Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Wisconsin Gazette)   'Vaginas Take Back the Capitol' in Michigan   ( wisconsingazette.com) divider line
    More: Cool, capitols  
•       •       •

14724 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Jun 2012 at 12:07 PM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



463 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-06-19 06:42:36 PM  

AngryJailhouseFistfark: 3StratMan: The bill attempts to regulate and define safe conditions at abortion clinics, and shut down clinics that are BELOW STANDARDS. You know, the ones that might be HARMING women because of their substandard operations.

Is that what Pastor told you? No, you've been deceived. The issue is one of clinic standards vs. hospital standards, and imposing rules normally applied only to large facilities to a small one that can't afford it. It's got nothing to do with cleanliness and procedure.


AngryJailhouseFistfark: 3StratMan: The bill attempts to regulate and define safe conditions at abortion clinics, and shut down clinics that are BELOW STANDARDS. You know, the ones that might be HARMING women because of their substandard operations.

Is that what Pastor told you? No, you've been deceived. The issue is one of clinic standards vs. hospital standards, and imposing rules normally applied only to large facilities to a small one that can't afford it. It's got nothing to do with cleanliness and procedure.


Can't afford what? To follow regulations? Boo farking hoo if clinics can't afford to pay fines because you don't want them to have to comply with the regulations. It seems to me YOU are waging the "war on women" for believing that some abortion clinics should be allowed to continue to operate below standards for any reason, without any consequence.

Here, read the bill and tell me exactly what it is asking for that constitutes this "war on women" that the vagina chanters are so pissed off about...Link
 
2012-06-19 07:09:20 PM  
I'm from Michigan.

I have a Vagina.

I think the number 2,5000 is Vagina Math (C)

/Vagina, Vagina, Vagina!
///Rah Rah Rah!
 
2012-06-19 07:17:20 PM  
When vaginas are outlawed, only outlaws will have vaginas.

/or something
 
2012-06-19 07:24:26 PM  

factoryconnection: If a woman gets an abortion, both parents are equally freed of financial responsibility. The argument is that pregnancy is a matter of the woman's body, as is abortion, so sorry that someone is making men pay child support for when they banged someone they couldn't otherwise stand.


That's retarded. The point being made is that:

1) Woman get's pregnant. Options B,C,D allow her to wash her hands of responsibility.
2) Man get's woman pregnant. No control of his own future exists.

Now, in olden days the men of society basically said, "Oh too bad for you, you're stuck with a uterus, therefore this is your burden. you deal with the fruit of thy womb."

Enlightenment brought us this idea of responsibility, so with DNA testing, it's now possible to determine beyond a shadow of a doubt who the father is. Yaay science! This meant that men couldn't simply wash their hands of it anymore.

So now society says that women can choose from multiple options that essentially determine their own future if a mistake is made.

But society also seems to say that men have no such options if the same mistake is made.

Fair? Really?

You can make body argument's all you want. Women are given the option of having no child to care for, and we all acknowledge that society is better for not seeing so many single-parent homes popping up. However, men are given no such options to protect their own future from a mistake.
 
2012-06-19 07:25:23 PM  

Virtue: rufus-t-firefly: See? Equal protection.

90% of women get custody.....try again


Actually, it's more like 80% and the main reason dads don't get custody as often as moms is because they don't ask for it. When they make an issue of it, they usually get shared parenting. Some get sole custody. Shared parenting (aka joint custody) is getting to be much more popular nowadays. So, men are getting custody of their kids. Stop your tantrum before you blow an artery.
 
2012-06-19 07:28:15 PM  

Big Man On Campus:
You can make body argument's all you want. Women are given the option of having no child to care for, and we all acknowledge that society is better for not seeing so many single-parent homes popping up. However, men are given no such options to protect their own future from a mistake.


Your option is to not have sex. You make your choice to take the chance when you yank it out.

That is eminently fair.
 
2012-06-19 07:28:41 PM  

Virtue: ph0rk: Basically, he was married to the then-president of NOW, then he wasn't. Then he sort of went bonkers.

Point out ONE thing in ANY of his books that is not 100% factual and annotated.


Uh... do you know about his pro-incest statements in Penthouse?

Warren Farrell - Penthouse
 
2012-06-19 07:50:19 PM  

ms_lara_croft: Virtue: rufus-t-firefly: See? Equal protection.

90% of women get custody.....try again

Actually, it's more like 80% and the main reason dads don't get custody as often as moms is because they don't ask for it. When they make an issue of it, they usually get shared parenting. Some get sole custody. Shared parenting (aka joint custody) is getting to be much more popular nowadays. So, men are getting custody of their kids. Stop your tantrum before you blow an artery.


in arizona custody is automatically awarded to the mother. you are wrong
 
2012-06-19 07:57:16 PM  

Rent Party: Your option is to not have sex. You make your choice to take the chance when you yank it out.

That is eminently fair.


Unless she lies about birth control in order to get a check. [cue Ace of Base.] Then, your only option is to inherently mistrust everyone of the opposite sex, or risk getting entrapped.

I think a man should be able, under such circumstances, to afirm under oath that he was mislead in this way, sign a document giving up all rights irrevocably, and be on his way. Given this option being available, a woman could no longer entrap a man in this way. And really, I think that's all the guys are really asking for, is a legal way to defend themselves from this sort of entrapment.
 
2012-06-19 07:59:44 PM  
Prank Call of Cthulhu:

Ha! I love you
 
2012-06-19 08:00:15 PM  

3StratMan: Here, read the bill and tell me exactly what it is asking for that constitutes this "war on women" that the vagina chanters are so pissed off about...Link


Go read this

Not that you will. Not that anything would change your mind.
 
2012-06-19 08:10:31 PM  

lazyguineapig33: ms_lara_croft: Virtue: rufus-t-firefly: See? Equal protection.

90% of women get custody.....try again

Actually, it's more like 80% and the main reason dads don't get custody as often as moms is because they don't ask for it. When they make an issue of it, they usually get shared parenting. Some get sole custody. Shared parenting (aka joint custody) is getting to be much more popular nowadays. So, men are getting custody of their kids. Stop your tantrum before you blow an artery.

in arizona custody is automatically awarded to the mother. you are wrong


Arizona statute states you don't know what you're talking about.

Arizona Custody Law

The great thing about the law is that people write it down.
 
2012-06-19 08:10:35 PM  

lazyguineapig33: ms_lara_croft: Virtue: rufus-t-firefly: See? Equal protection.

90% of women get custody.....try again

Actually, it's more like 80% and the main reason dads don't get custody as often as moms is because they don't ask for it. When they make an issue of it, they usually get shared parenting. Some get sole custody. Shared parenting (aka joint custody) is getting to be much more popular nowadays. So, men are getting custody of their kids. Stop your tantrum before you blow an artery.

in arizona custody is automatically awarded to the mother. you are wrong


One state out of 50. Most states now have shared parenting and dads are getting it more often.
 
2012-06-19 08:12:03 PM  

SouthernFriedYankee: Rent Party: Your option is to not have sex. You make your choice to take the chance when you yank it out.

That is eminently fair.

Unless she lies about birth control in order to get a check. [cue Ace of Base.] Then, your only option is to inherently mistrust everyone of the opposite sex, or risk getting entrapped.



If you're that worried, wrap it up, or don't have sex. You have all kinds of choices, but those choices become her choices once she's knocked up.

That is still eminently fair.
 
2012-06-19 08:12:56 PM  

ms_lara_croft: lazyguineapig33: ms_lara_croft: Virtue: rufus-t-firefly: See? Equal protection.

90% of women get custody.....try again

Actually, it's more like 80% and the main reason dads don't get custody as often as moms is because they don't ask for it. When they make an issue of it, they usually get shared parenting. Some get sole custody. Shared parenting (aka joint custody) is getting to be much more popular nowadays. So, men are getting custody of their kids. Stop your tantrum before you blow an artery.

in arizona custody is automatically awarded to the mother. you are wrong

One state out of 50. Most states now have shared parenting and dads are getting it more often.


He's wrong about that, too. 0 states out of 50 "automatically award custody to the mother."
 
2012-06-19 08:17:04 PM  

Rent Party: ms_lara_croft: lazyguineapig33: ms_lara_croft: Virtue: rufus-t-firefly: See? Equal protection.

90% of women get custody.....try again

Actually, it's more like 80% and the main reason dads don't get custody as often as moms is because they don't ask for it. When they make an issue of it, they usually get shared parenting. Some get sole custody. Shared parenting (aka joint custody) is getting to be much more popular nowadays. So, men are getting custody of their kids. Stop your tantrum before you blow an artery.

in arizona custody is automatically awarded to the mother. you are wrong

One state out of 50. Most states now have shared parenting and dads are getting it more often.

He's wrong about that, too. 0 states out of 50 "automatically award custody to the mother."


Don't stop him. He's on a roll.
 
2012-06-19 08:17:42 PM  

TheShavingofOccam123: Rent Party: ms_lara_croft: lazyguineapig33: ms_lara_croft: Virtue: rufus-t-firefly: See? Equal protection.

90% of women get custody.....try again

Actually, it's more like 80% and the main reason dads don't get custody as often as moms is because they don't ask for it. When they make an issue of it, they usually get shared parenting. Some get sole custody. Shared parenting (aka joint custody) is getting to be much more popular nowadays. So, men are getting custody of their kids. Stop your tantrum before you blow an artery.

in arizona custody is automatically awarded to the mother. you are wrong

One state out of 50. Most states now have shared parenting and dads are getting it more often.

He's wrong about that, too. 0 states out of 50 "automatically award custody to the mother."

Don't stop him. He's on a roll.


Just doin' my part to support vaginas!
 
2012-06-19 08:27:24 PM  
It's always the fat, ugly dyke chicks that rage the most about their Paginas! Nobody wants that gash anyway, but it makes them feel like they're a part of something. "No, you can't touch what nobody wants!"
 
2012-06-19 08:29:23 PM  

Rent Party: You have all kinds of choices, but those choices become her choices once she's knocked up.

That is still eminently fair.


I will simply observe that when an individual is so firmly convinced that their worldview is beyond examination, a meaningful discussion becomes impossible. This is the problem of the blind ideologues on both sides. They're playing for their team, not trying to arrive at an objective truth - because to them, there is no objective truth, only a victory for their team. Socio-political discourse has become a farking team sport in America (and elsewhere, as well).

There is nothing fair about what you just said. Nothing. If she can lie, he should be able to say goodbye. No forced abortion (good grief...), no forced pregnancy, simply a legal determination that entrapment is no more lawful for a private citizen than it is for a cop.
 
2012-06-19 08:31:33 PM  

Friction8r: It's always the fat, ugly dyke chicks that rage the most about their Paginas! Nobody wants that gash anyway, but it makes them feel like they're a part of something. "No, you can't touch what nobody wants!"


Really?! 400+ comments into this thread and that's the best you've got?

I live with my mom. Your troll-fu trembles before a bind kitten.
 
2012-06-19 08:31:55 PM  

Rent Party: ms_lara_croft: lazyguineapig33: ms_lara_croft: Virtue: rufus-t-firefly: See? Equal protection.

90% of women get custody.....try again

Actually, it's more like 80% and the main reason dads don't get custody as often as moms is because they don't ask for it. When they make an issue of it, they usually get shared parenting. Some get sole custody. Shared parenting (aka joint custody) is getting to be much more popular nowadays. So, men are getting custody of their kids. Stop your tantrum before you blow an artery.

in arizona custody is automatically awarded to the mother. you are wrong

One state out of 50. Most states now have shared parenting and dads are getting it more often.

He's wrong about that, too. 0 states out of 50 "automatically award custody to the mother."


True. Custody is awarded according to the best interests of the child, not by a preference for one parent over the other.
 
2012-06-19 08:34:33 PM  

SouthernFriedYankee: Rent Party: Your option is to not have sex. You make your choice to take the chance when you yank it out.

That is eminently fair.

Unless she lies about birth control in order to get a check. [cue Ace of Base.] Then, your only option is to inherently mistrust everyone of the opposite sex, or risk getting entrapped.

I think a man should be able, under such circumstances, to afirm under oath that he was mislead in this way, sign a document giving up all rights irrevocably, and be on his way. Given this option being available, a woman could no longer entrap a man in this way. And really, I think that's all the guys are really asking for, is a legal way to defend themselves from this sort of entrapment.


If you're that concerned over knocking up some woman, get snipped. Or sheath the beast.
 
2012-06-19 08:35:47 PM  

SouthernFriedYankee: Friction8r: It's always the fat, ugly dyke chicks that rage the most about their Paginas! Nobody wants that gash anyway, but it makes them feel like they're a part of something. "No, you can't touch what nobody wants!"

Really?! 400+ comments into this thread and that's the best you've got?

I live with my mom. Your troll-fu trembles before a bind kitten.


And yet the miniscule effort I put forth still elicited your response. Pagina!
 
2012-06-19 08:47:18 PM  

The Why Not Guy: The First Four Black Sabbath Albums: She was silenced for making crude, irrelevant references to her genitals. She probably would have been silenced just the same for saying "I'm flattered you're all so concerned about my furburger. But no means no."

You aren't making the point you think you are.

People say rude, irrelevant things on the floors of legislative houses all the time without being silenced. So either this is the rudest thing anyone has ever said, or they're being unfairly punished.


Did they silence Dick Cheney when he told off Leahy? (although technically the senate wasn't in session at the time) I LOL'd
 
2012-06-19 08:59:10 PM  

spamdog: 3StratMan: Here, read the bill and tell me exactly what it is asking for that constitutes this "war on women" that the vagina chanters are so pissed off about...Link

Go read this

Not that you will. Not that anything would change your mind.


Like I said, read the bill and tell me where there is a "war on women". Forget using an obviously left leaning publication as a source of information.

And anyway, as far as the info from your source goes...
Point 1: If you want to abort after 20 weeks, that's pretty much a war on a living human being, don't ya think? And why would one wait 20 weeks after a rape or incest situation? What will it be next, "abortion" as the baby is being born at around the 39 week time frame? Tell me where in the bill it bans abortion after 20 weeks. It DOES say : "If a dead fetus that has completed at least 20 weeks of gestation is delivered in an institution, the individual in charge of the institution or his or her authorized representative shall prepare and file the fetal death report and make arrangements for the final disposition of the dead fetus pursuant...." Doesn't sound like a ban to me.
Point 2: Apparently coerced abortion is OK with you? No "war on women " there, eh?
Point 3: Basically mail order abortion should be allowed? Gotcha. "Oh, I don't want to have to drive there- it's so far away". Give me a break. And I don't see anything in the bill covering this either. Unless I missed that one, since it is a "massive 45 page bill". 45 pages is a post-it-note compared to Obamacare.
Point 4: Don't doctors already have to carry malpractice insurance? If so, what makes abortion doctors so special that they should not have to as well? If others don't have to carry the insurance, I'll give you that one. But even so, that would be a war on abortion doctors, not women.
Point 5: Sounds like abortion clinics want to be a big time operation without having to follow the big time operation rules. Suck it up if you want to run with the big boys.

Like I said, screw your source article. Read the bill and tell me where the "war on women" exactly is.
 
2012-06-19 09:15:07 PM  

ms_lara_croft: If you're that concerned over knocking up some woman, get snipped. Or sheath the beast.


I'm uncomfortable with this. Many feminists (and others) rightly get angry when people tell a woman that she should do anything to mitigate the chances of being raped. If she is raped, she is a victim, and it is entirely the rapist's fault. ANY blame for victimization placed on her is reviled, and telling her to take any precautions is victim blaming. She should not have to live in fear of rapists. Period.

Why is it, then, that the man in this case would be responsible for preventing the woman from victimizing him by lying about her use birth control or other things? Shouldn't it be her responsibility to not lie, just like it is the man's responsibility to not rape, or does it somehow work differently because the act isn't as heinous? Why is him having an invasive medical procedure an option to prevent the consequences from her lying?

Clearly, rape is a much more heinous than lying about fertility and/or birth control, but both of these things could be life altering. Why is there a difference? How would we treat a man who lied to a woman about being infertile if she got pregnant form their intercourse?
 
2012-06-19 09:19:33 PM  
And anyway, I find it amusing how Farkers like to pick and choose where they want the Government sticking their noses. I've read so many times where Farkers claim that without Government regulations, this country would be a disaster. Food supplies would be poisoned, roads would be impassable, bridges would collapse, medical insurance companies and banks would have people dying in the streets, etc. But when it comes to causes that are near and dear to your hearts, you want the Government to stay out. Medical marijuana businesses should run unchecked, stay out of your lives when it comes to who should be allowed to get married and what bennies you should get after the fact, abortion clinics should do whatever they want anytime they want with no oversight, etc. When it comes to things you disagree with, you want the Government all in, but stay out of the stuff you really care about.
 
2012-06-19 09:22:21 PM  

telaran: ms_lara_croft: If you're that concerned over knocking up some woman, get snipped. Or sheath the beast.

I'm uncomfortable with this. Many feminists (and others) rightly get angry when people tell a woman that she should do anything to mitigate the chances of being raped. If she is raped, she is a victim, and it is entirely the rapist's fault. ANY blame for victimization placed on her is reviled, and telling her to take any precautions is victim blaming. She should not have to live in fear of rapists. Period.

Why is it, then, that the man in this case would be responsible for preventing the woman from victimizing him by lying about her use birth control or other things? Shouldn't it be her responsibility to not lie, just like it is the man's responsibility to not rape, or does it somehow work differently because the act isn't as heinous? Why is him having an invasive medical procedure an option to prevent the consequences from her lying?

Clearly, rape is a much more heinous than lying about fertility and/or birth control, but both of these things could be life altering. Why is there a difference? How would we treat a man who lied to a woman about being infertile if she got pregnant form their intercourse?


Rape and pregnancy have nothing to do with each other. I can't believe you just compared them to each other. You have a responsibility to prevent pregnancy if you don't want children. Take that responsibility.
 
2012-06-19 09:24:46 PM  

ms_lara_croft: Rape and pregnancy have nothing to do with each other. I can't believe you just compared them to each other. You have a responsibility to prevent pregnancy if you don't want children. Take that responsibility.


You either do not understand the purpose of analogy or do not understand that I was not comparing pregnancy to rape, but the consequences of lying - something regarded as bad and often victimizing - to another thing regarded as bad and often victimizing. Don't be intentionally obtuse.
 
2012-06-19 09:30:22 PM  

AngryJailhouseFistfark: 3StratMan: The bill attempts to regulate and define safe conditions at abortion clinics, and shut down clinics that are BELOW STANDARDS. You know, the ones that might be HARMING women because of their substandard operations.

Is that what Pastor told you?


And BTW, Mr. Know it all...I haven't been to church since about 1975, and when I used to go, the Episcopal Reverend at the church was about as big of a leftie as they come. I didn't realize it then, but I figured out when I got older. So no, that isn't what my Pastor told me.
 
2012-06-19 09:30:30 PM  

telaran: You either do not understand the purpose of analogy or do not understand that I was not comparing pregnancy to rape, but the consequences of lying - something regarded as bad and often victimizing - to another thing regarded as bad and often victimizing. Don't be intentionally obtuse.


FTFM.
 
2012-06-19 09:33:39 PM  
Prank Call of Cthulhu:

Was I the only one who read the as get a vagina moranus?
 
2012-06-19 09:37:32 PM  

telaran: ms_lara_croft: Rape and pregnancy have nothing to do with each other. I can't believe you just compared them to each other. You have a responsibility to prevent pregnancy if you don't want children. Take that responsibility.

You either do not understand the purpose of analogy or do not understand that I was not comparing pregnancy to rape, but the consequences of lying - something regarded as bad and often victimizing - to another thing regarded as bad and often victimizing. Don't be intentionally obtuse.


And I repeat what I said. When it comes to pregnancy, take responsibility for yourself. If you are that afraid she may lie to you, don't sleep with her. If you don't want children, get a vasectomy or use birth control. Besides, how do you know that she's lying should she become pregnant? Birth control sometimes fails. Stop sounding like a victim and grow a pair. Pregnancy is a risk you take when you have sex. Accept it or don't do it.
 
2012-06-19 09:42:25 PM  

ms_lara_croft: And I repeat what I said. When it comes to pregnancy, take responsibility for yourself. If you are that afraid she may lie to you, don't sleep with her. If you don't want children, get a vasectomy or use birth control. Besides, how do you know that she's lying should she become pregnant? Birth control sometimes fails. Stop sounding like a victim and grow a pair. Pregnancy is a risk you take when you have sex. Accept it or don't do it.


So you're okay with victim blaming when it suits you. Awesome. I hope that double standard works for you.
 
2012-06-19 09:51:08 PM  

telaran: ms_lara_croft: And I repeat what I said. When it comes to pregnancy, take responsibility for yourself. If you are that afraid she may lie to you, don't sleep with her. If you don't want children, get a vasectomy or use birth control. Besides, how do you know that she's lying should she become pregnant? Birth control sometimes fails. Stop sounding like a victim and grow a pair. Pregnancy is a risk you take when you have sex. Accept it or don't do it.

So you're okay with victim blaming when it suits you. Awesome. I hope that double standard works for you.


Oh, stop it. I have no double standard. I also don't think unmarried women who get pregnant should hit up the father for child support should they decide to let the pregnancy run to full term. And they shouldn't hit the guys up for child support later, either. Granted, the state will have other ideas should these women need welfare. Like I said, take responsibility and that means use birth control.
 
2012-06-19 09:52:55 PM  
...for an audience of about 2,5000.

Not sure how many people that is... this new math confuses me.
 
2012-06-19 09:59:23 PM  

telaran: I'm uncomfortable with this. Many feminists (and others) rightly get angry when people tell a woman that she should do anything to mitigate the chances of being raped.


I'm sorry, but WTF???? It's better to be raped than to do anything to mitigate the chances of being raped?
 
2012-06-19 10:04:26 PM  
I like women and support their rights and their vaginas. which I also enjoy.

that is all.
 
2012-06-19 10:14:54 PM  

ms_lara_croft: I also don't think unmarried women who get pregnant should hit up the father for child support should they decide to let the pregnancy run to full term. And they shouldn't hit the guys up for child support later, either. Granted, the state will have other ideas should these women need welfare.


That's fair, and I agree with you, including about the state having other ideas; for the most part, I am playing devil's advocate and have no personal involvement in the discussion because I'm gay.

Like I said, take responsibility and that means use birth control.

I'm still a bit uncomfortable with that given the way people talk about victim blaming, in many contexts. Oh well.
 
2012-06-19 10:15:13 PM  
This proposed law is more restrictive than the law in the Dominican Republic, which has the CATHOLIC CHURCH as part of its government.
 
2012-06-19 10:16:51 PM  

WhippingBoy: telaran: I'm uncomfortable with this. Many feminists (and others) rightly get angry when people tell a woman that she should do anything to mitigate the chances of being raped.

I'm sorry, but WTF???? It's better to be raped than to do anything to mitigate the chances of being raped?


That is a complicated question with a lot of loaded answers no matter how you choose to do so. :)
 
2012-06-19 10:23:36 PM  

meunier: This proposed law is more restrictive than the law in the Dominican Republic, which has the CATHOLIC CHURCH as part of its government.


Oh really? Well, once again, here's the Michigan law:
Link

Care to post the Dominican Republic law so we can compare?

Usually using Third World countries as examples of how you would like to see the USA operate is not such a good thing.
 
2012-06-19 10:29:56 PM  

monoski: This thread is all over the place from flat out stupid to hardcore woman hating.


True. But it's also had some very, very good vagina jokes.....
 
2012-06-19 11:15:57 PM  
I support this, as a Vagina American!
 
2012-06-20 12:06:03 AM  

ms_lara_croft: Oh, stop it. I have no double standard. I also don't think unmarried women who get pregnant should hit up the father for child support should they decide to let the pregnancy run to full term. And they shouldn't hit the guys up for child support later, either.


Consistent, and I can respect that. Unrealistic, but consistent. I'd be better with a pregnancy "quit-claim deed."
 
2012-06-20 01:05:44 AM  

telaran: ms_lara_croft: Rape and pregnancy have nothing to do with each other. I can't believe you just compared them to each other. You have a responsibility to prevent pregnancy if you don't want children. Take that responsibility.

You either do not understand the purpose of analogy or do not understand that I was not comparing pregnancy to rape, but the consequences of lying - something regarded as bad and often victimizing - to another thing regarded as bad and often victimizing. Don't be intentionally obtuse.


If you are worried she's lying and you have unprotected sex, you have no one to blame but yourself.

As a man, your reproductive choices are all made before intercourse. If the outcome of that intercourse doesn't appeal to you, TFB. Your personal responsibility took place prior too, not after the event.
 
2012-06-20 01:58:25 AM  
nothing good ever comes from vaginas guys just leave that area of law making to the female race.
 
2012-06-20 02:11:25 AM  

3StratMan: And anyway, I find it amusing how Farkers like to pick and choose where they want the Government sticking their noses. I've read so many times where Farkers claim that without Government regulations, this country would be a disaster. Food supplies would be poisoned, roads would be impassable, bridges would collapse, medical insurance companies and banks would have people dying in the streets, etc. But when it comes to causes that are near and dear to your hearts, you want the Government to stay out. Medical marijuana businesses should run unchecked, stay out of your lives when it comes to who should be allowed to get married and what bennies you should get after the fact, abortion clinics should do whatever they want anytime they want with no oversight, etc. When it comes to things you disagree with, you want the Government all in, but stay out of the stuff you really care about.


Well said, and I'm sooo not surprised that you received no acknowledgement for your pragmatism. Duplicitous, indignant libs are duplicitous!
 
2012-06-20 02:31:18 AM  

Rent Party: As a man, your reproductive choices are all made before intercourse. If the outcome of that intercourse doesn't appeal to you, TFB. Your personal responsibility took place prior too, not after the event.


It should be taking place all the time, for both parties. However, if one can abdicate "personal responsibility," so too should the other. If you think otherwise, you have no concept of what "personal responsibility" even is; it most certainly isn't one person having to support a child for 18 years (especially if that person conceived the child before society even regards him as an adult) while the other is able to give it up, even if it's a hard decision for her, unless your definition of "person" changes depending on who you're applying it to.
 
2012-06-20 02:48:58 AM  

Friction8r: 3StratMan: And anyway, I find it amusing how Farkers like to pick and choose where they want the Government sticking their noses. I've read so many times where Farkers claim that without Government regulations, this country would be a disaster. Food supplies would be poisoned, roads would be impassable, bridges would collapse, medical insurance companies and banks would have people dying in the streets, etc. But when it comes to causes that are near and dear to your hearts, you want the Government to stay out. Medical marijuana businesses should run unchecked, stay out of your lives when it comes to who should be allowed to get married and what bennies you should get after the fact, abortion clinics should do whatever they want anytime they want with no oversight, etc. When it comes to things you disagree with, you want the Government all in, but stay out of the stuff you really care about.

Well said, and I'm sooo not surprised that you received no acknowledgement for your pragmatism. Duplicitous, indignant libs are duplicitous!


Yes yes, everyone that disagrees with you is LIBS LIBS LIBS LIBS. Everything is 100% on one side or the other, there's no such thing as gray areas or doing one thing one way and a different thing another way. Also if one person says or does something then everyone does or says it too, if you're not with us then you're against us, there is only us and them, everything people that aren't us say or do is wrong and evil and we're the only ones who are good and right, blah blah blah we'd sooner destroy America than work with our most hated enemies to preserve it.

Maybe one day Americans will collectively grow up and actually see each other as fellow countrymen, brothers and friends. Hopefully before people like you guys completely destroy it.
 
Displayed 50 of 463 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report