Drea

I almost peed myself laughing! Stephan Dion is a hetro -- how could that be possible in your weird little world? And that fat bastard at Bountiful? Is he your ultimate hetro-male hero with his fat gut and peacock strut? Have you called him and asked him how to be a "man"? He must be one helluva man to "get" all those girls to screw eh? ppft.

You are too ridiculous. Even though I advocate for father's rights... please don't ever come to me. I would not know how to advocate for you... most of the dads I deal with want access to their children. Money aside, they want to SEE their kids. And yes, the kids trump all others. If there is one potato, a mom and two kids, guess who shares the potato? Guess who gets none? Why not, then, instead of paying "cash" to the mother, simply pay her entire rent or mortgage? That way you are sure that the money doesn't go to "stuff" for the mother! I'd ask the judge for that in your case. Well holy smokes! "being a parent is more than money!? You bet it is! Most fathers pay support, they have issues with not getting to see their children. That's why I fight for them. Please cite a case of this occuring. A link (not just to some pissed off guy's blog, but an actual news story about a woman collecting child support from more than one man. That's ridiculous. I am pretty sure he has to be in a relationship with both the mother and her children for a period of time. My hubby lived with a woman for two years -- she had two kids. They split. He DOES NOT pay support. He dated another woman for eight years... again, he never had to pay support for her kids even though the youngest was an infant. I lived with my brother for a bit when my son was a toddler -- lo and behold! He doesn't pay child support for my son! Must be a miracle right? So what gives? Why isn't he paying support for these five children? Get out of your teeny tiny world and look around you once in a while instead of making shit up. Geez. Uncles and grandparents do NOT fill the father role. So NO they will never be financially responsible for their sister's or daughter's children. NO MAN has ever been forced to pay child support simply because he screwed the mother. There is much much more to take into consideration by the courts, not just "did they screw?" I've come to the conclusion that you are simply a bitter, angry man and that you have no idea what you are talking about.

I advocate for father's in custody cases... yes our court system favours the mother. But in THIS case he was the children's father for 16 years, so for all intents and purposes he is their DAD, the only dad they have ever known. We don't know the background. We don't know if he abused his girls... we don't know if they loved each other deeply. If he did have a good relationship with his children why would he jeopardize it over two lousy years of child support? He may die a lonely old man ... oh well, at least he'll have his couple thousand bucks to love.

That's ridiculous. If he is not screwing the mom and living in the house and going to & from work and chaufferingthe kids and playing games with them daily and teaching them chores and making them do stuff they don't want to do every-single-day-of-the-year -- he is not filling the role of father. Uncles and friends are not substitutes for a father. Or do you have such a low opinion of fatherhood that a 1/2 hour game of football on the weekend is enough to call yourself a "father"? My son does/did not want to be adopted by his stepfather. He wants to keep his original name -- it's who he is. Regardless of whether or not his father and I are together; he still needs to know his lineage and therefor better know himself.

"Stupid" enough? You're obviously not half the man that my son's stepfather is. Gosh darn it -- He IS just like a real honest-to-goodness father! I don't think he's "acting" though. A father is much more than a sperm donor. A father is a mentor, a disciplinarian, a teacher, a fun guy...above all, he is VITAL in a child's life. Biology has nothing to do with fatherhood. So what happens if a man has a long term relationship with a woman with children? Should he only "come over" after the kidlets are asleep for the rest of their childhoods? What if he really likes (gasp! maybe even l-o-v-e!) the kids and want to be with them as well as their mother? What about children whose fathers' have died? (oh right the gov't provides a "widows" pension ) All you want to do is punish the "whore". You don't take into account the feelings of the children nor the stepfather. You just want revenge.

"Feminist" has been turned into a dirty word. And it's a shame. Most people don't have a clue what feminism is. It's not turning women into men. It's not exclusionary. It's equality and respect. It does not mean staying at home lying on your back eating bonbons while your husband does everything. It means participating equally in a relationship. Being an equal partner does not mean "strap on a penis", it means holding the bag when your partner cannot. Women who expect their partners to foot the bill and do everything for them are not feminists, they are traditional women. Now, back in my mother's time, her day was filled with washing clothes by hand, baking bread, etc. She worked just as hard as my father. Today's "traditional" wife drives the kid to school, puts the dishes in the dishwasher and goes out for coffee or shopping. Technology has made the "traditional wife" a role of a spoiled princess.

Are you genetirally predisposed to be attracted to women or do you CHOOSE to be attracted to them? If you believe it's your genetics and not a choice for you, then how can you say that those attracted to their own sex are not genetically motivated? Sick bugger aintcha!?

A Feminist would just raise the kids herself with her own income. This is a traditional woman. Baby, she ain't no feminist! Always think it so funny when people blame "feminists". Hell we're the ones working and supporting ourselves! You should be pissed at the traditional wife who simply lies on her back and you pay her for it. Ha ha. Bitter much? They are not his kids... he should cut and run if he has no relationship with them. They are not babies, they can leave their mother and live with him if they so choose.

And how did people 2000 years ago "discover" the paternity? My son looked nothing like his dad when he was born. In the story of Noah.... Lamech's wife gave birth to a child with blue eyes and "pink skin" but she swore up and down that Noah was his! Genetic throwback perhaps, who knows. And I am the ONLY blonde on both sides of my family... this is not proof that my mom fooled around on my dad Maternity is much more provable than paternity, especiall beofre the medical advances of today. How again did a man "find out" and "disown" the children thousands of years (or even decades) ago?

How shall we punish the woman who had an affair? By making her children live in poverty? By taking away the children? Jail? Death? What? For millions of years men have been raising children that they thought were theirs. That's why I've always thought that the "paternal tree" is alot more shaky than the "maternal tree".

So if there are no limitations in place... why did my doctor suggest I go to Seattle? Why not Vancouver? I think there are limitations and it's the very rare abortion that occurs late term. I think anti-choice folks are using scare tactics..."OMG!! women are aborting babies that could survive outside the womb... millions upon millions of 'em!!" Perhaps next time I see my family doctor I will ask.

I agree with limitations but not prosecution for those who abort after the "abortion expiry date". It's just not feasible. I am not sure "what to do" with those who abort later... at least if there were limitations perhaps fewer late term abortions would occur. Women need to know that if they choose abortion they won't be harassed or picketed when they go to a clinic. I can imagine some women would be afraid of these "protesters" and put off her abortion. Me I went to Women's Hospital, didn't see a single picket and came out 20 minutes later all done. Now if protesters had forced me to leave the clinic or threatened my life, I may have had to put off the abortion until I felt safe enough to go to the clinic. Perhaps that would be past the "abortion expiry date". As I said before, when I was five months along (and stressed) my doctor asked me if I wanted to go to Seattle for an abortion. Obviously 15 years ago there was some limitation here in BC or he would not have suggested I go to the US.

Only if he uses a coat hanger or bleach or some other dumb ass thing (which would be the only option if anti-choice folks get their way. "Woman's life -- fck her, she needs to pay for her "mistake". Pro-Life my ass. Pro-control women who dare to have sex is more like it. Cheers! Here's to hoping your daughter gets pregnant.

Wow... if she were on a medication so strong that it wiped out her memory imagine the effect on the growing fetuses! Geez. He has been their father for 16 years so yes, he is their "dad" regardless of DNA. If they would've never split up he and the girls would've never known any different. IF he loves his girls he will either fight for custody (kinda moot at age 16 though) or just continue paying for two more years and preserve his relationship with them.

Actually if you read her posts, Molly is not advocating for abortion at the ninth month. She is saying that anyone who would have an abortion that late in the pregnancy (for no discernable reason that a third person can determine) must be suffering horrendously to begin with and does not deserve criminal prosecution. Your belly is huge, you feel the baby kicking... very very very few women would abort at this stage. Perhaps someone with extreme mental health issues but no normal person. So the "punishment" for doing so should not be based on "the normal person". We do not need laws that criminally prosecute women who abort. No matter what stage. I agree on limitations to the 5th month or so, but I do not agree that abortion should be considered a criminal act in any way shape or form.

Catholic girls (and boys) do stuff behind their parents back. They are no different than others. Do you seriously think that secular families have "orgies", leave the "Playboy" laying around, get "wasted" in front of the kids, or allow Uncle Fred and Uncle Tim to f*&k on the couch during the Christmas holidays? You really do think you are better than everyone else dontcha? Good luck! This is what we all want --good kids. How does one GET a good kid? Allow them responsibility and make them accountable from a young age. The rest is really up to them, not you. You don't own them, they are only on loan for a while. Soon they will no longer be children, but young adults who need to be able to push boundaries -- and they will push, I guarantee it. All kids should see this crap in real life. Except the homo part, how are you going to find two men or two women to do "disgusting things" in front of your children? How will you ever find two people with such low morals? so don't make the same mistakes your parents made. By 15 in the 1970's you can guarantee that a kid would have tried cigs and pot, perhaps acid and certainly alcohol. But ahhh, we live in a wonderful time where our kids are educated, unlike us who couldn't do what we wanted simply because we "weren't old enough". Today our kids are much more savvy than we were.

Well I can one-up-yah! Today I saw a bird hit a picture window! How 'bout THAT! Dancer, it's not a pissing contest. No one gives a crap about whether or not a whole person or a person in little bits -- what matters is that they are dead and most of them are children. Soldiers sign up with the explicit expectation that they COULD be killed in battle. Children sign up for no such thing. By the way, did you enjoy blowing them up?

Ha ha ha. YOu will never know if your daughter has one. It's verrry easy, Mom can just say she has a "feminine" problem. You are obviously oblivious to what happens to a woman's body on a monthly basis. My stepfather never knew that his daughter (not me, his bio daughter) had an abortion in 1975. Mom just took her in for a "girl" thing. Of course your wife would rather have her daughter "ostrasized" and "disowned" than hide something from you right? Wool --> meet Mr. Canada's eyes!

Ridiculous! How do you go from aborting a fetus ... all the way to ... strapping on a bomb? The two issues cannot be likened to one another. One kills living breathing human beings... the other kills a fetus. And haven't we kinda already determined that 20 weeks (when brain activity begins apparently) is reasonable? And Dancer, geeeez... as if spreading AIDS has anything to do with abortion... You two are just silly and arguing for the sake of it. You all know that giving someone AIDS or strapping on a bomb affect other people's bodies, not just a person's own.

JBG you wrote this: Did the bomb that hit Hiroshima "de-select" schools, hospitals and supermarkets? You, jbg, are advocating for the destruction of a people. I suggest you read the book "Hiroshima" by John Hersey. It's only $7 so even you should be able to afford it. If not, pick it up at your local library and get back to us on your lovely idea of "total war". It takes the goddamn CAKE when a JEW is calling for the destruction of an entire race -- did you learn nothing? Does history need to be repeated ala Iran? Fug!

He does not know where he stands.. poor fella just wants to be a good christian and he has been brainwashed into thinking saving fetuses will get him points with the guy upstairs. The children in Gaza though -- their lives aren't worth shit are they? One dead Israeli soldier is worth 300 dead Palestinian children. Funny that he (and those like him) are not in Gaza holding children behind them to save them from certain death. But a Canadian fetus must be worth, what, maybe a million dead Palestinians? When the total dead children reaches on million will you get on board with saving them Mr. Canada? Or are their lives worth nothing in the eyes of your damndable god?

And MY tax dollars fund your church. Do I get a say in what occurs in your church? Mr. Canada I see that we pro-choicers have made an impact! You've gone from: All abortions should be illegal except in cases of rape, insest or the health (death) of the motherto: Ok, I'll settle for restricted abortions. Good for you! Now... it's time to move on (now that's settled) to the tax exempt status of churches. Do you believe churches, synagogues and mosques should be tax exempt? Or do you think it's time they started paying into the tax coffers (therefor benefitting ALL Canadians, not just the ones who join the "club"? Pony up Mr. Canada -- do you believe only certain Canadians should benefit from taxes or just a select few?

Do you have a citation that states women in "other" countries are monitored every month? Abortions from the 5th month onward on not "on demand"... in 1992 I was five months pregnant and stressed (single motherhood is kinda daunting to the first timer) and my doctor asked me if I wanted to go to Seattle for an abortion. I said no, I just needed someone to talk to about it -- and I never went back to him. I went to a woman doctor who could undertand that pregnancy is stressful. Now, if midterm or late term abortions are so widespread in Canada, why would my doctor suggest sending me to Seattle? Why not Women's in Vancouver? I do agree that abortion should be limited to 20 weeks with exceptions. For example the teen that hides her pregnancy because she is afraid of her parents...

How can I "hate" something that I don't believe exists? Does not believing in ET's translate into "hating" them? It IS a social club -- being a part of this "exclusive club" makes you feel good, that's nice for you -- but leave me out of it. One day you may regret not believing in Vishnu! What if Vishnu is an actual god??! What will you do? Being an atheist is easy -- I simply believe in one less god than you do.

That's why your church should not be tax exempt. WE pay for your social club for pete sake... so your social club should be answerable to me the taxpayer.