Man gives birth, in canada.
05-Jul-2008, 03:26 AM
#62
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: GTA
Posts: 2,305
so all this talk about why this is so crazy and horrible, can someone explain why with a reason outside of 'it's not traditional'?
women wearing bikinis and having jobs used to be unheard of.
slaves having the ability for their kids to get an education was unheard and "just wrong"
who does this harm and why does this make all of you so upset?
There isn't this much outrage about the war in Iraq over this, a woman with a ***** having a single child.
big fking deal
women wearing bikinis and having jobs used to be unheard of.
slaves having the ability for their kids to get an education was unheard and "just wrong"
who does this harm and why does this make all of you so upset?
There isn't this much outrage about the war in Iraq over this, a woman with a ***** having a single child.
big fking deal
05-Jul-2008, 09:57 AM
#65
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,570
so all this talk about why this is so crazy and horrible, can someone explain why with a reason outside of 'it's not traditional'?
women wearing bikinis and having jobs used to be unheard of.
slaves having the ability for their kids to get an education was unheard and "just wrong"
who does this harm and why does this make all of you so upset?
There isn't this much outrage about the war in Iraq over this, a woman with a ***** having a single child.
big fking deal
women wearing bikinis and having jobs used to be unheard of.
slaves having the ability for their kids to get an education was unheard and "just wrong"
who does this harm and why does this make all of you so upset?
There isn't this much outrage about the war in Iraq over this, a woman with a ***** having a single child.
big fking deal
The abovesaid change is positive b/c it helps us stop oppression and promote an egalitarian society; whereas a man having a child is WRONGGGGG....It can never be justified and should never be accepted as being normal/acceptable. The day we (the human race) begin to accept and support it, that would be the end of the world right there.
So whatever you believe in Bruce (and I have no ****ing clue what you believe in) that's your choice; but you cannot claim that a man having a child is acceptable and not a big deal.
05-Jul-2008, 01:58 PM
#67
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 23,881
how would we cease to exist if women keep having children? do you people read before you type things out?
a man who was born a woman...WOMAN gave birth to a child...who woulda thought a woman would have a child that chooses to live her life now as a man?? the concept is so difficult for you guys, like c'mon...I bet these people will love this child more than many "normal" couples in the world...and heck I dont know what some of y'all are complaining about when your mom's have just as much body hair as this guy...I know how them Italian, middle eastern women get y0!!
a man who was born a woman...WOMAN gave birth to a child...who woulda thought a woman would have a child that chooses to live her life now as a man?? the concept is so difficult for you guys, like c'mon...I bet these people will love this child more than many "normal" couples in the world...and heck I dont know what some of y'all are complaining about when your mom's have just as much body hair as this guy...I know how them Italian, middle eastern women get y0!!
07-Jul-2008, 07:10 AM
#72
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Etobicoke
Posts: 142
i's not "he", it's fukkked up "she". it's never gonna be a "he" even if they put a roll of skin that looks like a ***** and a pump to get it up...or whatever they do for the sex-change op. this is stupid. and ur not born gay, i dont believe in that nonsense. u become gay because of the environment you grow up in. like that lil girl...i'll bet you whatever u want that she won't be heterosexual.
09-Jul-2008, 11:32 PM
#74
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 599
I don't wanna get too involved in this...but I do have VERY strong opinions on stuff like this...and I gotta say I agree with Razvan 100% here...its the baby that concerns me more than the parents.
Girls that think they're men should not be having kids.
09-Jul-2008, 11:39 PM
#76
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 23,881
okay, nobody chooses to be gay...well no...no man willingly wants to be with other men...women are naturally bi-curious...no man is bi sexual...that just makes no sense...I dont even know why women like men for that matter...
10-Jul-2008, 01:04 AM
#77
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 301
It has something to do with birds and bees. 
As for the topic, technically its still a woman giving birth, so I dont see all the scientific buzz around it.
It seems to me issues like this always boil down to a basic argument of progress vs no progress. But what defines progress? Is it simply moving in the right direction?
I see people in this thread saying that the reasons for which we are against this issue are rooted in tradition, meaning that we are detrimental to progress. If progress is moving in the right direction, then how is a man giving birth to a child considered progress?
The examples of slavery, or womens rights dont stack up as good examples. Have they allowed us to move in the right direction? Most certainly. But how does a man giving birth in any way benefit society? And if it does not, wouldn't the issue then be detrimental to progress?
Some might argue that this is a case of freedom. That progress is made by allowing the freedom of a man to give birth. But I ask, what defines freedom? Freedom in its purest form would be the ability to do WHATEVER one pleases would it not? Does true freedom exist? In essence it does, yet we still place boundaries on it. Why? Are these boundaries detrimental to progress? It appears they are not. So then this can not be a case of freedom.
If the issue at hand offers nothing to benefit society, thus making no progress, and nulifying the argument for freedom, then what is the reason for supporting it?
Is it simple deviant behaviour and an effort to undermine true progress perhaps?
I hope no one is offended by my comments, as my intentions aren't to target any individuals. My comments are purely an application of logic from my perspective and understanding of the subject matter.
As for the topic, technically its still a woman giving birth, so I dont see all the scientific buzz around it.
It seems to me issues like this always boil down to a basic argument of progress vs no progress. But what defines progress? Is it simply moving in the right direction?
I see people in this thread saying that the reasons for which we are against this issue are rooted in tradition, meaning that we are detrimental to progress. If progress is moving in the right direction, then how is a man giving birth to a child considered progress?
The examples of slavery, or womens rights dont stack up as good examples. Have they allowed us to move in the right direction? Most certainly. But how does a man giving birth in any way benefit society? And if it does not, wouldn't the issue then be detrimental to progress?
Some might argue that this is a case of freedom. That progress is made by allowing the freedom of a man to give birth. But I ask, what defines freedom? Freedom in its purest form would be the ability to do WHATEVER one pleases would it not? Does true freedom exist? In essence it does, yet we still place boundaries on it. Why? Are these boundaries detrimental to progress? It appears they are not. So then this can not be a case of freedom.
If the issue at hand offers nothing to benefit society, thus making no progress, and nulifying the argument for freedom, then what is the reason for supporting it?
Is it simple deviant behaviour and an effort to undermine true progress perhaps?
I hope no one is offended by my comments, as my intentions aren't to target any individuals. My comments are purely an application of logic from my perspective and understanding of the subject matter.
10-Jul-2008, 08:08 AM
#78
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: At your moms
Posts: 2,633
It has something to do with birds and bees.
As for the topic, technically its still a woman giving birth, so I dont see all the scientific buzz around it.
It seems to me issues like this always boil down to a basic argument of progress vs no progress. But what defines progress? Is it simply moving in the right direction?
I see people in this thread saying that the reasons for which we are against this issue are rooted in tradition, meaning that we are detrimental to progress. If progress is moving in the right direction, then how is a man giving birth to a child considered progress?
The examples of slavery, or womens rights dont stack up as good examples. Have they allowed us to move in the right direction? Most certainly. But how does a man giving birth in any way benefit society? And if it does not, wouldn't the issue then be detrimental to progress?
Some might argue that this is a case of freedom. That progress is made by allowing the freedom of a man to give birth. But I ask, what defines freedom? Freedom in its purest form would be the ability to do WHATEVER one pleases would it not? Does true freedom exist? In essence it does, yet we still place boundaries on it. Why? Are these boundaries detrimental to progress? It appears they are not. So then this can not be a case of freedom.
If the issue at hand offers nothing to benefit society, thus making no progress, and nulifying the argument for freedom, then what is the reason for supporting it?
Is it simple deviant behaviour and an effort to undermine true progress perhaps?
I hope no one is offended by my comments, as my intentions aren't to target any individuals. My comments are purely an application of logic from my perspective and understanding of the subject matter.
As for the topic, technically its still a woman giving birth, so I dont see all the scientific buzz around it.
It seems to me issues like this always boil down to a basic argument of progress vs no progress. But what defines progress? Is it simply moving in the right direction?
I see people in this thread saying that the reasons for which we are against this issue are rooted in tradition, meaning that we are detrimental to progress. If progress is moving in the right direction, then how is a man giving birth to a child considered progress?
The examples of slavery, or womens rights dont stack up as good examples. Have they allowed us to move in the right direction? Most certainly. But how does a man giving birth in any way benefit society? And if it does not, wouldn't the issue then be detrimental to progress?
Some might argue that this is a case of freedom. That progress is made by allowing the freedom of a man to give birth. But I ask, what defines freedom? Freedom in its purest form would be the ability to do WHATEVER one pleases would it not? Does true freedom exist? In essence it does, yet we still place boundaries on it. Why? Are these boundaries detrimental to progress? It appears they are not. So then this can not be a case of freedom.
If the issue at hand offers nothing to benefit society, thus making no progress, and nulifying the argument for freedom, then what is the reason for supporting it?
Is it simple deviant behaviour and an effort to undermine true progress perhaps?
I hope no one is offended by my comments, as my intentions aren't to target any individuals. My comments are purely an application of logic from my perspective and understanding of the subject matter.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
imported_luvmycivic
Media - Non-Car Related
5
10-Apr-2007 12:55 AM
