You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #80: You want serious answers? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
qdemn7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-19-07 04:25 AM
Response to Reply #78
80. You want serious answers?
Here are my real thoughts and feelings.

I agree that some women understand the preciousness of life but apparently many don't. Just as a few examples; The continuing cases of women having child after child, being unable to care for them so they all live in poverty, but refusing to get sterilized or even use contraception. Or having a child and dumping it in the garbage, like... garbage, despite the fact there are so many couples begging for children. Or women who abandon their children, either physically or emotionally just so they can have a man. And then we hit the rock of abortion, and I'm pro-choice, BTW.

For many men, myself included, what appears to be the supreme hypocrisy of women are their stark views between the sacredness of life and abortion. If American women care about life, so much, then why do they have 1,000,000 abortions a year? After all it is a human life, not an inanimate object. So if they were really concerned, they could have the child and give it up. As I stated couples are begging for children. BUT, what truly angers me and other men, is that women seem to so concerned about life; ie; let's ban guns, let's have laws for this, laws for that, until THEIR freedom is personally threatened. It seems the only personal right women really understand is the right to choose.

The reason so many of us (men) are passionate is that we regard the RKBA (Right to Keep and Bear Arms) the way ardent feminists regard the Right to Choose. In effect we are saying "This is MY body, and NO ONE is going to tell me what I can do with it." This also extends to the "child" of my body which for many men is the fruit of their labors, their wealth and their property. By attempting to remove the "choice", that is the decision whether or not to own a gun, you are attempting to exert dominion over my body, and my property, and this is something that I / we will simply not tolerate. You can make all the arguments about OTHERS getting hurt, or the possibility of something bad happening, and to be frank, it is all irrelevant, since you are thus prioritizing my body as being less important than others. Now it is OK for ME to make that choice, but it is definitely not acceptable for YOU to be doing that. Anymore than it is my place to attempt to tell a women whether, when, how or even if she can reproduce.

In a country based on the Rights of the Individual, you are saying the Group is more important than the Individual, and that is something that is utterly unacceptable to many people in the USA.

Let's get something real clear. I don't care how much you, your friends, and so on think that because "Guns are dangerous" they must be banned. The idea that because "Things are dangerous, they must be restricted, or banned" is what is wrong with this country today. This country is becoming a sissy state and a nanny nation because a bunch of silly, emotional, phobic people of all genders are terrified "someone might get hurt". We are loosing are freedoms because people think that Safety is more important than Freedom.

As far as men having the child, sure it would change some men's minds, but not all. But that can't happen. What has changed in my lifetime, I was born in '57, btw, is how child rearing attitudes among men have changed. Forty years ago it was the woman's job alone. Many men these days are much more involved in their children's lives, much more so than when I was a child. So maybe society is changing slowly.

However saying all the positives, there is this negative.

War is the supreme test of man in which he rises to heights never approached in any other activity. --George S. Patton

Patton said man and he meant just that. War is a male endeavor, always has been. Men enjoy war else we wouldn't engage in it so much. So willingly going off to fight in them. So readily to send our young men to fight them. If war was so terrible, war would end after only one generation. The generation of men that fought a war would never send their sons to fight another one.

I can't find the quote, but someone said something to the effect as follows: War is the supreme act of male bonding men that engage in. In war men find brothers they otherwise never had. In war men are able to prove their manhood in the only way that really matters, to other men. In war men are freed from the "restrictions and constraints" of women. In war men are able to show their love for other men by sacrificing their lives for other men.

I may have went farther than you wanted, but you seem really curious, not just asking rhetorical questions.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC