What Does Financial Freedom Mean?

When we are planning for our finances, we must decide how we will measure our success. One such measure is by achieving financial freedom, but what does financial freedom really mean? The term “financial freedom” is thrown around a lot by both traditional financial planners and investment advisers, as well as every infomercial get-rich-quick scheme. Typically, most of the schemes are using the term to mean being so rich you never have to work again. But really financial freedom means being released from uncertainty and being able to confidentially know that you will be able to meet your life goals.

This may mean that you have enough passive income (through pension, investments, business ownership, or real estate rental income) to finance your basic expenses. Or, it may mean that you simply know how to use your income, and investments, to create a life where financial issues are no longer holding you back from your goals. But what I think is not important — what does financial freedom mean to you? If you lived in a world where you KNEW that you were going to be able to reach your goals, and you knew exactly what to do to reach your goals, how would that feel? What words come to mind when you think of financial freedom?

481 thoughts on “What Does Financial Freedom Mean?

  1. US workers are so self-defeating. The unions don’t seem to care about the state of the economy. How about making prosperity rather than destroying it individuals?

  2. Financial freedom is really important. You do not have to be rich to be free financially; but if you can go by the day and still have savings that you can use in the future for you or your family.

  3. Hi there! Financial freedom needs to be worked for by all working people. By being financially free, the future looks rosy.

  4. To me financial freedom doesn’t necessarily mean being a millionaire. It just means that I can do what I want, when I want, and I can live my life comfortably without having to worry about money. Then again, happiness in life means different things to different people, so the concept of financial freedom may also differ from one person to another.

  5. @ RJ and Stacy, it’s true you don’t need to be rich or a millionaire to achieve financial freedom. But not many people can achieve this. Most of us still live with debt all around.

  6. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  7. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  8. What do you mean by financial freedom? Why is it important to you? What will it be like to be financially free? What’s/who’s stopping me on achieving it? Why are they stopping me from achieving it now? How much pain would it be for my family if I die too soon? How can I take care of it now? What can I do to start this change? Can I do it now? How?
    Who will benefit from my financial freedom? What lasting value would it create for me and my family?

  9. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  10. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  11. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  12. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  13. My husband and I are working very hard to get out of debt. We only have school loans and a home loan. We pay off our credit card every month and pay extra towards the college loans. I would like to try for a baby. I have recently been diagnosed with an issue that may mean I am infertile. So I would like to try now just to try naturally first.
    My husband is thinking about it and he wants kids, but I think he is afraid of not having all of our financial ducks in a row, while I am afraid that waiting may mean no baby. So what should we do? I am just asking for your opinion I will definatley talk more indepth to my husband. Thanks so much

  14. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  15. Now I know this debate has been going on for a while but the more I think about it the more It amazes me that Liberals actually think they are for “freedom” when they support this sort of nonsense.

    To make this clear, Liberals and Democrats want to force PRIVATE insurance companies with PRIVATE owners to not have the FREEDOM to operate their business in their own terms.

    Now I want to point out some of the arguments Liberals are using for this nonsense.

    “They already covering Viagra, they should also cover contraception”
    Their is NO mandate to cover Viagra! insurance companies do it to attract more male clients! This is strictly profit based!

    “It will save them more money in the long run if they do so”
    Even if that is the case (which I seriously doubt) isn’t it still up to the company to do so? Should companies also be mandate to give monthly check-ups to people with higher risks of cancer because it will save them money in the long run as well? I mean since when was the government to
    nanny of private business?

    “Woman are going to go broke having sex if this law is not passed”
    This is so offensive on so many levels it is ridiculous, MOST women have sex within their financial means and wont’t be seriously effected by the measure.
    But most importantly SEX is NOT A RIGHT. No one should pay and co-pay any costs related to sex YOU VOLUNTARILY choose for, This whole notion that women need to be “Sexually Liberated” is just nonsense.

    But what do you think?
    @Bash

    If that is really the case then why did this law need to be passed? Why was Sandra fluke complaining about going broke having sex?

  16. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  17. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  18. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  19. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  20. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  21. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  22. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  23. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  24. Currently, we (wife, 2 children) live in a city that we love, the climate, the atmosphere, the people, etc.

    I currently rent and am 1-2 years away from having enough money to either put a down payment on a home or purchase land and build a new home.

    I own a house that needs remodeling in a different city which I do not enjoy (the opposite of where I live now).

    In terms of finances, opting to live in a house I already own is the best decision, meaning a difference of many thousands of dollars saved by no longer renting besides the costs involved in purchasing a home in the future and the reduction of financial stress by having no mortgage or rent to pay every month. Ultimately, this situation could be leveraged to achieve financial freedom in a significantly shorter period of time.

    Is it worth it? Would you exchange the environment you love in order to improve your current and future financial situation? If anyone has had a similar experience, please comment.
    Selling the house in question would not make a significant enough difference in finances nor get me any closer to purchasing a different house.

  25. We have a large amount of credit card debt and are considering debt negotiation through Freedom Financial. They say that we can pay off our debt in three years time and that while our credit rating will initially be affected, by the time the debt is paid, the negative rating will be mitigated. Has anyone used this service (or a similar one)?

  26. Now I know this debate has been going on for a while but the more I think about it the more It amazes me that Liberals actually think they are for “freedom” when they support this sort of nonsense.

    To make this clear, Liberals and Democrats want to force PRIVATE insurance companies with PRIVATE owners to not have the FREEDOM to operate their business in their own terms.

    Now I want to point out some of the arguments Liberals are using for this nonsense.

    “They already covering Viagra, they should also cover contraception”
    Their is NO mandate to cover Viagra! insurance companies do it to attract more male clients! This is strictly profit based!

    “It will save them more money in the long run if they do so”
    Even if that is the case (which I seriously doubt) isn’t it still up to the company to do so? Should companies also be mandate to give monthly check-ups to people with higher risks of cancer because it will save them money in the long run as well? I mean since when was the government to
    nanny of private business?

    “Woman are going to go broke having sex if this law is not passed”
    This is so offensive on so many levels it is ridiculous, MOST women have sex within their financial means and wont’t be seriously effected by the measure.
    But most importantly SEX is NOT A RIGHT. No one should pay and co-pay any costs related to sex YOU VOLUNTARILY choose for, This whole notion that women need to be “Sexually Liberated” is just nonsense.

    But what do you think?
    @Bash

    If that is really the case then why did this law need to be passed? Why was Sandra fluke complaining about going broke having sex?

  27. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  28. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  29. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  30. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  31. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  32. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  33. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  34. Now I know this debate has been going on for a while but the more I think about it the more It amazes me that Liberals actually think they are for “freedom” when they support this sort of nonsense.

    To make this clear, Liberals and Democrats want to force PRIVATE insurance companies with PRIVATE owners to not have the FREEDOM to operate their business in their own terms.

    Now I want to point out some of the arguments Liberals are using for this nonsense.

    “They already covering Viagra, they should also cover contraception”
    Their is NO mandate to cover Viagra! insurance companies do it to attract more male clients! This is strictly profit based!

    “It will save them more money in the long run if they do so”
    Even if that is the case (which I seriously doubt) isn’t it still up to the company to do so? Should companies also be mandate to give monthly check-ups to people with higher risks of cancer because it will save them money in the long run as well? I mean since when was the government to
    nanny of private business?

    “Woman are going to go broke having sex if this law is not passed”
    This is so offensive on so many levels it is ridiculous, MOST women have sex within their financial means and wont’t be seriously effected by the measure.
    But most importantly SEX is NOT A RIGHT. No one should pay and co-pay any costs related to sex YOU VOLUNTARILY choose for, This whole notion that women need to be “Sexually Liberated” is just nonsense.

    But what do you think?
    @Bash

    If that is really the case then why did this law need to be passed? Why was Sandra fluke complaining about going broke having sex?

  35. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  36. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  37. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  38. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  39. I am looking for some tips you guys use to help yourself avoid financial freedom.

    thanks!

  40. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  41. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  42. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  43. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  44. I have heard only good things about this book, does anyone know if The practical Guide to Total Financial Freedom: Volume 1 is as good as they say? Im thinking about buying it for sure at my bookstore, anyone love it?
    I found it at amazon and might order it:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FPractical-Guide-Total-Financial-Freedom%2Fdp%2F1411620542&tag=theinfosc-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325

  45. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  46. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  47. Now I know this debate has been going on for a while but the more I think about it the more It amazes me that Liberals actually think they are for “freedom” when they support this sort of nonsense.

    To make this clear, Liberals and Democrats want to force PRIVATE insurance companies with PRIVATE owners to not have the FREEDOM to operate their business in their own terms.

    Now I want to point out some of the arguments Liberals are using for this nonsense.

    “They already covering Viagra, they should also cover contraception”
    Their is NO mandate to cover Viagra! insurance companies do it to attract more male clients! This is strictly profit based!

    “It will save them more money in the long run if they do so”
    Even if that is the case (which I seriously doubt) isn’t it still up to the company to do so? Should companies also be mandate to give monthly check-ups to people with higher risks of cancer because it will save them money in the long run as well? I mean since when was the government to
    nanny of private business?

    “Woman are going to go broke having sex if this law is not passed”
    This is so offensive on so many levels it is ridiculous, MOST women have sex within their financial means and wont’t be seriously effected by the measure.
    But most importantly SEX is NOT A RIGHT. No one should pay and co-pay any costs related to sex YOU VOLUNTARILY choose for, This whole notion that women need to be “Sexually Liberated” is just nonsense.

    But what do you think?
    @Bash

    If that is really the case then why did this law need to be passed? Why was Sandra fluke complaining about going broke having sex?

  48. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  49. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  50. What books can help me to achieve financial freedom? I read the the 4 hour work week, but I feel it is not that great.

  51. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  52. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  53. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  54. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  55. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  56. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  57. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  58. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  59. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  60. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  61. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  62. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  63. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  64. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  65. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  66. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  67. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  68. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  69. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  70. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  71. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  72. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  73. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  74. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  75. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  76. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  77. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  78. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  79. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  80. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  81. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  82. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  83. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  84. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  85. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  86. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  87. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  88. Now I know this debate has been going on for a while but the more I think about it the more It amazes me that Liberals actually think they are for “freedom” when they support this sort of nonsense.

    To make this clear, Liberals and Democrats want to force PRIVATE insurance companies with PRIVATE owners to not have the FREEDOM to operate their business in their own terms.

    Now I want to point out some of the arguments Liberals are using for this nonsense.

    “They already covering Viagra, they should also cover contraception”
    Their is NO mandate to cover Viagra! insurance companies do it to attract more male clients! This is strictly profit based!

    “It will save them more money in the long run if they do so”
    Even if that is the case (which I seriously doubt) isn’t it still up to the company to do so? Should companies also be mandate to give monthly check-ups to people with higher risks of cancer because it will save them money in the long run as well? I mean since when was the government to
    nanny of private business?

    “Woman are going to go broke having sex if this law is not passed”
    This is so offensive on so many levels it is ridiculous, MOST women have sex within their financial means and wont’t be seriously effected by the measure.
    But most importantly SEX is NOT A RIGHT. No one should pay and co-pay any costs related to sex YOU VOLUNTARILY choose for, This whole notion that women need to be “Sexually Liberated” is just nonsense.

    But what do you think?
    @Bash

    If that is really the case then why did this law need to be passed? Why was Sandra fluke complaining about going broke having sex?

  89. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  90. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  91. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  92. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  93. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  94. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  95. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  96. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  97. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  98. Have you ever wondered what it woulld be like to be financially independent ? When was the last time you didn’t have a credit card? When was the last time that you where able to go shopping with out thinking about having enought money to pay the rest of the bills?

    Wouldn’t be nice to be free?
    What are you doing to accomlish those dreams?
    If you would be able to do something to be debt free, to be able to go shopping freely would you do it?

  99. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  100. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  101. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  102. Now I know this debate has been going on for a while but the more I think about it the more It amazes me that Liberals actually think they are for “freedom” when they support this sort of nonsense.

    To make this clear, Liberals and Democrats want to force PRIVATE insurance companies with PRIVATE owners to not have the FREEDOM to operate their business in their own terms.

    Now I want to point out some of the arguments Liberals are using for this nonsense.

    “They already covering Viagra, they should also cover contraception”
    Their is NO mandate to cover Viagra! insurance companies do it to attract more male clients! This is strictly profit based!

    “It will save them more money in the long run if they do so”
    Even if that is the case (which I seriously doubt) isn’t it still up to the company to do so? Should companies also be mandate to give monthly check-ups to people with higher risks of cancer because it will save them money in the long run as well? I mean since when was the government to
    nanny of private business?

    “Woman are going to go broke having sex if this law is not passed”
    This is so offensive on so many levels it is ridiculous, MOST women have sex within their financial means and wont’t be seriously effected by the measure.
    But most importantly SEX is NOT A RIGHT. No one should pay and co-pay any costs related to sex YOU VOLUNTARILY choose for, This whole notion that women need to be “Sexually Liberated” is just nonsense.

    But what do you think?
    @Bash

    If that is really the case then why did this law need to be passed? Why was Sandra fluke complaining about going broke having sex?

  103. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  104. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  105. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  106. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  107. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  108. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  109. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  110. Now I know this debate has been going on for a while but the more I think about it the more It amazes me that Liberals actually think they are for “freedom” when they support this sort of nonsense.

    To make this clear, Liberals and Democrats want to force PRIVATE insurance companies with PRIVATE owners to not have the FREEDOM to operate their business in their own terms.

    Now I want to point out some of the arguments Liberals are using for this nonsense.

    “They already covering Viagra, they should also cover contraception”
    Their is NO mandate to cover Viagra! insurance companies do it to attract more male clients! This is strictly profit based!

    “It will save them more money in the long run if they do so”
    Even if that is the case (which I seriously doubt) isn’t it still up to the company to do so? Should companies also be mandate to give monthly check-ups to people with higher risks of cancer because it will save them money in the long run as well? I mean since when was the government to
    nanny of private business?

    “Woman are going to go broke having sex if this law is not passed”
    This is so offensive on so many levels it is ridiculous, MOST women have sex within their financial means and wont’t be seriously effected by the measure.
    But most importantly SEX is NOT A RIGHT. No one should pay and co-pay any costs related to sex YOU VOLUNTARILY choose for, This whole notion that women need to be “Sexually Liberated” is just nonsense.

    But what do you think?
    @Bash

    If that is really the case then why did this law need to be passed? Why was Sandra fluke complaining about going broke having sex?

  111. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  112. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  113. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  114. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  115. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  116. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  117. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  118. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  119. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  120. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  121. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  122. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  123. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  124. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  125. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  126. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  127. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  128. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  129. Have you ever wondered what it woulld be like to be financially independent ? When was the last time you didn’t have a credit card? When was the last time that you where able to go shopping with out thinking about having enought money to pay the rest of the bills?

    Wouldn’t be nice to be free?
    What are you doing to accomlish those dreams?
    If you would be able to do something to be debt free, to be able to go shopping freely would you do it?

  130. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  131. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  132. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  133. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  134. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  135. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  136. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  137. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  138. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  139. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  140. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  141. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  142. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  143. I want to have enough money so that I will not have to worry about money for the rest of my life. I want to do what I want to do. I hate working a job I hate just to pay the bills. So what is financial freedom?

  144. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  145. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  146. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  147. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  148. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  149. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  150. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  151. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  152. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  153. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  154. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  155. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  156. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  157. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  158. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  159. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  160. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  161. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  162. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  163. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  164. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  165. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  166. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  167. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  168. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  169. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  170. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  171. How do you plan to become wealthy. (if at all)

    Please explain why you think your route to financial security is the “best” method.

  172. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  173. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  174. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  175. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  176. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  177. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  178. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  179. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  180. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  181. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  182. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  183. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  184. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  185. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  186. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  187. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  188. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  189. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  190. We are in the process of signing papers with Financial Freedom but I worry about them since the government seized their parent company IndyMac Bank. They say they can still make loans, but I worry if they will be able to continue the monthly payments. If I went with them, could I transfer to another lender at a later time?

  191. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  192. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  193. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  194. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  195. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  196. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  197. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  198. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  199. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  200. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  201. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  202. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  203. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  204. Now I know this debate has been going on for a while but the more I think about it the more It amazes me that Liberals actually think they are for “freedom” when they support this sort of nonsense.

    To make this clear, Liberals and Democrats want to force PRIVATE insurance companies with PRIVATE owners to not have the FREEDOM to operate their business in their own terms.

    Now I want to point out some of the arguments Liberals are using for this nonsense.

    “They already covering Viagra, they should also cover contraception”
    Their is NO mandate to cover Viagra! insurance companies do it to attract more male clients! This is strictly profit based!

    “It will save them more money in the long run if they do so”
    Even if that is the case (which I seriously doubt) isn’t it still up to the company to do so? Should companies also be mandate to give monthly check-ups to people with higher risks of cancer because it will save them money in the long run as well? I mean since when was the government to
    nanny of private business?

    “Woman are going to go broke having sex if this law is not passed”
    This is so offensive on so many levels it is ridiculous, MOST women have sex within their financial means and wont’t be seriously effected by the measure.
    But most importantly SEX is NOT A RIGHT. No one should pay and co-pay any costs related to sex YOU VOLUNTARILY choose for, This whole notion that women need to be “Sexually Liberated” is just nonsense.

    But what do you think?
    @Bash

    If that is really the case then why did this law need to be passed? Why was Sandra fluke complaining about going broke having sex?

  205. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  206. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  207. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  208. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  209. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  210. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  211. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  212. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  213. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  214. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  215. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  216. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  217. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  218. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  219. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  220. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  221. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  222. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  223. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  224. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  225. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  226. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  227. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  228. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  229. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  230. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  231. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  232. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion or falsify abortion itself :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father ! Better to defend the attitude as it is instead of telling people advices about how to fit with it.
    By the way stop following people trying to track some mistakes expression and get to the subject itself instead.

    However you dodge you can not hide this fact :

    Abortion = There is a way to opt out for women even with having sex, but there is no way to opt out for men = SEXISM
    Tax payers are not responsible for my sperm ? Then why they are responsible for a woman’s egg by giving her a paid pregnancy leave ? hypocrisy

  233. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  234. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  235. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  236. Step 8 – Understanding The Ebb And Flow Of The Money Cycle

    what does ebb mean? i searched the dictionary about ebb but i still can’t seem to understand about it

  237. Now I know this debate has been going on for a while but the more I think about it the more It amazes me that Liberals actually think they are for “freedom” when they support this sort of nonsense.

    To make this clear, Liberals and Democrats want to force PRIVATE insurance companies with PRIVATE owners to not have the FREEDOM to operate their business in their own terms.

    Now I want to point out some of the arguments Liberals are using for this nonsense.

    “They already covering Viagra, they should also cover contraception”
    Their is NO mandate to cover Viagra! insurance companies do it to attract more male clients! This is strictly profit based!

    “It will save them more money in the long run if they do so”
    Even if that is the case (which I seriously doubt) isn’t it still up to the company to do so? Should companies also be mandate to give monthly check-ups to people with higher risks of cancer because it will save them money in the long run as well? I mean since when was the government to
    nanny of private business?

    “Woman are going to go broke having sex if this law is not passed”
    This is so offensive on so many levels it is ridiculous, MOST women have sex within their financial means and wont’t be seriously effected by the measure.
    But most importantly SEX is NOT A RIGHT. No one should pay and co-pay any costs related to sex YOU VOLUNTARILY choose for, This whole notion that women need to be “Sexually Liberated” is just nonsense.

    But what do you think?
    @Bash

    If that is really the case then why did this law need to be passed? Why was Sandra fluke complaining about going broke having sex?

  238. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  239. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  240. I have heard only good things about this book, does anyone know if The practical Guide to Total Financial Freedom: Volume 1 is as good as they say? Im thinking about buying it for sure at my bookstore, anyone love it?
    I found it at amazon and might order it:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FPractical-Guide-Total-Financial-Freedom%2Fdp%2F1411620542&tag=theinfosc-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325

  241. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/chapters/htm/index2007_chap3.cfm

    For example, one of their categories is “monetary freedom.” Monetary freedom according to them is highest when inflation is low. HOWEVER, inflation is low in first world countries like the U.S. because the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT manipulates interest rates to keep it low. In the U.S., banks are COERCED to insure themselves with the federal reserve.

    Other categories include “business freedom” (for absence of regulation in general), “financial freedom” (for absense of banking regulation), “investment freedom” (for absence of investment regulation) and “labor freedom” (for absense of government enforced labor rights).
    Do laisez-faire cons really believe that the most primitive of third world countries can compete with the U.S., Europe, and Japan on regulation? You don’t even have to look at the regulations. Just look at all the departments: Department of Labor, SEC, FDA, OSHEA, FDIC, and plenty more that not even I know about.

    HERE’S A LIST OF ONLY A HANDFUL OF US REGULATIONS
    http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1

    Just one example. Child labor is illegal in this country, but legal or in practice allowed in third world countries.
    andy g,

    You bash liberals all the time. The difference is that I provide facts from third party sources to back up my arguments.
    Ryan,

    The problem is the RIGHT-WING site does not measure economic freedom. They define economic freedom as absense of government regulation in a host of categories. The problem is their index does not measure this.

    This RIGHT-WING think tank is spinning reality to support what they already believe in.

  242. Please read these two scenarios

    First
    A student who do not want to become a mother in the middle east had sex with a man and got pregnant, and abortion is not allowed in the middle east. Once she had her baby she also had a responsibility on her because of unwanted motherhood, and due to hard, and critical study material (+ Some ruthless exams) beside the child she was unable to success in her exams in college.

    Second
    A student who do not want to be a father had protected sex but unfortunately the condom failed, the friend decided to keep the baby EVEN he emphasized for her from the begin he do not want to be a father and he was unable to financially abort due to SEXIST laws. He was unable to continue support a forced UNWANTED child and pay college fees at the same time.

    In the first case the woman did not have an access to Physical abortion and hence she lost failed in her college, in the second case the man was not able to continue his college because of financial problems and no availability for financial abortion.

    So no access to financial abortion may have an impact on the man’s life too.

    Now let’s hear the feminist boring answers about forced fatherhoodfinancial abortion :

    1. CondomContraception etc = CondomContraceptionmorning-after pilletc
    2. Pants on (Or wrap it) = Women also is to get her pants on (Or wrap it)
    3. Vasectomy = AbstinenceCoilDiaphragmMorning-After Pill Hysterectomy
    4. You knew the risks (OR old enough to know them = risk to financial support) = She knew the risks (Or old enough to know them = Risk to become pregnant financial abort)
    5. No one forces you to throw your sperm = No one forces you to hold a penis or NOT to do oral or anal
    6. Be a gay = Be a lesbian
    7. Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Child support) = Perhaps this is thing you should think about before taking pants off (Financial abortion)
    8. I decide to have to have baby or not and be responsible for your own actions (I did not force you to sex, You play with me then I decide) = I decide to financially abort or not and be financially responsible for your own actions (I did not rape, You play with me then I decide)

    Let me answer :

    Condom : May fail
    Vasectomy : Is a pro-choice medical procedure, women still have an access to avoid motherhood WITHOUT having to do a pro-choice medical procedure so the fairness and equality imply that same thing to be applicable for men. Vasectomy has a chance of 1 over 1000 to fail and make the man fertile again. It is NOT 100 certain to protect him from unwanted fatherhood by Vasectomy. Women still have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex and men also must have 100% certain choice EVEN with having sex. Added to this Vasectomy reversal when the man is ready to be a father has a risk to fail, so after all these argument we conclude that vasectomy is NOT to be used as a defense in the abortion and fatherhood coercion debate. Yes abortion is medical procedure but it is NOT pro-choice, it comes after sex not before.
    Pants on : In any other instance if a woman have to choose either her freedom to become pregnant or risk to lose her job then this would be considered an abusediscrimination so making the man between two choices (either sexual freedom or possible unwanted fatherhood) is also abusediscrimination.
    You know the risks : Knowing the risks by itself NEVER means the law is fair, the woman also know the risks in case of financial abortion is allowed so does this mean financial abortion is fair now JUST because of “Know the risks” ? What if a higher supreme judge said : “Anyone who smack someone will have 2 years prison and 200 000 USD penalty, people you know the risks now” Does this mean the law is fair ? So it is better to defend the attitude about forced fatherhood by some other means.

    And so on for the rest of excuses (Actually a reply is summarized directly after them).

    So abortion means a woman has 100% certain choice for NOT becoming a mother, however there is no 100% choice for men except not having sex which I just refuted it and proved it is an abuse. Telling a man “You chose NOT to use condomvasectomy” which is the most common defense in this debate NEVER means that a man gave up his full independent choice on his wallet, What if “a woman chose NOT to use morning-after pill or coil”. Does this mean she gave up her right to control her body ?
    As far as for financial abortion they say :

    9. Great ! we would have 10 children with no father to support them = Great ! we would have one father supports 10 children and then go to prison for failure !
    10. What is the fault of the child = (S)he is innocent, and what is his fault if his condom or her morning-after pill failed ?
    11. Your fault to have sex = Her fault to have sex, and by the way if sex is fault let’s ban it and make it for marriage couples only !
    12. It is simple ! Do not have sex until you are ready to have a child (Or else support himher) = Do not have sex with someone who is not ready to have a child (Or else abort himher OR handle the responsibility alone)
    About the excuse number 9, children do NOT have to live in poverty because of these arguments. Governments (Most) which allow abortion already giving PAID pregnancy leave respecting her right and choice to become pregnant (Paying for her own choice) + Ability to go for the same payment work after pregnancy + Number of free abortions sometimes.
    So also as governments respect both choices to abort or not and financially support both choices and so governments must respect man’s right to financially abort and handle the child support (Paying for his own choice not to become a father). Women already have a right to access financial abortion which comes by the physical abortion itself, and if she decided to keep the baby then she gave up that right. It is exactly as when the man agree to support the child DURING pregnancy, by doing so he agree to give up his financial abortion right. There is no discrimination here.
    About the excuse number 12, A woman can also have sex even without being ready to have a child and still have a way to avoid forced motherhood, and hence the man also is to have sex even without being ready to become a father and still have a way to avoid forced fatherhood. EQUALITY means !
    “It seems like men just want to have sex and then complain when a woman gets pregnant. If the only thing you have to do to ensure you don’t get a woman pregnant is NOT have sex, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal.”

    What a nice try to build a defense for fatherhood coercion (Financially), but what about applying the same argument to sustain financial abortion :

    It seems like women just want to have sex then complain of financial abortion. If the only way to avoid financial abortion is to ensure you do not get a pregnant, I’d say that’s a pretty good deal. Or have sex with only with a man who really want to be a father !
    Do you want to compare 18 years of payments as consequence for the man with a 500$ abortion and some feeling of distress and other things for several days after abortion ?

  243. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  244. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  245. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  246. “One of the primary changes brought about the new law is the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the Federal Reserve.”

    This is a blatant example of the fox guarding the hen house.

    “This new agency will have sweeping powers to regulate virtually every kind of lending activity and lender, from the largest banks to the smallest pawn shops. … But there is one large group of lenders that escapes oversight by the new agency: car dealers/auto lenders.”

    And liberals wonder why conservatives complain about freedoms being usurped. ^^^ THIS is a perfect example.

    My question: Do I have this right? The Federal Reserve can dictate how pawn shops can institute lending practices, but not car dealers?

    What’s the point here? To ‘protect consumers’? If that’s the case, then why are car dealers void from this oversight? Personally, I work at a car dealership where predatory lending is commonly the norm (28% loan origination fees along with 25% interest rates….and that’s all profit for the banks, not the car dealers….the car dealers still need to profit from their sales.)

    WTF sense does any of this make?!

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/110085/what-financial-reform-means

  247. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  248. where people will have to go hungry because the realities of the instability of capitalism become more and more clear? i mean they try to give us the illusion that we have freedom, but when we’ve lost everything, we’ll know of the failure of what this global system is

    i hope it happens soon

  249. Hi there

    My pregnant girlfriend recently broke up with me and I’m confused about what to do when the baby is born. She has two children already to other men (both suggested abortion, one is not around and the other barely makes and effort) and I loved and cared for them as if they were my own however things changed for her and we split up. I was not excited when first finding out she was pregnant (she saw baby and I saw baby, costs AND three kids) I grew into it and I am looking forward to being a proper Dad.

    Where my dilemma lies is that I am from one side of the country and she is from the other. After news that her Dad doesn’t have long to live we returned to her hometown so she and her kids had as much time with her Dad as possible. Unfortunately, five weeks later, she decided that she didn’t want me to be a part of things. Despite intending to move back at an appropriate time after her father passes she has since said that she will probably not return to the west coast (where we were and where I’m from).

    Her hometown is a country town two hours from the nearest major town and six hours from the nearest major city. I’m not a country person by any means and job opportunities are scarce. I also love the west coast. All of my family and friends are on the west coast.

    What I would like feedback on is what is best for my child. My three options are as follows:

    1) Give up my life, support network and potentially happiness while living on the east coast and being 50% of a father. My girlfriend’s other two children spend time with different people often so my child spending time with me wouldn’t be a huge dilemma other than my girlfriend is very controlling. When he/she starts school I would prefer that he/she is treated the same as his/her siblings and I worry that me taking him/her away will affect all of the kids (especially as the oldest has no father and the second child’s Dad comes along when he pleases). I know that I will make friends and develop a new support network in time but until then it would be me and baby (half the time). That’s it.

    2) Give up my child and live on the west coast (not an option to me). As sad as it sounds, my child will live a happy and healthy life without me around. I know this as my girlfriend’s older kids have a lot of love and support without their Dads around and mine will receive the same. My girlfriend is a fantastic mother and I know my child will not go without. Also, it means that the kids won’t have to deal with ‘why does he/she get to go here but I don’t’.

    3) Return to site work. I used to work on remote mine sites and it gave me financial freedom however it meant living away from home for 2-4 weeks at a time and living life during my one week break. Work at these sites consisted of 13 days of 10-12 hour days followed by solitude (or binge drinking with bogans/rednecks – not my cup of tea) until sleep. My employer was very happy with my work and has offered me a position if I choose to return. This option means having no life for 2-4 weeks while I work and having no life but being able to see my child for the week that I am off work. If I choose to see friends or family on the west coast I would have to sacrifice time with my child or they would have to fly to the east coast, something that can become costly nor would I expect people to do. It would also mean asking (and expecting) to have my child from the moment I get my girlfriend’s hometown until the moment I leave (roughly five nights – there is a lot of travel involved and it’s limited time so I feel this is a reasonable expectation, even as a newborn). This would be OK while all of her kids are younger but will be questioned as they get older. I would be happy to take the other kids too but I’m not so sure she would be happy with that.

    So this is probably a strange question but that’s what I am facing and I would like to know what people think will be best for my child. I would love to be an active father but I also don’t want my child to be screwed up. He/she and his/her siblings will have a hard enough time as it is.

    Thanks in advance for your answers.

  250. How are you going to become financially successful?

    And before one of you type out a long depiction of success is different to everyone, let me state what kind of success i mean. financial freedom, in the sense of doing what you want, when you want, and how you want. You don’t have to work, it isn’t a necessity, but if you want to you can.
    You basically are being paid while you sleep. [passive income/cash flow]

    Now, my question is what do you plan on doing to reach this success and how are you going to do it? What as in affiliate marketing, writing eBooks, or MLM….? And how, as in writing out my goals, taking action, and things such as how soon are you going to take action?

    Well, i hope i clarified the question.

  251. Would you believe anything from a left-wing partisan website?

    Heritage take “economic freedom” to mean freedom from government regulation. However, that is not what their index measures.
    http:/