I don't believe you

[Habitat]

3 minutes ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

What happens if the adoptive parents back out?

The queue would soon shuffle forward, but in reality most people have given up, in Australia, so low is the availabilty. 

[Jodie.Lynne]

2 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

i repeat there was no such thing  as rape within a marriage,  either legally or in concept,

BULLSHIRT!

Do you think, because it is within marriage, a woman doesn't have the right to say "NO"?

If so, why not? Is it because she is the property of her husband?

By this argument, a wife has the right to purchase a strap-on sexual device and penetrate her husband, with or without his consent. And from the sound of your argument, Mrs Walker should do just that. It might just teach you some humility, if not an appreciation for a woman's right to her own body.

[Habitat]

Just now, Jodie.Lynne said:

BULLSHIRT!

Do you think, because it is within marriage, a woman doesn't have the right to say "NO"?

If so, why not? Is it because she is the property of her husband?

By this argument, a wife has the right to purchase a strap-on sexual device and penetrate her husband, with or without his consent. And from the sound of your argument, Mrs Walker should do just that. It might just teach you some humility, if not an appreciation for a woman's right to her own body.

He said "was", sweetie ! Is he agreeing with rape in marriage ?

[+Sherapy]

6 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

ALL such  things are names or constructs of human minds The y are and become how we perceive or see them to be 

i repeat there was no such thing  as rape within a marriage,  either legally or in concept, until the 1960s because marriage was seen to give ongoing consent to sex and this was a known part of the marriage contract.

Rape is non consensual sex, and in modern terms the consent  must be both informed, and freely given 

Marriage conferred informed, ongoing, consent as part of the deal. 

You don't need to worry about my attitudes to women.

I've been partially reconstructed, and now only give them the same respect and place of honour as I do men.    

 

“i repeat there was no such thing  as rape within a marriage,  either legally or in concept, until the 1960s because marriage was seen to give ongoing consent to sex and this was a known part of the marriage contract.”

Please support this with actual proof of the marriage contract and show me where it says this. 

[Jodie.Lynne]

Just now, Habitat said:

The queue would soon shuffle forward, but in reality most people have given up, in Australia, so low is the availabilty. 

So, Australia is the goalpost of the world?

The sad fact is that most adoptive couples are white, and they want cute lil white babies to raise as their own. BUT, there are a huge percentage of couples, hetero and homosexual, that are eager to adopt babies who need loving homes.

You are looking at the situation through a very narrow filter of your own design, and anything that falls out of your self-imposed range is invalid data.

[Mr Walker]

8 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Walker

Yes of course I did and the links I have responded with are relevant to the time and cultures involved. 

I haven't said you were arguing for slavery and my intent is to show a broader context as to what all is involved in the topic rather than skim past the objection aspects of slavery in those times. Your position is that it was at that time necessary for the advancement of a culture as a whole and I disagree. I was reading this short discussion on the economic aspects of slavery and how it impacted the fall of the Roman empire. You may wish to read it and rethink how it applies to your position.

 This is a part of the discussion.

Background

The Punic Wars with Carthage came to a final end in 146BC, but the devastation still remained. Hannibal had rampaged through Italy half a century earlier, and the Italian farms had not fully recovered, creating poverty. The Roman armies, who had hitherto been taking their food from the colonies of Sardinia and Sicily, returned to Rome, and the grain followed. The mass influx of foreign grain of better quality reduced the price of grain, which further reduced the wealth of Italy significantly. Wealthy Romans began to speculate on the vast reaches of land Rome had conquered, which further exacerbated the divide between rich and poor.

 

The entire Roman economy hinged on grain prices. Their deterioration, coupled with some snubs from elite Romans, angered the Latins in Italy, and created a perfect storm of economic circumstances that could end in only one way for the city of Rome. Revolution. But there was another factor - one far more important:

 

Slaves

Although slavery had a different social function in Roman times, its economic function was identical - reduced price of labor. More slaves in the city means a greater pool of workers for the local farms and such. That in turn meant a greater supply of labor with no change to demand, hence lower prices.

 

All this huge influx of labor was soon bought up by the wealthy Romans, who started for the first time to establish large estates with their armies of slaves doing all the hard work. They took over the public land, that in reality nobody owned but in practice everybody squatted on. Soon the small farmers found that without the capital advantage of millions of slaves, they could not compete in farming.

 

In this way the Italian farmers were rapidly forced off their land entirely. They went to Rome, seeking work, and finding extreme poverty. A huge mass of the ultra poor crowded the city, desperate for any opportunity they could get, and starving terribly. By 136BC, Roman census records show the population of Italy reaching a record low of just below 20,000, and that in turn made the military power of Rome exceptionally weak. As I shall show, these slave-run estates (latifundia) eventually literally destroyed the republic.

 

That is true and to be expected when you displace people and take their employment opportunities away from them making the created poor to compete with slave labor. These conditions were created through greed and not a necessity for the whole but rather for the benefit of the few which is why I have spent the time to show these other aspects as it does not seem to support your position of social and cultural benefits of slavery.

Even though race was not a factor in slavery in Rome, all slaves were property and were treated as such. They had no rights. The danger of violence varied. For some, the monetary value of a good slave ensured that they were treated with a modicum of decency, just as one might be careful not to damage any other expensive piece of property.

Some owners, however, had little regard for their slaves. Some were beaten or even killed for amusement. For female slaves, rape was an ever-present danger. Early Roman laws did not allow for slaves to give their testimonies in court against their masters. Slaves that tried to escape were hunted down and, if they weren't killed, they were branded with a FUG (fugitive) on their foreheads.

Jobs

In America, many slaves performed primarily agricultural and domestic work. In ancient Rome, however, slaves took on a much wider range of responsibilities; their jobs could divided into five main categories:

• Domestic - Domestic service meant a life in a Roman house as a personal servant to the owners. Slaves that worked in a Roman home had the easiest lives because they ate the same foods as their masters and weren't normally put in dangerous situations.
• Public - A public servant was owned by the government and was considered a personal servant to the royal family. Public servants could be educated people who taught Latin, mathematics, and philosophy to young Romans.
• Urban crafts and services - Urban slaves were generally craftsmen, but they could also be prostitutes or even gladiators.
• Agricultural - Most farms were worked purely by slaves, including the foreman. These positions meant longer hours and lots of manual labor.
• Mining - Mining was considered the worst job. Working conditions were extremely dangerous and life expectancy was very low. Those who were sentenced to slavery by criminal law were often sent to the mines.

 

Massimo, A Slave Actor

jmccr8

edit to add

Table 1 Hypothetical distribution of the free and slave population of the Roman Empire (in millions) Urban Rural Free Slaves Free Slaves Italy 1.3m 0.6m 3.5m 0.6m Egypt 1.25m 0.25m 4.2m 0.3m Others 4-5m 0.4-1m 42-45m 2.5-5.5 Total 6.5-7.5m 1.3-1.9m 49-52m 3.5-6.5m Key: Italy: Scheidel 2004b (free population), 2005a (slave population). Egypt: Scheidel 2001: 246-7 (total population); Alexandria (guess; cf. Scheidel 2004a): 350,000 free + 150,000 slaves; other cities (above): 890,000 free + 110,000 slaves; villages (above): 4,220,000 free + 280,000 slaves. Other provinces: Scheidel 2007 (total imperial population, provincial breakdown, and urbanization rates); low estimate: slaves are 10% of urban population (~ Egypt) and 6% of rural population (~ Egypt); high estimate: slaves are 20% of urban population (~ Italy/Egypt mean) and 12% of rural population (~ Italy/Egypt mean).

Obviously, the majority of slaves were not in the better-treated categories as agricultural and mining were at high risk with poor living conditions and life expectancy.

This link has some interesting information. I find it interesting that Egypt/Roman Egypt managed to develop into the powerful culture that it did without such a heavy dependence on slavery so it would seem that slavery is not all that essential in a solid cultural development and economic stabitity

The Roman slave supply

 

You are arguing my points for me

Only when slavery became an economic problem rather than an economic strength was it questioned

Many slaves lived better lives than freemen  

Maybe your figures didnt copy too well but they don't show a huge preponderance of slaves in mining.

  Indeed mining would only have been a small percentage  Agriculture would have been higher but was not necessarily a brutall lfe  About 50% of roman slvaes lived in the country and many were agricultural workers. However, often every worker  on a villa or estate was a slave, from the overseer through cooks, book keepers, and those who cared for animals, to field workers.

  Their living conditions differed considerably

Again my point is valid Slavery was not always terrible or evil and often slaves were better off than equivalent freemen (hence the unrest and riots )  

[Habitat]

2 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

“The number of infant adoptions in the US has increased very slightly from 18,078 in 2007 to 18,329 in 2014, the last year data is available. Domestic infant adoption comprises only .5% of all live births in the US and only 1.1% of births to single parents” (https://creatingafamily.org/adoption-category/adoption-blog/adoption-cost-length-time/j.

Still very low, at 18,000, but that graph I displayed that showed just a few hundred a year, in Australia, it would not surprise if that had gone lower since. The USA has more conservative and traditional pockets than Australia, which is more mono-cultural, I would say.

[Habitat]

1 minute ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

So, Australia is the goalpost of the world?

The sad fact is that most adoptive couples are white, and they want cute lil white babies to raise as their own. BUT, there are a huge percentage of couples, hetero and homosexual, that are eager to adopt babies who need loving homes.

You are looking at the situation through a very narrow filter of your own design, and anything that falls out of your self-imposed range is invalid data.

I don't imagine any Western culture is much different.

[Mr Walker]

8 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Walker

If slavery displaced working citizens and created larger numbers of poor in a culture the economic value is in favor of a select few and causes a greater social burden, on the whole, lessening the quality of life of its own citizens which is why people were put in prison for unpaid taxes and several other monetary reasons beyond the control of the individual.

• An estimated 40 million people are in modern slavery all over the world. This generates an estimated $150 billion in illegal profits every year, making forced labor the second largest international crime.
• Bonded labour or debt bondage is when a workers’ labor is demanded to repay a loan. The person is usually coerced into working long after the loan is repaid. Often, the debt is passed on to the next generation.
• Forced labor is any work which people are forced to do against their will. 16 million, or 64% of of people in forced labor are in the private economy, exploited by individuals or enterprises. According to the United Nations International Labour Organization (ILO) there are 24,900,000 people in forced labour.
• Child slavery is one of the most shocking forms of slavery. Worldwide it is estimated that that one in four victims of slavery are children. Children’s labour is exploited in many jobs, including physical labor and domestic slavery.
• Live-in migrant domestic workers are particularly vulnerable to exploitation because, confined to a private home, they are isolated from protections offered in a regular workplace.
• Child marriage can be another form of slavery, if the following three elements are present: if either party hasn’t given their free and informed consent, if either party is being subjected to control and a sense of ownership, and if either party cannot realistically leave or end the marriage. Servile marriage can affect adults too.
• Human trafficking is the act of recruiting or transferring a person by means of coercion, abduction or deception for the purpose of exploitation. Although most people assume sexual exploitation to be the most common reason for trafficking people, it is in fact for forced labor.

Slavery is illegal and yet there are 40 million still subjected to slavery, please do show the social benefit of this illegal activity. It is now as it was then for the financial benefit of a few and not the whole.

jmccr8

Slavery is illegal.

Illegal things  still occur  because of economic realities, but the y are not approved institutions  If slavery was the powerful economic driver world wide  that it once was, then it would still be legal.  

[Jodie.Lynne]

3 minutes ago, Habitat said:

He said "was", sweetie ! Is he agreeing with rape in marriage ?

Walkers mouthpiece.

Yes, he is stating that marriage, by its nature, confers consent, at any and all times. So that anytime a husband wants, he can violate his wife, because it is his right to do so.

Once again, demonstrating that women are nothing more than the property of men

[Mr Walker]

2 hours ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

Aw gee, there you go overturning Habitats neat little morality play with bothersome facts!

He is Australian and  was probably influence by our incredibly low adoption figures. In part this is a reaction to the stolen generation where aboriginal children were adopted by white families 

I was stunned to read that adotion is so common in america and will have to check those figures before i believe them . 

[Habitat]

Just now, Jodie.Lynne said:

Walkers mouthpiece.

Yes, he is stating that marriage, by its nature, confers consent, at any and all times. So that anytime a husband wants, he can violate his wife, because it is his right to do so.

Once again, demonstrating that women are nothing more than the property of men

I took it as a reference to past standards, not today's. It is offensive to say he promotes rape.

[Habitat]

Just now, Mr Walker said:

He is Australian and  was probably influence by our incredibly low adoption figures. In part this is a reaction to the stolen generation where aboriginal children were adopted by white families 

I was stunned to read that adotion is so common in america and will have to check those figures before i believe them . 

18,000 per annum, according to Sherapy's figures, in a population of what, 330 Million ?

[Jodie.Lynne]

Just now, Mr Walker said:

I was stunned to read that adotion is so common in america and will have to check those figures before i believe them . 

Feel free to check, but they are pretty on target.

I personally know about a dozen families that have adopted, some more than once.

[Habitat]

4 minutes ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

Feel free to check, but they are pretty on target.

I personally know about a dozen families that have adopted, some more than once.

Red herring, Sherapy says 18,000 newborns in the USA, abortions are around 600,000 per annum. 

[Mr Walker]

1 hour ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Habitat

Just wondering what you or anyone you know has done to change the situation besides criticizing how no one else is doing anything, charity starts at home.

jmccr8

Taken in 12 young people who were abandoned by their parents, or were homeless, from new born babies to  teenagers,  between  1982 and 2016.  Cared for them for periods between a few months to 10 years,  with no help or income from  any other source.  Continue to be parents to and for them, into their thirties and after the y have had children and grandchildren of their own. 

[+Sherapy]

15 minutes ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

BULLSHIRT!

Do you think, because it is within marriage, a woman doesn't have the right to say "NO"?

If so, why not? Is it because she is the property of her husband?

By this argument, a wife has the right to purchase a strap-on sexual device and penetrate her husband, with or without his consent. And from the sound of your argument, Mrs Walker should do just that. It might just teach you some humility, if not an appreciation for a woman's right to her own body.

I call BS too, the link I provided disputes Walker yet again. 

 

“The concept of woman as chattel has been abandoned in our society. In Trammel v. United States,56 the Court decided that "[n]o where in the common-law world-[or] in any modern society-is a woman regarded as chattel or demeaned by denial of a separate legal iden- tity and the dignity associated with recognition as a whole human being. '57 Thus, the rationale of woman as property of her husband is outmoded, invalid, and falls to support the marital rape exemption.”

https://repository.jmls.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1884&context=lawreview

[+Sherapy]

9 minutes ago, Habitat said:

18,000 per annum, according to Sherapy's figures, in a population of what, 330 Million ?

I only included California my state. 

You can plug in the rest yourself. 

[Jodie.Lynne]

19 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

i repeat there was no such thing  as rape within a marriage,  either legally or in concept, until the 1960s because marriage was seen to give ongoing consent to sex and this was a known part of the marriage contract.

@Habitat

Please read this statement by your hero, and stop fangirling long enough to comprehend the statement.

According to him, there was no rape in marriage, until the 1960's. When, presumably, the first cases of rape were brought to bear against husbands by wives.

In his deluded state, since there were no lawsuits, rape didn't exist before that time.

And in an earlier post, W stated that if the attacker didn't think it was rape, then it wasn't rape.

I wonder how either of you would feel about the matter if you were in prison, and became victims of rape.

I'm not wishing it upon either of you, but it might cause you to empathize a little bit. It just might open your eyes (among other things), if you could see the issue from the other side.

[Habitat]

1 hour ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Habitat

Just wondering what you or anyone you know has done to change the situation besides criticizing how no one else is doing anything, charity starts at home.

jmccr8

Huh  ? You want me to have a baby to provide for adoption ? The right place for a baby is with its parents, but I am sure many adoptive parents have made great parents. I never criticized anyone for "doing nothing", no idea what you are on about really.

[Jodie.Lynne]

7 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Red herring, Sherapy says 18,000 newborns in the USA, abortions are around 600,000 per annum. 

Sherapy quoted California stats. 

[Mr Walker]

1 hour ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Habitat

So outside of the 3 hundred locally how many adopt from other countries where children are at high risk of the abuses like in the links I gave you earlier?

jmccr8

All adoption in austrlai is made very difficult and expensive and can only be done through one govt agency.this explains  habitat's opinion about  adoption, and i was of the same mind KNOWING the figures involved.  it stunned me to see how easy adoption is in america

 

Adoption numbers increased In 2017–18, 330 adoptions were recorded as finalised. This was an increase of 5% from 2016–17 when there were 315 adoptions. However, this rise in finalised adoptions occurred against a backdrop of a 57% decline in Australia in the 25-year period from 1993–94 to 2017–18. Known child adoptions made up almost three-quarters of all adoptions While other types of adoption have declined, ‘known child’ adoptions—where the child is already known to the adoptive parent(s)—have increased over the past decade, from 104 in 2008–09 to 233 in 2017–18. These adoptions comprised 71% of all finalised adoptions in 2017–18, with adoptions by carers, such as foster parents, the most common (63%). The increase in known child adoptions can be attributed to a policy change in New South Wales that resulted in a higher number of adoptions from care. Local and intercountry adoptees were younger than known child adoptees Adoption of Australian children not known to their adoptive parents is called ‘local’ adoption. In 2017–18, 32 local adoptions were finalised, representing 10% of all adoptions. A further 65 adoptions of children from countries other than Australia, referred to as ‘intercountry’ adoptions, were also finalised. All local adoptees, and 65% of intercountry adoptees, were aged under 5. By comparison, only 1 in 6 known child adoptees (16%) were aged under 5.

https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/6d9374b3-974c-4ba3-8134-d59979733c87/aihw-cws-66.pdf.aspx?inline=true

So, for a country of 25 million a TOTAL of  330 adoptions in 2017-18

of these, 65 came for other counties 

ALL local adoptees and 65% of inter country adoptees were under 5 years of age 

Ie almost no child over 5 years of age was adopted by Australian parents in 2017-18  (maybe around 23 in total) 

Edited April 22, 2019 by Mr Walker

[Habitat]

1 minute ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

Sherapy quoted California stats. 

I wonder what ethnic group splits would look like. 

[Jodie.Lynne]

How many children are adopted each year?

Around 140,000 children are adopted by American families each year.⁷

 

https://adoptionnetwork.com/adoption-statistics

[+Sherapy]

4 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Taken in 12 young people who were abandoned by their parents, or were homeless, from new born babies to  teenagers,  between  1982 and 2016.  Cared for them for periods between a few months to 10 years,  with no help or income from  any other source.  Continue to be parents to and for them, into their thirties and after the y have had children and grandchildren of their own. 

So you claim, you also said you were not recognized as foster parents by your local government. 

You said you drove around and picked kids off the streets while the local authority’s knew you were doing this and looked the other way, your words.

Maybe you did, maybe you didn’t, but it wasn’t done legally or with checks and balances in place. 

It is not something people typically do, they don’t just take it on themselves to pick up kids and take them home.

They would take them to the proper authorities and become  a foster parent the legal way.