Mark Sobolewski wrote:
> In article ,
>  "bluesmama"  wrote:
>
> > Mark Sobolewski wrote:
> > > In article
,
> > >  "bluesmama"  wrote:
> > >
> > > > rdubose{at}pdq.net wrote:
> > > > > bluesmama wrote:
> > > > > > mark_sobolewski{at}yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > > > > bluesmama wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > A man who does not take
responsibility for his own
seed,
> > and
> > > > > leaves
> > > > > > > > that responsibility to someone
else, when he does not
want
> > to
> > > > > > father
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > child, is stupid. Trust, or lack of
trust, has nothing
to
> > do
> > > > with
> > > > > > it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But that's what trust _IS_.  It's about believing
someone's
> > elses
> > > > > > > word that they won't betray you.  It's
about believing in
> > their
> > > > > > > morality and their abilities.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What I'm saying is that responsibility is one
thing, and
> > "trusting"
> > > > > > someone else to take over your own
responsibility and make
it
> > > > theirs,
> > > > > > is something else entirely.
> > > > >
> > > > >    Let me put it this way. If a person tells another person
that
> > they
> > > > > can be trusted in a matter ie, "I cannot get
pregnant, fire
away"
> > she
> > > > > certainly has taken on a responsibility for the truth of it.
She
> > > > could
> > > > > always say "maybe" or "I am not
sure," etc. if that is truer.
She
> > > > > chooses in this case to say certain misleading things to get
what
> > she
> > > > > wants. She is not forced to give false reassurances to the
guy.
> > > > >    The guy here would not have skirked a responsibility. He
> > merely
> > > > > would have believed what his "lover" told him.
> > > > >    All criminal fraud has these elements. One could, I
suppose
> > toss
> > > > all
> > > > > of these laws out because "people should know
better than to
> > trust
> > > > > anybody with anything".     A feminist paradise.
> > > > >     Of course, without a good quality video tape it will
always
> > be
> > > > > possible to deny such conversations. But that is a dfferent
> > question.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Put it whatever way you want. Unless the guy knows for sure
that HE
> > is
> > > > shooting blanks, he is responsible for his semen and its
possible
> > > > impregnating effects. The guy here "would not have
shirked his
> > > > responsibility"? Bullshit. It's his seminal fluid, not hers.
> > > >
> > > > Should he be able to trust the woman he's sleeping with? Well,
that
> > all
> > > > depends on the situation. If she's a one night stand he picks
up at
> > the
> > > > bar, he can probably trust her as much as she trusts him - so
when
> > he
> > > > says "Hey, I'll call you" as he wipes himself
off and saunters
out
> > her
> > > > front door, his claim to call is probably just as trustworthy
as
> > her
> > > > claims that "It's okay, I can't get pregnant,
don't worry."
> > > >
> > > > If he does know her and they're in a romantic partnership of
some
> > kind,
> > > > legally recognized or not, then you would hope he could trust
her.
> > But,
> > > > sadly, people fall in love and sleep with untrustworthy people
> > every
> > > > day, and most of them don't know it until it's too late.
> > > >
> > > > You trust someone, you take a risk on your reading of their
> > > > trustworthiness. Some people have bad built-in bullshit
detectors.
> > > > They're the ones sending their bank information off in e-mails.
I
> > take
> > > > a risk trusting my husband because I believe in him, and I
believe
> > in
> > > > him because he's proven his trustworthiness to me. I believe
that
> > he's
> > > > worthy of my trust, but then again, I think he's worth more
than
> > all
> > > > the men I've met in my life, except for my father, of course.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not saying that anyone who trusts is stupid.
> > >
> > > But that's precisely what you're saying.  Now it's time for
> > > you to back out of it:
> > >
> > > > I AM saying that
> > > > Person A who trusts Person B to take care of something that is
> > Person
> > > > A's responsibility is taking a risk, and has to be responsible
for
> > the
> > > > choice he or she has made.
> > >
> > > Unless she dumps off the child legally or uses her to collect
> > > welfare.
> > >
> > > regards,
> > > Mark Sobolewski
> >
> > Do mothers abandon their children as often as men do? I know of
more
> > absentee Dads than I do absentee Moms.
>
> It looks like some more "cloudy" weather is in store for
> me here in Northern Virginia. :-)

I didn't get that one, sorry. Please explain! Just put two toddlers
down for a  nap and am still trying to get the Teletubbies theme song
out of my head...

> The FACT remains that single mothers LEGALLY abandon their children
> or exploit them for cash and single fathers do not.

No single fathers exploit their children for cash? Are there no welfare
fathers in the whole U.S.?

> If men were able to exploit the kids for cash, maybe they
> would stick around too, eh?

Maybe they would, maybe they wouldn't. Some women may have children for
all the wrong reasons, and if there was some way to discourage that
kind of behavior without having the innocent chidren suffer, then I
might have less compassion for single welfare moms. Frankly, I'd rather
my tax money went to feed kids and  moms on welfare than to bomb people
in other countries.

> > And as far as welfare goes, the "payoff" isn't all that much
compared
> > to the effort required in raising a child.
>
> So she needn't have one.  What were you saying about
> "taking responsibility" again?  Oh, wait, the
> taxpayer shouldn't just pay HER bills but they
> should clean her home and change the diapers for
> the kid too?

Isn't there always going to be an underclass (socio-economically
speaking) that requires some assistance? Isn't it the mark of a
compassionate society that those who can, do for those who cannot?

> Gee, why isn't my heart bleeding?

> > The trust/responsibility thing: we obviously will not see eye to
eye on
> > this, so we might as well consider the subject closed, and each
> > continue to believe we're right
>
> It sounds like you're running away.  I'm cool with that.
> If a welfare mother barely runs away from her children
> for profit, one can't hold you to a higher standard.
>
> regards,
> Mark Sobolewski

It was an awkward attempt at a taunt, but I'm not offended by your
comparison, in any case. If continuing to argue the difference in our
opinions seemed to be profitable to either one of us, I might continue.
But it seems as if we're both stuck firmly on our own side of the
fence...if you want to see that as running away, that's fine. I just
don't know how much further the discussion can go before it's just both
of us saying "Is too!" and "Is not!" and that just
seems like such a
waste of time.



--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/1/05 5:34:38 PM ---