Woman to Woman

By Devin Pintozzi

May 20, 2007 9:12 AM | Link to this

Beyond obvious objections from the pro-life community to Ms. Glass’s column, it seems to be a no-brainer for anyone who is pro-choice to make sure a woman has all the information she can before making a decision such as an abortion. It is not any medical facility’s job to describe all possible lifetime economic consequences on any medical procedure - that is not their field of expertise. However, they should be duty-bound to provide all of the medical related information they can. Ultrasounds provide crucial information for any woman who is considering this option, and she should be allowed complete access to this information, and not have the screen hidden from them, as is current practice in abortion clinics. Keeping women ignorant of the facts in medical facilities, as Ms. Glass apparently supports, still promotes a pro-ignorance position instead of a pro-choice position.

By Lyrazel

May 21, 2007 8:51 AM | Link to this

The numbers of children without parents (from abandonment, death, custody of state or incarceration) has surged. It seems advocates who wish to curtail a woman’s right to clinical abortions do NOT step in to adopt children of these same women. Instead of advocating for expensive programs the money spent on the mandatory sonogram program SHOULD be spent on adoptive and foster care services for the living. It makes me believe a fetus must have more status than all the born babies of this world. This should be readily apparent to all religious leaders who guide their flocks—but seldom is the need for adoption of infants, children, teens spoken of. Indeed, never once has Shaunti mentioned adoption/foster programs but rallies for abstinence programs and purity balls— and like most couples they want their own seed thus have never adopted a child born to a woman who did not abort it. So when the church (pick one) and their congregations rallies to adoption programs for 40,000 babies born to mothers who chose NOT to abort…I might listen, until then its just noise.

By Renee

May 21, 2007 9:14 AM | Link to this

Lyrazel - Great comment!

In my opinion, showing an ultrasound at the abortion is cruel. The majority of women having an abortion, didn’t run in there skipping and plan on throwing a party afterwards. It’s a turmultuous (sp?) decision, which has been agonized over and for whatever reason, they chose to go ahead. To show pictures of the fetus is ridiculous. With that mindset, why not sketch pictures of what it could have grown up to be, etc… That really angers me that this is actually supported by so many people.

By NetBanker

May 21, 2007 9:32 AM | Link to this

Abortion clinics already do ultrasounds: they just don’t let the woman see the screen. So let the woman see the screen if she asks, but requiring it be shown is just cruel. As Renee mentions most women (and I know several who have had abortions) agonize over the decision and have already made it before heading to a clinic. If the medical staff needs the ultrasound in order to determine the location of the fetus, then it does indeed serve a medical need that has no bearing on the patient other than to emotionally traumatize her.

I recently had a colonoscopy, but the doctor wasn’t required to show me a video of my insides afterward as part of the procedure. All kinds of medical tests and images are captured before procedures without a requirement that they all be showed to the patient before proceeding. Why require it for abortions only? Why control what is necessary for ‘informed consent’ for abortions, but no other procedures? Oh yeah…cause we need to birth more babies…when we can’t even adequately provide medical coverage, food, housing, education, and a safe home for all the children who already exist in our own nation (the wealthiest in the world).

Since we’ve beat this horse goodness knows how many times I’m done with this ‘debate.’ I’d like to see a discussion between the two side based on Cynthia Tucker’s column yesterday (http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/tucker/stories/2007/05/19/0520edtuck.html)

By Kristie Carter

May 21, 2007 9:32 AM | Link to this

To my horror, I’m going to speak up for Ms. Glass, in response to Devin’s post.. where do you see Ms.Glass being opposed to the ultrasound? I do believe she’s in support of women seeing the ultrasound, so that they can make informed medical and financial decisions. (In the interest of full disclosure, women need to know the health hazards and financial burden of bearing children)

What bothers me, is that women DO have complete “choice”. They can choose to take advantage of birth control methods, by the way, which are free at local health clinics… If a woman wants to have complete control over their bodies, they should be responsible enough to do everything in their power to PREVENT conception. We’re living in a medically advanced society and there are simply too many ways to prevent pregnancy. If in the case of medically dangerous cases, then yes, the Mother absolutely should be able to make the choice for abortion to save her life. IF a woman is careless, or less than responsible in having birth control in her sexual activities, then she should buck up and simply give birth and adopt that child to someone who may really, really want a family. At that point, I’d much rather see Federal and local funding, and even tax dollars go to support a woman who chooses to give birth and place that child for adoption in her prenatal and childbirth expenses. We all face reprecussions from our choices, and abortions can be dangerous. Why not simply give that child a chance to be loved and nurtured by someone who wants that responsibility?

By JokesOn

May 21, 2007 9:33 AM | Link to this

I am most definitely pro-choice.

That being said, I have a very difficult time when a person makes ANY significant decision with their head buried in the sand. I feel that refusing knowledge of serious choices like this is a cop-out that should not, at the least, be catered to.

At least have a waiver for the patients to sign.

By lovelyliz

May 21, 2007 9:33 AM | Link to this

Who would pay for such ultrasounds? Perhaps the government that doesn’t provide adequate prenatal care in the first place?

By Monica

May 21, 2007 9:45 AM | Link to this

Like Net, I am tired of seeing this topic on the blog. I do have a question though.

If showing a woman an ultrasound is cruel, and women agonize over the decision, might that indicate that it is wrong to have an abortion? If it’s just a tissue mass with no life, then why is it cruel to show a woman an ultrasound?

Abortion isn’t the main problem; it’s a symptom of a greater problem. Maybe we should focus on how to avoid the unwanted pregnancy instead of arguing an issue that will never have a solution.

By Jack

May 21, 2007 9:49 AM | Link to this

Yes. They should also show them a teddy bear that would have gone to the baby after they are born. Can’t afford the baby, no problem, all of the anti-abortionists have set up a fund to pay for the care for the child until they turn 18 years old.

By JokesOn

May 21, 2007 9:59 AM | Link to this

Liz/Lyrazel

Who would pay for such ultrasounds? Perhaps the government that doesn’t provide adequate prenatal care in the first place?

As stated, they are already being done, just away from the woman’s line of sight.

I would have thought that the current line of thinking, that women cannot handle the reality of the situation and must be protected, would be more insulting than having the option of full disclosure.

By Monica

May 21, 2007 10:12 AM | Link to this

Can’t afford the baby, no problem, all of the anti-abortionists have set up a fund to pay for the care for the child until they turn 18 years old.

Yeah, Jack, it’s called welfare. :)

By ProChoiceAmerica

May 21, 2007 10:19 AM | Link to this

Kristie we live in a country where a lot of religious nuts don’t want real & detailed birth control-family planning taught to anybody not married. Don’t forget most parents don’t teach proper sex ed to their own children at all.

So we really don’t have complete choice & not everybody has the knowledge to take advance of the birth control out there. I seriously knew a student that actually thought a condom was worn over the testicles.

I’m always surprised when a new strange, unusual & cruel tactic is used agains’t women choosing abortion. They should be using all that energy to educate everybody on birth control, now to use it properly, how to choose what is best for each person, & teaching boys to protect themselves, not just leave it up to the girls.

I am also sick of this topic, but we can’t ignore the anti-choice crazy.

By Nikita

May 21, 2007 10:30 AM | Link to this

Women already have the ability to see the ultrasound, if that’s what they want to do to edify themselves on fetal development. But this is not about education.

It is absurd to think that a woman, who has already been pregnant for some time, who has had to raise several hundred dollars for an abortion, who is legally required to be counseled (with some misleading and inflammatory information)and who must travel to obtain an abortion (sometimes across state lines) has not had adequate opportunity to determine the medical facts or her personal inclination to pursue such a procedure.

This is about adding additional stipulations to abortion care, about adding additional opportunities for the state to coerce women from obtaining their legally-guaranteed right to privacy and to self-determination, and about adding cost to the procedure so that fewer women will be able to afford or obtain it. Let’s be honest.

By Archie

May 21, 2007 10:34 AM | Link to this

I am pro-choice and I say yes to the topic question since ultrasounds are already being done. Having unprotected sex with someone you’re not married to needs to be discouraged strongly at the elementary,high school, and collegiate level and even outside of those places and yes even to working adults by way of public service announcements. I like sex and have participated in it plenty of times this week but as a man I know that we, men do not like to wear protection, plain and simple, so we need constant reminders and admonitions whether we like or not. Other than abstinence and a surgical procedure to sterilize a man, protection is the only way to avoid the topic question from even being an issue. I agree with JokesOn about full disclosure but let’s keep the choice available.

By ProChoiceAmerica

May 21, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

IF a woman is careless, or less than responsible in having birth control in her sexual activities, then she should buck up and simply give birth and adopt that child to someone who may really, really want a family.

Because women are not ever allowed to make mistakes ever, ever, ever? Women must pay their entire lives? And everybody knows every child born is wanted by somebody? That’s why we don’t need foster homes or orphanages? There’s no such thing as babies being left in bathrooms, trash cans?

sigh so many people are so ignornant.

By Scalia

May 21, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

And the anti-abortion crowd are the same people that do not want gays to adopt. They also make it so hard to adopt children in the U.S. that most people that do want to adopt have to go outside of the U.S. if they want to adopt.

And I was watching something interesting where a gay couple were adopting children that were born HIV positive. How many of the anti-aboritonists would do that?

By NetBanker

May 21, 2007 10:44 AM | Link to this

Monica….I don’t know that the agonizing and cruelty indicate that abortion is wrong so much as that it is an extremely emotional issue. I liken the requirement that the woman view the ultrasound along the lines of shoving a dog’s nose in it’s mess after you’ve already disciplined them for going in an inappropriate place just for good measure. It doesn’t serve a good purpose other than to make the person doing the shoving feel better. My best friend had an abortion before we met. Since that time she’s watched her mother die from ovarian cancer and herself had many problems with her reproductive health. In the end, the best recommendation was for her to have a hysterectomy at age 37 without having had children. Her agonizing during the initial decision was about her future if she carried to term, the stability and responsibility levels of the father, the failed contraception (she was on the pill), would she ever meet be married and have a child in the future? As it turns out that one child was her one shot to give birth and the decision haunted her a bit when she was preparing for her hysterectomy because she did meet an amazing man that she married and both wanted to have children. Yet she still maintains that while the decision was hard it was the right one for her. She has also come to accept that being a parent isn’t about birthing a child, but everything that comes afterward.

I agree completely that instead of focusing on abortion why not focus on avoiding them in the first place. I really do believe this is the common ground on which both sides should agree while also agreeing to disagree about abortion. It does seem that the pro-life/anti-choice crowd not only would like to make abortion illegal, but also don’t believe in birth control as witnessed by their support for abstinence only sex education, picketing of clinics that provide abortions even as these same clinics fill a vital role in the reproductive health of women (think mammograms, pap smears, std testing, routine exams, etc.) and, lobbying of legislatures. IMO, it’s one thing to declare a want to eliminate abortions, but it’s another to also work to remove women’s ability to keep from becoming pregnant in the first place especially in a world with so many abandoned children.

By lozen

May 21, 2007 11:07 AM | Link to this

NO!

By SusieHomeMaker

May 21, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this

I had an abortion when I was 18; and I’m glad that I did. At first I agonized over the decision for about one minute; that’s all it took. I looked around at my environment, (dorm room, on a partial scholarship, working 2 part time jobs), and I said knew I couldn’t do it and I just wasn’t ready. I didn’t want to become my cousin, a teenage parent who resented every breath the child she had took to sustain his life. I didn’t want to end up like my sister, who had to work 3 jobs to support her two kids because her ex disappeared at their birth.

I was using an alternative birth control method, (condoms), but after my pregnancy I started using what I call the triple protection option, (condoms, spermicide, implants), I wasn’t taking anymore chances with my life.

I’m glad I had the option to choose which way my life would go. I’m glad that no one at the clinic showed me an ultrasound of the fetus — I would’ve probably cursed them out and called them hate mongers and asked them if they adopt my child when it was born; or would it languish in social services for the rest of its life.

Those of you who disagree about my choices, until you’ve actually been in that situation, who are you to judge?

By Monica

May 21, 2007 11:25 AM | Link to this

I can’t believe I’m saying this…

I agree, Net, about promoting birth control. Please understand that as a Christian, I believe that sex outside of marriage is a sin, and that abortion is a sin (because I see it as a killing an innocent baby). God sees no difference in severity of sin; to him, sin is sin, which also means that all of us Christians who gossip and slander others are just as bad as the prostitutes that many comdemn. That’s why I ask for forgiveness a lot!

On an earthly level, I would much rather a non-married female use contraception than have an abortion. I don’t condone the act, and I still think that advocating abstinence is good, but I also realize that we need to do something different to reduce the need for abortions.

ProChoiceAmerica,

you asked, Because women are not ever allowed to make mistakes ever, ever, ever? Women must pay their entire lives? Drunk drivers make a mistake that they must pay for their entire lives. I know a kid sitting in prison because he fell asleep coming home from the prom (sober, BTW) and crossed the center line and killed the person that he hit head-on. He was charged with vehicular homicide. Many people make mistakes that they must pay for their entire lives. Or maybe a baby isn’t so much of a mistake after all.

By JokesOn

May 21, 2007 11:25 AM | Link to this

NetB,

I agree completely that instead of focusing on abortion why not focus on avoiding them in the first place.

What most people want to ignore is the fact that it has been proven time and again that humans only make the desired change in decision making when there are DIRECT consequence to the decision. This applies to all major decisions, not only the ones concerning safe sex.

Given this is how people (currently) operate, what other options are there in these issues: We have to embrace the negative in either situation, teen/unwanted pregnancies or the existence of a guilt trip.

I agree they are not pretty choices, but that never should condone a choice of denial.

By lozen

May 21, 2007 11:30 AM | Link to this

Will we ever, ever be able to overcome our puritanical heritage about sexuality in this country? Archie, how in the world is forcing abortion providers to show women ultrasound before abortion going to prevent men from wanting sex without protection? Yes, let’s do punish every woman who makes a mistake or uses a birth control method that fails and make her carry the fetus to term! Let’s keep pretending that sexual desires should be repressed until we’re married and if we never marry, then they should be repressed forever! Teenagers won’t have sex if we tell them about abstinence. Sex is bad, bad, bad. Punish anyone who has sex unless they have a piece of paper from the state saying it’s okay!

By Terry ReevesHanger

May 21, 2007 11:34 AM | Link to this

Dianes’d rebutal was so over the top it was comical. Those cells are people with no voice, guess that makes it easy to destroy them.

By JokesOn

May 21, 2007 11:42 AM | Link to this

Seeing as we have had this discussion MANY times with freak-out sessions on both sides, how about we try it without them and see what is said?

By petunia

May 21, 2007 11:47 AM | Link to this

NetBanker, your 10:44 post was VERY well written and eloquent. Kudos!

and I’m with you. It isn’t the ultrasound itself that troubles me, it’s requiring that they show them to you. Just as an oncologist isn’t required to show pictures of their cancerous tumors to patients, an ob-gyn shouldn’t be required to show pictures of zygotes or fetus’s. Medical personnel have been giving patients the pros and cons of medical procedures without the visual aids of ultasound for decades. Why “require” it now, and for ONLY this procedure?

currently, nothing prohibits doctors from showing the ultasounds, but women have a choice on seeing them or not…

By ProChoiceAmerica

May 21, 2007 11:51 AM | Link to this

It’s the woman’s choice to decide if to precede with a pregnancy. Cells are just that, cells.

Women are allowed to make mistakes & often very responsible women who do not want children become pregnant. Most of the time hormonal young people have sex & get pregnant. Unless you are willing to punish boys for getting someone pregnant, you can’t just force punishment on girls.

Should we be showing sonograms of the inside of a man’s testicles before he get’s snipped? Billions of sperm with no voice so it’s OK to destroy them?

ugg why do we still have this debate? People need to leave it alone & start education early.

By TheMeaningofLife

May 21, 2007 12:02 PM | Link to this

Every Sperm is Sacred

By Mara

May 21, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this

Every sperm is sacred,

Every sperm is great.

If a sperm gets wasted

God gets quite irate.

~ lyrics from Monty Python:The Meaning of Life

By kimberly

May 21, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this

Unless you are willing to punish boys for getting someone pregnant, you can’t just force punishment on girls.

That would be something called “equal protection under the law.” If one can walk away, then the other gets to walk away, or there is no such thing. But of course, you’re not speaking of the United States of America. The fundies are seeing to that.

“Get back in the kitchen where you belong, s-l-u-t-s! No freedom for you!”

By Monica

May 21, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this

Seeing as we have had this discussion MANY times with freak-out sessions on both sides, how about we try it without them and see what is said?

I don’t think that’s possible.

By NetBanker

May 21, 2007 1:07 PM | Link to this

Those cells are people with no voice The cells are NOT a person at least not until viable enough to survive outside of the mother’s womb. It may be a potential person, but definitely not a person.

Monica…I also appreciate your position as a Christian since that is the religion with which I was raised. I would much rather a non-married female use contraception than have an abortion What about married couples whose contraceptive measures fail, become pregnant, and realize that they can not afford a pregnancy let alone another child? They can’t afford the appropriate pre-natal care or the woman missing work will result in lost wages (or a lost job) that the family needs to keep food on the table?

LOL @ Mara! I started singing that song in my head just before I scrolled down to your post.

By 2D

May 21, 2007 1:07 PM | Link to this

This specific issue is stupid. If terminating a pregnancy is legal, then a woman should be able to go in, get it done, case closed.

Period.

I personally believe there should be much tighter guidelines and restrictions on this type of procedure, but that is a different issue for a different argument at a different time.

By Monica

May 21, 2007 1:17 PM | Link to this

That just demonstrates my narrow thinking, Net. I still think it’s wrong. I’ll get back to you with an attempted rational response.

By 2D

May 21, 2007 1:32 PM | Link to this

Here’s a question for the BLOG… Building on the very tragic example of Alicja Tysiac that Diane used…

I wonder if this woman has since gotten her tubes tied? I would think that in the scenarios where it is known that pregnancy can cause significant irreversible harm to the woman (blindenss, paralysis, death, etc.) then wouldn’t it be logical for that woman to take the nearly (and I state nearly) infallible precaution of self sterilization?

By ProChoiceAmerica

May 21, 2007 1:36 PM | Link to this

What sort of restrictions are needed & for what medical reasons if any?

If moral restrictions are placed on abortion shouldn’t we do the same, for example, men who need medical care for different VD they get? How many VD treatments are allowed?

If a man gets aids from a prostitute should he be denied medical care? If man get warts for the 2nd time should he only be given a topical temporary treatment because he needs to take responsibility for his sexual behavior?

By Mara

May 21, 2007 2:31 PM | Link to this

2D - Permanent sterilization (both vasectomy and tubal ligation) is prohibited in Poland. Contraception is frowned on and abortion is restricted to the point that it may as well be illegal.

http://www.contraception-esc.com/ESC_Newsletter4.htm

also, please remember that the woman was already pregnant when the doctors told her about the danger to her sight.

By ProChoiceAmerica

May 21, 2007 2:54 PM | Link to this

Permanent sterilization (both vasectomy and tubal ligation) is prohibited in Poland. Contraception is frowned on and abortion is restricted to the point that it may as well be illegal.

WHAT?? I had no idea Poland was such a dangerous country for women to be in. I’ll add Poland to one of the places I will never visit or support. What comes from Poland? Need to find out so I won’t purchase it.

By kimberly

May 21, 2007 2:54 PM | Link to this

If moral restrictions are placed on abortion shouldn’t we do the same, for example, men who need medical care for different VD they get? How many VD treatments are allowed?

There will never be such restrictions for men because it’s the WOMAN’s fault when they “sin.” The frame up first began when Adam, being too much of a pu—y to admit what he’d done, pointed the finger at the woman, who wouldn’t have been out walking alone and getting seduced by the serpent in the first place, if he hadn’t been acting like such a d—k. Some call it “original sin,” but I call it “the original frame up.” We’ve been taking the blame ever since. Can’t control your own urges? HER fault. Relationship issues? MOM’s fault. Nice….

By JokesOn

May 21, 2007 3:09 PM | Link to this

kimberly,

Blame, blame, blame…

You sometimes can debate in a civil and honest manner, and then there are times like these.

By Mara

May 21, 2007 3:31 PM | Link to this

ProChoice - Poland is very, very Catholic and the church has a great deal of influence.

JokesOn - are you trying to say that the knee-jerk reaction to stories about “loose” women ISN’T generally “well, she shoulda kept her legs closed” or some such? That when one hears about a woman out clubbing who gets raped, one of the first questions is “Well, she should have been more careful…”? Of course these are usually followed by the obligatiory “Not that it’s her fault but…”

By ProChoiceAmerica

May 21, 2007 3:32 PM | Link to this

lol good point Kimberly

By Archie

May 21, 2007 3:44 PM | Link to this

“Archie, how in the world is forcing abortion providers to show women ultrasound before abortion going to prevent men from wanting sex without protection?”

I am pro-choice Lozen and I am like others tired of this topic. To answer your question I mentioned men not wanting to use protection as a commentary on how we men,are. I was picking on men because if we did use protection more often women would not have to look at anything and they wouldn’t have think about certain issues. I was trying to bring up the man’s responsibility when it’s time for sex. Ultrasounds are already being done and you still have the choice which is what’s important here.

By ProChoiceAmerica

May 21, 2007 3:49 PM | Link to this

Has anybody heard about the hotels offering “Women Only” floors & restarants? Women now make up at least 1/2 of all business travelers & the added safety is an excellent idea.

Since we’re supposed to be more aware, more careful, make sure our doors are locked, don’t talk to too many strangers, etc this is an excellent idea. Those who oppose it are the same dumb arses that criticize women who are victims of crime. Mara good post.
Poland is very, very Catholic and the church has a great deal of influence. ? Well NO WONDER. Why would any woman agree to be Catholic?

By Monica

May 21, 2007 3:58 PM | Link to this

Mind if I stray from the topic? AJC’s current headline on the homepage is MySpace Revealing Predator Habits: Web site to let authorities know sex offenders are doing online. Do you think that the editors missed that one? Shoud it be “going online” instead of “doing online?” :)

By JokesOn

May 21, 2007 3:58 PM | Link to this

JokesOn - are you trying to say that the knee-jerk reaction to stories about “loose” women ISN’T generally “well, she shoulda kept her legs closed” or some such? That when one hears about a woman out clubbing who gets raped, one of the first questions is “Well, she should have been more careful…”? Of course these are usually followed by the obligatiory “Not that it’s her fault but…”

I think the best debates begin by treating everyone as though they are intelligent/thinking beings. And as individuals prove that they are not up to that task, stop debating with them. Or, if you must, ridicule them after foot is in mouth.

To entertain your notion above: How many people on here actually adhere to the idea presented?

And to get further into the gray area presented: Do you not know what the generally mean?

And finally, to put the statements in a gender neutral light: Heck, A friend got lost in the projects, and while digging for a map was mugged/car-jacked and the cops drilled him on why he was there for 1.5 hours, before taking him to ER, even though he was roughed up and bleeding.

So, in short: If you start from that point the discussion is already failed and it also insults everyone, not just the few that are that ignorant.

I also get pretty sick of this “slut” and “loose” jargon getting pinned on guys. In reality the women judge each other in that way more than guys by far.

Examples: “Can you believe she is wearing that? She looks like a slut!” “Those are not real and makes her look like a tramp.” Etc..etc

By kimberly

May 21, 2007 4:04 PM | Link to this

Jokester: Ruffled by a little tongue-in-cheek sarcasm, are we? (I forget the keybord symbol for that, but prefer to avoid tongue references, as they spur reactions that are then, somehow, MY fault…)

Re: Men and protection.. um, I’ll go on record as saying I’m FOR it, and by the way, it doesn’t diminish MY pleasure at all. HAHAHA!

By Archie

May 21, 2007 4:14 PM | Link to this

I also get pretty sick of this “slut” and “loose” jargon getting pinned on guys. In reality the women judge each other in that way more than guys by far.

I agree with those statements JokesOn. If I try to defend a certain woman I am then said to be going with that woman and on and on…

By NetBanker

May 21, 2007 4:18 PM | Link to this

Men and protection.. um, I’ll go on record as saying I’m FOR it, and by the way, it doesn’t diminish MY pleasure at all. But are there certain teyps of protection that can ADD to your pleasure?

By ProChoiceAmerica

May 21, 2007 4:22 PM | Link to this

I also get pretty sick of this “slut” and “loose” jargon getting pinned on guys.

When does this happen? When a guy has fathered a group of kids with different women? When a guy brags at baggin another chick, When a guy doesn’t even THINK to use protection? YES they are slut loose w******* men. Is that most men? Just about.

Sorry if that’s offensive Mr-On, it’s just a fact we women have known forever. You shouldn’t feel mad about it, we’re the ones that have to deal with it. lol

By Hey_Kim !

May 21, 2007 4:35 PM | Link to this

So why don’t guys think of protection? You’d think that 18 years of child support would remind them.

By JokesOn

May 21, 2007 4:37 PM | Link to this

Kim,

Jokester: Ruffled by a little tongue-in-cheek sarcasm, are we?

I find it quite careless seeing as it is a difficult subject already.

Whiley,

I also get pretty sick of this “slut” and “loose” jargon getting pinned on guys.

Sick of guys getting blamed for name-calling like “slut” and “loose.”

By Mrs.shauly

May 21, 2007 4:54 PM | Link to this

Hi I am Shauly 20 years old woman . I am interested your blew job . I like a job I am very sexy. and hot woman.

Please cont….to me and give me job.

Mrs.shauly

By JokesOn

May 21, 2007 5:00 PM | Link to this

Monica,

I think they missed a “what”: MySpace Revealing Predator Habits: Web site to let authorities know what sex offenders are doing online.

By Mrs.shauly

May 21, 2007 5:00 PM | Link to this

Hi I am Shauly 20 years old woman . I am interested your blew job . I like a job I am very sexy. and hot woman.

Please cont….to me and give me job.

Mrs.shauly

By JokesOn

May 21, 2007 5:05 PM | Link to this

Monica,

It actually reads correct (now): Site to let authorities know what sex offenders are doing online.

I caught an AJC ad that stated: Slightly used boys. Cheap! It was for a second hand store and should have read: “Slightly used boys cloths. Cheap!”

By 2D

May 22, 2007 8:45 AM | Link to this

I’m not sure about specific terms like “slut” or “loose” but I do believe that women are far more biting toward women than men ever are. Just look at workplace dynamics.

I’ve worked in balanced, mostly men and mostly women and the mostly women environment is the most caustic. Ever worked in an office that is 90-100 % female? It is the most petty, vindictive, exclusive working environment to potentially work in. The most productive, most welcoming environment is where most of the workers are men. No sexual tension and men tend to be more buddy-buddy with their co-workers.

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 9:24 AM | Link to this

I also get pretty sick of this “slut” and “loose” jargon getting pinned on guys.

When does this happen?

I have a response for you on this after thinking about it some. When a woman fools around a lot, women are the ones that call her names like slut. The only time I have heard guys refer to those names is when a girl cheated on her boyfriend.

Now, to answer you question of double standards: When a guy fools around he is called, by women once again, sexist and treating women as objects. {lozen is a perfect example of all this}

So, it seems you beef with why the terms like slut do not normally apply to guys, guys get much worse labels like misogynist. To further this line of thought, if a woman (like you whiley/lozen) is alright with casual sex another woman has with men; you applaud them and say it is perfectly fine. Yet when speaking of men in the same manner (having casual sex without wanting to commit) you condemn the behavior as sexist and degrading.

Alas, you do not really want to solve any issues or discover truth. You want to keep yelling that it is not fair.

By lozKimWhilMaraPCAon

May 22, 2007 10:01 AM | Link to this

Ever worked in an office that is 90-100 % female? It is the most petty, vindictive, exclusive working environment to potentially work in. The most productive, most welcoming environment is where most of the workers are men.

Really? I’ve never witnessed that at all. Anyone that is difficult to deal with in the workplace is just a difficult person. Doesn’t have anything to do with gender, not in this day & age.

I never refer to women as sluts, never have. Mainly because I do not view a woman that has sex as a slut.
It’s true young women throw that term around as much as young men use the term F* toward other guys. I don’t know how many times I’ve corrected kids on why they shouldn’t use those terms. Actually I correct adults when I hear those words. lol

The men I’ve known who sleep around a lot did so by lying to women, but that is usually what players do.

If you are up front about everything, man or woman I see no problem. If both parties discuss birth control & both use something (not leave it up to the woman without even talking about it), again no problems.

Men lie to get sex. Women have sex to get love. Human nature is a funny thing.

btw, the term slut is more damaging to women than calling a guy misogynist. Unless you are a woman you wouldn’t understand why & how. But that’s another discussion.

Once again why is everybody so obsessed with women’s sexuality, family planning & birthing options?

Here’s a good solution: Educate EVERYBODY on birth control, make it more open & socially acceptable to talk about & use birth control. Educate EVERYBODY on relationships between males & females, how to spot players & trouble. Make all family planning available !

There. A lot of problems just solved.

By Great Topic Change!

May 22, 2007 10:17 AM | Link to this

Men lie to get sex. Women have sex to get love.

Great new topic for the week! How is that working for every body? Men: Is it true and are you successful? Women: Does it work? Discuss.

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 10:35 AM | Link to this

There. A lot of problems just solved.

Whiley, now try not to stereotype men in your usual fashion and people may begin to listen to what you have to say.

It would really be quite nice to have another sane voice in the mix.

But there is Bullsh!t in your post still:

btw, the term slut is more damaging to women than calling a guy misogynist. Unless you are a woman you wouldn’t understand why & how. But that’s another discussion.

I find the word “sexist” much worse that a word like “slut,” and unlike your position it should be understandable by all, not only men.

Heck, you are one of the few people on the blog that call, both guys and women, HARSH names regularly.

And for example: I stated that the only use women have in my life now is for sexual relations and got ripped by you and lozen. Your actions/words contradict your last post.

By lozen

May 22, 2007 10:43 AM | Link to this

Some women are difficult to work with. Some men are difficult to work with. 2D, those are your generalizations about working with males and females. An all male situation is easier for you maybe but not for me. Hey Archie, the question is should abortion providers be required to show ultrasound to women having an abortion. Women would not have a choice in that situation; they would be forced to see the ultrasound. This is just another stepping stone for the right wing totalitarians. They realized they couldn’t get abortion banned out right (the majority of Americans are for abortion), so they changed their tactics and now are chipping away at abortion rights in little ways. This is one of the ways; the federal ban on late term abortion recently is another.

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 10:54 AM | Link to this

Great new topic for the week! How is that working for every body? Men: Is it true and are you successful? Women: Does it work? Discuss.

I think they are both lies. One is lying to another person and the other is lying to yourself. My opinion is that lying to yourself is much more dangerous.

By Giannis

May 22, 2007 11:18 AM | Link to this

I would love to hear more about this … zithromax

By lozKimWhilMaraPCAon

May 22, 2007 11:40 AM | Link to this

JokesOn, stop acting like just another dumb-male.

The intelligent men of the world realize there is a clear double standard between men & women when it comes to sex. (it’s changing thank goodness but it still exists)

The intelligent men of the world realize the term slut was invented for women to put down & degrade.

I don’t believe that calling a man sexist hurts as bad as calling a woman slut. I don’t think men are as hurt. Sorry just don’t see it. A lot of them laugh about it since they are sexually free, meaning they can seek out sex as openly as they want & aren’t critised too much for it. Hopefully that is changing due to society not being so accepting of male whatever behavior. Good will come out of it. I’m not saying we should all be made to feel bad about sex, just stop the boys will be boys mentality.

Some male behaviors are easy to stereotype because they are what they are. You can’t deny certain behaviors exist. Does the term “classic case” sound familiar?

A classic case of women (not all women, but a lot) use sex thinking love & a relationship will come out of it. Sometimes it does work, absolutely. But because there are many “classic cases” of players, it doesn’t work a lot of the time too. This works in reverse as well, I’m sure there are women players out there I just don’t know any.

JokesOn why do you get so angry at women who discuss men’s behavior? Can’t take it when the girls tell on ya? lol

Since you can’t experience or understand what women go through you have no right to call any of it BullSh!!t.

Now if you want to blog where men are not criticized & you can bash women all you want go somewhere else.

By kimberly

May 22, 2007 11:40 AM | Link to this

I have not observed a link between people who are difficult to work with and gender. Some people are just easier to get along with than others.

I never did understand, though, why some people think another person’s sex life (or reproductive choices) are any of their darn business. What’s with all the judgement? I’ll worry about mine; you worry about yours. If I want your freaking opinion on my personal choices, I’ll ask for it. Otherwise, please assume I’m not interested in what you think.

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 11:41 AM | Link to this

2D,

I have found the same things as you described, and I do my best not to let it influence my thinking. I am at times temped to just believe that that is the trend in general.

I often wonder why the proven sociological premise that “trends tend to clump in groups.” I always thought that was really a suave way of confirming that stereotypes do exist.

By kimberly

May 22, 2007 11:47 AM | Link to this

Whoa whoa whoa whoa…. WHAT?

Men LIE to get sex? Are you sh-tting me? You mean…. He DIDN’T really love me? Say it ain’t so!!!

Double-whammy: Sex won’t buy me love? (Choking on the giant hairball of shattered illusions and disbelief, rolling on floor, universe collapsing.)

By GreatTopicChange2

May 22, 2007 11:49 AM | Link to this

You’d have to re-write all teen movies in order to teach kids not to be players or thinking sex leads to romantic relationships.

LOL

By 2D

May 22, 2007 11:49 AM | Link to this

Y’all are correct. My comments about workplace environments are based on my experience and those of my spouse, friends, etc.

The comment was made, however, to back the point that generally speaking, women are far more critical and mean to each other than men are to women. Between the workplace, families, friends and hearing conversations in public, I do believe that to be the case.

The comment was not in any fashion a window into what environment is easier for me to work in. Since I compartmentalize my work and tend to not interract with co-workers outside of work functions, the interoffice crap doesn’t adversely effect my production. That doesn’t mean I don’t hear the “water cooler” talk or feel the general office vibe.

By Christoforos

May 22, 2007 11:56 AM | Link to this

hi, you have super site. zithromax

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 12:00 PM | Link to this

JokesOn why do you get so angry at women who discuss men’s behavior?

Because your info is inaccurate/hate inspired. You use double standards consistently along with childish name calling.

You are correct is stating that you do not generally see us whine about the stereotyping we receive; yet I will confront it on occasion before throwing up my hands and giving up.

Since you can’t experience or understand what women go through you have no right to call any of it BullSh!!t.

Yet, once again your double standard arises: You know what we guys think/feel and are motivated by, but there is no way we could understand where you are coming from.

You cannot even see the simple errors in your positions (no pun intended) much less the complexities that actually make us the same when all is considered.

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 12:05 PM | Link to this

Otherwise, please assume I’m not interested in what you think.

I suggest getting on a blog that does interest you then. It is completely normal to think that all involved in a discussion are interested in the opinions thrown around.

That is kind of the point, ya know?

By carter

May 22, 2007 12:06 PM | Link to this

Ladies if you don’t wish to have a child in modern times there are many options for those who aren’t aware there are birth control pills and for those who can’t tolerate the pills there are condoms and diaphrams and spermacides and there is the old standby simply cross your legs. If you are too stupid or lazy or just too much of a slut to say wait a minute get a condom there are the morning after pills. We can all understand abortion for health reasons either the mother or the child,theres always the adoption option. If for some other reason to obtain an abortion it must be that you are too stupid or slutty to have taken one of the other steps.It’s true that I happen to be a man therefore I don’t get pregnant,but I understand the english language I know the differance between yes and no and get a condom. This is too important to be stupid about,if you can’t afford a child or just don’t want one or don’t have time for one then please don’t get pregnant and kill the baby take responsibility for your actions.

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this

I wonder how many of us this applies to: A few guys are looking for the few girls that are not b!tches; but get used to the masses being b!tches and therefore sabotage the effort by treating most of that way.

And girls are in the same, but inverse, boat: Looking for a decent guy in the ocean of scum.

Each one ends up embodying exactly what they despise about the other in the end, thereby contributing to the scum masses; and all in a very insidious manner.

What a great satire we exist in.

By lozKimWhilMaraPCA

May 22, 2007 12:15 PM | Link to this

Because your info is inaccurate/hate inspired.

Because you can’t handle smart women who aren’t afraid of men like you. Go away dumb male.
Only intelligent men are wanted on a woman’s blog. If you don’t want women talking truth go to a porn site, women will agree with anything you say for $2 a minute.

ROFL KIM !

And WHAT MEN DON’T LIE JUST TO GET SEX???? WHAT????? But he said he loved me & even took me to meet his parents ! He said we have a future ! He currently has a pregnant girlfriend? OH I love him I’ll get him back he just needs understanding !

TEXT-BOOK BEHAVIOR. lol

By Not fooled

May 22, 2007 12:20 PM | Link to this

Somebody dug a hole under the fence. Woof.

By sheila

May 22, 2007 12:22 PM | Link to this

It nevers ceases to amaze how cruel, heartless and insensitive these pro-choice killers are. You don’t want to see the baby because then you will see how stupid you sound, talking about a clump of cells. By the time you know your pregnant, its more than a clump of cells, you cruel heartless killers. And your arguments just get dumber and dumber by the minute. Why should pro-lifers pay for your childrn. They didn’t create them. You laid down with God knows who and keep allowing yourselves to get pregnant. Learn restraint for petes sakes and stop expecting everyone to pay for the choices you make.

By sheila

May 22, 2007 12:23 PM | Link to this

It nevers ceases to amaze how cruel, heartless and insensitive these pro-choice killers are. You don’t want to see the baby because then you will see how stupid you sound, talking about a clump of cells. By the time you know your pregnant, its more than a clump of cells, you cruel heartless killers. And your arguments just get dumber and dumber by the minute. Why should pro-lifers pay for your childrn. They didn’t create them. You laid down with God knows who and keep allowing yourselves to get pregnant. Learn restraint for petes sakes and stop expecting everyone to pay for the choices you make.

By NetBanker

May 22, 2007 12:25 PM | Link to this

Hey JokesON…please see Carter’s post of 12:06pm for a perfect example of the use of the term slut in a perjorative manner that is clearly intended to be hurtful.

Carter…apparently you are aware that NONE of prevention methods you mention are 100% effective 100% of the time. What is your response to those cases? And why are you placing ALL of the responsibility on the woman for her actions? You don’t seem to hold men to the same standard of “if you don’t want her to get pregnant use a condom.”

By lozKimWhilMaraPCA

May 22, 2007 12:28 PM | Link to this

CarterOn, go back to your cell, nobody wants to hear your stupid crap. And please wear a condom if you don’t want or can’t afford a baby. Or keep your legs closed & stop acting like a slut. That is if you can actually get a woman to consent to having sex with you.

Dumb-male showing his ASZ today #2

ROFL !

By Kyle

May 22, 2007 12:31 PM | Link to this

I think you should show the ultrasound. I mean, if you were gonna shoot someone or stab them you would have to look at them, so why not make them look at the baby they are killing.

By sheila

May 22, 2007 12:34 PM | Link to this

Susie W******* Sounds to me like the probably isn’t the babies you and your family had or killed. Its you adults who obviously have no morals or conscious. For any “woman” to say she regrets every breath her child takes. thats a sick individual and the problem is not the child, its her trifling behind.

By NotFooled2

May 22, 2007 12:34 PM | Link to this

Sheila-jokeson-carter, go away nobody wants you here. Tell your husband & sons to stop creating kids with different mommas.

Dumb AZZ man posing as a woman #1

ROFL ! ! ! ! !

I think we should castrate all the right to lifers that continue to make babies with different women.

By sheila

May 22, 2007 12:34 PM | Link to this

Susie W******* Sounds to me like the probably isn’t the babies you and your family had or killed. Its you adults who obviously have no morals or conscious. For any “woman” to say she regrets every breath her child takes. thats a sick individual and the problem is not the child, its her trifling behind.

By MrRogers

May 22, 2007 12:39 PM | Link to this

There goes the neighborhood.

By JustMe

May 22, 2007 12:41 PM | Link to this

Realize that these “ultrasounds” are not free. Someone will have to pay for them. And, if it is a law then the tax payers will bear the burden. On this point alone, I disagree (as should all conservatives).

On another point, I do not think that this is even a law that can be really enforced. What happens if the women closes her eyes? Do we force the eyelids open? On this point, I disagree with the law.

On another point, I think that it is wrong to manipulate anyone into a decision. The woman already knows that she is pregnant - so what is the advantage of showing her an ultrasound except to attempt to manipulate her emotions? On this point, I disagree.

I am not saying that I agree or disagree with abortion or the right to choose or the right to life. I just disagree with this “ultrasound” requirement.

By NotFooled2

May 22, 2007 12:45 PM | Link to this

awwww Sheila’s angry women won’t date her.

Sheila, stop posing as an angry woman just to prove you’re a manly man & maybe someone will give you the time of day. Another thing that would help is wear some decent clothes & shave. A shower would help. Now go post somewhere else.

GreatTopicChange2 excellent point, kids learn more about dating from teen movies than anything else.

By NeighborhoodWatch

May 22, 2007 12:48 PM | Link to this

ROFL Sheila turned into Kyle !

Which one is it going to be Dumb-male? Do you want to be a top or bottom? Do you want to be the angry-dumb-male or stupid-stepford-wife?

ROFL ! ! ! ! !

By Jack

May 22, 2007 12:52 PM | Link to this

Men don’t mind when women lie to them to get sex. :)

By kimberly

May 22, 2007 1:22 PM | Link to this

Hey Jack, your wife said it was okay with her if you come over and take a look at my lawn mower this evening…..

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 1:23 PM | Link to this

Because you can’t handle smart women who aren’t afraid of men like you. Go away dumb male. Only intelligent men are wanted on a woman’s blog. If you don’t want women talking truth go to a porn site, women will agree with anything you say for $2 a minute.

Very intelligent response! You keep proving that you are incapable of reason and debate.

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 1:25 PM | Link to this

MrRogers,

You must be whiley since you cannot see that dog has not posted today yet.

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 1:26 PM | Link to this

NetB,

Hey JokesON…please see Carter’s post of 12:06pm for a perfect example of the use of the term slut in a perjorative manner that is clearly intended to be hurtful.

Where did I say it was not meant to be hurtful? Makes me wonder if someone is posting under your name.

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 1:31 PM | Link to this

It is obvious that when Whiley and lozen do not post that we can debate the thorny issues. Their arrival spurs on others who would normally discuss in a respectful manner.

You also cannot blame Dog on hostilities, because he was here three times now that it was commented on how it was a good blog day.

So if anyone SHOULD leave it would be mainly those two.

By Jack

May 22, 2007 1:47 PM | Link to this

Now I definitely need a fan! :)

By Rectilinear Propagation

May 22, 2007 1:54 PM | Link to this

What the heck is the ultrasound even supposed to show?

Most abortions are performed early in the pregnancy: it may very well look more like a blob in most cases than a baby. This may very well have the opposite effect that pro-life proponents think it will. Instead of dismissing all the reasons for the abortion at the sight of a beating heart the woman may end feeling relieved, if only so very VERY slightly, that at least she went to the clinic before the heart and brain developed.

By NeighborhoodWatch

May 22, 2007 2:23 PM | Link to this

Jack I’m your fan & that’s true ! “lie to me, lie to me ! Take advantage of me I love it”. So I said, “OK, give me your wallet I’ll be back in just a sec hon”.

It’s real easy for us to judge the young & horny. Which one of you were responsible ALL the time back then? Virgins till married? (that question is for the guys, we all know girls hold out till the wedding lol)

Rectilinear Propagation is so right. Since most abortions are done very early, what do they expect to harrass & guilt women with? Cracks me up what a waste of time & money.

By Monica

May 22, 2007 2:31 PM | Link to this

Actually, I had an ultrasound at 6 weeks (high risk pregnancy), and though it still looked like a little bean, I could see the heart beating. Just wanted to let you know.

By Rectilinear Propagation

May 22, 2007 2:52 PM | Link to this

I stand corrected by Monica as to when the heart is developed enough to be seen beating.

By NeighborhoodWatch

May 22, 2007 2:57 PM | Link to this

So what is the MEDICAL reason for an ultrasound? None.
This is simply “My morals are the only correct morals”.

The anti-choice believe in fairy tales & are too gullible to legislate anything based on their “morality”. Which is why mandatory sonograms are insane.

Here’s an idea, let’s legislate mandatory porn shows & male strippers for those “Purity Balls”, before those girls actually swear to be void of sexual feelings till marriage? Don’t they need to be completely informed of what they are about to consent to?

By 2D

May 22, 2007 3:02 PM | Link to this

Monica… I remember seeing heartbeats that early as well. The second ultrasound (I think was 12 weeks) showed a distinct head, face, appendages, etc. The sound really pounded the point home. Very small. Very human. Very powerful.

But…

6 Weeks? Why even discuss 6 weeks? Who could actually get to the baby killer in 6 weeks.

Most (I say most) women wouldn’t know for certain that they are pregnant until 3/4 weeks, then they have to decide to have the procedure, find a facility that would be suitable and schedule an appointment. Unless the decision was a “no-brainer”, the woman already new of a clinic and a slot was available, I dare say it would be nearly impossible to get in at six weeks.

Even then, the baby killer needs to make sure the pregnancy has advanced far enough to have the procedure done, less the poor woman would need to come back to finish the job. Unless technology has changed in the last few years, 6 weeks would be way too early.

By JokesON

May 22, 2007 3:06 PM | Link to this

Hey how about this?, mandatory large screen TV’s need to be installed in every fast food place. Gastric bypass surgeries, lipo & heart surgury should be shown so people are getting all the information they need to make the right decision.

By Jack

May 22, 2007 3:06 PM | Link to this

Not that kind of fan Dog. For some reason it got very warm in my cube after reading a portion of the blog. Need a cool breeze..

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 3:09 PM | Link to this

NeighborhoodWatch,

Here’s an idea, let’s legislate mandatory porn shows & male strippers for those “Purity Balls”,

You are quite sick for suggesting porn to teen girls.

By W2WPolice

May 22, 2007 3:13 PM | Link to this

Who could actually get to the baby killer in 6 weeks.

GO AWAY. You vagiana-envy whatever brainless bible beater you are.

Go away this is a woman’s blog. Go adopt the thousands of unwanted & abused children in this state before you mouth off your stupid crap that only causes grief to women & creates more unwanted & abused kids.

You’re right 6 weeks is too early. That’s becuase it’s not even CLOSE TO being a baby. NOW GO AWAY to your church compound & ask God why religious people are so stupid.

By Monica

May 22, 2007 3:16 PM | Link to this

So what is the MEDICAL reason for an ultrasound?

How about to demonstrate that it’s more than a group of cells? Take religion out of the picture. Medically, it is a developing human life.

By JokesON

May 22, 2007 3:20 PM | Link to this

Jokeson it was called SARCASM ! Do they have that on whatever planet you’re from?

Go away you are not wanted here.

By Scalia

May 22, 2007 3:20 PM | Link to this

That’s actually funny, JokesOn. They should show how a quadruple bypass looks, and how somebody looks when they have a heart attack. That way before they have their Good Morning Burger, and chili cheese fries on top of a blooming onion, they will know what they are getting themselves in to.

By Jack

May 22, 2007 3:29 PM | Link to this

“ask God why religious people are so stupid.”

Pretty general statement. Stupid is as stupid does. As was that post.

By JokesON

May 22, 2007 3:33 PM | Link to this

It’s a developing group of cells. Human “status” cannot be given to a group of cells the size of a peanut. It’s potential human. That’s IT. Nothing more.

There’s more to creating a person than just the 9 MONTHS of gestation & giving birth (which men don’t do so they all need to butt out). There is the feeding, care, housing, healthcare & raising. Which none of you anti-choice people care about at ALL.

Go away all your anti-choice, go preach your fairy tales on another blog.

Now, what else should the state make mandatory, OH what about alcohol? Mandatory viewing of DWI accidents. All the blood & gore. Anyone want a nice drink should be informed shouldn’t they?

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 3:34 PM | Link to this

Whiley,

You can call your sickness funny but in reality is sick.

You are used to living in your own sick world, so do not talk to me about what planet I am from.

By W2WPolice

May 22, 2007 3:38 PM | Link to this

Sorry Jack my temper rises sometimes. Sometime ya have to get mean when some people try to push others around.

“ask God why SOME religious people are so stupid.”

Honestly i do wonder why so many religious people aren’t too bright.

By Jack

May 22, 2007 3:40 PM | Link to this

They don’t show those in highschool anymore do they? I remember “Signal 30” Real footage from car wrecks, had all of us freaked out.

By lozen

May 22, 2007 3:41 PM | Link to this

SusieHomeMaker, you are a brave woman. You took responsibility for your life and did not bring a child into the world that you were much too young to have and couldn’t take care of. You did not allow one mistake to ruin your life. I salute you. I would give you a medal if I could!

Carter and Sheila: You must be some of those people who have been crippled by our puritanical heritage. When did you lose your natural urge for pleasure? You really can’t grasp the situation that often leads to mistakes. 99% of us have made mistakes in the throes of passion, esp. when we were young. The puritanically repressed however have never made such mistakes because they don’t dare to live. You judge others, call us names, tell us we’re irresponsible. Most of the people I’ve run into who think like you are so jealous because someone else is living their life and having fun. They have such repressive inhibitions they never experience passion. Would I change places with those people? Not in a million years! Have you ever spent a whole day smiling because last night was so sexy and so much fun? Go right ahead and judge me for that. Call me names if you like. One of the good things about getting older - you just don’t give a flying f—- what other people think anymore.

By JokesON

May 22, 2007 3:44 PM | Link to this

Scalia I’d love to see those wide screens at M-D’s. Triple bypass surgury with your Big Mac ! If you supersize you are required to watch the lipo show.

It does sound crazy doesn’t it? The GOVT forcing the unhealthy to view that stuff? It’s just as nutty with the sonogram crap.

Nobody gives a hoot about the innocent adults that are murdered by those murdering burgers & fries. Those borrito killers kill 24-7 & nothing is done. WHERE are the right to lifers when you really need them?

By Jack

May 22, 2007 3:45 PM | Link to this

Chuck may fit in that category but not Monica.

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 3:46 PM | Link to this

Monica,

So what is the MEDICAL reason for an ultrasound?

How about to demonstrate that it’s more than a group of cells? Take religion out of the picture. Medically, it is a developing human life.

And that is required in all surgeries to fully inform the patient, but that of course does not count here.

They want to live somewhere outside of logic and spirituality: It is called Never-never Land, where EVERYTHING is convenient.

By Jack

May 22, 2007 3:50 PM | Link to this

Lozen Hon. You just like a different type of religous experience. (snicker, snicker)

By Whiley

May 22, 2007 3:50 PM | Link to this

Honestly i do wonder why so many religious people aren’t too bright.

Pssst….Kettle. You are black ya know?

By Jack

May 22, 2007 3:58 PM | Link to this

Sometime ya have to get mean when some people try to push others around.

You are the one that began calling names. You know that right?

By lozen

May 22, 2007 3:59 PM | Link to this

Porn for the pre-teens. That is funny.

Can we let them participate?

By W2WPolice

May 22, 2007 3:59 PM | Link to this

They want to live somewhere outside of logic and spirituality: It is called Never-never Land, where EVERYTHING is convenient.

OH THAT’S where you live. Go back there where u belong.

Take religion out of the picture & it’s FOR SURE just a group of cells.

So the non-religious have to live by your nutty religious views? Yea only in YOUR neverland.

ROFL ! !

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 4:00 PM | Link to this

You are all getting really gross.

That is just too far.

By 2D

May 22, 2007 4:05 PM | Link to this

“You vagiana-envy whatever brainless bible beater you are.”

I think you meant “vagina-envy”. Brainless? Brainless people do not speak in clear coherent thoughts. I think each of mine have been. Yours on the other hand???

Bible-Beater? Never made one Biblical reference in the post, or in the past for that matter to support a particular point of view. Folks here would also probably say I have a much more open view of the text than most. I actually made several references, including just last week, that I would never legislate from the Bible. I want less government intervention, not more.

“Go away this is a woman’s blog. Go adopt the thousands of unwanted & abused children in this state before you mouth off your stupid crap…”

Do you think that only a man could be so opposed to terminating a pregnancy? If so, then you’re more ignorant than I thought.

I don’t have the capacity to adopt thousands of children, but I do have the ability to support through financial gifts programs that can and do provide care for those unfortunate children.

“You’re right 6 weeks is too early. That’s because it’s not even CLOSE TO being a baby.”

That makes NO sense. Too early for what? My statement clearly indicated 6 weeks was too early to terminate a pregnancy, unless of course technology has come a long way. I never said it was too early to be a human life.

“NOW GO AWAY to your church compound & ask God why religious people are so stupid.”

Now that’s inclusive isn’t it? Very open minded. I don’t live in a church compound, unless there is one ITP and my subdivision is actually one without my knowing. If so, I’d probably move.

Why would you call me stupid? Because you think I am a Bible thumper and all bible thumpers are stupid? OR Because when I look at an ultasound and see/hear a heartbeat that I see a human life where you don’t? Once you go through the same ultrsound experience and then several weeks later hold the baby that was in the ultrasound, I’m willing to bet you’d change your mind.

By JokesOn

May 22, 2007 4:08 PM | Link to this

So the non-religious have to live by your nutty religious views? Yea only in YOUR neverland.

Bzzz….Wrong. I am not religious.

Yet you want to introduce children to porn (men only at that). That must be a healthy world!

By Jack

May 22, 2007 4:09 PM | Link to this

Not my 3:58 but am guilty of being mean sometimes. Don’t recall calling names. I may have thought an earlier poster was Dog. if not, sorry.

By JokesON

May 22, 2007 4:12 PM | Link to this

Thank you lozen for getting my point. I KNOW JACK i was bad lol Have to protect my uterous so I come out fight-in.

JOkeson go away.

Ya think the Govt would require mandatory viewing of soldiers open wounds at recruiting offices? American soldiers blown to bits? Limbs blown off? Shouldn’t recruits be informed as well?

Or is it only stupid slutty women that need that type of “informing?”

Just wondering.

By Jack

May 22, 2007 4:23 PM | Link to this

Where is Chuck? this is right up his…….alley. Would like to hear from Chilao. Hope all is welll with you Chi.

Who’s on first anyway?

By Monica

May 22, 2007 4:24 PM | Link to this

Ya think the Govt would require mandatory viewing of soldiers open wounds at recruiting offices? American soldiers blown to bits? Limbs blown off? Shouldn’t recruits be informed as well?

Well, all one has to do is watch Saving Private Ryan or We Were Soldiers to get the point. :) I do see your point with this argument, however. Many eighteen year olds sign up with no clue as to what they face. Maybe there is some more information that they should have.

Thanks for the kind sentiments, Jack.

jokesON and/or W2W Police, why do you resort to personal attacks? Am I not just as entitled as you are to express my views on this blog? Why does my being against abortion make me a “brainless bible thumper” with “nutty religious views?”

By W2W Police

May 22, 2007 4:36 PM | Link to this

Monica as soon as someone says “baby killers”, etc or want to force EVERYBODY to go by only their moral codes, I consider them ignorant & dangerous.

I wonder often why the religious think the way they do. To just believe whatever they are told if the word God or Jesus is used in a sentence. There are so many different religions & each & everyone one thinks they are right & everybody else just needs to be changed. That’s not logical & free thinking to me. Sorry for the heat today. It’s so important women are educated & informed & have all family planning avail. I’m very passionate about it can you tell? Zero tolerence for the anti-choice.

By ok I'll jump in...

May 22, 2007 4:50 PM | Link to this

I don’t know nuthin’ exept in my more active days (young and pre-marriage) I was always so baby-phobic there wan’t a time I didn’t use effective precautions. One can be passionate and careful at the same time. I think most of the offenders who carelessly conceive babies will not be reading this blog anyway; they’re be getting drunk and getting it on without a second thought. Ooops … is that a baby in there? All I wanted was the big “O.” Uh-oh.

By Chilao

May 22, 2007 5:04 PM | Link to this

Hi Jack.

I am in and out, things/blog not really the same anymore.
(kinda round and round and round and round on the same ole…LOL)

Been doing great, though, thanks for asking. I read some here, but not always or even often.

funniest thing I read last week was some comment about a dog and a speeding bus….It must have been Friday or so..LOL

Reading an interesting book by some guy named Doctorow, THE MARCH, Sherman’s march to the sea from Atlanta. A friend recommended and I have been unable to put it down, almost done. good read.

Hi everyone else, Mara, Renee, Lozen, NetB. etc.

By Melissa_R_Adams384

May 22, 2007 7:43 PM | Link to this

 öåëîì ïîãîäû íå ñäåëàåò, íàäåþñü :) 141 ñïñ êîíñóëüòàíòïëþñ êîíñóëüòàíò ïëþñ èíòåðíåò âåðñèÿ

By wmsugt

May 23, 2007 3:08 AM | Link to this

http://www.oradea.edu/ ">Viagra Online

By wmsugt

May 23, 2007 3:09 AM | Link to this

http://www.oradea.edu/ ">Viagra Online

By wmsugt

May 23, 2007 3:09 AM | Link to this

http://www.oradea.edu/ ">Viagra Online

By Independent_thinker

May 23, 2007 8:54 AM | Link to this

A thousand years from now, the world will be 100% atheist, and people will read in history about how ‘new media’ became a decisive tool to providing a new voice of rational debate, thus rapidly destroying the silly remnants of silly myths. Note to theists: your great grandchildren will be laughing at you, just as we laugh at the ancient Greeks. Anti-abortion- rights folks will die out eventually.

By 2D

May 23, 2007 9:44 AM | Link to this

Yo Independent_Thinker… Ever watch South Park?

There was a great pair of episodes about that exact same topic. It was a spoof of Buck Rodgers.

Cartman wants a Nintendo WII but has to wait three weeks until it comes out to the stores. He is so jazzed, he can’t stand the wait so he decides to freeze himself in a snow drift and then have Butters thraw him out after the three weeks have passed.

Well, Butters can’t find him and he remains frozen for a couple of hundred years when he is found. The epsiode actually recreates the entire Buck Rodgers opening, complete with theme music. Turns out everyone is atheist and dedicated only to scientific principals. Problem is there are three factious atheist groups, all who believe they have the best science. One of the groups is an evolved species of sea lion, very hilarious.

I guess the point they are trying to make is, there will be differences and rifts within humanity regardless of religion. If everyone becomes atheist and scienc becomes the basis for everything, then the scientist will disagree on things. Sure there are accepted facts among all (i.e. how a covelant bond works), but greater concepts will cause divide no matter what.

1000 years from now we will be 100% atheist? That is the longings of a lonely atheist wishing others to join their misery. I doubt that religion is going anywhere in the next 1000 years. The Hebrew faith has lasted for several thousand years. Christianity for 2000. Islam for 1400 (I sincerely apologize if this way off to anyone of the Muslim faith).

I heard a study on the radio that indicated 80% of people retain the religious affiliation of their parents. That same study showed that people of faith out-reproduce others by nearly a 5 to 1 clip. If those numbers are correct, I doubt that the world will become 100% atheist.

As for the ancient Greeks… I don’t hink anyone laughs at them. In fact, their culture (and religion through the study of mythology) is taught in schools throughout the country. A movie about the ancient Greeks was just released and made huge money. Why? Because we as a society, particularly a Western society, appreciate their ideals and the fact that they stood up to tyranny.

I also believe the opposite about terminating a pregnancy. I believe that science will eventually convince people terminating a pregnancy is ending life and that practice as a legal option will eventually die out. Our technology is giving us a glimpse at the miracle/mechanics of life. Thirty-five years ago, they didn’t have ultra-sound. Now they can do 3D images in the womb. A baby was delivered at 24 weeks not that long ago. Perhaps they will be delivered even sooner in the future with advances in technology. Who knows where it will go? Not I, but I certainly see a trend. It is toward a world that sees life beginning closer and closer to conception.

By JokesOn

May 23, 2007 9:55 AM | Link to this

2D,

Nice response!

You and I think very alike, although our motivations are dis-similar. I do not adhere to any denomination of Christianity, but do derive much of the truths I have found from it - as well as the Beatles;)

By 2D

May 23, 2007 9:57 AM | Link to this

Chilao… I read/own that book as well. It is excellent. I’ve read several books about his life both before, during and after the war. Lots of myths, particularly about his conduct of the war were debunked.

I love Sherman. He was a fascinating individual. One of the few historical figures I would want to meet.

By 2D

May 23, 2007 10:10 AM | Link to this

JokesOn… The Beetles rock! I was listening to them on my way in to work. My dad got me the “One” CD for Christmas and it just makes me want to buy more of the old albums.

By 2D

May 23, 2007 10:16 AM | Link to this

JokesOn… Quick question. Why do you think our motivations are dissimilar?

By Archie

May 23, 2007 10:52 AM | Link to this

I didn’t log on yesterday but I agree with 2d and JokesOn about women being difficult and my comment comes from women saying just that very thing. Women tell me over and over again how difficult they are to deal with. This blog is the only place where I have read of men saying women are difficult to work with. There are differences between men and women and that’s just a fact. Now, I will say this to the men, I would rather work with women at times because we can be slack on details. I do think it works when men lie to get sex and I am amazed by that. Some of you women don’t even look at a man’s left hand, amazing. News flash, if a guy has a wedding ring on his left index finger 99 % of the time he is married and in many counties you can go to the internet and see if he’s married. My wedding date is public knowledge via computer and I wear my ring but I get asked if I am married so I could lie but I don’t. I like the women on this blog but you have no idea what I dealt with last weekend.

By aztum dnhba

May 23, 2007 10:59 AM | Link to this

csiv jgnmtkyb azns ihsql zcwj fvsxtmq rsqnd

By aztum dnhba

May 23, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this

csiv jgnmtkyb azns ihsql zcwj fvsxtmq rsqnd

By Mara

May 23, 2007 11:27 AM | Link to this

2D - “A baby was delivered at 24 weeks not that long ago. Perhaps they will be delivered even sooner in the future with advances in technology”

what they need to do is develop a procedure for zygote extraction and an artificial womb. At that point there would be no need for abortion.

By lozen

May 23, 2007 11:35 AM | Link to this

I did not write the 3:59 posted under my name yesterday!

By 2D

May 23, 2007 11:43 AM | Link to this

Mara… I think we have the ability to what you described only use another woman rather than an artifical womb, don’t they?

In any event, that’s not the point. The point was that we are trending to defining life closer and closer to conception. The pro-termination crowd always stands on the “viability” argument. As our technology allows viability closer and closer to conception, we can therefore define life closer and closer to conception and that will close the window for pregnancy termination further and further. All excellent outcomes of our technological advances.

By lozen

May 23, 2007 11:49 AM | Link to this

Hey Jack, you know me too well sweetie ;-). Hey Chilao, been missing you but understand why you don’t hang out here so much anymore. You would think these WtoW people could come up with better topics. They do go back over and over to the same old issues. However, we can take it anywhere we want it to go, no?

By 2D

May 23, 2007 11:52 AM | Link to this

Actually, the baby was delivered at < 23 weeks. Just reread the article.

By Jack

May 23, 2007 12:00 PM | Link to this

2D. Listen to Abbey Road and Sgt. Peppers. Those are my favorites. White Albumn too.

By Lyrazel

May 23, 2007 12:29 PM | Link to this

Ok, I did not know ultrasounds are part of procedure for abortion. Given that, I guess the topic is a mute point. I still have an issue with why should government involve itself in medical procedure above the decisions of a doctor? Of course certain safety issues are in place on the medical profession but when can the government say to a doctor: You Must Do This Operation or You Cannot Do This Operation? As I see it government medicine could instigate the slippery slope of mandatory abortions because the woman has too many children, is incarcerated, is immigrant of unwanted sort, has medical genetic defects, is mentally ill, is of wrong political party, etc. Do patients have any rights to keep government out of the operating room—or dont we?

By lozen

May 23, 2007 12:31 PM | Link to this

Well I guess one of the big differences here between those for and against abortion is who we identify with most. I identify most with women and not with zygotes and fetuses. Of course I was one of those too earlier but I don’t remember that part. I do remember that I was an unwanted child and I know what that does to both the woman (who has to care for and birth a child she doesn’t want) and the child. Of course abortion was illegal and the birth control pill wasn’t available. There were many unplanned, unwanted children in my grandmother’s and mother’s generations. So children were not really considered to be precious and they weren’t really appreciated. I didn’t want to become a mother at 19 but abortion was not an option. I was too young and naive and immature to be a good mother for my child. I loved her but I resented her because I wasn’t ready to give up my freedom for the next 20 years. Few 19 year old teenagers are able to be good mothers! I believe every person who comes into this world deserves to be truly wanted, to have a mother who is in love with him/her, to be fully cherished and appreciated. Women who are forced to have children before they’re ready simply cannot do that. Women can’t be free if we’re forced to carry every pregnancy to term. That is a fact. So abortion has to remain an option for us. Why don’t we have better birth control in 2007? Why are so many teens not educated about birth control? The same group of people who are against teaching young people how to protect themselves are the same group that want to ban abortion. That group thinks nobody should ever have sex outside of marriage, that everyone should follow their moral laws and anyone who doesn’t should suffer the consequences. Religious totalitarianism … I don’t believe we will have a 100% atheist population in the future. I would love to believe it, but human beings are too frightened of life and death for everyone to be atheists. Most people need to believe there’s a big daddy in the sky watching over them and taking care of them. And that they will continue after death as the little individual ego they are attached to now!

By lozen

May 23, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this

Lyrazel, good points as always. I remember when China was trying to limit population and women were allowed to have only one child. Everyone thought that was terrible. Well, if gov’t can make you have babies then they can make you not have babies. And this is why gov’t intrusion into the womb is so frightening whichever way it goes.

Jack, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah! Here comes the sun…. Blackbird … Rocky Raccoon! Everything is good.

By NetBanker

May 23, 2007 12:53 PM | Link to this

A baby was delivered at 24 weeks not that long ago. Perhaps they will be delivered even sooner in the future with advances in technology Sweet Jesus, I hope not after discussions with friends who work with premature babies and AIDS babies. Everyone thinks it’s great that the child survived despite such an early birth, but what we rarely hear about are the numerous and chronic medical issues that plague the person for the remainder of their life. These issues generally include some type of mental imparement.

Just because we CAN use technology to save a premature baby or severly injured child/adult doesn’t mean that we should if ‘quality of life’ has any meaning. I think this becomes a crux of the issue. My impression of ‘pro-lifers’ is that the quality of that life has no bearing on their position whatsoever. Just look at the Terri Schiavo case. If that was ‘life’ then I’d rather be dead or put out of my misery. The same goes for premature babies. H

ere’s a paradoxical thing about the pro-life crowd…when the basis of the argument is religious for not terminating a pregnancy due to the sacredness of life and especially ‘God’s will that the person became pregnant’ then why isn’t God’s will equally upheld for the dying and extremely ill? Why is it acceptable to thwart God’s will through the use of advanced medical techniques to keep someone ‘alive’ (even when that means in a permanent vegitative state with no hope of regaining cognitive functions), but not to terminate a potential life? If abortion is playing God, then isn’t going to extreme medical measures to keep someone from dying also playing God? Maybe pro-life isn’t the right descriptive name for the group. Maybe it should be that they are anti-death…which leads to another f’d up paradox that someone with a strong religious belief shouldn’t be afraid to die or of death at all even for another person.

By NetBanker

May 23, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this

gov’t intrusion into the womb is so frightening whichever way it goes Here’s another thought for the men…since women are starting to outstip men in numbers of births and higher education there will likley come a day when women are running things. At that point they WILL take back control of their wombs and men will need to watch out for their testicals. You’ve had too many kids…snip, snip for you! You don’t support the children you have…snip! You’re a dullard and a loser…snip! We should remember what’s good for the goose is good for the gander….which is just another way of phrasing The Golden Rule.

By lozen

May 23, 2007 1:13 PM | Link to this

And Net straight to the point: “…which leads to another f’d up paradox that someone with a strong religious belief shouldn’t be afraid to die or of death at all even for another person.” That is something that has always bothered me too. I think I have more faith than most people who call themselves christians.

By Jack

May 23, 2007 1:25 PM | Link to this

One should not want to die but you shouldn’t fear it either. I almost drowned as a teen and have not feared death ever since. Think about it. Life’s a b!tch and then you die. When you die, no more stress, needs, or wants. This vessel we occupy is temporary. The next level should be much better.

By Bruce

May 23, 2007 1:29 PM | Link to this

Hey guys, thought I would drop by and see if anything had changed. I don’t have time to post like I used to but sure wish I did. I really miss you guys.

By JokesOn

May 23, 2007 1:30 PM | Link to this

Well I guess one of the big differences here between those for and against abortion is who we identify with most.

The valid debate on abortion is regarding rights.

Women would never have gotten equal right if everyone voted in a manner of who they identified with most, so your logic is quite flawed.

By 2D

May 23, 2007 1:49 PM | Link to this

NetB… Just a couple of responses…

Your post asumes that people use religious grounds to in the effor to prevent or severely curtail (which is my goal) legal termination of pregnancy. Some do, some don’t. I don’t. While I am a person of faith, my opposition to the current state of pregnancy termination is not based solely in my belief in God. It is based more in my experience of seeing my daughter’s beating heart on an ultrasound at 6 weeks in the womb and then holding her after she was born. That experience changed my life and my position.

Also…

I believe that we can have all sorts of discussions on how best to use our technology, and quite frankly, I would probably agree with you on many of those points. The point about the baby surviving at < 23 weeks is merely a statement that our technology is trending us toward the idea that life begins closer and closer to conception. Nothing more.

OMT…

Great post about the women outnumbering men. The only issue is that outside of rape, the woman already has control over her womb. It’s not like she wakes up one morning, and whoa, finds herself pregnant. She was there when it happened. She could have taken any one of the following precautions.

She can opt to not have sex. She can opt to take birth control pills. She can opt to use a diaphragm. She can opt to not have sex during a few days in her menstrual cycle. She can opt to not have sex without a condom. She can be more selective with whom she has sex. She can… Well you get the point. Are any one of these full proof? Only one. But the others if used and especially if used in tandem can virtually ensure that a pregnancy will not occur. So, again, the woman already has control over her womb. That being said…

I am with you that dudes who rape, should have their testes whacked. Dudes who are pedophiles, should have their testes whacked. Dudes who have families all over the place, should have their tubes whacked. Dudes who are deadbeat dads, should have their tubes whacked.

While women do have ultimate control, men should never, EVER get off scott free. You are right… What’s good for the goose is definitely good for the gander.

By Lyrazel

May 23, 2007 1:57 PM | Link to this

Lozen your words about China really hits a great point. As we know they have relaxed the mandatory 1-child per family after so many practiced infanticide to remove girl children….see what government meddling does? Now China has a glut of males who need dates on Saturday night, a surging gay population and now needs to import brides! Mao is rolling in his tomb…

Life is not a b***, Jack. Life is sweet with bittersweet moments occurring at random intervals when we pretend we control our destiny. The fickle finger of fate, the giant raspberry of blessings be…but b***…hard to blame a female dog for personal issues, right?

By Lyrazel

May 23, 2007 2:02 PM | Link to this

2D said: I am with you that dudes who rape, should have their testes whacked.

Ah but what if found innocent in 10 years? I dont know of any operation that replaces testicles…super glue, anyone?

By JokesOn

May 23, 2007 2:08 PM | Link to this

Dudes who have families all over the place, should have their tubes whacked.

While I do agree with this statement, I doubt that many on here would have the same zeal regarding women.

I would like to hear lozen’s response to this.

By JokesOn

May 23, 2007 2:28 PM | Link to this

I am with you that dudes who rape, should have their testes whacked.

I understood “whacked” as a general procedure like tubes tied…

By funnyPicsheereasd

May 23, 2007 2:49 PM | Link to this

[url=http://www.xtopsearch.info/tramadol.htm]1[/url] [url=http://www.xtopsearch.info/tramadol.htm]Funny Pictures here[/url]

By Monica

May 23, 2007 3:51 PM | Link to this

Can I change the topic for a second?

My son just got off the bus (he comes to the high school with other teacher’s kids), and I’m looking through his backpack and find the “first grade readiness” folder. I just realized that my “baby” is going to be in first grade! Anyone have a hanky handy?

By JokesOn

May 23, 2007 4:02 PM | Link to this

Monica,

That is sweet, congrats.

By NetBanker

May 23, 2007 4:13 PM | Link to this

Deep breath, Monica! They all grow up sometime…it’s just some moments are more illuminating than others. Before you know it you’ll be sending him off for his freshman year in college.

2D…I agree that not everyone uses religion as their basis which is why I included the phrase “when the basis of the argument is religious”

While we’re talking about reproductive health and medical technologies and all….thoughts on fertility treatments? Basically, I’m opposed to them because I think they’re selfish and egotistical. I figure that if you’re unable to have biological children and you’re driven to be a parent then your assigned role in the universe is to adopt a child. They need a parent, you needed to be one, so perfect match! Could our vanity and selfishness in having one’s ‘own’ child be a reason for the numbers of unadopted children in this country and the world?

By Monica'sBaby

May 23, 2007 4:16 PM | Link to this

And I will be graduating from college next week.

By lozen

May 23, 2007 4:20 PM | Link to this

Jokeson: Women would never have gotten equal right if everyone voted in a manner of who they identified with most, so your logic is quite flawed. That’s your opinion. Mine is, women would never have gotten the vote if they hadn’t marched in the streets, gone to prison, been force fed during hunger strikes until some died, chained themselves to govment bldgs, stood in front of the White House holding signs that embarrassed the prez, gone on hundreds of speaking tours and continually put pressure on the gov-ment until they caved in.

Show me a woman who has families all over the place (how many houses can one woman clean in a day?) and I’ll tell you my opinion.

By JokesOn

May 23, 2007 4:23 PM | Link to this

Could our vanity and selfishness in having one’s ‘own’ child be a reason for the numbers of unadopted children in this country and the world?

I would have thought that was a given, no?

Even in the case of the 60 year old that just gave birth to twins via in-vitro could have adopted. Her sole reasoning was that her 6 year old needed siblings of a similar age. He has two other siblings, but 33 years old and a (i think) twenty-something year old.

By Jack

May 23, 2007 4:36 PM | Link to this

Anyone having a baby at that age is selfish. They aren’t thinking of the child, only themselves. Ridiculous!

By lozen

May 23, 2007 5:02 PM | Link to this

Ah Jack just think about having a “religious experience” tonight. That’ll cheer you up.

By JokesOn

May 24, 2007 9:05 AM | Link to this

Show me a woman who has families all over the place (how many houses can one woman clean in a day?) and I’ll tell you my opinion.

You have never heard of a woman who has children by three different men? You know better than that.

By Scalia

May 24, 2007 9:20 AM | Link to this

I know a woman that has three kids by three different men. A woman that has six kids by one guy, and two more by her new husband. Another woman that has one kid by one man, and another kid by another. So really, it is possible to have families all over the place.

By JokesOn

May 24, 2007 10:08 AM | Link to this

Scalia,

So really, it is possible to have families all over the place.

The existence of what you and I described is well known.

That is the main difference between lozen and I. I have no problem criticizing either gender - they BOTH deserve it in many, but often different, ways.

She is focused only on criticizing men because we are evil ones.

I would actually like her to prove me wrong. Not only once though, but continually.

By JokesOn

May 24, 2007 10:14 AM | Link to this

and I. I have

Should read: and I is that I have

By lozen

May 24, 2007 10:18 AM | Link to this

Well I guess I misunderstood. When you say “families all over the place” I took that to mean men who leave their children all over the place and don’t take care of them, and not women who are taking care of several children they’ve had with several different men. My bad.

By Deborah Sanders

May 24, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this

I have been an abortion advocate for the past 30 years. I am not a doctor, so I cannot dispute what Diane Glass is saying about health risks to the mother. But I do know I recently watched a special on PBS about the development of an embryo and, subsequently, looked up more information on the internet. I now support showing the ultrasound to pregnant women because most of them are not aware of when a blastocyst truly becomes a “baby.” If an abortion is performed prior to the 8th week of pregnancy, then it is a “bunch of cells” as Ms. Glass says. But, beyond the 8th week, that bunch of cells is developing a nervous system, has a heart, has tiny arms and legs and, in fact, is a “baby” as we recognize the term. Also, anything done beyond 12 weeks is felt by that child - would anyone knowingly take a child and crush its head to kill it as they do in partial-birth abortions? I don’t think so. Therefore, the more information a person has will enable them/her to make an informed choice. And, more importantly I think, make the “day after” pill available to everyone - that process will keep our fellow sisters from having to make such a painful choice.

By JokesOn

May 24, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this

lozen,

No problem, we all make mistakes - email/blogs are notorious for this.

Given the clarification, what is your response?

By Jack

May 24, 2007 10:40 AM | Link to this

I’m a green eyed Leo. I think about religious experiences all of the time. :)

By Archie

May 24, 2007 10:41 AM | Link to this

That is the main difference between lozen and I. I have no problem criticizing either gender - they BOTH deserve it in many, but often different, ways.

JokesOn, that is a problem with some women but mainly on this blog because many women I know criticize women harshly. I have been told repeatedly by women that two grown women can’t stay in the same house and you wonder how, we,husbands deal with them. My female co-worker said women are crazy in their 20’s and early 30’s. I have criticized men for not using protection and not one man objected because we know it’s true but if deliver the same type of criticism on this blog to women you get in trouble. I used to defend Justin because he had the right to vent even if it was annoying and it was at times. I know a man who refuses,refuses to use a condom, he would rather use the withdrawal method, now he deserves criticism and I will give it to him even it does no good but you have to criticize women for some of the choices they make.

By kimberly

May 24, 2007 11:04 AM | Link to this

Leos are HOT!

I know a man who refuses,refuses to use a condom. Hey Archie! Um… there’s more than one of those out there. I’m just sayin’.

By JokesOn

May 24, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this

Yeah Archie,

It is difficult and sometimes overly frustrating.

So, what is a good topic for the day….anyone?

Anyone find it funny that we (humans) are (by the bibles stance) have free will, but are one of the animals on earth NOT able to choose when to birth.

By “choose to birth” I am referring to the ability to hold sperm for multiple cycles and fertilize eggs at will - or self fertilization if no mates are around.

Definitely something that should be pursued by science even if not applicable for many years.

By Jack

May 24, 2007 11:43 AM | Link to this

Might take the fun out of it JokesOn. I’m sure glad that humans can do it more than twice a year unlike many of our animal friends.

By WomenNotCrazy

May 24, 2007 11:43 AM | Link to this

As crazy as some of you like to claim women are, we can’t even be in the same room with other women apparently. Women DO NOT go on shooting rampages, they do NOT murder their entire family because the marriage is breaking up, they do NOT kidnap children to commit sexual assault & murder, they DO NOT shoot up schools & places of work, they do NOT commit violent crime anywhere NEAR THE RATE OF MEN. Men are not criticized ENOUGH.

ewwwwww women are catty & impossible to work with! Is that the best you can come up with? Any specifics examples of crazy women? What does a women need to do before she is considered crazy? What does a man need to do to be considered crazy?

There are so many examples like this just in this state, too many to list all for today:

A former Forsyth County sheriff’s deputy was arrested Wednesday night on multiple child pornography charges. An Atlanta man was sentenced Monday to life in prison for shooting to death a father of six during an attempted robbery. A 54-year-old federal employee from Virginia has been charged with using the Internet to entice a person, who he thought was a 13-year-old Georgia girl, for sex, the U.S. Attorney’s Office said. Dismembered body identified Sandy Springs man found shot in head Stolen car inquiry leads to meth labs Cook charged with armed robberies in Peachtree City Texas man arrested in sex-predator case Peachtree City police make 20th sex sting arrest Man sought in Norcross shooting Teen charged with rape, kidnapping Cumming man indicted in huge drug operation Murder suspect held without bond Suspect held in Cobb slaying Man stabbed to death in apparent case of road rage Fulton County prosecutors Tuesday said they would seek the death penalty for two men charged with last month’s murders of two teenage cousins.

WOMEN are crazy????????? ROFL ! ! !

By WomenNotCrazy

May 24, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this

I take back what I just posted. Women are crazy idiots and I am crazy as they come.

I love to screw with you guys by railing you for other guys negative actions while denying any responsibilty for myself. Or for other females. rofl!!

It is just my way of compilations for my retarded emotional growth. And you HAVE to listen to me lol!

By JokesOn

May 24, 2007 11:55 AM | Link to this

Looks like the Guru of crazy just entered!

Damn, there goes any decent debate.

By WomenNotCrazy

May 24, 2007 12:04 PM | Link to this

Nice post Jokeson, you prove again why men need to be critisized more. Thank you for posting in my name does that make you feel like a big strong man?

Love how guys like you work, if anybody critisizes men, you pounce right on them.

Go away dumb-male.

I’m still wondering what a woman has to say or do to be considered crazy or hard to work with.

I’ve yet to hear one person anywhere name one of those men who download child porn on their work computer crazy. I would think that getting excited about illegal child porn is crazy wouldn’t you?

Or is the term crazy only used to describe women?

By Archie

May 24, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this

Hey Kimberly— know a man who refuses,refuses to use a condom. Hey Archie! Um… there’s more than one of those out there. I’m just sayin’. I could have said men but I was thinking about a certain barber at the time. Hey WomenNotCrazy, tell that to your fellow females who keep telling me that you are crazy. If you read my post I specifically stated that women spout criticisms about women all the time. It is only on this blog that someone gives examples of men’s crimes to make a point, only on this blog.

Jack, I am glad humans get to do it more than twice a year,too.

Kimberly I really like your sense of humor and I say that because I read some of your posts this week when I was unable to post. How about a topic on old-age driving or cellphone driving? An 84 year-old accidently killed herself yesterday while driving at the post office here in Columbia. How about church’s requiring you to give them a W-2?

By NetBanker

May 24, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this

I’m veering waaaaayyy off topic here, but had to share this little ditty

Lord have mercy our government at ‘work’ seemingly laying some interesting claims about the effectiveness of our programs to confront global climate change:

“A mild winter, followed by a cool summer caused U.S. carbon dioxide emissions to decline last year, the Energy Department said Wednesday. The results were hailed by the White House as support for its global warming policies. Preliminary data shows a 1.3 percent decline in the amount of heat-trapping carbon dioxide released in 2006 from energy-related sources, the first decline in 11 years and the biggest decline since 1990, the department’s Energy Information Administration said. President Bush issued a statement hailing the drop in the principal “greenhouse gas” that scientists have linked to a warming of the earth. “We are effectively confronting the important challenge of global climate change through regulations, public-private partnerships, incentives and strong economic investments,” Bush said.”

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/printedition/2007/05/24/natbriefs0524a.html

By Monica

May 24, 2007 12:18 PM | Link to this

Any specifics examples of crazy women? What does a women need to do before she is considered crazy?

How about the woman who strapped her two children in seatbelts in a car and sent them to their deaths in the lake? And then lied about it on national television? I think she blamed it on a male car-jacker.

How about the woman here in Atlanta who killed both of her husbands with anti-freeze?

Don’t forget the woman in Texas who placed a hit on the cheerleader who beat out her daughter for a spot on the squad.

Crazy people come in both genders; we have prime examples of that on this blog!

By Jack

May 24, 2007 12:31 PM | Link to this

Lions and tigers and bears! Oh My!

By Jack

May 24, 2007 12:36 PM | Link to this

How bout the woman who watchted as her son and husband abducted, sodomized and killed an 8 year old who lived in the same trailer park? (all three should be removed from the gene pool)

By Owl

May 24, 2007 12:40 PM | Link to this

Crazy people come in both genders; we have prime examples of that on this blog

Nah, can’t be. Who Who Who?

By Scalia

May 24, 2007 12:47 PM | Link to this

Andrea Yates and the woman that killed her boyfriends little girl(that was on the news yesterday) are two more examples.

How about the women that burn down their boyfriends houses (Left Eye)? Women that drive cars into their boyfriend’s garage doors (my friend’s ex-girlfriend), the examples go on and on.

So like Monica said, crazy comes in both genders. And don’t get me started on lesbian relationships.

By OhNo

May 24, 2007 12:48 PM | Link to this

Female Teacher of the Year charged in “kid” sex with young girl:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crimefile/2007/05/24/2007-05-24teacheroftheyearischargedinkidse.html

By kimberly

May 24, 2007 1:15 PM | Link to this

I’m crazy. So? You wanna make something of it?

But what’s up with these female teachers, anyway? I totally don’t get it. 1) Leave the kids alone! What’s so difficult about that? 2) Men are not holding their d—ks hostage. Hello!! If you need one, um… there’s plenty around from which to choose. You don’t need to manipulate and tarnish a child!!!

By Jack

May 24, 2007 1:28 PM | Link to this

I was never lucky enough to have one of those teachers.

By Monica

May 24, 2007 1:30 PM | Link to this

I’m with ya on that one, Kimberly…

By JokesOn

May 24, 2007 1:31 PM | Link to this

Thank you for posting in my name does that make you feel like a big strong man?

I was hoping you would get offended at an action you did multiple times now.lol

By WomenNotCrazy

May 24, 2007 1:38 PM | Link to this

Ok can anyone give any examples of a woman going on a shooting rampage, raping, killing, going on line to find sex with a 13 year old in today’s news? Any this week? Not something that happened a few years ago? You can’t keep using the same examples of the few women that commit those types of crimes. If that’s the case then i’ll need a separate website to list all the past & daily additions of horrific crimes men are doing.

Oh but it is WOMEN that are crazy right? lol

Kimberly I agree that female teachers going after teen boys are crazy. There are too many guys of legal age that will give it up easily.

I’m not crazy because I tell the truth & get angry about it. Men are allowed all degrees of anger & are actually respected for it.

An angry woman is not crazy. An angry woman fed up with what men do is not crazy.

Now what exactly does a woman have to do in the work place to be considered crazy?

By NetBanker

May 24, 2007 1:38 PM | Link to this

My sypmathies, Jack! LOL!! Do you think that anadolescent or teen boy who is ‘molested’ by an older female really feels sexually victimized instead of lucky?

By Jack

May 24, 2007 1:52 PM | Link to this

The fell lucky cause they always brag about it to their peers and the teacher ends up getting caught. Mum would be the word.

By kimberly

May 24, 2007 2:03 PM | Link to this

Now what exactly does a woman have to do in the work place to be considered crazy?

Aw, MAN! It’s such a great story, too! But if I tell, I could be identified. Sorry.

By Archie

May 24, 2007 2:04 PM | Link to this

Men are not holding their d—ks hostage. Hello!! If you need one, um… there’s plenty around from which to choose

Kimberly, those statements are so true and funny!!! Kimberly I have been trying to say certain things about us,men but people only pay attention to the criticisms of women. Men do crazy stuff like come home with a new girlfriend’s number in their wallet and leave the wallet unlocked on a dresser as if somehow the wife is never going to look in that wallet. Now that’s crazy. I did this before— on the phone talking to your girlfriend while at another girlfriend’s house, just plain crazy. I know of women that got mad at a guy for cheating—but they knew he had a wife who he cheated so why expect loyalty, crazy. One woman sent me a dirty joke and when did the same to her, she acted as if she were so offended. That caused me to be really careful in the workplace because the sexual harassment thing. My dirty joke was sent to me by… a minister, a female minister that has never uttered a profane word in the 7 years I have known her so the joke wasn’t too dirty. How about the woman that slept with the minister(Paulk) for 14 years but she had enough sense to come over when his wife wasn’t home, and she claimed she was brainwashed, just plain crazy. Everybody knows violence is wrong but when people think about relationships in and out of the workplace that’s when people call women crazy because they can’t think of another word. For 3rd time today the primary people I have heard call women crazy are other women.

By Archie

May 24, 2007 2:19 PM | Link to this

There is a news story about a woman posting a message on a mattress filled with profanities about her boyfriend’s cheating. Now that is crazy. The story is out of Cleveland. An Indianapolis story involves a woman hitting a police officer riding his motorcycle and when they caught up to the woman she gets out of her car and runs. There is a lady with an umbrella open inside my office and another lady calls someone’s name when she sneezes. If they see this written they know I am telling the truth.

By Gesundheit

May 24, 2007 2:36 PM | Link to this

She’s calling me, she’s calling my name.

By Scalia

May 24, 2007 2:52 PM | Link to this

Oh pleaze! Men are not allowed to have the degrees of emotions that women are allowed. If a man cries, he is considered weak. A man cannot feel sad. He once again is considered weak. He cannot be too happy because he is gay. There are several books out talking about how raising boys and how boys are expected to be macho, and void of feelings like compassion, etc. Men have two emotions: stoic and angry. That is why more women are attracted to the alpha male with the big muscles more than the studious male with glasses in the corner that weighs 100 lbs wet. If you don’t believe it, go to any high school or middle school. What guys are getting the most looks and giggles from girls?

By JokesOn

May 24, 2007 3:01 PM | Link to this

NetB,

Do you think that anadolescent or teen boy who is ‘molested’ by an older female really feels sexually victimized instead of lucky?

It really depends. When it is your friends mom (often the case) I do not think the kid feels healthy about the situation. Or when the lady gets pregnant and mad the the 15 year old cannot provide for their “family.” Or when it is an aunt….etc.

Would you, as a gay man, think that because a kid is gay that having an encounter with a 45 year old man would be viewed as “lucky?”

I doubt it is THAT simple.

By Monica

May 24, 2007 3:03 PM | Link to this

If a man cries, he is considered weak.

In the words of Jack Handy, “It takes a big man to cry, but it takes an even bigger man to laugh at that man.”

Seriously, Scalia, I agree with your statements. Luckily, my guy isn’t afraid to cry or express his emotions.

I know that many of you will start convulsing when I say James Dobson’s name, but his book, Bringing Up Boys, is very good.

By kimberly

May 24, 2007 3:06 PM | Link to this

Scalia, whoa whoa, slow down, buddy! I’ll not begrudge you any emotion; neither will most women I know. You have a right to your feelings!! As for those books, look to James Dobson and his ilk, on tips for raising “heterosexual sons.” Sure, you’d be right to assume I can’t stand a whiny-a— guy, but then you probably wouldn’t tolerate a whiny-a— woman, either! Men and women ARE different… women tend to be more vocal, and men tend to bottle it up more, but you certainly have every right to articulate your opinions AND your feelings! As for muscles… Ooooo, baby! What’s your point? {;->

By JokesOn

May 24, 2007 3:10 PM | Link to this

I’m not crazy because I tell the truth & get angry about it.

No, you are crazy because you are totally irrational.

Example: It’s so important women are educated & informed & have all family planning avail.

Yet you do not even know the function of testosterone, the reversible bc procedures avail, the actual percentages of violent male offenders as compared to the whole male population (<1%) - yet state positions as though you do and rail against the proof you are dead wrong.

…THEN you act exactly like those you despise: sexist and sick.

That is why you are crazy and shooed aside.

By JokesOn

May 24, 2007 3:33 PM | Link to this

Monica,

Seriously, Scalia, I agree with your statements. Luckily, my guy isn’t afraid to cry or express his emotions.

And he seems to be a very lucky guy to have a partner as rational, feminine, yet pro-woman as you are.

By Lucy

May 24, 2007 3:41 PM | Link to this

These religious freaks wear me out. If everyone would just mind their own business and get out of our bedrooms and out of our lives, this would be a much happier place to live.

Next thing you know, they’ll be requiring women to wear veils and long dresses.

Sometimes pregnancies occur by accident. A condom could break or you forget to take your pill OR you just get pregnant. Now, perhaps you aleady have two children and are stuggling to provide for them. Choosing an abortion seems the kinder thing to do as the little soul can go back to be with Jesus and perhaps come another day (no, certainly a Christian would not understand this but a Buddhist may). Why make it even harder on the parents and the two children who are already born? Do you think for one minute that making a choice like that by a loving Mother or Father would be EASY? Sometimes you have to use your brain instead of your emotions, especially when you have options. Not so many years ago, a desperate woman would find someone in a back alley to do this and then perhaps even die.

So, get OUT of my womb and if I want to see an ultrasound, I’ll ask. If I don’t then I won’t. It’s none of ANYONE’s business but mine. You get out of my womb and I’ll stay out of your church.

By JokesOn

May 24, 2007 4:17 PM | Link to this

Jack, I am glad humans get to do it more than twice a year,too.

That was not my point. Female octopus’ (octopi?) are able to keep the sperm separate from the eggs for many cycles until they CHOOSE to fertilize those eggs. They can also discard it all-together.

And if there are no desirable males many creatures (now some large sharks) can fertilize the eggs themselves (clones basically) and give birth.

That is the type of choice I was referring to.

By Crime

May 24, 2007 4:27 PM | Link to this

There are currently about 1.5 million people in state and Federal prisons and jails throughout the United States. At the current time, at least 24 states are under Federal court orders to relieve prison overcrowding. The US with a population approaching 300 million has an estimated 600,000 registered sex offenders and quite possibly some multiple of that who are unknown and unregistered.

Each & everyone of these men have at LEAST one victim, including family & friends that are affected by their crimes. It is truly tragic men are not held responsible as a group for this type of terrorism, which is exactly what it is. Letting men “off the hook”, a little slap on the wrist is what forces people to stay behind locked doors & on guard with every man at every moment.

Confusing is the energy the Pro-Life movement has when it concerns women’s reproductive choice & family planning. Why is the emphasis on women instead of the many men who pray upon the living & make life difficult for everyone?

By Shrommer

May 24, 2007 4:29 PM | Link to this

Responding to Lyrazel, May 21, why should the Church be the only group with interest in adopting? (And by the way, I would bet that most adoptions in the world are to Christian parents anyway, and Christians are the inventors of orphanages and foster care.) Why isn’t there a boom of homosexual couples wanting to adopt babies that other people do not want, since homosexual couples are unable to procreate their own children for themselves? Why not let the children be born for the sake of the homosexual couples, and let them pay the price as parents if they really want to get married and have families?

By lozen

May 24, 2007 4:38 PM | Link to this

Shrommer, you really think homosexuals find it easy (or even possible) to adopt children in the U.S.? If you do, you don’t know any homosexuals! Do you think it’s easy for a single person to adopt children in the U.S.? Ditto. Do you think it’s easy for a couple over 40 to adopt a child? Ditto!

By Shrommer

May 24, 2007 4:41 PM | Link to this

There are women who give birth to their babies who perhaps wish later on that they had aborted, and there are women who have aborted and later on regret that decision as well, and wish they had let their baby live. So there is no perfect choice which is right for the individual forever, even after that choice is made.

Pro-life people see an enemy in abortion and in those who help mothers have abortions. Pro-choice people, on the other hand, really have no problem with life being one of the choices alongside of abortion. A pro-choice person should not be the least bit bothered when a pro-life person convinces a mother to carry the baby to term, whether that is with the help of ultrasound, or by any other honest means. The only problem should be if misleading or dishonest information is given.

I say, Diane should have her way concerning women needing to know the risks and costs of having a baby, and Shaunti should have her way with women seeing the ultrasound. The two types of information are not mutually exclusive, and should both be of assistance in helping mothers make the best choice for themselves.

There is no way to keep mothers from regretting their decisions later on, but there is a way to keep mothers from basing their regrets on “if only I had known the truth at the time”. That way is to let mothers know and see the truth from the very beginning.

Persuasion is not the enemy; ignorance is the enemy. For the pro-choice person, there is no wrong choice, except the choice to keep the mothers in the dark about their babies.

By JokesOn

May 24, 2007 4:41 PM | Link to this

Crime = Whiley using yet another name.

Another example of crazy: It is truly tragic men are not held responsible as a group for this type of terrorism, which is exactly what it is.

held responsible as a group!!! rolf

Again she states that Jack and I (et al) should be punished for the crimes of <1% lol!!!!

You are to insane for words.

By kimberly

May 24, 2007 4:56 PM | Link to this

Know what makes me sad? THIS FLIPPING WAR! The metro page has an interactive fallen soldier page today. Go look at their faces, names, and ages. Though they are no longer here, they are loved by families and friends who feel anguish at their loss. That is REAL loss of life — human beings who had a place in the world, and parents, siblings, spouses, children, and to somebody who called them “friend,” they were the lone voice of sanity or hope on a dark night. They’re gone, and for WHAT? For me? I don’t feel any safer knowing this war makes us more enemies every day. Don’t send them to their deaths for me!

Today’s “Duh!” Headline o’ the Day: California Family Grieves Dead Soldier. Ya think?!! Good God, the pain….

Where are the “right-to-lifers” and religio fundies now? There is real loss of life going on in our name. How can you sleep at night knowing that, and then get up in the morning and squawk about the potential life of someone who does not yet exist? If you believe in life, protest this WAR, bring the troops home NOW, or STFU! Thanks for listening.

By Shrommer

May 24, 2007 5:01 PM | Link to this

Diane highlights that Shaunti does not mention any dangers related to getting an abortion. The dangers of abortion are obvious, but they do not apply so much to the person “getting an abortion” as they do to the living human being denied the legal status of being referred to as a person. The one who is aborted dies! That is danger enough.

Lucy posted that a kinder option would be to send the baby to be with Jesus. That part of it many Christians do “understand”, but not all Christians agree. It is hard for me to appreciate why Christians think that sending a baby to heaven is a crime against the baby. I personally do not believe that the baby goes to be with Jesus, nor do I believe the baby is reincarnated like Lucy says the Buddhists believe.

I think human life should be protected according to the original intent of the 14th amendment. The 14th amendment speaks of two kinds of human beings: American citizens, and all other persons. The Supreme Court wants to twist it and get three kinds of human beings: American citizens, persons (those who have been born) and all other living human beings (those who have not yet been born). It is a gross distortion of our Constitution. For aborion to be legal, the 14th Amendment should be amended, not twisted to the point of absurd interpretation.

By Crime

May 24, 2007 5:14 PM | Link to this

Men as a group need to take more responsibility for the violence men commit. Meaning a major social change needs to take place & men need to lead this. No one has ever said you or anyone else must be punished for the crimes of others, only that all men make an effort to stop what is going on.

This also means all people, particularly men need to stop making reproductive decisions for women. Men need to put a much stronger emphasis on men using birth control, too many don’t think twice about it. How is it acceptable to teach men to be that irresponsible with no respect for other people’s lives?

Men need to be taught more empathy for others. Too many are heartless without regard for anyone & will take what they want, hurt whoever they want, if given the opportunity. If that were not the case then there wouldn’t be so many currently incarcerated, paroled or registered as sex offenders. The most important thing to remember here is each criminal has at least one victim. At least.

By Buy Viagra ulo

May 24, 2007 10:42 PM | Link to this

Fine and pretty site! Very good owner!

By Buy Viagra chw

May 24, 2007 10:48 PM | Link to this

Your know end news! What is this? Discounts!

By Buy Viagra online ame

May 24, 2007 11:15 PM | Link to this

HI! Nice design!

By Dion

May 25, 2007 5:27 AM | Link to this

I glad too see this interest site, I tell my friends about it! They like sites like that: site penis enlargement pill

By JokesOn

May 25, 2007 10:17 AM | Link to this

Meaning a major social change needs to take place & men need to lead this.

We have discussed this to the point of absurdity. You have NO suggestions as to what more someone like Jack or I could do than we already have. You simply assert that we must do more, and fail to recognize that we ARE doing more.

No one has ever said you or anyone else must be punished for the crimes of others, only that all men make an effort to stop what is going on.

You are lying. You have repetitively stated that me should be: castrated, locked up at birth until proven non-violent, as well as plainly stating that “All men should be punished for the crimes of <1%.”

By JokesOn

May 25, 2007 10:51 AM | Link to this

Error:

me should be

men should be

By Crime

May 25, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this

First of all women have been trying since the dawn of time to change the violent behavior of men. We are not able to change much so it’s really up to you & all men to come up with the solutions.

My first suggestion as to how men can improve is take more responsibility in birth control. Stop legislating a woman’s reproductive choices. Men should never be standing outside a woman’s health clinic protesting anything. That would be a huge start. We’ve been fighting against double standards for centuries, the only conclusion is nothing will change unless men decide to change themselves. Till that time you’ll be up against loud women like me that are not afraid to stand up against injustice. lol

By lozen

May 25, 2007 11:33 AM | Link to this

Kimberly, there’s an article in The New York Review of Books about Bush’s Amazing Achievement. That achievement being that he’s brought forth agreement between those on the right and the left that the invasion of Iraq was a calamity, the presidency of GW has reduced America’s standing in the world and made us less secure with emboldened enemies and alienated friends. The war on terror took a country that had been free of jihadist militants and turned it into a breeding ground. It took a country that had been no threat to the US and turned it into a place where thousands of Americans and tens of thousands of Iraquis have been killed. It diverted resources thant should have been used to hunt down bin Laden, and it did bin Laden’s work for him by giving al-Qaeda the status it craved.

By JokesOn

May 25, 2007 11:35 AM | Link to this

My first suggestion as to how men can improve is take more responsibility in birth control.

Already done. Unfortunately, I cannot fly around in a cape dispensing condoms and performing vasectomies otherwise I would.

So, you will have to find some happiness in what IS being done.

I suggest that since your so big on gender rights, that you no longer have any legislative say as to what happens to men in ANY situation.

By your terms, it is OUR body, and I could formulate an argument that conforms to it just as well as you. Since it is my pen!s, I can do what I want with it and put it where I want. You say it violates your rights? I say whose rights are more important and since I identify with males more than females, I will back males regardless of the harm done to an innocent. You say that you have rights? Well I say you are just a collection of cells. You say it is unnatural? I say given the example of all other male animals, my job is to spread my seed as much as I can. You say you have a spirit/soul that can be lost/damaged? I say prove it!

Two can play the remedial game you love so much. rolf

By lozen

May 25, 2007 11:46 AM | Link to this

It’s Friday. For Pete’s sake doesn’t anybody have a good joke?

By Mara

May 25, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this

JokesOn - I say you are just a collection of cells

an autonomous collection of cells, thank you.

Since it is my pen!s, I can do what I want with it and put it where I want

And I agree that you SHOULD be able to do with it what you will and put it anywhere you like EXCEPT where it’s not wanted…

as for the the arguments that men shouldn’t have a say in legislating “womens” issues and your rebuttal of the “well women shouldn’t legislate for men”…NEITHER gender should be writing laws that ONLY apply to a narrow group of individuals. Laws should apply to all people equally. If a law isn’t applicable to a man, it should be legislated for a woman…and vice versa.

At least that’s MY opinion

By JokesOn

May 25, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this

It’s Friday. For Pete’s sake doesn’t anybody have a good joke?

But Whiley’s argument IS a joke;)

By 2D

May 25, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this

NetB… I know the response is late but… I agree with you on the fertility treatments. In my opinion, the biggest benefit may be the ancillary technologies that were developed and are now helping all pregnancies. Couldn’t name specifics, but I’m sure they exist.

By JokesOn

May 25, 2007 12:06 PM | Link to this

Mara,

I know all that;) Just adding a little tongue/cheek to illustrate the absurdity of whiley’s argument.

I, unlike her, would never use any anger I have towards individuals of a group to harm the whole group.

But I do not understand your statement: “If a law isn’t applicable to a man, it should be legislated for a woman…and vice versa.” Please clarify.

By 2D

May 25, 2007 12:11 PM | Link to this

We’ve all seen T-Shirts that read, everything I needed to know I learned in kindergarten, right… There should be one that reads, everything I needed to know I learned watching South Park.

Another South Park reference… Last night there was an episode title Bebe’s Breasts. The premise is that one of the fourth grade girls, Bebe, starts to show her womanhood before the others. For some strange reason, the boys all start gathering around and eventually acting down right primal over being in the company of Bebe. Stan even reenacts the famous scene from 2001 where the monkey figures out how to win fights with a bone.

Anyway, Bebe’s friends start calling her all kinds of names like w******* and slut and refuse to talk with her because she now gets all of the boys’ attention, when in fact, neither she, nor the boys know what’s going on until Bebe’s mom explains it to her. While this episode lampoons several themes in society, the vicsous nature of the girls to Bebe was particularly cruel and one the central plotlines.

The funniest, however, was the money-grubbing plastic surgeon who did an augmentation for one of the other fourth grade girls since she had $3000 cash.

By Lyrazel

May 25, 2007 12:15 PM | Link to this

Shrommer asked: Why should the Church be the only group with interest in adopting? (And by the way, I would bet that most adoptions in the world are to Christian parents anyway, and Christians are the inventors of orphanages and foster care. Actually it is harder to adopt children if you have zero religious belief, many agencies will not allow atheists to enter adoption. I think of all faiths when I use the term church. I dont have any information about which faith adopts more or which started foster care but bragging about the past does not help those in the NOW. I used church because many faith-based religions have right-to-life organizations whose participants dont adopt and want to end all abortion. To me believing their stance of mandatory all babies be born is cynical if they dont step up and adopt, especially when people say: I dont want to pay for a kid that isnt mine. Or I dont want a kid with health issues. Or I dont want a kid that color. Everyone in every nation ends up paying for the unwanted.

Why isn’t there a boom of homosexual couples wanting to adopt babies that other people do not want, since homosexual couples are unable to procreate their own children for themselves?

State laws, legislation that does not recognize homosexual couples as married, thus many states will not allow adoption to unmarried people. Adoption agencies also do not accept single parent houses as fit. I am not sure about foster care but the problem lies with government and law not willingness to adopt.

Why not let the children be born for the sake of the homosexual couples, and let them pay the price as parents if they really want to get married and have families?

Because then you require someone to give birth in other words her body no longer is under her control, she becomes a thing, a slave. She may not want to go through pregnancy or she may not have $$$ for pre-natal, post-natal health care or she may not be a responsible parent, a healthy person or mentally capable to give birth.

Enjoy the holiday

By BJ

May 25, 2007 12:19 PM | Link to this

Life is a gift, and it should not be a legitimate, legal “choice” of anyone’s to take it away. Diane has jumped on the “health of the mother” bandwagon, as most all pro-choicers do. But we all know that the majority of abortions are performed on women who just don’t want to be pregnant. A woman who’s health is compromised is, most likely, dealing with this issue with her personal OB/GYN and not running to an abortion clinic. But, no, I still don’t believe she should have a legal option to kill her unborn child. That’s equivalent to giving a woman an option to leave her child in a burning house or a sinking car in order to save herself. We don’t call that a “choice,” we call that negligence & cowardice, and prosecute her.

There has to be a line drawn on this issue. Either it’s wrong and you’re takng away a life, or it’s not. I vote that it’s wrong.

How many of you actually know what partial birth abortion is?? You take a 9-month “fetus” — that’s a baby — pull it half-way out of the mother, stick some scissor contraption into the base of it’s skull, open it, and suck out the brains. Then deliver a dead baby. But, hey, it’s okay because a leg or two was still inside the mother and it’s only a fetus until the entire body is officially “delivered” — so, it’s ok. It’s a “choice.”

Well, I made that choice 21 years ago because I was scared and couldn’t face up to my mistake and wanted it to just go away. If I’d had an ultrasound machine in that room and been offered the chance to see my baby, I would have taken that chance. And I would have a 20-year old child today to be the sibling of my 7-year old child.

I was the “typical” woman who goes to the abortion clinics today. I wish it hadn’t been so easy to “choose.”

By 2D

May 25, 2007 12:46 PM | Link to this

Lyrazel… Not sure about the rest of the country, but I can tell you that many of the barriers you described do not exist in Georgia.

At the various churches I’ve attended, I know singles of both sexual orientations and couples of both sexual orientations that have legally adopted children. The barrier is not an issue of gender or marital or gay/strait status. The barrier is $$$ (and race to a smaller degree). It costs a significant amount of money to adopt from here in the States and even more if adopting from outside the country.

Quite frankly, what I have seen through my experiences with prospective parents and the facilitators of adoption is that:

The pro-termination crowd calls these babies “unwanted”. That’s a load of crap. These babies are wanted, just not by the natural mother. If we made the facilitation of these children simpler and less expensive, I believe there would be people lined up to adopt them. there isn’t much we can do to negotiate with other sovereign countries, but within our own we can. Here are some suggestions.

By NetBanker

May 25, 2007 12:46 PM | Link to this

an estimated 600,000 registered sex offenders Crime…do you realize that just because one is a registered sex offender that doesn’t mean one was violent or even necessarily had a ‘victim’? An 18 year old having consensual sex with a 16 year old who is caught and reported by a parent could be convicted of statutory rape and then end up being a registered sex offender. A couple engaging in consensual oral sex (when that was still a crime) in parked car who were spotted by the police and cited would be forced to register as a sex offender. Not all registered offenders have an equally aggregious offense.

That’s equivalent to giving a woman an option to leave her child in a burning house or a sinking car in order to save herself. We don’t call that a “choice,” we call that negligence & cowardice, and prosecute her. You big DOPE, we do NOT prosecute anyone in either of these situations unless they set the fire and locked the kids in the house or strapped the kids into the car and drove into the water to sink the car on purpose.

BJ…you’re spreading a whole bunch of FALSE information in your post. I’m sorry you regret your CHOICE 21 years ago to have an abortion, but you did and NOW because you regret the CHOICE you made you’re willing to take that option away from other women? How incredibly selfish of you!! Additionally, there is no way for you to be certain that had you seen an ultrasound back then that that would have been enough to change your mind. It’s waaaay too easy to look backward and decide what you would have done now that you’re in an entirely different place in your life.

By lozen

May 25, 2007 12:46 PM | Link to this

BJ, I am really sorry you feel guilty and sad because of an abortion 20 years ago. You had good reason to be scared I’m sure. You made the best decision you could make at the time. My sister had an abortion around that same time and has not regretted it for one second. If she hadn’t she would have opened herself to all kinds of legal and health problems. She could not afford another child because she was a single parent with three already. A lot of us regret decisions we made in the past. We have to make peace with that and move on in our lives.

Partial birth abortion was highly uncommon and done only when the child was dead, deformed or the mother’s health was at stake. Now, however, the mother can just die if she has a health issue because of the federal ban on PB abortion. There are no exceptions for the health of the mother. So what if your doctor discovers your baby is dead? Too bad. Carry around that dead baby til the end! Horribly deformed? Too bad. Any doctor that would perform a late term abortion is liable to years in prison! There was a choice but now there is no choice for a woman in that situation.

By NetBanker

May 25, 2007 12:54 PM | Link to this

Why isn’t there a boom of homosexual couples wanting to adopt babies that other people do not want, since homosexual couples are unable to procreate their own children for themselves? Actually there are plenty of gay couples who want to adopt, but are generally barred by law from doing so. There was a fairly famous case in Florida of two men who were foster parents for 4-6 HIV+ children and who wanted to adopt those children. They were denied by the state and in their appeals all the way to the state Supreme Court simply on the basis of the men being gay. The truly f’d up thing is that it is acceptable to the state to allow the men to continue to be foster fathers who collect funds from the state for the children, but not acceptable for the men to adopt the very children they are raising, call them their own, and stop receiving state foster funds. I guess the conservative penchant for telling others what to do outweighed the mantras of personal responsibility (which these men wanted to formalize) and fiscal responsibility (allowing the men to stop foster payments by adopting).

By NetBanker

May 25, 2007 1:00 PM | Link to this

Happy Memorial Day to All! I’m off to my happy place in Hollywood, FL. May everyone have a safe, relaxing, and wonderful weekend!!

By Mara

May 25, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this

JokesOn - ooops, typo. Meant to write “it should’t be legislated…” That’s what I get for posting while I’m eating lunch :^)

FYI to the forum - Florida has banned all gays and lesbians from adopting since 1977, although they can be foster parents. Mississippi bans adoption by gay couples, but gay singles can adopt. Last year there were 16 states where anti-gay adoption measures were being considere: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, and West Virginia.

I’m not exactly sure how those measures turned out, but it does illustrate the hostility that gays who want to adopt face. Personally, I believe if someone has an honest, caring heart and the means to support a child in need, it shouldn’t matter one hill o’ beans whether they are gay or straight, married or single.

By lozen

May 25, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this

Also life can be a gift if you’re wanted and loved and you have parents who are ready to take care of you and your needs. It can be a horrible thing if you’re not wanted and loved and you have parents who don’t take care of you. If humans have souls and a soul is not able to come into the world right now, how can we say that soul doesn’t choose another vehicle? We can’t. We don’t know.

By 2D

May 25, 2007 1:08 PM | Link to this

Lozen… If you are referring to the statue passed by Congress in 2003, you’re full of crap.

That statute prohibits performing this particularly gruesome procedure when it is not necessary to save the life of the mother.

So there actually is a provision for the mortal health of the woman.

Further, it defines this as a procedure that:

A. deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus … for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus. B. performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the fetus.

Notice that it clearly identifies a “living” fetus, not dead.

So unless there have been changes (and there may have been that I do not know of) you are either bold face lying or not completely informed on the statute. I will assume that unless there have been changes I do not know about, you are merely using a hyperbolic argument in an effort to support the cruel and gruesome procedure.

By BJ

May 25, 2007 1:19 PM | Link to this

My post was of my personal experience and opinions and the accurate description of a partial birth abortion. There’s nothing in there that could be described as false.

But I understand your hostility… this is a hot topic and people feel very emotional about it.

The truth sometimes does hurt.

Have a great weekend!

By BJ

May 25, 2007 1:28 PM | Link to this

Although I do stand corrected on the fire and sinking car comments. That was pretty “dopey” — however, I would still call that woman a coward and negligent, and not pat her on the back for making the choice to save herself. That’s what I feel like this pro-choice business is all about — patting us on the back for terminating our pregnancies instead of calling it what it is.

Bye.

By kimberly

May 25, 2007 1:36 PM | Link to this

I’m also calling BS on BJ’s claim to have had a “partial birth abortion” at NINE MONTHS in the year 1986. Yeah, so you regret your choice to have an abortion, if you actually did, (not buying the “they killed a full term healthy baby with a pair of scissors when it was half-way out” story for a second!) Sorry. We’ve all made choices we regret, and each of us lives with our own. That does not give YOU the right to make medical decisions for someone else.

… meanwhile.. American soldiers are killing and dying in our name. Where are the REAL “pro-lifers?”

By 2D

May 25, 2007 1:37 PM | Link to this

Mara… Thanks for the follow-up information. I would agree with you on the fact that our laws on adoption should be more open and accepting of various familial structures (i.e. singles, same-sex couple, etc.).

Where you and I probably differ is that when all other factors are equal, I believe married, heterosexual couples should be given a higher priority in the adoption process than other familial makeups.

By Rectilinear Propagation

May 25, 2007 1:53 PM | Link to this

Someone way back asked where the money for all of the ultrasounds are supposed to come from. More recently someone posted about the barriers to adoption.

If they have the money for the ultrasounds it should be spent on beefing up the adoption system to make the process faster.

By JokesOn

May 25, 2007 2:02 PM | Link to this

Someone way back asked where the money for all of the ultrasounds are supposed to come from.

And they were informed that they already take place out of the woman’s sight.

By Mara

May 25, 2007 2:05 PM | Link to this

2D - I’m not sure what you mean by married hetero’s being given higher “priority”. Do you mean that a gay couple in the midst of an adoption should get bumped if a hetero couple decides that only THAT particular child will do for their family…I think that would be pretty unfair. Especially if the child had already started to bond with the gay parents.

By MybodyNotYours

May 25, 2007 2:45 PM | Link to this

A fetus is not a person you stupid religious freaks. If the Govt can allow ignorant religious freaks to invade a woman’s personal medical procedures & reproductive healthcare, then they MUST allow someone to show them the truth on what will happen if they give birth when they don’t want to. Show examples of women who can’t mentally handle having children & crack under the pressure. Women who end up on welfare unable to support their children. Women who’s health goes down the tubes. Oh & don’t forget the photos of all the Csection scars & permanant stretch marks, sagging breasts.
Low income housing. Bring in a few deformed & down syndrom kids & show them what they’ll be forced to care for the rest of their lives even tho they wouldn’t want to. Remind them of the permanent connection they’ll have with a dangerous & abusive man. That’s right informed consent ! Stay out of my healthcare & I’ll stay out of your fairytale church.

I agree with whatever her name is we love you ! Guys have zero business making reproductive choices for women.

By lozen

May 25, 2007 2:57 PM | Link to this

2D I am referring to the recent Federal Abortion Ban okayed by the Bush Supreme Court. I am not talking about something that passed in 2003. Jeez.

By lozen

May 25, 2007 2:59 PM | Link to this

Not long after the Supreme Court signaled its willingness to allow greater restrictions on a woman’s right to choose by upholding the Federal Abortion Ban, the North Dakota legislature passed a bill that would ban abortion in the state if Roe v. Wade is overturned and anti-choice Gov. John Hoeven signed it into law. The law even goes so far as to imprison doctors for up to five years if they provide abortion care!

This archaic law is just one more example of politicians interfering with a decision that should be between a woman and her doctor.

By Kim&Lozen Fan

May 25, 2007 2:59 PM | Link to this

BJ wants all women to become breeders for all the couples that want to adopt. (adopt white perfect babies let’s clarify) BJ doesn’t care that giving birth takes a huge physical toll on a woman even in the best circumstances. BJ wants all women to be punished ! Go back to your churchs & leave women alone.

By lozen

May 25, 2007 3:07 PM | Link to this

Pro-choice Americans were recently reminded of the danger that abortion providers and nurses face when they go to work every day. Last month, an anti-choice extremist left a bomb filled with 2,000 nails at the Austin Women’s Health Center. Fortunately, law enforcement officials safely detonated the bomb and arrested the man responsible. This man thought god hated abortion. So let’s kill people to protect a blob of cells.

By lozen

May 25, 2007 3:08 PM | Link to this

We applaud Ruth Bader Ginsburg for writing an eloquent and thoughtful dissent to the Supreme Court’s ruling upholding the Federal Abortion Ban. As Ginsburg stated, “[the decision] cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this court, and with increasing comprehension of its centrality to women’s lives.”

Her steadfast support of Roe v. Wade, is why she’s this month’s Hero.

By lozen

May 25, 2007 3:18 PM | Link to this

Just to catch up those too friggin ignorant to know what they’re trying to argue about: I* N CASE YOU missed the score between President George Bush’s new Supreme Court and California’s pro-choice majority, it’s 1-0. On April 18, five of nine justices signed onto a court opinion that effectively reversed established law and rolled back key protections that have been guaranteed since the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling 34 years ago. This ban is now federal law, trumping state law. This decision means a Bush-backed anti-choice law now trumps our state’s greater protections for a woman’s health and the right to choose. California is a pro-choice state. We’re the most pro-choice state in the nation, in fact. Our state lawmakers have even enacted safeguards for a woman’s right to choose that go beyond the federal constitutional protections. For the past two years in a row, we voted our pro-choice values and defeated anti-choice ballot initiatives Propositions 73 and 85. In Marin, more than 75 percent of voters defeated both propositions in 2005 and 2006, respectively. How will this ban affect California’s women and their families? This ban has no health exception - even if a doctor determines that a banned procedure is the safest option. Under this law, doctors could receive up to two years in prison for acting in what they believe is the best interest of their patient. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists - representing more than 90 percent of OB-GYNs in the country - and other leading medical organizations opposed this ban because it is harmful to women’s health and interferes with medical decision making. Further, this ban gives anti-choice politicians the green light to continue to interfere in personal, private medical decisions. These are not decisions to be left to politicians in Washington, D.C. These are decisions that should be made by a woman, in consultation with her doctor, her family and her conscience. There is no mystery to how this happened. Bush won the White House twice and had the opportunity to put two new justices on the Supreme Court. When running for president, Bush pledged to appoint judges in the mold of Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, thus opening the door to further attacks on Roe. Are you happy now?

By lozenFANS

May 25, 2007 3:42 PM | Link to this

Keep up the good work lozen we love ya !

By JokesOn

May 25, 2007 3:45 PM | Link to this

I will try again since no one would touch my question yesterday:

Would anyone think, because a kid (lets say 12-16 years old) is gay, that having an encounter with a 45 year old man would be viewed as “lucky?” Or with a friends dad?

If not, why would one so quickly believe that a straight kid and old lady would be “something to brag about?”

Jack? Anyone?

By lozen

May 25, 2007 4:24 PM | Link to this

Funny isn’t it? JokesOn seems to have the same problem as Dog!!!??? “Nobody would touch my question…” Pretty soon he’ll be claiming he won and beat everybody with his superlative logic! I ask ya… does this sound too familiar or what?

By JokesOn

May 25, 2007 4:50 PM | Link to this

lozen,

Why you want to try to pick a fight?

I was simply adding to a topic that was discussed.

As for Dog or I having ownership of asking a question and repeating it once; you are heavily mistaken - as usual.

By Not fooled

May 25, 2007 4:56 PM | Link to this

Not fooled; never was. You are right, lozen. Same wet dog smell.

By JokesOn

May 25, 2007 5:06 PM | Link to this

You really are as dumb as you sound.

Dog originally was going to fight me and stick up for Jack.

Bzzzz - wrong as usual.

By WomenGetFinalWord

May 25, 2007 5:38 PM | Link to this

Nobody is pro-abortion. I find it amusing how those who are “anti-choice” claim those who are “pro-choice” are also “pro-death” all while they promote the death penalty, do little to prevent unwanted pregnancies (decent sex ed, morning after pill distribution, avalibility of condoms, etc), and do nothing on the front of universal health care and better resources for mothers and for the little ones that pop out of these mothers AFTER they’re born. In my book they are the “pro-deathers”.

You don’t have to be a woman to be a feminist… you should jsut f* be one. If you’re not, I’m like, where did you come from? Did you grow from the ground? We all came from women.

I’m for it. A child should only be brought into this world if it is going to be wanted, loved and supported financially and emotionally. There’s more to being a parent than just being there for your child and you need to be prepared for that.

With overpopulation and the millions of children out there in foster homes and orphanages, why the hell would you ever think it’s acceptable to create more unhappy, unwanted and abandoned children? & don’t forget, the women that will suffer the rest of their lives being forced to give birth when they don’t want to go through that !

Abortion should be the choice of the individual, and that is all that should matter.

No offense, but it p** me off when guys take such a huge stand on abortion. you don’t have to worry about ever getting pregnant, so of course being pro-life isn’t much of an issue for you. what if you were a 14 year old girl who got raped by her uncle or some crazy sheit like that? would you still be pro-life then? you’ll probably say “yes,” and if you do then i don’t think you’re entirely putting yourself in someone else’s shoes. just because abortion is legal doesn’t mean you HAVE to get one. it just means it’s an option, and if you don’t believe in abortion, then don’t f* get one.

A man finds a fetus on a park bench, crying, and asks “What’s the matter?” The fetus responds, “I just got aborted!” “That’s terrible,” says the man, “but it could be worse. If you were born you’d probably end up fighting a war you don’t support in Iraq.”

Girl: Did I ever tell you about the worst abortion I ever had?? Man: no. Girl: It was great!

After a couple has sex, the woman turns to the man and says, “If i get pregnant, what should we call the baby?” “A fetus!” he bellows before erratically speeding off.

Why did the fetus cross the road? Because they moved the dumpster.

A daughter goes up to her mother and says, “Mom can I get $300 for an abortion?” “It depends,” says the mom. “Are you any good at it?”

You don’t know….

The ways… how…. manipulative some guys are.

Condoms break.

You forget a pill.

You make ONE bad decision.

And you are punished for the rest of you life?

If guys could get pregnant birth control would be free & abortions would be $10 at every grocery store.

By Epameinondas

May 25, 2007 6:01 PM | Link to this

The site’s very professional penis enlargement pill

By Athanasios

May 25, 2007 7:52 PM | Link to this

I like your diary. Allow to be friends! penis enlargement pills

By meridia

May 26, 2007 1:43 AM | Link to this

Thank you for good site! Welcome meridia, [url=http://www.quizilla.com/users/meridia-1/journal/528381/meridia-greatdiscounts.buythisdrug_online/]meridia[/url].

By Charilaos

May 26, 2007 8:25 AM | Link to this

Exciting website. Thank you.