Religious idiots... shut up

[_GoodK]

Here ya go. These are your words:

"Kevorkian spent 8 years in the joint, and kids can't get birth control because of you idiots."

"It's not just underage kids that can't get birth control."

"This is stupid in so many ways... let's have teenage parents instead of handing out condoms to them."

"The fact that you would want the government to do anything about kids getting birth control, kids getting condoms (as in prevent them from being given out for free) speaks volumes about your insecurity."

Why do you deny the very things that you write?

I think I know my position on things better than you, Jersey Girl. No matter how bad you want to take things out of context.
If you read the thread you'll see Kevin was talking about teachers who give out condoms to kids and he doesn't want his government "encouraging sexual activity". I was talking about him and people who would try to stop teachers from giving it out for free. Has my comments frazzled you that much that you actually comprehended that to mean I want "free birth control" as you put it.

Here is the thing, I'll be as clear as I can so you don't have to resort to whatever you are resorting to: If kids want birth control they should have access to it. If a girl wants to get on the pill, she should be able to walk into planned parenthood and get it. I've been along for the ride a few times to planned parenthood for the morning after pill. I'm not advocating, nor did I ever say that every kid should get a condom on their first day of school. The kids that want and need it should get it. Jesus Christ.

They shouldn't have fairy tale based morality forced upon them by people (like you?) who would rather force a kid to have a kid then let them have birth control.

----

The main problem that I see here, GoodK, is that your thinking is off the deep end.

Oh really now. Is that the only problem? Here I thought it was all the right to life religious nut jobs and the ACLU wackos that were the problem. If I had to choose which sort of thinking is off the deep end, I'd have to consider:

1. People who think other people who believe weird fairy tales should keep their fantasy's to themselves- that they shouldn't try to control the choices people make? That they should just leave people alone to decide for themselves what they think is moral and responsible. People who don't care if kids are having sex as long as they aren't crapping out babies and costing us money.

2. Or this little story: Some lady two thousand years ago got pregnant without having sex (even though she she was supposedly married) and gave birth to a carpenter who could walk on water, turn water into wine, and various other magic tricks (though not quite as impressive as David Blaine. So after that, he was given the death penalty (although contemporary historians forgot to write about it) but came back from the dead 3 days later (the time it took for most other mythical messiah figures to resurrect back then).

Long story short, this magic carpenter's dad happened to be a guy named God. God decided that it was important to write a book for a small group of animals that he had created, namely humans. This book tells these animals how to live; He really doesn't like when they worship other people or things, but He also doesn't like murder, adultery, lying, stealing and saying His name in vain. He also doesn't like gays, atheists, or people that don't listen to him or give Him money. He also doesn't like premarital sex, or abortions. Condoms - He's like ehhh.. not so much.

I'll let the readers decide what is off the deep end.

You are mixing up so many issues and attaching them to religion and some sort of persecution complex that I can't relate to.

No. I think you are just trying to find any way to defend stupid fairy tales and people that can't shut up about them.

The proper term for "kids" is "children".

What do you do for a living, Jersey Girl? Don't tell me how to write.

When you are the only person out of 2000 views who has gotten hung up on what I mean when I say "kids can't get birth control" then the problem is yours.

What you are attempting to forward here that children have some sort of "right" to have sex when what it is, is simply an unchecked lack of self control.

This is the type of insanity I can't stand anymore.

It is none of your business Jersey Girl. None of your damn business, the only sex that is your business is yours or YOUR kids. Leave everyone else alone, with what you THINK is an "unchecked lack of self control." Check your own self control, worry about brain washing your own kids and teaching them about self control, leave the rest of us alone.

You think that children should be able to have sex and provided with birth control as if there is some sort of condom god in the sky raining condoms down on them.

No, I never said this. Nice try.

There IS no such thing as "free" birth control.

There IS no such thing as a "free" lunch. Your point?

I am paying for this so called "free" birth control that you would like to see passed out to children who have no source of income, pay no health insurance premiums, probably haven't paid for the car they're screwing in

Nope. I think it should be given to them if they need it. You are also paying for teenage mothers Jersey Girl. You don't seem to want to acknowledge that, and you don't care to expound upon what is more costly. Now who is avoiding questions? I'll ask again, what costs more Jersey Girl. Birth control or teenage pregnancies?

I am footing the bill for their prenatal health care, their child's health care and whatever assistance (food stamps, subsidized child care to name a few items) they're getting.

Right. Which is we should give them birth control if they want it. How are you so far off on this?

Nothing is "free", GoodK. Just because children aren't paying for it, doesn't mean it's not being paid for.

And again, you are arguing against a point I didn't make. You are usually a bit sharper than this... what's up?

This has not a damn thing to do with religious beliefs.

It has everything to do with religious beliefs. It's sad you are actually denying that.

[_Jersey Girl]

GoodK,

In your above post, you ask what I do for a living. Well, over a span of 22 years (which is probably about as long as you've lived) I've taught (in part) the children of teenage mothers and also the teenage mothers themselves who had access to birth control and either failed to use it or failed to use it properly and who are shacking up with their baby Daddy or living with their parents in order to access Medicaid and other types of assistance that comes directly out of my salary and having multiple children in the process. Said children are also receiving state assistance (which I also pay for out of my salary) for early education because they are deemed at risk for school failure on account of a number of variable qualifiers not the least of which is that they were born to teen mothers, a service for which I held a council position for 5 years, and also accessing state funding for their children's childcare, not to mention federal student financial aid that provides said teenage mothers with free tuition (which I also pay for) and who cannot adhere to a simple schedule of classes because they were out partying the night before or take no resposibility because they have no vested interest in their own future and think that their parents or the state/Fed will bail them out because that's exactly what they're accustomed to.

That's what I do for a living.

You unknowingly stepped right on to my playing field, GoodK. And thanks for asking.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with religion. Why do you continue to make that excuse to me? It has to do with children engaging in adult activity they have no right to. Why? Because they are "underage". I trust you know what underage means. It means when they screw up, adults bail them out.

[_harmony]

I think I know my position on things better than you, Jersey Girl. No matter how bad you want to take things out of context.
If you read the thread you'll see Kevin was talking about teachers who give out condoms to kids and he doesn't want his government "encouraging sexual activity". I was talking about him and people who would try to stop teachers from giving it out for free. Has my comments frazzled you that much that you actually comprehended that to mean I want "free birth control" as you put it.

Perhaps you should clarify what you mean, without taking your bad temper out on Jersey. It's not her fault you don't put any effort to be clear in your post.

Here is the thing, I'll be as clear as I can so you don't have to resort to whatever you are resorting to: If kids want birth control they should have access to it. If a girl wants to get on the pill, she should be able to walk into planned parenthood and get it. I've been along for the ride a few times to planned parenthood for the morning after pill. I'm not advocating, nor did I ever say that every kid should get a condom on their first day of school. The kids that want and need it should get it.

Bullshaloney. Birth control medication is not a right. Parents have rights that children don't and one of those rights is to protect their children as they see fit and to lobby the government to provide that protection. If you don't like the way things are, then get off your butt and start campaigning for reform, but your griping is not only nonproductive, but irrational too.

And your definition needs work. The females of the species are girls from the day they are born. Are you advocating free birth control for 5 year olds? 8 year olds? 10 year olds? Why? Define your terms.

They shouldn't have fairy tale based morality forced upon them by people (like you?) who would rather force a kid to have a kid then let them have birth control.

Ever heard of clarity? KID? What kid gets pregnant and is forced to have the child??? We aren't talking about kids at all. Jersey is trying to get you to differentiate between children and teenagers but you don't see to get it, and you keep dumping anyone under 18 in the same catagory. They AREN'T!

1. People who think other people who believe weird fairy tales should keep their fantasy's to themselves- that they shouldn't try to control the choices people make? That they should just leave people alone to decide for themselves what they think is moral and responsible. People who don't care if kids are having sex as long as they aren't crapping out babies and costing us money.

That's not the way civilization works. If you don't like it, campaign to change it. It's a free country; a democracy, or at least some semblance thereof. Pissing and moaning is nonproductive, but you seem to have pissing and moaning down to a fine art.

The proper term for "kids" is "children".

What do you do for a living, Jersey Girl? Don't tell me how to write.

She works with children. She knows how to write with clarity. If you weren't such an ass, you'd wise up and learn from her.

When you are the only person out of 2000 views who has gotten hung up on what I mean when I say "kids can't get birth control" then the problem is yours.

She isn't. But she was carrying the ball quite well, so there was no reason to interfere. But now that there's 2 of us, I'm betting you still won't be able to write with clarity.

What you are attempting to forward here that children have some sort of "right" to have sex when what it is, is simply an unchecked lack of self control.

It is none of your business Jersey Girl. None of your damn business, the only sex that is your business is yours or YOUR kids. Leave everyone else alone, with what you THINK is an "unchecked lack of self control." Check your own self control, worry about brain washing your own kids and teaching them about self control, leave the rest of us alone.

As long as taxes are used to pay for the mess that unchecked lack of self control causes, you damn betcha it's our business.

I am paying for this so called "free" birth control that you would like to see passed out to children who have no source of income, pay no health insurance premiums, probably haven't paid for the car they're screwing in

Nope. I think it should be given to them if they need it. You are also paying for teenage mothers Jersey Girl. You don't seem to want to acknowledge that, and you don't care to expound upon what is more costly. Now who is avoiding questions? I'll ask again, what costs more Jersey Girl. Birth control or teenage pregnancies?

And what makes you think it isn't? That's what I don't get. We have free condoms available in every high school here, in every school nurse's office. We don't shove them into the hands of boys, but they're available, and constantly replenished via the health department. Anyone who is of an age to be sexually active can walk in our health department and they'll be given a condom, no questions asked. And there are no religious beliefs attached at all.

[_GoodK]

Oh, so you won't wear a condom but you expect kids to.

I never said I won't wear a condom. Female birth control is much more effective than condoms. Condoms aren't the form of birth control I was talking about in my OP...

Anywhere the government is passing out condoms to minors, it is encouraging sexual activity. The same holds true for anyone passing out guns would be encouraging gunfire
If you give a kid a match and lighter fluid, you're encouraging him to start a fire. Give them a text book, you encourage him to read. Give him a condom, you encourage him to have sex.

Actually I think the penis and the vagina encourage sexual activity. That is just me though. I've never been attracted to a condom.

How? I'm not a fundamentalist Christian. I don't think gays go to hell. I don't give a flying flip who or what you have sex with. You're beating up fundamentalist Christianity in order to score points, but with me it doesn't work. They have nothing to do with me.

Fine, then it doesn't. If the shoe fits, Kevin... Just keep your fairy tales, however mild they are, away from me. Please.

Oh, so now a right to life viewpoint is synonymous with idiocy!

If you read any of my posts, you would have known this from the beginning. The right to life "viewpoint" is idiotic. See the OP or the post on page 2.

How the hell do you figure that when you are amoral about the situation. f*** anything you want since there is no God to judge you.

Aww this old crappy argument. Because atheists are out of control, right Kevin? Prison is filled with atheists... Jesus

This is a textbook case of ignorance driving bigotry.

No, this is the textbook case of ignorance driving bigotry (just a few from one thread):

But to add the fact that Daddy1 and Daddy2 can't have kids of their own because they prefer to stick their penis' in each others rectum, only fosters more confusion and perhaps frustration.


I always thought evolutionists would have issues with this as well. After all, it isn't "natural" is it? Having to clean out your rectum with a water hose before you have sex. How does adaptation expect to address that one? If homosexuals were really "born that way," then what is evolution telling us? Maybe homosexual men will eventually evolve with two assholes? One for excretion and the other for pleasure.


Something that struck me as "different" after being out of the country for four years, is that it seems the number of homosexuals in the Atlanta area has increased a lot. They aren't transplants from San Francisco either.

You only see black and white. The entire group has to be guilty for you. There is no grey area. You have a dangerous mind. You and mercury should get together some time and torture baby ducks.

What a strange comment. Is there something you should tell us? Speaking from experience? Physco.

Marriage is and always has been a religious concept. If you disagree, then please provide your evidence of a marriage in history that wasn't religious based.

I only disagree if you don't consider ancient mythology a religion http://ancienthistory.about.com/library ... psyche.htm.

This coming from a kid who has already stated he never wants to have kids! Poor you. Torubled teen who has been mistreated by his family because they were religious. Cry me a freakin river.

I was mistreated by my family? Nice try, you silly guy. I refer you back to the OP.

You think Tila Tequila is a good role model for a four year old daughter? Probably.

You really are dumb if you think I think that. Do I think a parent that allows their four year old daughter to watch Tila Tequila is a good role model? Probably not.

You make no sense at all. WHO ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

I'm making enough sense for you to continue on with your senseless replies. You know damn well who and what I am talking about.


Now I have a paper to write. I'll be back in a few days.

[_Jersey Girl]

As long as taxes are used to pay for the mess that unchecked lack of self control, you damn betcha it's our business.

Exactly.

[_marg]

Dart

But to add the fact that Daddy1 and Daddy2 can't have kids of their own because they prefer to stick their penis' in each others rectum, only fosters more confusion and perhaps frustration.


I always thought evolutionists would have issues with this as well. After all, it isn't "natural" is it? Having to clean out your rectum with a water hose before you have sex. How does adaptation expect to address that one? If homosexuals were really "born that way," then what is evolution telling us?

Evolution is not some grand planned ultimate design for life which will result in what's best for the planet, what's best even for the future evolutions of species. Mankind is currently proficient at extending life, saving lives, feeding the masses, such that there is an over population problem. Increased homosexuality would actually be a good thing to reduce population growth, which would be a good thing to reduce planet destruction and consumption of limited resources. So don't think that what the process of evolution favors is actually necesssarily a good thing. And unfortunately while homosexuality might be a good thing to slow population growth down, it won't be favored within the evolutionary process.

[_GoodK]

Harmony,

Your post is so horribly formatted and worded, I can't even quote it here and respond to it how I would like to. For someone who accuses me of not putting any effort into being clear, well, I hope you didn't spend too much of your morning on your post.

Hopefully you edit it to make it more clear.


I'll respond by saying two things:

1. You're back patting to Jersey Girl is not surprising, nor is it persuasive. The truth is, you religious nut jobs are continuing to support my statements, even the ones I made in my OP. Apparently you don't read or you don't care if you are arguing with someone and proving them right while you do it.

Example:

Parents have rights that children don't and one of those rights is to protect their children as they see fit and to lobby the government to provide that protection.

How am I not being clear, when you are so clearly supporting my claims?

2.

As long as taxes are used to pay for the mess that unchecked lack of self control, you damn betcha it's our business.

You religious idiots don't care about "taxes" just like you don't care about life in your "right to life viewpoint". You won't address what is more costly, teenage pregnancy or birth control.

You and Jersey Girl won't do it, because you wise old birds know the answer. You care about people having sex on terms you don't agree with.
And that is why I wish you all would just shut up.

Jersey Girl, I asked what you did for a living because you were giving me tips on how to write. That's my playing field, pal, and I think I've accomplished my goal.
People keep asking me what's wrong, what shook my boat, what pee'd in my special k... the purpose of this post was to liven up this board, vent some frustrations, say some things that religious people need to hear. I wasn't writing out of any sort of anger nor was I upset. And the timing of the gay marriage court ruling couldn't have been better. This thread has been entertaining, to say the least, and that is what I wished to do when I started writing that post.

[_Jersey Girl]

I never said I won't wear a condom. Female birth control is much more effective than condoms. Condoms aren't the form of birth control I was talking about in my OP...

Oh, I see. You were talking about oral contraceptives? You think that underage kids should have access to free oral contraceptives?

Underage kids have access to free (in the sense that they themselves won't pay for it out of pocket) oral contraceptives under their parents health care coverage anytime they want it.

No wait. They'd have to tell Mommy and Daddy that they want to be (or are) sexually active. And why don't they?

Because they're KIDS who resort to sneaking around because they have no adult sense of responsibility. I'm sorry, GoodK, this "I have a hard on, please give my gf birth control so I can use it" doctrine is getting a little old. Just because your dick works, doesn't mean you have a right to use it on someone and expect adults to pay for your gf's birth control so you can.

[_GoodK]

I'm sorry, GoodK, this "I have a hard on, please give my gf birth control so I can use it" doctrine is getting a little old. Just because your dick works, doesn't mean you have a right to use it on someone and expect adults to pay for your gf's birth control so you can.

And Jersey Girl and her friends have the right to tell me what to do with my dick.

I rest my case.

[_Jersey Girl]

You religious idiots don't care about "taxes" just like you don't care about life in your "right to life viewpoint". You won't address what is more costly, teenage pregnancy or birth control.

Please take your "religious idiots" strawman and stick it, GoodK. Nowhere on this thread have I used religion as a reason for underage kids not to receive free birth control. I've already addressed the lack of responsibility in teenagers who DO have access to birth control.

In the above, you don't seem to see past the "teenage preganancy" issue. Believe it or not, a child results from teenage pregnancy, GoodK. I teach those children and have done so for years, and also their teen mothers.

Nowhere on this thread have I voiced an opinion regarding "right to life". Would you like me to state what my opinion/position is on that so you actually do have something real to work with here instead of waving your religious flag in my face?