Hey, all you kid haters should take a look at this OP: another reason to have kids. Look at the opportunities you’re missing!
Err wait, maybe that’s just another reason to hate kids and parents? I’m so confused…
Maybe that’s the real reason ** Oredigger77** wants kids that she plans on having minimal contact with for the first 12 or 13 years of their lives … express lane fillers.
I didn’t say kids aren’t useful they also allow you to use the carpool lane. If I ever need to pick up women at parties when my friends are there it is incredibly easy to get in a girls pants using the kids a bait.
I’m a he by the way and this is the first time I’ve ever been mistaken for a female I’m not sure if that’s a good thing or not.
My bad. I don’t really know what gave me that impression. All the other childfreepers in this thread are women, I guess I jumped to a conclusion.
But this begs a question. Having a kid will help you pick up chicks? One would assume your plan to have kids to ignore would include a wife or significant other of some sort. Do you think she might get a little pissed off at you for using little Johnny like a nightcrawler in said women trawling?
Or were you planning on going mail-order or something?
You know, there is no way in hell I’m going to read 35 pages of posts to make sure that my post is relevant, but more often than not, it’s actually the parents I hate. Compounded by the fact that most of my interaction with children is in the pharmacy, whether it’s a parent getting ADD meds and antipsychotics and antidepressants for their 3 children aged 5, 6 and 8, or talking on their cell phones at my window while their 3 kids wreak havoc on the reading glasses display, the chap stick display, and the tylenol display, all at the same time.
I ignore her completely until she gets off her phone.
First off, I didn’t say you were a parent, I said your brain cells are stuck on children. As for not being a bitter hag, that remains to be proven.
When you spend time defending those who do, you tend to get tarred with the same brush.
Last time I’m going to repeat this, then I’ll start skipping over your posts as I do Kalhoun’s. One - there are people out there who are not retired or dead who do not have jobs. This happens in every generation. Those who claim they are selfless for having children because we will need workers ignore history. Of course, those workers are merely adults and not as important as children, but that doesn’t change the bare fact that we have always had more workers than decent jobs, so there is no need to create even more workers. Two - generations are not as short as they were even when I was born. Workers last longer, and are now required by the fed to work longer, so children born now will come of working age while their parents are still working, not to mention all the others out there. If the parents of today don’t care if their kids can get a decent job, that isn’t my problem but again, it doesn’t mean that having kids is selfless.
Now, obviously some children have to be born to replace those workers who retire or die, but it is pretty obvious to anyone with a brain cell that we always have more workers around than jobs. So it should also be obvious to anyone whose brain isn’t stuck on KIDS!!! BABIES!!! CHILDREN!!! that every decade we have more children born than we have jobs to give them. Therefore, it follows that having children in order to provide workers is not only selfish, it’s stupid. Just like the argument that we have to have all these kids in order to keep the human race from dying out.
I said you were doing the same thing that I am - namely, complaining about something you don’t like. I have plenty of reasons to dislike children and have posted most if not all of them here.
So, unless you have something new and halfway intelligent to say, go talk to Kalhoun.
OK, how this applies to me saying I have friends that are 15 years younger than I am, I don’t know.
What in the world are you talking about?
Yeaaaah! 1,708 posts in this thread! We just set the new record for longest-running BBQ Pit thread. I am so proud of each and every one of you, except for curlcoat, who is crazy and a troll. But the rest of you! Hi-fives all around!
I feel like a proud father.
Oh, and O.S.U. sucks. 
Try your post #1575, where you said that parents “ask” for these things in response to my examples where they demand them, and then went off of a tangent about capitalism.
Huh. You think it is reasonable that parents demand that we all pay for someplace where their children can play? What is wrong with parks, school yards or their own yards? See, this is an example of what I am talking about, that parents have gotten such an entitled mindset that they see nothing wrong with wasting taxpayer money on something they themselves should be providing to their children. And I know that nobody cares, which is the really pathetic thing - our streets go to shit but the slides, swings and all of that in the playgrounds get replaced as soon as they get trashed (by the children).
Dunno. You are the one that tied playgrounds to children’s menus… :dubious:
Actually, most people do - noone likes having to pay more to subsidize others who could pay their own way.
“You got playgrounds on my children’s menu!”
“You got children’s menus on my playground!”
Heeeeeey… :eek:
curlcoat:You know what? You’re right! I hate children; I hate their parents. Dogs are better than people; humans do not to breed to continue to exist. You’ve convinced me through sheer playground repitition and staggering amounts of unchecked hypocrisy.
Thanks for setting me straight. I really do appreciate it.
No, you are just trying to push the responsibility off of me. I made a claim and you said it wasn’t true. If you care to prove it isn’t true, then it is up to you to provide said proof. Otherwise, as far as any rational person is concerned, you’re full of shit.
No, I don’t care either way. As long as I don’t have to pay to support anyone against my wishes, I don’t care if they work or not.
No dummy, what I said was that our schools are turning out poorly educated students because all of them are being taught at the level of whatever student is furthest behind/dumbest/whatever. Here, that almost always means the student that knows the least English. And since that student can start school at almost any grade (you do realize they can come across the border at any age, right?), the overall result is high school graduates who speak, read and write poorly. Their math skills don’t appear to be that good either, but when I was working math wasn’t all that important so I didn’t see much of that effect. This the result of billions of taxpayer dollars. This month, they will be asking for more money from the taxpayer, with no accountability as to why they are doing such a crap job with the money they already have.
Actually, no I don’t. There is no reason and, I believe, no law that says that the taxpayers of this state should have to pay to teach English to illegal immigrants.
If those billions of dollars were actually turning out an educated population, it wouldn’t be an issue.
Why? Why do you assume that we are paying to teach illegals to speak English?
Uh, you want me to prove something doesn’t exist?
Uh, curlcoat? Who gets to decide who should be having the replacement-level children that you admitted are necessary in the bolded section above?
You made a claim. It’s up to you to prove it’s true. I’m not claiming anything, just pointing to inconsistencies in your claims. I knew for a fact you wouldn’t be able to produce a cite, and I feel totally vindicated now. As for the rest of your post, wow, you’re both a liar and a hypocrite, but I knew that.
SNORT.
Ahha! History!
I wonder if we can break 2,000?
This is a day we’ll be able to tell our grandchildren about.
Not you, curlcoat, don’t worry.
I’ll probably tell my grandkids about curlcoat.
…snort.
Some of the people in this thread.
I’m not seeing any faces here…are you? :eek: