|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Women are married to the state. They obtain their defense, their income, and other privileges from the state. Men are subjects of the state and, therefore, subjects of women because women are married to the state and are one in the same. Men are, therefore, subjugated by both the state and women and rebel against the same by refusing to be further subjugated by the state and women by refusing to marry women who, in fact, are already married to the state. It makes both ethical and practical sense, therefore,for males not to get married. The same factors, however, will clearly destroy the state as social cohesion, the "social contract", in the form of marriage, is requisite for the state to exist. Women's marriage to the state and women's and the state's subjection of men will, therefore, destroy the state.Simple logic!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thats why socialism never wins, because someone has to lose, i.e. a slave race or in this case gender. Why should I pay for something I don't benifit from? Its taxation without representation, I thought americans won that war, guess not.
Someone said that mostly men voted for the bush administration, sounds like crap. I know a lot of women and (new yorker women) who voted Bush. If you ask me, its feminism thats oppressing women these days, dictating total conformatity amongst women with lies and propaganda , statistics that are so blown out of proportion that its no wonder they are afraid to walk out at night, or let alone even date. I mean I was on morpheus not long ago and the pop up message on the bottom was constantly saying, "Soon, he'll have his own job, his own car and his own wife to beat", than showed some pictures of some guys of all ethnic backgrouds, (its nice to know they don't discriminate in that way).
Anti-marriage groups? Im not sure, but whats the point? It creates hostility between the sexes, as it promotes an exagerated circumstance. Funny how it never goes the other way on those ads.
.
Dan Lynch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday July 13, @04:24PM EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Creates hostility between the sexes? If anything, that needs to be made more extreme, otherwise it's too easy to brush aside in the big picture, too easy for the powers that be to say, "well, it's only a few malcontents....". In fact, most men did and do vote republican, but little by little, thier eyes will open wide enough to see that the republican platform is no less feminized than the socialist democrat platform, it just dresses different. I'll put money on a bet that Bush will sign, before our very shocked eyes, the CEDAW treaty before his term expires. I wonder if men will be willing to admit at that point that more drastic actions be taken.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday July 13, @04:31PM EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
____ I wonder if men will be willing to admit at that point that more drastic actions be taken.
Like what?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday July 14, @12:01AM EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
Like the complete walkout that has been talked about for several years, just a complete and utter 'walk-away', not just a silly "marriage boycott", but walk away from the jobs, the armed forces, every social, public, paid, unpaid, job that men do`, and let the fembots carry the load, and be crushed by it. If every male walked out of the armed services, actually going to arrest them, the UN? HAH! Jeez. Like what? Some kinda feminazi lurker it looks like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"I'll put money on a bet that Bush will sign... the CEDAW treaty"
He doesn't have to. Clinton already did this, but it's not binding on the U.S. until Congress ratifies it. What we want Bush to do is "un-sign" the treaty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personally I think Bush is looking at dismantling the UN. Anyone who allows CEDAW to go through the way it is is a bigot. So keep contacting the the media on how biased and destructive it is. I mean seriously, they want the power to imprision clergy men for not performing marriages. Now thats cruel and unusual punishment dont you think? Regardless of one's sexuality no one should be forced to perform a marriage they are opposed to. Those fembots can't see the forest for the trees when it comes to human rights, we certainly shouldn't be letting them dictate to us their socialist agenda.
.
Dan Lynch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I kind of like that idea, I mean just let the garbage pile up to the moon. It would be hilerious.
Actually most of it sounds like we would start being men again. Stop wasting our time pulling people over for not wearing seatbelts. Stop busting people for smoking a joint, stop all kinds of things that make no sence.
Why are we resisting? If the fembots want to change a tire, I say god bless them.
Lets legalize prostitution while we're at it so we can stop paying the mortgage and just pay for what we really want. Ya, lets stop a lot of things. 'Anti-government' think about it, if its anyone whose going to enslave us, its them. Why give them the chance?
.
Dan Lynch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday July 20, @06:30AM EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
(let's legalize prostitution, while we're at it) It allresdy IS leagal, Dan, It's called Marriage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Love, Marriage, & the Family", essay by Richard T. Jeroloman http://home.att.net/~jeroloman/love/index.htm
with good quotes & citations incl. of marxist rote to destroy marriage, such as these below:
The family is an instrument of capitalist oppression, and its purpose is to protect property, not the happiness of the people involved. Alexandra Kollontaï suggests two requirements for the elimination of marriage:
1. The state must relieve women of the burden of children through money, care of the children when the mother is at work, etc..
2. Women must be prepared for a profession. Bertrand Russell also says that if "parental responsibility were removed, marriage would no longer be felt important".
The possibility of bringing down the institution of marriage is or should be the strongest argument in favor of socialism.
=======================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's gratifying to see someone at last giving voice to men's substantive concerns about the foreseeable hazards of marriage and fatherhood, rather than the cliched accusation passing for an explanation that men "fear committment," as if men currently lack the emotional, physical, financial and spiritual strength and endurance needed to go the distance with the modern liberated woman.
Apparently, she's anything but independent: how could she be, if she depends on the family law courts and child support enforcement apparatus designed for her welfare, at the expense of whomever she might name as the father of her childern.
The story about the dentist who was told to invest in life insurance rather than pay for chemotherapy for his brain tumor is a fair indication of the prevalent contempt for the life of a male, an attitude that can fairly be called disgusting. If he's worth more dead, then he should hasten the process. The family court has blood on its hands. This is what men want to avoid. Even the modern liberated woman isn't worth this kind of death.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The lighter "explanation" that men "fear committment" is a grossly unfair trivialization of the horror story that Baskerville tells in his commentary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Apparently, she's anything but independent: how could she be, if she depends on the family law courts and child support enforcement apparatus designed for her welfare, at the expense of whomever she might name as the father of her childern. "
Socialism.
The iwf is one of the only groups I have seen that really wants to move women forward on their own. The state doesnt want to pay the money to take care of these kids but make the nice claim of the 'best interest of the child' while shirking their own responsibility. They have to much power and sex is their weapon.
.
Dan Lynch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whenever we have the chance, we should discuss with young men and boys the likelihood that a marriage will break down. We should also make sure they are aware of the significance, in divorce proceedings, of the hateful, oppressive, anti-male legal system.
Men are engaging in the marriage boycott one by one. Perhaps this is, to a large extent, the way of the future for the men's movement -- individuality. We just need to be sure that men of marrying age are armed with the facts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday July 14, @02:06PM EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
When I went through my divorce I've been comtemplating that one such reaction is to boycott marriage. My ex used my children as tools of aggrandizment and was able to use the state to persue those goals.
Men should boycott marriage since 80% of women file divorce. Therefore it is women statistically who are failing committment. I absolutely agree, men of marrying age need to be armed with the facts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Men should boycott marriage since 80% of women file divorce. Therefore it is women statistically who are failing committment. I absolutely agree, men of marrying age need to be armed with the facts."
Thomas and I was talking to a girl last night, and she was going on about how bad she wanted to have kids. It occured to me, that this girl could easily take advantage of me while I was drinking and manipulate me into bed and take what she wanted. Wouldnt that be a form of coercive sex? And she was a sexual being and after she served me several rounds I was no longer in the position to decide for myself. Just a thought from the other side of the coin.
.
Dan Lynch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas and I was talking to a girl last night...
Huh?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Thomas and I was talking to a girl last night...
Huh?"
Wow!!! Im on glue. I think I wrote your name as I just read your post. I meant to say Ragtime and I was talking to some girl last night.
Anyways, sorry for the confusion.
I got together with Ragtime and we discussed many issues to the men's activism including marriage. After discussing bill C 117, it didnt appear as though either one of us were rushing to get married. Dating up standing moral women seemed to be the goal. I still want the birth control pill for men, as I mentioned before, accidents happen when drinking. If we can avoid 18 years of slavery and imprisonment lets do it.
.
Dan Lynch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sorry for the confusion.
No problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They are still blaming men for this marriage thing. Does anyone remember that article a while back where the girls in the UK were marrying and divorcing as soon as they could get their hands on the cash?
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/07/14/10261851 40145.html
Here's another article on it. Personally I think this article has underlying feminist issues's. YOu watch their solution to the problem will screw men over into being more slaves to the state. Its all in the works now.
.
Dan Lynch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
YOu watch their solution to the problem will screw men over into being more slaves to the state.
They'll try it, but I'd hedge any bets on them succeeding. We're wise to them now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday July 20, @06:18AM EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
Dan, Thomas, All I can say When it comes to MARRIAGE now a days is; Guys... RUN AWAY, RUN AWAY!!!!! Thundercloud.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday July 20, @05:37AM EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
AGREED, Thomas!!!! Spread the word LOUD and CLEAR, ESPESIALY to young and teen boys!! I've been a member of the 'MARIAGE BOYCOTT' myself, LONG before there even WAS one. I will NEVER marry, (as long as things are as they are) I will NEVER make love to a woman, I will not even DATE, EVER again. and haven't for a little over ten years now! THUNDERCLOUD
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
