Anyone know a good divorce lawyer?

[Arraya]

“But… where this planet’s environment is concerned, I still haven’t heard a rebuttal to my point that having children is one of the most destructive things a couple can do. To repeat myself, I don’t care if people have 10 children because, again, I don’t have an emotional attachment to what happens to this planet beyond my own lifetime. But how you or Marion “feel” about children and perpetuating human life is not relevant. So I’ll ask you, Marion, or anyone else, AGAIN, to disprove my thesis. Stick to facts and leave out the “feelings.””

You are 100% correct. Actually, to narrow it down in terms of environmental destruction, being a citizen of the US and having children is the most damaging thing you can do. A well off American family of 4 is equivalent to a small town of about 150 in Bangladesh. Population biologist measure this in something called energy slaves. We americans like our energy and in terms of some third world countries we have a population of 20 to 30 billion.

We are in what some biologists call the sixth extinction. Currently the earth is losing around 30,000 species a year, which is about 1000 times more that if humans were not involved. We are winning big time in our competition with other species for resources, food and land.

However, we seem to be bumping up against the limits of numerous resources which allow us to feed the 6.7 billion people on this planet. Maybe you have seen the food riots through out the third world as of recent. This is different from famine of the past because it is due to actual food shortages rather that distribution issues. This issue will no doubt get exacerbated in the near future due to the start of fossil fuel depletion and begin to kill off the worlds poor via starvation.

So in terms of carrying capacity of the earth which was passed back in the late 40s to early 70s according to most experts in the field, one could only conclude that breeding is the most environmentally irresponsible, selfish thing a couple can do especially in the 1st world. Unless you think your life is more important than poor 3rd world people. In that case breed away it will just kill off people in countries that we exploit for resources and compete for food with.

If you put yeast in a jar with sugar and water. The yeast will multiply like crazy until there is no more sugar. The population will skyrocket and collapse as food disappears. So far humans are not doing any better than yeast and now we are approaching the collapse phase of the population bell curve. Food production will undoubtedly start decreasing over the next decade, as we are just seeing the start off, and population will follow. It should be very interesting to witness.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1431038195362274085

[davelj]

Marion, do you have rocks in your head? Seriously.

Marion: “You’re just here to observe??” Dave do you know how weird that sounds? You sound like a freakin’ lunatic. Considering Silo’s post, I would agree that it’s a loathing of humanity, but also, and most importantly, born out of a loathing of oneself. Are you aware that if you’re not pro-human, you can’t be pro-Dave?

Weird? Lunatic? I prefer “eccentric” but use whatever adjective makes you feel better about yourself. That you think I’m a lunatic is actually comforting. I’d probably shoot myself in the head if I discovered my thinking resembled yours on anything meaningful. Self loathing of oneself? You cannot be serious. Ok, fess up, Marion. Did this come from Oprah or one of your self-help books? Your attempts at psychoanalysis are pitiful and obvious. If I’m not pro-human, I can’t be pro-Dave? What? You’re… just… uggh… Look, I hate the Yankees but like Mariano Rivera. I can root for the Yankees demise and still root for Rivera’s success. They’re not mutually exclusive. Catch the analogy? There are plenty of “critical thinking” classes that are available at the community college level.

Marion: I would say that any destruction of the planet has more to do with the industrialization of the planet, than the fact that human beings inhabit the planet. That can be contributed to the greed and outlook of SOME of us humans that inhabit it. We don’t need space shuttles, cars, guns, plastic bags, nuclear weapons, aresol sprays, etc that deplete our earth of its natural resources and f*ck up our ecosystem. …We don’t need all these toys. The best things in life are natural and free. A roof over our head to raise our children and to make love and make more children if we want, enriched soil to grow our own food, unpoluted water to drink, bathe and wash clothes. We don’t have to kill and eat animals if we don’t want to… Thus the destruction of the planet comes not from the fact that we are here, it’s how we behave while we are here.

First of all, it’s not “contributed,” but rather “attributed.” Having said that…

I agree with your last sentence because it’s stating the obvious. Here are my questions to you, Marion, since you’re obviously a dedicated environmentalist: We don’t need cars, huh? Ok. Do you drive a car? We don’t need plastic bags, huh? Do you use plastic bags? We don’t need toys, huh? Do you have anything that would be considered a toy? All we need is a roof over our head and clean water and soil for food, huh? That sounds awesome, Marion. If you truly believe all of this stuff, then you should be living out in Ted Kaczynski’s shack. It’s available and it’s perfect for your professed beliefs. But, you see, that’s all BS. Because you drive a car, use plastic bags, have toys and live in the suburbs, with all that implies. Why? Because you don’t have any intention of giving up the conveniences of modern life to live the life that you described above. You’re a complete hypocrite. All hat and no cattle. Hell, Marion, you’re so full of crap that if you gave yourself an enema, what’s left would fit inside a match box.

Regarding my comments on two parent vs. one parent households, you said, “If you feel this way, I feel sorry for you.” Earth to Marion. I was just reporting what I’ve read on the subject. There’s no opinion on my part on that subject. I don’t “feel” any way on the issue. I thought that was obvious, but I should have made that clearer for folks like you that are a little slow on the uptake.

[As to your procreation comments… it’s too philosophical and would confuse you. Believe whatever you want. Frankly, I don’t have the time or the patience.]

It’s a gorgeous day. Even by San Diego standards. So I’m off to the beach… but not until after I’ve engaged in some self loathing. Anyone know where I can buy some of those cat-o-nine-tails for some self-flagellation? Bwahahahaha…

[davelj]

Marion, do you have rocks in your head? Seriously.

Marion: “You’re just here to observe??” Dave do you know how weird that sounds? You sound like a freakin’ lunatic. Considering Silo’s post, I would agree that it’s a loathing of humanity, but also, and most importantly, born out of a loathing of oneself. Are you aware that if you’re not pro-human, you can’t be pro-Dave?

Weird? Lunatic? I prefer “eccentric” but use whatever adjective makes you feel better about yourself. That you think I’m a lunatic is actually comforting. I’d probably shoot myself in the head if I discovered my thinking resembled yours on anything meaningful. Self loathing of oneself? You cannot be serious. Ok, fess up, Marion. Did this come from Oprah or one of your self-help books? Your attempts at psychoanalysis are pitiful and obvious. If I’m not pro-human, I can’t be pro-Dave? What? You’re… just… uggh… Look, I hate the Yankees but like Mariano Rivera. I can root for the Yankees demise and still root for Rivera’s success. They’re not mutually exclusive. Catch the analogy? There are plenty of “critical thinking” classes that are available at the community college level.

Marion: I would say that any destruction of the planet has more to do with the industrialization of the planet, than the fact that human beings inhabit the planet. That can be contributed to the greed and outlook of SOME of us humans that inhabit it. We don’t need space shuttles, cars, guns, plastic bags, nuclear weapons, aresol sprays, etc that deplete our earth of its natural resources and f*ck up our ecosystem. …We don’t need all these toys. The best things in life are natural and free. A roof over our head to raise our children and to make love and make more children if we want, enriched soil to grow our own food, unpoluted water to drink, bathe and wash clothes. We don’t have to kill and eat animals if we don’t want to… Thus the destruction of the planet comes not from the fact that we are here, it’s how we behave while we are here.

First of all, it’s not “contributed,” but rather “attributed.” Having said that…

I agree with your last sentence because it’s stating the obvious. Here are my questions to you, Marion, since you’re obviously a dedicated environmentalist: We don’t need cars, huh? Ok. Do you drive a car? We don’t need plastic bags, huh? Do you use plastic bags? We don’t need toys, huh? Do you have anything that would be considered a toy? All we need is a roof over our head and clean water and soil for food, huh? That sounds awesome, Marion. If you truly believe all of this stuff, then you should be living out in Ted Kaczynski’s shack. It’s available and it’s perfect for your professed beliefs. But, you see, that’s all BS. Because you drive a car, use plastic bags, have toys and live in the suburbs, with all that implies. Why? Because you don’t have any intention of giving up the conveniences of modern life to live the life that you described above. You’re a complete hypocrite. All hat and no cattle. Hell, Marion, you’re so full of crap that if you gave yourself an enema, what’s left would fit inside a match box.

Regarding my comments on two parent vs. one parent households, you said, “If you feel this way, I feel sorry for you.” Earth to Marion. I was just reporting what I’ve read on the subject. There’s no opinion on my part on that subject. I don’t “feel” any way on the issue. I thought that was obvious, but I should have made that clearer for folks like you that are a little slow on the uptake.

[As to your procreation comments… it’s too philosophical and would confuse you. Believe whatever you want. Frankly, I don’t have the time or the patience.]

It’s a gorgeous day. Even by San Diego standards. So I’m off to the beach… but not until after I’ve engaged in some self loathing. Anyone know where I can buy some of those cat-o-nine-tails for some self-flagellation? Bwahahahaha…

[davelj]

Marion, do you have rocks in your head? Seriously.

Marion: “You’re just here to observe??” Dave do you know how weird that sounds? You sound like a freakin’ lunatic. Considering Silo’s post, I would agree that it’s a loathing of humanity, but also, and most importantly, born out of a loathing of oneself. Are you aware that if you’re not pro-human, you can’t be pro-Dave?

Weird? Lunatic? I prefer “eccentric” but use whatever adjective makes you feel better about yourself. That you think I’m a lunatic is actually comforting. I’d probably shoot myself in the head if I discovered my thinking resembled yours on anything meaningful. Self loathing of oneself? You cannot be serious. Ok, fess up, Marion. Did this come from Oprah or one of your self-help books? Your attempts at psychoanalysis are pitiful and obvious. If I’m not pro-human, I can’t be pro-Dave? What? You’re… just… uggh… Look, I hate the Yankees but like Mariano Rivera. I can root for the Yankees demise and still root for Rivera’s success. They’re not mutually exclusive. Catch the analogy? There are plenty of “critical thinking” classes that are available at the community college level.

Marion: I would say that any destruction of the planet has more to do with the industrialization of the planet, than the fact that human beings inhabit the planet. That can be contributed to the greed and outlook of SOME of us humans that inhabit it. We don’t need space shuttles, cars, guns, plastic bags, nuclear weapons, aresol sprays, etc that deplete our earth of its natural resources and f*ck up our ecosystem. …We don’t need all these toys. The best things in life are natural and free. A roof over our head to raise our children and to make love and make more children if we want, enriched soil to grow our own food, unpoluted water to drink, bathe and wash clothes. We don’t have to kill and eat animals if we don’t want to… Thus the destruction of the planet comes not from the fact that we are here, it’s how we behave while we are here.

First of all, it’s not “contributed,” but rather “attributed.” Having said that…

I agree with your last sentence because it’s stating the obvious. Here are my questions to you, Marion, since you’re obviously a dedicated environmentalist: We don’t need cars, huh? Ok. Do you drive a car? We don’t need plastic bags, huh? Do you use plastic bags? We don’t need toys, huh? Do you have anything that would be considered a toy? All we need is a roof over our head and clean water and soil for food, huh? That sounds awesome, Marion. If you truly believe all of this stuff, then you should be living out in Ted Kaczynski’s shack. It’s available and it’s perfect for your professed beliefs. But, you see, that’s all BS. Because you drive a car, use plastic bags, have toys and live in the suburbs, with all that implies. Why? Because you don’t have any intention of giving up the conveniences of modern life to live the life that you described above. You’re a complete hypocrite. All hat and no cattle. Hell, Marion, you’re so full of crap that if you gave yourself an enema, what’s left would fit inside a match box.

Regarding my comments on two parent vs. one parent households, you said, “If you feel this way, I feel sorry for you.” Earth to Marion. I was just reporting what I’ve read on the subject. There’s no opinion on my part on that subject. I don’t “feel” any way on the issue. I thought that was obvious, but I should have made that clearer for folks like you that are a little slow on the uptake.

[As to your procreation comments… it’s too philosophical and would confuse you. Believe whatever you want. Frankly, I don’t have the time or the patience.]

It’s a gorgeous day. Even by San Diego standards. So I’m off to the beach… but not until after I’ve engaged in some self loathing. Anyone know where I can buy some of those cat-o-nine-tails for some self-flagellation? Bwahahahaha…

[davelj]

Marion, do you have rocks in your head? Seriously.

Marion: “You’re just here to observe??” Dave do you know how weird that sounds? You sound like a freakin’ lunatic. Considering Silo’s post, I would agree that it’s a loathing of humanity, but also, and most importantly, born out of a loathing of oneself. Are you aware that if you’re not pro-human, you can’t be pro-Dave?

Weird? Lunatic? I prefer “eccentric” but use whatever adjective makes you feel better about yourself. That you think I’m a lunatic is actually comforting. I’d probably shoot myself in the head if I discovered my thinking resembled yours on anything meaningful. Self loathing of oneself? You cannot be serious. Ok, fess up, Marion. Did this come from Oprah or one of your self-help books? Your attempts at psychoanalysis are pitiful and obvious. If I’m not pro-human, I can’t be pro-Dave? What? You’re… just… uggh… Look, I hate the Yankees but like Mariano Rivera. I can root for the Yankees demise and still root for Rivera’s success. They’re not mutually exclusive. Catch the analogy? There are plenty of “critical thinking” classes that are available at the community college level.

Marion: I would say that any destruction of the planet has more to do with the industrialization of the planet, than the fact that human beings inhabit the planet. That can be contributed to the greed and outlook of SOME of us humans that inhabit it. We don’t need space shuttles, cars, guns, plastic bags, nuclear weapons, aresol sprays, etc that deplete our earth of its natural resources and f*ck up our ecosystem. …We don’t need all these toys. The best things in life are natural and free. A roof over our head to raise our children and to make love and make more children if we want, enriched soil to grow our own food, unpoluted water to drink, bathe and wash clothes. We don’t have to kill and eat animals if we don’t want to… Thus the destruction of the planet comes not from the fact that we are here, it’s how we behave while we are here.

First of all, it’s not “contributed,” but rather “attributed.” Having said that…

I agree with your last sentence because it’s stating the obvious. Here are my questions to you, Marion, since you’re obviously a dedicated environmentalist: We don’t need cars, huh? Ok. Do you drive a car? We don’t need plastic bags, huh? Do you use plastic bags? We don’t need toys, huh? Do you have anything that would be considered a toy? All we need is a roof over our head and clean water and soil for food, huh? That sounds awesome, Marion. If you truly believe all of this stuff, then you should be living out in Ted Kaczynski’s shack. It’s available and it’s perfect for your professed beliefs. But, you see, that’s all BS. Because you drive a car, use plastic bags, have toys and live in the suburbs, with all that implies. Why? Because you don’t have any intention of giving up the conveniences of modern life to live the life that you described above. You’re a complete hypocrite. All hat and no cattle. Hell, Marion, you’re so full of crap that if you gave yourself an enema, what’s left would fit inside a match box.

Regarding my comments on two parent vs. one parent households, you said, “If you feel this way, I feel sorry for you.” Earth to Marion. I was just reporting what I’ve read on the subject. There’s no opinion on my part on that subject. I don’t “feel” any way on the issue. I thought that was obvious, but I should have made that clearer for folks like you that are a little slow on the uptake.

[As to your procreation comments… it’s too philosophical and would confuse you. Believe whatever you want. Frankly, I don’t have the time or the patience.]

It’s a gorgeous day. Even by San Diego standards. So I’m off to the beach… but not until after I’ve engaged in some self loathing. Anyone know where I can buy some of those cat-o-nine-tails for some self-flagellation? Bwahahahaha…

[davelj]

Marion, do you have rocks in your head? Seriously.

Marion: “You’re just here to observe??” Dave do you know how weird that sounds? You sound like a freakin’ lunatic. Considering Silo’s post, I would agree that it’s a loathing of humanity, but also, and most importantly, born out of a loathing of oneself. Are you aware that if you’re not pro-human, you can’t be pro-Dave?

Weird? Lunatic? I prefer “eccentric” but use whatever adjective makes you feel better about yourself. That you think I’m a lunatic is actually comforting. I’d probably shoot myself in the head if I discovered my thinking resembled yours on anything meaningful. Self loathing of oneself? You cannot be serious. Ok, fess up, Marion. Did this come from Oprah or one of your self-help books? Your attempts at psychoanalysis are pitiful and obvious. If I’m not pro-human, I can’t be pro-Dave? What? You’re… just… uggh… Look, I hate the Yankees but like Mariano Rivera. I can root for the Yankees demise and still root for Rivera’s success. They’re not mutually exclusive. Catch the analogy? There are plenty of “critical thinking” classes that are available at the community college level.

Marion: I would say that any destruction of the planet has more to do with the industrialization of the planet, than the fact that human beings inhabit the planet. That can be contributed to the greed and outlook of SOME of us humans that inhabit it. We don’t need space shuttles, cars, guns, plastic bags, nuclear weapons, aresol sprays, etc that deplete our earth of its natural resources and f*ck up our ecosystem. …We don’t need all these toys. The best things in life are natural and free. A roof over our head to raise our children and to make love and make more children if we want, enriched soil to grow our own food, unpoluted water to drink, bathe and wash clothes. We don’t have to kill and eat animals if we don’t want to… Thus the destruction of the planet comes not from the fact that we are here, it’s how we behave while we are here.

First of all, it’s not “contributed,” but rather “attributed.” Having said that…

I agree with your last sentence because it’s stating the obvious. Here are my questions to you, Marion, since you’re obviously a dedicated environmentalist: We don’t need cars, huh? Ok. Do you drive a car? We don’t need plastic bags, huh? Do you use plastic bags? We don’t need toys, huh? Do you have anything that would be considered a toy? All we need is a roof over our head and clean water and soil for food, huh? That sounds awesome, Marion. If you truly believe all of this stuff, then you should be living out in Ted Kaczynski’s shack. It’s available and it’s perfect for your professed beliefs. But, you see, that’s all BS. Because you drive a car, use plastic bags, have toys and live in the suburbs, with all that implies. Why? Because you don’t have any intention of giving up the conveniences of modern life to live the life that you described above. You’re a complete hypocrite. All hat and no cattle. Hell, Marion, you’re so full of crap that if you gave yourself an enema, what’s left would fit inside a match box.

Regarding my comments on two parent vs. one parent households, you said, “If you feel this way, I feel sorry for you.” Earth to Marion. I was just reporting what I’ve read on the subject. There’s no opinion on my part on that subject. I don’t “feel” any way on the issue. I thought that was obvious, but I should have made that clearer for folks like you that are a little slow on the uptake.

[As to your procreation comments… it’s too philosophical and would confuse you. Believe whatever you want. Frankly, I don’t have the time or the patience.]

It’s a gorgeous day. Even by San Diego standards. So I’m off to the beach… but not until after I’ve engaged in some self loathing. Anyone know where I can buy some of those cat-o-nine-tails for some self-flagellation? Bwahahahaha…

[Anonymous]

“Hell, Marion, you’re so full of crap that if you gave yourself an enema, what’s left would fit inside a match box.”

That was rather crude. Wow! (which could be interpretated as “I don’t believe what I’m hearing!” What a load of filth! Where is this coming from? Nevermind, it’s obvious.

If you toned down some of the venom, you might actually be debatable. Please don’t confuse that with datable.

Regarding my comments on two parent vs. one parent households, you said, “If you feel this way, I feel sorry for you.” Earth to Marion. I was just reporting what I’ve read on the subject. There’s no opinion on my part on that subject. I don’t “feel” any way on the issue. I thought that was obvious, but I should have made that clearer for folks like you that are a little slow on the uptake.

Pure B.S., Dave. People don’t usually post findings/opinions, etc. unless they agree with them. If they don’t, they usually preface the statement with an objection or a contrary belief. The fact that you were 100% agreement with what you posted was obvious.

Because you drive a car, use plastic bags, have toys and live in the suburbs, with all that implies. Why? Because you don’t have any intention of giving up the conveniences of modern life to live the life that you described above. You’re a complete hypocrite. All hat and no cattle.

I could easily give them up, if I lived in an environment that didn’t necessitate the use of them. If I didn’t need a car to get to my current job, or the grocery store, etc. What’s so hard about not driving a car, Dave, when you have what you need around you? If you’re going to drive, what’s so hard about driving a prius, or something that gets great gas mileage, and doesn’t pollute the environment? I drive such a car instead of a gas guzzling SUV.

Dave, I’m starting to believe you may be unreachable…

By the way, my critical thinking skills are just fine.

Ok, enough of trading insults on a message board. Enjoy your day and I’ll enjoy mine.

[Anonymous]

“Hell, Marion, you’re so full of crap that if you gave yourself an enema, what’s left would fit inside a match box.”

That was rather crude. Wow! (which could be interpretated as “I don’t believe what I’m hearing!” What a load of filth! Where is this coming from? Nevermind, it’s obvious.

If you toned down some of the venom, you might actually be debatable. Please don’t confuse that with datable.

Regarding my comments on two parent vs. one parent households, you said, “If you feel this way, I feel sorry for you.” Earth to Marion. I was just reporting what I’ve read on the subject. There’s no opinion on my part on that subject. I don’t “feel” any way on the issue. I thought that was obvious, but I should have made that clearer for folks like you that are a little slow on the uptake.

Pure B.S., Dave. People don’t usually post findings/opinions, etc. unless they agree with them. If they don’t, they usually preface the statement with an objection or a contrary belief. The fact that you were 100% agreement with what you posted was obvious.

Because you drive a car, use plastic bags, have toys and live in the suburbs, with all that implies. Why? Because you don’t have any intention of giving up the conveniences of modern life to live the life that you described above. You’re a complete hypocrite. All hat and no cattle.

I could easily give them up, if I lived in an environment that didn’t necessitate the use of them. If I didn’t need a car to get to my current job, or the grocery store, etc. What’s so hard about not driving a car, Dave, when you have what you need around you? If you’re going to drive, what’s so hard about driving a prius, or something that gets great gas mileage, and doesn’t pollute the environment? I drive such a car instead of a gas guzzling SUV.

Dave, I’m starting to believe you may be unreachable…

By the way, my critical thinking skills are just fine.

Ok, enough of trading insults on a message board. Enjoy your day and I’ll enjoy mine.

[Anonymous]

“Hell, Marion, you’re so full of crap that if you gave yourself an enema, what’s left would fit inside a match box.”

That was rather crude. Wow! (which could be interpretated as “I don’t believe what I’m hearing!” What a load of filth! Where is this coming from? Nevermind, it’s obvious.

If you toned down some of the venom, you might actually be debatable. Please don’t confuse that with datable.

Regarding my comments on two parent vs. one parent households, you said, “If you feel this way, I feel sorry for you.” Earth to Marion. I was just reporting what I’ve read on the subject. There’s no opinion on my part on that subject. I don’t “feel” any way on the issue. I thought that was obvious, but I should have made that clearer for folks like you that are a little slow on the uptake.

Pure B.S., Dave. People don’t usually post findings/opinions, etc. unless they agree with them. If they don’t, they usually preface the statement with an objection or a contrary belief. The fact that you were 100% agreement with what you posted was obvious.

Because you drive a car, use plastic bags, have toys and live in the suburbs, with all that implies. Why? Because you don’t have any intention of giving up the conveniences of modern life to live the life that you described above. You’re a complete hypocrite. All hat and no cattle.

I could easily give them up, if I lived in an environment that didn’t necessitate the use of them. If I didn’t need a car to get to my current job, or the grocery store, etc. What’s so hard about not driving a car, Dave, when you have what you need around you? If you’re going to drive, what’s so hard about driving a prius, or something that gets great gas mileage, and doesn’t pollute the environment? I drive such a car instead of a gas guzzling SUV.

Dave, I’m starting to believe you may be unreachable…

By the way, my critical thinking skills are just fine.

Ok, enough of trading insults on a message board. Enjoy your day and I’ll enjoy mine.

[Anonymous]

“Hell, Marion, you’re so full of crap that if you gave yourself an enema, what’s left would fit inside a match box.”

That was rather crude. Wow! (which could be interpretated as “I don’t believe what I’m hearing!” What a load of filth! Where is this coming from? Nevermind, it’s obvious.

If you toned down some of the venom, you might actually be debatable. Please don’t confuse that with datable.

Regarding my comments on two parent vs. one parent households, you said, “If you feel this way, I feel sorry for you.” Earth to Marion. I was just reporting what I’ve read on the subject. There’s no opinion on my part on that subject. I don’t “feel” any way on the issue. I thought that was obvious, but I should have made that clearer for folks like you that are a little slow on the uptake.

Pure B.S., Dave. People don’t usually post findings/opinions, etc. unless they agree with them. If they don’t, they usually preface the statement with an objection or a contrary belief. The fact that you were 100% agreement with what you posted was obvious.

Because you drive a car, use plastic bags, have toys and live in the suburbs, with all that implies. Why? Because you don’t have any intention of giving up the conveniences of modern life to live the life that you described above. You’re a complete hypocrite. All hat and no cattle.

I could easily give them up, if I lived in an environment that didn’t necessitate the use of them. If I didn’t need a car to get to my current job, or the grocery store, etc. What’s so hard about not driving a car, Dave, when you have what you need around you? If you’re going to drive, what’s so hard about driving a prius, or something that gets great gas mileage, and doesn’t pollute the environment? I drive such a car instead of a gas guzzling SUV.

Dave, I’m starting to believe you may be unreachable…

By the way, my critical thinking skills are just fine.

Ok, enough of trading insults on a message board. Enjoy your day and I’ll enjoy mine.

[Anonymous]

“Hell, Marion, you’re so full of crap that if you gave yourself an enema, what’s left would fit inside a match box.”

That was rather crude. Wow! (which could be interpretated as “I don’t believe what I’m hearing!” What a load of filth! Where is this coming from? Nevermind, it’s obvious.

If you toned down some of the venom, you might actually be debatable. Please don’t confuse that with datable.

Regarding my comments on two parent vs. one parent households, you said, “If you feel this way, I feel sorry for you.” Earth to Marion. I was just reporting what I’ve read on the subject. There’s no opinion on my part on that subject. I don’t “feel” any way on the issue. I thought that was obvious, but I should have made that clearer for folks like you that are a little slow on the uptake.

Pure B.S., Dave. People don’t usually post findings/opinions, etc. unless they agree with them. If they don’t, they usually preface the statement with an objection or a contrary belief. The fact that you were 100% agreement with what you posted was obvious.

Because you drive a car, use plastic bags, have toys and live in the suburbs, with all that implies. Why? Because you don’t have any intention of giving up the conveniences of modern life to live the life that you described above. You’re a complete hypocrite. All hat and no cattle.

I could easily give them up, if I lived in an environment that didn’t necessitate the use of them. If I didn’t need a car to get to my current job, or the grocery store, etc. What’s so hard about not driving a car, Dave, when you have what you need around you? If you’re going to drive, what’s so hard about driving a prius, or something that gets great gas mileage, and doesn’t pollute the environment? I drive such a car instead of a gas guzzling SUV.

Dave, I’m starting to believe you may be unreachable…

By the way, my critical thinking skills are just fine.

Ok, enough of trading insults on a message board. Enjoy your day and I’ll enjoy mine.

[Ricechex]

Marion….I am doubtful you have much experience in the field. You wrote:

If you feel this way, I feel sorry for you. Some of the most messed up kids in the world come from family’s where they do not get enough nurturing from their parents, or are physically and emotionally abused. This has nothing to do with the educational level of the parents. Parents that have a high educational level abuse, just as much as parents who only graduated high school. No diff here.

My response:
There is a difference. These are the lies they tell ya in school. In regards to domestic violence it was said “domestic violence is equally distributed among all social classes, but we see less of the higher SES because they cover it up more.” This is simply not true. People at the lower SES tend to have more problems overall, limited coping skills, and a multitude of problems. People of low SES also have less education as an overall.

This is not to say that those in the lower SES cannot raise healthy, happy and successful children. They can, and they do. Many of them raise their children to pursue education. With education comes the ability to move up a class. However, those in the higher ranks, have less external issues, such as food, housing, and meeting basic needs. Can educated people have f***ed up children? Absolutely. But as a general rule, with the exception of sex offenders, children from lower SES families tend to have a greater potential for physical abuse, drug abuse, etc. Chaotic environments make for chaotic lives. Educated parents tend to have greater communication skills, coping skills and buy into societal norms, which discourage abusive behaviors.

I agree with the poster about critical thinking. Marion, you aren’t the sharpest tool in the shed here, you’re a simpleton, and your posts reflect arrogance and entitlement. However, you do stir up a good discussion here and there, so I give ya that.

Arraya, great post. I really enjoy your well written and insightful posts, even if they are dismal. I concur with your hypotheses on many matters.

[Ricechex]

Marion….I am doubtful you have much experience in the field. You wrote:

If you feel this way, I feel sorry for you. Some of the most messed up kids in the world come from family’s where they do not get enough nurturing from their parents, or are physically and emotionally abused. This has nothing to do with the educational level of the parents. Parents that have a high educational level abuse, just as much as parents who only graduated high school. No diff here.

My response:
There is a difference. These are the lies they tell ya in school. In regards to domestic violence it was said “domestic violence is equally distributed among all social classes, but we see less of the higher SES because they cover it up more.” This is simply not true. People at the lower SES tend to have more problems overall, limited coping skills, and a multitude of problems. People of low SES also have less education as an overall.

This is not to say that those in the lower SES cannot raise healthy, happy and successful children. They can, and they do. Many of them raise their children to pursue education. With education comes the ability to move up a class. However, those in the higher ranks, have less external issues, such as food, housing, and meeting basic needs. Can educated people have f***ed up children? Absolutely. But as a general rule, with the exception of sex offenders, children from lower SES families tend to have a greater potential for physical abuse, drug abuse, etc. Chaotic environments make for chaotic lives. Educated parents tend to have greater communication skills, coping skills and buy into societal norms, which discourage abusive behaviors.

I agree with the poster about critical thinking. Marion, you aren’t the sharpest tool in the shed here, you’re a simpleton, and your posts reflect arrogance and entitlement. However, you do stir up a good discussion here and there, so I give ya that.

Arraya, great post. I really enjoy your well written and insightful posts, even if they are dismal. I concur with your hypotheses on many matters.

[Ricechex]

Marion….I am doubtful you have much experience in the field. You wrote:

If you feel this way, I feel sorry for you. Some of the most messed up kids in the world come from family’s where they do not get enough nurturing from their parents, or are physically and emotionally abused. This has nothing to do with the educational level of the parents. Parents that have a high educational level abuse, just as much as parents who only graduated high school. No diff here.

My response:
There is a difference. These are the lies they tell ya in school. In regards to domestic violence it was said “domestic violence is equally distributed among all social classes, but we see less of the higher SES because they cover it up more.” This is simply not true. People at the lower SES tend to have more problems overall, limited coping skills, and a multitude of problems. People of low SES also have less education as an overall.

This is not to say that those in the lower SES cannot raise healthy, happy and successful children. They can, and they do. Many of them raise their children to pursue education. With education comes the ability to move up a class. However, those in the higher ranks, have less external issues, such as food, housing, and meeting basic needs. Can educated people have f***ed up children? Absolutely. But as a general rule, with the exception of sex offenders, children from lower SES families tend to have a greater potential for physical abuse, drug abuse, etc. Chaotic environments make for chaotic lives. Educated parents tend to have greater communication skills, coping skills and buy into societal norms, which discourage abusive behaviors.

I agree with the poster about critical thinking. Marion, you aren’t the sharpest tool in the shed here, you’re a simpleton, and your posts reflect arrogance and entitlement. However, you do stir up a good discussion here and there, so I give ya that.

Arraya, great post. I really enjoy your well written and insightful posts, even if they are dismal. I concur with your hypotheses on many matters.

[Ricechex]

Marion….I am doubtful you have much experience in the field. You wrote:

If you feel this way, I feel sorry for you. Some of the most messed up kids in the world come from family’s where they do not get enough nurturing from their parents, or are physically and emotionally abused. This has nothing to do with the educational level of the parents. Parents that have a high educational level abuse, just as much as parents who only graduated high school. No diff here.

My response:
There is a difference. These are the lies they tell ya in school. In regards to domestic violence it was said “domestic violence is equally distributed among all social classes, but we see less of the higher SES because they cover it up more.” This is simply not true. People at the lower SES tend to have more problems overall, limited coping skills, and a multitude of problems. People of low SES also have less education as an overall.

This is not to say that those in the lower SES cannot raise healthy, happy and successful children. They can, and they do. Many of them raise their children to pursue education. With education comes the ability to move up a class. However, those in the higher ranks, have less external issues, such as food, housing, and meeting basic needs. Can educated people have f***ed up children? Absolutely. But as a general rule, with the exception of sex offenders, children from lower SES families tend to have a greater potential for physical abuse, drug abuse, etc. Chaotic environments make for chaotic lives. Educated parents tend to have greater communication skills, coping skills and buy into societal norms, which discourage abusive behaviors.

I agree with the poster about critical thinking. Marion, you aren’t the sharpest tool in the shed here, you’re a simpleton, and your posts reflect arrogance and entitlement. However, you do stir up a good discussion here and there, so I give ya that.

Arraya, great post. I really enjoy your well written and insightful posts, even if they are dismal. I concur with your hypotheses on many matters.

[Author]

Posts