or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by BR

This idea that rape should be categorized into "she kicked and screamed and really wanted it to stop" and "eh, she didn't quite struggle enough so she must have sorta liked it" isn't new and isn't just Akin's.  It's the House Republican (and Blue Dog Democrat) party line.         http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-repugnant-code-behind-todd-akins-words/2012/08/20/7e91ed12-eb08-11e1-a80b-9f898562d010_story.html?wprss=rss_homepage&tid=pp_widget
Paul Ryan was Akin's accomplice in promoting the term "forcible rape" in a bill proposed earlier this year.  There are two of them.  That's what we call more than one.  You use plural forms for that.  Furthermore, while the Republican spin machine distanced themselves from the phrase "legitimate rape", the Republican party is on record supporting the use of the phrase "forcible rape".     Oh MJ, this is what we call you being...well...  
Good response, Mr. President.   http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19326638
Paul Ryan isn't for his "forcible rape" fiasco.  He was rewarded with a VP nomination.
Yup, Akin doubled down on the idiocy by saying today that he really meant "forcible rape" rather than "legitimate rape".  You know, that term that he and Ryan came up with in their attempt to restrict certain kinds of abortions covered by Medicaid?  See, Republicans want to have a deep discussion about whether or not the poor girl struggled enough to qualify as "forcible rape" over "well, she sorta liked it rape".  Again, bunch of sick...
Dammit, you just Poe'd me.    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Poe's_Law      
Uh oh, there's that relativity again that they can't seem to grasp.  You're really asking for it from them, Sammi.  
Why are you bringing up guns?  Oh right, you hate the government.  Everything devolves to that argument for you.   Yes, clearly we need armed guards in classrooms painting laser targets on children as they are forced to look at vaginas.  Hyperbole much?  You are utterly outrageous, MJ.  Insufferable, really.
Ah, the classic "no I'm not, stop lying" projection defense.     If you are for parental exemptions, you aren't for sex education for everyone.  You can't be for both.  See, because everyone means everyone.  Exemptions mean not everyone.  "Not everyone" does not mean "everyone".  I see how you can confuse the two, but don't call me a liar because you don't understand the word not. 
You are opposed to comprehensive sex education.  That means every child.  No exceptions.  It should not be optional.  If this is your position, please say so and I'll admit to being wrong.  
New Posts  All Forums: