Go to Shaferspeare by Songbird
- Add a comment
- Go to TIRED!
Thank you, FactorFiction
In all situations, I try my best to be fair. I almost deleted all this blogger's comments because they are so offensive.
Because of what you said, though, I won't; this way, other bloggers can see what this blogger's post entries will be like.
I need add nothing more...God richly bless you.
posted by
songbirdshafer
on April 22, 2006 at 8:26 AM
| link to this | reply
Songbird
You are one gracious woman...
Much better at turning the other cheek than I it seems...
posted by
FactorFiction
on April 22, 2006 at 8:03 AM
| link to this | reply
Turning Point,
Tom Cruise appears to be doofus enough to do anything. I wouldn't put anything past him.
As for your opinions--and that is all any of our posts really are--they are utter poison. You do not have a clue as to real life situations, and I will not waste any more time arguing with you, nor will I sink to your level and spew insults.
You might want to consider that if you continue to alienate the BlogIt members by hurling your hostility as you've done, you'll soon be ignored. You'd be wise to tone down, at least, so you can make some money writing your blogs.
God bless you anyway, and goodbye.
posted by
songbirdshafer
on April 21, 2006 at 11:10 PM
| link to this | reply
Why you are wrong
I can’t believe you think Tom Cruise is actually going to eat his baby’s placenta. This isn’t China for God’s sake. Yes, Tom Cruise is eccentric, and let’s face it, no one really likes him. But let’s face it: He was joking!! Just like he always does. Jesus Christ.
Secondly, these are not my “opinions.” People on this blog have a problem with accurate reading, so let me reiterate: There was a STUDY done, a very legitimate study, and the final results were the MAJORITY (not all) of men AND women were happier when the man was the PRIMARY (not ONLY) breadwinner. It’s not opinion, that is a fact. I’m talking about changes in social policy, not your singular, and probably insignificant life.
Thirdly, it is not absurd for a woman to have as many babies as she biologically can. Third-world mothers do it ALL the time, and are doing it CURRENTLY. In civilized Western countries, we have digressed into the “feminize herd instinct” which is the provider instinct. This is when people worry about if all their children have enough money to go to college or a different pair of shoes for every day of the week. You don’t see immigrant mother’s in this country worrying about that. It’s only the educated people (who, buy the way, tend to think that education is a substitute for intelligence. It isn’t).
Finally, I clearly stated that most women would be happier and healthier (notice I said HAPPIER on a base level, not on the intellectual level, whether they know it or not… I didn’t say their children would have more nice things) if they had 4, 5, or 6 children. Possibly more for some women. And yet two people have said something retarded along the liens of “uhh, how many children should they have? 10, 20?” Once again, read the post idiot.
It really matters not. Those of us who are strong and realistic will live, and all the other idiots will die. God will not heal me because there is not man with a beard touching people with his finger healing people. God is inside us all, we all have free will, free souls, and free minds. I am God too. And I am freed from my chains of ignorance. I’m trying to do the same for others.
May “God” cleanse your ignorance.
posted by
TheTurningPoint
on April 21, 2006 at 9:48 AM
| link to this | reply
Turning Point,
You are, of course, entitled to your opinions, but your thinking is seriously flawed, and not just by my standards, either.
I stand by everything I said. It is dangerous for the man to be the primary breadwinner; it leaves women too vulnerable. No marriage is guaranteed to last, and anything can happen to anybody. A woman needs enough financial resources so that she can get out of a marriage on short to no notice. I know, because I am in a situation I desperately need to escape, though, thank God, I am safe. Other women are not safe physically many times, and if you've never lived a situation like this or known a woman who has, it may explain why you fail to understand the danger of men being in financial control.
Most women have sense enough to realize they don't need to have as many children as they can bear, and in today's world, it's ludicrous for any woman who behaves so irresponsibly as to bear without control. Again, she's vulnerable in a situation where she has more child responsibilities than she can handle. Your attitude makes her sheer biology a curse.
Also, having a large multitude of children is financially irresponsible and unfair to the children. How would even the most loving, well-matched couple feed, clothe, and educate 10, 12, 14 kids? Society is no longer agriculturally-based. Large numbers of children are not needed to run the family farms, as in days gone by.
The world is already in shambles, and attitudes like yours do nothing to improve it.
Again, you're entitled to your opinion, but whether you realize it or not, your "passion" is outright hostility, and women are your primary target.
May you look to the Lord to heal you.
posted by
songbirdshafer
on April 21, 2006 at 1:21 AM
| link to this | reply
<img src="http://www.blogit.com/Blogs/Images/Emoticons/emsmile.gif" />
posted by
Whacky
on April 20, 2006 at 3:24 PM
| link to this | reply
My repsonse to your comment on my blog
"First, sexuality outside marriage is wrong for men AND women."
Agreed. But no one was talking about that.
”Second, it does not matter whatsoever how many children women bear, or whether she bears any at all. It is and should always be a woman's choice as to whether she has children (and I am not referring to abortion).”
Also agreed. It should always be the choice of the individual women. But the vast majority of women should (and do, even if they don't know their own biology) desire almost as many children as they are physically capable of having. If their mind is not poisoned to the contrary of course.
”Third, it is a gross error to state that it's best for the man to be the primary breadwinner. In a situation where a woman's financial resources are insufficient and she is in an abusive marriage, she is in danger and may not have any way out.”
Disagree with the first part. Like I said, it has been found that the MAJORITY of men and women from THEIR MOUTHS say that they are happier when the man is the primary breadwinner. There will always be exceptions, but you do not make the rule based on the exceptions.
”I hope you can heal from your hostility that you're obviously carrying. God bless and help you.”
Not hostility my friend... passion. Our world is soon to be in shambles. Shouldn't we start looking at the truth before it's too late?
posted by
TheTurningPoint
on April 20, 2006 at 9:35 AM
| link to this | reply