When you have to carry a child, sustaining it with your body even if you know it may kill you, or cannot live outside your womb, or will require constant medical attention at taxpayer expense because you have no money and this unintended pregnancy ends your career, then you can have a say. Until then, what you think is irrelevant.

You left out birth control failure....not that any of your exceptions exist in this new anti woman law. I hope all the decent thinking women in Texas move. I know some ready to. This can only dumb down an already short bus state.

Rape survivors had no choice. Incest survivors had no choice. Birth control failures were not by choice. None of these are exempt. Medical inability to safely carry a child.....that's up to doctors and courts to determine...doctors and courts with anti choice agendas wielding great power while shirking any responsibility.

You're such a misogynistic asshole. If men carried embryos abortions wouldn't just be available in every doctors office, they would be free, and there would be absolutely zero roadblocks to getting one on demand. You would have had at least three, I know full well you're far too stupid to be smart about sex even if you bore the brunt. You would impose Sharia law to remove autonomy from women only because it's unlikely to effect you. How about this....every time a woman is denied an abortion, the man who got her pregnant must have their entire penis removed and be forced into indentured servitude to pay for the bills....over $200000 on average. When you fight for that and win, you get a voice in this woman's issue.

Every time you get out the tweezers and Jack off, you've aborted millions of potential babies. You've therefore, by your definitions, personally murdered more babies than any group of women ever could. Obviously you don't care a bit when you are the murderers....then those unborn children don't count, even though the bible actually specifically says they do but never mentions abortion.

Hilariously, the party of "personal freedom" to make decisions about your own life doesn't believe women should enjoy that freedom....just like you claim to be the party of law and order....but only for others not yourselves.

If it can't live without help outside the womb, it's not a baby, it's a parasite living off another human being. If you think it's ok to force one person to be a life support system for a not yet human, get your ass down to the hospital and donate your kidney, liver, and stay at least 9 months as a transfusion donor without an option to quit...and pay the bills for those you saved. Until then, shut your idiotic hypocritical mouth you moronic woman hating dumb ass.

The Spartans were right, it's not a human until it's first birthday.

Why aren't you busy telling us how Trump will be reinstated as president in August? You know it will happen, a crack head said so. You do know Trump is pro-abortion and has arranged many, right?

"Abortion is murdering your baby....that's not my opinion, that's fact."
Like all "conservatives", he's completely flipped what he believes is opinion and what is fact.
Abortion doesn't happen to babies, because they have to be born first to be a baby....fact.

Most children do come from single mother homes...because multiple mother homes are quite rare and illegal in many states.

Such asinine twaddle, @bobknight33. Misogynistic babble from a moron.

Try it. If she takes the kid and bolts, it's legal. Even if you manage to get a court order before she leaves state, chances are you won't get equal custody unless she's a documented certifiable nutjob. I say this because you live in a fault state which are invariably the same states backwards enough to automatically give women custody and force fathers to prove the mother is unstable and dangerous, and even then you'll share with her as primary without documented abuse.

So you've been together 20 years and share nothing. What a way to live.

Shared assets when not married aren't divided by the courts. If you want their help, gotta be married or sign an ownership contract with every purchase.

I can find no instance where I said my brother "won". He got custody, that's different from "winning". Be real. If you're going to quote me, please don't make up the quotes. Spending over $100000 on a two week marriage isn't winning by my definition.

That link is off topic. Find a study of similar jobs with similar hours worked and compare salaries, not a study that says average women work X ammount less so overall earning should be X amount less but instead it's X-1 less, so women are overpaid. That's not what their study showed, they're extrapolating there, and ignoring that the lower hours are usually not their choice, but their superiors orders to avoid paying overtime and full benefits to women. Also, they said Married men managers without kids also earn more for each hour at work: they earn $38.40 per hour while married women without kids earn only $28.70. That means that for each hour spent at their jobs, male married managers without kids earn about 34% more than women. 34% more for each hour. Did you read it? Mic drop.

See, more insulting dismissiveness...those women couldn't possibly be more competent or harder workers, they must be succeeding because of preferential treatment. In case you missed it, that's incredibly misogynistic.

What?! Prove it.....with data not an anecdote.

So....You wouldn't marry a crazy person only because of what divorce would cost. Yeah....right.

" I wouldn't even consider marrying anyone that has any adverse indicators" sounds like personal issues to me, they aren't good enough to marry....because of divorce....Again ignoring the prenup that dictates divorce splits.

Lol. Such utter bullshit. Maybe if they have an impairment and no lawyer, and can prove it in court, not because they say so.

Ashley Maddison.

Wedding rings are aphrodisiacs. It's why I don't wear one, hit on repeatedly wearing it, never once without it. My experience differs from your assumptions and statistics, same with my friends. I'm 5'9", so not tall cute and photogenic....but two out of three ain't bad.

Bob said it, you agreed with him and more.

An uncodified partnership is one of convenience or even imaginary. Nothing to stop either of you walking tomorrow if you meet your new soul mate. That's not a stable partnership. It may be exactly what you want. It seems you made up your mind that marriage=bad for men long ago, in which case you should not partake. I hope your path leads to at least half the happiness mine has.

Newt

So weird seeing people disagree with you and offering various examples of marriages that contradict your blanket statements and then you go off spouting shit about subjective pitfalls some minority still experience after being married as if those outcomes are the only possible outcomes or even the norm.
What you two mean to say is DIVORCE is win win for the woman and lose lose for the man, still dead wrong but at least it's the point you two are trying to make.

Objectively, by the numbers, in terms of who benefits if the marriage ends, it's neither in no fault states.

It's asinine of you two to assume the man always has more assets, and more earning power. It's maybe true on average but it's trending away from that, and it's absolutely not in every instance.

My brother won. He got full custody and child support. No alimony for either. In Texas, a non no fault state where the woman is assumed to be the primary child raising parent.

Really, you still think most women don't work? Are you still living in the 1960's? My wife works, has since before we met in 92. I retired in early 2000's. If we divorced, I would get alimony.

I've known plenty of women who lost in marriage, not sure where you come up with that, and for over 1/2 the population, divorce is 50/50 split of marital assets, no winner.

It's only men in fault states who caused the dissolution of the marriage or don't fight for custody that get screwed as you describe. Most of us tossed out the system you describe decades ago. Most of us understand that while women still get paid less for the same work, that's no guarantee she makes less than her husband. As for "marrying up".... plenty of men do that too. Even if your significant other is a homemaker, they contribute enormously to the marriage, at one point they determined the jobs a homemaker does would cost over $80 K per year if you hired people.

With your opinion about women and marriage, I doubt you need to worry about the kind of woman who would marry you. The ones who accept the outdated misogynistic patriarchal mindset you show aren't the ones with much to offer, the desperate and insecure who will take whoever accepts them. They might resemble the women in your descriptions. Treat women better and you'll attract better women.

What makes you think you are some prize that only a near perfect woman would be acceptable to? It sure sounds like you're alone now. How is making the perfect the enemy of the great working for you?

Again, many states have changed the law to no fault, 50/50 splits with no prenup. Hard to be more fair. You complain about issues most Americans evolved out of.

What a ridiculously narcissistic misogynistic viewpoint.

I feel so sorry for your wife, who I imagine you must jab at constantly for making you such a constant and complete loser. She must feel so loved and appreciated, knowing how you feel, that she's nothing but a leech on your life, only taking never giving....in fact giving you nothing while taking from you...everything.- Leonidas

My marriage is nearing 23 years. It was a definite win win for me, and my wife seems to feel the same. We've both carried the other in hard times, and as importantly enjoyed the good times together as a team.

The fact that you've only attracted women with nothing to lose and nothing to offer says a lot more about you than it does about women.

You misogynists just need to keep abreast of the situation.

I recognize there is no answer you would find satisfactory, your emotional bias precludes your ability to reason. You will continue to believe everything you are spoonfed from the left and will only be able to demonize the perceived "right" as monsters the can only win elections by cheating or the riling of the racist, xenophobic, misogynistic, etc. etc. base.

President Carter is our best ex-President but he is wrong about this and is showing poor form in making such comments. He had an opportunity to work to unify the nation but instead chose to further divide us. It's a shame.

Yes, considered that by partisan idiots who couldn't see past their hatred for anything left of Regan....they thought him a dumb country bumpkin too. To the rest of us, he was the last responsible president not interested in using the office for personal gain, one who kept us out of war with Iran, and was cheated out of a second term by the right wing/Regan Iran Contra scandal, which delayed the release of hostages to help Regan win the election.

Read. There's proof of 100 contacts between the campaign and Russia, and an undeniable estimation of their actions which were 100% aimed at electing Trump, because he would divide us even more than Clinton (which is a high bar, to be sure), and be weak on foreign policy.
Edit: for someone trying to deny the efficacy of Russian propaganda, you certainly repeat it a lot.

Look at him go, still building houses by hand. Trump can't walk from one hole to the next tee without getting winded, that's why he drives his cart onto the green.

Nuclear submarine designer....proof of extremely high level intelligence. Commander and tester of same, proof of high level of competence and service to the nation. President bone spurs can't compete in any way.

Wow, Bob. You can't do better? Even you say he's a pedophilic lech at best, and you can name not a single charity he's involved in you know isn't fraudulent? Sad.
That's what you come up with, a joke about his lack of character that's not even a joke because it's true, caught on tape? Sad you see him for the anti humanitarian, misogynistic, infidelity flaunting, charity fraud he is, and still stand with him and smirk. Pathetic Bob. Just pathetic.

So many misogynist jokes... so difficult to decide...

No Bob, you don't need to keep crying "but I love him"....we know you'll gladly ignore any foibles he has while viciously attacking others for the same, or similar but lesser crimes he claimed they were guilty of.
We know you allow him to bold faced lie to you about anything.
We know you're ready and willing to repeat any stupidity or nonsense he feeds you.
We know you're 100% prepared to accept his word over your own eyes, ears, or memory.
We know you're prepared to claim financial and civil gains even though reality disagrees.

You really don't need to keep telling us you love your lying fraud of an abuser....we know.

Do I need to remind you about Carter again? A politician who was never two faced or untruthful. Please, please don't display your stupidity by attempting to attack his undeniably excessive levels of intelligence or morality. Dumb people don't design nuclear submarines, immoral people don't command them with honor....they get phantom bone spurs that miraculously disappear the minute the draft ends so they can screw the wives of their honorable associates while they go to war.

Good, if Trump is really done playing politician, that's great for all of us. I hadn't heard he had quit.
It's just asinine to claim the person holding the most powerful political position in the world isn't a politician. You might as well claim he's not a fraud, not a thief, not a philanderer, not a business failure, not a hypocrite, not immoral, not a misogynist, and not dishonest while you're denying reality.

As noted above, your video evidence and your claims have nothing in common.

I voted.
Like I said elsewhere...
Whatever gains we make (fiscally, job growth, unemployment, trade), it isn't worth having these anti-free speech, misogynistic, fear mongering, racist assholes represent our country and our values.
I'm all for being tough, but you can be firm and yet kind. Right now we are just being bullies.

New low? This is now the status quo. There is a constant attempt to silence the press and whitewash the news to promote a positive image of this shit show.
I'm fairly conservative , especially fiscally. I want immigration reform to happen. I do believe that international trade needs/needed to be renegotiated. But what this administration has caused me to realize is that the misogynistic, racist, fear mongering, anti-science, anti-free speech administration that we have in place isn't worth having; despite whatever gains we may make from it.
But the rush of democrats to make themselves the polar opposites of the republicans isn't doing them any favors either.

I hope they start with him. ;-)

So, he thinks Russia has no churches!?! He thinks Venezuela is religion free?! Lol. What a maroon.
"If" they ever get power? Like 2008, when thousands of Christians were hunted like animals and murdered in the streets and organized religion was outlawed in America?....oh, wait....

UnChristian "Christians" like him are why people are fleeing religions like rats on a sinking ship.
The church is a bastion of pedophiles, racists, misogynists, and charlatans. I, for one, would support legal prosecution and even execution of the leaders of these evil cabals and most vile perpetrators from them, just like I would active members and leaders of NAMBLA, and the forfeiture of all church assets like any other criminal organization would see, they have each destroyed far more than one life, it's not unreasonable to think they should pay with their own. Just think of the dent that could make in the national debt and the criminals that would remove from our communities.

Even I, however, don't advocate (anti) religious warfare, what he's suggesting. I believe our legal system, properly and fairly applied, could easily and righteously eradicate most organized religions if only people didn't turn a blind eye towards their undeniable institutionalised crimes and sins.

Also, shouldn't any Christian hope they would be martyred, isn't that a free ticket into heaven in their belief system? Didn't Jebus tell them to turn the other cheek, not to strike first?

Upvote for exposure, not agreement

Any rational country wouldn't elect a misogynistic, racist compulsive liar as president either though. I'm not expecting much either.