Paternity Tests and the Catholic Church

[JackieMom]

Oh yes? Wriggling in the ever tightening clutches of reason?

No. With charity, you come across in this thread as completely unhinged, and arguing with someone who is irrational is simply frustrating, not enlightening or productive.

 

[silentfactor80]

---

Been hanging out at the “manosphere” --have you. One of the “traits” is to troll the internet for instances of women “behaving badly” – and use that to spew “men’s rights”.

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.

 

[silentfactor80]

---

Men have had the “victim blaming” down for generations. People need to wake-up – the MRM and the radical feminists are opposite sides of the same coin. Control – power – and make enemies out of men and women.

Your dismissive tone in hearing about the issues men care about is what makes enemies out of men and women. If women want men to listen then women have to listen too. A one way street does not exist in this case. As long as ya’ll have the holier than thou attitude you only fuel the fire.

I understand women have issues they care about and I want to work on those. I also want women to work on the issues men care about. One of those issues bearing equal responsibility for ones actions.

 

[Walking_Home]

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.

---

No – it is about “re-establishing” a structure of male domination. “Men’s rights” is a tool to use and hide behind. And we well know – what happened to and the status of women – when the past was “significantly different”- with men holding the power and control.

From a “manosphere blog”.

JoeS
There’s something else I find annoying. This talk that men working together is somehow unnatural or unmasculine, the persistent sniping at MRM’s who advocate cooperation. Of course there is not going to be effective leadership at this time, but the fact is that cooperation among men is the basis for organized societies,** and it was by their cooperation that women were kept in their place.** It’s only since a certain malevolent group has managed to get to the levers of control that they’ve set to sabotaging social relations and rules that historically maintained our society.

JoeS
I’m struck by people who have a compulsive need to believe that men didn’t actually have more power in the past. All I have to do is look at my own parents and grandparents to see what a load of BS that is. Some of you people, particularly some of the Protestants, don’t know what it is for women to be traditional minded and non-feminist. You literally have no experience of it, so you concoct these crazy ideas about the world always being covertly under women’s control. There would be no feminism, no extremism, and no compulsive need to deny that the past was ever significantly different, if it weren’t for the fact that family men did indeed have far more rights and power than they have now.

 

[Litcrit]

Neither do men. When men use a woman for sex and she gets pregnant, he is just a biological dad, a dad by accident. Women should avoid men who just want them for sex. It demeans both.

And when women use men for sex and get pregnant, does it mean that the child should automatically be given to the man, because she is just a biological mom, a mom by accident? Two can do a stupid thing together and two can still be decent parents to the resulting child.

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.

As a feminist, I couldn’t agree more.

 

[silentfactor80]

---

No – it is about “re-establishing” a structure of male domination. “Men’s rights” is a tool to use and hide behind. And we well know – what happened to and the status of women – when the past was “significantly different”- with men holding the power and control.

From a “manosphere blog”.

No one is arguing a return to the past! At least I am not! That blog you quoted is just that, a blog. The groups that organize around men’s right like the National Organization for Men are led by intellectuals like Dr. Warren Farrel (former N.O.W. chair in the northeast). Maybe you should read his book “The Myth of Male Power.”

All I am arguing for is equal responsibility! Women worked on equal rights and now men want them to be subject to equal responsibility. I gave several examples in my earlier post but you clearly glossed over all of them because of your misandry!

 

[Walking_Home]

No one is arguing a return to the past! At least I am not! That blog you quoted is just that, a blog. The groups that organize around men’s right like the National Organization for Men are led by intellectuals like Dr. Warren Farrel (former N.O.W. chair in the northeast). Maybe you should read his book “The Myth of Male Power.”

All I am arguing for is equal responsibility! Women worked on equal rights and now men want them to be subject to equal responsibility. I gave several examples in my earlier post but you clearly glossed over all of them because of your misandry!

---

My – you do resort to throwing “epitaphs” at others. First it was “female supremacist” at and now “misandry”.

 

[Nimzovik]

---

Men have had the “victim blaming” down for generations. People need to wake-up – the MRM and the radical feminists are opposite sides of the same coin. Control – power – and make enemies out of men and women.

Yes… There is a degree of truth in this… However, it obviously recognizable that the Men’ Rights Groups only came into existence in response to the flagrant and highly amoral Feminist demands such as abortion, the right to kill a man’s aswell child.

 

[Nimzovik]

---

My – you do resort to throwing “epitaphs” at others. First it was “female supremacist” at and now “misandry”.

Hmmmmmmm… in view of the context of the thread, his responses to the rather overwhelmingly **sexist **comments of the opposition, I ask - was he actually wrong in these cases?

There! I used the ‘epithet’ sexist. I guess I am in the same boat then eh?

 

[Walking_Home]

Hmmmmmmm… in view of the context of the thread, his responses to the rather overwhelmingly **sexist **comments of the opposition, I ask - was he actually wrong in these cases?

There! I used the ‘epithet’ sexist. I guess I am in the same boat then eh?

---

Yea – I guess saying that radical feminism – is about power/control – making enemies out of men and women – which is also found in the MRM - is “sexist” to those who want to hide it on both sides.

 

[chevalier]

• Whats best for the child.* It supersedes any genetic parent “rights” or anyone’s right to have a “shot at” being a parent.

1. “What’s best for the child,” cannot be a lockpick argument to get out of problems caused by promiscuity and the moral implications of lying.
2. Men have a right not to have someone else’s children imposed to them. Families have a right not to have false heirs imposed on them.

It doesn’t come down to that poor sacrificing mother deciding what’s best for her child. It comes down to trying to be fair to others after screwing up.

 

[Nimzovik]

---

Yea – I guess saying that radical feminism – is about power/control – making enemies out of men and women – which is also found in the MRM - is “sexist” to those who want to hide it on both sides.

Feminism is sexism. Maleism is sexism. By definition of their very titles at least. Ideally, instead of being Feminists or Maleists, we should rather choose to
be We -ists. Or Us-ists. This is what I thought I was doing when I became a Catholic.

It really irritates me when I hear our very own Religous leaders refer to themselves as ‘Feminist.’ What we, as Catholics have is far, far superior to Feminism.**

To be Feminist is to be divisonary. Ditto with the Maleists.

We as Catholics should not fall for such obvious machinations of the evil one.

 

[Walking_Home]

1. “What’s best for the child,” cannot be a lockpick argument to get out of problems caused by promiscuity and the moral implications of lying.
2. Men have a right not to have someone else’s children imposed to them. Families have a right not to have false heirs imposed on them.

It doesn’t come down to that poor sacrificing mother deciding what’s best for her child. It comes down to trying to be fair to others after screwing up.

---

Which brings up the question – are children being viewed via an “animalistic” lens. Like a male lion – whose first order of business – when he takes over a pride – is to “dispatch” the other male’s offspring --the false heirs - to establish his own blood line.

 

[Pedro_1987]

This is completely ridiculous! All this talk about the poor little woman who deserves her secrecy. How adorable. If the wife wasn’t so promiscuous in the first place, it wouldn’t be a problem in the first place. I hate how male promisuity is always seen as a bad thing, and how men are dogs, etc. But when women want to be promiscuous, it’s always about their choice. Oh poor little women, boo hoo.

And don’t tell me I’m sexist; this comes any time we compare the states of women to the states of men. A man refuses to raise a kid, he’s a deadbeat dad and a horrible person. A women refuses to raise a kid, she is seen as empowered and a woman who makes her own decisions. A man uses his smarts to and takes people’s money despite not working very hard, and he’s a con-man and belongs in jail. A stripper uses men’s lust against them to get their money despite not working very hard, and she’s a poor little victim. Equal pay at work, despite the fact they refuse to do any manual labor or lift anything more than ten pounds.

Feminism is a complete and utter joke. Equal rights for women! But let’s portray them as victims at every oppurtunity.

 

[Nimzovik]

No. With charity, you come across in this thread as completely unhinged, and arguing with someone who is irrational is simply frustrating, not enlightening or productive.

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 …

 

[Nimzovik]

---

Which brings up the question – are children being viewed via an “animalistic” lens. Like a male lion – whose first order of business – when he takes over a pride – is to “dispatch” the other male’s offspring --the false heirs - to establish his own blood line.

Well! That was rather inflammatory, now wasn’t it?

Pssssssssssttttttttt… Men are not animals. Humans are not animals.

 

[Nimzovik]

This is completely ridiculous! All this talk about the poor little woman who deserves her secrecy. How adorable. If the wife wasn’t so promiscuous in the first place, it wouldn’t be a problem in the first place. I hate how male promisuity is always seen as a bad thing, and how men are dogs, etc. But when women want to be promiscuous, it’s always about their choice. Oh poor little women, boo hoo.

And don’t tell me I’m sexist; this comes any time we compare the states of women to the states of men. A man refuses to raise a kid, he’s a deadbeat dad and a horrible person. A women refuses to raise a kid, she is seen as empowered and a woman who makes her own decisions. A man uses his smarts to and takes people’s money despite not working very hard, and he’s a con-man and belongs in jail. A stripper uses men’s lust against them to get their money despite not working very hard, and she’s a poor little victim. Equal pay at work, despite the fact they refuse to do any manual labor or lift anything more than ten pounds.

Feminism is a complete and utter joke. Equal rights for women! But let’s portray them as victims at every oppurtunity.

Yet* another* male speaks! Methinks awareness is growing. Methinks Feminsim is finally being recognized for what it is. A power grabbing, male disenfranchising political action committee of pandemic proprotions.

 

[Walking_Home]

Walking_Home:

Which brings up the question – are children being viewed via an “animalistic” lens. Like a male lion – whose first order of business – when he takes over a pride – is to “dispatch” the other male’s offspring --the false heirs - to establish his own blood line.

Well! That was rather inflammatory, now wasn’t it?

Pssssssssssttttttttt… Men are not animals. Humans are not animals.

---

Well – it may be “inflammatory” – to see how close – the human is coming to/mimicking the animal.

 

[Oh_Charlotte]

Originally Posted by JackieMom
No. With charity, you come across in this thread as completely unhinged, and arguing with someone who is irrational is simply frustrating, not enlightening or productive.

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 {etc.etc.]…

With all due respect, Nimzovik, I you come across to me like that too. I withhold my judgment - I have not come near to understanding why you come across this way, and I will assume there is some reason.

You are posting hours and hours of links here in this one thread alone. Have you ever considered how many people would listen to these things? I think not any! Its just too much. If you want an audience, think tweet-length.

 

[Nimzovik]

Apparently, the issue does indeed need to be discussed at length. It is readily apparent when one sees some of the comments that are written in this very thread.

Tweet length you say? Knowledge worth knowing does not come in a sound byte or …tweets.

It is worth noting that this thread has over 1,500 views. It would seem that a fair number of people are curious about such issues - eh?