Tom Brady to be a DADDY!

[PromisedLand]

If a guy espcecially a celebrity, wants to make sure a woman does not get pregnant, it is his responsibility to practice birth control...Condoms and abstinence are your two choices here.

It is actually none of my business that Bridget is pregnant and Tom is the father. I just hate when people blame woman for "trapping" men. If a guy doesn't want some woman to get pregnant he can use a condom or keep it in his pants. The guy bears equal responsible for the pregnancy.

I am a man, and I agree with you for the most part, except for when a women tells a man she is taking the pill and she isn't.

But I also think it is ridiculous for some people here to be jumping to the conclusion that Bridget did that. Let the truth have time to come out, if it will, or if it doesn't, respect the privacy of these two people.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Take a bow. This was the best post in this thread. Good job. :rocker:

Thanks. This is a tough subject.

 

[groundgame]

... I just hate when people blame woman for "trapping" men. If a guy doesn't want some woman to get pregnant he can use a condom or keep it in his pants. The guy bears equal responsible for the pregnancy.

You have to admit that a peek at the timeline does not favor Briget M. in this case. She announces in 2006 that she is desparate to start having children. The couple had been going out for 36 months. They break-up in month #36. Coincidentally, she is pregnant in month #36.

 

[BradyManny]

You have to admit that a peek at the timeline does not favor Briget M. in this case. She announces in 2006 that she is desparate to start having children. The couple had been going out for 36 months. They break-up in month #36. Coincidentally, she is pregnant in month #36.

Right, that's my point, too. A 36 year old woman isn't exactly the epitomity of fertility, so it's hard to believe that there wasn't some pre-thought on either Briget and/or Tom's behalf here.


And I'm sorry, but putting aside one's own religious beliefs, what's the big F-in deal here? A woman who was very eager to have a baby is now going to be having a baby. The kid could come into a lot worse scenarios than being the child of two beautiful, healthy, intelligent, wealthy people, so what's all the freakin fuss about?!?

 

[Fanfrom1960]

This has turned into one of the dumbest, most irrational, knee-jerk, holier-than-thou threads I've ever read on any board anywhere. A lot of people need to get off of their high horse and give the man a chance to be a goddamn father before they crucify him or Bridget M.

Oh, I don't know, seems like a pretty normal bell curve distribution to me. Opinions all over the lot with a lot of "hey, they're only human" in the middle to one or two crucify him on one extreme and I don't know what the other extreme would be.

 

[iguide]

You know what. Even if they both have public lives it is nobodies business but there own. They have to live with their decisions; just like us "common folk" have to live with ours. The news media only wants to sell papers, advertising spots on the tube or radio so they sensationalize everything and everyone they can. They do not care about people at all. Every one and everything is a commodity to them. Small people talk about small things, such as other people’s lives. Every one get off your high horses and let them live their private lives in private.

If this really pisses you off then you know I am right so go ahead and flame me. I will not be back to this thread to bother responding to something that does not warrant a response.

 

[BradyManny]

You know what. Even if they both have public lives it is nobodies business but there own. They have to live with their decisions; just like us "common folk" have to live with ours. The news media only wants to sell papers, advertising spots on the tube or radio so they sensationalize everything and everyone they can. They do not care about people at all. Every one and everything is a commodity to them. Small people talk about small things, such as other people’s lives. Every one get off your high horses and let them live their private lives in private.

If this really pisses you off then you know I am right so go ahead and flame me. I will not be back to this thread to bother responding to something that does not warrant a response.

I somewhat agree with your sentiment, but you are also on a "high horse" by thinking you are above talking about this issue.

Yes, it's private, but it's going to be talked about. Tom knows it, Briget knows it - it's the price that comes with being rich and famous. I'm sure they've come to deal with it at this point.

What I don't get is why everyone seems to think this is such a huge deal or some kind of shameful event. Briget wanted children, now she's going to have a kid. It's all good. Tom will be a fine father, and the kid is going to have amazing genes and be well-provided for.

 

[upstater1]

Upstater, this is the second post in which you've claimed some Christian faiths do not prohibit extramarital sex. I certainly don't claim to be a theologist but if this is true it is news to me. Please educate us: exactly which Christian faiths condone extramarital sex?

It depends on what you mean by condone. Some of them don't forbid it. Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans, Unitarians, etc. They counsel that marriage is best, but it's not forbidden. The United Church of Christ and the Unitarians especially don't make a big deal out of it.

First, to answer to 1996's posts, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism all permit premarital sex. Yes, you heard right. Premarital is ok in Judaism.

Some links and quotes for you:

http://www.americanpresbyterianchurch.org/sex.htm

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_epis6.htm

Think about this: some churches do not condemn homosexuality. So, how are gays supposed to have marital sex if, in most states, they can't get married? It follows then that these churches don't forbid premarital sex.

From the Episcopal church [note, this is the church that recently confirmed gay bishops, and they have had female bishops for a long time]: "A document commissioned by the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church (Continuing the Dialogue, published by Forward Movement, Cincinnati, 1995) stated on page 45 that the passages in this Biblical story (SONG OF SONGS )are "in praise of sexual love, celebrating youthful passion, with no reference to marriage.... It affirms that sexual love is in itself good and beneficial." "

Here's just one line from the Presbyterians: "total intimacy should happen in a relationship of total commitment, which marriage is intended to be. We advocate responsible behavior, understood as sexual expression that matches the seriousness and permanence of the relationship."

From the Lutherans: "having casual sexual relations is sinful because this does not proceed from or contribute to respect, intimacy, and care of the other. Promiscuity is inconsistent with our identity as Christians (1 Cor. 6:12-20). Being sexually active in order to be popular or only to gratify sexual desire is morally wrong."

I guess it depends on the degree of intimacy.

Look at this site: http://www.beliefnet.com/features/chastity_chart.html

 

[upstater1]

If a guy espcecially a celebrity, wants to make sure a woman does not get pregnant, it is his responsibility to practice birth control...Condoms and abstinence are your two choices here.

It is actually none of my business that Bridget is pregnant and Tom is the father. I just hate when people blame woman for "trapping" men. If a guy doesn't want some woman to get pregnant he can use a condom or keep it in his pants. The guy bears equal responsible for the pregnancy.

Yeah, but, let Tom know where he can buy foolproof condoms, will ya?

 

[JoeSixPat]

Of course, it's inevitable that this is going to raise another round of comparisons between Brady and Manning. I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet. I think I'll take the honor of priming the pump (pun not intended).

I mean, hasn't Manning been married since what, 2001? And how many kids do they have? None if I'm not mistaken

Now that its well known what prodigious swimmers Brady has, it's only a matter of time before Manning starts feeling the pressure.

Is he not trying hard enough? Is the pressure getting to him? Do his boys just not have what it takes? I mean what gives?

I know, I know - everyone says he's still somewhat young and he still has plenty of time in his prime fathering years to start a family. But mark my words, the longer it takes, the more Manning's going to feel the pressure, and more and more people are going to start talking, and that monkey on his back is going to get bigger and bigger and the comparisons to Brady will just never end.

 

[upstater1]

I never said anything about prohibitions against sex - only about having a kid outside of a committed relationship. That's incredibly irresponsible.

Why is it irresponsible?

When did I say that all Jews go to the temple? I said that other the followers of other religions adhere, in far greater numbers than to Christians, to the principles of their relgion. You haven't denied it so I guess you also know it's true

You have a link for proof of this statement? Nexrt, I'll tell you who else is devout. Pagans and Wicca. You see, there are no prohibitions there against premarital sex, or really much of anything else. See how that works: I'm devout to my belief, which is, um, I have no beliefs. Easy. For instance, practicing Jews have no prohibitions against premarital sex either!

 

[mikey]

Yeah, but, let Tom know where he can buy foolproof condoms, will ya?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/15/nyregion/15condom.html?ref=nyregion


Actually Tom can pick up free condoms at any NYC subway stations courtesy of the taxpayers.




.

 

[upstater1]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/15/nyregion/15condom.html?ref=nyregion


Actually Tom can pick up free condoms at any NYC subway stations courtesy of the taxpayers.
.

I said "foolproof." As anyone knows, anything to do with the bureaucracy in New York is NOT foolproof.

 

[BradyManny]

Of course, it's inevitable that this is going to raise another round of comparisons between Brady and Manning. I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet. I think I'll take the honor of priming the pump (pun not intended).

I mean, hasn't Manning been married since what, 2001? And how many kids do they have? None if I'm not mistaken

Now that its well known what prodigious swimmers Brady has, it's only a matter of time before Manning starts feeling the pressure.

Is he not trying hard enough? Is the pressure getting to him? Do his boys just not have what it takes? I mean what gives?

I know, I know - everyone says he's still somewhat young and he still has plenty of time in his prime fathering years to start a family. But mark my words, the longer it takes, the more Manning's going to feel the pressure, and more and more people are going to start talking, and that monkey on his back is going to get bigger and bigger and the comparisons to Brady will just never end.

LOL. Tom outdoes Peyton again.

 

[mb6592]

Not sure why several posters feel congratulations are in order. When I found out my wife was pregnant with our third child (this news came as my youngest - I worked nights and babysat days - was about to graduate from 1/2 day kindergarten to full day 1st grade), I did not want to hear any congratulations. And I was well aware of the blessings of parenthood when I received this news, something Giselle dating Tom is probably not tapped into. So, please dispense with the "congrats Tom" unless you're sure that he shares your enthusiasm.

 

[patchick]

And I'm sorry, but putting aside one's own religious beliefs, what's the big F-in deal here? A woman who was very eager to have a baby is now going to be having a baby. The kid could come into a lot worse scenarios than being the child of two beautiful, healthy, intelligent, wealthy people, so what's all the freakin fuss about?!?

I'll say. Come on, does anybody think the public ever will or should know the details of how and why this baby was conceived? Let 'em alone...the last thing a pregnant woman needs is the stress of thousands of strangers calling her names for having a baby.

But-- this being a football bulletin board, I'm astonished that so little attention has been paid to the football angle of the story. Rather than speculating on condom breakage, why isn't there a raft of speculation about the uncharacteristically mediocre playoff performance of a QB who, we now know, was in the middle of a breakup-pregnancy-new girlfriend soap opera?

.

 

[Sean Pa Patriot]

12 more out of wedlock and he catches up to Shawn Kemp. "Kemp has reportedly fathered 12 or 13 children out of wedlock."

He at least feeds his kids, Mcdonalds.. Oh wait no that was him.. sorry..

 

[BradyManny]

I'll say. Come on, does anybody think the public ever will or should know the details of how and why this baby was conceived? Let 'em alone...the last thing a pregnant woman needs is the stress of thousands of strangers calling her names for having a baby.

But-- this being a football bulletin board, I'm astonished that so little attention has been paid to the football angle of the story. Rather than speculating on condom breakage, why isn't there a raft of speculation about the uncharacteristically mediocre playoff performance of a QB who, we now know, was in the middle of a breakup-pregnancy-new girlfriend soap opera?

.

No, we will never know the details, and I think it's only human nature to speculate. I don't think we need apologize for that. We'll never know whether Briget and or Tom had any intention of having this child, and I'll joke about Briget "forgetting" her pills so as to have Tom Brady's baby (b/c let's face it, who wouldn't want their child to have Tom Brady's DNA!?), but the truth is, there are many scenarios from which this baby was conceived, and we really will never know. Nor does it really matter. She's pregnant, she wanted a child, it should be a joyous event.

Maybe I'm just looking at this thing too lightly, but I really don't see the reason for all the shock. Anyone who didn't think Tom and Briget were having "relations" was being pretty naive, the fact that she ended up pregnant doesn't change what one should think of Tom. You either think pre-marital sex is OK or you don't, a resulting pregnancy has no bearing on that, it could happen to anybody. And like I said, in this case it happened to someone who wanted a kid, so it's a good thing.

As for the football side of thing, I'm doing my best to NOT think of the playoffs, and frankly, would rather gossip about Brady and Briget's baby then have to anaylze his performance in the playoffs. I don't think it affected him though, these guys are pros. They have lives, I'm sure they are as complicated as our own and they are able to go about doing their jobs just as we are. The only difference is that their complicated lives become public whereas ours don't. But when Brady steps on that football field, I'm sure he's able to forget everything else.

 

[NoCal Patriot]

I'll say. Come on, does anybody think the public ever will or should know the details of how and why this baby was conceived? Let 'em alone...the last thing a pregnant woman needs is the stress of thousands of strangers calling her names for having a baby.

But-- this being a football bulletin board, I'm astonished that so little attention has been paid to the football angle of the story. Rather than speculating on condom breakage, why isn't there a raft of speculation about the uncharacteristically mediocre playoff performance of a QB who, we now know, was in the middle of a breakup-pregnancy-new girlfriend soap opera?

.

You are exactly correct.The Football angle and Tom Brady's performance should be open for debate.We know little if anything regarding The Pregenancy Situation .I think speculating on the pregnacy situation is woefully premature on anyone's part.

 

[patchick]

As for the football side of thing, I'm doing my best to NOT think of the playoffs, and frankly, would rather gossip about Brady and Briget's baby then have to anaylze his performance in the playoffs.

Hmm, I see your point.

That's it, back to the draft board! Ah, the bountiful, unlimited future!