On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:

>On Sun, 27 May 2018 07:53:45 +1000, Bruce >
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 26 May 2018 17:49:03 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>>
>>>The anti abortion crowd is not all male. One of the few people I know
>>>who is opposed to abortion in one of my sisters in law. She is not
>>>involved with any anti abortion groups, but has supported them.
>>>
>>>Then there are people like the ex wife of an old friend of mine who
>>>proudly announced that she had had 5 abortions. Maybe she was trying to
>>>make a statement that would get her labelled as a liberal, but it just
>>>made me think she was an idiot. I would have expected that, like most
>>>women who have had unwanted pregnancies, that she would have learned
>>>from her mistake the first time.
>>>
>>I wouldn't even let my cat have an abortion, let alone a human if I
>>had any say over it. It's too close to murder for me. But to each
>>their own.
>
>Well don't impregnate a woman because I don't think you get the final
>say in Oz.

Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
long enough and look at the world!

wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2018 16:50:17 -0500, Hank Rogers >
> wrote:
>
>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>> On 5/26/2018 4:34 PM, wrote:
>>>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>>>> dsi1 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Everybody has their own religion. It's either one of God/nature or
>>>>>> it's the religion of >themselves. Personally, I'd feel safer around
>>>>>> people that believe that there's something >bigger than themselves.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because someone who thinks he's got a higher being wouldn't hurt anyone?
>>>
>>>> That wou.ld be idiotic considering more people have been murdered in
>>>> the name of religion than for all other reasons combined.
>>>
>>> Plenty of murders have been committed by people who wouldn't dream of
>>> missing church, and that doesn't even touch the fanatics who believe
>>> it's their job to kill people because they have their God's blessing.
>>>
>>> nancy
>>
>> Yes indeed. Read the bible to learn of not only gods murderous ways, but
>> his people also were quite murderous.
>>
>> Old Popeye is no murder authority, but I would tend to believe him if he
>> starts commenting on all the sex stories which are also plastered all
>> through the bible.
>>
>>
> Should he start with the famous Leviticus bit???
>

You mean the bit about what must be done when women have a menstrual
period and become "unclean"?

He actually should start with genesis. Tons of sex stories, and many
other stories, rivaled only by Hitchcock and Serling.

On Sun, 27 May 2018 09:32:49 +1000, Bruce >
wrote:

>On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 27 May 2018 07:53:45 +1000, Bruce >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 26 May 2018 17:49:03 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>>>
>>>>The anti abortion crowd is not all male. One of the few people I know
>>>>who is opposed to abortion in one of my sisters in law. She is not
>>>>involved with any anti abortion groups, but has supported them.
>>>>
>>>>Then there are people like the ex wife of an old friend of mine who
>>>>proudly announced that she had had 5 abortions. Maybe she was trying to
>>>>make a statement that would get her labelled as a liberal, but it just
>>>>made me think she was an idiot. I would have expected that, like most
>>>>women who have had unwanted pregnancies, that she would have learned
>>>>from her mistake the first time.
>>>>
>>>I wouldn't even let my cat have an abortion, let alone a human if I
>>>had any say over it. It's too close to murder for me. But to each
>>>their own.
>>
>>Well don't impregnate a woman because I don't think you get the final
>>say in Oz.
>
>Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
>comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
>long enough and look at the world!

Cry me a river! If the situation was reversed are you seriously
trying to tell me men would have allowed women to decide whether they
were going to continue their pregnancy or not? You are being
exceptionally silly, men have had the most important say for
centuries, so if you don't like the results, point your finger at
yourself and other men!

On Saturday, May 26, 2018 at 10:17:52 AM UTC-10, Nancy Young wrote:
>
> Because someone who thinks he's got a higher being wouldn't hurt anyone?
>
> nancy

That would be the general idea.

On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:50:06 -0300, wrote:

>On Sun, 27 May 2018 09:32:49 +1000, Bruce >
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 27 May 2018 07:53:45 +1000, Bruce >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 26 May 2018 17:49:03 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The anti abortion crowd is not all male. One of the few people I know
>>>>>who is opposed to abortion in one of my sisters in law. She is not
>>>>>involved with any anti abortion groups, but has supported them.
>>>>>
>>>>>Then there are people like the ex wife of an old friend of mine who
>>>>>proudly announced that she had had 5 abortions. Maybe she was trying to
>>>>>make a statement that would get her labelled as a liberal, but it just
>>>>>made me think she was an idiot. I would have expected that, like most
>>>>>women who have had unwanted pregnancies, that she would have learned
>>>>>from her mistake the first time.
>>>>>
>>>>I wouldn't even let my cat have an abortion, let alone a human if I
>>>>had any say over it. It's too close to murder for me. But to each
>>>>their own.
>>>
>>>Well don't impregnate a woman because I don't think you get the final
>>>say in Oz.
>>
>>Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
>>comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
>>long enough and look at the world!
>
>Cry me a river! If the situation was reversed are you seriously
>trying to tell me men would have allowed women to decide whether they
>were going to continue their pregnancy or not? You are being
>exceptionally silly, men have had the most important say for
>centuries, so if you don't like the results, point your finger at
>yourself and other men!

But if my wife and I have a child and we then divorce, I also lose the
child. And because the ever important child has to live in a good
house, I also lose the house. So I'd lose wife, house, and child. So
even before we divorce, my wife can blackmail me. Do as I say or you
lose everything.

Shouldn't men have some rights too?

On Sat, 26 May 2018 17:05:03 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

>On Saturday, May 26, 2018 at 10:17:52 AM UTC-10, Nancy Young wrote:
>>
>> Because someone who thinks he's got a higher being wouldn't hurt anyone?
>>
>> nancy
>
>That would be the general idea.

You're just guessing, silly.

On Saturday, May 26, 2018 at 11:16:20 AM UTC-10, Dave Smith wrote:
>
> I don't feel very safe around people who think it is their duty to
> convert or kill people who don't buy into their religion. I don't feel
> comfortable in a community where there are silly laws based on religious
> beliefs. There are simply too many different religions, each with their
> own Us vs. Them Good vs. Evil issues.

Religion is the only rational basis for a moral code. Moral codes are the basis for human civilization. Otherwise, we'd just be as animals.

On Sat, 26 May 2018 17:09:05 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

>On Saturday, May 26, 2018 at 11:16:20 AM UTC-10, Dave Smith wrote:
>>
>> I don't feel very safe around people who think it is their duty to
>> convert or kill people who don't buy into their religion. I don't feel
>> comfortable in a community where there are silly laws based on religious
>> beliefs. There are simply too many different religions, each with their
>> own Us vs. Them Good vs. Evil issues.
>
>Religion is the only rational basis for a moral code. Moral codes are the basis for human civilization. Otherwise, we'd just be as animals.

This is so retarded, I'll let other people knock him on the head.

On 2018-05-26 5:18 PM, wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2018 16:50:17 -0500, Hank Rogers >
> wrote:
>
>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>> On 5/26/2018 4:34 PM, wrote:
>>>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>>>> dsi1 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Everybody has their own religion. It's either one of God/nature or
>>>>>> it's the religion of >themselves. Personally, I'd feel safer around
>>>>>> people that believe that there's something >bigger than themselves.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because someone who thinks he's got a higher being wouldn't hurt anyone?
>>>
>>>> That wou.ld be idiotic considering more people have been murdered in
>>>> the name of religion than for all other reasons combined.
>>>
>>> Plenty of murders have been committed by people who wouldn't dream of
>>> missing church, and that doesn't even touch the fanatics who believe
>>> it's their job to kill people because they have their God's blessing.
>>>
>>> nancy
>>
>> Yes indeed. Read the bible to learn of not only gods murderous ways, but
>> his people also were quite murderous.

Still are!!!!

On Sat, 26 May 2018 18:49:03 -0600, graham > wrote:

>On 2018-05-26 5:18 PM, wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 May 2018 16:50:17 -0500, Hank Rogers >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>>> On 5/26/2018 4:34 PM, wrote:
>>>>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>>>>> dsi1 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Everybody has their own religion. It's either one of God/nature or
>>>>>>> it's the religion of >themselves. Personally, I'd feel safer around
>>>>>>> people that believe that there's something >bigger than themselves.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because someone who thinks he's got a higher being wouldn't hurt anyone?
>>>>
>>>>> That wou.ld be idiotic considering more people have been murdered in
>>>>> the name of religion than for all other reasons combined.
>>>>
>>>> Plenty of murders have been committed by people who wouldn't dream of
>>>> missing church, and that doesn't even touch the fanatics who believe
>>>> it's their job to kill people because they have their God's blessing.
>>>>
>>>> nancy
>>>
>>> Yes indeed. Read the bible to learn of not only gods murderous ways, but
>>> his people also were quite murderous.
>
>Still are!!!!

But in rfc, the atheists are the most verbally aggressive. Makes you
think...

On 2018-05-26 7:17 PM, wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2018 17:49:03 -0400, Dave Smith

>>
>> Bear in mind that reporters covering controversial social issues bend
>> over backwards to find the most radical people to interview. I am not
>> exactly pro-abortion, but I am definitely pro-Choice. I don't think
>> that abortion should be used as birth control. I would prefer that
>> people be taught about birth control and use it rather than resorting to
>> a medical procedure that carries some risks. I want abortion to be
>> legal so that women have the option of obtain safe abortions.
>
> We certainly don't need a return to coat hanger days, agreed. However
> I believe it is a myth that some women use abortion as birth control,
> if in fact, they did, I doubt they would make great mothers. Taking a
> pill looks great (either birth control pills or morning after) rather
> than a surgical procedure.
>>
>> The anti abortion crowd is not all male. One of the few people I know
>> who is opposed to abortion in one of my sisters in law. She is not
>> involved with any anti abortion groups, but has supported them.
>
> When Henry Morgentaler came to Halifax to open the first clinic there
> was a big demo when he spoke at the Dal Student Union. I went with
> two or three friends, it was bitter cold and on the other side of the
> road the pro choicers arrived, we started out shouting them and the
> young man beside me suddenly looked up at the placard I was carrying
> which said 'I don't let a man in Rome decide what I do' and said
> 'hell, I'm on the wrong side of the road' he started to cross over and
> we got a yell going for him to have a nice pregnancy

The guy in Rome is the head of a church where a lot of people gave lip
service to his ruling on abortion. Yet Catholics have as many abortions
as non Catholics.

>>
>> Then there are people like the ex wife of an old friend of mine who
>> proudly announced that she had had 5 abortions. Maybe she was trying to
>> make a statement that would get her labelled as a liberal, but it just
>> made me think she was an idiot. I would have expected that, like most
>> women who have had unwanted pregnancies, that she would have learned
>>from her mistake the first time.
>
> Agreed - I would not have responded nicely had she said that to me,
> hopefully it wasn't true, just something she thought would win her
> some kudos.

I don't know if it is true or not, but it is definitely what she told
me. If she expected kudos from me she certainly did not get them. In
fact, I told my friend's sister that as we were returning from his
funeral and she was telling me about the hell the ex had put him through.

On 2018-05-26 7:32 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:
>

> Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
> comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
> long enough and look at the world!
>

Yeah. There is some truth to that. I used to car pool with a co-worker.
His wife was screwing around on him and they divorced. She had a
daughter by a former deadbeat husband. My co-worker applied for custody
of the step daughter. He thought the ex was unfit to be a mother. He was
told that since he was not the biological father he had no claim.
However..... since he was the only father she ever knew, he had to pay
support.

On 2018-05-26 7:50 PM, wrote:
> On Sun, 27 May 2018 09:32:49 +1000, Bruce >
> wrote:

>> Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
>> comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
>> long enough and look at the world!
>
> Cry me a river! If the situation was reversed are you seriously
> trying to tell me men would have allowed women to decide whether they
> were going to continue their pregnancy or not? You are being
> exceptionally silly, men have had the most important say for
> centuries, so if you don't like the results, point your finger at
> yourself and other men!
>

By the same token..... what if a guy thinks the woman is on a reliable
form of birth control and ends up pregnant? Should he be able to insist
that she abort?

On Sat, 26 May 2018 22:14:11 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2018-05-26 7:32 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:
>>
>
>> Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
>> comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
>> long enough and look at the world!
>>
>
>Yeah. There is some truth to that. I used to car pool with a co-worker.
>His wife was screwing around on him and they divorced. She had a
>daughter by a former deadbeat husband. My co-worker applied for custody
>of the step daughter. He thought the ex was unfit to be a mother. He was
>told that since he was not the biological father he had no claim.
>However..... since he was the only father she ever knew, he had to pay
>support.

Even if he had been the biological father, he would have lost, unless
the mother was a total alcoholic, living under a bridge.

It's time men stood up and claimed their rights!

On 5/26/2018 10:35 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2018 22:14:11 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> On 2018-05-26 7:32 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>> On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:
>>>
>>
>>> Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
>>> comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
>>> long enough and look at the world!
>>>
>>
>> Yeah. There is some truth to that. I used to car pool with a co-worker.
>> His wife was screwing around on him and they divorced. She had a
>> daughter by a former deadbeat husband. My co-worker applied for custody
>> of the step daughter. He thought the ex was unfit to be a mother. He was
>> told that since he was not the biological father he had no claim.
>> However..... since he was the only father she ever knew, he had to pay
>> support.
>
> Even if he had been the biological father, he would have lost, unless
> the mother was a total alcoholic, living under a bridge.
>
> It's time men stood up and claimed their rights!
>

There was a lawyer that posted here some years back. Her specialty was
rights of fathers.

On Sat, 26 May 2018 22:50:36 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 5/26/2018 10:35 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 May 2018 22:14:11 -0400, Dave Smith
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 2018-05-26 7:32 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>>> Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
>>>> comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
>>>> long enough and look at the world!
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah. There is some truth to that. I used to car pool with a co-worker.
>>> His wife was screwing around on him and they divorced. She had a
>>> daughter by a former deadbeat husband. My co-worker applied for custody
>>> of the step daughter. He thought the ex was unfit to be a mother. He was
>>> told that since he was not the biological father he had no claim.
>>> However..... since he was the only father she ever knew, he had to pay
>>> support.
>>
>> Even if he had been the biological father, he would have lost, unless
>> the mother was a total alcoholic, living under a bridge.
>>
>> It's time men stood up and claimed their rights!
>>
>
>There was a lawyer that posted here some years back. Her specialty was
>rights of fathers.

That must have been hard work and little to work with!

On Sun, 27 May 2018 10:08:18 +1000, Bruce >
wrote:

>On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:50:06 -0300, wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 27 May 2018 09:32:49 +1000, Bruce >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 27 May 2018 07:53:45 +1000, Bruce >
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sat, 26 May 2018 17:49:03 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>The anti abortion crowd is not all male. One of the few people I know
>>>>>>who is opposed to abortion in one of my sisters in law. She is not
>>>>>>involved with any anti abortion groups, but has supported them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Then there are people like the ex wife of an old friend of mine who
>>>>>>proudly announced that she had had 5 abortions. Maybe she was trying to
>>>>>>make a statement that would get her labelled as a liberal, but it just
>>>>>>made me think she was an idiot. I would have expected that, like most
>>>>>>women who have had unwanted pregnancies, that she would have learned
>>>>>>from her mistake the first time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>I wouldn't even let my cat have an abortion, let alone a human if I
>>>>>had any say over it. It's too close to murder for me. But to each
>>>>>their own.
>>>>
>>>>Well don't impregnate a woman because I don't think you get the final
>>>>say in Oz.
>>>
>>>Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
>>>comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
>>>long enough and look at the world!
>>
>>Cry me a river! If the situation was reversed are you seriously
>>trying to tell me men would have allowed women to decide whether they
>>were going to continue their pregnancy or not? You are being
>>exceptionally silly, men have had the most important say for
>>centuries, so if you don't like the results, point your finger at
>>yourself and other men!
>
>But if my wife and I have a child and we then divorce, I also lose the
>child. And because the ever important child has to live in a good
>house, I also lose the house. So I'd lose wife, house, and child. So
>even before we divorce, my wife can blackmail me. Do as I say or you
>lose everything.
>
>Shouldn't men have some rights too?

You're out of touch with how settlements go now, at least how they go
here. I am often at events at my younger daughters house where her ex
husband is present and also her current, that way they both get to
share their sons for Xmas Day etc. The first time it felt a bit
strange but we managed, now its a given. In fact he swings past to
pick me up and give me a drive out to her place. It's called Joint
Custody.

On Sun, 27 May 2018 08:00:55 -0300, wrote:

>On Sun, 27 May 2018 10:08:18 +1000, Bruce >
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:50:06 -0300, wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 27 May 2018 09:32:49 +1000, Bruce >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sun, 27 May 2018 07:53:45 +1000, Bruce >
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Sat, 26 May 2018 17:49:03 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The anti abortion crowd is not all male. One of the few people I know
>>>>>>>who is opposed to abortion in one of my sisters in law. She is not
>>>>>>>involved with any anti abortion groups, but has supported them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Then there are people like the ex wife of an old friend of mine who
>>>>>>>proudly announced that she had had 5 abortions. Maybe she was trying to
>>>>>>>make a statement that would get her labelled as a liberal, but it just
>>>>>>>made me think she was an idiot. I would have expected that, like most
>>>>>>>women who have had unwanted pregnancies, that she would have learned
>>>>>>>from her mistake the first time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>I wouldn't even let my cat have an abortion, let alone a human if I
>>>>>>had any say over it. It's too close to murder for me. But to each
>>>>>>their own.
>>>>>
>>>>>Well don't impregnate a woman because I don't think you get the final
>>>>>say in Oz.
>>>>
>>>>Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
>>>>comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
>>>>long enough and look at the world!
>>>
>>>Cry me a river! If the situation was reversed are you seriously
>>>trying to tell me men would have allowed women to decide whether they
>>>were going to continue their pregnancy or not? You are being
>>>exceptionally silly, men have had the most important say for
>>>centuries, so if you don't like the results, point your finger at
>>>yourself and other men!
>>
>>But if my wife and I have a child and we then divorce, I also lose the
>>child. And because the ever important child has to live in a good
>>house, I also lose the house. So I'd lose wife, house, and child. So
>>even before we divorce, my wife can blackmail me. Do as I say or you
>>lose everything.
>>
>>Shouldn't men have some rights too?
>
>You're out of touch with how settlements go now, at least how they go
>here. I am often at events at my younger daughters house where her ex
>husband is present and also her current, that way they both get to
>share their sons for Xmas Day etc. The first time it felt a bit
>strange but we managed, now its a given. In fact he swings past to
>pick me up and give me a drive out to her place. It's called Joint
>Custody.

Yes, I've heard of that But your daughter's in charge. What if she
moves to Newfoundland? Or to Australia?

On Sat, 26 May 2018 22:16:19 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2018-05-26 7:50 PM, wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 May 2018 09:32:49 +1000, Bruce >
>> wrote:
>
>>> Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
>>> comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
>>> long enough and look at the world!
>>
>> Cry me a river! If the situation was reversed are you seriously
>> trying to tell me men would have allowed women to decide whether they
>> were going to continue their pregnancy or not? You are being
>> exceptionally silly, men have had the most important say for
>> centuries, so if you don't like the results, point your finger at
>> yourself and other men!
>>
>
>By the same token..... what if a guy thinks the woman is on a reliable
>form of birth control and ends up pregnant? Should he be able to insist
>that she abort?

If he didn't want her to become pregnant, he could have worn a condom
or better yet, not had sex with her. He had choices and made them.

On Sun, 27 May 2018 12:35:26 +1000, Bruce >
wrote:

>On Sat, 26 May 2018 22:14:11 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>
>>On 2018-05-26 7:32 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>> On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:
>>>
>>
>>> Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
>>> comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
>>> long enough and look at the world!
>>>
>>
>>Yeah. There is some truth to that. I used to car pool with a co-worker.
>>His wife was screwing around on him and they divorced. She had a
>>daughter by a former deadbeat husband. My co-worker applied for custody
>>of the step daughter. He thought the ex was unfit to be a mother. He was
>>told that since he was not the biological father he had no claim.
>>However..... since he was the only father she ever knew, he had to pay
>>support.
>
>Even if he had been the biological father, he would have lost, unless
>the mother was a total alcoholic, living under a bridge.
>
>It's time men stood up and claimed their rights!

You are way behind the times!

On Sun, 27 May 2018 08:10:06 -0300, wrote:

>On Sun, 27 May 2018 12:35:26 +1000, Bruce >
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 26 May 2018 22:14:11 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>>
>>>On 2018-05-26 7:32 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>>> Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
>>>> comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
>>>> long enough and look at the world!
>>>>
>>>
>>>Yeah. There is some truth to that. I used to car pool with a co-worker.
>>>His wife was screwing around on him and they divorced. She had a
>>>daughter by a former deadbeat husband. My co-worker applied for custody
>>>of the step daughter. He thought the ex was unfit to be a mother. He was
>>>told that since he was not the biological father he had no claim.
>>>However..... since he was the only father she ever knew, he had to pay
>>>support.
>>
>>Even if he had been the biological father, he would have lost, unless
>>the mother was a total alcoholic, living under a bridge.
>>
>>It's time men stood up and claimed their rights!
>
>You are way behind the times!

No, I'm ahead of you. You're still stuck in Women's Lib. I've moved on
to Men's Lib.

On Sun, 27 May 2018 21:05:59 +1000, Bruce >
wrote:
>>>Shouldn't men have some rights too?
>>
>>You're out of touch with how settlements go now, at least how they go
>>here. I am often at events at my younger daughters house where her ex
>>husband is present and also her current, that way they both get to
>>share their sons for Xmas Day etc. The first time it felt a bit
>>strange but we managed, now its a given. In fact he swings past to
>>pick me up and give me a drive out to her place. It's called Joint
>>Custody.
>
>Yes, I've heard of that But your daughter's in charge. What if she
>moves to Newfoundland? Or to Australia?

She can't under the terms of joint custody, not that it really applies
any more as both boys are heading 30. When it started, she moved out,
and rented a place nearby. They both had to provide their tax
receipts to the court and the money was divided so that both
households were equal. At that point Paul had to pay her some extra.

The boys were to do two weeks with her, two weeks with him but since
both of them had to travel occasionally in their jobs, they remained
flexible about it. Then when she bought a house and was earning
more, she had to pay him to keep the homes equal.

The boys would leave their bikes at Joanna's in the a.m. and take the
school bus from there, returning to her home (and her 'fridge and
emptying it) before they biked home to Pauls!

Basically it worked well because the boys could not do that favoured
thing of saying '..but Dad lets us do that' because they knew if they
did she would simply pick up the phone and ask him or vice versa

These days he is talking of moving to Honduras and retiring there and
both sons get a bit exasperated with him as being impractical The
joint custody is now over because both boys are over the age of
majority.

On Sun, 27 May 2018 21:14:54 +1000, Bruce >
wrote:

>On Sun, 27 May 2018 08:10:06 -0300, wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 27 May 2018 12:35:26 +1000, Bruce >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 26 May 2018 22:14:11 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 2018-05-26 7:32 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
>>>>> comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
>>>>> long enough and look at the world!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yeah. There is some truth to that. I used to car pool with a co-worker.
>>>>His wife was screwing around on him and they divorced. She had a
>>>>daughter by a former deadbeat husband. My co-worker applied for custody
>>>>of the step daughter. He thought the ex was unfit to be a mother. He was
>>>>told that since he was not the biological father he had no claim.
>>>>However..... since he was the only father she ever knew, he had to pay
>>>>support.
>>>
>>>Even if he had been the biological father, he would have lost, unless
>>>the mother was a total alcoholic, living under a bridge.
>>>
>>>It's time men stood up and claimed their rights!
>>
>>You are way behind the times!
>
>No, I'm ahead of you. You're still stuck in Women's Lib. I've moved on
>to Men's Lib.

Well then, before you start shouting from the hills really LEARN what
happens today, not what someone tells you, probably usually a man.

Bruce wrote:
>
> On Sun, 27 May 2018 08:10:06 -0300, wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 27 May 2018 12:35:26 +1000, Bruce >
> >wrote:
> >
> >>On Sat, 26 May 2018 22:14:11 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>>On 2018-05-26 7:32 PM, Bruce wrote:
> >>>> On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>> Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
> >>>> comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
> >>>> long enough and look at the world!
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Yeah. There is some truth to that. I used to car pool with a co-worker.
> >>>His wife was screwing around on him and they divorced. She had a
> >>>daughter by a former deadbeat husband. My co-worker applied for custody
> >>>of the step daughter. He thought the ex was unfit to be a mother. He was
> >>>told that since he was not the biological father he had no claim.
> >>>However..... since he was the only father she ever knew, he had to pay
> >>>support.
> >>
> >>Even if he had been the biological father, he would have lost, unless
> >>the mother was a total alcoholic, living under a bridge.
> >>
> >>It's time men stood up and claimed their rights!
> >
> >You are way behind the times!
>
> No, I'm ahead of you. You're still stuck in Women's Lib. I've moved on
> to Men's Lib.

Women's Lib even demanded to allow women in combat. Those idiots.
Back in my Vietnam draft days, young women were safe from being
drafted. What parent would fight for the right for their daughter
to also be drafted?

Note: I do understand the combat experience thing. Without combat
experience, your promotions in the military were not going to go
very far. Still... It was a "be careful what you ask for" thing.

PS - I was one of the lucky divorced fathers. My wife said, "I'm
tired of being a wife and a mother." She meant it too. I got full
custody of my daughter with no argument and I was so glad for
that. I really enjoyed being a single parent and doing it all. I
never got a single penny of child support but I didn't care...I
didn't lose my daughter. It all worked out well.

wrote:
>
> Dave Smith wrote:
> >By the same token..... what if a guy thinks the woman is on a reliable
> >form of birth control and ends up pregnant? Should he be able to insist
> >that she abort?
>
> If he didn't want her to become pregnant, he could have worn a condom
> or better yet, not had sex with her. He had choices and made them.

Yep...it's all the man's fault. ;-)

On Sun, 27 May 2018 08:30:53 -0400, Gary > wrote:

wrote:
>>
>> Dave Smith wrote:
>> >By the same token..... what if a guy thinks the woman is on a reliable
>> >form of birth control and ends up pregnant? Should he be able to insist
>> >that she abort?
>>
>> If he didn't want her to become pregnant, he could have worn a condom
>> or better yet, not had sex with her. He had choices and made them.
>
>Yep...it's all the man's fault. ;-)

Nope, you don't read properly - he had a choice and made the wrong one
for him. It's not a question of fault, more responsibility and
acknowledgement of the possible consequences.

On 5/27/2018 7:00 AM, wrote:
> On Sun, 27 May 2018 10:08:18 +1000, Bruce >
> wrote:
>
>> But if my wife and I have a child and we then divorce, I also lose the
>> child. And because the ever important child has to live in a good
>> house, I also lose the house. So I'd lose wife, house, and child. So
>> even before we divorce, my wife can blackmail me. Do as I say or you
>> lose everything.
>>
>> Shouldn't men have some rights too?
>
> You're out of touch with how settlements go now, at least how they go
> here. I am often at events at my younger daughters house where her ex
> husband is present and also her current, that way they both get to
> share their sons for Xmas Day etc. The first time it felt a bit
> strange but we managed, now its a given. In fact he swings past to
> pick me up and give me a drive out to her place. It's called Joint
> Custody.
>

I don't know about other countries but my oldest brother got full
custody of his son. This was back around 1987 or '88. The courts (at
least in the US) have been flexible regarding custody issues for quite
some time.

Jill

On Sunday, May 27, 2018 at 7:15:00 AM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
> On Sun, 27 May 2018 08:10:06 -0300, wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 27 May 2018 12:35:26 +1000, Bruce >
> >wrote:
> >
> >>On Sat, 26 May 2018 22:14:11 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>>On 2018-05-26 7:32 PM, Bruce wrote:
> >>>> On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>> Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
> >>>> comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
> >>>> long enough and look at the world!
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Yeah. There is some truth to that. I used to car pool with a co-worker.
> >>>His wife was screwing around on him and they divorced. She had a
> >>>daughter by a former deadbeat husband. My co-worker applied for custody
> >>>of the step daughter. He thought the ex was unfit to be a mother. He was
> >>>told that since he was not the biological father he had no claim.
> >>>However..... since he was the only father she ever knew, he had to pay
> >>>support.
> >>
> >>Even if he had been the biological father, he would have lost, unless
> >>the mother was a total alcoholic, living under a bridge.
> >>
> >>It's time men stood up and claimed their rights!
> >
> >You are way behind the times!
>
> No, I'm ahead of you. You're still stuck in Women's Lib. I've moved on
> to Men's Lib.

From what do men need to be liberated?

Cindy Hamilton

On 5/27/2018 9:00 AM, wrote:
> On Sun, 27 May 2018 08:30:53 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>>> By the same token..... what if a guy thinks the woman is on a reliable
>>>> form of birth control and ends up pregnant? Should he be able to insist
>>>> that she abort?
>>>
>>> If he didn't want her to become pregnant, he could have worn a condom
>>> or better yet, not had sex with her. He had choices and made them.
>>
>> Yep...it's all the man's fault. ;-)
>
> Nope, you don't read properly - he had a choice and made the wrong one
> for him. It's not a question of fault, more responsibility and
> acknowledgement of the possible consequences.
>

Maybe. If the woman indicates she is "safe" then he is not to blame.
There have been deceptive women that figure getting pregnant is a way to
catch a husband, others just don't know or care.

There are women with four kids and four fathers and there are men with
four kids and four mothers.

On 5/27/2018 10:03 AM, jmcquown wrote:
> On 5/27/2018 7:00 AM, wrote:

> I don't know about other countries but my oldest brother got full
> custody of his son.Â* This was back around 1987 or '88.Â* The courts (at
> least in the US) have been flexible regarding custody issues for quite
> some time.
>
I know someone in the US, who managed to get custody of three young
half-sisters - the youngest was the only one who was biologically his
daughter, but he believed it would be cruel to separate them, and he was
a much better parent than the girls' mother ever was.

On 2018-05-27 7:09 AM, wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2018 22:16:19 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:

>>> Cry me a river! If the situation was reversed are you seriously
>>> trying to tell me men would have allowed women to decide whether they
>>> were going to continue their pregnancy or not? You are being
>>> exceptionally silly, men have had the most important say for
>>> centuries, so if you don't like the results, point your finger at
>>> yourself and other men!
>>>
>>
>> By the same token..... what if a guy thinks the woman is on a reliable
>> form of birth control and ends up pregnant? Should he be able to insist
>> that she abort?
>
> If he didn't want her to become pregnant, he could have worn a condom
> or better yet, not had sex with her. He had choices and made them.
>

Ah. I see. He should have known better than to have believed her.

On 2018-05-27 7:00 AM, wrote:
> On Sun, 27 May 2018 10:08:18 +1000, Bruce >
> wrote:

>> But if my wife and I have a child and we then divorce, I also lose the
>> child. And because the ever important child has to live in a good
>> house, I also lose the house. So I'd lose wife, house, and child. So
>> even before we divorce, my wife can blackmail me. Do as I say or you
>> lose everything.
>>
>> Shouldn't men have some rights too?
>
> You're out of touch with how settlements go now, at least how they go
> here. I am often at events at my younger daughters house where her ex
> husband is present and also her current, that way they both get to
> share their sons for Xmas Day etc. The first time it felt a bit
> strange but we managed, now its a given. In fact he swings past to
> pick me up and give me a drive out to her place. It's called Joint
> Custody.
>




He's not the one who is out of touch with how settlements go. You are.
Your exception does not make the rule. According to Statistics Canada,
court ordered settlements award custody to the mother in 79.3% of cases,
to men in 6.6% and joint custody in 12.8%. To put it another way, women
get custody more than 12 times as often as me, and there is joint
custody almost twice as often as men get sole custody.

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/f...at2000/p4.html

On 5/27/2018 10:15 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 5/27/2018 9:00 AM, wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 May 2018 08:30:53 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>>>> By the same token..... what if a guy thinks the woman is on a reliable
>>>>> form of birth control and ends up pregnant? Should he be able to
>>>>> insist
>>>>> that she abort?
>>>>
>>>> If he didn't want her to become pregnant, he could have worn a condom
>>>> or better yet, not had sex with her.Â* He had choices and made them.
>>>
>>> Yep...it's all the man's fault.Â* ;-)
>>
>> Nope, you don't read properly - he had a choice and made the wrong one
>> for him.Â*Â* It's not a question of fault, more responsibility and
>> acknowledgement of the possible consequences.
>>
>
> Maybe.Â* If the woman indicates she is "safe" then he is not to blame.
> There have been deceptive women that figure getting pregnant is a way to
> catch a husband, others just don't know or care.
>
From what I understand, back in the old days <chuckle> if a man got a
woman pregnant he was expected to do the honorable thing (aka marry
her). These days, not so much.

I knew a woman who had already caught (what a silly term!) a husband.
He was much older and made it perfectly clear he did not want to have
children. She got pregnant anyway thinking he'd change his mind. He
didn't. I have no idea why she was surprised he didn't magically turn
into a loving, doting father.

Scheming rarely works out the way one intends.

> There are women with four kids and four fathers and there are men with
> four kids and four mothers.

Gotta love Judge Judy. She tells litigants [men and women equally] all
the time to stop making babies with all these different people. That
ship, sadly, has sailed.

Jill

On 5/27/2018 10:46 AM, S Viemeister wrote:
> On 5/27/2018 10:03 AM, jmcquown wrote:
>
>> I don't know about other countries but my oldest brother got full
>> custody of his son.Â* This was back around 1987 or '88.Â* The courts (at
>> least in the US) have been flexible regarding custody issues for quite
>> some time.
>>
> I know someone in the US, who managed to get custody of three young
> half-sisters - the youngest was the only one who was biologically his
> daughter, but he believed it would be cruel to separate them, and he was
> a much better parent than the girls' mother ever was.
>
Kudos to him!

In the US (and hopefully everywhere) it all depends on the situation.
Bruce states if he got divorced his wife wife would automatically get
the child and the house and lots more besides. Something to do with
Women's Lib and now he's proclaiming Men's Lib. LOL

In many situations even if the children aren't biological issue, if the
man is deemed the better parent the courts will award custody to him.
The courts try to determine what is in the child[ren]'s best interests.
If that means awarding custody to a non-biological father in order to
keep siblings together, best case scenario that is what happens. Of
course the man has to want this and in your case, he did.

Sounds like Bruce wouldn't bother to put up much of a fight in his
hypothetical scenario. He just assumes the courts will give everything
to his hypothetical ex-wife and child. IOW, he caves.

Jill

On Sun, 27 May 2018 10:15:44 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 5/27/2018 9:00 AM, wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 May 2018 08:30:53 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>>>> By the same token..... what if a guy thinks the woman is on a reliable
>>>>> form of birth control and ends up pregnant? Should he be able to insist
>>>>> that she abort?
>>>>
>>>> If he didn't want her to become pregnant, he could have worn a condom
>>>> or better yet, not had sex with her. He had choices and made them.
>>>
>>> Yep...it's all the man's fault. ;-)
>>
>> Nope, you don't read properly - he had a choice and made the wrong one
>> for him. It's not a question of fault, more responsibility and
>> acknowledgement of the possible consequences.
>>
>
>Maybe. If the woman indicates she is "safe" then he is not to blame.
>There have been deceptive women that figure getting pregnant is a way to
>catch a husband, others just don't know or care.

If he does not want a baby then as I said, HE made the wrong choice.
Something so important, don't trust the other person. I am sure if
they had come up with a pill for men to take it would have suffered a
great lack of success, I don't know many women who would have trusted
he had taken his pills etc!!
>
>There are women with four kids and four fathers and there are men with
>four kids and four mothers.

Which is why I say look after yourself and the rest will take care of
itself, no unwanted pregnancies.

On Sun, 27 May 2018 10:53:29 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2018-05-27 7:09 AM, wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 May 2018 22:16:19 -0400, Dave Smith
>> > wrote:
>
>>>> Cry me a river! If the situation was reversed are you seriously
>>>> trying to tell me men would have allowed women to decide whether they
>>>> were going to continue their pregnancy or not? You are being
>>>> exceptionally silly, men have had the most important say for
>>>> centuries, so if you don't like the results, point your finger at
>>>> yourself and other men!
>>>>
>>>
>>> By the same token..... what if a guy thinks the woman is on a reliable
>>> form of birth control and ends up pregnant? Should he be able to insist
>>> that she abort?
>>
>> If he didn't want her to become pregnant, he could have worn a condom
>> or better yet, not had sex with her. He had choices and made them.
>>
>
>Ah. I see. He should have known better than to have believed her.

If the outcome was that important to him, yes, take action himself,
wear a condom.

On Sunday, May 27, 2018 at 8:29:48 AM UTC-4, Gary wrote:
> Bruce wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 27 May 2018 08:10:06 -0300, wrote:
> >
> > >On Sun, 27 May 2018 12:35:26 +1000, Bruce >
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >>On Sat, 26 May 2018 22:14:11 -0400, Dave Smith
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>On 2018-05-26 7:32 PM, Bruce wrote:
> > >>>> On Sat, 26 May 2018 20:19:44 -0300, wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> Yes, men are 2nd rate citizens when it comes to these things. When it
> > >>>> comes to custody, for instance. Time for Men's Lib! Women have ruled
> > >>>> long enough and look at the world!
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>Yeah. There is some truth to that. I used to car pool with a co-worker.
> > >>>His wife was screwing around on him and they divorced. She had a
> > >>>daughter by a former deadbeat husband. My co-worker applied for custody
> > >>>of the step daughter. He thought the ex was unfit to be a mother. He was
> > >>>told that since he was not the biological father he had no claim.
> > >>>However..... since he was the only father she ever knew, he had to pay
> > >>>support.
> > >>
> > >>Even if he had been the biological father, he would have lost, unless
> > >>the mother was a total alcoholic, living under a bridge.
> > >>
> > >>It's time men stood up and claimed their rights!
> > >
> > >You are way behind the times!
> >
> > No, I'm ahead of you. You're still stuck in Women's Lib. I've moved on
> > to Men's Lib.
>
> Women's Lib even demanded to allow women in combat.

If a woman is physically capable and wants to be a soldier, she
should.

> Those idiots.
> Back in my Vietnam draft days, young women were safe from being
> drafted. What parent would fight for the right for their daughter
> to also be drafted?

What parent would fight for the right for their son to be drafted?
Do parents love their sons less than their daughters?

Cindy Hamilton

On Sun, 27 May 2018 11:01:33 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2018-05-27 7:00 AM, wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 May 2018 10:08:18 +1000, Bruce >
>> wrote:
>
>>> But if my wife and I have a child and we then divorce, I also lose the
>>> child. And because the ever important child has to live in a good
>>> house, I also lose the house. So I'd lose wife, house, and child. So
>>> even before we divorce, my wife can blackmail me. Do as I say or you
>>> lose everything.
>>>
>>> Shouldn't men have some rights too?
>>
>> You're out of touch with how settlements go now, at least how they go
>> here. I am often at events at my younger daughters house where her ex
>> husband is present and also her current, that way they both get to
>> share their sons for Xmas Day etc. The first time it felt a bit
>> strange but we managed, now its a given. In fact he swings past to
>> pick me up and give me a drive out to her place. It's called Joint
>> Custody.
>>
>
>
>
>
>He's not the one who is out of touch with how settlements go. You are.
>Your exception does not make the rule. According to Statistics Canada,
>court ordered settlements award custody to the mother in 79.3% of cases,
>to men in 6.6% and joint custody in 12.8%. To put it another way, women
>get custody more than 12 times as often as me, and there is joint
>custody almost twice as often as men get sole custody.
>
>http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/f...at2000/p4.html

Mine was not an exception, I was merely relating how joint custody
works, and works well. Women most likely get sole custody more often
because the father is not capable of looking after the kids. I know
plenty of cases of joint custody and it surely is the best thing for
the kids who didn't ask to be there.

I also know one where the mother would like sole custody but can't
have it. What does he do when he has the kids? Drops them off at his
mothers.

On 5/27/2018 10:15 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Sunday, May 27, 2018 at 7:15:00 AM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
>> No, I'm ahead of you. You're still stuck in Women's Lib. I've moved on
>> to Men's Lib.
>
> From what do men need to be liberated?
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>
The tyranny of women, of course! Men have been the underclass for *so
long*. It's time for them to break the glass ceiling.

It's too damn bad we gave them the right to vote.

Jill

wrote:
>
> On Sun, 27 May 2018 10:15:44 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
> >On 5/27/2018 9:00 AM, wrote:
> >> On Sun, 27 May 2018 08:30:53 -0400, Gary > wrote:
> >>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Dave Smith wrote:
> >>>>> By the same token..... what if a guy thinks the woman is on a reliable
> >>>>> form of birth control and ends up pregnant? Should he be able to insist
> >>>>> that she abort?
> >>>>
> >>>> If he didn't want her to become pregnant, he could have worn a condom
> >>>> or better yet, not had sex with her. He had choices and made them.
> >>>
> >>> Yep...it's all the man's fault. ;-)
> >>
> >> Nope, you don't read properly - he had a choice and made the wrong one
> >> for him. It's not a question of fault, more responsibility and
> >> acknowledgement of the possible consequences.
> >>
> >
> >Maybe. If the woman indicates she is "safe" then he is not to blame.
> >There have been deceptive women that figure getting pregnant is a way to
> >catch a husband, others just don't know or care.
>
> If he does not want a baby then as I said, HE made the wrong choice.
> Something so important, don't trust the other person. I am sure if
> they had come up with a pill for men to take it would have suffered a
> great lack of success, I don't know many women who would have trusted
> he had taken his pills etc!!
> >
> >There are women with four kids and four fathers and there are men with
> >four kids and four mothers.
>
> Which is why I say look after yourself and the rest will take care of
> itself, no unwanted pregnancies.

That is a fact of life. I do agree with you.