* Please note, if you are easily offended and don't like very graphic language - don't read this! I don't want to read comments complaining about the salty language. But now you've been told!
What is it with Conservatives? Why are so many of them obsessed with the sex lives of others?
Gay marriage
Too many conservatives fought this one. REAL Women of Canada actually suggested that allowing gay people to get married decreases the number of straight people getting married. Really?
Maybe formal marriages are decreasing because people see no need to get that little piece of paper for a variety of reasons. But I am pretty sure that people aren't getting married because gay people can. Although I did read that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie made a public statement saying that they would not get married until gay marriage was legalized in California. But I dont' think that is what REAL was talking about.
If my friend Fred over at GayAndRight decided to get married to his very charming and handsome boyfriend it would in no way offend me. Or make my own marriage less valid, sacred or whatever in any way. The only thing that offends me is that as an event planner I haven't been able to break into that market! (Note to self - develop new marketing plan.)
Abortion
On this topic I agree with President Bill Clinton. Abortion should be safe, legal and rare. Any woman who is faced with this decision has my deepest and sincerest empathy. I do not envy her this choice and I won't judge any woman on this. Who knows what the circumstances leading up to her pregnancy were. No woman wakes up and says to herself, "Hmm, I think today is a good day to get pregnant, then have an abortion later on". Okay, maybe Sinead O'Connor did but that girl has got issues.
Too many conservatives are still fighting to have the legislation on this changed. But it's done. Women in Canada have the legal right to terminate a pregnancy. That is not going to change. I don't have any stats but I suspect that abortion isn't more common because it's legally available.
Women have induced abortions for thousands of years. A tea of mugwort and pennyroyal has been a standard for European women for centuries. Other cultures and climates have their own concoctions to induce. My mother told me of how women she knew used knitting needles or got blind drunk on Pernod to terminate a pregnancy.
Mugwort and pennyroyal will kill if the mixture isn't prepared exactly. Knitting needles and coat hangers cause deadly infections. Alcohol poisoning can knock you out forever. No woman deserves to die because she has an unwanted pregnancy.
Abortions aren't going to stop.
Want to prevent abortions? Well, then we need to get to my next point with the SoCon obsession with other people fucking.
Sex Ed and Contraception
All the folks ranting and raving about sex ed in the schools are conservative. And the suggestion that condoms be handed out in high schools is enough to make a SoCon's head implode. (Don't come with comments about it's not the school's responsibility either. I don't buy that - this is a health issue. We immunize kids in schools. Prevent pregnancy is morally akin to preventing disease. We do one and should do the other.) But I digress.
Remember the third world maternal health program? Remember when it was first announced that contraception would not be included? Remember the reaction?
Stephen Harper looked like a schmuck and Conservatives looked like ignorant, self righteous prigs.
Information and condoms for everyone! Conservatives like to pride themselves on business acuity. Seems to me that an investment in sex ed and condoms/birth control will pay off in saving millions, hell, billions on welfare, healthcare (think AIDS and STDs) and prison.
Prostitution
And this is the item that inspired me to write this post. It appears that Justice Minister Rob Nicholson is appealing to Craigslist to remove ads for prostitutes. Doesn't he have anything better to do with his time? Real criminals to be concerned with?
Okay, I know it is illegal to solicit but why is that?
Some women agree to have sex after a man takes them out to dinner and a movie. Some women have sex because they feel the need to get laid. Some women agree to have sex after a man proclaims his love. Some women agree to have sex with a man only after he has said "I do" in a very official ceremony. And some women have sex with men who give them cash.
Cash, dinner, diamond ring. One thing being exchanged for another.
What goes on between consenting adults who want to fuck each other - how they negotiate that is quite frankly nobody's business but their own.
And there you have it. The conservative obsession with other people fucking.
It makes me wonder why. Why are so many conservatives obsessed with the sex lives of others ? Psychology 101 tells me that it's because they aren't getting any of the good stuff themselves. So they project. Sad really.
Conservatives need to have more sex. Even Mark Steyn thinks we should be having more sex and he's advocating unprotected sex! And who am I to argue with Mark Steyn.
So like the man I have previously called the most perfect man on the planet, I encourage all conservatives to start having more sex.
I don't care with who you have sex with. None of my business. Or why you have sex. None of my business.
But, I am always open for a good gossip session. I would like to formally invite any MP staffer (don't care about party affiliation) out for drinks. I just want to buy a refreshing beverage for all you poor overworked, under appreciated foundations of our democracy. I know that you are the legs that your MP stands on. I understand - I once worked for a politician as community liaison,event management and communications, I know you are overworked and undervalued! You drink, I buy. I listen. We'll have fun!
But it all comes down to this message for conservatives. Stop obsessing with other people fucking and start obsessing about who you are fucking.
Like the ad says, just do it.
Still I had to laugh when Dennis Miller (who is more of a Ayn Rand type Libertarian actually as I am) said that San Franciso banning Happy Meals because they are bad for your health is hilarious since some statistics say that if you are a man having sex with men you can shave 20 years off your life.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on almost everything you said.
ReplyDeleteGay marriage? Marriage rates were declining long before the term "gay marriage" was even being whispered in political circles. Besides, the government shouldn't even be in the marriage business.
Abortion? Nobody thinks it's a good thing. I certainly am against it but don't believe that outlawing it is the solution. And, no, it's not murder. Taking the life of another human being with malicious intent is murder. But even sometimes the taking of adult human life is justified otherwise we wouldn't have wars.
Contraception? People have to get over themselves. Especially when you have people against both contraception and abortion. Look, if you consider abortion to be the greater evil, then what do you care if a person uses a rubber or is on the pill?
Prostitution? There are more evils resulting from the outlawing of prostitution than if it were legal. And if our concern is over women being objectified or threatened, it's a lot worse in a state of illegality than legality.
Where I disagree with you is in regards to the whole Harper and the Third World Maternal Health Program. The media and the left-wing have done a very good job in portraying it as being an entirely ideological question when in fact it was more a question of efficiency.
First of all, the only thing the Conservatives were not going to fund was abortion (a pregnant woman can't use condoms or birth control pills). And this was portrayed entirely as a Canadian ideological issue.
But the fact is that the overwhelming majority of Third World countries, a) outlaw abortion, and b) don't like outside countries interfering with their internal ideologies. Any stipulation regarding abortion funding in the first place would be like throwing a molotov cocktail into what should be a straight up issue in helping pregnant women.
If abortion were to come into play, it would add a huge bureaucratic mess in dealing with these third world countries. This in the end would hinder the ability to deliver what the whole program was focused on: maternal health.
Even if we were to consider adding abortion into the equation, it would be more helpful to first establish the maternal health program without abortion. It can always be added later on.
I'm sure there were ideological elements within the Conservative party who would be against abortion delivery as it is. But even the openly gay, pro-choice feminist Senator Nancy Ruth knew the dangers in pursuing abortion as part of any maternal health program... hence her "shut the f___ up" comment that was so often repeated.
Wow! And to think I found this at Blogging Tories!
ReplyDeleteActually, Surecure, Rightchik is correct in stating that initially the plan did NOT include contraception.
Here's Larry Loose Cannon:
"It does not deal in any way, shape or form with family planning. Indeed, the purpose of this is to be able to save lives," Mr. Cannon told the Foreign Affairs committee.
From here.
They walked that one back pretty quickly, but it was certainly there. And as Rightchik says Conservatives looked like ignorant, self-righteous prigs. On the world stage,no less.
But then, I think this batch of Conservatives are ignorant, self-righteous prigs mostly. Anti-fact, anti-science, anti-sex, anti-anything modern or progressive.
I agree with you on everything except abortion.
ReplyDeleteThe anti-human progressive movement is only too happy push the cost of living up such that children are to expensive to have. They don't want us having children for the sake of the planet incase you hanv't been paying attention.
I think that free unlimited abortions paid for on the backs of people who can't afford children of their own is an aberration of the role of government.
The first abortion would have a small fee. If the girl hasn't learned about condoms the second time around she should pay the full cost.
You can't deny that economics is a factor in the abortion decision. This makes it far to easy to wipe out a class of people with the skillful deployment taxes. Its humane genocide, but its still genocide.
Surecure, on Tuesday March 16, 2010 Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon insisted that contraception would not be part of the maternal health program.
ReplyDeleteTwo days later Stephen Harper said "We are not closing doors against any options, including contraception...But we do not want a debate here or elsewhere on abortion."
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/03/18/birth-control-maternal-health.html?ref=rss#ixzz14QFhQvMF
So, however the plan was originally written (and be careful what you claim because I personally know the man who wrote the original proposal) was not how it was officially rolled out.
Harper removed contraception from the roll out because he was throwing a bone to the SoCons. Turns out he had a bigger dog turn around and bite him in the ass!
He backstepped and conceded what was originally in the plan - the need for contraception as part of maternal health programming.
But back to my original point. The SoCon minority in the Conservative party are obsessed with other people's sex lives. Really, so many SoCon issues are related to sex.
Sex, sex, sex. It's just sex with these people. LOL.
So tell me, because you never mentioned it - do you think Conservatives should have more sex?
Alex, the comment about girls needing to learn about condoms shows an amazing lack of insight on this issue. Don't assume or presume that women get pregnant because they are not using condoms. Condoms aren't 100%. Neither is the pill. I found that out 25 years ago but lucky for me, I had the ability to choose to carry through with my pregnancy. Believe it or not, accidents do happen.
ReplyDeleteA woman who is raped, molested or assaulted shouldn't be penalized for getting pregnant.
And if it is a choice between the mother's health and carrying through with the pregnancy - then again, why should she be penalized.
There are so many reasons why women find themselves with an unwanted pregnancy and quite frankly it isn't up to you to decide.
Honestly you are presenting a very warped conspiracy theory. Inflation happens so people won't have children? Give your head a shake and rethink that.
Abortions happen because women have unwanted pregnancies. Which occur for a variety of reasons. Abortions are sad. I know many women who have had abortions and none - none, did so flippantly.
As for the unlimited abortions - why limit that? Why not limit - cardiovascular treatments like heart bypasses or cancer treatments. Hell, a form of diabetes can be prevented with proper diet.
Why don't we revoke health care from people who don't eat right and excercise?
Again, abortion is sad and heartbreaking but it is nobody's business but the woman involved.
Fern, you're missing something very important here. The majority of Conservatives are not ignorant, self-righteous prigs mostly. Or anti-fact, anti-science, anti-sex, anti-anything modern or progressive.
ReplyDeleteThat group is a distinct minority within the party and it would be a mistake to paint all Conservatives with that brush.
Perhaps you need to engage with more conservatives. Read Maxime Bernier's blog or gayandright.blogspot.com There is always the blog of Making Sense with Gerry Nicholls as well. Anything by Karen Sellick will inform as well.
Here's the truth of the matter. SoCons are like the crazy uncle that every family has. Weird, loud, annoying, sometimes scary but not really much of a threat. More bark than bite.
SoCons distract. Trust me on this one Fern. But if you don't then just check out the blogs I mentioned.
Rightchik, you're absolutely right. I personally believe that Fred has the same right to be miserable as straight people. I myself vote conservative because it seems the safest way to protect liberalism. Most of the conservatives stay away from bedroom issues, it's the so-called liberals that would have taxpayer-funded cameras in my house if they thought it would get them elected. As a matter of fact, the people that I see that seem to match the media profile of a social conservative are usually people that vote Liberal (I'm talkin' PEI here. It's beyond dot-com.).
ReplyDeleteNow if I could only find a hooker....
Paul, you are connected to the internet. Finding a hooker should be easy! Just like pizza or fried chicken - they deliver. Have fun but play safe!
ReplyDeleteYou sound like you're as much of a nag as those who you're screeching at. But it's okay for you to be that way because you're a Libertarian! Lucky You! Tell me, why is it that you people don’t go off and start a Libertarian Party and show us Conservatives what you’re “made of” by winning an election. I dare ya!
ReplyDeletePS : abortion is wrong because it's the destroying of a human life. It doesn't matter how you ignore that fact or reminisce about what dear old Mom said back in the olden days.
The killing of humans should be reserved for those who murder, not beautiful innocent babies.
Rightchik, I know there are -- or were -- reasonable 'Conservatives'.
ReplyDeleteI liked you guys better before you took the 'Progressive' out. Although at least it's honest. There is nothing progressive about this present gang.
But the so-con religious crazies have taken over your party. Look at the whackadoodle Teabaggers in the US. That's where you're headed.
And now Jim Prentice has bailed, leaving, as one ProgBlogger said, the mean intelligence in Cabinet significantly lower.
I was just kidding about the hooker part. There's enough people giving it away for free anyway!
ReplyDeleteBlame Crash, your suggestion that killing a fetus in the stages of development is the same thing as killing a human being seems to be lacking in research. While the fetus is ripe with cellular life, the absence of a soul (which has been proven measurable and detectable) makes that fetus in the early stages of development as much of a human being as a car is a car without the engine. I can agree with you that abortion is not a good solution for bad family planning, but there are instances where it would be best to terminate the development of a fetus before it's occupied as the potential end-user would be sorely lacking the needs of any developing human being. I'm sure there'll be much name calling over this subject from both sides of the fence, either for religous reasons or for emotional attachments to an opinion, but this is an issue that will never be solved until it is understood.
ReplyDeleteI absolutely disagree with you. Strong families, respect for life, and protecting the dignity of women is the basis of a strong and prosperous civilization.
ReplyDeleteConservatives care about other people "f*cking" because irresponsible choices have direct consequences for society -- a society shared by everyone.
Conservatives stand for human rights and human dignity. The unborn "fetus" is scientifically a human being, and to suggest that it should die due to convenience because they're smaller, less developed, or even disabled pure discrimination. At 5 weeks old, the heart is already beating. Canada has a declining birth rate -- and yet we continue to kill our future. Abortion also has various side effects. Most empirical studies have shown that is causes breast cancer. Depression and mental illness are also another side effect. As for rape, it is a very difficult circumstance; however we should be punishing the criminal, not the innocent child. There are alternatives and options out there besides abortion.
As for prostitution, as a conservative I am absolutely against it. I will refuse to let Canada become to next Netherlands or the world's capital of human trafficking, sexual abuse, and exploitation. In Canada, most prostitutes start out as teenagers because they are desperate to make money. To turn a blind eye away from these people and dismiss the issue of exploitation as a matter of "people f*cking" is irresponsible and absolutely void of compassion.
Just because abortion and prostitution continue to happen does not mean we should stand up for what is right. Murder will continue to occur -- should we legalize that too? Think about it.
I stand corrected on the possibility pro/con of contraception.
ReplyDeleteThat however doesn't change a single element of my argument. Helping pregnant women is a great thing. That is something that all parties can agree on.
Adding any discussion of abortion -- pro or con -- is as I said like throwing a molotov cocktail into the discussion. People have the right to their opinion. And on abortion I believe that people have the right to fight for what they think is right.
The question is, why do you think it is absolutely 100% necessary for there to be a debate on abortion in trying to implement a program to help pregnant women?
To suggest it is 100% necessary would be just as ideologically nonsensical as what you accuse the Conservatives of being. This legislation could have gone through easily, effectively helping women in third world countries.
Instead we got a political sideshow. Whose fault is that? Certainly not the Conservatives.
Politics is just as much about finding common ground as it is making change. The Conservatives put forward funding for the things that were agreeable to everybody. The Opposition were the ones who turned it into an ideological head-butting.
I'm sorry if you can't see it.
Right on, Rightchik! I keep telling people that there's a silent majority of sane & rational conservatives that get drowned out by the shrieking minority of jabbering sex-obsessed nanny-statist nitwits (aka socons), but they don't believe me. Finally, I have proof :p
ReplyDelete(PS - Love the shoes!)
Blame Crash. Gee, what a wit you are. Name calling in order to make your argument. Really it says a lot more about you than it does about me. Here's a little bit of reality - the majority of Canadians agree with me. The majority of Canadians believe that abortion is a choice that is private and not up for public discussion. And your feeble attempts at insulting me aren't going to change that.
ReplyDeletePaul, not only do you have a sense of humour but you are smart. And with your looks I suspect that finding companionship will not be an issue. But again, have fun, play safe!
Anon @ 3:35 you argue that the sex lives of others is your business because of their impact on society. How tall are you? How old are you? What is your weight? Trying to figure out your BMI. Your cholesterol levels – what are those numbers? What's your diet like? Do you drink? Do you smoke? Do you do cardiovascular exercise 3 times a week? What about weight training? How many glasses of water do you drink a day. Do you eat 8 - 10 servings of vegetables and fruit a day?
You say "Conservatives care about other people "f*cking" because irresponsible choices have direct consequences for society -- a society shared by everyone." I could go on and on about different things that are really private choices that could be argued to have impact on the public. Your lifestyle could cost society. So are you one of those people who live in glass houses and throws stones?
Also what makes you think you have a monopoly on “Strong families, respect for life, and protecting the dignity of women is the basis of a strong and prosperous civilization.” ?
There is something that SoCons, particularly those who are Christian always seem to forget. Matthew 8:28-34. Remember the part about shaking the dust from your feet as you leave a home or city that will not receive you or hear your words.
Your religious views are not mine and this is a democracy not a theocracy.
Suggesting murder be legalized is sophomoric. Paying for or receiving money for sex is not the same as depriving a person of their life. As for abortion the legal question has been resolved, a fetus is not a person. Just like an acorn is not the same as an oak tree. BTW, StatsCan shows that abortion rates are decreasing. Yes, decreasing.
I say this in spite of my own religious views. Mine is a fertility religion – I’m a pagan. Life is sacred. But my faith is that – mine. I will not force my faith on anyone and my gods don’t require me to.
Surecure you ask why do I think it is absolutely 100% necessary for there to be a debate on abortion in trying to implement a program to help pregnant women? I don’t. Never said that. So I am not sure what you are trying to ask me. Never suggested that abortion be part of the third world maternal health program. But I sure think that contraception needs to be part of it.
And to suggest that Conservatives only put forward policies that are agreeable to everybody is simply incredulous! Are you so blind that you can’t see that every politician – every government in spite of political stripe– takes the opportunity to take advantage of ideological head butting. You can’t possibly be that naive or that doctrinarian? Or are you?
JJ – thanks for the kind words! I’ve said it before and I will say it again. SoCons are clearly not representative of the majority of Conservatives. Just like they aren’t representative of the majority of Canadians. Their vocal insistence on obsessing with other people fucking is annoying but whatever. It’s not like they have enough votes to change anything!
Paul, so it’s “lacking in research” eh!
ReplyDeleteWhose research would that be? The very same peoples research that call abortion pro-choice”? Well that figures!
I have no intention of letting the so called smart set do my thinking for me. The reason for that is they’re just not that smart. They can dress up their ideology in the clothing of “objective science” all they want, but I see it for what it truly is and that’s “bunk”. Has the Global Warming hoax taught us nothing?
Can’t YOU see how corrupt and untrustworthy science has become, or maybe it would be better to say it always has been that way.
Now, about your “potential end user” comment. To be blunt, what the hell is that? Are you referring to an unborn human? Are you insinuating that this unborn human would prefer not to exist because he or she might not be born into an environment that YOU deem suitable. Well, that’s big of you!
"Their vocal insistence on obsessing with other people fucking is annoying but whatever. It’s not like they have enough votes to change anything!"
ReplyDeleteI'm a so-con and I vote the way I do because these are my beliefs. They do not depend on the snide remarks of an MSM editor, the sleazy arguements of a lawyer, the arrogant blustering of some pompous assed judge or the shrill shrieking of a blogger.
Who knows if so-cons have enough votes to change anything? But I would be willing to wager they have enough votes to deny the CPC a majority or probably even a government.
I'm a thoughful voter. I am not stupid as you believe so-cons to be. Nor am I a Bible thumping religious wacko. But my conscience DOES guide my decisions. They are not swayed simply because a given pressure group screams that they are a victim.
If my views are disagreeable to you - tough.
Then we have fern hill (AKA : typical leftard)
ReplyDeleteMy question to you is when the are you Canadian leftards going to stop blindingly following everything that your American masters tell you? Or are you claiming you’ve never noticed that about yourselves before? Figures!!
As a social conservative I have ask, if the CPC libertarians hate us so cons so much then why bother voting for the party THEY support? I'm getting a bit sick of being called names and having my ideals belittled and smeared.
ReplyDeleteIf we have so little influence then maybe it might be useful to simply sit out the next election and see if anything happens?
Blame Crash, you called me out, but I have no idea what you are blathering about. Merkin masters? Huh?
ReplyDeleteJohn, democracy is hard. And quite frankly SoCons get a hard time because they give others a hard time. SoCons are not content to live and let live. You insist that your religious philosophies be mandanted. That's why SoCons get their chops busted! At least be honest.
ReplyDeleteCPC libertarians don't hate SoCons. Why use that word? CPC libertarians are frustrated that SoCons continue fighting battles that are finished.
Move on to other issues - issues that can get majority governments. Accept that your views on abortion and gay marriage do not represent the average Canadian voter.
Go ahead. Sit out the next election. Seriously. Can you get all of your SoCon friends to agree?
Hey, write a press release! Let every Canadian voter know that SoCons are no longer part of the CPC. Please. It will help the CPC get a majority.
Press releases are kind of stone age don't you think?
ReplyDeleteI could simply go on the comments boards of various blogs and pretend to be a libertarian - and, using some libertarian's own words, (paraphrased of course) piss off as many socons as I can and then THEY will stay home.
The same idea would work with Quebecers too. Pissed off Quebecers vote Bloc not CPC.
Or I could go to libertarian blogs and provoke them into statements that would infuriate socons.
There are lot's of ways of creating a dissention that would hurt the CPC.
If so cons are valued so little then why bother supporting you?
If you want to attack, ridicule and marginalize so cons simply because you disagree with them on a few issues then you can expect them to fight back --- and your party will be the loser.
For the record I don't mind social change that evolves through the normal electoral process but I abhore social change rammed through by activists and the courts, which is what is happening. If the libertarians want the socons as allies then start doing something about SCOC activism. Term limits maybe?
Why would you say press releases are stone age? That's a pretty lame insult, considering that press releases are the main method of communication for any government or political party. The PMO and the CPC included.
ReplyDeleteSupport me, don't support me. Whatever. It doesn't really matter.
Yes, I will attack and ridicule and marginalize SoCon agendas that infringe on my freedoms. As long as SoCons continue to throw themselves into the bedrooms of Canadians, without getting naked and participating, then hell yes, I am going to comment.
We have common ground on issues of criminal justice, economics and international policy but on where we differ - where we differ is on matters that are of individual freedom. The state has no place in my or anyone's bedroom. Simple.
Get over your obsession with other people fucking and we'll get along just fine. Beleive whatever you want to believe but leave me out of it.
Sharia law demands complete obediance to religious ideology. Don't want it from Muslims and I don't want it from Christians. Or Jews. Or Buhddists. Or any other faith.
I have a faith of my own thank you. I do not want yours.
As for social change, guess what. Change happened because of normal electoral process. Canadians made their feelings known to politicians and the politician acted accordingly.
By the way, politicians by their nature are activists. They work towards goals based on an ideology.
Term limits? Sounds good. How about you set an example and limit your comments.
Seriously, I like the idea of term limits, but then again it does seem to infringe on democracy. It's a tricky philosophical issue. But I am not going to get into the nuances of that debate here.
I'm going to bed. And I won't be alone!
Getting a bit hysterical aren't we? No, I do not have a problem with other people f$$$%$#.
ReplyDelete(Classy)
I know you don't believe it but I don't care about who beds whom.
I *DO* care about vocal, pressure groups using a slavishly compliant supreme court and news media to ram a fundamental societal change down everybody else's throat.
Just because 9 politically correct Liberla and Blue Liberal appointed blowhards say it's so doesn't make it so. Especially when these blowhards have faced no scrutiny except some minor rubber stamping by other lawyers and judges.
YOU and your so called "freedom loving" friends seem to be ok with this.
If you believe this "societal change" was done with the full consent of the people through the electoral process then you are dreaming in technicolor.
Mind you, of course you'll be ok with it as londg as those blow hards keep making judgements you AGREE with.
A sfar as your faith? Who cares. I'm not interested.
As far as limiting my comments? That's rich coming from someone who has a blog. Typical hysteria.
"I love freedom but I don't like what you're saying. So stop saying it."
Term limits for judges DOES NOT infringe on democracy. It enhances it. Giving an activist judge a job for life is undemocratic. Replacing them every few years is a better idea. Then there is less chance they can force THEIR biases down others throats.
"I'm going to bed. And I won't be alone!"
SO?
I'm sorry Rightchik... where did I say that Conservatives only put forward policies that everybody agrees with?
ReplyDeleteI said that in the instance of the maternal health program, they put forth funding on the things that everybody could agree with. Which is true.
As for your view the contraception HAS to be included in all discussions on the health of pregnant women, I find that makes as much sense as saying that a discussion on cancer care must include preventing radiation poisoning. Yes, preventing radiation poisoning can lead to no need for cancer care. But radiation poisoning does not apply to all cases of cancer.
Now, I am using an extreme example there but it's just to show that while there is connectivity and overlap between A and B, talking about B does not automatically mandate a discussion on A.
My my, don't you have your knickers all in a knot. Listen John. You don't have to read my blog. Really. Honestly. If you don't like what I am writing or my opinions then navigate to another blog.
ReplyDeleteDo you have reading comprehension problems? Because reading your blathering certainly makes the reader think so.
Term limits. It's a nuanced discussion. You of course don't seem to have the intellectual finesse to see differences or how your original blanket statement lacked in depth and insight.
Should there be appointments that are for life? No. Positions should be earned. Reviewed. And earned again.
But should there be term limits for elected positions. No. The people have the right to decide who represents them. And if the people want to keep voting for the same professional politician term after term after term, then the people have that right.
That is democracy.
BTW, this is my blog and I will say whatever I want here. My blog allows me to criticize anyone I want.
Also unlike most blogs I don't screen my comments. I don't delete them. Look around a bit. Many conservative blogs don't allow comments to run amok the way I do, so that particular insult doesn't work here. I do allow for free unfettered speech. If I tell you to shut up it's because you're annoying not because I am muzzling opinions.
Just makes you look like an ignoramous for not doing the research.
For crying out loud if you are going to insult me at least find something that sticks.
As for my going to bed and not alone statement - you really don't understand humour do you? No wonder SoCons are mocked - you are just such an easy target for scorn and ridicule. But maybe that's just you and not all SoCons.
Again, you don't have to read my blog. In fact why are you reading my blog? A friend has a theory about men like you who pick fights with me. You are a sexual submissive. You want to be smacked down by a beautiful alpha female wearing high heels.
Was it good for you John? Are you satisfied now?
SureCure, I spoke of contraception as a part of maternal health - which is not limited to pregnant women. Maternal health include pre and post natal care. Read the policy. The whole thing. You are bogged down on a point of semantics. You clearly don't understand the language.
ReplyDeleteMaternal health is accepted in the policy document to include pre natal, natal, and post natal care.
So, maybe you should get your information straight. Really. Read the documentation. I know you want to make a point but it's falling flat because you have only looked at bits and peices of the policy.
Read it http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/acdi-cida/ACDI-CIDA.nsf/eng/FRA-61882334-GJT and then come back to me. I promise to be gracious in accepting your acknowledgement that I was right yet again.
Research people. If you are going to pontificate about specific policies then it behooves you to read those policies. Don't rely on the dribs and drabs of information provided in the media. Go straight to the source. Read, be informed!
1) “You argue that the sex lives of others is your business because of their impact on society. How tall are you? How old are you? What is your weight? … I could go on and on about different things that are really private choices that could be argued to have impact on the public.”
ReplyDeleteThis is a red herring. The debate is not about trivial things like height and weight. It is about life and death – in the case of abortion, death of the unborn child and health side-effects for the mother and in the case of prostitution, the slavery of women and children forced into the sex trade (which is NOT a “private choice”).
2) “As for abortion the legal question has been resolved, a fetus is not a person.Just like an acorn is not the same as an oak tree. BTW, StatsCan shows that abortion rates are decreasing. Yes, decreasing.”
We are not talking about trees; we are discussing human life. An unborn child is not “legally” a person, but it does not make it any less of a person. Blacks and women were not legally “people” decades ago, but they are now protected by the law through hard fought victories. Are you seriously telling me that a fetus with its own beating heart, hands, legs, eyes, face, etc. can be destroyed just 1 minute before delivery? Because if so, you are picking and choosing who should have rights and who should not. What about prematurely born babies? They are not any less human than we are.
Also, decreasing abortion rates are decreasing partly due to the hard work of the pro-life movement working to counsel and support women. Ironically, the same people you complain are interfering with “people f*cking” are the same people helping to decrease abortion rates.
If you are going to argue that interfering that one health/medical choice impacts society then the argument must follow to its logical conclusion. Who gets to decide which health choice crosses that line from private matter to public?
ReplyDeleteProstitution doesn't always mean slave trade or the exploitation of women and children. Does that exist of course it does. Exploitation happens when the industry is forced underground.
Legalize prostitution, regulating it will allow women to make the choice with safety and dignity. If a woman or a man wish to trade sex for money then why not? Consenting adults make bargains all the time. I know many women who joke that when the husband presents the blue box from Tiffany's he gets very special attention from her that night. Men know this. And some want a sure thing and prostitutes are sure things.
Actually, I’ve known prostitutes. I had a business reading tarot cards, etc. and I did readings for all sorts of people. Judges, politicians and nuns to name a few. Yes, I am gifted - I was used by police in a cold murder investigation. Long story, maybe some other time.
Anyway, a woman who owned a massage parlour called me and asked if I could come down and do readings for her employees, perhaps even council them on meditation techniques. She was a super nice lady who ran a very successful business. Her staff were frank with me and not one was there by anything other than her own choice.
Each of those women realized that the field they had trained for (yes, educated) was not the ticket to prosperity they thought. Smart gals. They realized that with the rub and tug they could do things like afford a better house. New cars every year. One wanted me to read the markets using astrology. She made a killing on my advice. Another put her kids in a private school. They were smart, funny, self aware and had a damn good sense of self preservation about them. The last time I spoke with them they were trying to figure out how they could arrange group health insurance. They paid my exorbitant fees and tipped well! Yup, I like prostitutes.
A regulated system would allow us to monitor more closely would ensure that all prostitutes are coming to this of their own free will, they are being paid fairly, have safe working conditions and environment and my personal favourite - the pride that comes from paying taxes and knowing that you have contributed to society. When a bright light shines, there can be no darkness!
Yes we are talking about life. The life of a woman who lives and as for the fetus, we are talking legally about cell tissue. Do I think it is a baby, yes I do but that is a religious opinion and my religious opinions cannot be forced on others.
ReplyDeleteAbortions in Canada are done in the first trimester. Later term abortions do happen but usually under extraordinary circumstances. Abortions done in Canada are done on fetuses that can not survive outside the womb. And preemies are another matter - their mothers made their choice and I support that choice.
As for why the rates of abortion are decreasing do you not think that there may be a number of factors involved with that one? Maybe abortion rates are decreasing because of access to sex education and birth control. Handing out condoms and the pill! This means, girls aren’t getting pregnant!
Let's not forget this increasing potency and success of new methods of birth control.
Oh and maybe abortion rates are decreasing because more women, like me are choosing life. I was 20, in a bad relationship and pregnant. I made to choice to have my baby. And I have never had a moment of doubt about how this was the right decision. But it was my decision nonetheless.
While prolife groups are providing valuable aid to confused pregnant women, these groups are not the only ones who are working very hard to decrease abortions. Trust me, SoCons don't hold the monopoly of wanted to decrease abortions.
Safe, legal and rare. Tell me, which, if any or all of these do you want to apply. Just remember - unwanted pregnancies will keep happening.
Yep,Put your PENIS in the shit hole and then have someone suck it.No wonder their are so many diseases in this world.If humans were made to have sex in the arse we would be shitting out of our penis.How disgusting do we have to get to make you understand rightchick.Sex is penis & vagina...not penis and arsehole.Gays can do whatever they want about sex,but don,t make it out to be normal.And get rid of the disgusting gay parades.
ReplyDelete