|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
Stay out of my life! | by tms1791 | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
<Deleted> | <Deleted> | 2002-12-01 12:33:29 |
|
<Deleted> | <Deleted> | 2002-12-01 13:46:36 |
| repost without the language |
by Nea |
2002-12-01 14:51:40 |
(Sparks up flame thrower) [by tms1791]
Just kidding.
I don't see what's so bad about the redistribution of wealth
What's bad about it is that I work hard for my money, I take the time to learn about how the financial system works, and I take the time and money to make it work for me. Why should I, after having spent all this time and effort to attain whatever wealth I have attained, give it away to a bunch of people I don't know? It's just wrong, and it takes away the incentive for people to do things for themselves.
marriage as a legal contract. What a wonderfully romantic view of human relationships and love
In the context of the article and in any divorce court in the country, that's exactly what it is. If it wasn't, there wouldn't be divorce courts or laws which determine who gets what. My ideas and views on love and romance are quite separate from my views on marriage and divorce.
in Germany, there's such a thing as a 'marriage contract', which you sign *optionally* *in addition* to getting married, which contains rules about each one's behaviour.
Maybe I'll move to Germany...
You seem unable to decide between modern views ('women should get their own job and their own money') and good old chauvinist social ideas ('who's going to spend the most time with the kids? The woman!')
I have no trouble deciding where I stand. I think that women (and men) should be prepared for the potential eventuality of divorce. In partnerships which produce children, the overwhelming majority of the time it's women who take care of them. It's just a plain old run-of-the-mill fact. If a couple decides (there's that word again) to have kids, they need to make sure that their roles are clearly defined, and that one party isn't going to incurr penalties just because the other party feels that they're owed something. Think of a marriage as a company with two employees. In most cases, the "job" of the man is to go to work and make money so that the woman has a roof over her head, electricity, clean water, etc. The "job" of the woman is to keep things neat and clean, water the plants, cook the food, etc. (Keep in mind, these aren't necessarily my views, this is just how most marriages work). Now assume that the company dissolves for whatever reason and both employees had performed their duties equally well during the life of the company. Why should one employee have to pay another once the company is defunct? He (or she) did their job. If they didn't like that job, they should have looked for another.
I don't get the feeling you love women; as your 'LoVe' implies, you love p******, and couldn't care less about the person around them.
That's not actually the case. My initial post was regarding relationships in the context of the NYT article. Believe it or not, when it comes to relationships I'm an extremely nice guy, very caring, compassionate and loving. I get very emotionally attached to my girlfriends, and my relationships tend to last years, not weeks or months.
I do get the impression that, according to you, 'all women are just out to exploit men'.
Not all. Quite a lot, but not all, and when it comes to the issues of alimony and child support, I don't think that many of the remainder really understand the issues and what their responsibilities should be. This is why we're where we are with this issue.
The underlying issue here is really about having kids. There wouldn't be any alimony issues if both people had careers and made decent money. The disparity in income is usually brought about by having children and one parent giving up their career to rear them. Most of society sees it as their duty to have children, or that their friends, neighbors, church or whatever outside forces which influence them will think less of them or shun them if they decide not to. The fact is that having kids is a lifestyle choice, plain and simple. If you make that choice, you should be financially prepared to do so.
|
|
[ Reply ] |
|
keep the fire burnin' | by julius.apweiler | 2002-12-02 13:40:53 |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
