Times have changed.

Originally Posted by MrESqueek

Chardish, there's a difference between making a mathematical assumption and a logical assumption. I can't say 2+2 = 5 (Even though I have a shirt that agrees with me) and get away with it. It's common knowledge that 2+2 is AND ALWAYS IS 4.

Only that's because what you've been taught your whole life by oppressive teachers who won't let you think for yourself. FORM YOUR OWN BELIEFS!

And Kilga, the ONLY topic I locked was the atheism thread because thet was a nonsensical rant on Aedak's part against Christianity.

[Aedak]

Originally Posted by chardish

And Kilga, the ONLY topic I locked was the atheism thread because thet was a nonsensical rant on Aedak's part against Christianity.

And you edited out a page and a half of good argument of mine. Good job Childish! Attempt to keep yourself from looking ignorant when I show you evolution has been observed and proven (while Creationism hasn't) and you edit my argument out.

[flypie743]

Good job Childish!

You spelled his name wrong.

[Aedak]

Originally Posted by flypie743

You spelled his name wrong.

That's his new nickname, as I specified in the post he edited of mine.

[DracIV]

I'm fairly certain I am going to mirror your speech pattern in a non-mocking form of response.

I believe everyone is to be respected and Chivalry upheld. Chivalry earns you respect.

I believe life is sacred, as do a huge portion of the world, but the question of when life begins and whether a more advanced (in time) life is worth sacrificing for a younger potential life has become a major problem.

I believe in being honest in all I do. Fools and the ignorant believe that only the self matters and the improvement for one means the loss for another. Perhaps someone should introduce them to Reality and the "Game Theory" of mathematics. Reality says the other people around you effect you and matter, Game Theory says that all players can improve to a certain point before one must lose some for another to gain, and that point is most definately not reached in Reality, only perceived.

Morality has not fallen, although I agree the truest path has become vague. I've written entire essays on why the path has become vague, but the simplest reason is that there are now so many more paths to choose from and so many more acceptable paths to others that no true path remains and only approximates choices are left. It's easy to become lost, but that's why there are guides in life who come back to help you onto the right path.

[QreepyBORIS]

Originally Posted by chardish

1+2 = 5649

I'm correct, because I believe this to be true. It doesn't matter what anyone else thinks or what is actually correct, just as long as it's good enough for me it's socially acceptable.

Oh, shit,you divided by zero!


You said "I am correct...It doesn't matter...what is actually correct."

Wait, did you just contradict yourself?

[Anticrombie0909]

My morals are that I feel it is morally incorrect to have morals.

Heyyy...

[jewpinthethird]

I agree with Laharl. Very very very much.

But...times change, people change.
In all honesty, I believe there are two major things responsible for the decline of morals.
Technology and lack of relegion.

I love technology, and I am not religious, however I do believe women are to be respected. Women, after all, are the givers of life. However, I also believe it is a women's right to choose, not some Congress person in Washington DC.

Just because I dont believe in a God, that doesnt mean I am a bad person.

[Aedak]

Originally Posted by jewpinthethird

I love technology, and I am not religious, however I do believe women are to be respected. Women, after all, are the givers of life. However, I also believe it is a women's right to choose, not some Congress person in Washington DC.

Just because I dont believe in a God, that doesnt mean I am a bad person.

Very much agreed, I concur.

[JurseyRider734]

Let's look at the amount of men who respect women that HAVE wives or girlfriends....


Not look at the ones who don't.


HMMM....I SENSE A PATTERN :O

[Laharl]

Originally Posted by MrESqueek

Whole entire = redundant.

Redundancy = driving point towards an idea wishing to be expressed.

@ Jursey: Uhm... most guys that have girlfriends are just as guilty of not respecting women as are most guys that don't have one. In fact, the majority of guys 14 to 24 or so that have girlfriends are the reason I say that men don't respect women. I can't stand the way I see some girls treated by those that "love them".

And half of all marriages end in divorce (IIRC, anyway). Even married men don't really see their spouse as anything more than an object at times.

[Aedak]

Originally Posted by Laharl

Redundancy = driving point towards an idea wishing to be expressed.

@ Jursey: Uhm... most guys that have girlfriends are just as guilty of not respecting women as are most guys that don't have one. In fact, the majority of guys 14 to 24 or so that have girlfriends are the reason I say that men don't respect women. I can't stand the way I see some girls treated by those that "love them".

You really live in a sad part of the world my friend. I don't know where you're from, but I feel sorry for your town, city, or where ever it is you call home. I think if you make a blanket statement such as "the majority of guys 14 to 24... that men don't respect women" - You really have not seen much of the world. Now don't get me wrong, I see where you are coming from. You think that more men should treat their girlfriends or wives with respect. This is probably somewhat true, but I think it's unfair to make a generalization as you did and say most men between this age range do "such and such" - It's simply not true, nor is it measureable within a scientific study.

And half of all marriages end in divorce (IIRC, anyway). Even married men don't really see their spouse as anything more than an object at times.

A young couple marrying for the first time today has a lifetime divorce risk of 40%, unless current trends change significantly. So in essence you're right. About half of young people's marriages will end in divorce. But, there are many more factors you're not talking about here. I will mention a few so you understand my point; which is that there is no unifying reason (such as men not treating their wives with respect) for which marriage will end in divorce.

One factor is quite obvious to me, and that is that young people have low incomes. Youthful marriages are a risk factor to divorce: young people may be in a less good position to marry for the right reason. Furthermore, they are not as mature as older persons are to cope with conflict and their personalities have not yet stabilized.

Another factor is personal goals. Low incomes and poverty are risk factors for divorce as is a very rapid upward social mobility where the acquisition of money and status is a prime motive. This may be because such a pursuit of materialism takes time away from relationships or reflects values which are incompatible with a good conjugal life. This would lead to a whole other discussion of materialism though, and I do not want to get into it at the moment.

Also, parental divorce correlates with higher divorce rates among their children later on, especially so when the parental marriage had a low level of conflict--such parents are less committed to marriage and may transmit this value to their children.

Low religiosity is related to lower marital happiness and a higher propensity to divorce. Furthermore, religious and to some extent racial heterogamy are risk factors for marital instability, perhaps because of a lack of shared values.

Divorce rates were already slowly inching up in the 19th century as the result of secularization trends, the liberalization of norms concerning individual choice, and the lessening of religious influence. The religious aspect is now largely missing in the institution of marriage: this is often referred to as the desacralization of marriage. Marriage has become an individual choice rather than a covenant before God and this change has contributed to the acceptance of its temporal nature.

These sociocultural trends later came to influence the liberalization of divorce laws. In turn, easier divorce laws, such as those promulgated in the 1960s and 1980s (I think), are usually followed by an increase in divorce. Then, such laws signal the normalization of divorce. Hence, divorce lost its stigma and became socially accepted. These cultural and legal factors have made it easier for people to be less attached to marriage as an institution and consequently to turn to divorce.

The trends toward individualism that began two centuries ago have resulted in an emphasis on rights rather than duties. When individualism is coupled with an ideology of gratification, particularly sexual and psychological, where people are encouraged to be "happy" and "fulfilled," it follows that the spouses' mentality about their marriage is affected. Marriage is no longer seen as an institution centered on mutual responsibilities but is now based on the pursuit of happiness, fulfillment, and companionship. More is demanded of marriage in terms of personal gratification. As R.L. Simons put it, "If the raison d'être for marriage is mutual love and support, it is difficult for people to justify staying in a relationship where this is no longer present."

Along with the trends, I think Canadians and Americans have developed a lower threshold of tolerance when their marriage does not meet with their expectations for personal fulfillment. All things considered, while more is expected of marriage, couples are also less tolerant about its challenges and less willing to shoulder the sacrifices it may require. At the positive level, however, this also means that women now leave abusive relationships that would have kept them captive 40 years ago.

[JurseyRider734]

I still think that guys that treat women with more respect either get a. better wives/girlfriends and b. their relationships last longer

Originally Posted by Aedak

And you edited out a page and a half of good argument of mine. Good job Childish!

1) Please do not call me "Childish" again. I am asking you nicely. This is a respect issue.

2) I edited your topic because usually when a topic gets locked, that means discussion on it is over.

[xObserveRx]

Originally Posted by jurseyrider734

I still think that guys that treat women with more respect either get a. better wives/girlfriends and b. their relationships last longer

or they don't end up with women at all.

The way i see it, men and women put themselves in harm's way. It's simply the way it is. If you look at a lot of women in their late teens, early twenties, you will more often than not find one complaing about their partner in some way or another, whether its lack of manners, consideration issues, not being emotional enough, etc.

You could look at men as well, and you'll prolly find almost the same amount that would have something to say about their partner's actions, or attitude as well.

I think its very rare these days to find a young person who completely accepts their partner.

I think this comes from a variety of different reasons:

1. I think a lot of the time, people are motivated to find the best in people. This of course, is a very good thing to be doing, yet it can sometimes blind people to the bad in a partner. If others you know are commenting that your partner isn't what you believe he is, either listen to them seriously, or prove to them that they're wrong.

2. People pick partners for a wrong reason. Now this happens a lot. Obviously being human beings, we usually tend to pick or desire a partner that we're physically attracted to. This is totally fine, but i believe it sometimes leads to bad things. I'm not saying that good looking people are at fault here, because they're not. I'm just saying that sometimes you can run into jealousy issues, which will ultimately lead to seperation.

I'm sure there's many other reasons as well, but that's all i have for now.

I just think that if you're picking the wrong people all the time, that 40% divorce rate is never going to come down.

[GuidoHunter]

Chivalry is a fantastic idea. I'm glad my parents smacked me around when I did things like not opening the car door for my girlfriend.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[stretchypanda]

@Jursey: Sadly, girls go for the bad boy, and thus end up in relationships with men who treat them like ass. It's that, "But he's nice to me when we're alone!!" mentality. "Sure, he may have physically abused his last girlfriend, and the one before that might still be reeling from the emotional turmoil he caused, but he LOVES me, and he'll CHANGE for me!" I've spent many a conversation with many a really, really, really nice guy about why the good girls go for the bad boys. It's because women are stupid.

@Laharl: I see a lot wrong with today, but it gives me a reason to keep going. I have nothing but hope for our world, because I know dozens of people who are going to change it. It's good that you feel the way you do, as long as you don't despair. AND the high divorce rate has WAY too many factors to blame the lack of respect for women... hell, most women forgive an adulterous spouse.

As for chivalry, I enjoy those nice little things like having a door held open for me, or not having to carry a heavy duffel bag (even though I COULD), but I see it more as just.. nice. I'll open a door for a guy or help him carry stuff any day. It's common courtesy, and I don't feel like being on a higher plane. I used to have to race a guy to my car so I could open my own goddamn door every now and then.

I'm glad my parents smacked me around when I did things like not opening the car door for my girlfriend.

Me too, it made me laugh.

[JurseyRider734]

Yeah, but the girl ends up leaving that guy anyways, I mean, she doesn't end up spending the rest of her life with that guy unless she is REALLY desperate or something.

[stretchypanda]

It's not so much desperation as it's fear. Sometimes fear for personal safety, but not always. A guy like that can convince a girl that she is unworthy of being loved, and that she should thank her lucky stars every day that he decided to bless her with his presence. It's not because she is weak or vulnerable that she believes this, but simply because it is something she fears -- that she will end up alone. I've been in this kind of a relationship. It's the worst feeling I've ever experienced, to want out, but to feel trapped because if I leave him, what else will I have? It takes an enormous amount of courage and strength to leave someone like that. In my case, it took a good book, an insightful boss, an ex, and several of my best friends whom I had not seen in three years. I never thought I could be one of those girls.. I've always been very cynical about relationships like that ("Why doesn't she just leave?"), but it can happen to all of us. I don't know how to make it NOT happen for other girls because even if there was some database of all the emotionally abusive men in the world, we wouldn't pay attention to it. As humans and women we are stubborn. We just have to have good people behind us ready to fix things when we finally shake off the "But he LOVES me" haze..

[Moogy]

I find it hilarious that someone named "Laharl" started this topic.