timesjoke

Well, certainly women have changed a lot in the areas of morals and taking care of children from when I was young. Women were the rocks that tought the kids and kept the homes safe and secure for raising children. Most importantly, they showed by example what was right and wrong. These days, women seem to be doing everything in their power to show they can out do men in every way, and being immoral and selfish is taking the top of the list on their agenda. I do keep a record of things but like I said, she could beat the kids with a belt every day and the court would not care. In most states, it is almost impossible to get custody of kids away from mothers because of the old and very outdated notion that women are genetically better parents. I know a man who has tried to get custody of his kids several times and has proof their mother is a drug addict (busted on possession charges several times, over 12 failed drug screenings during her time on probation, neighbors calling children's services while she was stoned out of her mind passed out in her front yard, etc...) and every time they get to court, she just tells the judge that her kids are the only thing keeping her alive so the judge refuses to take custody away from her.

Interesting: PoliPundit.com ? How Many Liberals Does it Take to Change a Lightbulb ? Read the comments, they are very funny, example: It takes zero liberals to change a light bulb. They insist that conservatives immediately change the bulb because children, the poor, and the elderly would be in the dark. Then they spend the next 4 years complaining about how it was done, who actually changed the bulb, and why competitive bidding and affirmative action weren?t used to determine who changed the bulb. After that, they call for investigations and supoena powers.

I have to agree, lol.

They are not concerned with being PC, most western Nations are.

Well, certainly some situations are beyond our control. My showing my behind or worse would only result in me being permanently separated from my children, a thing I would be very hurt by. After divorce, fathers have no real say in the raising of their children any more because society has devalued us to little more than a nuisance getting in the way of what women want. If I want to have any real involvement in my children's lives at this point, I must toe the line. Their mother is only interested in the money, she does not truly love our kids the way I love them. My kids respect me more because they know without doubt how much I care about them. Most parents plop their kids in front of the television and forget them, I don't. At any rate, I am not perfect, but my love for them is above all other things, and as far as I'm concerned, that is the way it should be.

Well, the thing that bothers me is while the liberals are doing what they do, as we expect, the guys claiming to be Conservatives have jumped in bed with the liberals and feel simply slowing down the move to true socialist agendas is good enough. I believe people like Ron Paul make the situation worse because he has to add so much garbage into his great ideas to make everyone draw back from him (sounds like someone else I know). The very idea of a radical makes people avoid them and their most vocal ideas to avoid being branded with the wacko label. Should we make a move to ragain control of this out of control train? Yes. Will we? No, this is why it is a good idea to have portable valuables that have nothing to do with any Nation's currency. I laugh my behind off when I hear people say they are saving their liquid funds in euros or something, like if American funds ever go belly up, their economy will not be torn down too. Oh, and the investment into a few firearms may well be one of the best investments you ever make, if you value your life and property that is.

I have a saying that kinda goes to this comment: "The amount of crap a person can take in their job is directly comparable to the amount their getting paid." Sure there are negatives connected to being a celebrity, but their getting paid millions of dollars from the same public driving their fame and wanting the juicy details of their lives. There are exceptions to be sure, but most of the biggest problems of paparazzi crowds are caused directly by the celebrity acting poorly to invite this attention. Like Britney giving them bare crotch shots on purpose, they are directly fanning the flames of this problem. How do we blame the paparazzi when their simply stuck in the middle? Their stuck in the middle of making large amounts of money to get pictures. It is like a feeding frenzy to be sure but it is the companies paying incredible amounts of money for these pictures that is truly causing it. No money to be made, no paparazzi. If you want to stop all of this, simply make it illegal to sell an image of another person without their permission.

Nothing I can do, it is legal in Florida, hell even the schools still give "swats". Don't get me wrong, I see nothing wrong with spanking a child "who needs it" but I just rarely find a situation where a kid needs it. We are the adults, and if your imagination and creativity cannot deal with regular needed discipline without turning to violence, you have serious issues. An interesting observation is that while she is the one who shows the trend to violence, my kids behave better for me than her, there have even been times she has called me and put them on the phone with me so I can tell them to behave for her, lol.

Sounds like a good opportunity for the fake tears again.

I agree completely, but "if" they are going to get involved, the least they can do is be consistant and not say crimes against young boys are not as severe as the same crime against young girls.

So why is it all the studies show women turn to violence faster then men? Clearly old saying like "hell hath no fury like a woman scorn" have their basis in fact. We have all seen women react in a violent way in public against men at one time or another but the concept is that men must have done something to deserve it. This goes to the double standard of who women are given the benefit of the doubt while men are not. We have been conditioned to believe men are the bad side and women are the innocent and kind ones when that is not the case. I will give you an example from my own life. My ex-wife uses a belt on my children at least once a week while I have never had to spank my kids (other then a little pat on the diaper). My kids do get out of control sometimes but while I turn to sitting in the corner, writing lines, go to bed early, trim grass with hand clippers, etc...... her only option is to beat them with a belt.

Maybe it shouldn't matter but we have to face reality. The actions of the reporters and stuff are driven by both ends and they are just in the middle. On one end you have celebrities who are selling themselves for the attention. It drives their worth with upward for things like their movies and such. Then on the other end, you have the stupid masses who want all the info on these celebrities, the more messed up the information, the more they want it. Case in point: FOXNews.com - Pop Tarts: Oops! Britney Hits Hollywood Without Her Underwear While Her Dogs Run Amok in Hotel - Celebrity Gossip | Entertainment News | Arts And Entertainment Consider this. Does the fanning of the flames with someone like Britney help her to make more money on things like her album sales? Sure it does, so the whole process is a self feeding fire, out of control.

Do women turn to violence more often than men? FOXNews.com - Police Say New York Woman Stabbed Man With Kitchen Knife for Calling Her 'Ugly' - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News While there is no arguement as to men being stronger than most women and have the greater chance of doing great harm to women when they get violent, I believe women turn to violent actions faster then men, and more often. This violence tends to not be reported because men are pressured to be tough and take the abuse without complaint. I cannot tell you how many times I have seen women strike men in public for things like looking at another woman but nobody ever says anything about their violence. Are men just pet lions with woman as the trainers putting their heads into the lions mouth?

The people like Britney are adding to the fire though. By giving them jucy things to report, it is like moths to the fire. Guys like Wil Smith get lots of attention but because their not in rehab and stuff, it is kept to a low roar instead of the out of control mess with people like britney, lindsy, Paris....... I guess what I am trying to say is the paparazzi frenzies are in many cases feeding off the train wreck they are chasing. Britney and the rest want the attention, and do everything they can to get that attention.

While you may find a rare case here and there of men getting a light penalty, that would be the exception, not the rule. Women get much lighter sentences than men for the same and worse crimes than men by a very large margin. I can give examples: When Etta Ann Urdiales was murdered in Colorado, two completely different juries convicted two different people of the crime. Both juries believed there was only one murderer. One convicted Bobbie Hogan, a woman. The other convicted Jess Jacobs, a man. She got 10 years in prison. He was put to death. Gender is a deciding factor for everything including the decision to charge a person with a crime or not. There have been many studies done to show that many women are not even charged for crimes that a man would be sent to prison for. Interesting reading: ftp://repec.iza.org/RePEc/Discussionpaper/dp2870.pdf It is a long read at the beginning but you can go to the end for the data tables, yes they are a few years old but they wanted to use numbers that were still being effected by the mandate for equal sentences, interesting that while there was a rule to give equal sentences, the judges did not follow the rule so how do you think their doing now without the rule?

Believe me, girls have hormones going crazy also.

Our laws are either equal or their not. The "potential" of harm is the same for any person, reguardless of sex. Yes, boys are "supposed" to be tough or sexual machines but they are still children.

I know you are but what am I?

why even try to bring me into a fight again and again Wez? I saw this thread of yours as what it was, a bait tactic to start your games because without conflict, you cannot stand yourself. You are the control freak, you try to manipulate everything into an arguement. You must be in control or you lose your mind, lash out at people, spam personal attacks and childish games if you cannot get your way through browbeating people. I avoided this topic to try and keep the peace with you Wez, but clearly you don't want peace. Just keep my name out of your mouth if all you can do is this kind of childish attacks.

A middleschool teacher get only 6 years for molesting 5 boys: FOXNews.com - S.C. Teacher Sentenced to 6 Years for Sex Acts With 5 Boys - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News Do you think a man doing the same thing would get this kind of understanding: Stories like this piss me off because crimes against males are treated as insignificant, not worth the time of society to even care.

But was it not all just further results of their change in belief structure? As a domino effect, a fundamantal change in belief structure will change evcerythign in a society. After the push tword Christanity, there were secrete pockets of people who were still worshiping their old beliefs and even more trying to blend the two and the excesses that go with these actions ran into other areas. The timelines show after the puch tword changing beliefs marked the massive changes in political methods as well. \ I believe it is cause and effect but who knows for sure being as were were not there but it is also interesting to see some of the same changes in America as we are moving away from the belief structure that made us strong. As they say, history repeating itself.

In my opinion, Rome fell once they started changing their faith. Every great society has had one thing in common, a common belief structure. When you play games with the thread that tied your society together, you risk everything falling apart. As we are seeing in America now.

Only two? Case in point, Wal-Mart. Everywhere they go, they cause the closing of several businesses. Well, if the poor could not get medical attention, then I could see his point of disease "culling out the herd" but if you make medicine available to everyone, then we are all similar in that area. The only real problem I see in his theory is if you kill off all the poor and close to poor, who is buying the goods and services of the companies?

Well, a lot of his beliefs were proven wrong as well. I always wondered why he was against public schools when his father was a school teacher and he was an assistant school master. I do believe modern society has completely removed the survival of the fittest part of human development and is most likely the cause of so much disease. Things like government handouts and modern medicine has made it possible for the sick and lazy to not only survive long enough to pass on their genetic code, but they have been able to take over society. Now it is acceptable to be a lifetime welfare recepient and to breed countless numbers of children into the same existance. And they all vote liberal, imagine that.

Again, I hope your right, but like the video Bender just posted, Obama is promising what he calls hope, the "yes we can" slogan is catching on and no matter how empty his promise is, people are believing in him where Mccain does not have believers, he has supporters. I don't like Mccain, I will place my vote for him, but I am not inspired by him in any way at all. If a moderate liberal was running for office, I would vote for that moderate in a heartbeat over Mccain. The reason I do not like Mccain is because he is a true moderate pretending to be a conservative and there are many Americans like me and Cloaked who are very dissapointed in Mccain. Cloaked is dissapointed enough to vote for the pure liberal, I'm not, at least not yet, but believe me, there are lots of dissapointed true conservatives who don't want Mccain soiling the name of conversative in the whitehouse. I spoke with some fellow Republicans the other day who were talking about Obama getting elected as the nasty tasting medicine America needs to remind Americans how bad radical liberals are when in complete control. I see their point and in a very rare time of my life, I could not offer an arguement against their idea. We are always skirting the edges of socialism in America and it is a constant battle to fight it off. Most Americans do not even understand how bad this kind of agenda is. Sometimes they have too see for themselves.