User Controls
Fags shouldn't raise children
-
2018-01-02 at 6:02 PM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon Give the child away? Anyway, the circumstances don't matter. For whatever reason, do you think there is any reason why the general class of people known as "single parents" should be disallowed from raising children?
but consider this :
most double parent homes are running on a single parent mode for like 5 or 6 days in a week and only become really double parent in the weekends.
either the father is working leaving mom at home with kids or they both work and the kids are raised by institutions or nannies if their lucky.
so if you wanted to disallow single parents from raising their kids, you'd have to say the whys and the conditions in single parenthood thats detrimental to a childs wellbeing to justify it.
why single parenthood is bad when double parenthood is more or less the same or worse ??? -
2018-01-02 at 6:08 PM UTC
Originally posted by benny vader but consider this :
most double parent homes are running on a single parent mode for like 5 or 6 days in a week and only become really double parent in the weekends.
either the father is working leaving mom at home with kids or they both work and the kids are raised by institutions or nannies if their lucky.
so if you wanted to disallow single parents from raising their kids, you'd have to say the whys and the conditions in single parenthood thats detrimental to a childs wellbeing to justify it.
why single parenthood is bad when double parenthood is more or less the same or worse ???
I think you might be wrong on this, even though my dad worked and my mom stayed home, we pretty much had equal parentship in my bros and i's household, just because he worked didn't mean he didn't come home after work and have influence over my brother and I. and the time we were just only with our mom was a few hours considering we were at school all day.
plus my dad was the parent to help me with my mathematics home work. But then my mom would help me with literature and art projects.
But it really depends on the personal dynamic of the parents.
you're over simplifying everything here spenny -
2018-01-02 at 6:13 PM UTC
Originally posted by benny vader but consider this :
most double parent homes are running on a single parent mode for like 5 or 6 days in a week and only become really double parent in the weekends.
either the father is working leaving mom at home with kids or they both work and the kids are raised by institutions or nannies if their lucky.
so if you wanted to disallow single parents from raising their kids, you'd have to say the whys and the conditions in single parenthood thats detrimental to a childs wellbeing to justify it.
why single parenthood is bad when double parenthood is more or less the same or worse ???
regardless...for the significant majority of modern-human existence, the standard of child-rearing was at least one parent was always at-hand in one way or another, while the child was 'purposefully engaged.' by 'purposefully engaged' i mean either going to school (since about the 1800s or 1900s) or working in one form or another at a trade, apprenticeship, family 'business', or the like. im not including how the aristocracy offspring were raised since they are a very small proportion of the population as well as a completely different subject. most of the time they were reared by non-parental figures hired by the parents BUT with the intention of rearing the spawn in a manner the parent chose.
nowadays both parents are virtually forced to be away from home for long periods of time to earn income and the offspring are unattended by any means that would serve to properly guide them on their way to adulthood. what they are attended by...and learning from...are the plethora of M-rated video games, internet sites of dubious educational or moral value, and media bombardment instilling the most degenerate lifestyle choices since sodom and gomorrah were nuked into dust.
someone call god. its time to nuke this entire planet into fire and brimstone. -
2018-01-02 at 6:19 PM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock regardless…for the significant majority of modern-human existence, the standard of child-rearing was at least one parent was always at-hand in one way or another, while the child was 'purposefully engaged.' by 'purposefully engaged' i mean either going to school (since about the 1800s or 1900s) or working in one form or another at a trade, apprenticeship, family 'business', or the like. im not including how the aristocracy offspring were raised since they are a very small proportion of the population as well as a completely different subject. most of the time they were reared by non-parental figures hired by the parents BUT with the intention of rearing the spawn in a manner the parent chose.
nowadays both parents are virtually forced to be away from home for long periods of time to earn income and the offspring are unattended by any means that would serve to properly guide them on their way to adulthood. what they are attended by…and learning from…are the plethora of M-rated video games, internet sites of dubious educational or moral value, and media bombardment instilling the most degenerate lifestyle choices since sodom and gomorrah were nuked into dust.
someone call god. its time to nuke this entire planet into fire and brimstone.
or we can just wait for jesus to come back and save us -
2018-01-02 at 6:23 PM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock regardless…for the significant majority of modern-human existence, the standard of child-rearing was at least one parent was always at-hand in one way or another, while the child was 'purposefully engaged.' by 'purposefully engaged' i mean either going to school (since about the 1800s or 1900s) or working in one form or another at a trade, apprenticeship, family 'business', or the like. im not including how the aristocracy offspring were raised since they are a very small proportion of the population as well as a completely different subject. most of the time they were reared by non-parental figures hired by the parents BUT with the intention of rearing the spawn in a manner the parent chose.
i prefer to see thing in their simplest way possible, and i think it has everything to do with intent and purpose :
why.
why do you want kids and what do you want from them ???
are you trying to build a military society or hippies ????
what is an ideal child to you ??? a productive member of the society or do you just want them to be happy and be themselves, whatever that may be ????
parenting is just means toward that end. the question is what end ???? -
2018-01-02 at 6:27 PM UTC
-
2018-01-02 at 6:32 PM UTCi don't think its ideal by any stretch but on the other hand there are shitloads of orphaned kids and kids in abusive families with nobody to bring them up. i reckon even a weird upbringing is better than kids having nobody. at least they'll have somebody giving them guidance on normal everyday facets of life and someone to care and support them through their development. i mean as long as they're not nonsing on em or anything.
. -
2018-01-02 at 6:33 PM UTC
Originally posted by benny vader i prefer to see thing in their simplest way possible, and i think it has everything to do with intent and purpose :
why.
why do you want kids and what do you want from them ???
are you trying to build a military society or hippies ????
what is an ideal child to you ??? a productive member of the society or do you just want them to be happy and be themselves, whatever that may be ????
parenting is just means toward that end. the question is what end ????
there is no 'simplest way possible.' human nature forbids such things.
i dont want kids...i dont have any kids for that specific reason. the second surreptitious line of inquiry i have for chicks is their intention for me getting them knocked up. the first being their views on miscegenation.
im not trying to do anything. as far as im concerned its time for human civilization as a whole to get a factory-reset. someone call god and have him steer a nice juicy asteroid into a large body of water. maybe an airborne hemorrhagic fever variant with a fatality rate in the high ninety-plus-percentile range.
you worded that in a way that you presume both results to be mutually exclusive. that is not necessarily the case and the resulting conflict in personality is the explanation for a large number of the mental illnesses existing today.
there is no end. the universe gives not one fuck how offspring turn out when they reach adulthood. if the offspring fails in a matter the universe deems severely enough they will introduce them to darwin to solve the problem. -
2018-01-02 at 7:04 PM UTC
Originally posted by benny vader but consider this :
most double parent homes are running on a single parent mode for like 5 or 6 days in a week and only become really double parent in the weekends.
either the father is working leaving mom at home with kids or they both work and the kids are raised by institutions or nannies if their lucky.
so if you wanted to disallow single parents from raising their kids, you'd have to say the whys and the conditions in single parenthood thats detrimental to a childs wellbeing to justify it.
why single parenthood is bad when double parenthood is more or less the same or worse ???
No my point is that a man or a woman alone cannot asexually reproduce (and homosexuals can heterosexually reproduce). These are just a problem of apparatus. But there's nothing principally preventing a single woman or man from raising a child. Just like there's nothing principally preventing two men or two women from raising a child. Whether or not you want to/have access to pussy has nothing to do with it. Would you be okay with a pair of gay men raising children that they sired naturally by fucking a woman? -
2018-01-02 at 7:13 PM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock i dont want kids…i dont have any kids for that specific reason. …
thats what i always find funny about you and people like you.
why insist homosexuality is wrong becos it doesnt produce offsprings while at the same time actively engaged in heterosexual sexes that also intended not to produce any offsprings. -
2018-01-02 at 7:32 PM UTC
Originally posted by benny vader thats what i always find funny about you and people like you.
why insist homosexuality is wrong becos it doesnt produce offsprings while at the same time actively engaged in heterosexual sexes that also intended not to produce any offsprings.
merry christmas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man -
2018-01-02 at 11:59 PM UTC
Originally posted by NARCassist i was adopted and my parents adopted me because they couldn't naturally have kids. are you saying they shouldn't have been able to raise children too?
There's a difference between being sterile and gay sex. Unlike heterosexual relationships, homosexual relationships will never result in the natural production of children. Ever. -
2018-01-03 at 12:21 AM UTC
Originally posted by D4NG0 There's a difference between being sterile and gay sex. Unlike heterosexual relationships, homosexual relationships will never result in the natural production of children. Ever.
not true. Bill Krozbys conception was the direct result of a nigger male and mexican male engaged in mutual butthole-faggotry where one of the males inseminated the rectum of the other male... -
2018-01-03 at 12:29 AM UTC
-
2018-01-03 at 12:31 AM UTC
-
2018-01-03 at 2:45 AM UTC
-
2018-01-03 at 3:21 AM UTC
-
2018-01-03 at 10:58 AM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock merry christmas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
so your ok with gay peoples ???? -
2018-01-03 at 11:02 AM UTC
Originally posted by D4NG0 There's a difference between being sterile and gay sex. Unlike heterosexual relationships, homosexual relationships will never result in the natural production of children. Ever.
no,
homosexuality is natures way of making individuals who're not sterile sterile.
like how nature makes rats commit mass suicide by marching into a body of water when over population had been achieved .....
or turning your friendly grasshoppers into locustses .... -
2018-01-03 at 1:44 PM UTC
Originally posted by D4NG0 There's a difference between being sterile and gay sex. Unlike heterosexual relationships, homosexual relationships will never result in the natural production of children. Ever.
Gay love leads to the greatest miracle the world, the sharing of The Gift between consenting partners who love each other very much.
When your neghole has been pozed you'll understand, children just don't compare. Walking around with his poz load in you feels just makes you feel so special.
It's the brown gold of love.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
