Jump to content

txduo2000

Registered
  • Content Count

    690
  • Joined

Community Reputation

18 Good

About txduo2000

  • Rank
    Super Contributor
  • Birthday 10/27/1969

Personal Info

  • Relationship Status
    Couple
  • Location
    Dallas TX Area

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This is all true .... to an extent. That is to say that if a woman comes up pregnant, the husband's name goes on the birth certificate, and there is an assumption that he is the father. However, I have read case studies of this happening, and when the parties divorce, "dad" requests (and receives) a paternity test, finds out the child is not biologically his, and if a bio-dad can be found, support is sought there. If a bio-dad cannot be found, or if mom refuses to disclose, then husband remains the responsible party. Personally, and most unpopular, my opinion where "trickery" in conception is concerned goes something like this: If a woman wants to get pregnant, and does so "on her own" so to speak, meaning she becomes pregnant through fraudulent and covert means, and "dad" never wanted a child, still doesn't want one after finding out about the pregnancy ... "dad" should be permitted to bow out gracefully, sign away his parental rights and responsibility for support and walk away into the sunset. While I also understand and appreciate the concept that sexual activity in and of itself is an activity that includes some sort of risk of pregnancy, I am speaking specifically of the type of sexual activity that would lead a reasonable person to believe that pregnancy is of a considerably lesser risk, such as this scenario that Uomo presents. In addition to be considered is the scenario where a man intentionally wears a condom, with the primary purpose being to prevent pregnancy. By his very action it can be presumed that pregnancy is not the desired outcome, and he should not be held liable if the woman's intent WAS to become pregnant and she tampered with the condom or inserted the captured semen into her vagina to facilitate her intent. My opinion is based solely on intentional fraud perpetrated by the woman when the man has done all in his power to prevent a pregnancy. As I said, I know mine is not a particularly popular opinion; however, it is fundamentally based upon the woman's "right to choose" ... and I do not believe her choices should in any way adversely affect an unwilling or unknowing participant. Women do have the option to seek an abortion without the father's consent or knowledge (although injunctions have been filed and granted by desirous fathers). Women have the right to give a child up for adoption without the father's consent as long as she doesn't disclose paternity. Women hold absolute and total reproductive control ... if SHE wants to get pregnant, she WILL get pregnant and trapping an unwitting man into such an unfair situation is simply not ethically or morally right, and should not be legally permitted. Personally, in Uomo's scenario, my ideal (though probably not practical) solution would be for the judge to grant custody to Sarah, but also impose punitive damages for her fraudulent method of conception. The matter of child support is a sticky situation. While I understand why the child's support is paramount to all other issues and concerns, personally, I feel that Sarah entered into this situation willingly and intentionally and she should, solely bear the burden of support. Most states, however, insist that two parents are responsible for the support of children so that it does not cause an undue burden on the State's financial resources. And of course it is not the child's fault the manner of conception and the child should not unduly suffer the consequences of his mother's irresponsible and reproachable actions. I would want to determine if Sam was a knowing and willing participant in Sarah's fraud. If that is determined, then support should be paid by Sam, who assumed the risk right alongside Sarah, was presumably listed as the father on the birth certificate, and is now fully participating in creating a broken home for this child. Also, if it is determined that Sam was a willing participant in the fraud, then he should also be ordered to pay the punitive damages as well. Dick and Jane should be let off the hook if that is their wish.
  2. You know, in my initial post I seem to have missed commenting on this completely. Very good point curious! It would be one thing if they could clearly hear all the goings on from, say, their couch on the opposite wall from the shared wall between the rooms, but that they put their ears to the wall to listen in more closely????? Bottom line ... if it was noisy enough to bother them from across their hotel room, then they should have called the front desk and asked for management to do something to quiet the noise. It was just morbid curiosity that caused them to press their ears to the wall to hear more clearly what was going on, which makes them nothing more than nosey, and now judgmental, assholes. As far as board meetings taking place quarterly, I know this. It still doesn't explain why this particular member is just now reporting an incident that took place three months ago if it was of such major concern to him. Perhaps he is anticipating wild and crazy goings on at the forthcoming board meeting? Perhaps he is an idiot? Perhaps the upcoming board meeting just simply "jarred his memory" of what happened last time? Who knows? I still think it is a little untimely for him to make this complaint this late in the game. After your puppy has pissed on the rug, you don't wait 3 months to punish him for it. And Kevin, as to your boss's "moral indiscretions" ... if you are aware of such, it seems to me that you have a little closer relationship with him other than the simple boss-employee relationship. I have had many jobs -- I never knew what the hell my bosses did in the oh so private sectors of their lives. So if this is the case, and he brings it up again, I think I would follow curiousagain's advice on this one ... let him know you will not tolerate "the pot calling the kettle black" and anyone, let alone HIM, making moral judgments against you for any reason, real or imagined is unacceptable. Leave it at that, refuse to discuss the situation further and just be careful when it comes time for your next meeting.
  3. HA! Not! Now, I do not have a theological degree, and have never studied religion in any sense other than sitting in the congregation listening to the sermon, but I will say that it is my humble and probably not very enlightened opinion that preachers, ministers, priests, and all other "men of the cloth" are simply just that ... men (i.e., human) and prone to the same sins and mistakes as we are all. Because they carry a little more education in the area of religion and hold a title that assumes they are a little closer to God than the general masses, does not, in my opinion, get them any closer to God than the rest of us. Basically, while I carried faith for a long time, I do not believe in nor advocate "organized religion". I do not believe in sanctimonious, judgmental and self-righteous people telling others how they should live. I believe that churches have become more of a social structure than a faith-filled one, putting far too much emphasis on money and status than in the humble church days of old. I believe that many church-goers, preachers and the like sin in horrible ways sometimes more devastating than what non-church-goers do, and veil it under their "religion". I know people who have been "saved" and now perform every task with a prayer, but these same people are more harsh to their fellow man, more judgmental, more critical ... and THAT in itself wars with MY ideals of religion most of all. I will be honest; I have struggled with my views on religion for as long as I have known who and what God is. Since beginning swinging, I have refused to "practice" religion in any sense - I do not go to church, I do not really even pray anymore. In a sense, swinging has been at war with my faith and my Christian beliefs. It's like I have made a conscious decision that since swinging wars with what I have been taught, I feel like I am a hypocrite if I practice religion AND swing ... However, recently, I have been doing a great deal of thinking on the subject. Unfortunately, I think I have started to lean more towards the "Big Bang" and "Theory of Evolution" rather than the "Theory of Creation". Kidding ... Creation has been ingrained into my head since I was a very small child, so I am sure that the idea of God will never fully leave me. I will just say that I am so disappointed in the terrible things that occur on a daily basis in this world that I am constantly left questioning the intelligence in believing in a Greater Good. So many people who live under the cloak of God are just not good people down deep. And I do not care to be associated with that type of person. But most of all, I hate seeing really good people negatively affected by the world around them on a regular, systematic basis ... and where is God in these instances? Oh yeah, he's over there turning a blind eye to the child who is molested every single day for the last 8 years of her life, or he's allowing a serial killer to devastate the lives of 30 families before finally being caught, or he's looking the other way when a series of devastating hurricanes hit and destroy so many people's lives and livelihoods ... the list goes on, but I think those scenarios show how I feel. I do not want to get into a big war of the religions, but I just want to say that for me, the bottom line is live the best life I can, hurt no one knowingly, be kind as I can to my fellow man, treat others as I would like to be treated, don't cheat, lie or steal, do what I can to help others less fortunate when I can, raise my kids to be decent human beings with these same basic philosophies, and just hope I, my family and other decent human beings can simply get though this thing we call life. If there's a heaven on the other end, then I hope I lived my life well enough to gain entry. And if I didn't, then I will try to remember to pack a bathing suit on my way down south.
  4. I do not think I conveyed myself properly. I also will not play with someone who I do not find physically attractive. Part of what I was trying to say is that in MY perception, the "beautiful people" tend to place unattainable standards onto others. It seems that the ones WE have come across are looking for absolute perfection, which no one has, yet some actually believe themselves to be. As a sidenote, I will state that when I have "criticized" the "beautiful people" to some of our friends (speaking generally, of the type of environment that the aforementioned club is reputed to have), I have often been told that I am one of the "beautiful people" ... I disagree with that statement each time I am told that. I am told that I would fit in wonderfully with those at this particular club, but I am simply not interested. Yes, there are some "beautiful people" with great personalities ... I do not place them in this Ken and Barbie category. Someone else stated that they considered Ken and Barbie to reflect artificial personalities, shallowness, and conceitedness. That's my opinion as well. I know some very beautiful people who have terrific personalities ... I have seen pics of people, and only talked to them on this board. I think they are absolutely gorgeous ... because of MORE than their physical attributes ... because of WHO they portray themselves to be on this board. (Example: Mrs. LikeMinds is beautiful, inside and out, but it is her personality on this board and her sensitivity as a human being that enhances her physical beauty. Rarely does physical beauty enhance a dull or lacking personality). I think that there are a great many people who are beautiful in my eyes, but wouldn't be in another's. That's just preference. My opinions are about those who are beautiful, know it, want to make sure everyone else knows it and have impossibly high standards for anyone else to attain. This is why those clubs that generally cater to solely the "pretty people" typically fade out over time. Mr. and Mrs. Spoo ... you are both VERY hot ... but are not in the category of Ken and Barbie, as the definition has evolved into what it has currently. Mr. and Mrs. Twofer ... VERY hot and not Ken and Barbie. Thrax, curiousagain, ES .... VERY hot ... not Kens. Vespertine, Dynamar, Mrs. Intuition ... very beautiful women ... not Barbies. See what I am saying?
  5. Just curious, but wouldn't swinging be an even stronger reason to go through with the vasectomy? I mean, you can't assume that every woman you are with is on birth control or has been surgically sterilized, and condom accidents occur from both sides, do they not? I wish my husband would get a vasectomy ... I am surgically sterilized, but I always worry about him. He has proved to be quite fertile in the past (had five kids with previous wife), and there is always that chance at a mishap.
  6. My impression of Ken and Barbie as the bad guy is mostly from reading their profiles ... which always emphasize that they want people just like them - buff, beautiful, built. That right there smacks clearly that they don't give a hoot about personality, and since they don't care about anyone else's personality, they probably don't have much personality themselves. There is a swing club here in Dallas that we have never been to because the impression is that they cater solely to the "beautiful people". There are many clubs here in Dallas and we like to attend most of them to get a feel of which ones we like best. A friend of ours, who is kind of a BBW, attended this particular club and confirmed our impression. Heck, their website even proclaims in so many words that they are where the "beautiful people" come to party in the lifestyle. We have heard it from a couple of others who have gone as well, people who say they will never go back because it's just one big Ken/Barbie fest. It just comes down to the impression that most Ken and Barbies give off that looks are paramount over and above any personality anyone else may have. That's what makes them the bad guy. I believe myself to be an attractive woman. I never fail to garner my fair share of appreciative glances and compliments. Even many of you here have complimented me ... but I still do not believe I fit the "mold" that the Ken and Barbies are looking for. Their standards are simply too high. It's like their basic personality consists of "look at me and how great I am." And my opinion is that people of lesser attractiveness generally possess a higher level of congenial personality.
  7. My question is why did it take 3 months for this complaint to finally be made by the board member, then to the president, then to your boss, then finally to you??? If it was of SUCH high concern, why didn't the board member immediately make this complaint known at the conclusion of the meeting and upon everyone returning to their normal workplaces? I think I would use this should you have occasion to talk to your boss or the president of the association about this issue again. Seems to me that waiting this long to lodge a complaint would taint the complainant's credibility Granted, you can't make everyone believe your story over his, especially if he is a highly respected businessman. I don't know what position you hold, but that he offered an eye-witness account of actually seeing your friend leave your room will weigh heavy on the minds of the president and the boss, and of course they will assume you are lying to protect your image and your wife's reputation, and to squirm around a very uncomfortable accusation. It goes without saying that people should conduct themselves at a higher standard when they are traveling in a business group on the company's dime, and of course you realize this. I get the impression that you are simply venting rather than asking for advice. It has always been my belief that it is a bad idea to drink to excess, party with fellow co-workers, etc. when in the company of your business associates. Because the sun will rise the next day, and you will be accountable for any adverse actions you displayed the evening before. This is a sticky situation, for sure, and one that I don't envy you being in at all. I am so sorry you are going through this.
  8. You definitely said a mouthful here, Mrs. Uomo. I think we all realized this about Mr. Uomo right off the bat ... that can be verified by reading the various responses to the threads he has started. But, in his defense, I will say that it seems like being on this board, and getting his hand slapped a time or two has caused him to rethink his position. Communication is always key. I hate to see a marriage end, unless due to abuse of some kind, and I sincerely hope that you two can come to a meeting of the minds. I don't think he's a bad guy ... I just think he needs to get his ego in check. And we definitely appreciate your perspective on the matter.
  9. I don't like Barbie because my husband had an affair with her. But that's just me. :rollseyes Ok, seriously ... we are turned off by the "Ken and Barbie" types because they seem to always put the shallow attributes above all. It's like, if you don't have a personality, that's fine as long as you have a gorgeous face and a perfect body and can fit in with "our" clique. That's our issue. I am not perfectly thin and china-doll like. I have a few extra pounds, I have stretch marks, I have insecurities. My husband does not possess a six-pack, though he is naturally lean. His hairline is receding and he is far from perfect. All in all, I think we are still a good looking couple. Neither of us fail to garner looks of appreciation when we are out, whether it is vanilla or swinger venue. But we still don't feel we fit the "Ken and Barbie" mold and we do not want to. We are "real" which we feel sets us apart from those who are not.
  10. ESFJ Extroverted - 11 Sensing - 12 Feeling - 62 Judging - 1 slightly expressed extrovert slightly expressed sensing personality distinctively expressed feeling personality slightly expressed judging personality
  11. Ves and Spoo ... I think you are both as brainy and intellectual as any other on here .... and welcome to the soapbox! We are glad to have you!!! Exactly how big is this particular soapbox???? I want Thrax, Mr. and Mrs. Twofer, Mrs. Spoo, Mr. and Mrs. LM, curiousagain and whoever else can squirm up here, in addition to those already standing here, patiently waiting!!!!
  12. HotMoCpl, I can understand where you are coming from. As a mother, I did take on the responsibility of being frank in discussions with my children about sexual matters, starting at early ages (around 3, when they first start wanting to know where babies come from). I have been honest, used actual terminology rather than slang, and have long felt that the responsibility for their sex education lay with me, rather than with the schools or society at large. Just yesterday, I had to tell my 14 y.o. daughter what "tossing someone's salad" means. :rollseyes However, I still do believe that one's sexual proclivities are a private thing ... not for general public consumption. Sure, I am a swinger, and I "share" my sexuality with others ... but I do not do it in public venues, and I never will. What people do with their sexuality is their own business, and if they choose to share it with other likeminded folks, then that too is their business. It ceases to become their business when they convey their sexuality in a publicly diverse crowd and flaunt their sexuality to other people's children. That is simply a "right" that I will not agree with. My kids do not know we swing. I didn't even know what swinging was until my late 20's. I believe, and some may disagree, that it is something that each has to come to on their own, if they are so inclined. My children's father left me for another woman. I was distraught over that. At their still young ages of 17 and 14, they are not mature enough to know the distinction between "adultery" and "swinging" ... I am sure they would feel that I am a hypocrite for being upset at their father's adultery, then knowing I occasionally have sex with other men with my current husband's permission. Some things have to be learned with time and maturity.
  13. "Sexually charged" versus "innocent nudity" ... that's exactly what I was trying to convey. THANKS THRAX! You said it very well, and you are definitely a good source, being that you are a nudist (which I am not) and a world traveler (again, I am not).
  14. For us, it's usually Denny's, IHOP or Whataburger (they must have expanded; used to be only a Texas thing!) A Whataburger Taquito at 3am is the bomb. (For those who have not yet been graced with the opportunity to dine at Whataburger, a Taquito is basically a breakfast burrito - scrambled eggs, bacon or sausage, hashbrowns, cheese all rolled up in a flour tortilla and served with picante sauce). I cannot stand Waffle House ... I am sure the food is really great, according to a great many people ... HOWEVER, I can never get past the smell inside each and every Waffle House I have ever been in. It's a combination of stale dishrags, meat that's been sitting out too long and burnt bacon. EWWWWW I like White Castle ok. We had it in Tennessee one time. I didn't think it was all THAT great though. I am not lamenting the fact that we don't have them in Texas.
×
×
  • Create New...