part of a
persecuted minority religion?
It is not discrimination or persecution to choose not to associate
with or hire people known to be violating laws.
Well, of course it is. That's what discrimination means. To chose one
over another. The issue is whether or not the discrimination is
acceptable to ones own particular code of conduct.
Kevin Aylward
salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gary" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
21 Oct 2003 11:41:01 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 08:33:50 -0400, "Lee Paulson"
<lrpaulson@earthlink.net> wrote:
Then people should be denied the same humanitarian assistance that the
rest of society may receive, for the "crime" of being part of a
persecuted minority religion?
It is not discrimination or persecution to choose not to associate with or
hire people known to be violating laws. If Tom Greene et al. chose to break
laws (and polygamy is a legal violation), he brought about many of his own
end results.
That said, everyone eligible should receive the same benefits.
Tom Green's wives will argue that it was the DA/Governers brother who
hurt them, that Tom never did anything harmful. That includes Linda,
who he was accused of raping as a child, though she is now well into
her adulthood years, and still wants to remain his wife.
You don't even have to practice polygamy to be a victim of
discrimination. Two brothers had a seller back out of a land sale,
after doing some "research at church". Neither of them practiced
polygamy, though they had a surname which is very common in polygamous
groups, and some of their relatives were polygamists. Judge Dee
Benson threw their case out of federal court, stating that polygamy
was "unquestionably illegal".
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lee Paulson" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
22 Oct 2003 06:15:28 AM |
|
|
"Gary" <garym21doesnotwantspam@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:n61cpv8ijs4oca6qmqa6m87uktrg59gief@4ax.com...
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 08:33:50 -0400, "Lee Paulson"
<lrpaulson@earthlink.net> wrote:
Then people should be denied the same humanitarian assistance that the
rest of society may receive, for the "crime" of being part of a
persecuted minority religion?
It is not discrimination or persecution to choose not to associate with
or
hire people known to be violating laws. If Tom Greene et al. chose to
break
laws (and polygamy is a legal violation), he brought about many of his
own
end results.
That said, everyone eligible should receive the same benefits.
Tom Green's wives will argue that it was the DA/Governers brother who
hurt them, that Tom never did anything harmful. That includes Linda,
who he was accused of raping as a child, though she is now well into
her adulthood years, and still wants to remain his wife.
You don't even have to practice polygamy to be a victim of
discrimination. Two brothers had a seller back out of a land sale,
after doing some "research at church". Neither of them practiced
polygamy, though they had a surname which is very common in polygamous
groups, and some of their relatives were polygamists. Judge Dee
Benson threw their case out of federal court, stating that polygamy
was "unquestionably illegal".
I don't see how it's relevant--there has to be more to it than that.
Sellers generally can refuse to sell property. If the case was no more than
denial of a contract based on a name, the judge clearly erred.
The point is simply that we have laws. It doesn't matter that you were not
caught breaking the laws--if you are, you pay a penalty. That's the way it
works. Don't like the laws? Work to get them changed.
We've all had weird, potentially discrimnatory things happen to us. Who
knows why? People are strange sometimes.
And I'll repeat--I don't think the women or children should be penalized for
being in need. I do think the fathers who leave those children and women in
need should be.
--
Regards,
Lee the James, uM, feminist
The deepest sin against the human mind is to believe things without
evidence--Thomas H. Huxley
.
|
|
|
| User: "father of peace" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
25 Oct 2003 01:51:45 PM |
|
|
Don't like the laws? Work to get them changed.
One of the most effective ways to work to get bad
laws changed is to ignore the law, to break the law,
if enough people break the law it becomes a
meaningless law... Consider prohibition. Consider
the 55 mph speed limit...
And I'll repeat--I don't think the women or children should be penalized for
being in need. I do think the fathers who leave those children and women in
need should be.
I believe that women should be 100% responsible for any
children that they have. It is wrong to take the gift of
sperm that a man gives, and then to make the man
an indentured servant for the next 20 years.
Love,
Absalom
--
http://absalom.com/mormon/home.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lee Paulson" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
27 Oct 2003 12:18:15 PM |
|
|
"father of peace" <absalom@pipeline.com> wrote in message
news:3f9ac597.463292906@news.west.earthlink.net...
snip
limit...
And I'll repeat--I don't think the women or children should be penalized
for
being in need. I do think the fathers who leave those children and women
in
need should be.
I believe that women should be 100% responsible for any
children that they have. It is wrong to take the gift of
sperm that a man gives, and then to make the man
an indentured servant for the next 20 years.
Love,
Absalom
I believe men should be able to give their sperm freely, just as long as
it's not capable of impregnating anyone. If a man has a chance of being a
father, he should own up to his responsibility and take the gift the woman
gives him.
Don't be dumb.
--
Regards,
Lee the James, uM, feminist
The deepest sin against the human mind is to believe things without
evidence--Thomas H. Huxley
.
|
|
|
| User: "greg randall" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
29 Oct 2003 04:07:01 AM |
|
|
"Lee Paulson" <lrpaulson@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:bnjnh7$10f1hd$1@ID-146277.news.uni-berlin.de...
"father of peace" <absalom@pipeline.com> wrote in message
news:3f9ac597.463292906@news.west.earthlink.net...
snip
limit...
And I'll repeat--I don't think the women or children should be
penalized
for
being in need. I do think the fathers who leave those children and
women
in
need should be.
I believe that women should be 100% responsible for any
children that they have. It is wrong to take the gift of
sperm that a man gives, and then to make the man
an indentured servant for the next 20 years.
Love,
Absalom
I believe men should be able to give their sperm freely, just as long as
it's not capable of impregnating anyone. If a man has a chance of being a
father, he should own up to his responsibility and take the gift the woman
gives him.
Don't be dumb.
Yeah Dont be dumb, never belive the "Yes Ive been taking the pill on time"
story, no matter how well you "think" you know her. Because it only has
99.99 % sucess rate and your always the other 0.001 %
Greg
--
Regards,
Lee the James, uM, feminist
The deepest sin against the human mind is to believe things without
evidence--Thomas H. Huxley
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lee Paulson" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
29 Oct 2003 10:36:50 AM |
|
|
"greg randall" <grandall@dnet.aunz.com> wrote in message
news:newscache$a4kinh$luh$1@mars.dataline.net.au...
"Lee Paulson" <lrpaulson@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:bnjnh7$10f1hd$1@ID-146277.news.uni-berlin.de...
"father of peace" <absalom@pipeline.com> wrote in message
news:3f9ac597.463292906@news.west.earthlink.net...
snip
limit...
And I'll repeat--I don't think the women or children should be
penalized
for
being in need. I do think the fathers who leave those children and
women
in
need should be.
I believe that women should be 100% responsible for any
children that they have. It is wrong to take the gift of
sperm that a man gives, and then to make the man
an indentured servant for the next 20 years.
Love,
Absalom
I believe men should be able to give their sperm freely, just as long as
it's not capable of impregnating anyone. If a man has a chance of being
a
father, he should own up to his responsibility and take the gift the
woman
gives him.
Don't be dumb.
Yeah Dont be dumb, never belive the "Yes Ive been taking the pill on
time"
story, no matter how well you "think" you know her. Because it only has
99.99 % sucess rate and your always the other 0.001 %
Greg
You might well be the failure. Or you might be deceived intentionally.
Whatever reason, if a pregnancy results, you can be quite sure whether it's
yours--we have marvelous techniques these days.
I was just lecturing my eldest son about this very topic yesterday.
--
Regards,
Lee the James, uM, feminist
The deepest sin against the human mind is to believe things without
evidence--Thomas H. Huxley
.
|
|
|
| User: "greg randall" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
30 Oct 2003 05:28:20 AM |
|
|
"Lee Paulson" <lrpaulson@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:bnoqb2$12lobv$1@ID-146277.news.uni-berlin.de...
"greg randall" <grandall@dnet.aunz.com> wrote in message
news:newscache$a4kinh$luh$1@mars.dataline.net.au...
"Lee Paulson" <lrpaulson@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:bnjnh7$10f1hd$1@ID-146277.news.uni-berlin.de...
"father of peace" <absalom@pipeline.com> wrote in message
news:3f9ac597.463292906@news.west.earthlink.net...
Don't be dumb.
Yeah Dont be dumb, never belive the "Yes Ive been taking the pill on
time"
story, no matter how well you "think" you know her. Because it only has
99.99 % sucess rate and your always the other 0.001 %
Greg
You might well be the failure. Or you might be deceived intentionally.
Whatever reason, if a pregnancy results, you can be quite sure whether
it's
yours--we have marvelous techniques these days.
I was just lecturing my eldest son about this very topic yesterday.
Yes your right Lee,
If the outcome was judged as the result of trust put in a women and trust
in a Pharmaceutical company as a youth believing them, then yes it I may
well have been a failure. But then I suppose If the lecture your son has had
was available then or the rightious upringing of a Christian household, I
possibly would not have been that failure. ( purley an assumption) !
If the outcome was producing a Beautiful Blue eyed, blond haired child, who
bought much Joy to many, then perhaps I was a success, albeit an
unintentional one.
I belive I was imature and too trusting of many, yet if I am ultimatly at
fault for not being socially mature and/or not being morally sound in my
judgements I accept that given the fact I was *not* devoid of understanding
of right from wrong at that age but was more reckless as a result of many
many issues. I claim no moral advantage over the the young Lady involved,
infact for some reason even to this day despite my somtimes stating stupid
remarks ( usualy after afew Borbon & Cokes) I still feel/want/ need to
believe that the Lady concerned was telling the truth.
Note the tests were acccurate back in the eighties too. It nothing new to
this generation, Its just cheaper & easier to find out the truth now days.
Regards
Greg
--
Regards,
Lee the James, uM, feminist
The deepest sin against the human mind is to believe things without
evidence--Thomas H. Huxley
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Nori Otaku" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
26 Oct 2003 01:52:34 AM |
|
|
father of peace wrote on Sat, 25 Oct 2003 18:51:45 +0000:
I believe that women should be 100% responsible for any children that they
have. It is wrong to take the gift of sperm that a man gives, and then to
make the man an indentured servant for the next 20 years.
If you're going to be consistent, and you really believe the above, then
fathers should have no rights to their children either. When a woman and
man engage in intercourse (and esp. if neither one takes contraceptive
action), and a child results, they are both at least somewhat responsible.
Helping to shoulder the burden a man helps create for the woman (maternity
leave, additional financial and emotional responsibility) is called
*responsibility*, and it in no way makes the man "an indentured servant".
--
NoriOtaku :: Change 'spam' to 'com' to send mail
.
|
|
|
| User: "father of peace" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
26 Oct 2003 02:58:05 AM |
|
|
I believe that women should be 100% responsible for any children that they
have. It is wrong to take the gift of sperm that a man gives, and then to
make the man an indentured servant for the next 20 years.
If you're going to be consistent, and you really believe the above, then
fathers should have no rights to their children either.
Of course not.
When a woman and
man engage in intercourse (and esp. if neither one takes contraceptive
action), and a child results, they are both at least somewhat responsible.
The only time I would make the male responsible is if he raped
the woman, or if he made a pre-intercourse agreement that he
would take care of the children.
Helping to shoulder the burden a man helps create for the woman (maternity
leave, additional financial and emotional responsibility) is called
*responsibility*, and it in no way makes the man "an indentured servant".
Slave would be a better word.
Love,
Absalom
--
http://absalom.com/mormon/home.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nori Otaku" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
28 Oct 2003 12:13:34 AM |
|
|
father of peace wrote on Sun, 26 Oct 2003 08:58:05 +0000:
I believe that women should be 100% responsible for any children that
they have. It is wrong to take the gift of sperm that a man gives, and
then to make the man an indentured servant for the next 20 years.
If you're going to be consistent, and you really believe the above, then
fathers should have no rights to their children either.
Of course not.
Well, then, at least you're consistent. Good on you.
When a woman and
man engage in intercourse (and esp. if neither one takes contraceptive
action), and a child results, they are both at least somewhat
responsible.
The only time I would make the male responsible is if he raped the woman,
or if he made a pre-intercourse agreement that he would take care of the
children.
There is a general legal principle of "contributory responsibility". In
breif, it states that if you knowingly contribute to a certain result,
then you are partially accountable for it.
For instance, if you sell a man a gun knowing that he plans to use it to
kill his boss, you can be found an accomplice (criminal) and/or an
actionable party (civil) to that crime.
Following that legal principle leads us to hold that when a man has sex
with a woman in a situation where he knows conception is possible (i.e. he
knows neither of them are using contraception), then he has contributory
responsibility.
However, if he is led to believe the woman is using contraceptives, or if
the child is a result of contraceptive failure, the legal waters are muddy.
Helping to shoulder the burden a man helps create for the woman
(maternity leave, additional financial and emotional responsibility) is
called *responsibility*, and it in no way makes the man "an indentured
servant".
Slave would be a better word.
So, let me be clear here. You're OK with a man leaving a woman *because*
he got her pregnant (as an example), and then having no responsibility to
care for the mother or the child in any way?
Let me ask you, would it be acceptable if, given this situation, the man
were given the choice (by the woman) to care for them or to pay for an
abortion?
--
NoriOtaku :: Change 'spam' to 'com' to send mail
.
|
|
|
| User: "father of peace" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
28 Oct 2003 02:24:02 AM |
|
|
So, let me be clear here. You're OK with a man leaving a woman *because*
he got her pregnant (as an example), and then having no responsibility to
care for the mother or the child in any way?
I think our current system is evil, because it makes a man a slave to
a woman for decades just because they had sex that resulted
in a child being born. Alimony is an even greater evil...
Let me ask you, would it be acceptable if, given this situation, the man
were given the choice (by the woman) to care for them or to pay for an
abortion?
It is acceptable to me for whomever has custody of the children
to pay to support the children. It is not acceptable to me for the
non-custodial parent to be coerced, at government gunpoint,
to pay child support...
Love,
Absalom
--
http://absalom.com/mormon/home.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lee Paulson" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
29 Oct 2003 10:27:49 AM |
|
|
"father of peace" <absalom2003@pipeline.com> wrote in message
news:3f9e26cb.78885906@news.west.earthlink.net...
So, let me be clear here. You're OK with a man leaving a woman *because*
he got her pregnant (as an example), and then having no responsibility to
care for the mother or the child in any way?
I think our current system is evil, because it makes a man a slave to
a woman for decades just because they had sex that resulted
in a child being born. Alimony is an even greater evil...
First of all, no system will make you pay beyond a child's 18th birthday,
unless there is an educational stipulation. So it's not decades.
Second, if a man is willing to father a child and then unwilling to ensure
that child is well fed and cared for, should the child suffer, the man is no
better than a murderer of his own child.
--
Regards,
Lee the James, uM, feminist
The deepest sin against the human mind is to believe things without
evidence--Thomas H. Huxley
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Geoff Matthews" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
28 Oct 2003 03:36:19 PM |
|
|
(father of peace) wrote in message news:<3f9e26cb.78885906@news.west.earthlink.net>...
So, let me be clear here. You're OK with a man leaving a woman *because*
he got her pregnant (as an example), and then having no responsibility to
care for the mother or the child in any way?
I think our current system is evil, because it makes a man a slave to
a woman for decades just because they had sex that resulted
in a child being born. Alimony is an even greater evil...
Let me ask you, would it be acceptable if, given this situation, the man
were given the choice (by the woman) to care for them or to pay for an
abortion?
It is acceptable to me for whomever has custody of the children
to pay to support the children. It is not acceptable to me for the
non-custodial parent to be coerced, at government gunpoint,
to pay child support...
Love,
Absalom
Terry, which is worse, that a man abandons his wife and children to
poverty, or that a government holds the man, at the least, financially
responsbile? If the father is not held responsible, the children do
suffer, and currently, you haven't argued why it is better for the
children to suffer than the father to suffer.
Can you please address that issue?
Geoff Matthews
.
|
|
|
| User: "Terry/Anti" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
28 Oct 2003 06:20:37 PM |
|
|
"Geoff Matthews" <vodyanoi@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:67eaf128.0310281336.493a5664@posting.google.com...
absalom2003@pipeline.com (father of peace) wrote in message
news:<3f9e26cb.78885906@news.west.earthlink.net>...
So, let me be clear here. You're OK with a man leaving a woman
*because*
he got her pregnant (as an example), and then having no responsibility
to
care for the mother or the child in any way?
I think our current system is evil, because it makes a man a slave to
a woman for decades just because they had sex that resulted
in a child being born. Alimony is an even greater evil...
Let me ask you, would it be acceptable if, given this situation, the
man
were given the choice (by the woman) to care for them or to pay for an
abortion?
It is acceptable to me for whomever has custody of the children
to pay to support the children. It is not acceptable to me for the
non-custodial parent to be coerced, at government gunpoint,
to pay child support...
Love,
Absalom
Terry, which is worse, that a man abandons his wife and children to
poverty, or that a government holds the man, at the least, financially
responsbile? If the father is not held responsible, the children do
suffer, and currently, you haven't argued why it is better for the
children to suffer than the father to suffer.
Can you please address that issue?
Geoff Matthews
I wasn't going to get into this, but since you ask. I think a man should
take responsibility for any offspring that are a result of his breading.
It's not a victimless crime. The child, mother and society all become
victims when the father becomes deadbeat.
Gramps
Move the @ ahead of hot to email me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Geoff Matthews" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
29 Oct 2003 12:02:40 AM |
|
|
"Terry/Anti" <GrandpaTDhot@mail.com> wrote in message news:<vpu1trmpfeou03@corp.supernews.com>...
"Geoff Matthews" <vodyanoi@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:67eaf128.0310281336.493a5664@posting.google.com...
absalom2003@pipeline.com (father of peace) wrote in message
news:<3f9e26cb.78885906@news.west.earthlink.net>...
So, let me be clear here. You're OK with a man leaving a woman
*because*
he got her pregnant (as an example), and then having no responsibility
to
care for the mother or the child in any way?
I think our current system is evil, because it makes a man a slave to
a woman for decades just because they had sex that resulted
in a child being born. Alimony is an even greater evil...
Let me ask you, would it be acceptable if, given this situation, the
man
were given the choice (by the woman) to care for them or to pay for an
abortion?
It is acceptable to me for whomever has custody of the children
to pay to support the children. It is not acceptable to me for the
non-custodial parent to be coerced, at government gunpoint,
to pay child support...
Love,
Absalom
Terry, which is worse, that a man abandons his wife and children to
poverty, or that a government holds the man, at the least, financially
responsbile? If the father is not held responsible, the children do
suffer, and currently, you haven't argued why it is better for the
children to suffer than the father to suffer.
Can you please address that issue?
Geoff Matthews
I wasn't going to get into this, but since you ask. I think a man should
take responsibility for any offspring that are a result of his breading.
It's not a victimless crime. The child, mother and society all become
victims when the father becomes deadbeat.
Gramps
Move the @ ahead of hot to email me.
Sorry Gramps, but the question was directed to Terry Lofthouse. But
I'm glad to hear your voice of reason on this matter.
Geoff Matthews
.
|
|
|
| User: "father of peace" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
31 Oct 2003 01:45:37 AM |
|
|
(Geoff Matthews) wrote:
Sorry Gramps, but the question was directed to Terry Lofthouse.
Geoff Matthews
To whom it may concern.
I believe that Geoff Matthews is stalking me. That he is
encouraging people to engage in violence against me
by posting my name to this forum.
I have already been attacked two times by people
because of my posts to this forum. I belive
that Geoff is threatening my physical safety, and
is trying to set me up to be attacked again.
I use a pen name on this forum because of those
attacks and because I am sick and tired of fascist
LdS people reporting me to my bishop for a difference
of opinion.
Love,
Absalom
--
http://absalom.com/mormon/home.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "GoddessXena" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
31 Oct 2003 01:52:19 AM |
|
|
father of peace wrote:
vodyanoi@yahoo.com (Geoff Matthews) wrote:
Sorry Gramps, but the question was directed to Terry Lofthouse.
Geoff Matthews
To whom it may concern.
I believe that Geoff Matthews is stalking me. That he is
encouraging people to engage in violence against me
by posting my name to this forum.
I have already been attacked two times by people
because of my posts to this forum. I belive
that Geoff is threatening my physical safety, and
is trying to set me up to be attacked again.
I use a pen name on this forum because of those
attacks and because I am sick and tired of fascist
LdS people reporting me to my bishop for a difference
of opinion.
Love,
Absalom
--
http://absalom.com/mormon/home.html
Maybe you should have reconsidered your "gift"... lol! Karma is a real
***** sometimes, isn't She?
absalom@pipeline.com wrote:
I believe that women should be 100% responsible for any
children that they have. It is wrong to take the gift of
sperm that a man gives, and then to make the man
an indentured servant for the next 20 years.
Love,
Absalom
--
More Trees, Less Bush
--
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that
we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic
and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
- Theodore Roosevelt
---
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/subjectarchive/halloween.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~goddessxena/index.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "father of peace" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
31 Oct 2003 02:10:56 AM |
|
|
Maybe you should have reconsidered your "gift"... lol! Karma is a real
***** sometimes, isn't She?
My lover was very put out by my post.
Love,
Absalom
--
http://absalom.com/mormon/home.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "GoddessXena" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
31 Oct 2003 02:36:27 AM |
|
|
father of peace wrote:
Maybe you should have reconsidered your "gift"... lol! Karma is a real
***** sometimes, isn't She?
My lover was very put out by my post.
Love,
Absalom
--
http://absalom.com/mormon/home.html
I should hope so!
--
Faith is deciding to allow yourself to believe something your intellect
would otherwise cause you to reject -- otherwise there's no need for faith.
--
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that
we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic
and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
- Theodore Roosevelt
---
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/subjectarchive/halloween.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~goddessxena/index.htm
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "ut-1067623626" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
31 Oct 2003 01:27:09 PM |
|
|
father of peace wrote:
vodyanoi@yahoo.com (Geoff Matthews) wrote:
Sorry Gramps, but the question was directed to Terry Lofthouse.
Geoff Matthews
To whom it may concern.
I believe that Geoff Matthews is stalking me. That he is
encouraging people to engage in violence against me
by posting my name to this forum.
I have already been attacked two times by people
because of my posts to this forum. I belive
that Geoff is threatening my physical safety, and
is trying to set me up to be attacked again.
I use a pen name on this forum because of those
attacks and because I am sick and tired of fascist
LdS people reporting me to my bishop for a difference
of opinion.
Love,
Absalom
--
http://absalom.com/mormon/home.html
Very unfortunate. Some Christians think ethics are optional.
--
Urim Thummim
"Beware of 'God of the Gaps', the Incredible Shrinking Deity who fills the
gaps in our understanding until understanding shrinks both gaps and God
down to nothing."
--George A. Staffa
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Nori Otaku" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
28 Oct 2003 11:46:59 PM |
|
|
father of peace wrote on Tue, 28 Oct 2003 08:24:02 +0000:
Let me ask you, would it be acceptable if, given this situation, the man
were given the choice (by the woman) to care for them or to pay for an
abortion?
It is acceptable to me for whomever has custody of the children to pay to
support the children. It is not acceptable to me for the non-custodial
parent to be coerced, at government gunpoint, to pay child support...
Ok, but you didn't answer my question.
--
NoriOtaku :: Change 'spam' to 'com' to send mail
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "GoddessXena" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
25 Oct 2003 08:46:08 PM |
|
|
father of peace wrote:
I believe that women should be 100% responsible for any
children that they have. It is wrong to take the gift of
sperm that a man gives, and then to make the man
an indentured servant for the next 20 years.
Pig.
--
Christianity is not a religion; it's an industry.
--
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that
we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic
and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
- Theodore Roosevelt
---
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/subjectarchive/halloween.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~goddessxena/index.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "father of peace" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
26 Oct 2003 02:58:51 AM |
|
|
I believe that women should be 100% responsible for any
children that they have. It is wrong to take the gift of
sperm that a man gives, and then to make the man
an indentured servant for the next 20 years.
Pig.
But of course...
Love,
Absalom
--
http://absalom.com/mormon/home.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Clovis Lark" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
22 Oct 2003 08:40:10 AM |
|
|
In alt.religion.mormon Gary <garym21doesnotwantspam@comcast.net> wrote:
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 08:33:50 -0400, "Lee Paulson"
<lrpaulson@earthlink.net> wrote:
Then people should be denied the same humanitarian assistance that the
rest of society may receive, for the "crime" of being part of a
persecuted minority religion?
It is not discrimination or persecution to choose not to associate with or
hire people known to be violating laws. If Tom Greene et al. chose to break
laws (and polygamy is a legal violation), he brought about many of his own
end results.
That said, everyone eligible should receive the same benefits.
Tom Green's wives will argue that it was the DA/Governers brother who
hurt them, that Tom never did anything harmful. That includes Linda,
who he was accused of raping as a child, though she is now well into
her adulthood years, and still wants to remain his wife.
You don't even have to practice polygamy to be a victim of
discrimination. Two brothers had a seller back out of a land sale,
after doing some "research at church". Neither of them practiced
polygamy, though they had a surname which is very common in polygamous
groups, and some of their relatives were polygamists. Judge Dee
Benson threw their case out of federal court, stating that polygamy
was "unquestionably illegal".
Correction, there were 3 brothers. They wanted 4 lots. They *claimed*
not to practice polygamy, but to be closely related to those who did. Just
the facts...
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "ut" |
|
| Title: Re: Mormons worse than welfaricans? |
20 Oct 2003 10:02:56 AM |
|
|
On Monday 20 October 2003 05:33, Lee Paulson <lrpaulson@earthlink.net>
typed:
"Gary" <garym21doesnotwantspam@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:kus5pvokkltg8fjd5q0ammd831koftb1ub@4ax.com...
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 09:12:42 GMT, Confusious <confusious@nomail.com>
wrote:
If the polygamist 'husband' can't support all of his 'wives' properly,
then he should keep it in his pants.
Polygamists in Utah are discriminated against in housing and
employment. In his book, "I Wed Three Wives", Roy Potter describes
several years of being unable to find anyone willing to hire him,
after he was fired from the Murray Police Department for practicing
polygamy.
snip
Then people should be denied the same humanitarian assistance that the
rest of society may receive, for the "crime" of being part of a
persecuted minority religion?
It is not discrimination or persecution to choose not to associate with or
hire people known to be violating laws. If Tom Greene et al. chose to
break laws (and polygamy is a legal violation), he brought about many of
his own end results.
While I'm not fan of Tom Green, I have no inhibitions against letting the
profit motive drive my hiring decisions as I try to obtain the most
effective and loyal people I can. Tom might be good at something and if no
one else will give him a job, you have built in loyalty. A buck is a buck
is a buck as long as you are employing and working within society's
appropriate laws.
That said, everyone eligible should receive the same benefits.
Absolutely.
--
Urim Thummim
And in the beginning there was nothing.
And God said, Let there be light.
And there was still nothing but now you could see it!
--Anon
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
