Is the US turning Japanese?

[FaaR]

You were clearly linking "Religious Right" Christian beliefs with out-of-wedlock child births being unacceptable.

I was talking about the AMERICAN religious (right). I said nothing about (primarily buddhist/shinto) Japan. It does not apply.

Flunked highschool debate class, or what?

 

[nehalem256]

Then clearly you only have sex with women you've married. Thus, problem solved, eh?!

Because you're not suggesting that your own personal ideals on who's allowed to have babies (and with whom, presumably) should apply universally, to everyone? That'd be - and please pardon the french here - the most fking presumptious thing I've ever heard. Well, actually no. But relatively close-ish anyhow.

I am simply suggesting that I not be made to support other people's morals.

Oh, I understand that just fine, which is why I gave you the choice of either abstaining, or failing that, paying for your own actions by supporting the child you yourself fathered. Why's this so hard to grasp, are you really that inhumane and devoid of morals?

You mean like the million+ America women who kill their children every year

Compared to that men who abandon their children should get a noble peace prize.

Grownups have responsibilities, certainly. Why wouldn't they? What's your point?

And women around the world are also doing that, typically ending up working far more than most men in the process. However that aside, it's not too much to ask of you that you carry your half of the financial burden, considering the kid carries one half of your genes and all.

Strawmen sure are popular on the far-right fringe.

How is expecting independent women to not rely on men a "strawman"

And I see you are unfamiliar with the concept of sperm donor. Just because a child shares half of a man's dna does not mean he should be required to be responsible for it.

 

[nehalem256]

I was talking about the AMERICAN religious (right). I said nothing about (primarily buddhist/shinto) Japan. It does not apply.

Flunked highschool debate class, or what?

Your argument is that it is the American religious right that says it is wrong to have a child out of wedlock.

And yet buddhist Japan has exactly the same belief. And in fact ACTUALLY PRACTICES IT.

 

[FaaR]

I am simply suggesting that I not be made to support other people's morals.

And I am saying you be made to support your own actions. Do you partake in chicken races, or play russian roulette? No, probably not, because there are the risk of consequences you probably aren't willing to pay. But screwing women, unprotected, that's OK, because if the woman gets pregnant then it's all her fault/problem somehow?

The disgusting stink of hypocirsy in your reasoning is so thick you could cut it with a knife...

You mean like the million+ America women who kill their children every year

...Says the man who wants women to go through abortions just so he can dodge child support (and undoubtedly screw more women without consequences). Somehow I don't see you holding the moral highground here.

How is expecting independent women to not rely on men a "strawman"

Because that wasn't something I actually said.

And I see you are unfamiliar with the concept of sperm donor. Just because a child shares half of a man's dna does not mean he should be required to be responsible for it.

Oh please. You just reached so far you pulled your arm out of its socket. Lol! SPERM DONORS! We were talking about having raw, unprotected sex in the buff, and you come waltzing back with sperm donors. ROFL.

Shit, that really takes the cake!

Btw, many (civilized) countries have legislation concerning sperm donations, for example to ensure they will not be held liable for child support, or considered a parent and thus obligated to raise the child and so on. So it wouldn't apply to this discussion anyway.

 

[FaaR]

Your argument is that it is the American religious right that says it is wrong to have a child out of wedlock.

And yet buddhist Japan has exactly the same belief. And in fact ACTUALLY PRACTICES IT.

Yes, SO WHAT?! Two different countries, with different societies, religions, history, social constructs, cultures and so on!

Apples and oranges!

 

[unokitty]

Well like I already mentioned, just because you're not married doesn't mean you're single. Ok?

And the religious angle (your hyperbole aside, labelling it as "hatred") stems from the generally US-only idea that it's bad that unmarried women have children, due to the high level of christian religious dogma permeating that society.

This, of course, comes from old colonial days when lots of christian fundies emigrated from Europe to settle in NA. It's a well-established historical fact.

My post refers to single parent families. It doesn't mention marriage or religion.

The statistics cited in my post include international sources. This isn't exclusively an American issue at all...

Whatever your problem is with marriage and religion, its not related to this thread or to my post.

Best of luck,
Uno

 

[nehalem256]

Yes, SO WHAT?! Two different countries, with different societies, religions, history, social constructs, cultures and so on!

Apples and oranges!

So 2 different countries with different societies, history, social constructs, and cultures both evolved the same beliefs about having children out of wedlock being bad :hmm:

EDIT: which is a direct contradiction of your previous statement of

And the religious angle (your hyperbole aside, labelling it as "hatred") stems from the generally US-only idea that it's bad that unmarried women have children, due to the high level of christian religious dogma permeating that society.

 

[Bateluer]

Anyone trying to re-inflate the bubble should be rocketed aboard a shuttle to space, then thrown out the air lock.

Renting seats on Russian Soyuz would be prohibitively expensive for that.

 

[FaaR]

My post refers to single parent families.

Yeah, well the post which I originally replied to did not, and neither did my reply. It just concerned unmarried women, which in fact, ISN'T the same thing as single women.

But, thank you for playing.

So 2 different countries with different societies, history, social constructs, and cultures both evolved the same beliefs about having children out of wedlock being bad :hmm:

Nobody's actually established yet that the people of Japan think having children out of wedlock is BAD. The single piece of statistic posted about Japan so far doesn't support such a claim.

EDIT: which is a direct contradiction of your previous statement of

What?

They're still two different societies, where's the contradiction?

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Besides China, who else is the U.S. indebted to?

The people of the United States hold the greatest portion of US debt.

 

[nehalem256]

Nobody's actually established yet that the people of Japan think having children out of wedlock is BAD. The single piece of statistic posted about Japan so far doesn't support such a claim.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/opinion/sunday/douthat-incredible-shrinking-country.html

Japan is facing such swift demographic collapse, Eberstadt’s essay suggests, because its culture combines liberalism and traditionalism in particularly disastrous ways. On the one hand, the old sexual culture, oriented around arranged marriage and family obligation, has largely collapsed. Japan is one of the world’s least religious nations, the marriage rate has plunged and the divorce rate is higher than in Northern Europe.

Yet the traditional stigma around out-of-wedlock childbearing endures, which means that unmarried Japanese are more likely to embrace “voluntary childlessness” than the unwed parenting that’s becoming an American norm.

What?

They're still two different societies, where's the contradiction?

And the religious angle (your hyperbole aside, labelling it as "hatred") stems from the generally US-only idea that it's bad that unmarried women have children, due to the high level of christian religious dogma permeating that society.
.

That it is not just a US-only idea that it is bad for unmarried women to have children.

Oh look here is another country that considers it bad for unmarried women to have children

http://www.pop.org/content/chinas-population-policy-1456

According to Article Two of Tianjin Municipality Regulations of Planned Birth, out-of-plan births and out-of-wedlock births are prohibited; birth can only be granted to children within the plan. As Tianjin Planned Birth Committee explains, “Prohibiting out-of-plan births means prohibiting non-approved second or third births”; “out-of-wedlock births means unmarried people giving birth,” and this is considered to be illegal; “population growth must correspond to plan” means that the superior government units stipulate subordinate units’ birth plans, which must in no case be “overfilled.”

 

[Sonikku]

Well where's my fucking used panties vending machine then?

 

[shortylickens]

Well where's my fucking used panties vending machine then?

why hello thar!

 

[unokitty]

Yeah, well the post which I originally replied to did not, and neither did my reply. It just concerned unmarried women, which in fact, ISN'T the same thing as single women.

But, thank you for playing.

Haters gonna hate.

Uno

 

[ArizonaSteve]

Well where's my fucking used panties vending machine then?

Dang... beat me to it...

 

[soulcougher73]

I really think so.

Doh..im way late to this thread. But your 1st post was going to be my responce. Good job