Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: Divorce, single parents and step-families

Divorce, single parents and step-families 18 Jun 2014 05:15 #21

  • Frog
  • Frog's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Boarder 
  • Government is simply a conspiracy against a nation!
  • Posts: 2072
  • Likes received: 1701
sketti wrote:
Frog wrote:

As I said I have no idea if she is a lesbian or not and quite frankly I don't see what bearing that has on the stuff she presents which people can verify, agree or disagree with. .


And right there frog, you've touched upon a very real, growing vein running through this place.

Right there.

You see what you want to see I guess.

It would probably be best if they consider the information she provides rather than her personality imho


It's not her personality. It's her sexuality that is a problem for timesarrow and many others on this forum. What the woman says is moot because they can't see past this tiny little detail.

timesorrow has already addressed you on that issue. Afaik she isn't a lesbian but as I don't know her personally I couldn't say one way or the other and it's of no consequence to me. She raises some valid points and she has taken the time to research the subject, she can and does politely discuss the issues she speaks and writes about. People can take or leave what she says but dismissing her entirely seems rash to me. Which is the point I was making and letting other people put you off investigating someone's work would be unwise. Some of the best info I have found has been by following links other people were trying to discredit for whatever reasons.

And I don't care how far our differences seem to have gone in the recent past, but I damn well know that that's not a view you share, so it begs the question, why is it suddenly so acceptable now?


Our differences are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned when we are discussing a subject, because it's the subject that is the issue nothing more nor less. Maybe misunderstanding that was a cause of issues that we may have had? As you know I don't run round labelling people or socking up and stalking them. I don't go round dictating to people or destroying things they are involved in quite the opposite in fact. I do my own thing and if I don't like a situation I deal with the situation I don't mess about playing silly games with people.

Psketti when did I ever give you the impression that I don't accept everyone's views? I don't have to agree with the people I discuss things with in order to discuss a subject respectfully (that goes for Novum and Diamondgeezer from my experience). In fact I would far rather discuss things with people I disagree with, than those I do provided they can give a reasoned argument. Which would seem to be the case in this tread. I extend the same courtesy to anyone equally as that is what free speech is all about and I have always been in favour of free speech.

I don't see us throwing one liners at each other with a little gif anims as a punch line do you? That's because it's a discussion not a bun fight or point scoring exorcise. I agree with the overall premise of the argument, I just can't see it in such isolated terms. Because the effects are brought about as a result of a combination of issues all of which form part of a much wider agenda that's at play imho.

"Whenever you're in conflict with someone, there is one factor that can make the difference between damaging your relationship and deepening it. That factor is attitude." William James
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Seaic

Divorce, single parents and step-families 21 Jun 2014 02:03 #22

  • sketti
  • sketti's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1249
  • Likes received: 304
Frog wrote:

You see what you want to see I guess.
.


That would only work if it was only myself who saw it.



Our differences are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned when we are discussing a subject, because it's the subject that is the issue nothing more nor less. Maybe misunderstanding that was a cause of issues that we may have had? As you know I don't run round labelling people or socking up and stalking them. I don't go round dictating to people or destroying things they are involved in quite the opposite in fact. I do my own thing and if I don't like a situation I deal with the situation I don't mess about playing silly games with people.

Psketti when did I ever give you the impression that I don't accept everyone's views? I don't have to agree with the people I discuss things with in order to discuss a subject respectfully (that goes for Novum and Diamondgeezer from my experience). In fact I would far rather discuss things with people I disagree with, than those I do provided they can give a reasoned argument. Which would seem to be the case in this tread. I extend the same courtesy to anyone equally as that is what free speech is all about and I have always been in favour of free speech.

I don't see us throwing one liners at each other with a little gif anims as a punch line do you? That's because it's a discussion not a bun fight or point scoring exorcise. I agree with the overall premise of the argument, I just can't see it in such isolated terms. Because the effects are brought about as a result of a combination of issues all of which form part of a much wider agenda that's at play imho

Maybe misunderstanding that was a cause of issues that we may have had?


Yes, I guess that's possible.

Psketti when did I ever give you the impression that I don't accept everyone's views?



And no, you haven't ever given me such an impression.


But I'm clearly not 'viewing' things the same way as you are because we're very obviously seeing different pictures when it comes down to an over all opinion on here. From where you're sitting, its a forum of free speech, where I'm sitting, it's a forum where the same groups of people are targeted over and over again and this in turn breeds hate. Hate against individual fractions of society.
At the very least, that feeds hate... but its all heading in the same direction.

This will never be right on any level to me and is only serving to make our bigger problems seem so much further away.

Continually hating on whole nations of people helps what exactly?
Posting the absolute worst acts and degrading events involving homosexuals and lesbians help who?
Believing you're somehow better than someone else based purely on where you were born does what to help us all in the grander scheme of things?

Those questions aren't directed at you... more an expression.

The subjects that dominate this forum are hate filled and that's why I have a problem with it.
And yes, I could just f$*ck off and not bother.... but somehow I can't. That's clearly more my bone than yours and I deal with it in my posting style which isn't likely to change anytime soon. Sorry if that's not the answer you wanted but I'm being honest. Might as well.

We're not gonna agree on this... that much is clear... so we'll just have to get on with it and see where it goes.
Trolling myself in the mirror at night...
Last Edit: 21 Jun 2014 02:05 by sketti.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Divorce, single parents and step-families 21 Jun 2014 02:30 #23

  • Orangeaid
  • Orangeaid's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • Posts: 11646
  • Likes received: 8032
sketti wrote:
Frog wrote:

As I said I have no idea if she is a lesbian or not and quite frankly I don't see what bearing that has on the stuff she presents which people can verify, agree or disagree with. .


And right there frog, you've touched upon a very real, growing vein running through this place.

Right there.

It would probably be best if they consider the information she provides rather than her personality imho


It's not her personality. It's her sexuality that is a problem for timesarrow and many others on this forum. What the woman says is moot because they can't see past this tiny little detail.

And I don't care how far our differences seem to have gone in the recent past, but I damn well know that that's not a view you share, so it begs the question, why is it suddenly so acceptable now?
What are you? The love child of Druid and Fairy Princess after FP had gender reassignment surgery?

Typical stalinist thought police. "People must now all worship gays and lesbians ... anyone who disproves will be sent to the gulag".

No one has to respect someone else's sexuality such that it's idolatry.

The LGBBQ choose to promote their sexuality like some badge of honor and then shout about how "oppressed" they are. They're not oppressed. They're not denied jobs. Its illegal to do so. People 50+ are regularly denied jobs for "valid" reasons (according to the 25 year old in HR doing the recruiting). Where's their mouthpiece??

LGBBQ can catch the same bus, drink from the same water fountain and go to the same theatres and shops as everyone else. They are not oppressed.

That lesbian you tube (a jewess by chance? Many prominent you tubers are) "loves" men because she is a lesbian? She's a male supremacist? The LGBBQ has spread so much hate against all and sundry yet expects / demands "tolerance". And this one is a supremacist? Does she miss not having a penis?

I have no respect for a man hating or man loving lesbian. They demand "tolerance" but gives none in return. She warrants no respect nor any understanding. She and her girlies mimic men under the sheets with strap ons and other penile shaped projectiles. Many hate men but enjoy penis shaped objects.

What self-centred narcissistic misandrists those ones are .... and justifies it because she's a woman who likes pussy.

And this one is woman who likes pussy but also idolises the penis.

Sorry. She is extremely messed up.
Last Edit: 21 Jun 2014 02:44 by Orangeaid.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Seaic

Divorce, single parents and step-families 21 Jun 2014 02:46 #24

  • sketti
  • sketti's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1249
  • Likes received: 304
Orangeaid wrote:
What are you? The love child of Druid and Fairy Princess after FP had gender reassignment surgery?

Typical stalinist thought police. "People must now all worship gays and lesbians ... anyone who disproves will be sent to the gulag".

No one has to respect someone else's sexuality such that it's idolatry.

The LGBBQ choose to promote their sexuality like some badge of honor and then shout about how "oppressed" they are. They're not oppressed. They're not denied jobs. Its illegal to do so. People 50+ are regularly denied jobs for "valid" reasons (according to the 25 year old in HR doing the recruiting). Where's their mouthpiece??

LGBBQ can catch the same bus, drink from the same water fountain and go to the same theatres and shops as everyone else. They are not oppressed.

That lesbian you tube (a jewess by chance? Many prominent you tubers are) hates men because she is a lesbian. That's wrong. The LGBBQ has spread so much hate against all and sundry yet expects / demands "tolerance".

I have no respect for a man hating lesbian. She demands "tolerance" but gives none in return. She warrants no respect nor any understanding. Yet no doubt her and her girlies mimic men under the sheets with strap ons and other penile shaped projectiles. They hate men but enjoy penis shaped objects.

What a self-centred narcissistic misandrist she is .... and justifies it because she's a woman who likes pussy.

And this one is woman who likes pussy but also idolises the penis.

Sorry. She is extremely messed up.



There, there koolaid.... you just let it all out :thumbup:

Your rather enlightening but so very true personality is shining like a beacon. Keep up the spendid work.
Trolling myself in the mirror at night...
Last Edit: 21 Jun 2014 02:48 by sketti.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Divorce, single parents and step-families 21 Jun 2014 02:50 #25

  • Seaic
  • Seaic's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Voluntarily Inactive
  • Posts: 1910
  • Likes received: 2150
Bzzz, bzzzzz, bzzzzz. Go away, little sketti-fly.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Divorce, single parents and step-families 21 Jun 2014 02:54 #26

  • sketti
  • sketti's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1249
  • Likes received: 304
Seaic wrote:
Bzzz, bzzzzz, bzzzzz. Go away, little sketti-fly.


I'd suggest you try and make me if I thought you were a worthy opponent.
Trolling myself in the mirror at night...
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Seaic

Divorce, single parents and step-families 21 Jun 2014 03:03 #27

  • Seaic
  • Seaic's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Voluntarily Inactive
  • Posts: 1910
  • Likes received: 2150
Thank you for the compliment - I am more than glad you don't consider me a worthy opponent. :yup:
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: sketti

Divorce, single parents and step-families 21 Jun 2014 03:06 #28

  • sketti
  • sketti's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1249
  • Likes received: 304
Good then.

As we were :cool:
Trolling myself in the mirror at night...
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Seaic

Divorce, single parents and step-families 21 Jun 2014 03:31 #29

  • Orangeaid
  • Orangeaid's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • Posts: 11646
  • Likes received: 8032
Sketti, go back and clean your caravan. The LGBBQ is funded by the ADL and uses the same tactics as the ADL.

LGBBQ choose to identify themselves by their sexuality. It's THEIR choice and THEIR issue. Using their own psycho babble like Karen Straughan (lesbian with multiple children - to whom? How?) to justify male supremacism or male hatred is plain stupid.

No one has to respect and idolise someone purely because that person chooses to identify themselves by their sexuality.

Its nothing but modern day golden calf for the ignorant amd ill informed, such as yourself.
Last Edit: 21 Jun 2014 04:42 by Orangeaid.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Seaic

Divorce, single parents and step-families 21 Jun 2014 03:46 #30

  • Orangeaid
  • Orangeaid's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • Posts: 11646
  • Likes received: 8032
sketti wrote:
Seaic wrote:
Bzzz, bzzzzz, bzzzzz. Go away, little sketti-fly.

I'd suggest you try and make me if I thought you were a worthy opponent.
A worthy opponent to you need only an IQ of 10.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Seaic

Divorce, single parents and step-families 22 Jun 2014 05:14 #31

  • sketti
  • sketti's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1249
  • Likes received: 304
Orangeaid wrote:
Sketti, go back and clean your caravan. .


Bit wrecked to answer this just now kooliad, not that there's alot I can say :D
Trolling myself in the mirror at night...
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Divorce, single parents and step-families 26 Jun 2014 23:24 #32

  • Seaic
  • Seaic's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Voluntarily Inactive
  • Posts: 1910
  • Likes received: 2150
A good article I just read from an American perspective. I don't agree with all of it, but it's still a good read nonetheless.

opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/08/how-single-motherhood-hurts-kids/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
By KAY S. HYMOWITZ FEBRUARY 8, 2014 2:30 PM

The last few weeks have brought an unusual convergence of voices from both the center and the left about a topic that is typically part of conservative rhetorical territory: poverty and single-parent families. Just as some conservatives have started talking seriously about rising inequality and stagnant incomes, some liberals have finally begun to admit that our stubbornly high rates of poverty and social and economic immobility are closely entwined with the rise of single motherhood.

But that’s where agreement ends. Consistent with its belief in self-sufficiency, the right wants to see more married-couple families. For the left, widespread single motherhood is a fact of modern life that has to be met with vigorously expanded government support. Liberals point out, correctly, that poverty rates for single-parent households are lower in most other advanced economies, where the welfare state is more generous.

That argument ignores a troubling truth: Single-parent families are not the same in the United States as elsewhere. Simply put, unmarried parents here are more likely to enter into parenthood in ways guaranteed to create turmoil in their children’s lives. The typical American single mother is younger than her counterpart in other developed nations. She is also more likely to live in a community where single motherhood is the norm rather than an alternative life choice.

The sociologist Kathryn Edin has shown that unlike their more educated peers, these younger, low-income women tend to stop using contraception several weeks or months after starting a sexual relationship. The pregnancy — not lasting affection and mutual decision-making — that often follows is the impetus for announcing that they are a couple. Unsurprisingly, by the time the thrill of sleepless nights and colicky days has worn off, two relative strangers who have drifted into becoming parents together notice they’re just not that into each other. Hence, the high breakup rates among low-income couples: Only a third of unmarried parents are still together by the time their children reach age 5.

Also complicating low-income single parenthood in America is what the experts call “multipartner fertility.” Both divorced and never-married Americans are more likely to repartner and start “second families” than Europeans, but the trend is far more common among unmarried parents. According to data from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study at Princeton and Columbia Universities, over 60 percent of low-income babies will have at least one half sibling when they are born; by the time they are 5, the proportion will have climbed to over 70 percent.

All of this would be of merely passing interest if it weren’t for the evidence that this kind of domestic churn is really bad news for kids. The more “transitions” experienced by a child — the arrival of a stepparent, a parental boyfriend or girlfriend, or a step- or half sibling — the more children are likely to have either emotional or academic problems, or both. (My own research indicates that boys, especially, suffer from these transitions.)

Part of the problem is that a nonresident father tends to fade out of his children’s lives if there’s a new man in his ex’s house or if he has children with a new partner. For logistical, emotional and financial reasons, his loyalty to his previous children slackens once he has a child with a new girlfriend or wife. Nor is it likely, from the overlooked child’s point of view, that a mother’s new boyfriend or husband can fill the gap. There’s substantial research showing that stepfathers are sometimes worse than none at all.

These realities help explain the meager results of government marriage promotion programs. It doesn’t make much sense to encourage, much less pressure, a couple with no shared history, interests or deep affection to marry. At any rate, given the prevalence of multipartner fertility it’s not clear, as one scholar asked in a paper, “who should marry whom.”

But those same realities raise serious doubts about the accept-and-prop-up response to single-parent families. Increasing government largess could actually incentivize, or at least enable, parental choices that everyone admits are damaging to kids. The United States aside, scholars have found a connection between the size of a welfare state and rates of both nonmarital births and divorce. Even if you believe that enlarging the infrastructure of support for single-parent families shows compassion for today’s children, it’s not at all obvious that it shows much concern for tomorrow’s.

Most surprising, given the likely feminist sympathies of liberal advocates for single mothers, is their fatalism toward men. While it’s a safe bet that most in this camp wouldn’t hesitate to scold married “bastards on the couch” for not pulling their weight at home, they seem more than willing to write off unmarried fathers. Not only does this merely accept the personal loss suffered by millions of children living without their fathers; it also virtually guarantees a permanent gender gap — single mothers are inevitably competing in the labor market with one hand tied behind their backs — and entrenched inequality.

So where does that leave us, policy-wise? Liberal critics of marriage promotion are probably correct that there are only limited steps government can take to change the way low-income couples meet and mate. But that doesn’t mean the status quo is the way things have to be. Not so long ago, the rise of teenage motherhood seemed unstoppable. Instead, over the past two decades adolescent births have declined to record lows. Researchers believe the decline was caused by a combination of better contraceptive use and delayed sexual activity. Both were grounded in a growing consensus — including by the policy makers, educators, the public and teenagers themselves — that having a baby when you are 16 is just a really bad idea.

It’s not impossible that Americans could reach a similarly robust consensus about having children outside of a committed relationship, which in the United States, at least, tends to mean marriage. But despite the growing list of center-left writers willing to admit that single motherhood is complicit in our high levels of poverty and inequality, that consensus still seems a long way off.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Timesarrow

Divorce, single parents and step-families 27 Jun 2014 00:00 #33

  • Timesarrow
  • Timesarrow's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Voluntarily Inactive
  • Posts: 776
  • Likes received: 946
All of this comes back to - "you can't expect people to control their sex drives. People should be allowed to have sex whenever they like, with whoever the like, for whatever reason they like. This is their human right. It is then the responsibility of the rest of society to bear the consequences, and to hell with the best needs of the child. What's really important is that adults get to have sex."

What's wrong with reserving sex for a committed, monogamous relationship with someone you love and trust? Are people not capable of this? They're not animals. We expect people to control how much they eat, why can't they control other appetites? And if sex was reserved for these situations, the single motherhood epidemic would be slashed overnight.

It's because there are no rules, prohibitions or expectations around sex any more, and people have sex in the most casual, uncommitted, and inappropriate of situations, where love and not even like are prerequisites. We need to impose some serious standards around sexuality again, otherwise our society hasn't a hope.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Seaic

Divorce, single parents and step-families 27 Jun 2014 00:54 #34

  • Seaic
  • Seaic's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Voluntarily Inactive
  • Posts: 1910
  • Likes received: 2150
Timesarrow wrote:
All of this comes back to - "you can't expect people to control their sex drives. People should be allowed to have sex whenever they like, with whoever the like, for whatever reason they like. This is their human right. It is then the responsibility of the rest of society to bear the consequences, and to hell with the best needs of the child. What's really important is that adults get to have sex."

What's wrong with reserving sex for a committed, monogamous relationship with someone you love and trust? Are people not capable of this? They're not animals. We expect people to control how much they eat, why can't they control other appetites? And if sex was reserved for these situations, the single motherhood epidemic would be slashed overnight.

It's because there are no rules, prohibitions or expectations around sex any more, and people have sex in the most casual, uncommitted, and inappropriate of situations, where love and not even like are prerequisites. We need to impose some serious standards around sexuality again, otherwise our society hasn't a hope.

Precisely, people think they can do what they like because of modern nonsense concepts like "human rights" and "equality", which all sound very nice (and make you sound bad if you criticise them) but have no basis and no weight, and are contrary to human nature. Humans have always been beings that restrict their primal urges for the common good, it's unnatural to deviate from that course.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Timesarrow

Divorce, single parents and step-families 27 Jun 2014 19:18 #35

  • sketti
  • sketti's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1249
  • Likes received: 304
Timesarrow wrote:
What's wrong with reserving sex for a committed, monogamous relationship with someone you love and trust? Are people not capable of this? They're not animals. .


Absolutely nothing is wrong with that. As you've said, we're not animals :thumbup:

Except, if it wasn't for the fact that you yourself have then claimed in another thread that in this loving, committed, monogamous relationship with someone you love and trust, that you should only be close with this person you love so very much, when it's time to procreate and that anything in between is basically 'satan at work' - with sickboy even going as far as stating its disgusting to even lick your partner anywhere ! :facepalm:

I'm starting to wonder now if you lot aren't just on some group wind-up because the more you post, the more bizarre some of the threads around here are becoming. :iitm:
Trolling myself in the mirror at night...
Last Edit: 27 Jun 2014 19:19 by sketti.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Divorce, single parents and step-families 27 Jun 2014 19:22 #36

  • sketti
  • sketti's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1249
  • Likes received: 304
Timesarrow wrote:

We need to impose


Your desire to impose alot of things has been duly noted and long before now ;)
Trolling myself in the mirror at night...
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Divorce, single parents and step-families 27 Jun 2014 19:40 #37

  • Timesarrow
  • Timesarrow's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Voluntarily Inactive
  • Posts: 776
  • Likes received: 946
sketti wrote:
Timesarrow wrote:
What's wrong with reserving sex for a committed, monogamous relationship with someone you love and trust? Are people not capable of this? They're not animals. .


Absolutely nothing is wrong with that. As you've said, we're not animals :thumbup:

Except, if it wasn't for the fact that you yourself have then claimed in another thread that in this loving, committed, monogamous relationship with someone you love and trust, that you should only be close with this person you love so very much, when it's time to procreate and that anything in between is basically 'satan at work' - with sickboy even going as far as stating its disgusting to even lick your partner anywhere ! :facepalm:

I'm starting to wonder now if you lot aren't just on some group wind-up because the more you post, the more bizarre some of the threads around here are becoming. :iitm:

I never said anything of the sort, but your comprehension skills are clearly right up there with your maturity and intelligence :thumbup:
Last Edit: 27 Jun 2014 19:42 by Timesarrow.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Seaic

Divorce, single parents and step-families 27 Jun 2014 19:41 #38

  • Timesarrow
  • Timesarrow's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Voluntarily Inactive
  • Posts: 776
  • Likes received: 946
sketti wrote:
Timesarrow wrote:

We need to impose


Your desire to impose alot of things has been duly noted and long before now ;)

Yes, and?

If only your parents had imposed a lot more things on you - discipline, manners, morality, respect - maybe you wouldn't have turned out into the kind of person you have.
Last Edit: 27 Jun 2014 19:41 by Timesarrow.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Seaic

Divorce, single parents and step-families 27 Jun 2014 19:46 #39

  • sketti
  • sketti's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1249
  • Likes received: 304
Timesarrow wrote:
sketti wrote:
Timesarrow wrote:

We need to impose


Your desire to impose alot of things has been duly noted and long before now ;)

Yes, and?

If only your parents had imposed a lot more things on you - discipline, manners, morality, respect - maybe you wouldn't have turned out into the kind of person you have.


My parents did just fine given I might have turned out like you :D
Trolling myself in the mirror at night...
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Divorce, single parents and step-families 27 Jun 2014 19:57 #40

  • Timesarrow
  • Timesarrow's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Voluntarily Inactive
  • Posts: 776
  • Likes received: 946
sketti wrote:
Timesarrow wrote:
sketti wrote:
Timesarrow wrote:

We need to impose


Your desire to impose alot of things has been duly noted and long before now ;)

Yes, and?

If only your parents had imposed a lot more things on you - discipline, manners, morality, respect - maybe you wouldn't have turned out into the kind of person you have.


My parents did just fine given I might have turned out like you :D

Evidently not.

Although I am hardly presenting myself as an epitome of perfect humanity, it would certainly be a step in the right direction if you were more like me.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Seaic
Moderators: novum, rodin, Flare
Powered by Kunena Forum

Annual Server Target

Whether its 50 cents or five dollars, your donations are appreciated and help keep this community site running so we can all continue to enjoy using it.
This target is to meet our server cost for one year, June 2020 - May 2021, in USD.
$ 340 - Target
( £ 250 GBP )
donation thermometer
donation thermometer
$ 192 - Raised
( £ 140 GBP )
donation thermometer
56%
Most Recent Donation $122 USD
4th January 2021
Bitcoin Address: bc1q0kazqya0nurfxtunxv807vm0m8852nnrrk8mj8
 
Ethereum Address: 0xe69915c80dd75df19f438d556267e04f932f057d
 
More Info: Donation options for TZ
 

No one is obliged to donate, please only donate what you can afford. Even the smallest amount helps. Being an active member is a positive contribution. Thank You.