PatrickS77 said:

Empress said:

Congrats to Mick! He can afford another child and this woman wants to bless him with one, so why not?

Yes. Because it's all about him. Who cares about the kid, who has to live a with a great grandfather as a dad or no dad at all. It's disgusting.

Disgusting??? WTF?? How is this disgusting? There are so many other things in this world that are truly disgusting and this is NOT one of them. Perhaps you should take a closer look at what disgusting really means. You know what I find disgusting.......the non-stop shootings in my city on an almost daily basis. This is something to be disgusted about.

PatrickS77 said:

Empress said:

Congrats to Mick! He can afford another child and this woman wants to bless him with one, so why not?

Yes. Because it's all about him. Who cares about the kid, who has to live a with a great grandfather as a dad or no dad at all. It's disgusting.

Blame your creator? He allowed the organs to still work beyond a certain age in Men ... I think because early men use to lose a lot of their early children to catastrophe, illnesses, and predators. YHWH allows it. He created it.

Men did not chase around children anyway. They went-outside to build, farm, hunt (I'm a vegan though), and defend..

Couples use to have babies as soon as puberty too...

In this world, "To The Victor goes The Spoils"...

Women are taught to "marry-up"...So, they can have comfort when having babies. Wealthy men are still have "polygyny" in the form of divorcing multiple wives and alimony.

Nothing has changed.

[Edited 7/19/16 9:36am]

Connected said:

dancerella said:

Cinny said:

dancerella said:

I see he moved on from his girlfriend that committed suicide last year.

Like he deserves to mourn her forever. It was over two years ago.

No but I do think celebrities tend to move on quickly from break ups, divorces, etc faster than we do.

Suicide is fucked up - I have first hand experience.

I don't think judging anyone on those effects is appropriate

maplenpg said:

PatrickS77 said:

Yes. Because it's all about him. Who cares about the kid, who has to live a with a great grandfather as a dad or no dad at all. It's disgusting.

I disagree. When your dad is Mick Jagger, it really don't matter how old he is. The child will have every advantage in life, live a life most of us could only dream of, and I'm sure s/he'll be proud to say who his/her dad is, even if he is older than most.

I'm sure Paris Jackson (and Prince and Blanket) would return all the money she will have until the rest of her life, to have one more day with her dad. Or ask Lisa Marie Presley whether she would rather be rich or would have preferred to have her father for many more years longer. It's not all about the money. Especially, when as a kid, you have to deal with the fact, that your father won't be around that long.

[Edited 7/19/16 17:05pm]

Linn4days said:

PatrickS77 said:

Yes. Because it's all about him. Who cares about the kid, who has to live a with a great grandfather as a dad or no dad at all. It's disgusting.

Blame your creator? He allowed the organs to still work beyond a certain age in Men ... I think because early men use to lose a lot of their early children to catastrophe, illnesses, and predators. YHWH allows it. He created it.

Men did not chase around children anyway. They went-outside to build, farm, hunt (I'm a vegan though), and defend..

Couples use to have babies as soon as puberty too...

In this world, "To The Victor goes The Spoils"...

Women are taught to "marry-up"...So, they can have comfort when having babies. Wealthy men are still have "polygyny" in the form of divorcing multiple wives and alimony.

Nothing has changed.

[Edited 7/19/16 9:36am]

Blame your creator?? Do we have Bible hour now? Fuck the creator. Whatever the hell that is supposed to be. It's the selfishness of people that decides to have kids at that age.

PatrickS77 said:

Especially, when as a kid, you have to deal with the fact, that your father won't be around that long.

What if the father came from a sperm bank? Youth is no guarantee of anything. A teen mom can get hit by a car tomorrow, have a heart attack, overdose on drugs, catch a disease, live in a place like Flint Michigan and drink contaminated water, die during childbirth, or abandon a baby in the trash. A kid can also have a parent in the mafia, Yakuza, Triads, or a street gang, where they are less likely to live a long life. What's so great about 2 parents anyway? They can beat their children or be alcoholics. Sharon Osbourne didn't get along with her father and was estranged from him for years. Julian Lennon was not around John all that much while John was alive. Yoko Ono's 2nd husband kept their daughter Kyoko from her and Yoko didn't see her for a long time.

maplenpg said:

The child will have every advantage in life, live a life most of us could only dream of, and I'm sure s/he'll be proud to say who his/her dad is, even if he is older than most.

Many younger parents abandon their children and they wind up in an orphanage or homeless. In foster care, children might be placed in homes of people who only want the money and neglect the child or they just remain in the system until they are kicked out at 18 without any skills. Jackie Chan grew up in the Peking Opera School where kids had rough training.

MickyDolenz said:

PatrickS77 said:

Especially, when as a kid, you have to deal with the fact, that your father won't be around that long.

What if the father came from a sperm bank? Youth is no guarantee of anything. A teen mom can get hit by a car tomorrow, have a heart attack, overdose on drugs, catch a blablabla bs, bs, bs

Right! I see, you wanna play stupid now. Not playing that game. It's a fact, that the chances of a 72 year old father being around when the child reaches adolescence is considerably smaller, than a father that is 27. End of story.

PatrickS77 said:

It's a fact, that the chances of a 72 year old father being around when the child reaches adolescence is considerably smaller, than a father that is 27. End of story.

In the US, there's a lot of deadbeat dads and mothers, which is not much of a difference than a deceased one. Or a child could be raised by 2 lesbians. If a woman gets a donation from a sperm bank, then there is no father. I went to school with kids who lived with a mother and father and they're in jail, on drugs, or dead. Same thing with some of my relatives. Do you think all criminals, gang members, or people who shoot up a school or movie theater come from single mothers? So a father makes no difference or they can be a negative influence. How about some fathers in places like China & India, who throw babies in the river to drown them because they are a girl instead of a boy who can carry on the family name. Some fathers in Latino culture teach sons machismo. Everybody doesn't have a Ben Cartwright, Ward Cleaver, Mike Brady, or Heathcliff Huxtable type of dad. In this case, Mick Jagger & Ronnie Wood are millionaires, so the children are in a better position than one with a deadbeat dad, one in a gang, in the foster care system, or poor. With some celebrities and other rich folks, hired nannies are raising the kids anyway, not the actual parents or they send them to boarding schools. So your Leave It To Beaver style family is often not the case.

I see you have a pic of Michael Jackson, and on his forum I see some posters putting down Papa Joe's parenting style all the time.

Ya'll need to stop with these excuses! This man is too old to be having children. Its so inconsiderate to the child. I agreed with that one poster. Just because you can physically still make children after a certain age doesn't mean you should. I don't think its disgusting. I think its more so immoral and selfish. I would think as a parent you would want to give 100% energy, time, dedication etc to your child and I don't see how you can do that at 72 already with 7 grown kids

mjscarousal said:

Ya'll need to stop with these excuses! This man is too old to be having children.

I don't see anything wrong with it. You do. I don't care. Saying that someone should be young to have children is ageism and outdated. Mick has children with several women and was only married to one of them. If having a mother and father is always a good thing, then there wouldn't be CPS to take kids away from parents. Anyway Mick's girlfriend is 29 and Ronnie's wife is 38, so they're young. As I said a father makes no difference other than maybe financial. A father isn't necessary for raising a child or there wouldn't be sperm banks. Most kids are accidents anyway, they weren't on purpose.

MickyDolenz said:

mjscarousal said:

Ya'll need to stop with these excuses! This man is too old to be having children.

I don't see anything wrong with it. You do. I don't care. Saying that someone should be young to have children is ageism and outdated. Mick has children with several women and was only married to one of them. If having a mother and father is always a good thing, then there wouldn't be CPS to take kids away from parents. Anyway Mick's girlfriend is 29 and Ronnie's wife is 38, so they're young. As I said a father makes no difference other than maybe financial. A father isn't necessary for raising a child or there wouldn't be sperm banks. Most kids are accidents anyway, they weren't on purpose.

I completely agree with you Micky.

MickyDolenz said:

mjscarousal said:

Ya'll need to stop with these excuses! This man is too old to be having children.

I don't see anything wrong with it. You do. I don't care. Saying that someone should be young to have children is ageism and outdated. Mick has children with several women and was only married to one of them. If having a mother and father is always a good thing, then there wouldn't be CPS to take kids away from parents. Anyway Mick's girlfriend is 29 and Ronnie's wife is 38, so they're young. As I said a father makes no difference other than maybe financial. A father isn't necessary for raising a child or there wouldn't be sperm banks. Most kids are accidents anyway, they weren't on purpose.

I don't care either. I am simply offering my two cents in the discussion as you and countless others have. Nothing I said is ageism or is discriminatory toward elders. Its careless and mindless to have random kids with different women and to not care how the child will be raised or neglect it all together. Will Mick even be alive to see his child get married or the important milestones a father should be apart of? Probably not, that is what my critique is about.

mjscarousal said:

I don't care either. I am simply offering my two cents in the discussion as you and countless others have. Nothing I said is ageism or is discriminatory toward elders. Its careless and mindless to have random kids with different women and to not care how the child will be raised or neglect it all together. Will Mick even be alive to see his child get married or the important milestones a father should be apart of? Probably not, that is what my critique is about.

Do deadbeat parents, or families who don't get along, do any of those things? No. Someone being alive doesn't mean they will do all that. What about adopted kids? They generally don't know who their biological parents are. There's children resulting from incest/inbreeding. Did their parents have "high morals"? Ozzy Osbourne is still alive and he was mostly high and drunk when his kids were groing up. Same with Keith Richards and many other rock & jazz musicians. Bobbi Kristina had a mother and father and look what happened to her. Having a father doesn't necessarily mean a child will have better behavior than one raised by a single mother or lesbians. It's been said preacher's kids sometimes go wild after leaving home. You do know KKK members and neo-nazis have kids. What are they teaching their children?

^^But Mick Jagger is none of these things... he's just an old as dirt, selfish fuck, who decides, at an age where he is very lucky to have another healthy and lucid 10 years, to have another kid. The welfare of the kid and the predetermined reality of the kid not having a father for very long be damned. Apperently he doesn't give a shit about that.

PatrickS77 said:

^^But Mick Jagger is none of these things... he's just an old as dirt, selfish fuck, who decides, at an age where he is very lucky to have another healthy and lucid 10 years, to have another kid. The welfare of the kid and the predetermined reality of the kid not having a father for very long be damned. Apperently he doesn't give a shit about that.

Again Mick & Ronnie are rich, so the childrens' welfare is taken care of. So it doesn't matter if they die before the child grows up. The money will take care of it. A father raising the children is not necessary. I'm pretty sure the women are aware of the ages of their companions. If they don't have a problem with it, then it's none of your business. Also if you're so concerned about a child being raised by a father, where was Debbie Rowe and the mother of Blanket? Or is the mother not required, just the father?

^^Geez, how stupid do you have to be to realize that it's not about the fucking money. Would you trade in your parents/having grown up with parents, for money??? Where did I ever say that I agree with Michael's (and Debbie's) decision to cut the mother out of the children's life?? That was selfish too. But unlike in a deceased parent's case, Debbie is still around and Paris did seek to get in contact with her and now has a relationship with her. That's not possible if someone is dead and buried.

MickyDolenz said:

PatrickS77 said:

^^Geez, how stupid do you have to be to realize that it's not about the fucking money. Would you trade in your parents/having grown up with parents, for money??? Where did I ever say that I agree with Michael's (and Debbie's) decision to cut the mother out of the children's life?? That was selfish too. But unlike in a deceased parent's case, Debbie is still around and Paris did seek to get in contact with her and now has a relationship with her. That's not possible if someone is dead and buried.

If the mothers are ok with their ages, it's none of your business. Why are you worried about how somone else lives their life, especially a person you do not know? It has nothing to do with you. It's not illegal to have children at an old age. Some kids are raised by grandparents and not the parents. People like you think everybody is supposed to live in some pre-determined way by society (which is different depending on where a person lives). Most likely in a European type of way, that's why they always sent missionaries to non-white countries to convert everybody to their way of thinking and languages. In some places in Africa, polygamy is practiced, but that is against the law in the USA. Ages of consent and drinking ages also vary in different countries. Anyway, parents does not necessarily mean a biological mother & father. It can be a single mom/dad, grandparents, aunts/other relatives, 2 women, 2 men, a tribe, nuns, foster parents, adopted parents, etc. Having a good father is nice, but it is not the only way to raise a family. So one is not required. Do you think all children who have lesbians or homosexual men as parents, miss a parent of the opposite gender? That children can only have a good life with traditional mother/father parents?

PatrickS77 said:

^^But Mick Jagger is none of these things... he's just an old as dirt, selfish fuck, who decides, at an age where he is very lucky to have another healthy and lucid 10 years, to have another kid. The welfare of the kid and the predetermined reality of the kid not having a father for very long be damned. Apperently he doesn't give a shit about that.

Agree

MickyDolenz said:

PatrickS77 said:

^^Geez, how stupid do you have to be to realize that it's not about the fucking money. Would you trade in your parents/having grown up with parents, for money??? Where did I ever say that I agree with Michael's (and Debbie's) decision to cut the mother out of the children's life?? That was selfish too. But unlike in a deceased parent's case, Debbie is still around and Paris did seek to get in contact with her and now has a relationship with her. That's not possible if someone is dead and buried.

If the mothers are ok with their ages, it's none of your business. Why are you worried about how somone else lives their life, especially a person you do not know? It has nothing to do with you. It's not illegal to have children at an old age. Some kids are raised by grandparents and not the parents. People like you think everybody is supposed to live in some pre-determined way by society (which is different depending on where a person lives). Most likely in a European type of way, that's why they always sent missionaries to non-white countries to convert everybody to their way of thinking and languages. In some places in Africa, polygamy is practiced, but that is against the law in the USA. Ages of consent and drinking ages also vary in different countries. Anyway, parents does not necessarily mean a biological mother & father. It can be a single mom/dad, grandparents, aunts/other relatives, 2 women, 2 men, a tribe, nuns, foster parents, adopted parents, etc. Having a good father is nice, but it is not the only way to raise a family. So one is not required. Do you think all children who have lesbians or homosexual men as parents, miss a parent of the opposite gender? That children can only have a good life with traditional mother/father parents?

Excuses, excuses, excuses. You just sound like a stupid smoker, desperately trying to justify their habit of smoking and why they should have the freedom to smoke wherever they want. It's pathetic. None of your bs applies. Just ask the child in 10 or 15 years, whether he/she misses his/her dad and whether he/she would have loved to have spent more time with his/her dad and if the shitload of money is a consolation for losing dad at an early age in life. Everything else is just theory, bs and doesn't matter one bit.

PatrickS77 said:

You just sound like a stupid smoker, desperately trying to justify their habit of smoking and why they should have the freedom to smoke wherever they want. It's pathetic.

maplenpg said:

PatrickS77 said:

Yes. Because it's all about him. Who cares about the kid, who has to live a with a great grandfather as a dad or no dad at all. It's disgusting.

I disagree. When your dad is Mick Jagger, it really don't matter how old he is. The child will have every advantage in life, live a life most of us could only dream of, and I'm sure s/he'll be proud to say who his/her dad is, even if he is older than most.

Like that kid will care that his dad is Mick Jagger. ....When you are a part of a celeb family, you don't idolize the person as the world does, nor see them as a celeb like the world does, Mick will just be "dad" to that kid. Do you think that Michael Jackson (for instance) brothers and sisters, thought of him as Michael Jackson the entertainer, "no", he was just the little brother they grew up with. That kid won't care that he's Mick Jagger.

MickyDolenz said:

PatrickS77 said:

You just sound like a stupid smoker, desperately trying to justify their habit of smoking and why they should have the freedom to smoke wherever they want. It's pathetic.

And that just proves my point. Thanks.

PatrickS77 said:

And that just proves my point. Thanks.