What's new

Are you guys completely cool with your kids dating/marrying someone of a different race?

I have not been reading this thread.

I dated a Mexican girl in College.

Kissed a Native American girl one time too.

Other than that, strictly whities.

Tall, pale, busty brunettes/black hair are my favorite. However I think that pretty asian and hispanic girls are gorgeous.
 
No, I wouldn't. Most people prefer to date their own kind anyway.

<-------------Guilt free. No PC bs here.



This reminds me, one time, a black fellow from the neighboorhood crime watch asked my daughter out. She knows better so she declined saying that I would forbid it (it was an excuse as to not seem like a jerk, she only dates whites). So he wound up coming after me one night. I took care of him, Lanza style. I actually got a hold of the surveillance video. Check it out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFaLokC9hqk

And the best part, which I didn't get on video, was after I blew the ****er away, I told him, "You're not going to create little Obamas with MY princess."
 
Interesting topic, but instead of weeding through 22 pages of discussion, can someone give me a quick summary?

Rep will be given. :)
 
LOL.. not what I was looking for but Okay.. I can work with that.. LOL

It started out as people saying it means more what kind of person they are and not what race. that turned into non white guys treating our daughters ok. That turned into 10 pages of arguing if Mormons (and to a much lesser extent Catholics and JWs) are misogynist and if they hate women or not.
 
Not really... you argued points with no understanding intended.

I took your thoughts, and tried to see where they went logically. You could have clarified them, instead you whined, apparently surprised that I didn't treat them them as complete on their own, with no further implications. That's fine, you don't owe me anything. If you feel the need to justify your shutting down the conversation based on what you assume my motivations are, I certainly can't prevent that. However, I see no need to let your falsehoods go unchallenged. I was trying to understand your points ande expand them. Apparently, you just don't like where they lead.

Now that you have passed on that opportunity I will just view your words as intentional lies. Ignorance is no excuse to say untrue things, especially intentional ignorance.

The irony boggles the mind.
 
C'mon Brow... you know I'm just ****ing with you, right?

I think you're more than bight enough that you could be messing with me and still be expressing a legitimate concern, so I wanted to cover the bases. I really don't know if there is a difference between a conference talk and something you hear in church in terms of authority.

But the answer to your question is, neither. I have never been taught specifically that men are not head of the household. Likewise, I have never been taught specifically that women are not head of the household. I think that distinction exists in most people's minds because of an ingrained need to organize. Like I said, I am a practicing mormon, and my wife and I run the joint 50/50. I have been taught that I am responsible for my family, not because I am the only one who can be, but because I need to have that responsibility to learn and grow. My wife is taught the same way.

Thank you for clarifying that. I'll try to keep that in mind in the future.

You haven't answered my question of what you mean when you say "the man is in charge". Does this mean all final decisions rest with him? Or that all activity must be cleared through him? Or that he directs the minutia of the household? You need to expand a little bit so I know what you're trying to trap me with.

The usual construct seems to boil down to husbands don't need to make every decision, but do decide which decisions their wives make, and will overrule them when appropriate; wives do not get the same opportunities. Not that this always happens in practice, but that's usually the thrust of the doctrine. You seem to be saying Mormons teach it should be otherwise. I think that would be a good thing, particularly if the other Mormons in hear your rejection of that construct.

The problem is, you have an almost comically broad definition of misogyny (and racism, and sexism, etc., etc., etc.)

I would say that the definitions that rely on applying terms to individuals lead to mindsets where we think of "monsters", the unusual people who are racist, misogynistic, etc. However, the reality is humans are in large part products of the culture they are raised in, our culture acts to reinforce these practices, and if we don't fix the culture the problems won't go away. Looking at the recent case in Steubenville, it's not that there were two "bad kids", there was an entire party that watched and encouraged what happened. There were kids asking for photos of the event afterwards. Every time some asks "why was she drinking" or something similar, that amounts to blaming a victim. No amount of drinking justifies what happened to her, so that she was drinking isn't relevant. More generally, we need to look at the messages we teach every day.
 
I've always taught them that if you think things are going south, hit hard and ask questions later. That's exactly what she did.

The guy that got his *** kicked wanted to press charges. Fortunately a security camera caught the entire incidence as well as several witnesses that watched it go down.

Kudos to your daughter. She should never have been put in that position, and it sounds like she did well.

What about the daughters who are born with more timid personalities? Why did all those witnesses think it was OK for the guy to pressure her in the first place? Why wasn't the guy taught beforehand that's it's wrong to pressure girls? What if the next guy is the type that can shrug off that assault?
 
I took your thoughts, and tried to see where they went logically. You could have clarified them, instead you whined, apparently surprised that I didn't treat them them as complete on their own, with no further implications. That's fine, you don't owe me anything. If you feel the need to justify your shutting down the conversation based on what you assume my motivations are, I certainly can't prevent that. However, I see no need to let your falsehoods go unchallenged. I was trying to understand your points ande expand them. Apparently, you just don't like where they lead.



The irony boggles the mind.

Nice try. There wasn't much conversation going on, I don't take challenging every statement as conversation, I take that as someone with an agenda and contradiction. I was going to say argument, but I learned from Monty Python that contradiction is not an argument.
An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition. 'tisn't just contradiction.
I only paid for the 5 minute argument, not the full half hour, so my time is up. Good Day. If you want to continue to argue you will have to pay.

How's this for irony, I think it fits our conversation.
images


See, I don't just expect women to do the irony.
 
Back
Top