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.

(CNN)   Which is worse, that a 23 year old has 5 kids or that she superglued one of her rug rats to the wall?   (cnn.com) divider line 216
    More: Sick, A Texas  
•       •       •

16948 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Oct 2012 at 6:02 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-09 10:07:58 AM  

Brostorm: I never said that or anything close to it.


Maybe you didn't "say" it, but lets follow your own logic a moment:

Letting them starve to death because of their parents (which, by the way, starvation is a pretty damn painful way to go), but letting parents beat their children incessantly should still be punished?

Brostorm: Abusing children us a crime a punishable.


Starvation's not abuse?

Eeeeeenteresting...
 
2012-10-09 10:08:03 AM  

RembrandtQEinstein: Liberals refuse to admit that people who can't take care of themselves shouldn't have children.
Conservatives refuse to admit that people who can't take care of themselves are still people.


I admit both -- Senorita Escalone should not only have no children, but she should be summarily executed, buried and forgotten. (Also, go ahead and microchip those kids now, because they are going to be a burden on the taxpayer and a staunch source/beneficiary of Democrat political support for the rest of their lives.)

I'd also admit that Senorita Escalona is a person -- after all, there's no other animal on earth that's capable or willing to torture its offspring, much less do it with such creative flair, nor follow it up with such a grand display of rationalizations or delusions of persecution by imaginary sky-fairies.
 
2012-10-09 10:15:22 AM  

SkunkWerks: sodomizer: Or just stop subsidizing the terrible people, and start spending our money on the good ones.

Were the kids "good ones" or "bad ones" in this equation?

I'm unclear on this point. I thought a large part of the whole point of having children is that they have the potential to grow up a lot of different ways. Assuming they don't starve to death because of their parents (and a state who decided to play hear no evil/see no evil/speak no evil), of course.

AmbassadorBooze: That is kind of the point of not having the state intervene. If an individual or group wants to feed the kids, let them. They are free to, or not. Anybody that chooses to help children is a better person than me. But I am free to choose to be a bad person, unless the state forces us (through taxes) to help. Then we are not free to be good or bad.

Those kids sure aren't free to be good or bad. their parents made that decision for them... apparently.


Children don't make all their decision and never have. If the 13th child dies because of a lack if food its sucks but its on the parents and no one else. If you want to personally feed and cloth tgese children, good for you, the state should not.

And to kill the obvious response, The current wars are a massive waste of money and should not have beeb fought
 
2012-10-09 10:17:19 AM  

LoneCoon: JackieRabbit: If one needs to wear a condom, then jerking off is the better option. Sex with a condom really isn't worth the effort. This is to say: don't have sex with anyone who you don't know is disease-free and using effective contraception.

So my wife and I should just have not have sex? We don't want kids, hormonal birth control is ineffective due to her medication, and copper IUDs were out of the question because she's allergic to certain metals. Not everyone fits into neat little categories.


That's why God made anal so much fun.
 
2012-10-09 10:18:15 AM  

RembrandtQEinstein: JackieRabbit: RembrandtQEinstein: A per-requisite for any government assistance should be sterilization.

Liberals refuse to admit that people who can't take care of themselves shouldn't have children.
Conservatives refuse to admit that people who can't take care of themselves are still people.

I can't decide if you are a really bad troll or just plain stupid. Inasmuch as you don't know how to spell prerequisite, we'll go with the later.

OMG I picked the wrong word from the spellcheck list. My point is totally invalidated! You win at internet rhetoric this time JR but I'll get you next time! NEXT TIME!!!1!one!


Your argument that the very people who fight for legalized and free access to safe abortion are the ones who " refuse to admit that people who can't take care of themselves shouldn't have children" is more stupider than your typo.
 
2012-10-09 10:18:59 AM  

SkunkWerks: Brostorm: I never said that or anything close to it.

Maybe you didn't "say" it, but lets follow your own logic a moment:

Letting them starve to death because of their parents (which, by the way, starvation is a pretty damn painful way to go), but letting parents beat their children incessantly should still be punished?

Brostorm: Abusing children us a crime a punishable.

Starvation's not abuse?

Eeeeeenteresting...


Of course starvation is abuse, you are being obtuse on purpose. The parent should be held accountable for that abuse, just like I have said repeatedly
 
2012-10-09 10:20:22 AM  

LoneCoon: JackieRabbit: If one needs to wear a condom, then jerking off is the better option. Sex with a condom really isn't worth the effort. This is to say: don't have sex with anyone who you don't know is disease-free and using effective contraception.

So my wife and I should just have not have sex? We don't want kids, hormonal birth control is ineffective due to her medication, and copper IUDs were out of the question because she's allergic to certain metals. Not everyone fits into neat little categories.


get a vasectomy
 
2012-10-09 10:21:25 AM  

schrepjm: SgtArkie: NewportBarGuy: Kazan: vast majority of services provided by PP are not abortion

I mean... They are two very simple words. Planned. Parenthood. Planning to be a parent. Who the f*ck can honestly be against that?

Aside from their other medical services... That's why I give them money. It is a rational, sane, and intelligent, actually, for a society to plan for such things. It improves the community as a whole. As it only relates to those that actually need the assistance, most other people make that decision on their own, as a couple, or as adults.

 
ok I will give you some of that...PP on paper sounds great help the dumb/poor in making parental decisions, but since we have had PP for umpteen years show me stats where there has been a marked improvement in teen pregnancy, out of wedlock children.

Here you go.


of course the troll doesn't come back when the requested data is provided
 
2012-10-09 10:21:36 AM  

Brostorm: If you want to personally feed and cloth tgese children, good for you, the state should not.


We live in a society and in order to have a society that functions at a level that allows for the type of innovation and culture we have you need to have people not stealing copper wiring and manhole covers to sell for scrap to feed their kids. Or do you plan on just spending 5 times as much tax payer money policing all the people you refuse to help feed through the state?
 
2012-10-09 10:25:57 AM  

Brostorm: Children don't make all their decision and never have.


Yes. That's more than a little of the point, my friend. It's why we eneacted laws to protect them. It's why they're not running under mechanical presses, losing fingers and toes at the ass end of the morning for little or no pay. Because they're quite vulnerable under the care of less than scrupulous individuals... individuals who are often- as fortune would have it- their forebears.

Brostorm: If the 13th child dies because of a lack if food its sucks but its on the parents and no one else.


So, once again, starvation (which is arguably a worse way to go than getting beaten to death- seriously, your damn body starts consuming itself), is not abuse and therefore not worthy of punishment?

Do you have some concept of starvation in mind that was perhaps largely based on Saturday morning cartoons or what?

Brostorm: And to kill the obvious response, The current wars


I'm not thinking about wars. So I don't know what species of obviousness you're subscribing to. I'm still dumbfounded as to why you insist on protecting kids in one instance and abandoning them in the other. Starvation rates as abuse according to the law. It's child abuse when it happens to kids and there's a parent responsible. I'm gathering there's a good reason for this. I wager I just hinted at it numerous times.
 
2012-10-09 10:27:05 AM  

Headso: Brostorm: If you want to personally feed and cloth tgese children, good for you, the state should not.

We live in a society and in order to have a society that functions at a level that allows for the type of innovation and culture we have you need to have people not stealing copper wiring and manhole covers to sell for scrap to feed their kids. Or do you plan on just spending 5 times as much tax payer money policing all the people you refuse to help feed through the state?


If getting a job is so far down the list of ways to take care of ones family that those seem like better options you areca complete lost cause and any money spent on you or children children raised by you is a massive net loss for society.
 
2012-10-09 10:30:33 AM  

Brostorm: you are being obtuse on purpose


Yes, that must be it. I must be "being obtuse" and not commenting on the absurdity of the giant ethical contradiction you're proposing to be as right as rain.

Brostorm: The parent should be held accountable for that abuse, just like I have said repeatedly


But we shouldn't intervene. Even if we know we can save these kids from a horrible death (again, very probably more painful than being beaten to death). This is what you've said.

Hell, why help out any other human being in a tight spot other than yourself in that case? They have a word for this kind of wanton disregard for human life. It's called sociopathy.
 
2012-10-09 10:31:23 AM  
Skunk, I dont know how many times I have to say starvation is abuse until you stop pretending I didn't. It is abuse and the parent should be held accountable, not rewarded for popping out another kid.
 
2012-10-09 10:33:45 AM  

SkunkWerks: Brostorm: you are being obtuse on purpose

Yes, that must be it. I must be "being obtuse" and not commenting on the absurdity of the giant ethical contradiction you're proposing to be as right as rain.

Brostorm: The parent should be held accountable for that abuse, just like I have said repeatedly

But we shouldn't intervene. Even if we know we can save these kids from a horrible death (again, very probably more painful than being beaten to death). This is what you've said.

Hell, why help out any other human being in a tight spot other than yourself in that case? They have a word for this kind of wanton disregard for human life. It's called sociopathy.


We shouldn't intervene before a crime happens. Death isn't the first sign of starvation, you are aware of that right?
 
2012-10-09 10:34:58 AM  

Brostorm: Headso: Brostorm: If you want to personally feed and cloth tgese children, good for you, the state should not.

We live in a society and in order to have a society that functions at a level that allows for the type of innovation and culture we have you need to have people not stealing copper wiring and manhole covers to sell for scrap to feed their kids. Or do you plan on just spending 5 times as much tax payer money policing all the people you refuse to help feed through the state?

If getting a job is so far down the list of ways to take care of ones family that those seem like better options you areca complete lost cause and any money spent on you or children children raised by you is a massive net loss for society.


you don't get it, they will make you spend money on them one way or another they don't vanish off the face of the earth if you decide to stop paying out welfare and food stamps.
 
2012-10-09 10:39:04 AM  

Headso: Brostorm: Headso: Brostorm: If you want to personally feed and cloth tgese children, good for you, the state should not.

We live in a society and in order to have a society that functions at a level that allows for the type of innovation and culture we have you need to have people not stealing copper wiring and manhole covers to sell for scrap to feed their kids. Or do you plan on just spending 5 times as much tax payer money policing all the people you refuse to help feed through the state?

If getting a job is so far down the list of ways to take care of ones family that those seem like better options you areca complete lost cause and any money spent on you or children children raised by you is a massive net loss for society.

you don't get it, they will make you spend money on them one way or another they don't vanish off the face of the earth if you decide to stop paying out welfare and food stamps.


Kids born in this envirnment are net losses no matter the system. I dont see how capping all assistance at two kids to not incentivise more doomed souls has rustled so many jimmies
 
2012-10-09 10:39:51 AM  

Brostorm: We shouldn't intervene before a crime happens.


If the kids are being starved, a crime is in progress.

Brostorm: Death isn't the first sign of starvation, you are aware of that right?


Ahh, you seem to be backpedaling now. You said we shouldn't intervene- at all. You said it was okay that they starved to death.

Yes, it's true. Death isn't the first sign (which I've been mentioning for a while now). It takes a lot of painful weeks for it to happen, and people are bound to notice that there's a bunch of little skeletons living next door, sooner or later. People are bound to wonder what's going on in that house. And any decent person would probably want to do something about it- before it results in something more permanent.

But you said we shouldn't intervene. Because it "costs the state money". Let them starve to death. This is what you said. Either your confused about what point you're making, or you're intentionally moving the goalposts because you know you're wrong... likely because you never considered the whole issue.
 
2012-10-09 10:41:41 AM  

Brostorm: Kids born in this envirnment are net losses no matter the system.


Oh, it's Determinism now. Cute.

Why not just bring in a Caste system while you're at it there, Punchy?
 
2012-10-09 10:43:39 AM  

SkunkWerks: I thought a large part of the whole point of having children is that they have the potential to grow up a lot of different ways.


Please keep your assumptions constrained to the factual.

Genetics plays the largest role in the development of a child.

If a child is half sociopathic idiot, and that sociopathic idiot was pretty indiscriminate about who she chose as a donor, the child is doomed from before birth.
 
2012-10-09 10:45:33 AM  
When have I ever said we should not punish.a crime? Starvation.is abuse and the parties responsible should be punished. The differebce is you believe the state is responsible and not the human garbage that had to many kids
 
2012-10-09 10:46:19 AM  

Brostorm: Headso: Brostorm: Headso: Brostorm: If you want to personally feed and cloth tgese children, good for you, the state should not.

We live in a society and in order to have a society that functions at a level that allows for the type of innovation and culture we have you need to have people not stealing copper wiring and manhole covers to sell for scrap to feed their kids. Or do you plan on just spending 5 times as much tax payer money policing all the people you refuse to help feed through the state?

If getting a job is so far down the list of ways to take care of ones family that those seem like better options you areca complete lost cause and any money spent on you or children children raised by you is a massive net loss for society.

you don't get it, they will make you spend money on them one way or another they don't vanish off the face of the earth if you decide to stop paying out welfare and food stamps.

Kids born in this envirnment are net losses no matter the system. I dont see how capping all assistance at two kids to not incentivise more doomed souls has rustled so many jimmies


You believe that these people have this business plan to go out and have a bunch of kids so they can live off welfare and their decisions are all part of the operating procedures outlayed in the business plan and your idea to cap assistance to two kids will make them rewrite their plans. But this is the real world, these people are not logical or intelligent and they have no plans they have sex and don't use birth control because it isn't super easy to get and they don't get abortions because they aren't super easy to get.
 
2012-10-09 10:46:36 AM  

sodomizer: Genetics plays the largest role in the development of a child.


Please keep your assumptions constrained to the factual.

Pretty sure the jury's still out on Nature vs. Nurture. And that there are subtle interactions between the two we still don't fully understand either.
 
2012-10-09 10:49:42 AM  

SkunkWerks: Brostorm: Kids born in this envirnment are net losses no matter the system.

Oh, it's Determinism now. Cute.

Why not just bring in a Caste system while you're at it there, Punchy?


The caste system is already in place,contrary to myth people born to shiatty parents tend to end up shiatty parents living in poverty.
 
2012-10-09 10:49:47 AM  

soupgoblin: Occasional outlier?

You don't catch the news much, do you?

Child abuse is pretty common, and so is overbreeding (Catholics and Mormons).


I watch the news plenty. How many stories of this sort have you seen this year? Lets look at some numbers and see just how small of a percentage of occurrence you call "pretty common".
 
2012-10-09 10:57:45 AM  

Brostorm: When have I ever said we should not punish.a crime?


When you said "let them starve to death".

Brostorm: The differebce is you believe the state is responsible and not the human garbage...


The 'differebce' between you and I is that I don't write off children as "human garbage" just because their parents happen to be.
 
2012-10-09 10:59:34 AM  

Brostorm: The caste system is already in place,contrary to myth people born to shiatty parents tend to end up shiatty parents living in poverty.


"Tend", and "always do in every case without exception" aren't the same thing. Therefore it isn't already in place.

But you're acting like it is. It's precious.
 
2012-10-09 11:01:09 AM  
Oh how the times have changed.

I dated a girl in college whose parents insisted we get married and start pumping out kids. They were surprised she could land a man since she was already 22 and had yet to have children.

That being said - anyone who wants 5 kids should be able to raise them. People like this give young mothers a bad image.
 
2012-10-09 11:06:35 AM  

SkunkWerks: Brostorm: When have I ever said we should not punish.a crime?

When you said "let them starve to death".

Brostorm: The differebce is you believe the state is responsible and not the human garbage...

The 'differebce' between you and I is that I don't write off children as "human garbage" just because their parents happen to be.


If they starve, a crime has been commited that should be punished, like I said you are jusr being obtuse there.

The parents are human garbage and should be punished for any crimes they commit
 
2012-10-09 11:09:09 AM  

Brostorm: If they starve, a crime has been commited that should be punished, like I said you are jusr being obtuse there.


You're being obtuse about knowing what "obtuse" means.

You said "let them starve to death, even if you know they are starving, don't intervene".

Fortunately I know what "duplicitous" means, and it fits you nicely.
 
2012-10-09 11:09:26 AM  

SpectroBoy: Hawnkee: Good enough. Hang her by the ovaries until dead.

I make this counter-proposal;

I propose that we crazy glue her hands to the wall and then kick her to death.


You're too nice to the guilty. I'll help you change that.
 
2012-10-09 11:18:28 AM  

hasty ambush: Woman With 15 Kids: "Somebody needs to be held accountable, and they need to pay."


The responses to that video are priceless! This lady was right on target with what she said! I about died laughing when she said, "Didja ever think to back up off the diak biatch?"
 
2012-10-09 11:22:59 AM  

Headso: Brostorm: Headso: Brostorm: Headso: Brostorm: If you want to personally feed and cloth tgese children, good for you, the state should not.

We live in a society and in order to have a society that functions at a level that allows for the type of innovation and culture we have you need to have people not stealing copper wiring and manhole covers to sell for scrap to feed their kids. Or do you plan on just spending 5 times as much tax payer money policing all the people you refuse to help feed through the state?

If getting a job is so far down the list of ways to take care of ones family that those seem like better options you areca complete lost cause and any money spent on you or children children raised by you is a massive net loss for society.

you don't get it, they will make you spend money on them one way or another they don't vanish off the face of the earth if you decide to stop paying out welfare and food stamps.

Kids born in this envirnment are net losses no matter the system. I dont see how capping all assistance at two kids to not incentivise more doomed souls has rustled so many jimmies

You believe that these people have this business plan to go out and have a bunch of kids so they can live off welfare .


Yes, The Federal welfare system has become mutligenerational and many now view it has a career choice. Plus I might add that condoms are free at PP, public health clinics and even some schools which besides reducing the need for abortions have the added advantage of reducing the spread of STDs. The alledged non-availability fo abortions is hardly an excuse.

You have people who grew up on welfare having their own children and raising them in the same public housing project they grew up in. It is easier to get public assistance if you have a kid and up to a point the more kids you have the more money you get.

President Obama Admits Welfare Encourages Dependency
 
2012-10-09 11:27:28 AM  
 
2012-10-09 11:30:19 AM  

hasty ambush: President Obama Admits Welfare Encourages Dependency


Any comment on how the Welfare system- as it's structured now- actively discourages independence as well?
 
2012-10-09 11:40:51 AM  
I heard this story on the drive to work this morning. Absolutely disgusting.

The only Planned Parenthood location in Dallas I've seen is the one on Park Lane. I'm sure there are more, but without searching that's the only one I recall seeing around the city.
 
2012-10-09 11:44:41 AM  

hasty ambush: Yes, The Federal welfare system has become mutligenerational and many now view it has a career choice.


There's a federal 5 year lifetime limit on welfare benefits and states are allowed to half that limit which most states have done. If you don't even know that you probably have yourself worked up into a angry lather over nothin...
 
2012-10-09 12:00:21 PM  

Headso: hasty ambush: Yes, The Federal welfare system has become mutligenerational and many now view it has a career choice.

There's a federal 5 year lifetime limit on welfare benefits and states are allowed to half that limit which most states have done. If you don't even know that you probably have yourself worked up into a angry lather over nothin...


Because that is enforced and everyobe that asks for an exemption is denied right? Are you even being serious?
 
2012-10-09 12:02:06 PM  
I helped duct tape a guy to his door in the dorm after he passed out. We were all really drunk.
 
2012-10-09 12:16:20 PM  

soupgoblin: SkunkWerks: doglover: death penalty

I'm not really for that either, but that's an entirely different and loooooong tangent, I'm sure.

What of forced sterilization? You're really okay with putting that sort of power in Uncle Sam's hands because the occasional outlier does something this sick?

Occasional outlier?

You don't catch the news much, do you?

Child abuse is pretty common, and so is overbreeding (Catholics and Mormons).

Sterilize anyone with more than 3 kids, we don't want to overpopulate this country like the 3rd world countries do.


blessthe40oz.com
 
2012-10-09 12:24:11 PM  
But that neck tat makes her look so responsible.
 
2012-10-09 12:28:59 PM  
I would like to know the brand of that glue. Not that I would use it for that, but I just gotta have it.
 
2012-10-09 12:29:45 PM  

SpaceyCat: My understanding was that she was pregnant at the time she glued her other child to the wall (September 2011), not that she is currently pregnant. Not that is much of an improvement, but at least she's not currently breeding.

Her legs need to be glued together.


Yep.
 
2012-10-09 12:30:26 PM  

Breech Birth: I would like to know the brand of that glue. Not that I would use it for that, but I just gotta have it.


Isn't it obvious?

Krazy Glue.
 
2012-10-09 12:34:38 PM  

stuffy: But that neck tat makes her look so responsible.


As does her Myspace moniker of choice: "Thug Girl".
 
2012-10-09 01:12:45 PM  

Brostorm: Headso: hasty ambush: Yes, The Federal welfare system has become mutligenerational and many now view it has a career choice.

There's a federal 5 year lifetime limit on welfare benefits and states are allowed to half that limit which most states have done. If you don't even know that you probably have yourself worked up into a angry lather over nothin...

Because that is enforced and everyobe that asks for an exemption is denied right? Are you even being serious?


The guy who thinks the poor have a business plan to acquire the most welfare dollars is asking if I am being serious?
 
2012-10-09 01:33:01 PM  

hasty ambush: She would not use them anyway. The mroe kids the bigger her check from Obama.


So this has changed under Obama how, exactly?

/Failure to answer is admitting you are a mindless GOP'tard
 
2012-10-09 01:33:59 PM  
Please don't be Mexican-American.Please don't be Mexican-American.Please don't be Mexican-American.Please don't be Mexican-American.

FARK
 
2012-10-09 01:35:09 PM  

SkunkWerks:

The 'differebce' between you and I is that I don't write off children as "human garbage" just because their parents happen to be.


You think of the children. That is very noble of you. And you don't like forced sterilization. Which is also A-Ok, because it is kinda invasive. But you have no problem infringing on the rights of the tax payers. They happen to be human beings, too. But in your world view they seem to be nothing but cattle to be exploited and instrumentalized. Wy does exploiting other people not seem to trouble you? Do you think it is perfectly normal to dispose of the money of other people?
 
2012-10-09 01:40:34 PM  
Go(o)d example of what the GOP is advocating: No education for poor, especilly no SexEd, No Family counceling, No contraceptives, No support for infants outside of the vagina, etc etc
Only JESUS SAVES!!
 
2012-10-09 02:03:53 PM  

Monophtalmos: You think of the children. That is very noble of you. And you don't like forced sterilization. Which is also A-Ok, because it is kinda invasive. But you have no problem infringing on the rights of the tax payers. They happen to be human beings, too.


Will I see them on late night TV, thin and emaciated, opposite Sally Struthers? No?

Then I fail to comprehend how this has anything to do with the point I was making.

Monophtalmos: Wy does exploiting other people not seem to trouble you?


Wyoming isn't exploiting people... at least not intentionally.

Monophtalmos: Do you think it is perfectly normal to dispose of the money of other people?


If you're arguing Brostorm's part (as you seem to be) I'd think the more pertinent question would be: Do you think that disposing of children- so long as you think of them as 'human garbage'- is perfectly normal?

Then again, this is because I'm not a sociopath.
 
Displayed 50 of 216 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





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