Fox News Nihilism! Pregnant Teens!

[Cancel3]

Everyone I humiliate resorts to "you must be a troll". Your defeat is hard to face. I understand.

Your argument is that these 17 year old girls should be encouraged because of biological precedents set by lower animals.

I'd hardly call that a victory.

My argument is about what is best for these girls, for their families, and for society. (in that order)

I'd call that victory. Because you have done nothing but proclaim that they are biologically ready to reproduce and therefore are adults.

 

[Kamala Trump]

Your argument is that these 17 year old girls should be encouraged because of biological precedents set by lower animals.

Biological precedents set by lower animals? It was just a couple generations ago that people got married and had kids in their teens quite often.

Your anti-life, "wait till forty", "Beamers Before Children" propaganda is the aberration.

Take your anti-white eugenics elsewhere. ok, Pooky?

I'd hardly call that a victory.

You cannot recognize anything clearly. You're brainwashed.

My argument is about what is best for these girls, for their families, and for society. (in that order)

I'd call that victory. Because you have done nothing but proclaim that they are biologically ready to reproduce and therefore are adults.

That is the definition of adult, yes.

 

[Kamala Trump]

I actually think it's good to have large numbers of children these days.

When the fascists collapse the dollar through massive fiscal abuse and our society disintegrates, we will need lots of people to be "on our side" in all the street wars.

 

[Cancel3]

You are using a biological definition of adult to determine adulthood for our society. And just a couple of generations ago, it was perfectly ok for men to beat their wives, women were bsically property, and half of the children born didn't live to see adulthood.

And please point out where I said anything about waiting until you are 40 to have kids. For some reason you think its either having kids as soon as you hit puberty or wait until you are 40. Most people have their children in their late 20s or early 30s. The average life expectancy has gone up. In 1900 in the USA, life expectancy for men was 48.3 years and for women it was 51.1 years. In 1990 the life expectancy for men was 72.1 and for women it was 79.0. So we have added more than 2 decades to our lives, on average. So the fact that people married and had kids at such an early age is not relevant. They had to because their lives were much shorter. Also, since we were an agrarian society, children were seen as field hands that didn't have to be paid. Farming is now only a small portion of the population's livelihood and is largely mechanized. So the extra hands are not needed.


In order to do well in our society, one must be educated. These girls have chosen motherhood over education, thereby lowering their chances at a successful life.


In the book Future Shock, there is a chapter about the changes in our world. If you create a timeline based on events and inventions that changed the world or society instead of on years, the middle of the timeline would be around 1900. In other words, the average life for people around 1900 was more similar to that of ancient Rome than to modern times.

Using the standards of "a couple of generations ago" doesn't hold water when discussing what happens today.

 

[Kamala Trump]

You are using a biological definition of adult to determine adulthood for our society. And just a couple of generations ago, it was perfectly ok for men to beat their wives, women were bsically property, and half of the children born didn't live to see adulthood.

Don't comingle spousal abuse from the past with the beauty of childbirth. It's intellectually dishonest and cheap. Because some things from the past are negative doesn't mean having children is wrong.

And please point out where I said anything about waiting until you are 40 to have kids.

This just happens when you accept the consumerist/fascist lie that social status is the most important thing, even over the joys of family.

For some reason you think its either having kids as soon as you hit puberty or wait until you are 40. Most people have their children in their late 20s or early 30s. The average life expectancy has gone up. In 1900 in the USA, life expectancy for men was 48.3 years and for women it was 51.1 years. In 1990 the life expectancy for men was 72.1 and for women it was 79.0. So we have added more than 2 decades to our lives, on average.

But idiot. Women cannot have children any later in life, and that's what matters. Maybe they've added a few years, but maximum health for mother and infant is still in the first years of fertility. That's the reality.

So the fact that people married and had kids at such an early age is not relevant. They had to because their lives were much shorter.

This argument was refuted above. Wome are still maximally fertile in the early years, despite a longer life.

Also, since we were an agrarian society, children were seen as field hands that didn't have to be paid. Farming is now only a small portion of the population's livelihood and is largely mechanized. So the extra hands are not needed.

They are wanted. It's about love, you genocidal freak. And about having large fighting force after society breaks down from monetary abuse, and totalitarian energy management.

In order to do well in our society, one must be educated. These girls have chosen motherhood over education, thereby lowering their chances at a successful life.

Some consider motherhood the ultimate joy, not the empty ambition of climbing a corporate ladder.

In the book Future Shock, there is a chapter about the changes in our world. If you create a timeline based on events and inventions that changed the world or society instead of on years, the middle of the timeline would be around 1900. In other words, the average life for people around 1900 was more similar to that of ancient Rome than to modern times.

Using the standards of "a couple of generations ago" doesn't hold water when discussing what happens today.

Again, lifespan is not the issue. It's the biological clock, and we all know it's real, so stop your genocidal antihuman idiocy.

 

[uscitizen]

You know Sol perhaps AHZ is right and we should kick out the kids when they reach puberty. ?

Strange how more kids going on 30 are moving in with mom and dad now-a-days though.

More children / grandchildren living with their parents than ever before

 

[Kamala Trump]

You know Sol perhaps AHZ is right and we should kick out the kids when they reach puberty. ?

Strange how more kids going on 30 are moving in with mom and dad now-a-days though.

More children / grandchildren living with their parents than ever before

I didn't say kick kids out when they hit puberty. I think a child can pull families together actually. It has also been the norm for multiple generations to live together. A new home for every generation is just marketing. You should know better.

 

[Cancel3]

I can see that Asshat wants to define women as child bearers and mothers, without any worry about their having any sort of life outside the home.

And ass, when the social breakdown you seem to cherish happens, having more mouths to feed without having a way to feed them is not going to be an asset. You might be able to field more soldiers, but after you win how do you feed them?

Your arguments are nonsense. You have accused me of hating humanity and yet you show no concern for the life of the mothers that are having these children.

You talk about the joys of having a child, and yet the stresses of being financially strapped will ruin much of those joys. Your plan also perpetuates a lack of education and a lack of goals for their future.

And my mentioning domestic abuse is simply bringing up what went hand in hand (very often) with very young mothers. A woman who is a mother at 17 has far fewer options. This means that have far fewer places to go if hubby starts being violent. Today many women leave after the first violent episode, but that is because they either have no children or they are capable of supporting themselves.


Besides, your ideas of creating a societal model based on a future collapse and revolution is stupid. Its no more logical than the idiots who were sure nuclear war would happen. It is no more logical than those survivalists who moved out into the boonies 20 years ago and have been waiting.

This is not about the beauty of motherhood. This is about girls having kids because they think it will garner them attention and make them popular.

I have known quite a few women who gave birth at a young age. Not one of them would recommend it.

 

[Epicurus]

In his ramblings, you get glimpses of the sort of society AssHat wants to live in.

It's hilarious.

 

[Cancel3]

In his ramblings, you get glimpses of the sort of society AssHat wants to live in.

It's hilarious.

I think he believes he will be "somebody" in a postapocalyptic world. Apparently the standards will be much lower.

Either that or the neanderthal types will have an easier time.

 

[uscitizen]

AHZ does not know what kind of world he wants to live in. Perhaps one day he will get it sorted out.

 

[Kamala Trump]

AHZ does not know what kind of world he wants to live in. Perhaps one day he will get it sorted out.

I know precisely.

 

[uscitizen]

Just like you knew precisely a few years ago ?

 

[Kamala Trump]

Just like you knew precisely a few years ago ?

I want the same kind of world, i was just under the wrong impression about certain ideologies and how far their proponents are willing to go to twist them into instruments of oppression and destruction.