Paternity Tests and the Catholic Church

[Mary_Gail_36]

Your tone about men’s rights is rather saddening on a site that is about social justice. Men’s rights is about ensuring EVERYONE accepts equal responsibility for their equal privileges / rights. That includes same prison sentences for the same crime which women currently receive lighter sentences. That also includes registering for the currently discriminatory Selective Service. Men have a great “undue burden” (borrowing from feminism) when it comes to registering for the SS. If we don’t do it we loose federal benefits like financial aid, state and federal employment, and in most states we can’t get drivers licenses. One girl I knew didn’t even know guys had to do that!!!

Also, as a man I am tired of being though of as nothing more than a bank roll and potential soldier. Women get endless praise for being mothers but dads get nothing. Dad is often thought of as a useless appendage when it comes to children despite the evidence showing otherwise. Dads loose out when it comes to the miracle of life because women think they own kids.

Healthcare is a another issue men loose out on. We die on average about 5 years earlier than women. 80% of centegenarians are women. We spend more money on women’s health research (not all is birth related) and again its all because of man < woman (feminism). Obamacare is perfect example of feminisms philosophy (kaiserhealthnews.org/Features/Insuring-Your-Health/2012/health-law-men-michelle-andrews-082812.aspx). Men are human beings too and deserve equal respect. That is what “men’s rights” is about! This is not about finding a “few woman behaving badly.” It is about a whole lobby of women behaving unjustly because they think they are better than men so they deserve more.

This part confuses me. Are you claiming that 100 year old women have received better health care over the course of their lives?

We really cannot control how many 100 year old ladies there are compared to men, my garndmother lived to be 103. She was widowed twice. I’m sure she would have perferred her husband to be present

Overall, our life expectancy is longer becuse more children are surviing childhood due to better advances in medicine.

Men and women suffer from different ailments, men are more likely to contract heart disease and cancer, woman more likely to contract chronic diseases like lupus and MS.

Post menopausal woman are as likely as men to contract the same deseases

 

[Nimzovik]

Speaking of the inequalities of health benefits in terms of retirement benefits see here:

youtube.com/watch?v=3S7v4fuguHI

I notice we have a Breast Cancer Awareness, Month… see here: nbcam.org/

Hmmmmmmm…How about a Prostate Cancer Careness Month with *equal *publicity?

See here for gender Bias in regard to health care by the W.H.O. who.int/mental_health/prevention/genderwomen/en/

 

[silentfactor80]

This part confuses me. Are you claiming that 100 year old women have received better health care over the course of their lives?

We really cannot control how many 100 year old ladies there are compared to men, my garndmother lived to be 103. She was widowed twice. I’m sure she would have perferred her husband to be present

Overall, our life expectancy is longer becuse more children are surviing childhood due to better advances in medicine.

Men and women suffer from different ailments, men are more likely to contract heart disease and cancer, woman more likely to contract chronic diseases like lupus and MS.

Post menopausal woman are as likely as men to contract the same deseases

From the 50’s to the early 70’s men and women had about the same life expectancy. Then we started pouring massive amounts of money into women’s health because feminist groups lobbied for it. If you read the article it even says men’s health is poorly researched. That is the injustice I think society should correct.

I am not saying they received better healthcare per se but they were protected much more so than men. Men till this day account for 93% of job related deaths excluding military deaths. The reason for this is women avoid risky jobs and feminists certainly don’t care to encourage women to seek these jobs. Why would they?

Also, I have seen several scientific articles that claim men’s immune systems are weaker though the evidence is not well established. That being said, why aren’t we putting more money into keeping men healthy? It would make scientific sense to do so. Again, feminists only care about themselves and their power so if men die, no big deal to them. This is the attitude that needs to be corrected. If men try to lobby for funding for anything we get labeled as “backlashers looking to take away from women.”

 

[Nimzovik]

Also: Why does Society not ask why 90% of the homelss are men?

 

[JackieMom]

Oh yeeeeeessssssssss…?

You always act charitably by referring to people’s oppositional comments as ‘unhinged,’ do you?

Here is a speech by a famous** Feminist** Speaker that has a book published in over 140 countries world wide. I now present to you** Eve Ensler** Keynote speaker at the 2012 National NOW Conference in Baltimore, Md. on Friday, June 29. Introduction by** NOW** President Terry O’Neill.

youtube.com/watch?v=dFg1NWmSpKQ&playnext=1&list=PLBF80AFCE949D0237&feature=results_video

Commentary by a woman on the above speech here: youtube.com/watch?v=wuJJuK7ADk8

Your claims of being a Feminist… wellllllllllllllll… kinda speaks for itself, now doesn’t it.

Now then. What was that word** you** used to describe me…

You advocate this… stuff?

*The ‘**War ***on women’ get a grip.

Heh heh heh …

See, that’s what I’m talking about. You post hours worth of links, the bizzare overuse of ellipses, weird smiley icons, strange “heh hehs” and “ehs?” that make no sense. You sound unstable and your posts are hard to follow.

I never said I was a feminist. I never mentioned a “war on women,” I have no idea what you mean by “…stuff.” I never said you were unhinged. I said your posts came across that way. Is English not your first language? That would make sense.

I stand by everything I said but will not argue with you anymore. Your posts are becoming more and more erratic and I don’t see the point. If you would like to have a discussion without the odd syntax and smilies, the accusations and red herrings and strange multiple links to other sites, that would be welcome.

 

[Nimzovik]

Of course… I suppose I was not really expecting anything different…

O.K. So you do not advocate Feminism and correspondingly view it as a somewhat erroneous proposition, I take it?

It did indeed appear by your arguments similar to the positions feminists advocate for, such as your comments like “I find the term “men’s rights” quite laughable.” and … Your definition of “real father” is interesting. If two men are sleeping with a woman, one legitimately so as the husband and one doing so under the most appalling amd decietful of circumstances, it is in my mind not necessary to determine who the “real” father is. The father is the one the woman is married to and the one who should raise the child with the mother. This is the risk you take when you sleep with a married lady." which devalues men as Farthers **and **quotes like this from post #36 "Some men are “mere seed.” Which again devalues men as Fathers. Hmmm… if they talk like a Feminist…well…

Apparently I am mistaken?

Perhaps the post in which I mentioned that when people refer to Fathers as things like ‘seed donnors’ and ‘Bio Daddy’, that for men, we view that as being an insult equivalent to racist speech?

 

[silentfactor80]

See, that’s what I’m talking about. You post hours worth of links, the bizzare overuse of ellipses, weird smiley icons, strange “heh hehs” and “ehs?” that make no sense. You sound unstable and your posts are hard to follow.

I never said I was a feminist. I never mentioned a “war on women,” I have no idea what you mean by “…stuff.” I never said you were unhinged. I said your posts came across that way. Is English not your first language? That would make sense.

I stand by everything I said but will not argue with you anymore. Your posts are becoming more and more erratic and I don’t see the point. If you would like to have a discussion without the odd syntax and smilies, the accusations and red herrings and strange multiple links to other sites, that would be welcome.

And you didn’t reply to many of my posts either which didn’t have all the fillers Nimzkov’s did. I gave several facts and made several claims in response to your posts earlier that you completely evaded.

Also, lets talk about the elephant in the room. I assume most of you posting on here are Catholic and the Catholic Church certainly does put men in a position it doesn’t put women. What’s your response to that? It seems rather hypocritical to be trashing men, saying their rights are “laughable,” and be part of a Church that excludes women from certain roles but not men.

 

[JackieMom]

And you didn’t reply to many of my posts either which didn’t have all the fillers Nimzkov’s did. I gave several facts and made several claims in response to your posts earlier that you completely evaded.

Also, lets talk about the elephant in the room. I assume most of you posting on here are Catholic and the Catholic Church certainly does put men in a position it doesn’t put women. What’s your response to that? It seems rather hypocritical to be trashing men, saying their rights are “laughable,” and be part of a Church that excludes women from certain roles but not men.

No one said that equal rights are laughable. I think the idea of a “mens rights movement” is about as necessary and appropriate as a “white person’s rights movement” or a “welathy people’s rights.”

I am fine with the current structure of the Catholic church. I think you are confusing me saying that the so-called men’s rights movement is a joke with me hating men. I have no problem with men and women filling differing roles in the Church, in the family and in society. You have extrapolated my opinion on “what should be done if a baby is conceived in an adulterous relationship” to mean that I somehow despise men and want bad things for them. And that is simply not true.

My opinion will always fall on the side of children’s needs and security over adult’s desires. And ultimately, I think providing a safe, intact home is THE preeminent goal when a baby has been concieved under unideal circumstances. This has nothing to do with hating men, but with expecting men (and often women) to let go of their desires and wishes, even if it is heartbreaking, for the betterment of a child. You may disagree. You may believe that it is better for a child to know the truth, even if it destroys two intact families and makes him a pariah amonst his siblings, and shames his mother publicly. You may feel it better to let the cards fall where they may so that both bio parents get their shot at the kid. I simply disagree with that.

 

[silentfactor80]

No one said that equal rights are laughable. I think the idea of a “mens rights movement” is about as necessary and appropriate as a “white person’s rights movement” or a “welathy people’s rights.”

I am fine with the current structure of the Catholic church. I think you are confusing me saying that the so-called men’s rights movement is a joke with me hating men. I have no problem with men and women filling differing roles in the Church, in the family and in society. You have extrapolated my opinion on “what should be done if a baby is conceived in an adulterous relationship” to mean that I somehow despise men and want bad things for them. And that is simply not true.

My opinion will always fall on the side of children’s needs and security over adult’s desires. And ultimately, I think providing a safe, intact home is THE preeminent goal when a baby has been concieved under unideal circumstances. This has nothing to do with hating men, but with expecting men (and often women) to let go of their desires and wishes, even if it is heartbreaking, for the betterment of a child. You may disagree. You may believe that it is better for a child to know the truth, even if it destroys two intact families and makes him a pariah amonst his siblings, and shames his mother publicly. You may feel it better to let the cards fall where they may so that both bio parents get their shot at the kid. I simply disagree with that.

The men’s rights movement is about equal responsibility AND equal rights!! If you have no problem with equal rights then you should have no problem with men’s rights! Rights can be taken away much more easily than they are gained. Just because men are believed to be in control of everything it doesn’t mean that we can’t have our basic right violated as a group. I gave examples of where men are already being discriminated against in health care. Feminism can easily develop into a tyranny if left unchecked as easily as maleism did in the past.

Also, I never advocated for putting the adults desires over the childs. I said an adulterous spouse has a responsibility to tell their spouse what they did for the reasons I gave. I said a man should not be LIED into fathering a child he did not CHOOSE to. I also said an adulterous woman should not be given defacto status as the parent who gets the child. She is just as guilty as the adulterous man so if the man feels he is a better or equal parent then a court of unbiased law should settle it.

 

[JackieMom]

The men’s rights movement is about equal responsibility AND equal rights!! If you have no problem with equal rights then you should have no problem with men’s rights! Rights can be taken away much more easily than they are gained. Just because men are believed to be in control of everything it doesn’t mean that we can’t have our basic right violated as a group. I gave examples of where men are already being discriminated against in health care. Feminism can easily develop into a tyranny if left unchecked as easily as maleism did in the past.

Also, I never advocated for putting the adults desires over the childs. I said an adulterous spouse has a responsibility to tell their spouse what they did for the reasons I gave. I said a man should not be LIED into fathering a child he did not CHOOSE to. I also said an adulterous woman should not be given defacto status as the parent who gets the child. She is just as guilty as the adulterous man so if the man feels he is a better or equal parent then a court of unbiased law should settle it.

I agree that the husband should be informed that the baby may not be his. A real man will step up and raise the child as his own, a lesser man will abandon his wife and the baby for not having his DNA and out of pride.I am 100% confident that my husband would be able to set aside his anger at me and hurt to do the right thing for an innocent child. I doubt he’d want a paternity test. But, we don’t agree with divorcing for infidelity as long as a commitment is made to never let it happen again

 

[silentfactor80]

I agree that the husband should be informed that the baby may not be his. A real man will step up and raise the child as his own, a lesser man will abandon his wife and the baby for not having his DNA and out of pride.I am 100% confident that my husband would be able to set aside his anger at me and hurt to do the right thing for an innocent child. I doubt he’d want a paternity test. But, we don’t agree with divorcing for infidelity as long as a commitment is made to never let it happen again

We will let God decide who is and isn’t the lesser man / woman. Also, this thread wasn’t about your husband but men in general.

 

[silentfactor80]

No one said that equal rights are laughable. I think the idea of a “mens rights movement” is about as necessary and appropriate as a “white person’s rights movement” or a “welathy people’s rights.”

I am fine with the current structure of the Catholic church. I think you are confusing me saying that the so-called men’s rights movement is a joke with me hating men. I have no problem with men and women filling differing roles in the Church, in the family and in society. You have extrapolated my opinion on “what should be done if a baby is conceived in an adulterous relationship” to mean that I somehow despise men and want bad things for them. And that is simply not true.

I’d also like to point out that in general it is elitist men that run the show. Your average guy or poor man doesn’t get the same say / sway an elitist guy has. You can’t put all men in one power of influence box. The power is not equal among classes.

 

[Nimzovik]

JackieMom- here are some thoughts for you…

Indeed. Women call men ‘Donors’ and relegate us with the term ‘Bio Daddy’ instead of Fathers for purposes of marginalizing men. Legislation is often enacted in terms of favoring women in regard to the legal custody issues.

I would give exmples, but I do not wish to be accused of adding fillers! Horrors! Who needs* facts? *

Suppose men start treating women in the same manner women treat men?

Suppose men start enacting legislation that deprived women of their acess to their own children eh? Suppose men get to choose who the mother of his child is going to be -Ahmmmmmmmm?

**And **in terms of the female role regarding reproducton, what if men relegated women to a more marginalizing terminology eh?

What if men referred to women as ‘mere incubators’ instead of* mothers* eh? In the same manner Feminists treat men - eh?

**What if !!! Instead of Mother’s Day, we have rather "Incubators Day?’ **

Can you here men now?

SO. Men do not need a rights advocate group eh? Men’s rights are ‘laughable’ eh?

May I suggest you think again?

 

[JackieMom]

JackieMom- here are some thoughts for you…

Indeed. Women call men ‘Donors’ and relegate us with the term ‘Bio Daddy’ instead of Fathers for purposes of marginalizing men. Legislation is often enacted in terms of favoring women in regard to the legal custody issues.

I would give exmples, but I do not wish to be accused of adding fillers! Horrors! Who needs* facts? *

Suppose men start treating women in the same manner women treat men?

Suppose men start enacting legislation that deprived women of their acess to their own children eh? Suppose men get to choose who the mother of his child is going to be -Ahmmmmmmmm?

**And **in terms of the female role regarding reproducton, what if men relegated women to a more marginalizing terminology eh?

What if men referred to women as ‘mere incubators’ instead of* mothers* eh? In the same manner Feminists treat men - eh?

**What if !!! Instead of Mother’s Day, we have rather "Incubators Day?’ **

Can you here men now?

SO. Men do not need a rights advocate group eh? Men’s rights are ‘laughable’ eh?

May I suggest you think again?

I would argue that there are a decent number of women who are just incubators or only slightly above that. No one in this entire thread has said that all fathers are is sperm donors. You are making that up. Many men are excellent dads. But do you not uderstand that simply impregnating a woman does not make a man a father?

 

[Nimzovik]

I would argue that there are a decent number of women who are just incubators or only slightly above that. No one in this entire thread has said that all fathers are is sperm donors. You are making that up. Many men are excellent dads. But do you not uderstand that simply impregnating a woman does not make a man a father?

Wellllllll… “But do you not uderstand that simply impregnating a woman does not make a man a father?” that is **obvious." **

I do not know of anyone that is proposing the counter of this statement.

However! When a man does indeed impregnate a woman, that man does indeed have a say in the subsequent upbringing regarding that child. You argued to the contrary. You indicated that you would flee with the discussed love child’ and not even tell the man of his very own child! I dare say if the roles were reversed you might think otherwise.

I agree that many males in the past have abandoned the role of Father in such sircumstances. However! That does** not** give women the right to* make that choice for **all ***men that find themselves in that circumstance. To do so, and run away with the child, is nothing short of kidnapping IMHO. How would you feel if someone ran off with your baby eh?

Pretty simple really.

BTW. It is the pervasive attitude of women that routinely make such pronouncements, by virtue of their sex, that clearly indicates the **dire **need for a Men’s Rights Movement.

Thankyou for this oppurtunity to elevate the Social Consciousness of Men’s Issues.

P.S. I hope I have afforded you yet another splendid oppurtunity to mock my posting techniques for your recreational pleasures?

 

[silentfactor80]

I would argue that there are a decent number of women who are just incubators or only slightly above that. No one in this entire thread has said that all fathers are is sperm donors. You are making that up. Many men are excellent dads. But do you not uderstand that simply impregnating a woman does not make a man a father?

And you do understand simply getting impregnated does not make one a mother? Why slightly above being an incubator? Are any men slightly above being a “seed donor” as you elegantly put it?