Catholics & Catholicism

Question:

I hear you. As a representative of a formerly sovereign nation soon to endure the evils of federalism, I assure you that I’m with you in your sentiments. The Crawling Eye and Gamera vs Barugon are neck and neck right now. Which will load first, I wonder? OTS "eerieguy" <eerie…@noone.com> wrote in message

news:O0Vx9.127235$Ju.91320@news2.central.cox.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Oh, a ware house or two.  "The Man" says that’s not ok, so I’m seceding from > the Union.  What’s right is right.  And if I choose to defend my home with > 88 mm howitzer, don’t oppress my freedom.  Sometimes collateral damage is > acceptable, especially if they happen to be my neighbors whom I don’t really > like much anyway.  And yes I do need fully automatic weapons to hunt deer. > Sure, they look cute, but wait till they go on a rampage.  And those cute > does with their big brown eyes?  They’d eat your babies if you gave them > half a chance. > [end of rant] > "Wing Commander Sandcastle" <ollie.sandcas…@ntlworld.com> wrote in message > news:aq95p9$7u329$1@ID-73971.news.dfncis.de… > > Wow! How many anti-tank weapons have you got? > > OTS > > "eerieguy" <eerie…@noone.com> wrote in message > > news:F8Ux9.126848$Ju.44508@news2.central.cox.net… > > > Don’t blame the government because you want to adhere to some outmoded > > > belief system of no pratical value other than group identification, ego > > > inflation, and feelings of moral superiority.  And so forth.  That’s > your > > > choice.  If you want to imagine that an omnipotent being cares about a > > > marriage license, that’s not Uncle Sam’s problem.  You think you have > > > troubles,the guvment wants to confiscate my collection of anti-tank > > weapons, > > > which I believe are protected by the 2nd amendment–a fact obvious to > all > > > reasonable men. > > > P.S. I think many Catholics are also Pentacostalists, esp. in Latin > > America. > > > Have you considered Unitarianism? > > > "Cheerful Pickle" <cheerfulpic…@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message > > > news:N7Px9.27153$VJ5.1638665@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net… > > > > DraMATTics, > > > > Before you get so high and mighty as to where my money came from, let > me > > > > tell you.  For thirty years I paid into the Social Security Trust > Fund, > > > just > > > > as you are doing.  I did so with the expectation that either when I > > > retired > > > > or got disabled, that money would be available to me.  People on SSI > pay > > > > little if anything into that fund.  People like my last girlfriend are > > > > entitled to their VA pension for their service to their country.  If > you > > > > would begrudge her of her money or me of mine, then begrudge yourself > > when > > > > you reach retirement age.  People like me who are on SSA and people > like > > > you > > > > who will be at the age of 65, 66 or 67 have the right to expect that > > money > > > > to be there. > > > > As to my religious preference, I am Protestant and > > > Pentecostal/Charismatic, > > > > not Roman Catholic.  I only mentioned the Catholic Church in context > of > > > its > > > > introduction of the concept of a paper trail pertaining to marriage > that > > > led > > > > to the modern marriage lisence as imposed by the government. > > > > Andy > > > > The Cheerful Pickle > > > > "DraMATTics" <matts…@cox.net> wrote in message > > > > news:fnMx9.390916$o.4433715@news1.west.cox.net… > > > > > Have you ever thought the reason the goverment makes it difficult > for > > > > people > > > > > who are on SSI or SSA to get married is to prevent families that > would > > > not > > > > > be able to afford the high cost of raising a child, from having > them. > > > Thus > > > > > preventing these family’s from becoming a financial burden on the > God > > > > > fearing, lawbiding, hard working, taxpaying citizens of this United > > > > States. > > > > > First off, you need to remember where you are getting that money to > > > begin > > > > > with. That’s right, from me and from everyother God fearing, > > lawbiding, > > > > hard > > > > > working, taxpaying citizen of these United States of America. > > > > >Plus, from what your are saying you > > > > > appear Catholic. > > — > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.391 / Virus Database: 222 – Release Date: 19/09/2002

— Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.391 / Virus Database: 222 – Release Date: 19/09/2002

Response:

> No, it is all a matter of honesty, if nothing else.  If it were not for > these ridiculous penalties, I could have married either of the two women in > question.  Simply just to pretend to be married is a form of moral and > economic dishonesty.  If I were to not marry my last girlfriend but live > with her as though we were married, we would be morally, if not legally, > committing fraud by taking money that we should not be entitled to take. > Should one violate one’s conscience in such a case?  I say, "No."  My last > two girlfriends felt the same way and I respect them for that. > People with principles deserve our respect.  Unfortunately, we live in an > age where the unprincipled often receive more respect that the principled > do. > It is better not to live than to live without integrity before God and

man.     Since nobody else has said it yet, let me say that I’m humbled by your moral concerns and wish more people were likewise. If I was female and 60 I’d ask you out. But oh well. I’m surprised to hear there’s such a reduction in payments upon marriage. Not that there’s anything I can do about it, but know at least that I’m rooting for you.

Response:

Thanks, Chris.  I appreciate your thoughts. "Chris Wiegert" <cwieg…@shaw.ca> wrote in message

news:DxXx9.658587$v53.27928960@news3.calgary.shaw.ca… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > No, it is all a matter of honesty, if nothing else.  If it were not for > > these ridiculous penalties, I could have married either of the two women > in > > question.  Simply just to pretend to be married is a form of moral and > > economic dishonesty.  If I were to not marry my last girlfriend but live > > with her as though we were married, we would be morally, if not legally, > > committing fraud by taking money that we should not be entitled to take. > > Should one violate one’s conscience in such a case?  I say, "No."  My last > > two girlfriends felt the same way and I respect them for that. > > People with principles deserve our respect.  Unfortunately, we live in an > > age where the unprincipled often receive more respect that the principled > > do. > > It is better not to live than to live without integrity before God and > man. >     Since nobody else has said it yet, let me say that I’m humbled by your > moral concerns and wish more people were likewise. If I was female and 60 > I’d ask you out. But oh well. I’m surprised to hear there’s such a > reduction in payments upon marriage. Not that there’s anything I can do > about it, but know at least that I’m rooting for you.

Response:

Oh, a ware house or two.  "The Man" says that’s not ok, so I’m seceding from the Union.  What’s right is right.  And if I choose to defend my home with 88 mm howitzer, don’t oppress my freedom.  Sometimes collateral damage is acceptable, especially if they happen to be my neighbors whom I don’t really like much anyway.  And yes I do need fully automatic weapons to hunt deer. Sure, they look cute, but wait till they go on a rampage.  And those cute does with their big brown eyes?  They’d eat your babies if you gave them half a chance. [end of rant] "Wing Commander Sandcastle" <ollie.sandcas…@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:aq95p9$7u329$1@ID-73971.news.dfncis.de… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Wow! How many anti-tank weapons have you got? > OTS > "eerieguy" <eerie…@noone.com> wrote in message > news:F8Ux9.126848$Ju.44508@news2.central.cox.net… > > Don’t blame the government because you want to adhere to some outmoded > > belief system of no pratical value other than group identification, ego > > inflation, and feelings of moral superiority.  And so forth.  That’s your > > choice.  If you want to imagine that an omnipotent being cares about a > > marriage license, that’s not Uncle Sam’s problem.  You think you have > > troubles,the guvment wants to confiscate my collection of anti-tank > weapons, > > which I believe are protected by the 2nd amendment–a fact obvious to all > > reasonable men. > > P.S. I think many Catholics are also Pentacostalists, esp. in Latin > America. > > Have you considered Unitarianism? > > "Cheerful Pickle" <cheerfulpic…@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message > > news:N7Px9.27153$VJ5.1638665@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net… > > > DraMATTics, > > > Before you get so high and mighty as to where my money came from, let me > > > tell you.  For thirty years I paid into the Social Security Trust Fund, > > just > > > as you are doing.  I did so with the expectation that either when I > > retired > > > or got disabled, that money would be available to me.  People on SSI pay > > > little if anything into that fund.  People like my last girlfriend are > > > entitled to their VA pension for their service to their country.  If you > > > would begrudge her of her money or me of mine, then begrudge yourself > when > > > you reach retirement age.  People like me who are on SSA and people like > > you > > > who will be at the age of 65, 66 or 67 have the right to expect that > money > > > to be there. > > > As to my religious preference, I am Protestant and > > Pentecostal/Charismatic, > > > not Roman Catholic.  I only mentioned the Catholic Church in context of > > its > > > introduction of the concept of a paper trail pertaining to marriage that > > led > > > to the modern marriage lisence as imposed by the government. > > > Andy > > > The Cheerful Pickle > > > "DraMATTics" <matts…@cox.net> wrote in message > > > news:fnMx9.390916$o.4433715@news1.west.cox.net… > > > > Have you ever thought the reason the goverment makes it difficult for > > > people > > > > who are on SSI or SSA to get married is to prevent families that would > > not > > > > be able to afford the high cost of raising a child, from having them. > > Thus > > > > preventing these family’s from becoming a financial burden on the God > > > > fearing, lawbiding, hard working, taxpaying citizens of this United > > > States. > > > > First off, you need to remember where you are getting that money to > > begin > > > > with. That’s right, from me and from everyother God fearing, > lawbiding, > > > hard > > > > working, taxpaying citizen of these United States of America. > > > >Plus, from what your are saying you > > > > appear Catholic. > — > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.391 / Virus Database: 222 – Release Date: 19/09/2002

Response:

Wow! How many anti-tank weapons have you got? OTS "eerieguy" <eerie…@noone.com> wrote in message

news:F8Ux9.126848$Ju.44508@news2.central.cox.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Don’t blame the government because you want to adhere to some outmoded > belief system of no pratical value other than group identification, ego > inflation, and feelings of moral superiority.  And so forth.  That’s your > choice.  If you want to imagine that an omnipotent being cares about a > marriage license, that’s not Uncle Sam’s problem.  You think you have > troubles,the guvment wants to confiscate my collection of anti-tank weapons, > which I believe are protected by the 2nd amendment–a fact obvious to all > reasonable men. > P.S. I think many Catholics are also Pentacostalists, esp. in Latin America. > Have you considered Unitarianism? > "Cheerful Pickle" <cheerfulpic…@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message > news:N7Px9.27153$VJ5.1638665@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net… > > DraMATTics, > > Before you get so high and mighty as to where my money came from, let me > > tell you.  For thirty years I paid into the Social Security Trust Fund, > just > > as you are doing.  I did so with the expectation that either when I > retired > > or got disabled, that money would be available to me.  People on SSI pay > > little if anything into that fund.  People like my last girlfriend are > > entitled to their VA pension for their service to their country.  If you > > would begrudge her of her money or me of mine, then begrudge yourself when > > you reach retirement age.  People like me who are on SSA and people like > you > > who will be at the age of 65, 66 or 67 have the right to expect that money > > to be there. > > As to my religious preference, I am Protestant and > Pentecostal/Charismatic, > > not Roman Catholic.  I only mentioned the Catholic Church in context of > its > > introduction of the concept of a paper trail pertaining to marriage that > led > > to the modern marriage lisence as imposed by the government. > > Andy > > The Cheerful Pickle > > "DraMATTics" <matts…@cox.net> wrote in message > > news:fnMx9.390916$o.4433715@news1.west.cox.net… > > > Have you ever thought the reason the goverment makes it difficult for > > people > > > who are on SSI or SSA to get married is to prevent families that would > not > > > be able to afford the high cost of raising a child, from having them. > Thus > > > preventing these family’s from becoming a financial burden on the God > > > fearing, lawbiding, hard working, taxpaying citizens of this United > > States. > > > First off, you need to remember where you are getting that money to > begin > > > with. That’s right, from me and from everyother God fearing, lawbiding, > > hard > > > working, taxpaying citizen of these United States of America. > > >Plus, from what your are saying you > > > appear Catholic.

— Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.391 / Virus Database: 222 – Release Date: 19/09/2002

Response:

Don’t blame the government because you want to adhere to some outmoded belief system of no pratical value other than group identification, ego inflation, and feelings of moral superiority.  And so forth.  That’s your choice.  If you want to imagine that an omnipotent being cares about a marriage license, that’s not Uncle Sam’s problem.  You think you have troubles,the guvment wants to confiscate my collection of anti-tank weapons, which I believe are protected by the 2nd amendment–a fact obvious to all reasonable men. P.S. I think many Catholics are also Pentacostalists, esp. in Latin America. Have you considered Unitarianism? "Cheerful Pickle" <cheerfulpic…@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

news:N7Px9.27153$VJ5.1638665@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> DraMATTics, > Before you get so high and mighty as to where my money came from, let me > tell you.  For thirty years I paid into the Social Security Trust Fund, just > as you are doing.  I did so with the expectation that either when I retired > or got disabled, that money would be available to me.  People on SSI pay > little if anything into that fund.  People like my last girlfriend are > entitled to their VA pension for their service to their country.  If you > would begrudge her of her money or me of mine, then begrudge yourself when > you reach retirement age.  People like me who are on SSA and people like you > who will be at the age of 65, 66 or 67 have the right to expect that money > to be there. > As to my religious preference, I am Protestant and

Pentecostal/Charismatic, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> not Roman Catholic.  I only mentioned the Catholic Church in context of its > introduction of the concept of a paper trail pertaining to marriage that led > to the modern marriage lisence as imposed by the government. > Andy > The Cheerful Pickle > "DraMATTics" <matts…@cox.net> wrote in message > news:fnMx9.390916$o.4433715@news1.west.cox.net… > > Have you ever thought the reason the goverment makes it difficult for > people > > who are on SSI or SSA to get married is to prevent families that would not > > be able to afford the high cost of raising a child, from having them. Thus > > preventing these family’s from becoming a financial burden on the God > > fearing, lawbiding, hard working, taxpaying citizens of this United > States. > > First off, you need to remember where you are getting that money to begin > > with. That’s right, from me and from everyother God fearing, lawbiding, > hard > > working, taxpaying citizen of these United States of America. > >Plus, from what your are saying you > > appear Catholic.

Response:

DraMATTics, Before you get so high and mighty as to where my money came from, let me tell you.  For thirty years I paid into the Social Security Trust Fund, just as you are doing.  I did so with the expectation that either when I retired or got disabled, that money would be available to me.  People on SSI pay little if anything into that fund.  People like my last girlfriend are entitled to their VA pension for their service to their country.  If you would begrudge her of her money or me of mine, then begrudge yourself when you reach retirement age.  People like me who are on SSA and people like you who will be at the age of 65, 66 or 67 have the right to expect that money to be there. As to my religious preference, I am Protestant and Pentecostal/Charismatic, not Roman Catholic.  I only mentioned the Catholic Church in context of its introduction of the concept of a paper trail pertaining to marriage that led to the modern marriage lisence as imposed by the government. Andy The Cheerful Pickle "DraMATTics" <matts…@cox.net> wrote in message

news:fnMx9.390916$o.4433715@news1.west.cox.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Have you ever thought the reason the goverment makes it difficult for people > who are on SSI or SSA to get married is to prevent families that would not > be able to afford the high cost of raising a child, from having them. Thus > preventing these family’s from becoming a financial burden on the God > fearing, lawbiding, hard working, taxpaying citizens of this United States. > First off, you need to remember where you are getting that money to begin > with. That’s right, from me and from everyother God fearing, lawbiding, hard > working, taxpaying citizen of these United States of America. >Plus, from what your are saying you > appear Catholic.

Response:

Have you ever thought the reason the goverment makes it difficult for people who are on SSI or SSA to get married is to prevent families that would not be able to afford the high cost of raising a child, from having them. Thus preventing these family’s from becoming a financial burden on the God fearing, lawbiding, hard working, taxpaying citizens of this United States. First off, you need to remember where you are getting that money to begin with. That’s right, from me and from everyother God fearing, lawbiding, hard working, taxpaying citizen of these United States of America. The goverment didn’t say you could not get married. It was your beliefs that stopped you from getting married. Perhaps you need to rethink the logic behind them. Try weighing your present "unhappiness" against them and then tell yourself where you find the logic behind them. Plus, from what your are saying you appear Catholic. If that’s so what are you worried about if you live in sin with someone. Have you forgotten that all Christians shall be forgiven. "Happiness lies neither in vice nore in virtue; but in the manner we appreciate the one and the other, and choice we make pursuant to our individual organization." Marquis de Sade (1797) "Cheerful Pickle" <cheerfulpic…@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

news:w7Lx9.46718$Mb3.2314174@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> DraMATTics, > I can understand and sympathize with the position you took.  What you say > brings to mind the other major problem I have with getting married: > interference from Uncle Sam.  It can be quite hard enough to find a good > woman without intrusive interference from the government. > The law seems to reward vice and penalize virtue in this case.  The question > here is not one of merely a piece of paper; it is of the commitment that > piece of paper represents.  It is, furthermore, a declaration to the world > and to God — I am a solid believer in God as are all the women I date — > that we take seriously our vows to each other and to God, whether or not > there is a piece of paper.  Unfortunately, the law wants a piece of paper > for a variety of legal reasons that give a spouse benefits not enjoyed by a > live-in companion. > It has only been for the last 1000 years that there has been a piece of > paper kept as a public record anyway (interestingly enough, the idea of > keeping public records of marriage was not that of the state, but of the > Catholic Church, which wanted to stop bigamy).  Unfortunately, government > came along and did it in such a way that fails stop bigamy.  Furthermore, it > taxes married people just because they are married.  Should it cost $70 just > for some clerk to record a record of marriage on a computer?  Of course, > not, the $70 is just a disguised marriage tax.  Additionally, it taxes them > with additional income taxes.  (Everyone has heard of the IRS’s infamous > "marriage penalty.")  Government has inflicted other evils as well on the > married and those who would like to get married. > No, it is all a matter of honesty, if nothing else.  If it were not for > these ridiculous penalties, I could have married either of the two women in > question.  Simply just to pretend to be married is a form of moral and > economic dishonesty.  If I were to not marry my last girlfriend but live > with her as though we were married, we would be morally, if not legally, > committing fraud by taking money that we should not be entitled to take. > Should one violate one’s conscience in such a case?  I say, "No."  My last > two girlfriends felt the same way and I respect them for that. > People with principles deserve our respect.  Unfortunately, we live in an > age where the unprincipled often receive more respect that the principled > do. > It is better not to live than to live without integrity before God and man. > Frankly, I believe that government should butt out of marriage all together, > except to prevent bigamy (which they could do in a way similar to how the > Catholic church does by recording marriages on one’s birth certificate) and > preventing incest (in the same way).  Government may also perhaps have a > legitimate concern regarding restricting the right of the mentally > incompetent to marry.  Other than those limited situations, government has > absolutely no business in doing anything to try to determine who should > marry whom.  Government has no right to foster "living together" over > marriage.  Government should not put any financial impediments in the road > to marriage at all.  Government has no right to put impediments in the road > to marriage based purely on which disability program one is in. > Government, butt out of my life.  It can be hard enough finding a good woman > without having to check with an attorney to see if we can afford it. > Andy > The Cheerful Pickle > "DraMATTics" <matts…@cox.net> wrote in message > news:gvHx9.381317$o.4326064@news1.west.cox.net… > > I fail to understand why the relationships end just because should the two > > of you get married it would affect you financially. Have you considered > > staying together and not getting married. It seems to me the problem isn’t > > with how the goverment has decided to treat people on SSI or SSA (although > I > > do agree you are treated unfairly) It seems the problem lies with whomever > > decides the relationship has to be end simply because of small piece of > > paper that the same goverment who penalizes you for getting married gives > to > > you before you can "feel" married. Marriage has more to do with two people > > making a commitment to eachother then it does with obtaining a piece of > > paper that says so. If that is the case, create one the computer, lable it > > "marriage certificate" sign your names on it, say your vowes to eachother > > and consider yourselves married. Don’t let the goverment get in the way of > > love. Or religion either if it applies. I do feel for you and I apologize > to > > you if I sound a bit harsh. That’s only because I fail to see the logic of > > why two people in love quit eachother over something I feel is missing the > > point. But, hey what do I know.

Response:

I fail to understand why the relationships end just because should the two of you get married it would affect you financially. Have you considered staying together and not getting married. It seems to me the problem isn’t with how the goverment has decided to treat people on SSI or SSA (although I do agree you are treated unfairly) It seems the problem lies with whomever decides the relationship has to be end simply because of small piece of paper that the same goverment who penalizes you for getting married gives to you before you can "feel" married. Marriage has more to do with two people making a commitment to eachother then it does with obtaining a piece of paper that says so. If that is the case, create one the computer, lable it "marriage certificate" sign your names on it, say your vowes to eachother and consider yourselves married. Don’t let the goverment get in the way of love. Or religion either if it applies. I do feel for you and I apologize to you if I sound a bit harsh. That’s only because I fail to see the logic of why two people in love quit eachother over something I feel is missing the point. But, hey what do I know. "Cheerful Pickle" <cheerfulpic…@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

news:_HGx9.46460$Mb3.2280213@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> When it comes to women, I’ve been hurt by so many rejections that it has > made me very gun shy.  How can one be anything but shy around women when all > they seem to want to do is to hurt and reject.  I am 56 years old and tired > of being alone and lonely.  Good women don’t seem to grow on trees.  In > fact, it seems that good women, especially my age, don’t grow anywhere. > What good women there are have long since been married. > What is left seems to be the same ilk that I’ve had to put up with for the > last thirty-seven years, only there seems to be far more of them.  It always > boils down to the same story. > Boy meets girl. > Girl meets boy. > Boy thinks girl is super. > Girl leads boy on. > Boy dates girl. > Girl dates boy. > Boy gets hooked on girl. > Girl dumps boy. > Boy gets hurt. > End of sad, sad story. > Regrettably, that is the story of my dating experience.  Most of the time, > it seems like all a woman is interested in is "hurt and reject."  Gee, > according to Goggle Groups, those are the same words I used when I posted > similar sentiments to this newsgroup in Feb. 1999.  Things haven’t changed > any, regrettably.  I don’t know whether the above scenario is deliberate on > any woman’s part, I sure hope not, but it always seems to work that way. > Unfortunately, now that I am on disability, as I was in 1999, I have come > across an additional monkey wrench seemingly designed with the intent of > messing things up.  That monkey wrench is created by the screwballs and > yoyo’s we voters elect to Congress. > I am on Social Security Disability (for some bizarre reason, government > bureaucrats abbreviate that as  SSA).  One girl I dated a few years back was > on Supplemental Security Income (logically — surprise — abbreviated as > SSI).  Because she was on SSI and I on SSA, if we were to marry, the > government would have slashed her check from $550 to $150 a month.  That was > too much for her to handle, so any prospects of marriage were dashed.  The > next girl I dated, with whom I just broke up, was on a VA disability > pension.  Her late husband was on SSI and because a VA pensioner and an SSI > pensioner married each other, each had their income increased by $150 a > month.  If the government was willing to leave her check alone if we were to > marry we would have made $1 a month less than they would have if he had not > passed away.  However, because she was on VA and I on SSA instead of on SSI, > they would have slashed her check by $600 a month.  That was more than she > could have handled.  Needless to say, I do not hold Congress in the highest > possible esteem after all their meddling in my love life. > The disability has another drawback.  Among pensioners it would seem I have > to rule out the great majority who are on SSI and the few on VA because the > government makes it all but impossible financially to marry someone on > either SSI or VA.  Since I have been able to find absolutely no woman on SSA > whether they are interested or not, my only other option is to find a > working woman.  What woman making in the neighborhood of $30,000 to $40,000 > a year would be interested in a man who makes under $10,500 a year?  I sure > can’t find any willing to give me the time of day.   I tend not to attract > the women making around $17,000 a year since they tend to think I’m too > smart for them.  Actually, they might be surprised if they were to give me a > chance.  Back in 1999 someone posted in reply to me, "Especially in your age > group, there are women who would not be concerned with how much or how > little money you have.  In this day and age, we are self supporting for the > most part.  Jae".  So far I have found no evidence to collaborate her > theory.  If anything, all I see tends to be more discouraging than > encouraging.  Believe me. > I’m not giving up, though.  Even if all is lost, I will go down trying. It > is just that now, finding someone with whom to try is getting harder and > harder.  There are so few GOOD fish in the pond that have not been taken. > Sometimes, I have to admit that it seem to be an exercise in futility; other > times my faith rises up and I say, "With God, even this is possible."  We > will see which side of me wins on this one. > Take it easy, folks. > Andy > The not always so Cheerful Pickle

Response:

DraMATTics, I can understand and sympathize with the position you took.  What you say brings to mind the other major problem I have with getting married: interference from Uncle Sam.  It can be quite hard enough to find a good woman without intrusive interference from the government. The law seems to reward vice and penalize virtue in this case.  The question here is not one of merely a piece of paper; it is of the commitment that piece of paper represents.  It is, furthermore, a declaration to the world and to God — I am a solid believer in God as are all the women I date — that we take seriously our vows to each other and to God, whether or not there is a piece of paper.  Unfortunately, the law wants a piece of paper for a variety of legal reasons that give a spouse benefits not enjoyed by a live-in companion. It has only been for the last 1000 years that there has been a piece of paper kept as a public record anyway (interestingly enough, the idea of keeping public records of marriage was not that of the state, but of the Catholic Church, which wanted to stop bigamy).  Unfortunately, government came along and did it in such a way that fails stop bigamy.  Furthermore, it taxes married people just because they are married.  Should it cost $70 just for some clerk to record a record of marriage on a computer?  Of course, not, the $70 is just a disguised marriage tax.  Additionally, it taxes them with additional income taxes.  (Everyone has heard of the IRS’s infamous "marriage penalty.")  Government has inflicted other evils as well on the married and those who would like to get married. No, it is all a matter of honesty, if nothing else.  If it were not for these ridiculous penalties, I could have married either of the two women in question.  Simply just to pretend to be married is a form of moral and economic dishonesty.  If I were to not marry my last girlfriend but live with her as though we were married, we would be morally, if not legally, committing fraud by taking money that we should not be entitled to take. Should one violate one’s conscience in such a case?  I say, "No."  My last two girlfriends felt the same way and I respect them for that. People with principles deserve our respect.  Unfortunately, we live in an age where the unprincipled often receive more respect that the principled do. It is better not to live than to live without integrity before God and man. Frankly, I believe that government should butt out of marriage all together, except to prevent bigamy (which they could do in a way similar to how the Catholic church does by recording marriages on one’s birth certificate) and preventing incest (in the same way).  Government may also perhaps have a legitimate concern regarding restricting the right of the mentally incompetent to marry.  Other than those limited situations, government has absolutely no business in doing anything to try to determine who should marry whom.  Government has no right to foster "living together" over marriage.  Government should not put any financial impediments in the road to marriage at all.  Government has no right to put impediments in the road to marriage based purely on which disability program one is in. Government, butt out of my life.  It can be hard enough finding a good woman without having to check with an attorney to see if we can afford it. Andy The Cheerful Pickle "DraMATTics" <matts…@cox.net> wrote in message

news:gvHx9.381317$o.4326064@news1.west.cox.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I fail to understand why the relationships end just because should the two > of you get married it would affect you financially. Have you considered > staying together and not getting married. It seems to me the problem isn’t > with how the goverment has decided to treat people on SSI or SSA (although I > do agree you are treated unfairly) It seems the problem lies with whomever > decides the relationship has to be end simply because of small piece of > paper that the same goverment who penalizes you for getting married gives to > you before you can "feel" married. Marriage has more to do with two people > making a commitment to eachother then it does with obtaining a piece of > paper that says so. If that is the case, create one the computer, lable it > "marriage certificate" sign your names on it, say your vowes to eachother > and consider yourselves married. Don’t let the goverment get in the way of > love. Or religion either if it applies. I do feel for you and I apologize to > you if I sound a bit harsh. That’s only because I fail to see the logic of > why two people in love quit eachother over something I feel is missing the > point. But, hey what do I know.

Response:

Where are they hiding?  I don’t know any. Andy The Cheerful Pickle "DaKitty" <daki…@o-tay.com> wrote in message

news:aq7d65$794er$1@ID-152068.news.dfncis.de… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> You need to find those who make 80,000 or a 100,000, then it won’t matter > what you make. > Money isn’t everything. > "Cheerful Pickle" <cheerfulpic…@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message > news:_HGx9.46460$Mb3.2280213@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net… > > When it comes to women, I’ve been hurt by so many rejections that it has > > made me very gun shy.  How can one be anything but shy around women when > all > > they seem to want to do is to hurt and reject.  I am 56 years old and > tired > > of being alone and lonely.  Good women don’t seem to grow on trees.  In > > fact, it seems that good women, especially my age, don’t grow anywhere. > > What good women there are have long since been married. > > What is left seems to be the same ilk that I’ve had to put up with for the > > last thirty-seven years, only there seems to be far more of them.  It > always > > boils down to the same story. > > Boy meets girl. > > Girl meets boy. > > Boy thinks girl is super. > > Girl leads boy on. > > Boy dates girl. > > Girl dates boy. > > Boy gets hooked on girl. > > Girl dumps boy. > > Boy gets hurt. > > End of sad, sad story. > > Regrettably, that is the story of my dating experience.  Most of the time, > > it seems like all a woman is interested in is "hurt and reject."  Gee, > > according to Goggle Groups, those are the same words I used when I posted > > similar sentiments to this newsgroup in Feb. 1999.  Things haven’t changed > > any, regrettably.  I don’t know whether the above scenario is deliberate > on > > any woman’s part, I sure hope not, but it always seems to work that way. > > Unfortunately, now that I am on disability, as I was in 1999, I have come > > across an additional monkey wrench seemingly designed with the intent of > > messing things up.  That monkey wrench is created by the screwballs and > > yoyo’s we voters elect to Congress. > > I am on Social Security Disability (for some bizarre reason, government > > bureaucrats abbreviate that as  SSA).  One girl I dated a few years back > was > > on Supplemental Security Income (logically — surprise — abbreviated as > > SSI).  Because she was on SSI and I on SSA, if we were to marry, the > > government would have slashed her check from $550 to $150 a month.  That > was > > too much for her to handle, so any prospects of marriage were dashed. The > > next girl I dated, with whom I just broke up, was on a VA disability > > pension.  Her late husband was on SSI and because a VA pensioner and an > SSI > > pensioner married each other, each had their income increased by $150 a > > month.  If the government was willing to leave her check alone if we were > to > > marry we would have made $1 a month less than they would have if he had > not > > passed away.  However, because she was on VA and I on SSA instead of on > SSI, > > they would have slashed her check by $600 a month.  That was more than she > > could have handled.  Needless to say, I do not hold Congress in the > highest > > possible esteem after all their meddling in my love life. > > The disability has another drawback.  Among pensioners it would seem I > have > > to rule out the great majority who are on SSI and the few on VA because > the > > government makes it all but impossible financially to marry someone on > > either SSI or VA.  Since I have been able to find absolutely no woman on > SSA > > whether they are interested or not, my only other option is to find a > > working woman.  What woman making in the neighborhood of $30,000 to > $40,000 > > a year would be interested in a man who makes under $10,500 a year?  I > sure > > can’t find any willing to give me the time of day.   I tend not to attract > > the women making around $17,000 a year since they tend to think I’m too > > smart for them.  Actually, they might be surprised if they were to give me > a > > chance.  Back in 1999 someone posted in reply to me, "Especially in your > age > > group, there are women who would not be concerned with how much or how > > little money you have.  In this day and age, we are self supporting for > the > > most part.  Jae".  So far I have found no evidence to collaborate her > > theory.  If anything, all I see tends to be more discouraging than > > encouraging.  Believe me. > > I’m not giving up, though.  Even if all is lost, I will go down trying. > It > > is just that now, finding someone with whom to try is getting harder and > > harder.  There are so few GOOD fish in the pond that have not been taken. > > Sometimes, I have to admit that it seem to be an exercise in futility; > other > > times my faith rises up and I say, "With God, even this is possible." We > > will see which side of me wins on this one. > > Take it easy, folks. > > Andy > > The not always so Cheerful Pickle

Response:

You need to find those who make 80,000 or a 100,000, then it won’t matter what you make. Money isn’t everything. "Cheerful Pickle" <cheerfulpic…@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

news:_HGx9.46460$Mb3.2280213@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> When it comes to women, I’ve been hurt by so many rejections that it has > made me very gun shy.  How can one be anything but shy around women when all > they seem to want to do is to hurt and reject.  I am 56 years old and tired > of being alone and lonely.  Good women don’t seem to grow on trees.  In > fact, it seems that good women, especially my age, don’t grow anywhere. > What good women there are have long since been married. > What is left seems to be the same ilk that I’ve had to put up with for the > last thirty-seven years, only there seems to be far more of them.  It always > boils down to the same story. > Boy meets girl. > Girl meets boy. > Boy thinks girl is super. > Girl leads boy on. > Boy dates girl. > Girl dates boy. > Boy gets hooked on girl. > Girl dumps boy. > Boy gets hurt. > End of sad, sad story. > Regrettably, that is the story of my dating experience.  Most of the time, > it seems like all a woman is interested in is "hurt and reject."  Gee, > according to Goggle Groups, those are the same words I used when I posted > similar sentiments to this newsgroup in Feb. 1999.  Things haven’t changed > any, regrettably.  I don’t know whether the above scenario is deliberate on > any woman’s part, I sure hope not, but it always seems to work that way. > Unfortunately, now that I am on disability, as I was in 1999, I have come > across an additional monkey wrench seemingly designed with the intent of > messing things up.  That monkey wrench is created by the screwballs and > yoyo’s we voters elect to Congress. > I am on Social Security Disability (for some bizarre reason, government > bureaucrats abbreviate that as  SSA).  One girl I dated a few years back was > on Supplemental Security Income (logically — surprise — abbreviated as > SSI).  Because she was on SSI and I on SSA, if we were to marry, the > government would have slashed her check from $550 to $150 a month.  That was > too much for her to handle, so any prospects of marriage were dashed.  The > next girl I dated, with whom I just broke up, was on a VA disability > pension.  Her late husband was on SSI and because a VA pensioner and an SSI > pensioner married each other, each had their income increased by $150 a > month.  If the government was willing to leave her check alone if we were to > marry we would have made $1 a month less than they would have if he had not > passed away.  However, because she was on VA and I on SSA instead of on SSI, > they would have slashed her check by $600 a month.  That was more than she > could have handled.  Needless to say, I do not hold Congress in the highest > possible esteem after all their meddling in my love life. > The disability has another drawback.  Among pensioners it would seem I have > to rule out the great majority who are on SSI and the few on VA because the > government makes it all but impossible financially to marry someone on > either SSI or VA.  Since I have been able to find absolutely no woman on SSA > whether they are interested or not, my only other option is to find a > working woman.  What woman making in the neighborhood of $30,000 to $40,000 > a year would be interested in a man who makes under $10,500 a year?  I sure > can’t find any willing to give me the time of day.   I tend not to attract > the women making around $17,000 a year since they tend to think I’m too > smart for them.  Actually, they might be surprised if they were to give me a > chance.  Back in 1999 someone posted in reply to me, "Especially in your age > group, there are women who would not be concerned with how much or how > little money you have.  In this day and age, we are self supporting for the > most part.  Jae".  So far I have found no evidence to collaborate her > theory.  If anything, all I see tends to be more discouraging than > encouraging.  Believe me. > I’m not giving up, though.  Even if all is lost, I will go down trying. It > is just that now, finding someone with whom to try is getting harder and > harder.  There are so few GOOD fish in the pond that have not been taken. > Sometimes, I have to admit that it seem to be an exercise in futility; other > times my faith rises up and I say, "With God, even this is possible."  We > will see which side of me wins on this one. > Take it easy, folks. > Andy > The not always so Cheerful Pickle

Response:

When it comes to women, I’ve been hurt by so many rejections that it has made me very gun shy.  How can one be anything but shy around women when all they seem to want to do is to hurt and reject.  I am 56 years old and tired of being alone and lonely.  Good women don’t seem to grow on trees.  In fact, it seems that good women, especially my age, don’t grow anywhere. What good women there are have long since been married. What is left seems to be the same ilk that I’ve had to put up with for the last thirty-seven years, only there seems to be far more of them.  It always boils down to the same story. Boy meets girl. Girl meets boy. Boy thinks girl is super. Girl leads boy on. Boy dates girl. Girl dates boy. Boy gets hooked on girl. Girl dumps boy. Boy gets hurt. End of sad, sad story. Regrettably, that is the story of my dating experience.  Most of the time, it seems like all a woman is interested in is "hurt and reject."  Gee, according to Goggle Groups, those are the same words I used when I posted similar sentiments to this newsgroup in Feb. 1999.  Things haven’t changed any, regrettably.  I don’t know whether the above scenario is deliberate on any woman’s part, I sure hope not, but it always seems to work that way. Unfortunately, now that I am on disability, as I was in 1999, I have come across an additional monkey wrench seemingly designed with the intent of messing things up.  That monkey wrench is created by the screwballs and yoyo’s we voters elect to Congress. I am on Social Security Disability (for some bizarre reason, government bureaucrats abbreviate that as  SSA).  One girl I dated a few years back was on Supplemental Security Income (logically — surprise — abbreviated as SSI).  Because she was on SSI and I on SSA, if we were to marry, the government would have slashed her check from $550 to $150 a month.  That was too much for her to handle, so any prospects of marriage were dashed.  The next girl I dated, with whom I just broke up, was on a VA disability pension.  Her late husband was on SSI and because a VA pensioner and an SSI pensioner married each other, each had their income increased by $150 a month.  If the government was willing to leave her check alone if we were to marry we would have made $1 a month less than they would have if he had not passed away.  However, because she was on VA and I on SSA instead of on SSI, they would have slashed her check by $600 a month.  That was more than she could have handled.  Needless to say, I do not hold Congress in the highest possible esteem after all their meddling in my love life. The disability has another drawback.  Among pensioners it would seem I have to rule out the great majority who are on SSI and the few on VA because the government makes it all but impossible financially to marry someone on either SSI or VA.  Since I have been able to find absolutely no woman on SSA whether they are interested or not, my only other option is to find a working woman.  What woman making in the neighborhood of $30,000 to $40,000 a year would be interested in a man who makes under $10,500 a year?  I sure can’t find any willing to give me the time of day.   I tend not to attract the women making around $17,000 a year since they tend to think I’m too smart for them.  Actually, they might be surprised if they were to give me a chance.  Back in 1999 someone posted in reply to me, "Especially in your age group, there are women who would not be concerned with how much or how little money you have.  In this day and age, we are self supporting for the most part.  Jae".  So far I have found no evidence to collaborate her theory.  If anything, all I see tends to be more discouraging than encouraging.  Believe me. I’m not giving up, though.  Even if all is lost, I will go down trying.  It is just that now, finding someone with whom to try is getting harder and harder.  There are so few GOOD fish in the pond that have not been taken. Sometimes, I have to admit that it seem to be an exercise in futility; other times my faith rises up and I say, "With God, even this is possible."  We will see which side of me wins on this one. Take it easy, folks. Andy The not always so Cheerful Pickle

Response: