Comments on: The International Marriage Broker Regulation Act and Free Association http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/02/27/the-international-marriage-broker-regulation-act-and-free-association/ Conservative and Libertarian Intellectual Philosophy and Politics Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:00:53 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Vituperator http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/02/27/the-international-marriage-broker-regulation-act-and-free-association/comment-page-1/#comment-40281 Vituperator Mon, 26 Mar 2007 04:52:29 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/the-international-marriage-broker-regulation-act-and-free-association/#comment-40281 "Feminists consider all marriages with foreign women to be “servile” sex trafficking and inherently abusive." Actually, although this is close to the truth, here is the real truth: Misandrists responsible for the passage of IMBRA consider any marital type relationship with men to be inherently abusive to women. All men are rapists. These so-called "feminists" are misandrists - plain and simple. They hate men with a passion and they hate and despise any form of institutional marriage, especially of a heterosexual nature. I told people over 30 years ago that these "feminists" were going to try to destroy traditional marriage as we know it, and people laughed. IMBRA is not about protecting foreign women. And as soon as they could get that fecal bit of legislation cemented beyond repair, domestic agencies would become their next target. The phenomenal growth of men looking abroad for wives represents a significant threat to the agenda of these misandrists. "...the counter-feminist movement is every bit as willing to bend truth and sensationalize issues as the feminist movement, and it’s no better coming from either side." Patrick, you are a spineless equivocator and you bring nothing of any value to the table of discussion. “Feminists consider all marriages with foreign women to be “servile” sex trafficking and inherently abusive.”

Actually, although this is close to the truth, here is the real truth: Misandrists responsible for the passage of IMBRA consider any marital type relationship with men to be inherently abusive to women. All men are rapists.

These so-called “feminists” are misandrists – plain and simple. They hate men with a passion and they hate and despise any form of institutional marriage, especially of a heterosexual nature. I told people over 30 years ago that these “feminists” were going to try to destroy traditional marriage as we know it, and people laughed. IMBRA is not about protecting foreign women. And as soon as they could get that fecal bit of legislation cemented beyond repair, domestic agencies would become their next target. The phenomenal growth of men looking abroad for wives represents a significant threat to the agenda of these misandrists.

“…the counter-feminist movement is every bit as willing to bend truth and sensationalize issues as the feminist movement, and it’s no better coming from either side.” Patrick, you are a spineless equivocator and you bring nothing of any value to the table of discussion.

]]> By: Patrick Mulligan http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/02/27/the-international-marriage-broker-regulation-act-and-free-association/comment-page-1/#comment-38326 Patrick Mulligan Sat, 03 Mar 2007 01:33:56 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/the-international-marriage-broker-regulation-act-and-free-association/#comment-38326 My post was in regards to David Usher's previous two articles, in which he explained that Islam may be the last hope for families, as it observes such traditional-values rules as men being the head of the household... and honor killings, rape, repression and abuse of children. He went on to explain that the reason for homicide bombings in the middle east is that, "Muslims don't want feminism shoved down their throats" via I-VAWA. Evidently it was retroactively responsible for instigating the violence of Muslims who just want to observe the aforementioned "traditional values" free of American intervention. I don't agree with I-VAWA and don't know much about IMBRA, but would undoubtedly oppose it if I did. But Mr. Usher is a propagandist and a sensationalist. Judging by what I've hard of his material, I think the counter-feminist movement is every bit as willing to bend truth and sensationalize issues as the feminist movement, and it's no better coming from either side. My post was in regards to David Usher’s previous two articles, in which he explained that Islam may be the last hope for families, as it observes such traditional-values rules as men being the head of the household… and honor killings, rape, repression and abuse of children. He went on to explain that the reason for homicide bombings in the middle east is that, “Muslims don’t want feminism shoved down their throats” via I-VAWA. Evidently it was retroactively responsible for instigating the violence of Muslims who just want to observe the aforementioned “traditional values” free of American intervention.

I don’t agree with I-VAWA and don’t know much about IMBRA, but would undoubtedly oppose it if I did. But Mr. Usher is a propagandist and a sensationalist. Judging by what I’ve hard of his material, I think the counter-feminist movement is every bit as willing to bend truth and sensationalize issues as the feminist movement, and it’s no better coming from either side.

]]> By: sqeekyskweel http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/02/27/the-international-marriage-broker-regulation-act-and-free-association/comment-page-1/#comment-38319 sqeekyskweel Fri, 02 Mar 2007 22:53:19 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/the-international-marriage-broker-regulation-act-and-free-association/#comment-38319 No, Patrick, but IMBRA IS responsible for the prison growth here at home, alcohol and drug addiction in men, particularly lower income males, lost potential in the workforce( not to mention lost opportunity to maximize production with unnecessary costs to the labor force)and a host of un recorded child abuse by women--this act is one of many that is designed to keep men from looking too closely at the behaviors of women, as long as they can keep the harsh light on men. Did you know that most men were abused with physical violence, coercion, etc by mothers and other female caregivers when they were children? Did you know that most rapists report having been physically and sexually abused by women in their childhood? Did you know that previous to the holocaust of facts that these same feminists used, that most acts of domestic violence begin by women hitting men? However, to our detriment as men( we are responsible, accountable and wholsome in our view of ourselves) we generally still are a bit accountable when we say things like this:"Feminists abhor American men having a way to find a marriage partner worth taking a risk on." I mean, are men really "risks" because we were involved with psychotic women or became involved in the justice system in ways that clearly discriminate against men? I think not....here we see us as men doing what men trsditionally do: blaming ourselves for our own abuse, i.e. giving credence to the idea that we actually are "risks", when in fact, it is a risk to be a man in such a system as ours. No, Patrick, but IMBRA IS responsible for the prison growth here at home, alcohol and drug addiction in men, particularly lower income males, lost potential in the workforce( not to mention lost opportunity to maximize production with unnecessary costs to the labor force)and a host of un recorded child abuse by women–this act is one of many that is designed to keep men from looking too closely at the behaviors of women, as long as they can keep the harsh light on men.
Did you know that most men were abused with physical violence, coercion, etc by mothers and other female caregivers when they were children? Did you know that most rapists report having been physically and sexually abused by women in their childhood? Did you know that previous to the holocaust of facts that these same feminists used, that most acts of domestic violence begin by women hitting men?
However, to our detriment as men( we are responsible, accountable and wholsome in our view of ourselves) we generally still are a bit accountable when we say things like this:”Feminists abhor American men having a way to find a marriage partner worth taking a risk on.”

I mean, are men really “risks” because we were involved with psychotic women or became involved in the justice system in ways that clearly discriminate against men? I think not….here we see us as men doing what men trsditionally do: blaming ourselves for our own abuse, i.e. giving credence to the idea that we actually are “risks”, when in fact, it is a risk to be a man in such a system as ours.

]]> By: Patrick Mulligan http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/02/27/the-international-marriage-broker-regulation-act-and-free-association/comment-page-1/#comment-38065 Patrick Mulligan Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:19:06 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/the-international-marriage-broker-regulation-act-and-free-association/#comment-38065 Well as bad as IMBRA is, at least it isn't responsible for instigating faithful, Godly Muslims to resort to homicide bombing and terrorism like I-VAWA is, right? Well as bad as IMBRA is, at least it isn’t responsible for instigating faithful, Godly Muslims to resort to homicide bombing and terrorism like I-VAWA is, right?

]]>