Fireproof: Any reason why he waited until after Santorum, the most anti-sex guy, dropped out to make this statement?

um, he's old

mjbok: the_geek: Once the Supreme Court is out of the way then it's easier to pick of most of the states one at a time to make abortion and most forms of contraception illegal. It's just step one of the plan.

How does this make most forms of contraception illegal?


Because the loony right views the Pill as an early-term abortion. The Pill, the Morning After Pill, hormonal implant patches/shots, etc. etc., all are abortions.

So wrap that rascal or use a diaphram with "spermicidal jelly" (though that KILLS SPERM they'll probably go after that too) or try the rhythm method. That's what's left.

OH WAIT FORGOT ABOUT ABSTINENCE!!! The one that 'always' works, like it did for Palin's daughter.

fritton: Johnny Savage: the_geek: mjbok: Is not wanting to pay for it the same thing as preventing someone from getting it? I am the most anti-Catholic person I know, but as an employer they shouldn't be forced to pay for something that they are morally opposed to.

If you're going to pay for health insurance you shouldn't get to choose what kind of health you'd like to provide. You get to provide health as it's regulated by the FDA, AMA, etc. Otherwise you could arbitrarily make up whatever nonsense you wanted to. If you're opposed to providing health care, don't provide it. We have religions in this country that believe rattlesnake venom cures diseases and that blood transfusions are sinful.

Besides, it's not as if it *costs* money to provide birth control. It's much cheaper to provide the pill to someone than it is to pay for the birth of a child. So it's not as if these religious organizations are *paying* for anything. They get a discount by providing birth control. They should pay a premium to *not* provide it.

This sentence exemplifies why the productive members of society hate liberals.

The insinuation that you should be able to regulate employees minimum healthcareinsurance because you offer a health package that is advantageous to the employee due to group rates and sign *part* of the check to the insurer exemplifies why the productive members of society pity conservativesis logical.

Liberals just love being the authoritarians, don't they? "Pay for my shiat, And, shut up about it, too."

mjbok: Is not wanting to pay for it the same thing as preventing someone from getting it? I am the most anti-Catholic person I know, but as an employer they shouldn't be forced to pay for something that they are morally opposed to.

Hope you don't get a Christian Scientist or Jehovah's Witness as a boss.

fritton: Well then I should be able to make all sorts of decisions for my employees health care (cause my moral opinion is so damned important after all) and none of it should be regulated in any way by minimum care standards.

Are you a recognized religion? Though most (if not all) religions are businesses, they are also religions, and there is a recognized separation of church and state. The fact that some states allow drivers licenses with veiled faces (or non photo ID's for licenses) shows how far the government will sometimes go to not impose their will on a religion or members of a religion.

Personally I think that it should be covered if it is for medical reasons, and subsidized (think co-pay) for contraceptive reasons, but even that is questionable. If the sole reason is for contraception that is a choice, not a medical need.

I think abortion is a woman's right, and I would never vote for anyone who states they would try to remove that right.

Should condoms be free for men? Should they be paid for (even partially) by insurance? If it is being used solely for contraception, what is the difference?

//Thinks the pill is one of the greatest inventions ever.

12349876: Hope you don't get a Christian Scientist or Jehovah's Witness as a boss.

So do I.

mjbok: I looked up the Roe v. Wade thing. Romney's position (as best as I can tell at this moment) is that it should be a state decision, not federal policy. While it is over-turning RvW, it is not making abortion illegal. Important distinction.

But even that argument is BS.

States can't decide wearing yellow is illegal no matter how much the general citizenry hate that color.

As I see it, freedoms should be ensconced at the federal level. So that my freedom to be a right-handed guy in my city doesn't get me jailed when I vacation in leftie-town.

How many little tyrants run your local board of whatever?

I get your legal distinction but I would argue it is a foothold situation. Like the morons who advocate "teach the controversy". They just want to crack the door open ...

Good on ya Heff. Now how about stopping Playboys war on the vagina?

mjbok: fritton: Well then I should be able to make all sorts of decisions for my employees health care (cause my moral opinion is so damned important after all) and none of it should be regulated in any way by minimum care standards.

Are you a recognized religion? Though most (if not all) religions are businesses, they are also religions, and there is a recognized separation of church and state. The fact that some states allow drivers licenses with veiled faces (or non photo ID's for licenses) shows how far the government will sometimes go to not impose their will on a religion or members of a religion.

Personally I think that it should be covered if it is for medical reasons, and subsidized (think co-pay) for contraceptive reasons, but even that is questionable. If the sole reason is for contraception that is a choice, not a medical need.

I think abortion is a woman's right, and I would never vote for anyone who states they would try to remove that right.

Should condoms be free for men? Should they be paid for (even partially) by insurance? If it is being used solely for contraception, what is the difference?

//Thinks the pill is one of the greatest inventions ever.

You know when I made the statement that Republicans preventing women from getting birth control, I wasn't just referring to the newest insurance debacle, but the multiply times in the past when a new contraceptive had been release and conservatives goes out of there way to either try to ban it or flat out refuse to stock or sell them.

Oh BS! The media nitwits always come up with lies and stories just to get people to watch their stupid shows.

mjbok: "Romney's position (as best as I can tell at this moment) is that it should be a state decision, not federal policy."

Yeah, that's the last refuge of the bullshiat repressive. "State's Rights". They tried it with slavery and women's rights and sodomy laws and civil rights and desegregation and miscegenation and pornography and birth control and abortion (the first time) and Voter's Rights and on and on.

It's basically a two-faced political maneuver to tell the Red Staters "I'd let you overturn Roe v Wade" without the Blue Staters ever clearly hearing "Romney supports overturning Roe v Wade". And if the Red Staters follow through on some bullshiat repressive law, like legislating government intervention in private medical decisions or defunding family planning or pushing abstinence-only education or dictating theology be taught as science in public schools... oh well. To these coldly calculating power-hungry sociopaths, someone else's suffering could not be further from their list of concerns.

At the very least, they should have the balls to stand up for the repressive social issues they support.

Stig O'Tracy: Children, over the past 50 years, Hefner has been instrumental in our society's countless battles in the unending war on human rights. He broke down barriers for revolutionary performers, artists and musicians. If he never existed, the world would be a vastly different place today. Porn is just a small part of his amazing story.

Look up "Hefner Dick Gregory" and LEARN. Just one small example of Hef's impact on the world.

Deep Purple's first American television appearance was on "Playboy After Dark" when no networks would dare show them.

/kids these days

Too bad Deep Purple sucked


brianbankerus: See, when two men and x-number of women (with x being a variable between 0 and 5) love each other very much, they share a "special hug" which most people call "hole pounding".

Can I hire you to have "the talk" when I have kids and they get to that age?

fritton: So the defining line is whether or not my particular brand of morality is "recognized"? Please by all means give me an internet certificate for whatever brand of cultish tribalism is popular these days then. I'll make sure to throw in a few by-laws of my own.. such as the laws against marijuana and prostitution. Forcing me to use my tax dollars for their enforcement is *totalitarianism"!!!

No, it's a legal thing. Not the easiest thing in the world to get recognized by the gvt as a religion. Right or wrong, many religions go back centuries and to their followers none of this is based on a whim. Country was partially founded for religious freedom.

/not religious

irving47: Right, sure. A lot of married mormons hate sex...

Having multiple wives does not increase your chances of having sex. See: Silas Simpson. "I said, wives, not girlfriends."

fritton: Johnny Savage: fritton: Johnny Savage: the_geek: mjbok: Is not wanting to pay for it the same thing as preventing someone from getting it? I am the most anti-Catholic person I know, but as an employer they shouldn't be forced to pay for something that they are morally opposed to.

If you're going to pay for health insurance you shouldn't get to choose what kind of health you'd like to provide. You get to provide health as it's regulated by the FDA, AMA, etc. Otherwise you could arbitrarily make up whatever nonsense you wanted to. If you're opposed to providing health care, don't provide it. We have religions in this country that believe rattlesnake venom cures diseases and that blood transfusions are sinful.

Besides, it's not as if it *costs* money to provide birth control. It's much cheaper to provide the pill to someone than it is to pay for the birth of a child. So it's not as if these religious organizations are *paying* for anything. They get a discount by providing birth control. They should pay a premium to *not* provide it.

This sentence exemplifies why the productive members of society hate liberals.

The insinuation that you should be able to regulate employees minimum healthcareinsurance because you offer a health package that is advantageous to the employee due to group rates and sign *part* of the check to the insurer exemplifies why the productive members of society pity conservativesis logical.

Liberals just love being the authoritarians, don't they? "Pay for my shiat, And, shut up about it, too."

Yah, employees never help pay for their healthcare (you mention the group rate itself),

Employees pay a portion of a rate that is discounted because of their association with the employer and his willingness to provide a single source of billing for the insurer.

also, you're going to go with *liberals* as the authoritarians? That's a joke.

If the shoe fits.

Simple fact is that health care (and insurance) is a regulated trade. Government has the right to set acceptable standards and minimums. I don't get to opt out of any other government regulation because of some bronze age morality, but conservatives sure love to play the victim if they see a ...

This goes back to the authoritarianism of the matter. The simple fact is that everyone has the right to procure health insurance individually. 'Liberals' want to force employers to spend money on things they (liberals) feel are moral. Ultimately, the 'liberal' argument is that employers have no rights over their own property. Also, they should be regulated within the employer/employee transaction.

Johnny Savage: tjsands1118: Republican motto:
Smaller government, less intrusion, lower taxes.

Republican actions:
Take away freedom to consume drugs, I haven't seen Democrats do any different
prevent gays from marrying state and local governments from acknowledging the marriage of two individuals of the same gender.
prevent women from having abortions They view it as taking a life
prevent women from getting birth control No, they don't
cut taxes on the rich, while raisingcutting taxes on the poor
invading other countries Vietnam, Somalia, Bosnia, Lybia

I like the motto, but been having problems with their actions.

/minor adjustments.

Came here to say this. Thank you.

Speaking of mysogynistic, check out hef in Pic#1 Whoa-HOAH.

By which I mean, check out the article researcher who couldn't even be bothered to put names on two of the three people in the picture. But yeah, it's Hef who's a mysogynist.

puppetmaster745: Johnny Savage: tjsands1118: Republican motto:
Smaller government, less intrusion, lower taxes.

Republican actions:
Take away freedom to consume drugs, I haven't seen Democrats do any different
prevent gays from marrying state and local governments from acknowledging the marriage of two individuals of the same gender.
prevent women from having abortions They view it as taking a life
prevent women from getting birth control No, they don't
cut taxes on the rich, while raisingcutting taxes on the poor
invading other countries Vietnam, Somalia, Bosnia, Lybia

I like the motto, but been having problems with their actions.

/minor adjustments.

Came here to say this. Thank you.

Normally, it's thankless work. But, you're welcome.

mjbok: vwarb: Plus, it's not like the President gets to just strike down Supreme Court rulings.

It's all about looking at the court and figuring out when they'll die/retire. It is possible that the next President (especially if it is 8 instead of 4 years) might get a few judges to nominate.

tjsands1118: prevent women from getting birth control

Is not wanting to pay for it the same thing as preventing someone from getting it? I am the most anti-Catholic person I know, but as an employer they shouldn't be forced to pay for something that they are morally opposed to.

I am sad to see that "not getting it for free" = "not getting it". Where have we come as a country?

Ask the average idiot on the street, and he will tell you that the GOP wants to take away birth control. Absolutely false.

/ Catholic
// You still get a high-five

DysphoricMania: Xythero: I'm glad he's saying this. A popular defense of contraception is that some women need it to regulate their menstrual cycle. There are purely wholesome purposes to the pill!

My wife and daughter both take the pill, not for contraception. They take them to regulate the ovarian cystic thing they both have. Take the pills, or the hormones go crazy and it's off to the GYNOdoc to remove polyps from their insides every couple years. And the secondary effects of the condition (blood pressure, weight, diabetes) tend to shorten life-spans so I'm fully in support of the pill.

Politicians should stick to what they know, and stop trying to regulate the things they do not.

Then maybe people should stop prefacing their beliefs with things like "My wife and daughter both take the pill, not for contraception". The reasons a woman takes the pill does not matter. If people keep stating the reasons for which they take them, then those people who try to control such things will keep thinking they have a right to know.

If he's so concerned about the war on sex, why doesn't he publish hardcore porn like the rest of the porn guys. The only sex you see in his mags are in cartoon form. SHOW THE GOODS HEPH! SHOW THE GOODS!

Sincerely, my childhood

I read if for the articles

/No really I have internet

I'm getting a kick out of this because I actually spent time in the Chicago Playboy Mansion on several occasions and talked with Hugh Hefner.

He was one of the greatest forces for good in my time long before I ever met him. Playboy changed the sexual landscape in ways that directly benefited me as a person when I was growing up in the '50s. The nudes were great (if quite tame by today's standards), but it was exhilarating to see fresh new attitudes about sex and society presented in some of the literary world's best journalism, commentary and fiction. Impeccable, frank sexual advice helped me a lot with the ladies, believe me. Contrary to feminist complaints, Playboy talked females as women, not objects, and helped young men to understand them better in a day when that kind of advice was taboo.

Later on, I wrote for Playboy, which published my very best work, stories that were too forward-thinking for any of the other mass media that published my celebrity profiles of people like Bob Dylan and Brian Wilson. I learned to put up with the same adolescent snickering that I see here, because I was given the freedom and the backing to be my very best as a writer.

Playboy isn't what it used to be. Don't count it out yet. I hear that big changes are taking place. Meanwhile, have a look at some of the issues from the late 1970s and tell me if you know any magazine that came close to that quality. The nude pictures are today quaint. The text is as alive as it was when first printed.

Christian Bale: So wrap that rascal or use a diaphram with "spermicidal jelly" (though that KILLS SPERM they'll probably go after that too) or try the rhythm method. That's what's left.

The "rhythm method has been replaced with a much more effective method, Natural Family Planning. With NFP, you actually monitor hormone levels to pinpoint the time of ovulation. It's not just the religious who practice NFP, either.

And no, semen will never be viewed as being protected, at least not by the Catholic Church.

mjbok: I looked up the Roe v. Wade thing. Romney's position (as best as I can tell at this moment) is that it should be a state decision, not federal policy. While it is over-turning RvW, it is not making abortion illegal. Important distinction.

Fark your distinctions. I live in a state that borders five other states. If states had a chance to outlaw abortion, no more than one of those six (Florida, and that's a stretch) would have any prayer of having safe, legal abortion. If women have to get on a plane to get one, it's basically farking illegal.

I think it'd be a bit of an upset if these states allowed abortion after Roe was overturned:
AL, AK, AZ, AR, FL, GA, ID, IN, KS, KY, MS, MT, NE, NC, ND, OK, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, WY - 22 states. More would probably have legitimate fights

cryinoutloud: LeroyBourne: I'm glad he could tear himself away from his huge bed whom he shares with many ladies.
/i typically don't go for that type, but his fiance in pic 8 is out of control

Crystal Harris? After she dumped him days before they were supposed to get married, she told everybody that she was only marrying him for money and publicity, that he sucked in bed, all the stuff about the dog shiat, then refused to give back the engagement ring.

Hef graciously told her that she could keep it. He then said that he "felt sorry for her" and that he'd dodged a bullet.

So you'd better hope that you don't go for "that type."

/Thank goodness she seems to have slunk right back into obscurity.

Holy hell, I did not know that.

He looks like a Muppet now. Every time he takes a picture next to an 18 year-old, his mag sells 1000 fewer issues.

Their is no war on sex you koolaid drinking idiots

Johnny Savage: The simple fact is that everyone has the right to procure health insurance individually.

Uh, no: no such right. Not unless you see a corresponding responsibility of health insurance providers to cut a policy for anyone who wants to buy one. Is that where you're going with this point?

Isn't that dumb basterd dead by now

the_geek: mjbok: I looked up the Roe v. Wade thing. Romney's position (as best as I can tell at this moment) is that it should be a state decision, not federal policy. While it is over-turning RvW, it is not making abortion illegal. Important distinction.

The distinction is not as important as it sounds on the surface. The point is to remove the (currently) Constitutionally granted right of medical privacy. Once the Supreme Court is out of the way then it's easier to pick of most of the states one at a time to make abortion and most forms of contraception illegal. It's just step one of the plan.

The idea that we have a bill of rights for the whole country but that we could revert to there being such a fundamental difference in women's autonomy from state to state is completely absurd. The fact that an abortion ban will only affect poorer women who lack the means, before it's too late, to travel to a state where abortion is legal, is even more absurd. There's no such thing as an abortion ban for women who have enough money. Anything but a national guarantee of abortion rights creates a chasm between men and women and rich and poor that nobody of childbearing age today remembers.

The GOP has no real problem with sex. They just think only rich Christians should be aloud to enjoy it.

BokerBill: Johnny Savage: The simple fact is that everyone has the right to procure health insurance individually.

Uh, no: no such right. Not unless you see a corresponding responsibility of health insurance providers to cut a policy for anyone who wants to buy one. Is that where you're going with this point?

Fine... omit 'right'... insert 'opportunity'.

Johnny Savage: The simple fact is that everyone has the right to procure health insurance individually.

If insurance denies coverage for pre-existing conditions, that is de facto lack of coverage. You'd think pre-existing conditions are things like smokers lung or drinker's liver. Genetic problems are also pre-existing. Hell, A woman with a broken arm can get denied because they claimed that a history of domestic violence made her more at risk for broken bones and consequentially makes this a "pre-exisiting condition"

So, No, not everyone has that 'right'.

/ Besides, if everyone is insured, even minimal coverage, doctors and hospitals no longer have to absorb and make up for the cost of treating the uninsured. This would cut the outrageous charges down to a more sensible level.

sweet jeez: Isn't that dumb basterd dead by now

tjsands1118: Republican motto:
Smaller government, less intrusion, lower taxes.

Republican actions:
Take away freedom to consume drugs,
prevent gays from marrying
prevent women from having abortions
prevent women from getting birth control
cut taxes on the rich, while raising taxes on the poor
invading other countries

I like the motto, but been having problems with their actions.

Obama hasn't put out any bills to legalize drugs. Neither has any other Democrat politician. Looks like both parties are stopping you from that.
Gays can get married. No one is stopping them.
You enjoy the murder of children?
Where have the poor had their taxes raised?
Libya? Oh, that was Obama. Obama also promised to remove us from Iraq and Afghanistan. We're still there. Gitmo is still open, too, and he promised to close that.

Your outrage is misplaced.

Johnny Savage:

This sentence exemplifies why the productive members of society hate liberals.

Is this where I bite on the obvious troll? Hi there! Liberal, ex-military, works for DoD, makes a lot of money, works hard for it too, has a lot of fairly liberal co-workers, also has racist tea-party co-workers.

Oops, forgot to mention that no one is preventing women from getting birth control, we just don't want to pay for it. You want to have sex, fine, you buy the wrappers and leave me and my money out of it.

tjsands1118: I like the motto, but been having problems with their actions.

They've done a helluva job with their marketing.

shotglasss: tjsands1118: Republican motto:
Smaller government, less intrusion, lower taxes.

Republican actions:
Take away freedom to consume drugs,
prevent gays from marrying
prevent women from having abortions
prevent women from getting birth control
cut taxes on the rich, while raising taxes on the poor
invading other countries

I like the motto, but been having problems with their actions.

Obama hasn't put out any bills to legalize drugs. Neither has any other Democrat politician. Looks like both parties are stopping you from that.
Gays can get married. No one is stopping them.
You enjoy the murder of children?
Where have the poor had their taxes raised?
Libya? Oh, that was Obama. Obama also promised to remove us from Iraq and Afghanistan. We're still there. Gitmo is still open, too, and he promised to close that.

Your outrage is misplaced.

No it's not, I farking hate Obama. I want to be a Republican, like I said I like the motto. But the party has some major faults. I just don't see how the government has anymore right to tell me not to smoke pot, as it does to tell a woman she can't have an abortion, or to tell a gun nut he can't own a gun.

But yeah I was working as a medical marijuana provider, you don't have to tell me how farking bad Obama is, but TFA isn't about Obama, isn't about the Dems, it's about the GOP being chewed out for being overstepping moral ram pagers.