How women are building a shameless society

[Kyle B]

Why? Why should she have an opportunity?

Freedom of speech is guaranteed by the government, meaning that the government (local, state or federal) cannot shut them up. But if she was in my house, business or arena I wouldn't allow her to speak. I'd tell her to shut the fuck up and get the hell out.

And if people want to shout her down to shut her up, so be it. They have every right to do so. That doesn't have anything to do with her "freedom of speech"

I can't remember the specifics of the case, but didn't the Canadian government deny her entry or something?

Edit: Should have done my research, it was a university that she got booted from. Okay, I was basing my comment thinking that the Canadian government shut her up. My bad.

 

[Panacea]

I can't remember the specifics of the case, but didn't the Canadian government deny her entry or something?

Edit: Should have done my research, it was a university that she got booted from. Okay, I was basing my comment thinking that the Canadian government shut her up. My bad.

No, protesters in Canada booed her. Oops lol I failed too, we're all good.

 

[Dana]

So, you missed the part at 8:33 where he says "one of the greatest mistakes America made was to allow women the opportunity to vote". Bigotry comes in all colors, shapes and sizes.

Wow... Yeah I think I'll pass on the video. I refuse to dumb myself down.

 

[porterjack]

I can't remember the specifics of the case, but didn't the Canadian government deny her entry or something?

Edit: Should have done my research, it was a university that she got booted from. Okay, I was basing my comment thinking that the Canadian government shut her up. My bad.

the Canadian govt has however refused a visa in the past to George Galloway, who at the time was an MP form UK, he had raised funds for Hamas ( humaintarian aid he claimed) and Hamas is on the Canadian govt list of terrorist organisations - he had been invited to speak but never go the chance, actually he got more air time as a result of is than had he been given the visa

 

[mclovin1]

Wow, that guy isn't all there, if you know what I mean.

 

[Mercury]

LOL ... I think this guy is onto something ....

.... or is that ON something ???? ....

 

[All Else Failed]

The reality is, women HAVE gained more power in the past 50 years or so that have drastically changed the sexual and financial markets.


This guy is an idiot, but odds are women's lib can probably be partially traced to some problems in modern society. Women's lib was a massive and whole cultural shift, and people don't seem to realize that it may have had some bad outcomes here and there. When you gain something, you lose something.

And if people want to shout her down to shut her up, so be it. They have every right to do so. That doesn't have anything to do with her "freedom of speech"

usually the people that do this are the first ones to whine about "fascism" when they are shouted down themselves

That way 50% of the population can carry on making the same screw ups with a clear conscience.

no that is not how this works

 

[CityGirl]

The reality is, women HAVE gained more power in the past 50 years or so that have drastically changed the sexual and financial markets.


This guy is an idiot, but odds are women's lib can probably be partially traced to some problems in modern society. Women's lib was a massive and whole cultural shift, and people don't seem to realize that it may have had some bad outcomes here and there. When you gain something, you lose something.

Some "bad outcomes here and there" is a small price to pay. Yes, the feminist movement was a "massive and whole cultural shift" and one that was much needed. 19th century American laws regarding women were based on 19th century English laws.

1. a married woman has no legal existence whether or not she is living with her husband;
2. her property is his property;
3. she cannot make a will, the law gives what she has to her husband despite her wishes or his behavior;
4. she may not keep her earnings;
5. he may sue for restitution of conjugal rights and thus force her, as if a slave to return to his home;
6. she is not allowed to defend herself in divorce;
7. she cannot divorce him since the House of Lords in effect will not grant a divorce to her;
8. she cannot sue for libel;
9. she cannot sign a lease or transact business;
10. she cannot claim support from her husband, his only obligation is to make sure she doesn't land in the parish poorhouse if he has means;
11. she cannot bind her husband to any agreement. In short, as her husband, he has the right to all that is hers; as his wife she has no right to anything that is his. (33)http://www.umd.umich.edu/casl/hum/eng/classes/434/geweb/PROPERTY.htm

Anecdotally, in my life time, I recall my grandmother (who never worked outside the home) and how it was her custom to do her grocery shopping on Thursdays. My grandfather was well aware of this and more often than not did not make the money regularly available to her which forced my grandmother to ask. She found this terribly humiliating to have to ask for the money when she knew he knew she would have need of it. If this type scenario played out in homes across the country, it is no wonder women began to work outside the home. I know my grandmother wished she would have.

 

[All Else Failed]

Some "bad outcomes here and there" is a small price to pay.

I'm not sure if the near-complete destruction of marriage is that small of a price to pay. I believe women's liberation can be traced directly to the state of marriage and divorce that we find ourselves in.

That is not the only reason as to why marriage is the way it is now, or how the divorce laws completely destroy people, but it is certainly a main feature.

Oh and politicians encouraged women's lib because they wanted a larger tax base.

 

[CityGirl]

I'm not sure if the near-complete destruction of marriage is that small of a price to pay. I believe women's liberation can be traced directly to the state of marriage and divorce that we find ourselves in.

That is not the only reason as to why marriage is the way it is now, or how the divorce laws completely destroy people, but it is certainly a main feature.

Having been raised a product of divorce and now celebrating 21 years of marriage, I'd venture to say divorce has more to do with commitment than women's liberation. I'd also venture to say that divorce is not required for the destruction of a marriage, it merely allows those involved to remove themselves from the destruction. Marriage should not be a state of oppression for either party.

Oh and politicians encouraged women's lib because they wanted a larger tax base.

How's that larger tax base working given the fact that the average wage for workers has been stagnant for 30 years?

 

[T1mDfag]

I'm glad I live in Canada.

 

[porterjack]

I'm glad I live in Canada.

I like canada

 

[All Else Failed]

Canada is nice.

 

[Accountable]

Why? Why should she have an opportunity?

Freedom of speech is guaranteed by the government, meaning that the government (local, state or federal) cannot shut them up. But if she was in my house, business or arena I wouldn't allow her to speak. I'd tell her to shut the fuck up and get the hell out.

And if people want to shout her down to shut her up, so be it. They have every right to do so. That doesn't have anything to do with her "freedom of speech"

:homo:

 

[All Else Failed]

Having been raised a product of divorce and now celebrating 21 years of marriage, I'd venture to say divorce has more to do with commitment than women's liberation. I'd also venture to say that divorce is not required for the destruction of a marriage, it merely allows those involved to remove themselves from the destruction. Marriage should not be a state of oppression for either party.

I disagree. I think it is no accident that near 70% of divorces are initiated by women now. No fault has to go.

http://www.divorce-lawyer-source.com/faq/emotional/who-initiates-divorce-men-or-women.html

Lack of commitment has a hand in it, but it is only part of the problem. Things like no-fault divorce *are* contributing to the death of marriage.

 

[Accountable]

The civil union called marriage should go. It's meaningless as an instrument of commitment, and couples can be committed without paying a fee to city hall.

 

[All Else Failed]

It is not meaningless at all.

 

[Accountable]

Okay. Outside of the church, in a land where more than half of all marriages end in divorce and having children outside of wedlock is no big deal, what is the significance of paying for a piece of paper that says you're married?

 

[porterjack]

Okay. Outside of the church, in a land where more than half of all marriages end in divorce and having children outside of wedlock is no big deal, what is the significance of paying for a piece of paper that says you're married?

i think estate settlement is easier handled when the parties were married, not to say that estate settlement laws should not be modifed though, i dont think people enter into marriage with that kind of long term view. Marriage to me is a truly personal, emotional experience, there is no logic to it however

 

[Minor Axis]

So, you missed the part at 8:33 where he says "one of the greatest mistakes America made was to allow women the opportunity to vote". Bigotry comes in all colors, shapes and sizes.

"True Power comes from God and God gave Man the authority over Women." For evaluation purposes, what else needs to be said? I made it about 2 min in. You say Fox gives this character credence?