Why men won't marry you

[glorydaz]

Should people wonder if you have grandchildren and a community to serve instead of spending "so much time" posting here? I ask because you are casting aspersions.

I'm not the one bragging about my overly fertile womb while posting non stop about how other men have hurt her.

You just know about Dark Shadows but never watched it? You didn't answer the telephone? Talk to neighbors? Let your children play on their own while you knitted or read? :doh:

Nope, never watched Dark Shadows. I did watch Days of Our Lives until my kids came along.

Forget that a mother could be posting on her smartphone while she is cooking a meal and watching the kids with a soap opera playing in the background and just consider that 1PM has a post average of .48/day and your average is 6.22/day. That's all the evidence I need to prove your aspersions are just perversions of reality.

As I recall, your wife spoke of the possibility of losing one her kids to a predator while she spread sunscreen on another....claimed it wouldn't be her fault. So, save your excuses for someone who buys them.

God provides for us without me having to work or pay taxes. In fact, your taxes pay for my living expenses, and that comes tax free to me. I get to be a stay-at-home dad and wouldn't prefer it any other way. In an hour, I'm taking four of my children to see Kung Fu Panda.

God provides? Looks like the Government is your God, and they use my taxes to do the providing. So I provide. :chuckle:

Just as I suspected. You live off other people and claim to be a righteous man.

Now don't you look real silly?

Not to anyone with half a brain.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

As I recall, your wife spoke of the possibility of losing one her kids to a predator while she spread sunscreen on another....claimed it wouldn't be her fault. So, save your excuses for someone who buys them.

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4577151#post4577151

Oh, so you're claiming the parents bear no responsibility if their child gets molested?

Yes. I am. I don't think that when a pervert steals or harms a parent's child in a Wal-Mart or at the beach that it's the parent's fault.

Even if they were comparing prices at the time of the snatch, or stopping to tend to another child's sunscreen under the umbrella instead of peering suspiciously around at all times like a watchdog.

 

[Arthur Brain]

What? Hold women accountable for their behavior?

Punish a woman for bad behavior?

Now you are talking crazy.....individual accountability with a
primal twist?

Not in our world.......not likely......

Just to clarify in context here. Are you saying that a beating can be appropriate *punishment* for a husband to give his wife for..."bad behaviour"?

 

[Angel4Truth]

Just to clarify in context here. Are you saying that a beating can be appropriate *punishment* for a husband to give his wife for..."bad behaviour"?

opcorn:

 

[ok doser]

Just to clarify in context here. Are you saying that a beating can be appropriate *punishment* for a husband to give his wife for..."bad behaviour"?

of course

 

[glorydaz]

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4577151#post4577151

Thank you. It's the parents' job to keep their children safe. Putting sunscreen on a child is not an excuse for allowing another one to get snatched. Yes, parents need to be watching like hawks, and for you to imply they shouldn't only tells me you should have stopped after one child. Maybe then you'd be able to watch one (out of the corner or your eye) while still looking cool.

 

[Arthur Brain]

of course

Well, normally I just ignore you but here you are on record for clarifying that it can be appropriate for a husband to beat his wife.

I wonder how many here would think that's acceptable - or even legal.




What a total knob...

 

[1PeaceMaker]

Thank you. It's the parents' job to keep their children safe. Putting sunscreen on a child is not an excuse for allowing another one to get snatched. Yes, parents need to be watching like hawks, and for you to imply they shouldn't only tells me you should have stopped after one child. Maybe then you'd be able to watch one (out of the corner or your eye) while still looking cool.

It's in a parent's self interest (and the whole family's) to be guarded and I'm not implying otherwise. Never did.

But that will not change the predator. He just searches for the most vulnerable child until he finds a victim. And if he wants a particular one, he'll just scheme and wait for the right moment.

That's what is wrong with victim blaming. It works the same way with those who hunt adult human prey. It's not going to reduce crime to keep yourself from being a victim on any given day, it just means the victim gets shifted to being someone else - or the same victim but in a different situation at a different time.

 

[ok doser]

Well, normally I just ignore you but here you are on record for blablablablabla

what

a


loser

 

[Arthur Brain]

what

a


loser

I wonder what TOL management will make of some little knob advocating that it's okay for a husband to beat his wife. Let's find out eh?

 

[ok doser]

I wonder what TOL management will make of some little knob advocating that it's okay for a husband to beat his wife. Let's find out eh?

oh artie - even more retarded than usual, eh?

:mock:tardlyartie

 

[Traditio]

I wonder what TOL management will make of some little knob advocating that it's okay for a husband to beat his wife. Let's find out eh?

I also wonder what TOL management would make of that.

Fortunately, however, Ok_Dozer didn't assert that, nor did you ask that. He did not say categorically that it's acceptable to beat one's wife. What you asked him, and what he affirmed, is that beating could be a suitable punishment for at least certain forms of bad behavior.

 

[ok doser]

I also wonder what TOL management would make of that.

Fortunately, however, Ok_Dozer didn't assert that, nor did you ask that. He did not say categorically that it's acceptable to beat one's wife. What you asked him, and what he affirmed, is that beating could be a suitable punishment for at least certain forms of bad behavior.

and one who is not retarded might have noticed that I'm not advocating that anybody do that

 

[Crucible]

I wonder what TOL management will make of some little knob advocating that it's okay for a husband to beat his wife. Let's find out eh?

Liberal Brits

They don't believe in freedom of speech. They're all about the censorship so nobody gets offended.

Except for Muslims.
Muslims can say whatever they want. Because PC is better than logic.


There is no rule saying that you can't advocate something.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I also wonder what TOL management would make of that.

Fortunately, however, Ok_Dozer didn't assert that, nor did you ask that. He did not say categorically that it's acceptable to beat one's wife. What you asked him, and what he affirmed, is that beating could be a suitable punishment for at least certain forms of bad behavior.

Since when is beating a spouse in any way appropriate for 'bad behaviour'?

Short of self defence I ain't seeing when that's all okay Trad so how about you spell out just when it is?

 

[Traditio]

Since when is beating a spouse in any way appropriate for 'bad behaviour'?

Short of self defence I ain't seeing when that's all okay Trad so how about you spell out just when it is?

Legally?
Absolutely speaking?

In abstracto, I can conceive of any number of cases in which a husband rightfully might feel tempted to beat his wife, and in which the State could (and probably should) in principle permit him to do so.

I have two cases in mind:

1. Due to serious moral deficiency, and apart from the knowledge of her husband, the woman has clandestinely brought her household economy to ruin. I have in mind the case of a woman who tapped out the retirement savings that her husband worked long and hard for and completely squandered it on gambling, effectively destroying the possibility of his retiring on time.

She sure as heck deserved a beating, and I wouldn't have blamed the husband if he would have beaten her.

2. Adultery

There could in principle be other cases.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Liberal Brits

They don't believe in freedom of speech. They're all about the censorship so nobody gets offended.

Except for Muslims.
Muslims can say whatever they want. Because PC is better than logic.

Oh, I report folk on here all the time Sum...

Oh, except I don't.

Advocating beating a partner is something that doesn't and should never fly, at least among any person with anything about them, so darn straight I'll report that.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Legally?
Absolutely speaking?

In abstracto, I can conceive of any number of cases in which a husband rightfully might feel tempted to beat his wife, and in which the State could (and probably should) in principle permit him to do so.

I have two cases in mind:

1. Due to serious moral deficiency, and apart from the knowledge of her husband, the woman has clandestinely brought her household economy to ruin. I have in mind the case of a woman who tapped out the retirement savings the her husband worked long and hard for and completely squandered it on gambling.

She sure as heck deserved a beating.

2. Adultery

There could in principle be other cases.

Then you're just as much of a knob as they are...

 

[Crucible]

Oh, I report folk on here all the time Sum...

Oh, except I don't.

Advocating beating a partner is something that doesn't and should never fly, at least among any person with anything about them, so darn straight I'll report that.

Soo.. reporting things that aren't against the rules because you don't like it.

Don't come to America, broskillet :thumb:

 

[Traditio]

Then you're just as much of a knob as they are...

The Law of Moses advises the death penalty in the latter case. If stoning is permissible, a forteriori, beating is permissible.

In the former case, do you assert that the woman is culpable of wrong doing or not? Has she wrong her husband or not? If she is culpable of wrong doing, does she deserve punishment? If she does, then what form of punishment is suitable for the wrong that she's done?

And let's ignore the question of what she deserves. If you were on a jury, would you convict a man who beat his wife after he just found out that he can't retire because she's an idiot? I wouldn't.