In A Traditional Marriage, A Woman Don’t Need No Money

[Brother_Rapp]

Giovanni Casanova
Moderator

I have tried my best to be civil with you. I see that that was a waste of my efforts. You just go ahead and say whatever you want in whatever manner that pleases you.I'm not going to respond to you any more.

 

[Wyldfire]

Gio...you seem a bit "uptight". Perhaps you might want to consider a good old-fashioned colon cleanse to loosen you up a bit.

 

[MetalFortress]

"Your argument lacks any real merit, because it is comprised merely of you saying, "Things should be done my way because I say so!" "

And your argument consists of the same thing, with a few extra swear words and "retards" thrown around randomly. You're a tool.

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

Originally posted by MetalFortress
And your argument consists of the same thing, with a few extra swear words and "retards" thrown around randomly. You're a tool.

Not only is your response ironic, but it proves my point. You cannot respond to that type of argument with logic and reasoning because there is no logic or reasoning to argue with.

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

I also find it instructive that more than half of the people responding to this poll disagree 100%.

 

[Brother_Rapp]

I feel that debates serve a very good purpose. Through the jousting of ideas, new meanings can be formed. I know that I am not perfect. I am also pretty sure that no one else walking this planet is perfect either. I have formed beliefs about various aspects of life. In my attempt to determine the validity of those beliefs, I have to throw them out to others. Why? There may be something that I didn’t take into consideration. As I said before, I am not perfect. I can make mistakes. But the validity of a belief cannot be based on the theory that “Might Is Right”, the level of intelligence and/ or the character of the messenger. 1+ 1 = 2 no matter who says it. You can have atomic bombs on your side and the other guy may only have a baseball bat, it doesn’t matter. 1 + 1 will still equal 2. That’s because it was theorized and then proven. Look at the discovery of America by Christopher Columbus. He wasn’t sure that the world was round. The guy was ridiculed. He was given criminals to man the boats. He theorized it was round, then he tested his theory. If I were living back then, I can only hope that I wouldn’t have let peer pressure prevent me from thinking that the guy could be right.

I believe that I am an intelligent person. But just as I am more intelligent then some, there are others more intelligent then myself. So fyckin’ what!! If I want to make fun of someone’s intelligence, then I should start and stop with my own. My clothes are better then some, but not as good as others. So if I want to make fun of someone’s clothes, I should start and stop with my own. Whatever you have and are, there will always be others who are better off then you and worst off then you. There is no place in a debate for the making of fun of others in an attempt to win an argument.

This is the United States of America. This isn’t the former Soviet Union. This isn’t China. This isn’t North Korea. No one should be intimidated into not voicing his views. So I welcome the views of others. I hope that you may find something that I didn’t think about in the formation of my views. No spit balls or corked bats, just what you honestly believe. Now who wants to jump into the batter’s box?

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

Originally posted by Brother_Rapp
This is the United States of America. This isn’t the former Soviet Union. This isn’t China. This isn’t North Korea. No one should be intimidated into not voicing his views. So I welcome the views of others. I hope that you may find something that I didn’t think about in the formation of my views. No spit balls or corked bats, just what you honestly believe. Now who was to jump into the batter’s box?

It is my view that you're an idiot. Why won't you just welcome my view?

 

[Wyldfire]

Originally posted by Giovanni Casanova
I'm nice and loose, but not in the colon.

Ya know...that REALLY doesn't sound right. Are you trying to say that when you toss around the pig skin you play Wide Receiver? hehehehehe

Gawd I crack myself up!

 

[Wyldfire]

Originally posted by Giovanni Casanova
I said NOT in the colon.

Gio...I think you might be slightly confused as to what your colon is.

Here ya go:

http://www.mobyhealth.com/sub/graphics/colon.jpg

 

[Wyldfire]

Originally posted by Giovanni Casanova
I know what a gotdamned colon is.

I just don't happen to be "loose" there.

Yeah...you're pretty "retentive" there, actually.

(Relax Gio...I'm just f*ckin' with ya because you get annoyed with me too easily. It's entertaining to me...I'm not going to lie. )

 

[Climax]

tsk tsk tsk.........

Giovanni Casanova: u suck! (Just felt like joining in with the flame war)

Anyways.... I'm not gonna write a long essay or wateva.. all i can say is that both you Giovanni Casanova, and Brother_Rapp have your good points here and there... But overall I'm going to have to agree with Mr Gio.. and like it was mentioned before by Gio himself, look at the poll results, they speak for themselves

Well anyways, I'm on my way out.. feel free to flame me


Laterz...

 

[MetalFortress]

Originally posted by Giovanni Casanova
Not only is your response ironic, but it proves my point. You cannot respond to that type of argument with logic and reasoning because there is no logic or reasoning to argue with.

Actually, you use logic and reasoning to defeat illogical and unreasonable words. Even you should know that. I'm glad you're too scared of arguing correctly though. Oh wait, that's just a bad excuse.

I don't even agree with this guy's main point, but you're just being stupid.

 

[Brother_Rapp]

~ªêQµïTª$~

Poll results can be interesting, but they can be interpreted in a number of ways. For one thing, the entire argument is on going. These three pages have explored different aspects of the initial argument. People who originally voted before page two may now have a change of heart after page two. There are also those that just want to be on a wining side. They watch the flow and then go with it. The poll is also a determination of the votes cast by those that are aware of and eligible to vote. I left the polling open forever, so it will be interesting to see how it goes over an extended period of time as those that are already members who haven’t vote do so and new members coming in vote as well. It’s not over yet.

 

[Giovanni Casanova]

Originally posted by MetalFortress
Actually, you use logic and reasoning to defeat illogical and unreasonable words. Even you should know that. I'm glad you're too scared of arguing correctly though.

Arguing correctly with what? There's nothing there to argue with. Saying women should be subservient to men... you can't argue that with logic because it's just stupid. That's like saying that black people should serve white people... now argue that with logic. It's stupid, but it isn't based in logic so you can't argue it with logic. Even if you try, it won't matter because any retard that says it isn't going to be swayed by logic and reason anyhow.

But they still deserve to be called retards.

 

[Brother_Rapp]

~ªêQµïTª$~

MetalFortress


A woman’s traditional part is to give the guy the power of control. A man will not care about something that doesn't belong to him. He should find a woman who is prepared to surrender power in exchange for love. Marriage is about union, two people becoming one. For women, surrender of power (her independence ergo money) is the essence of love.

If a woman can't trust a man with her money and her whole life, she doesn't love him and shouldn't marry him

Would you two gentlemen care to comment on this?

 

[MetalFortress]

Originally posted by Giovanni Casanova
Arguing correctly with what? There's nothing there to argue with. Saying women should be subservient to men... you can't argue that with logic because it's just stupid. That's like saying that black people should serve white people... now argue that with logic. It's stupid, but it isn't based in logic so you can't argue it with logic. Even if you try, it won't matter because any retard that says it isn't going to be swayed by logic and reason anyhow.

But they still deserve to be called retards.

Okay, I'll argue it with logic. Ever heard of studies on mental capacity of blacks and whites? Just because the racist won't listen doesn't make the argument itself invalid.

 

[Brother_Rapp]

She just don't need no two, three hundred dollars in her pocket. The guy should determine the direction of the main money. I even said earlier that she should have cigarette money, and gas money and enough money to do as he might want her to do something. No man should want to be nickled and dimed to death. Who would want to be bothered every minute for something. I would hope that he would have enough sense to be sure she had spending money for incidentals.

 

[MetalFortress]

Originally posted by Brother_Rapp
~ªêQµïTª$~

MetalFortress


A woman’s traditional part is to give the guy the power of control. A man will not care about something that doesn't belong to him. He should find a woman who is prepared to surrender power in exchange for love. Marriage is about union, two people becoming one. For women, surrender of power (her independence ergo money) is the essence of love.

If a woman can't trust a man with her money and her whole life, she doesn't love him and shouldn't marry him

Would you two gentlemen care to comment on this?

I'm not arguing any of that, because I agree with it. But I'm not going to be so limited in how much money she can have. If she can't be trusted to be smart with the money I bring home, then there's a problem there.

 

[Brother_Rapp]

MetalFortress

In the previous post, I stated "not no two or three hundred dollars" in her purse. That's my thinmking.Others my have a different level. And it ain't that her name can't be on the bank account also.I got no problem with that. She has a right to know where the money is going. He has a right to know what she's gonna cook that night. Ain't no secrets around here. There has to be communication in a marriage for it to survive.


Just like she gives him the power, she can take it away and file for divorce. A man holds the power with her consent, and not by force.

Men traditionally respond to the weakness of women not to power. They want to be needed in that respect. An independent minded woman doesn’t need protection. Hence, he doesn’t want to screw her. Men want power. Women want love. The female surrenders and allows the male to protect and possess her. By encouraging young women to be "strong and independent", feminism has given them a mental dyck. Men become a needless duplication of what these liberated bytches do. Why then do they need men? A man cannot love a woman if he doesn't have the power to grant her wishes. When the husband has the power, he can and does his best within reason to make his wife happy. The power is thus used for the benefit of the two of them.

 

[MetalFortress]

I agree. I also love how the only liberal argument to this is "derrr u must be insecure oll im more sufusticated then u"