On Jun 22, 12:42 am, BlackBeard <spk_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Jun 21, 6:33 pm, tankfixer <paul.carr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article <485c9468.374...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, eugene@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > says...
>
> > > "D. Spencer Hines" <pant...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > >Nilita Gay was happy to get pregnant out of wedlock too.
>
> > > Oh wow! What a discovery. David Sherlock Holmes is outdoing
himself.
> > > It's about time he woke up and smelled the coffee. More than 60% of
> > > pregnancies occur out of wedlock these days. So what - wedlock is
an
> > > outdated man made invention of control and is designed mainly to
> > > assure inheritance. Pure male chauvinism at its worst. And it only
> > > works partially at the best of times. Pre-WW2 a famous early
> > > researcher into genetics (he went on to win the Nobel prize) went
> > > around some of the top private maternity homes in New York state
> > > collecting blood from mothers, babies and fathers for his research.
> > > Over a thousand cases in his sample. He never published that
> > > particular study due to the simple fact that more than 10% of the
> > > babies born had not been sired by the legal lawfully wedded husband.
> > > A more recent study done in Europe suggests an even higher
percentage.
> > > So what would you prefer - born out of wedlock or a good chance your
> > > daddy ain't your daddy? Anyway only someone stuck in the rut of
> > > outdated middle-class thinking would let it matter. Who one's
parents
> > > are - or if they underwent some farcical ceremony prior to one's
> > > conception - has no bearing on who the child is.
>
> > While I have no problem with someone doing as they wish I do object
when
> > asked to pay for the results of their fun.
>
> > --
>
> > "Oh Norman, listen! The loons are calling!"
> > - Katherine Hepburn, "On Golden Pond"
>
> All digressions aside... What is it about Massachusetts and child
> ***? It seems to be a decades (if not longer) old problem. I
> remember an incident in the 80's where teens/sub-teens were running
> their own prostitution ring. It happened again in the last decade.
> Where are the parents?
> I know you can't control your child's ***ual behavior completely, but
> how do you not know about them being involved in / running their own
> brothels?
> We pretty much knew when our daughters became ***ually active, talked
> to them and put them on the pill. It wasn't difficult. What is it
> about Bean-town?
>
> BB
>
> I guess everybody has some mountain to climb in their life.
> It's just fate whether you live in Kansas or Tibet.
You might ask all those priests and church officials who have been
found to perform their own version of abstinence, at least no 11 year
old boys got pregnant.
|
