FARK.com: (6929392) "While Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum are making each other unelectable, the president is singing Al Green, congratulating Super Bowl winners, raising obscene amounts of campaign cash and watching his poll numbers soar"

If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

		"While Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum are making each other unelectable, the president is singing Al Green, congratulating Super Bowl winners, raising obscene amounts of campaign cash and watching his poll numbers soar" (washingtonpost.com)		323
		More: Spiffy, Rick Santorum, Super Bowl champions, watch

• • •

3824 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Feb 2012 at 12:38 PM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/6929392

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

323 Comments (+0 »)

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

AmorousRedDragon		2012-02-08 02:25:28 PM

Lord Dimwit		2012-02-08 02:27:16 PM

DeltaPunch: Wicked Chinchilla: Never understood this either. You are already "crossing the line" so to speak by having sex. Why not just be smart about it and use contraception?

This is why I support Obama's decision. The whole "no birth control" idea is archaic, medieval, and stupid as all hell. If your parishioners are good Catholics, they're not going to be having sex anyways, so why the hell does the Catholic Church even care about birth control?!? It can only be used in situations where a much greater sin is already being committed...

Technically, the Church is also against contraception within marriage as well, when sex isn't sinful.

lennavan		2012-02-08 02:29:11 PM

ExperianScaresCthulhu: Maybe. Maybe not. If the athletes have the money and (more importantly) the popularity, then they're going to get the pussy. If brains have the money and (more importantly) the popularity, then they're going to get the pussy instead. It doesn't matter, athletic or brainy, whoever's on top of the status quo gets the goods.

As it turns out, getting a science PhD is a terrific place to meet girls. The girl:boy ratio is awesome and you're dating hot brainy chicks no less. Not so sure about Physics for that kid but when he gets past college, he's in for the promised land.

sweetmelissa31		2012-02-08 02:30:47 PM

ThatGuyGreg		2012-02-08 02:32:45 PM

tlchwi02: god is going to be so man!

And you wouldn't like him when he's man.

/or maybe you would
//Jesus seems like a decent guy
///due for a haircut though
////dirty hippie

AmorousRedDragon		2012-02-08 02:32:53 PM

lennavan: As it turns out, getting a science PhD is a terrific place to meet girls. The girl:boy ratio is awesome and you're dating hot brainy chicks no less. Not so sure about Physics for that kid but when he gets past college, he's in for the promised land.

Lo, if he builds it, she will come.

www.grafirle.com

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears		2012-02-08 02:33:20 PM

tlchwi02: the guy i heard on the radio who was against it claimed that being forced to cover birth control would make the church out to be "hypocritical."

I heard the same thing. Diane Rehm show, right?

Anyway, I thought that was just about the most absurd argument one could make. The Catholic Church (God love 'em, they do a lot of good, too) surely doesn't need ANY help being hypocrites. They do it quite well on their own. But the guy's problem was that the government was going to MAKE them hypocrites? That's insane. That particular ship has sailed. If the government gives them favorable tides it doesn't make a difference at this point.

meat0918		2012-02-08 02:34:10 PM

Lord Dimwit: DeltaPunch: Wicked Chinchilla: Never understood this either. You are already "crossing the line" so to speak by having sex. Why not just be smart about it and use contraception?

This is why I support Obama's decision. The whole "no birth control" idea is archaic, medieval, and stupid as all hell. If your parishioners are good Catholics, they're not going to be having sex anyways, so why the hell does the Catholic Church even care about birth control?!? It can only be used in situations where a much greater sin is already being committed...

Technically, the Church is also against contraception within marriage as well, when sex isn't sinful.

Even more technically, the Church is against any artificial means that stop conception, be it condoms, the pill, or anything else. The only two forms of "contraception"(and I use that word lightly) they approve of are the withdraw method and it's evolved descendant (which the name escapes me at the moment) a method were a woman monitors the consistency of the mucus her cervix produces to estimate when she is ovulating and when she is not, but also involves withdraw.

I suppose I could include abstinence as well, but we all know how well that works in the long run.

Spartapuss		2012-02-08 02:34:44 PM

PsiChick		2012-02-08 02:37:58 PM

Boring President. Great sense of humor. (new window)

/And this is why he amuses me...

AmorousRedDragon		2012-02-08 02:40:18 PM

simplicimus		2012-02-08 02:41:45 PM

meat0918: Lord Dimwit:

Even more technically, the Church is against any artificial means that stop conception, be it condoms, the pill, or anything else. The only two forms of "contraception"(and I use that word lightly) they approve of are the withdraw method and it's evolved descendant (which the name escapes me at the moment) a method were a woman monitors the consistency of the mucus her cervix produces to estimate when she is ovulating and when she is not, but also involves withdraw.

I suppose I could include abstinence as well, but we all know how well that works in the long run.

It was called the rhythm method. and before the pill, hysterectomies were called "Catholic Birth Control".

CapnBlues		2012-02-08 02:43:14 PM

For a toolbox harvard grad elitist owned by the corporate machine, I gotta say, our president is a pretty cool guy. I mean, compared to the toolbox yale grad elitist owned by the corporate machine we had before, he's a freakin rock star.

Aldon		2012-02-08 02:45:34 PM

Lord Dimwit: DeltaPunch: Wicked Chinchilla: Never understood this either. You are already "crossing the line" so to speak by having sex. Why not just be smart about it and use contraception?

This is why I support Obama's decision. The whole "no birth control" idea is archaic, medieval, and stupid as all hell. If your parishioners are good Catholics, they're not going to be having sex anyways, so why the hell does the Catholic Church even care about birth control?!? It can only be used in situations where a much greater sin is already being committed...

Technically, the Church is also against contraception within marriage as well, when sex isn't sinful.

almost everyone is against having Churches offering health care according to their rules, this religios rights stuff is hogwash. This is about religion dictating to the people, rather than the rights of the church. There are churches that believe that you should do nothing but pray when you are sick. Would you support letting, no demanding, children of workers die rather than use something other than prayer? (christian scientists) Would you support denying insulin or a pig heart valve to those who need it (Islam)?

CapnBlues		2012-02-08 02:45:34 PM

simplicimus: meat0918: Lord Dimwit:

Even more technically, the Church is against any artificial means that stop conception, be it condoms, the pill, or anything else. The only two forms of "contraception"(and I use that word lightly) they approve of are the withdraw method and it's evolved descendant (which the name escapes me at the moment) a method were a woman monitors the consistency of the mucus her cervix produces to estimate when she is ovulating and when she is not, but also involves withdraw.

I suppose I could include abstinence as well, but we all know how well that works in the long run.

It was called the rhythm method. and before the pill, hysterectomies were called "Catholic Birth Control".

back in my day we didn't have these fancy methods of birth control... LIKE PULLIN OUT

beelzebubba76		2012-02-08 02:50:58 PM

What you're saying is that 0bama0 is the reverse beergoggles. Damn you, Taxb0ng0!

Jackson Herring: sweetmelissa31: Jackson Herring: Yeah, it's just an optical illusion. He's actually 5' 8", 190, and the captain of the football team

Yep, for example, next to Obama, McCain's all like:

[www.thewashingtonnote.com image 453x515]

But take away Obama and he's actually:

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 375x500]

[www.topnews.in image 437x339]

[www.thebounce.co.za image 560x840]

RolandGunner		2012-02-08 02:51:53 PM

"Soar"

moralpanic		2012-02-08 02:53:03 PM

DeltaPunch: gtomako: "While Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum are making each other unelectable, the president is singing Al Green, congratulating Super Bowl winners, raising obscene amounts of campaign cash, watching his poll numbers soar and kicking Catholic Church ass."

[desmond.imageshack.us image 640x431]

The best part is that 60% of Catholics support birth control, so this may end up creating a bit of schism in the Church itself, more than anything else...

That may be overall number, but amongst women it's 70% support and use birth control.

Listen, just because you have backwards beliefs, doesn't mean you need to impose them on everybody. Not everybody that works for a Catholic university or institution is Catholic. And even amongst those Catholics, the majority of them support birth control.

Are we going to make exceptions for Muslims and their sharia law as well?

Lord Dimwit		2012-02-08 02:53:25 PM

Aldon: Lord Dimwit: DeltaPunch: Wicked Chinchilla: Never understood this either. You are already "crossing the line" so to speak by having sex. Why not just be smart about it and use contraception?

This is why I support Obama's decision. The whole "no birth control" idea is archaic, medieval, and stupid as all hell. If your parishioners are good Catholics, they're not going to be having sex anyways, so why the hell does the Catholic Church even care about birth control?!? It can only be used in situations where a much greater sin is already being committed...

Technically, the Church is also against contraception within marriage as well, when sex isn't sinful.

almost everyone is against having Churches offering health care according to their rules, this religios rights stuff is hogwash. This is about religion dictating to the people, rather than the rights of the church. There are churches that believe that you should do nothing but pray when you are sick. Would you support letting, no demanding, children of workers die rather than use something other than prayer? (christian scientists) Would you support denying insulin or a pig heart valve to those who need it (Islam)?

...I'm not sure who you're responding to. I'm not Catholic, nor am I advocating that people shouldn't use birth control (or that health plans shouldn't pay for it).

As for the Christian Scientist thing, most states have exemptions in their child abuse/neglect laws saying that parents aren't guilty of neglect if they tried to spiritually heal their children according to the tenets of their religion. This is, of course, stupid. The First Amendment protects the practice of your religion, it does not protect your right to neglect your children.

(And how do these people reconcile the fact that God didn't save their children? Do they think they just didn't pray hard enough or what?)

(Family Guy talked about this the other day and did give a good argument: Couldn't it be that the doctors and medications are the answer to your prayers? I know enough about Christian Science philosophy to know that they don't view it that way, but...)

MartinD-35		2012-02-08 02:53:46 PM

CapnBlues: For a toolbox harvard grad elitist owned by the corporate machine, I gotta say, our president is a pretty cool guy. I mean, compared to the toolbox yale grad elitist owned by the corporate machine we had before, he's a freakin rock star.

Fortunately the comparison is like lead and helium to start with so there is no comparison. It's not even a Martin compared to a Takamine, it's more like a D-35 compared to a rock. But we are often a nation of idiots, so everything is always up for grabs in the end - even a Santorum. He's like Bachman, only a little crazier ULP!

Jackson Herring		2012-02-08 02:54:19 PM

sweetmelissa31: [johnpaulus.com image 512x341]

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 468x333]

ragefac.es

Lord Dimwit		2012-02-08 02:54:30 PM

moralpanic: DeltaPunch: gtomako: "While Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum are making each other unelectable, the president is singing Al Green, congratulating Super Bowl winners, raising obscene amounts of campaign cash, watching his poll numbers soar and kicking Catholic Church ass."

[desmond.imageshack.us image 640x431]

The best part is that 60% of Catholics support birth control, so this may end up creating a bit of schism in the Church itself, more than anything else...

That may be overall number, but amongst women it's 70% support and use birth control.

Listen, just because you have backwards beliefs, doesn't mean you need to impose them on everybody. Not everybody that works for a Catholic university or institution is Catholic. And even amongst those Catholics, the majority of them support birth control.

Are we going to make exceptions for Muslims and their sharia law as well?

No, because Shari'a is wrong, whereas Canon Law is right.

See? That was easy.

beelzebubba76		2012-02-08 02:54:38 PM

Engineering is very poor in that respect .... especially mechanical engineering.

/I should know .... (sob).

lennavan: ExperianScaresCthulhu: Maybe. Maybe not. If the athletes have the money and (more importantly) the popularity, then they're going to get the pussy. If brains have the money and (more importantly) the popularity, then they're going to get the pussy instead. It doesn't matter, athletic or brainy, whoever's on top of the status quo gets the goods.

As it turns out, getting a science PhD is a terrific place to meet girls. The girl:boy ratio is awesome and you're dating hot brainy chicks no less. Not so sure about Physics for that kid but when he gets past college, he's in for the promised land.

CrackpipeCardozo		2012-02-08 02:55:13 PM

DeaH: Everyone focuses on the little girl with the doll. I think we need to keep an eye out for the boy on the far right. Look at the expression on his face. It says either, "What has been seen cannot be unseen," or, "You all must DIE!"

i2.listal.com

Jackson Herring		2012-02-08 02:56:35 PM

tlchwi02		2012-02-08 02:57:59 PM

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: I heard the same thing. Diane Rehm show, right?

yup. although the guy threw out some "well that doesn't have any bearing here" thing, he got real subdued after the caller who brought up the kiddie diddling. I wish sometimes that the moderator would call out panelists on that, since they hang up on the caller after they say their piece. The child abuse scandals absolutely have bearing here, because the Church is claiming that the government is trying to "force" them to be hypocrits. But if they, through their own actions, are already perpetuating hypocracy, that whole argument can't hold water. There aren't "degrees" of hypocracy that i'm aware of (and even if there were, i think that "diddles children" would get you a lot more points on the scale than "affiliated organizations allow contraceptives to be covered by insurance.") Not that the moderator should be pushing one side of the agenda, but i think the moderator should be able to say "now wait, you're not addressing his argument, you're just ignoring the point and claiming it has no bearing without any reasoning why it doesnt."

meat0918		2012-02-08 03:01:46 PM

Lord Dimwit: Aldon: Lord Dimwit: DeltaPunch: Wicked Chinchilla: Never understood this either. You are already "crossing the line" so to speak by having sex. Why not just be smart about it and use contraception?

This is why I support Obama's decision. The whole "no birth control" idea is archaic, medieval, and stupid as all hell. If your parishioners are good Catholics, they're not going to be having sex anyways, so why the hell does the Catholic Church even care about birth control?!? It can only be used in situations where a much greater sin is already being committed...

Technically, the Church is also against contraception within marriage as well, when sex isn't sinful.

almost everyone is against having Churches offering health care according to their rules, this religios rights stuff is hogwash. This is about religion dictating to the people, rather than the rights of the church. There are churches that believe that you should do nothing but pray when you are sick. Would you support letting, no demanding, children of workers die rather than use something other than prayer? (christian scientists) Would you support denying insulin or a pig heart valve to those who need it (Islam)?

...I'm not sure who you're responding to. I'm not Catholic, nor am I advocating that people shouldn't use birth control (or that health plans shouldn't pay for it).

As for the Christian Scientist thing, most states have exemptions in their child abuse/neglect laws saying that parents aren't guilty of neglect if they tried to spiritually heal their children according to the tenets of their religion. This is, of course, stupid. The First Amendment protects the practice of your religion, it does not protect your right to neglect your children.

(And how do these people reconcile the fact that God didn't save their children? Do they think they just didn't pray hard enough or what?)

(Family Guy talked about this the other day and did give a good argument: Couldn't it be that the doctors and medi ...

Well, with more and more kids dying from completely treatable conditions and the internet making this known more and more throughout the country rather than isolated in small communities, that exemption is rightfully under attack.

Oregon removed the exemption last year.

lennavan		2012-02-08 03:05:17 PM

Aldon: almost everyone is against having Churches offering health care according to their rules, this religios rights stuff is hogwash. This is about religion dictating to the people, rather than the rights of the church. There are churches that believe that you should do nothing but pray when you are sick. Would you support letting, no demanding, children of workers die rather than use something other than prayer? (christian scientists) Would you support denying insulin or a pig heart valve to those who need it (Islam)?

No, this is about religions delving into areas other than religion. It's perfectly fine to be a church and do churchy things. In this case, they no longer religions, they are health insurance providers. They are no longer religions, they are hospitals.

This isn't about forcing a religion to do anything. This is about forcing a health insurance provider to do something. This is about forcing a hospital to do something. Who owns the hospital or insurance company is irrelevant. Thats why Obama has it wrong. And my guess is Obama has it wrong because he's too much of a pussy to take on the religious zealots in the country who want to merge religion with... pretty much everything.

FoopytheMoose		2012-02-08 03:05:19 PM

quick and dirty

moralpanic		2012-02-08 03:10:23 PM

lennavan:
This isn't about forcing a religion to do anything. This is about forcing a health insurance provider to do something. This is about forcing a hospital to do something. Who owns the hospital or insurance company is irrelevant. Thats why Obama has it wrong. And my guess is Obama has it wrong because he's too much of a pussy to take on the religious zealots in the country who want to merge religion with... pretty much everything.

Wait, how is Obama wrong on this?

Dr Dreidel		2012-02-08 03:10:31 PM

Lord Dimwit: (Family Guy talked about this the other day and did give a good argument: Couldn't it be that the doctors and medications are the answer to your prayers? I know enough about Christian Science philosophy to know that they don't view it that way, but...)

A man is stranded on his roof during a flood. As he stands there, waters climbing ever higher, he begins to pray for help.

A man comes by, floating on his front door. he has enough space for his stranded neighbor to climb aboard and help paddle to safety, but the man does not. "God will help me," he says to his neighbor as he floats away.

Now the water has completely covered the first floor of his house. A woman comes by in a boat. She's got room, and enough gas to get the two of them to safety. The man thanks her for her concern, but tells her that "God will help me."

As the water finishes covering his house, a helicopter comes by and the pilot offers to give the man a ride to safety. "No thanks," he says. "God will help me."

Sure enough, the man drowns. As he approaches the heavenly throne, he asks god "I prayed and prayed for you to send help, yet I was not saved. What gives, Almighty Father?"

God replies: "I sent your neighbor, I sent a boat, and I sent a helicopter - how much more help did you need?"

// have respect for that joke
// it's likely older than the combined age of farkers in the thread
// probably didn't initially feature a helicopter

sweetmelissa31		2012-02-08 03:10:32 PM

Aldon		2012-02-08 03:11:38 PM

Lord Dimwit:

...I'm not sure who you're responding to. I'm not Catholic, nor am I advocating that people shouldn't use birth control (or that health plans shouldn't pay for it).

Just a general rant on the subject :-)

m2313		2012-02-08 03:13:26 PM

mrshowrules: All good points. As I've said for a very long time, health care is not the commodity traded within your current health care system. The commodity are the patients themselves. They are the ones traded in the market. Any sense of personal control over ones own health care is purely an illusion.

Just a different form of "labor markets" or "labor as a commodity".
Slavery never went away, it's just slaves work to get wages for their masters or they're denied access to resources needed to live.

starsrift		2012-02-08 03:15:16 PM

Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum aren't making each other unelectable - they were already unelectable. They're just making it obvious, so that Obama won't have to.

lennavan		2012-02-08 03:15:49 PM

moralpanic: lennavan:
This isn't about forcing a religion to do anything. This is about forcing a health insurance provider to do something. This is about forcing a hospital to do something. Who owns the hospital or insurance company is irrelevant. Thats why Obama has it wrong. And my guess is Obama has it wrong because he's too much of a pussy to take on the religious zealots in the country who want to merge religion with... pretty much everything.

Wait, how is Obama wrong on this?

He is exempting churches.

lacrossestar83		2012-02-08 03:20:25 PM

Minus1Kelvin: Is it just my imagination or has there been a palpable lack of the well known, "well opinionated" Fark rightwing trolls today in the Politics tab? Maybe they've finally decided to just take their ball and go home...

GaryPDX's account has been deleted. That dolt was entertaining.

Aldon		2012-02-08 03:22:53 PM

lennavan: Aldon: almost everyone is against having Churches offering health care according to their rules, this religios rights stuff is hogwash. This is about religion dictating to the people, rather than the rights of the church. There are churches that believe that you should do nothing but pray when you are sick. Would you support letting, no demanding, children of workers die rather than use something other than prayer? (christian scientists) Would you support denying insulin or a pig heart valve to those who need it (Islam)?

No, this is about religions delving into areas other than religion. It's perfectly fine to be a church and do churchy things. In this case, they no longer religions, they are health insurance providers. They are no longer religions, they are hospitals.

This isn't about forcing a religion to do anything. This is about forcing a health insurance provider to do something. This is about forcing a hospital to do something. Who owns the hospital or insurance company is irrelevant. Thats why Obama has it wrong. And my guess is Obama has it wrong because he's too much of a pussy to take on the religious zealots in the country who want to merge religion with... pretty much everything.

Yes, and we force companies to do stuff every day...we force meat packers to sell non-diseased meat, power companies to dispose of nuclear waste, truckers to obey the speed limit, doctors to be licensed, our water to be drinkable.....

You have a problem with these things?

/notice that we are talking about life and death here

qorkfiend		2012-02-08 03:23:06 PM

lennavan: moralpanic: lennavan:
This isn't about forcing a religion to do anything. This is about forcing a health insurance provider to do something. This is about forcing a hospital to do something. Who owns the hospital or insurance company is irrelevant. Thats why Obama has it wrong. And my guess is Obama has it wrong because he's too much of a pussy to take on the religious zealots in the country who want to merge religion with... pretty much everything.

Wait, how is Obama wrong on this?

He is exempting churches.

I think there's some element of "pick your battles" going on here; it would be decried by the right as an "assault on religion", except unlike the other "assaults on religion", this is actually trying to get religious organizations to do something counter to their beliefs (however misguided they are). I don't think there's anything wrong with skipping that battle in an election year, especially given how demotivated the GOP voters are.

Stand on principle? Sure, but the decision has to be made: would it be better for Obama stand on principle and lose, or pass and keep the GOP out of the White House?

qorkfiend		2012-02-08 03:25:27 PM

Aldon: meat packers to sell non-diseased meat, power companies to dispose of nuclear waste, truckers to obey the speed limit, doctors to be licensed, our water to be drinkable.....

I guess the difference is that truckers don't have a 2000-year-old organization with "no speed limits" as an important tenet.

tinyarena		2012-02-08 03:26:52 PM

Jackson Herring		2012-02-08 03:27:33 PM

Lunchlady		2012-02-08 03:27:43 PM

qorkfiend: lennavan: moralpanic: lennavan:
This isn't about forcing a religion to do anything. This is about forcing a health insurance provider to do something. This is about forcing a hospital to do something. Who owns the hospital or insurance company is irrelevant. Thats why Obama has it wrong. And my guess is Obama has it wrong because he's too much of a pussy to take on the religious zealots in the country who want to merge religion with... pretty much everything.

Wait, how is Obama wrong on this?

He is exempting churches.

I think there's some element of "pick your battles" going on here; it would be decried by the right as an "assault on religion", except unlike the other "assaults on religion", this is actually trying to get religious organizations to do something counter to their beliefs (however misguided they are). I don't think there's anything wrong with skipping that battle in an election year, especially given how demotivated the GOP voters are.

Stand on principle? Sure, but the decision has to be made: would it be better for Obama stand on principle and lose, or pass and keep the GOP out of the White House?

Honestly if religious people want to live in the dark ages (and this goes for pretty much everything) and it doesn't affect the general welfare we should just let them.

But if you build a Catholic Hospital that takes all comers but wants to have special treatment in one or two specific areas then hell-yes you should be forced to follow everyone else's rules. It's like the pharmacist who won't sell condoms to 16 year-olds. You're free to think that teens shouldn't be having sex, you just can't do it as a pharmacist.

Cedars Sinai is about as Jewish as it gets but they don't close up shop Friday nights.

lennavan		2012-02-08 03:29:34 PM

Aldon: You have a problem with these things?

No, I don't. I was saying people have no problem with forcing an insurance company to do those things but they do have a problem forcing a church to do those things. My argument was you shouldn't view it as a church being forced, it's an insurance provider that happens to be owned by a religious person/people.

qorkfiend: I think there's some element of "pick your battles" going on here; it would be decried by the right as an "assault on religion"

I agree. I guess the terms I put it in were a bit less elegant and a bit more crass. Obama's a pussy.

qorkfiend: this is actually trying to get religious organizations

No, it's not. It's about trying to get an insurance provider to do something. Just because the insurance provider is owned by a religious person/people doesn't suddenly make it no longer an insurance provider.

qorkfiend: Stand on principle? Sure, but the decision has to be made: would it be better for Obama stand on principle and lose, or pass and keep the GOP out of the White House?

He's not going to lose.

Mike Chewbacca		2012-02-08 03:32:46 PM

tlchwi02: Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: I heard the same thing. Diane Rehm show, right?

yup. although the guy threw out some "well that doesn't have any bearing here" thing, he got real subdued after the caller who brought up the kiddie diddling. I wish sometimes that the moderator would call out panelists on that, since they hang up on the caller after they say their piece. The child abuse scandals absolutely have bearing here, because the Church is claiming that the government is trying to "force" them to be hypocrits. But if they, through their own actions, are already perpetuating hypocracy, that whole argument can't hold water. There aren't "degrees" of hypocracy that i'm aware of (and even if there were, i think that "diddles children" would get you a lot more points on the scale than "affiliated organizations allow contraceptives to be covered by insurance.") Not that the moderator should be pushing one side of the agenda, but i think the moderator should be able to say "now wait, you're not addressing his argument, you're just ignoring the point and claiming it has no bearing without any reasoning why it doesnt."

Heh, Hypocracy: rule by hypocrites.

bugontherug		2012-02-08 03:34:34 PM

Mike Chewbacca: Heh, Hypocracy: rule by hypocrites.

See also: GOP House of Representatives.

Zerochance		2012-02-08 03:36:37 PM

lacrossestar83: Minus1Kelvin: Is it just my imagination or has there been a palpable lack of the well known, "well opinionated" Fark rightwing trolls today in the Politics tab? Maybe they've finally decided to just take their ball and go home...

GaryPDX's account has been deleted. That dolt was entertaining.

Oh man...you're right. He stood out.

The-dentist-who-must-not-be named has also been gone for a while. I asked another FARKer that seemed to be in the know why his account was deleted, and his answer made it seem like it's not OK to even mention the guy.

Rent Party		2012-02-08 03:39:50 PM

what_now: James!: That kid will kill us all one day.

Yeah...he's in 8th grade? And he's about 4 feet tall, a science nerd, and wears glasses?

Poor lil guy. I almost want to let him feel my boobs just because it will be 10 years before he gets another chance.

Hey, well you know, I like science, too....

sweetmelissa31		2012-02-08 03:40:10 PM

Jackson Herring: [i.imgur.com image 615x346]

[upload.wikimedia.org image 640x408]

Win.

qorkfiend		2012-02-08 03:42:00 PM

lennavan: No, it's not. It's about trying to get an insurance provider to do something. Just because the insurance provider is owned by a religious person/people doesn't suddenly make it no longer an insurance provider.

True; perhaps I should have said "organizations that think they're religious". In this case, perception is paramount.

lennavan: Obama's a pussy.

I don't know. There's quite a bit of difference between "abandoning the field" and "retreating to a better tactical position".

lennavan: He's not going to lose.

I hope not, but this far out, anything is possible.

Displayed 50 of 323 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Redisplay/refresh comments

This thread is closed to new comments.