rehmwa

What do you mean by "stability"? Because if it's just a 'stable' sit-neutral position (that's what being answered - "winds aloft have ZERO impact on that"), my observation is .... Seriously? Long spots subconsciously make you tense and thus you can't hold a sit as well in the exact same air-environment you'd have on a windier day? ground winds, in terms of flight performance/environment are absolutely inconsequential until you get under canopy, and only then it matters in terms of getting to your target look up and constrast the terms "air speed" with "ground speed" ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

and in liberal arts fields it can net a great career as a 'consultant' or a political correspondant ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

sure, and your real problem is you just stay on the retarded and sophmorically simple and trite. pretty much the stereotype of a resentful blue collar old timer ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I have another option: Since any sex act can result in pregnancy, and which guy it is is just random chance - I'd propose that all of a woman's partners are 'responsible'. This is based on the comments "if he isn't prepared to raise a kid, he should keep it in his pants". Each sex partner has to contribute $$$ to the woman each time they have sex - say, $500 each time. She then has the financial support in the event of a pregnancy. on the flip side - here's another: they hook up - she gets pregnant, but she miscarriages. She assesses her life and decides she REALLY wants to be a single mom and adopts a baby. Since the first guy didn't choose to "keep his dick in his pants" and she actually did get pregnant by him he really does have a responsibility to at least some child somewhere - shouldn't he help raise this adopted child anyway? Can she pretty much elect to force any previous partner to support any child she ever has? Edit: my crapulence knows no bounds today ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

the 9 months can be fatal, destroys your dating options, definitely hurts your career, and prevents you from working effectively for at least a few months. Costs additional money in services, as well as lost wages. ADD: much of the damage to dateability is perm if you keep the child. the price of child support has no effect on your health or your work, does cost you income, may impair your dating prospects to the degree that you disclose the child or that it reduces your marginal income. uh huh - so you are offering what option for parity of choice??? If I may infer then, you are proposing the following: Two people hook up - she gets pregnant. She has the viable life mass for 9 months and gets to abort any time she chooses. For any reason, on demand. He has no choice. At birth, the viable life mass is given to the male, who must have the mass on him at all times for 9 months, he is solely responsible for changing and feeding the life mass - no exceptions, no baby sitting. During that nine months, he may also abort the life mass (take it to a doctor and have it crushed and disposed of). For any reason, on demand. She has no choice. At the end of the 18 month cycle - both parent, having chosen independently to keep the child - have to be responsible for the upbringing of the, now, child. Else both have to agree at that point to allow adoption. you have an interesting proposal ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

actually, it devalues the entire monetary pool - the hoped for effect is likely devaluing the assets of the rich in hope of a relative shift in value to those making the minimum wage runaway inflation in effect - still the end goal can, at best, while everyone is miserable, the rich might be made a bit more miserable than the poor...???? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Have you noticed how many people here don't agree with that? and put it all on the male??? Reject the options all you want provided you give your own - If the woman can abort, what do you suggest is the 'closest' equivalent right that the male can take? I'm not thrilled with the 3 I offered either - you're smarter than me - brain storm something different. Edit: one problem with this debate is the concept of what abortion does - does it simply terminate the medical condition, or does it also terminate everything that happens after that point (giving birth, raising a child, being responsible for it etc.....) But I hate that because then the militant abortion/anti-abortions people get into the conversation and it derails to the same old drift we always see...... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I'm talking hypotheticals and you keep throwing out the PC position tied to "that's the way it is, deal with it". We are talking past each other. I appreciate the adoption point as the only way to equal the options. You solved the logical problem, but also then revoked Roe vs Wade - I don't want to be in your shoes when everyone finds out you did it. But the premise I'd like to discuss is predicated on the abortion choice the woman has that the man doesn't and what scenarios level the field while still keeping abortion for the woman as a legitimate choice. In essence - what is the 'closest' equivalent to abortion that the man has. (Wendy's response just says, there is no equivalent - ok, given - but what's the 'closest' we can get?) I posit he aborts the responsibility to raise the child as the closest equivalent. The mother can do it unilaterally be terminating the pregnancy (removing the option of the mass becoming a child thus avoiding all that it entails for the next 30 years) - though the father can't. So, the father does it by removing himself completely from the part he would have to experience (everything but the gestation and labor) - also an option the mother can have if the father wants to raise the child, or through adoption. Do I find it moral for the male to do that? - absolutely not. But it's a parallel for discussion. What else is there? This pisses off militant pro-choice because the advertising is predicated on the position that it's not yet a child, so they take/make it as escalatory. I don't mean it to be, but I can't come up with anything closer that's more PC..... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I like this direction - can you define equivalent rights, then in each of the scenarios? Tough qualitative discussion imbedded in it though - is 9 months equivalent or more/less impactful than a lifetime of forced support (for either partner)? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

tangent - you support choice I actually support choice in situations where the male is a creep or totally out of the picture (not completely PC, but I figure it's only my business if I'm the father) but that's not what I'm fishing for.... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

If you do it enough times, the economy crashes, all those that are retired or are very rich (i.e., they pay wages, rather than earn wages) end up with about the same amount of worthless wealth as all the rest 'caught up' to them. Then everyone is equally poor and starving. That's the plan anyway. Then we burn cash for heat and return to a barter system. It's really very simple. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

no, but it does seem to create executives in many engineering companies ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

oh, I can name at least 5 right off hand that are more obtuse about it ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I assume you meant "fine, you want the viable life mass that politically isn't defined as a person until some other arbitrary checkpoint? Then you gestate it, grow it in your male uterus, give birth to it..." I would contend then that the common ground is the choice of whether or not to financially, commit-wise, emotionally, etc - wise choose to raise the child post birth and having similar option to accept or avoid that part. (this does mean I'm conceding, and have always conceded, that gestation and labor are unique (no kidding, it's the foundation of the 'other' debate) - but the following responsibilities are inherently tied into the option to abort or not as, at least, a consequence of that option.) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Hi Wendy - In terms of genetic differences vs social responses to that difference, I think it's moot - social cliched responses are overwhelming in this type of discussion ("it's her body", "it's not really a potential human until after the birth so you can't draw parallels", "he should keep it in his pants even if she isn't held to that standard", "the man has a responsibility more than the weak woman", etc ad nauseum), but yet our laws are whimsical and arbitrary - so one can debate under the premise of 'how to maximize the equality of treatment' and come up with scenarios to discuss. your note is simply "viva la difference - therefore there is no point trying" - kinda a moot point when discussion hypothetical options........ doncha think ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I leave the H O Terms as an insignificant percentage that can be covered under a different but meaningful summary elsewhere. However - I suspect most of those will still eventually fall under some poorly constructed belief system anyway and could be moved to one of my main categories. (Their own protestations to the contrary considered and then used as proof of my flawless stereotyping of all humans ). ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

that's a loaded item, ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I don't follow the logic when you talk adoption. If neither partner wants the child, than adoption satisfies both parties' desires - as does abortion. the issue is when they disagree - If both parties want equal ownership of decision - the only way to give both parties equal choice of responsibility is to wait until after the birth - then either party can raise the child (with the other party volunteering only what they choose to contribute - including nothing). If neither wants a child, then adoption where both parties elect to nothing. So the interesting situation is what is 'equivalent' to the female choice of abortion - for the male. I can't think of one. she gets another option in abortion - he doesn't. "Just don't have sex" is the knee jerk statement - but that can be applied to the woman as well - since that's not acknowledged, I just claim it's a sexist position to the discussion at hand - true, but not applied equally to the debate. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

that's easy to fix, we just pass a law forbidding you from laying off those 2 (and then 3rd) employees AND, in DD's world, once you die, we just give the company to those employees anyway - 6 rich employees, and the bonus is the wealthy exploiter (you) also dies ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Abortion - The woman has the option (without the consent of her partner) to abort (but still have sex). Been down this discussion, but it got derailed by hotheads last time. Where does the man have the equivalent option to abort his responsibility (without the consent of his partner) but still have sex? Scenarios and options - 1 - Man wants the kid, woman wants the kid - no problem - they deal with it, both pay 2 - Man doesn't, woman doesn't - abort - no problem again 3 - Man wants the kid, woman doesn't - abort (woman gets her way, man doesn't) 4a - Man doesn't want a kid, woman does - today, man pays anyway and the kid is born (woman gets her way, man doesn't) 4b - Man doesn't want the kid, woman does - have the kid, aborts the financial responsibility as his only option (woman gets her way, man also) 4c - Man doesn't want the kid, woman does - have the kid, but then kill it after it's born when it's out of the woman's body (man gets his way, woman doesn't) There is no equivalent option for the man to #3 - but 4b is closer than 4a. 4c is closest, but abhorrent under almost anyone's morals. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

That means a lot from the master. So no response? Ok. It's a response in kind - no more, no less ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

That means a lot from the master. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

cutting taxes without cutting spending is pointless the spending is the issue - borrow and spend vs tax and spend still both get you nowhere reduce spending to balance the budget - reduce taxes to increase net revenue right now? cutting spending would be the big dial to turn. Leaving taxes alone to assess the impact on the economy. too many chefs stirring the pot ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Some pretty decent guy way back when walked around and told people how nice it would be if we'd all be decent to each other. Douglas Adams noted that this guy got nailed to a tree for his trouble. Like many others, a power structure rose up around this terrible event in order to manipulate the ignorant (instead of just a bunch of people following the advice to be nice to each other). thousands of years later, they are still exploiting the people oh, and a few other groups said "me too" and started their own brand of exploitation with pretty much the same story and different levels of aggression and intolerance of the other power structures the neat thing is that like 90% of the human race wants to be exploited the other 10% are completely under control of similar religions called political parties - many are under control of combinations of several ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I agree today's politicians are incapable of cutting spending. So we need something new - the only long term solution is on the spending side. Focusing solely on the revenue side is an admission of failure. And self fulfilling. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants