When Mitt Romney becomes president.... *FLUX THREAD!*

[Jason]

So what if you lost all yr money and yr home, would you be totally chill with strapping on yr bandanna and going Rambo through the streets of IDK Des Moines, Iowa or wherever the hell you live hunting down foxes because hey, at  least no goverrnment is holding you down (until a cop who doesn't understand your civil rights is literally holding you down for firing an automatic weapon in a suburban neighbourhood) and you and your family are free if so very cold #romney2012

I would expect a post like that from someone who lives in a country where criminals have more access to guns than law-abiding citizens. But I'll give you credit for not using the "Wild Wild West" analogy that so many other leftists use.

By the way, Romney is an enemy of gun rights.

[GreatUrduPoet]

So what if you lost all yr money and yr home, would you be totally chill with strapping on yr bandanna and going Rambo through the streets of IDK Des Moines, Iowa or wherever the hell you live hunting down foxes because hey, at  least no goverrnment is holding you down (until a cop who doesn't understand your civil rights is literally holding you down for firing an automatic weapon in a suburban neighbourhood) and you and your family are free if so very cold #romney2012

I would expect a post like that from someone who lives in a country where criminals have more access to guns than law-abiding citizens. But I'll give you credit for not using the "Wild Wild West" analogy that so many other leftists use.

By the way, Romney is an enemy of gun rights.

But Paul Ryan is a champion of compound bow rights:

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=4578504593705234&id=5f2d2a5fe11afef01c49d8c1329f5b49

When will Republicans end their "war on deer"?

By the way, Noam Chomsky is a wealthy, America-hating douche-bag who doesn't listen to the Beach Boys.

[Jason]

Paul Ryan is a liberal, just like Romney. Chomsky is a classic capitalist and many of his hardcore followers don't get it.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Chomsky is a classic capitalist and many of his hardcore followers don't get it.

 

Nor does Chomsky himself, apparently.

[hypehat]

So what if you lost all yr money and yr home, would you be totally chill with strapping on yr bandanna and going Rambo through the streets of IDK Des Moines, Iowa or wherever the hell you live hunting down foxes because hey, at  least no goverrnment is holding you down (until a cop who doesn't understand your civil rights is literally holding you down for firing an automatic weapon in a suburban neighbourhood) and you and your family are free if so very cold #romney2012

I would expect a post like that from someone who lives in a country where criminals have more access to guns than law-abiding citizens. But I'll give you credit for not using the "Wild Wild West" analogy that so many other leftists use.

By the way, Romney is an enemy of gun rights.

Tbf, it would be quicker to list the rights of 21st century human beings that Romney Ryan don't oppose. It's a bitter, spiteful ticket. f*** them. At least Barack Obama does not have any contempt for gays and women.

Also, the only people I have ever seen with guns EVER are the police here. Knives are pretty popular, though. But I would expect that kind of response from someone who lives in America and has formed a well organised militia lately.  but my beef is not with you, you and rockandroll are bringing it itt. It's this jackass here who says poor people should hunt for their food in a western superpower.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

So what if you lost all yr money and yr home, would you be totally chill with strapping on yr bandanna and going Rambo through the streets of IDK Des Moines, Iowa or wherever the hell you live hunting down foxes because hey, at  least no goverrnment is holding you down (until a cop who doesn't understand your civil rights is literally holding you down for firing an automatic weapon in a suburban neighbourhood) and you and your family are free if so very cold #romney2012

What's the weather like on your planet today?

I love the tough talk about no man starving as long as he has his gun to hunt with.

Oh yeah? You actually aren't even free to starve in this country. It all costs you money and punishment. So, if you're already poor but have a gun: do you have a hunting license? If not and you're poor, how do you get one? Oh, and that gun had better be registered and you better have a concealed weapons permit as well. And how are you going to get from the city out into the woods if you're poor? Do you have bus fair? Cab fair? If you're homeless, do you have any friends who'll give you a ride out into the woods? And if you do have a car: where will you park it while you go live in the woods? And when it gets towed away, how will you pay to get it out? Or will you just try and hunt IN the city? What will you kill and eat? Rats? Squirrels? What: you'll be shooting squirrels in the park? You'll likely be arrested within minutes and since you're poor, good luck making bail. Or will you be hunting people's pet cats and dogs? Same problem there.... And if you do make it out into the woods, you'd better have stocked up on camping/survival gear ahead of time. Oh, but you're poor and you have no car to haul it in. Hmmmmm, so you're out there hunting like Rambo and the game warden comes and checks for your hunting license, which of course you have, right? You'll likely be arrested/fined in this situation as well.... All in all, you'll be spending a lot of money you don't even have being free to starve.....  

[Jason]

So what if you lost all yr money and yr home, would you be totally chill with strapping on yr bandanna and going Rambo through the streets of IDK Des Moines, Iowa or wherever the hell you live hunting down foxes because hey, at  least no goverrnment is holding you down (until a cop who doesn't understand your civil rights is literally holding you down for firing an automatic weapon in a suburban neighbourhood) and you and your family are free if so very cold #romney2012

I would expect a post like that from someone who lives in a country where criminals have more access to guns than law-abiding citizens. But I'll give you credit for not using the "Wild Wild West" analogy that so many other leftists use.

By the way, Romney is an enemy of gun rights.

Tbf, it would be quicker to list the rights of 21st century human beings that Romney Ryan don't oppose. It's a bitter, spiteful ticket. f*** them. At least Barack Obama does not have any contempt for gays and women.

Also, the only people I have ever seen with guns EVER are the police here. Knives are pretty popular, though. But I would expect that kind of response from someone who lives in America and has formed a well organised militia lately.  but my beef is not with you, you and rockandroll are bringing it itt. It's this jackass here who says poor people should hunt for their food in a western superpower.

Barack Obama's sudden "evolution" on gay marriage was such a calculated attempt to get the LGBT vote it's a wonder the LGBT community took him that seriously. I say that as someone who spoke out in favor of gay marriage more than a decade ago, much to the chagrin and strange looks from my friends and family. This is not a defense of Romney/Ryan. Romney and Obama are both liberals and they're both warmongers.

[Jason]

Chomsky is a classic capitalist and many of his hardcore followers don't get it.

 

Nor does Chomsky himself, apparently.

He'll never admit it but the proof is in the pudding.

http://www.hoover.org/publications/hoover-digest/article/6222

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

It is very unfortunate the power people have given these two stupid words: "Liberals" and "Conservatives" .... A linguist like Mr. Chomsky might himself be amused up in his ivory tower.

How about we from now on call Liberals "Child Rapists" and Conservatives "Child Molesters"?

I'm sure it would catch on quick and we'd get the same pathetic arguments and with each side being proud to be present themselves as either term.

Can't we all just get along and see that we're just being played like fiddles?

[GreatUrduPoet]

So what if you lost all yr money and yr home, would you be totally chill with strapping on yr bandanna and going Rambo through the streets of IDK Des Moines, Iowa or wherever the hell you live hunting down foxes because hey, at  least no goverrnment is holding you down (until a cop who doesn't understand your civil rights is literally holding you down for firing an automatic weapon in a suburban neighbourhood) and you and your family are free if so very cold #romney2012

I would expect a post like that from someone who lives in a country where criminals have more access to guns than law-abiding citizens. But I'll give you credit for not using the "Wild Wild West" analogy that so many other leftists use.

By the way, Romney is an enemy of gun rights.

Tbf, it would be quicker to list the rights of 21st century human beings that Romney Ryan don't oppose. It's a bitter, spiteful ticket. f*** them. At least Barack Obama does not have any contempt for gays and women.

Also, the only people I have ever seen with guns EVER are the police here. Knives are pretty popular, though. But I would expect that kind of response from someone who lives in America and has formed a well organised militia lately.  but my beef is not with you, you and rockandroll are bringing it itt. It's this jackass here who says poor people should hunt for their food in a western superpower.

Are you eligible to vote in the 2012 U.S. elections? You sound like you are located in a foreign land. I spend most of my time in the U.S. and Mexico an I see LOTS AND LOTS of criminals with guns around all the time. I'm not happy about it, but at least self-defense hasn't
been outlawed here yet (except in New York City, Washington, D.C., Maryland, Chicago and most of California.

[guitarfool2002]

I'll choose my words carefully and address this question to "those who are not conservatives", specifically those members outside the US. I'm not out to trap or mock anyone, but I'm genuinely curious, and I want to follow it up with an observation and question as well, in the best debate style.

Where did you or where do "those who are not conservatives" get their impression or image of Americans who identify themselves as "conservative"? Is it from the mass media, is it from films like those from Michael Moore, is it from American television such as Jon Stewart or Bill Maher, or other sources?

My comment: It looks a lot like stereotyping, and quite frankly it's not only amateurish from a political standpoint but it's a bit childish as well. In some of the viewpoints I've seen in this thread, anyone other than "those who are not conservative" is part of the same sub-group of citizens, who are a combination of stereotypical characteristics cobbled together into one ready-made image. And that image...do we need to list the hallmarks of that all-encompassing description? Some of the traits were mentioned on the last few pages.

I think it does a disservice to anyone holding a discussion or debate to rely on those points, because in my opinion it does nothing except play into whatever stereotype someone has formed in their mind if a person says "I'm a conservative".

Are we really at the point in political discourse where there is an assumption that individuals on either side are somehow homogenous and unable to be independent individual thinkers capable of taking their views from whichever side most agrees with their own? Or how about whichever side makes a stronger case and on a base level "makes more sense" than the opponent?

After all that, seriously, where are these stereotypes being formed and promoted so folks outside the US have such a crystal-clear image in mind of an American conservative...mind you, one which totally dismisses individuality in favor of lockstep group-think and stereotypes?

[hypehat]

So what if you lost all yr money and yr home, would you be totally chill with strapping on yr bandanna and going Rambo through the streets of IDK Des Moines, Iowa or wherever the hell you live hunting down foxes because hey, at  least no goverrnment is holding you down (until a cop who doesn't understand your civil rights is literally holding you down for firing an automatic weapon in a suburban neighbourhood) and you and your family are free if so very cold #romney2012

I would expect a post like that from someone who lives in a country where criminals have more access to guns than law-abiding citizens. But I'll give you credit for not using the "Wild Wild West" analogy that so many other leftists use.

By the way, Romney is an enemy of gun rights.

Tbf, it would be quicker to list the rights of 21st century human beings that Romney Ryan don't oppose. It's a bitter, spiteful ticket. f*** them. At least Barack Obama does not have any contempt for gays and women.

Also, the only people I have ever seen with guns EVER are the police here. Knives are pretty popular, though. But I would expect that kind of response from someone who lives in America and has formed a well organised militia lately.  but my beef is not with you, you and rockandroll are bringing it itt. It's this jackass here who says poor people should hunt for their food in a western superpower.

Barack Obama's sudden "evolution" on gay marriage was such a calculated attempt to get the LGBT vote it's a wonder the LGBT community took him that seriously. I say that as someone who spoke out in favor of gay marriage more than a decade ago, much to the chagrin and strange looks from my friends and family. This is not a defense of Romney/Ryan. Romney and Obama are both liberals and they're both warmongers.

He did repeal DADT. That's fairly major, even you have to admit. Limited to the military, yes, but with something like LGBT rights in a country like America there isn't going to be a big snap, it's going to have to come in tiny steps. I already admitted he's no saint, but, y'know he ain't Mittens. If both candidates suck the same corporate dick yadda yadda, isn't it better to still vote for the party whose few principles still remaining would do that? McCain would never have repealed DADT, there would be no reason to listen to LGBT minorities because THE GOP, BITCHES.

(Also, it's nice to see you won't try and defend the GOP stance on women because, JESUS... i wasn't aware it was the 30's, y'know)

Guitarfool, I get my American news from the Beeb, The Guardian (Brit paper), and the internet (another forum I frequent has more in-depth election discussion than here). BTW, all three reported on the fact that GOP con delegates threw peanuts at a (black) CNN camerawoman saying 'this is how we feed animals', so if I wasn't lacking for a reason to hate on modern Republican politics, there it is. That's discourse for ya.

Essentially, anyone who thinks that everyone having a gun somehow makes them safer is in some way delusional. (IMO)

What else? Ah yes,  GUP, you're a fool. I was satirising the point that you made by so calmly suggesting that man should have no qualm with hunting for his food in the United States of America in the year 2012 (in an election year, for gods sake). That is foolish. This is the 21st century, goddamit, and  I would like to think that we have evolved somewhat. In case you have missed my point, you are a fool*.



*Please note this is different in all other ways, except spelling, to a 'guitarfool', the 2002 model being another rather astute and valued commentator to these threads. Unlike you, you fool.

[Jason]

He did repeal DADT. That's fairly major, even you have to admit. Limited to the military, yes, but with something like LGBT rights in a country like America there isn't going to be a big snap, it's going to have to come in tiny steps. I already admitted he's no saint, but, y'know he ain't Mittens. If both candidates suck the same corporate dick yadda yadda, isn't it better to still vote for the party whose few principles still remaining would do that? McCain would never have repealed DADT, there would be no reason to listen to LGBT minorities because THE GOP, BITCHES.

(Also, it's nice to see you won't try and defend the GOP stance on women because, JESUS... i wasn't aware it was the 30's, y'know)

He repealed a law signed by a Democratic president (Bill Clinton) in 1993. It was a law that never should have been on the books to begin with. So no, the Democrats have no more love for gays than the Republicans do. It's too much of a wedge issue.

As far as the "war on women", I think it's half-true, half-hogwash. For one, no one has a right to birth control or abortions...that's not a "war on women", that's called "go out and pay for it yourself if you want it." However, I will fully agree with the stance that it's ridiculous that insurance companies cover Viagra but not birth control. I think both should be covered or neither should be covered.

[guitarfool2002]

Guitarfool, I get my American news from the Beeb, The Guardian (Brit paper), and the internet (another forum I frequent has more in-depth election discussion than here). BTW, all three reported on the fact that GOP con delegates threw peanuts at a (black) CNN camerawoman saying 'this is how we feed animals', so if I wasn't lacking for a reason to hate on modern Republican politics, there it is. That's discourse for ya.

Essentially, anyone who thinks that everyone having a gun somehow makes them safer is in some way delusional. (IMO)

What else? Ah yes,  GUP, you're a fool. I was satirising the point that you made by so calmly suggesting that man should have no qualm with hunting for his food in the United States of America in the year 2012 (in an election year, for gods sake). That is foolish. This is the 21st century, goddamit, and  I would like to think that we have evolved somewhat. In case you have missed my point, you are a fool*.



*Please note this is different in all other ways, except spelling, to a 'guitarfool', the 2002 model being another rather astute and valued commentator to these threads. Unlike you, you fool.

I'm only taking these excerpts in the quote because that's the part relative to my question. First, thanks for the reply and the kind words!

Second, I would ask that you reconsider your views in light of a few points which I'll make.

That incident at the GOP convention - are there not idiots in every group, at every gathering, at every opportunity, in essence? I don't think it is a good idea to take what were a bunch of idiots, less than perhaps even a miniscule percentage of the total number of attendees at that event, and use that to suggest the entire crowd is that same way.

Do we need to go as far as this very board from the previous summers' tour in the US, to find those eyewitness accounts of a few concert goers acting rude, being obnoxious, or in general acting like a bunch of asses? Do those accounts of a few choice fans who are assholes and acted up at the concerts in any way represent the majority of fans who went to see the Beach Boys this year and enjoyed the show without acting the fool?

In that case, you can take the negative experiences of one concert and either dismiss it as an isolated incident of someone acting like a jerk, or take it to suggest that the actions of a few jackasses defined the experience of that particular Beach Boys concert.

Would it be ok, then, to define any event where someone gets out of line by that incident rather than the overall actions of the larger group?

Take it to the recent conventions where various Occupy groups had shown up to protest outside the venues: Some of these folks took the opportunity to dangle donuts on fishing poles in front of police assigned to patrol the streets outside the event, and there are reports of others who were making deliberate attempts to clog the emergency services in the area by phoning in fake reports and calls to bog down the ambulance and fire response by sending them on wild goose chases and worse. The donuts on fishing rods is to be expected - the emergency services bit is not only illegal but dangerous. I haven't heard a follow-up on the sum of all those activities, other than a certain Occupy group asking the same police officers who they were taunting with donuts for directions to their next protest location when they couldn't find it.

Is everyone identified with the Occupy movement that inconsiderate and that ignorant to think it was in any way beneficial to delay or distract emergency services in the name of politics, or to suggest they agreed with or participated in that tactic? Is it fair to suggest anyone who walks under the "Occupy" banner is of the same selfish and irresponsible mindset as those few idiots?

Is it - I won't use the word "fair" - is it right to take the actions of a few idiots and irresponsible jerks to somehow define the sum of others in their particular group?

If it were right to do that, it would justify many a stereotype for those who would seek to use stereotypes for whatever reason...and I'd ask that the actions of a few idiots at the RNC convention not be applied the same way to everyone identifying themselves as a Republican, because it simply is not the truth any more than it would be to tag all Democrats based on the questionable behavior of some of their members.

It does work both ways, I'd just ask for a little bit more consideration before lumping all people together with those peanut-throwing folks.

And if that were the standard, I could say without hesitation that the average Mets or Red Sox fan is a bloated, drunken, loudmouthed jerk based on the games I've seen them play against the Phillies.    But I know to assume that based on the jerks I've encountered is not correct or not even logical.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

"He repealed a law signed by a Democratic president (Bill Clinton) in 1993. It was a law that never should have been on the books to begin with. So no, the Democrats have no more love for gays than the Republicans do. It's too much of a wedge issue.

As far as the "war on women", I think it's half-true, half-hogwash. For one, no one has a right to birth control or abortions...that's not a "war on women", that's called "go out and pay for it yourself if you want it." However, I will fully agree with the stance that it's ridiculous that insurance companies cover Viagra but not birth control. I think both should be covered or neither should be covered."



Well, that's one of the defining characteristics of a Republican stereotype: that no one has the right to anything (other than to bear arms, that is) .... Yeah, I get it: no one should have the right to something like preventing a pregnancy (I won't even get into abortion) that might create more poor people for stereotypical conservatives and conservative politicians to hate and cut all programs for while raping the kid's parents through taxes. It's all a vicious cycle of hateful stupidity. OK, would you feel better if condoms and safe sex info was SOLD to kids in schools? Or covered via health insurance with a special extra co-pay?

When does the idiocy ever end? When is ugly ugly enough?

[Jason]

Why do I have to pay for someone else's abortion or birth control? I have no moral or legal obligation to do so. If you can't afford birth control, here's a tip. DON'T f***. And if you get pregnant from CONSENSUAL SEX and can't afford an abortion, live with the consequences or take out a loan to pay for it.

This isn't the United States of False Entitlement.

You have the right to your life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Your right ends where another's begins. But a government mandate that tells me I have to pay taxes to provide for birth control and abortions for "underprivileged women" (let's be real, many of these 'underprivileged women" are the Sandra Fluke types in universities)...no. Never. This is another reason why I will defend the right to bear arms - to keep people who THINK they have a right to my life and my liberty from unlawfully depriving ME of it...by any means necessary.

[hypehat]

Why do I have to pay for someone else's abortion or birth control? I have no moral or legal obligation to do so. If you can't afford birth control, here's a tip. DON'T f***. And if you get pregnant from CONSENSUAL SEX and can't afford an abortion, live with the consequences or take out a loan to pay for it.

This isn't the United States of False Entitlement.

You have the right to your life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Your right ends where another's begins. But a government mandate that tells me I have to pay taxes to provide for birth control and abortions for "underprivileged women" (let's be real, many of these 'underprivileged women" are the Sandra Fluke types in universities)...no. Never. This is another reason why I will defend the right to bear arms - to keep people who THINK they have a right to my life and my liberty from unlawfully depriving ME of it...by any means necessary.

Whoo, now THIS is going to get interesting....

[Jason]

Why do I have to pay for someone else's abortion or birth control? I have no moral or legal obligation to do so. If you can't afford birth control, here's a tip. DON'T f***. And if you get pregnant from CONSENSUAL SEX and can't afford an abortion, live with the consequences or take out a loan to pay for it.

This isn't the United States of False Entitlement.

You have the right to your life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Your right ends where another's begins. But a government mandate that tells me I have to pay taxes to provide for birth control and abortions for "underprivileged women" (let's be real, many of these 'underprivileged women" are the Sandra Fluke types in universities)...no. Never. This is another reason why I will defend the right to bear arms - to keep people who THINK they have a right to my life and my liberty from unlawfully depriving ME of it...by any means necessary.

Whoo, now THIS is going to get interesting....

Bring it on. I already had two folks on Facebook unfriend me because I called the striking Chicago teacher's union a group of welfare whores.

My point is simple. Pay for your own bloody birth control and stop trying to sponge off others.

[hypehat]

Guitarfool, I have no reason to believe that anyone at the 70+ dates of the Beach Boy tour debased a member of the press with racial slurs and abuse. It's clearly something the attendee thought was appropriate at their parties national convention. Not quite the same as getting drunk and singing along off key at a gig (if something worse happened at a gig, sure, but I haven't heard it). The OWS stuff is crappy, yes - not the donuts thing, because, hey it's protest and irreverence and mockery towards authorities is kinda the point. The line should be drawn at emergency services, though, you're quite right. I don't think our Occupy did those things (they did smash up Tory HQ though, which didn't help much on the PR sidee  )

Amazingly, not a lot of the Occupy stuff made it across the pond after the first couple of weeks. What a strange year of quasi-protest we have both had.

RE: There's also Todd Akin, 'Corporations are people, my friend', the socialist as four letter word and birther 'scandal' following Obama around (Mitt even mentioned it two weeks  ago!).... It's easier to get unfiltered, or aat least, differently filtered stuff nowadays. I have seen literally nothing of the Republican tickets that have said 'that man/woman/robot is sane and I am happy for that person to b Leader Of The Free  World'. Call it a hunch!

Also, no sweat on the kind words - you guys argue all the time, but they're nice and respectful arguments. What I don't dig is some other posters going 'nice try LOL' and demeaning the discussion. I can do that plenty myself  

[Jason]

I agree that the personal attacks against people for their views are a bit much. As I've stated before, I've disagreed with rockandroll more than anyone here but I never personally attacked him. I respect his viewpoints and his willingness to be open about them, mainly because my own viewpoints are similarly "controversial".

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Why do I have to pay for someone else's abortion or birth control? I have no moral or legal obligation to do so. If you can't afford birth control, here's a tip. DON'T f***. And if you get pregnant from CONSENSUAL SEX and can't afford an abortion, live with the consequences or take out a loan to pay for it.

This isn't the United States of False Entitlement.

You have the right to your life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Your right ends where another's begins. But a government mandate that tells me I have to pay taxes to provide for birth control and abortions for "underprivileged women" (let's be real, many of these 'underprivileged women" are the Sandra Fluke types in universities)...no. Never. This is another reason why I will defend the right to bear arms - to keep people who THINK they have a right to my life and my liberty from unlawfully depriving ME of it...by any means necessary.

[hypehat]

Why do I have to pay for someone else's abortion or birth control? I have no moral or legal obligation to do so. If you can't afford birth control, here's a tip. DON'T f***. And if you get pregnant from CONSENSUAL SEX and can't afford an abortion, live with the consequences or take out a loan to pay for it.

This isn't the United States of False Entitlement.

You have the right to your life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Your right ends where another's begins. But a government mandate that tells me I have to pay taxes to provide for birth control and abortions for "underprivileged women" (let's be real, many of these 'underprivileged women" are the Sandra Fluke types in universities)...no. Never. This is another reason why I will defend the right to bear arms - to keep people who THINK they have a right to my life and my liberty from unlawfully depriving ME of it...by any means necessary.

Whoo, now THIS is going to get interesting....

Bring it on. I already had two folks on Facebook unfriend me because I called the striking Chicago teacher's union a group of welfare whores.

My point is simple. Pay for your own bloody birth control and stop trying to sponge off others.

Questionable rhetoric aside - why use whores? Could it be you are saying questionable things to stoke attention on the internet in lieu of real substance to your outlook?

People should have readily accessible birth control because a) sh*t happens to everyone b) no-one deserves unwanted pregnancy c) it's cheaper than benefits to single mums or unemployed parents. If the government provides the options (like condoms, seeing as you are conveniently forgetting men in this thing - condoms burst, mate, but i bet it's the 'whore's' fault) i see literally no reason to get offended when there are probably millions of other things that government spends money on you could be (rightfully) getting pissed off at.

And saying WHORE on facebook is a pretty bad look imo

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Why do I have to pay for someone else's abortion or birth control? I have no moral or legal obligation to do so. If you can't afford birth control, here's a tip. DON'T f***. And if you get pregnant from CONSENSUAL SEX and can't afford an abortion, live with the consequences or take out a loan to pay for it.

This isn't the United States of False Entitlement.

You have the right to your life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Your right ends where another's begins. But a government mandate that tells me I have to pay taxes to provide for birth control and abortions for "underprivileged women" (let's be real, many of these 'underprivileged women" are the Sandra Fluke types in universities)...no. Never. This is another reason why I will defend the right to bear arms - to keep people who THINK they have a right to my life and my liberty from unlawfully depriving ME of it...by any means necessary.

So, a 13, 14, 15 year old is supposed to go buy condoms? REALLY? Do I need to even open up THIS discussion? Just how much ignorance and selfishness are you willing to openly display?

So, I'm assuming you must also take issue with your tax $$$ going into building churches? Huge, expensive rooms especially set aside for deity worship and why?? ....... Because it's a right to worship!

How about this: if you fall and crack your head open, please do not call 911 because someone else is paying for that 911 operator and someone else is paying for that ambulance. And please stop using streetlights, or crosswalks, or electricity: or the internet and please take your guns and go live in the woods and let's see how many rights the animals give you at night. We live in a sovereign nation, where people go and die en masse for freedoms and rights that you seem to have a lot of anger about.

Do you REALLY care if a cent of your tax dollars goes toward sex education of safe sex options for teens and women (and men)? Really? Do you take the same issue with that money going toward carpet bombs that kill men, women, and children in far off places? Somehow I think you're just fine with that.

[Jason]

Why do I have to pay for someone else's abortion or birth control? I have no moral or legal obligation to do so. If you can't afford birth control, here's a tip. DON'T f***. And if you get pregnant from CONSENSUAL SEX and can't afford an abortion, live with the consequences or take out a loan to pay for it.

This isn't the United States of False Entitlement.

You have the right to your life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Your right ends where another's begins. But a government mandate that tells me I have to pay taxes to provide for birth control and abortions for "underprivileged women" (let's be real, many of these 'underprivileged women" are the Sandra Fluke types in universities)...no. Never. This is another reason why I will defend the right to bear arms - to keep people who THINK they have a right to my life and my liberty from unlawfully depriving ME of it...by any means necessary.

Whoo, now THIS is going to get interesting....

Bring it on. I already had two folks on Facebook unfriend me because I called the striking Chicago teacher's union a group of welfare whores.

My point is simple. Pay for your own bloody birth control and stop trying to sponge off others.

Questionable rhetoric aside - why use whores? Could it be you are saying questionable things to stoke attention on the internet in lieu of real substance to your outlook?

People should have readily accessible birth control because a) sh*t happens to everyone b) no-one deserves unwanted pregnancy c) it's cheaper than benefits to single mums or unemployed parents. If the government provides the options (like condoms, seeing as you are conveniently forgetting men in this thing - condoms burst, mate, but i bet it's the 'whore's' fault) i see literally no reason to get offended when there are probably millions of other things that government spends money on you could be getting pissed off at.

And saying WHORE on facebook is a pretty bad look imo

As you well know I am not one for subtlety. It was not an attack on women. It was an objective conclusion based on the evidence I had at hand.

I do agree that people should have the easiest access to birth control; I've never disputed that. I think it should be EASIER and CHEAPER to acquire birth control...condoms, contraceptive pills, IUD, depo shot, you name it. I want it all on the free market, to be purchased at your local corner store, supermarket, pharmacy (chemist for those of you in the UK), you name it. But with this availability will come the need for personal responsibility. I think EVERYONE (men and women) needs to take on this responsibility. It is the responsibility of parents to teach this responsibility to their children; it is not the responsibility of the government. And yes, in the case of unwanted pregnancies I am not saying "thou shalt bear the fruit of thine unwed coitus". I am saying if they want or need to get an abortion to go ahead and do it...but they have to shoulder that responsibility.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Here's a hypothetical situation RealBeachBoy:

Let's forget all these "whores" and shoulda-known-better 13 year old girls who got knocked up by a wise and considerate 25 year old neighbor: how about...... now please TRY and imagine...... that you, a smart and personally responsible man........ meets a member of the opposite sex and...... has sex....... Wonderful! Now, ...... a few weeks later, it seems like it's starting to burn when you take a leak..... Hmmmmmm, did you use a condom or were you too embarrassed to ask if she had one? Or did you assume that any woman willing to have sex out of wedlock is a whore and just must have been handed her own file of condoms from ..... wait... our of YOUR pocket??? So, it's her responsibility to have them and if she doesn't?.... Well, of course you'll demand that she keeps the baby, right? But first things first: it burns when you pee, and who knows what else you might have contracted.... Soooooo, do you have health insurance? If so, you try and get an appointment, but it's Friday and they can't even see you until next week and it's REALLY starting to burn and you're freaking out, so......... Ah, there's a Planned Parenthood clinic nearby! What??? You can just show up and they'll test you up and down and advise you on how to prevent such a panic in the future! Yup, it will be a nice experience! Oh, and they'll also give you a little something to take care of that burning piss problem.... Oh, but wait..... WTF?? A infinitesimal portion of your tax $$$ went to..... what..... THIS?

Surely you'd refuse treatment (and the free condoms that you might now be wise enough to keep around) and walk out that door a proud "personally responsible" Conservative!

Good riddance....