Mexico: Jealous husbands may face trial in court
MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexican men who display extreme
jealousy or avoid sex with their wives could be tried in court
and punished under a new law, the special prosecutor for crimes
against women told a local newspaper on Friday….
I can’t say I’m against marriage, I’m simply against the crap that marriage requires. From taxes to lawyers, it’s a big pain in the ass. That said, if you find the right girl, there isn’t much you can do other than marry her.
Not marrying would be best, because then you would have to continue to want to be with each other, and if you grow apart you could just leave without the legal hassles. It’s logical. Marriage is for tribal people who need to lay claim on their property.
Now go check out this site which basically pimps you into marrying foreign girls: http://nomarriage.com/
Yeah, I’d like to own a foreign girl, too… but I’d also like to have an intelligent conversation with the wench, and Yo No Hablo Espanol.
Thanks to HogOnIce.com, once again, for good shit. Own the feed today. I do.
So I’m reading an article at Dhimmi Watch originally from the UK Daily Mail, and one of the first paragraph makes some startling points about this woman’s views:
And despite her presentation by Channel 4 as a moderate, in the past the 38-year-old has described non-believers as “rats in cages going round on a treadmill” of consumerism, and declares she would like to see Britain’s pubs converted into mosques.
Pretty wild stuff. So I read on, and see:
Atkinson went on, in an essay published on the Internet for fellow muslims: “When I see large numbers of non-believers I feel very sad for them as they remind me of rats or gerbils in cages going round and round on a treadmill, believing that they are fulfilling their sole purpose in life and reaching their true destiny (which is Argos).
“If only they could uncover their eyes and see the damage they cause themselves and to their children.
“I feel certain that if they were to have a tiny glimpse of what Islam could give them there would be Mosques on every corner instead of pubs.”
So that first interesting paragraph somewhat overstates this woman’s position. Now I don’t agree with the woman — she’s a mixed-up radical searching for a cause greater than herself to justify her existence, and works for radicals with bully-tactic ethics — but the Daily Mail was stirring up some shit, so you know you can’t exactly trust what the Daily Mail reports because they like to overemphasize some points for sensationalism.
Further, I’d bet that some women do find freedom in being relieved of responsibility for certain things. It’s much easier to follow when you “know your place” as described by a book than it is to lead in a society where you have to make more decisions for yourself.
Freedom for some is slavery for others, but the ultimate freedom is being able to decide for yourself which to choose. That’s what I try to stand for; not freedom for freedom’s sake, but freedom to choose your own path, no matter if it’s making it in the world of business or becoming a veiled housewife. The ability to choose your path is the real freedom.
First, the fun, from the Advice Goddess Blog:
The U.S. abortion rate remains among the highest of all industrialized nations—more than twice as high, for example, as the Netherlands (nine per 1,000 women of reproductive age).
In the parenthesis above, also in bold [my emphasis], we’re talking about abortion. Now this isn’t an abortion rant, so take it easy. This is just about the words used in those parenthesis. If you look at that, basically everything after “1,000″ should be gone. I mean c’mon! Using “women” in there is pointless, because men don’t have abortions. But then to add “of reproductive age”?! What the fuck? What other women would have abortions? Where are the statistics for abortion rates in non-reproductive age groups? You gotta be fucking kidding me.
Now, the birthrates.
From the same article that I quoted above, she’s basically talking about how hung up on sex are the people in the U.S. And we are, no doubt. But from JihadWatch.org, we find out that American birthrates (2.2/couple) are higher than European birthrates (averaging less than 2 per couple), and Muslim birthrates are monstrous compared to us (averaging between 6 and 8 children per couple).
Fertility rates in the Muslim world look like this: Niger (7.46 children per woman), Mali (7.42), Somalia (6.76), Afghanistan (6.69), and Yemen (6.58). The Palestinian woman in Gaza who – at age 64 – just became the world’s oldest suicide bomber was the mother of nine and (at last count) the grandmother of 41.
[...]
Compared to the rest of the industrialized world, the United States is experiencing a veritable population explosion – with a birth rate of 2.11, just about replacement level. From there, it’s demographic winter as far as the eye can see: Canada (1.5), Germany (1.3), Russia and Italy (1.2) and not-so-sunny Spain (1.1). The latter three nations could cease to exist, as they are currently constituted, within the next 50 years.
So this gets me to thinking, and you know that’s just downright scary, but sexual repression seems to cause higher birthrates. Without the taboos, and with all the social baggage, sex may become less enticing.
Of course there are other ways to look at it. From Western career women who don’t want to have children, to much more availability of birth control compared to Muslim women, a lot can be said for why our birthrates are low while Muslim birthrates are high.
But I still say the social structure plus the lack of taboo has an effect.
This does not mean I want the prudes to win. Just the opposite. But I am with Cartman on this one.
Cartman says:
Say it like you mean it, snoop.
