Stanek Sunday funnies 2-10-13
Here were my top five favorite political cartoons this week. Today I realized I pick up a lot of news from these cartoons (the revelation of which may be a self-indictment?). Vote for your fav in the poll at the bottom of the post.
by Chip Bok at Townhall.com…
by Steve Kelley at Townhall.com (in reference to this news)…
by Stuart Carlson at GoComics.com (in reference to this news and this line)…
by Ken Catalino at Townhall.com (in reference to this news)…
by Henry Payne at Townhall.com…
[polldaddy poll=6890478]
Feb.10, 2013 12:20 pm |
Cartoons |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
It must be tough being a homosexual and always having to look over your shoulder.
#2 is awesome. I still don’t understand why they felt any need to change the Monopoly pieces, they were fine as they were.
Because of the sexist, patriarchal clothes iron, JDC. It wasn’t PC.
because men never, ever iron. Ever. In the history of ironing.
I can’t help but feel that people who make a stink about something being “racist” or “misogynist” sometimes are projecting their own racism/sexism for seeing these things as “racist” or “misogynist” in the first place.
Ken, I don’t get your point.
Jack,
I hope you were joking – although I hear that was the major reason for the change. I never liked the iron anyway. The cat does go with the Scottish terrier.
My Dad ironed just as much as my Mom. Even I did it like twice in my life. :)
Lol of course I was joking. I did all the housework when I was married, and still do. :D
“It must be tough being a homosexual and always having to look over your shoulder’ – would that be because of the range of threats from people such as you?
Hi Hans,
If you’re a dinosaur like me, you will remember our mothers had ironing days. I remember my mother did laundry on Tuesday, hung the clothes outside or in the basement, sprinkled them when they were dry, put them in a plastic bag for overnite, then ironed them on Wednesday or Thursday. Collars were starched by dunking them in some blue liquid and hanging them to dry.
When I was a Blue Bird, I remember making my mother a sprinkler bottle out of an Ivory dish soap container, with a cork sprinkle top stuck on the end and decorated with a butterfly sticker for Mother’s Day.
I started ignoring comments about gay people coming from Ken a long time ago. It worked wonders on my blood pressure.
About Monopoly, my children and their dad would get so absorbed in that game. I wasn’t a great one for board games, except chutes and ladders.
Hi Hans,
If you’re a dinosaur like me
Mary,
Oh, I definitely hail from the Cretaceous Period. I remember staying up all night when Apollo 8 went around the Moon. I was groggily lying on the sofa in the family room and Mom walks by at 5 a.m. to do some laundry.
Who knew moms (and dads) worked that much? :)
I don’t get why the new token is such a big deal. Changing the first two properties from purple to brown, changing income tax to a flat $200, and bringing luxury tax to $100 from $75 were all far more noteworthy IMO.
“I don’t get why the new token is such a big deal. Changing the first two properties from purple to brown, changing income tax to a flat $200, and bringing luxury tax to $100 from $75 were far more noteworthy imo”
I’ve never played Monopoly, it sounds boring.
It’s just like the Obama economy. Nobody wins.
Me and my sister used to play Monopoly sometimes. I’m not sure if we ever even finished a game because it takes so long.
It’s often quite like republican economic policies. The rich get richer and the rest get left with nothing. And there’s no ‘trickle down’ or ‘crumbs from the table’ either.
Reality,
Can you dispense with the class warfare claptrap? Its old…and very tiresome.
“Its old…and very tiresome” – it is indeed Mary. Yet here we are still trying to drag the gop into the 21st century and convince them of the benefits of social equality.
Reality,
…and I forgot to mention your class warfare claptrap is tedious as well.
Its the republican approach to socio-economic policies which is tedious.
Go to the Democratic oases of Paradise in the inner cities if you want to see tedious.
Hi Hans,
Great point. Let’s not forget how 50 years of Democrat rule has turned the once prosperous city of Detroit into a sinkhole.
Uh huh. Well you wouldn’t acknowledge the impact of the dramatic changes, reductions and relocations of the auto industry then.
MARY!!
I was a Blue Bird too!! :)
I remember my mother sprinkling the clothes while she ironed and talked on the phone. The hourglass from Days of Our Lives was on the tube……
She also drank Tab and had these weight loss chocolates called Ayds.
You can always reference the squalor of downtown Oakland, CA. I’ve seen it firsthand. Give Dems the reigns long enough, and you’ll find the area run into the ground eventually.
Reality,
Industry rises and falls and cities prepare for this by diversifying and attracting new and more businesses. Again, the city of Detroit has been run for 50 years by Democrats. Certainly it should be an oasis of prosperity and economic growth, wouldn’t you agree?
http://www.davidjforan.com
Check the menu on the left, click on Detroit- liberal destruction.
Hi Carla,
I’ll be darned!! Days of Our Lives, I watched that in college. Doug and Susan. A youngster like you remembers your mother sprinkling clothes? I thought that went out in the mid 60s :) I do recall though my mom doing a lot of ironing in the basement in the late 60s.
We had a black desk dial phone so my mom was pretty limited as to where she could talk. We thought we were moving up in the world when we put a wall extension in the basement. Then we got one in the upstairs bedroom!
My brother thought it was hilarious to call me a Blue Turd.
Listen to the Blue Birds
Merrily we sing
Blue Birds bring the sunshine
Sunshine comes with spring
Blue Birds happy Blue Birds,
Spreading out our wings,
Striving to fly higher
On to bigger things
LOL!!
I was born in 65. Just between you n me of course. :)
I check in on Days every 10 years or so. Just to see if Marlena is possessed.
David Foran? Really?
Following that logic trail we can deduce that the Bushes are responsible for wars involving Iraq and Clinton for the former Yugoslavia.
Sure Reality,
Whatever.
I also read his “Erroneous Drones’ diatribe so you’ll understand why I give little credance to his claims.
There are numerous pieces available describing how the auto industry’s failure to act had the impacts it did on cities like Detroit. I don’t think too many democrat voters are in charge of the auto manufacturers.
Perhaps auto manufacturers are in charge of the Democrat voters (who are the unionized workers) and don’t want to be. Better workers elsewhere? I don’t know. I’m just guessing.
Why aren’t the Democrats in charge of the auto manufacturers, anyway? Don’t they want to invest in the future? Don’t they care about America?
But actually, I think that Democrats have had great control over the auto manufacturers. Think of unions. Think of tax-payer-bailed-out GM (and President Obama, who took it over). Think of Democrat legislation requiring manufacturing of electric cars.
LOL,
Shows how little you know Reality.
http://politicaloutcast.com/2012/12/unions-built-and-destroyed-michigan/
BTW, what political party do you suppose these unions have long supported?
You seriously think that doubling the wingnuttery citations improves your case?
Mary and Carla,
In ’64 or so I was a cub scout. It was great. At our den mother’s house we had kool-aid and cookies and watched Hercules movies.
And it was Doug and Julie. Susan was her real name. Not that I’d know anything about Days of Our Lives. Or Edge of Night. Or…
My mom was six and my dad was ten in 1964. You people are old. ;)
Now listen here you young whippersnapper!
I see Gotye picked up a few gongs.
You’re not the boss of me!
Now that’s funny, good one! :-)
I distinctly remember in ’64 thinking that 9 was the perfect age. I also thought the same thing when I was 11. I must have been kidnapped in a UFO when I was 10, otherwise I can’t remember what was so wrong with that age. ;)
My mom was six and my dad was ten in 1964. You people are old.
My parents were born in 1961. :/
Reality 12:22am
Yes I think my sources do a great job of proving my case, thank you.
Hi Hans,
My mother was a den mother in the mid 50s. By 1964 I was a Camp Fire Girl. And you are right about Days of Our Lives, it was Julie. I remember when she married that old gaffer Bob Anderson, he had a midlife crisis, but she was really in love with Doug. My memory of Edge of Night was that my great aunt watched it. Dear soul was always half in the bag, but she had the neatest house and “Edge of Night” was her favorite soap. Always makes me think of her house. Its not that I watched soap operas or anything.
My other great aunt loved General Hospital, you can see the old black and whites on Youtube, I love watching them. Those are such classics. You’d think all the time Jessie spent in Dr. Hardy’s office, he’d been looking at the same x-ray for years, would have generated some scandal. By the mid sixties it got a little too racy for her though!
BTW youngsers, nothing you guys did for fun could ever hold a candle to the Saturday afternoon chariot races. Now that’s what I called a good time.
I don’t get why having gays and women in the military is such a big deal. If someone is willing to serve their country, and possibly die for their country, and is good at their job, THEN IT SHOULDNT MATTER IF THEIR SKIN IS BLUE AND ARE A LESBIAN, OR PLAY GUITAR IN THE BATHTUB, OR RAISE PURPLE MONSTERS or whatever! I really don’t get why this is such a difficult concept for some people.
I’m studying in the UK right now, and while I don’t eat meat, I feel very sorry for those that do right now. I’m an equestrian, and I can tell you firsthand, that eating horses is a really bad idea! Considering that they are not raised for meat, thus many are fed drugs and/or supplements not meant at all for human consumption. yikes.
‘It must be tough being a homosexual and always having to look over your shoulder’
Hal says: February 10, 2013 at 3:44 pm “Ken, I don’t get your point.”
Real-stupid-ity says: February 10, 2013 at 5:53 pm “would that be because of the range of threats from people such as you?”
Hal and R
Most male homosexuals are assaulted and murdered at the hands of other male homosexuals.
The arabic speaking world refers to sodomy as ‘lut’, whicn means ‘to be taken from behind.’
To see his paramour ‘take him from behind’ a male homosexual would have to ‘look over his shouder’. It is a doble entendre or perhaps a triple entendre.
Real-stupid-ity,
For the record I have never hit, kicked, stabbed, shot, poisioned, electrocuted, choked, strangled, bludgeoned, run over…a homosexual, nor have I encouraged or condoned these acts of violence.
That is your not so latent bigotry on display.
JackBorsch says: February 10, 2013 at 3:04 pm
“Because of the sexist, patriarchal clothes iron, JDC. It wasn’t PC.”
JB,
Thanks for the explanation. I had no idea. Now, it’s funny.
X-woman says: February 10, 2013 at 3:30 pm
“because men never, ever iron. Ever. In the history of ironing.”
A male human probably invented the clothes iron.
I have ironed my own clothes, but it was a long time ago…before the days of ‘permanent press’.
My wife is going to be gone for a month, so I may have to re-qualify on the clothes washer and dryer as well as the electric iron.
Last time she was gone for a month I relied on my daughters.
The dynamics have changed since then, I don’t know if I can presume upon their good graces.
“Most male homosexuals are assaulted and murdered at the hands of other male homosexuals.”
lol what? If most male homosexuals were murdered, then I don’t think we would have as many in the world as we do.
And it doesn’t count if people don’t tolerate intolerance. It’s not bigotry if people call you on being a jerk. It’s only bigotry when people don’t tolerate others for things they can’t control, like being gay.
‘It must be tough being a homosexual and always having to look over your shoulder’
Also see ‘fragging’ in the context of male homosexuals in the military combined with the irrefutable fact of the high incidence of homosexual on homosexual violence in civilian life.
But of course one has to take into account the moderating effect of the kinder gentler gender being introduced into the combat equation.
Speaking of the kinder gentler gender: This is what I define as gun control:
http://by172w.bay172.mail.live.com/default.aspx#n=739986510&fid=3&mid=c020aec5-6f9d-11e2-b6b4-80c16e70a1f4
a7X,
Thanks for pointing out the poor sentence construction. Hope this correction clears up the ambiguity.
‘Most assaults and murders of male homosexuals are done at the hands of other male homosexuals.’
It’s only bigotry when people don’t tolerate others for things they can’t control, like being gay.
I reject the premise that male humans are incapable of controlling their sexual urges and changing their sexual orientation.
What male homosexuals cannot change is being ‘male’.
‘Most assaults and murders of male homosexuals are done at the hands of other male homosexuals.’
False. Most violence against gay men is committed by straight men. Gay men are at risk for domestic violence against each other, just like straight women are at risk from men and straight men are at risk from women.
I reject your premise that you can change being gay.
I also reject your premise that women are a “kinder and gentler sex” lol.
I didn’t ignore him. :(
Mary,
Like many, I watched soaps with my mom when I got home from school. Edge was the only one still on that late. It was heavy on murder mystery, which I liked. The only one I still check out is GH.
Serials are nothing new. That’s what Dickens’ and Verne’s novels were in first run.
“Yes I think my sources do a great job of proving my case, thank you.” – no, they just do a great job of supporting your opinion. Which is wrong.
“I reject your premise that you can change being gay.”
“I also reject your premise that women are a “kinder and gentler sex” lol.”
JB,
We could ‘poll the audience’ and see if the ‘audience’ reflects your ‘enlightened view’ of humanity.
But Truth is not determined by the majority. Truth is it’s own vindication.
The Truth will set you free…from the lie, but it will probably aggravate you first.
I am reminded of the fellow on the radio who was sharing his experiences as a former male homosexual. A caller challenged his claim, “You were never really gay?”
The fellow said he had participated in sexual encounters with several hundred men and asked how many male lovers he was required to sleep with before he would have been considered legitimately homosexual.
How many women does the former homosexul have to have sex with before you will acknowledge he is now legitimatley heterosexual?
Holy Spirt once spoke to me and said. “Your mother has a spirit of contention.”
So I ‘tested the spirit of contention’.
I said, “Mom, did you know the world is a sphere?”
Mom replied instantaneously, “Some people claim it is flat!”
Mom knew the world was a sphere, but the ‘spirit of contention’ overruled her reason.
The same could be said of you when you want to joust with the self evident truth, that females as a whole are kinder and gentler, than males.
Maybe you know of a third gender who is kinder and gentler?
” I am reminded of the fellow on the radio who was sharing his experiences as a former male homosexual. A caller challenged his claim, “You were never really gay?”
The fellow said he had participated in sexual encounters with several hundred men and asked how many male lovers he was required to sleep with before he would have been considered legitimately homosexual.
How many women does the former homosexul have to have sex with before you will acknowledge he is now legitimatley heterosexual?”
There’s a difference between sexual orientation and sexual behavior. Orientation is not a choice, but sexual behavior is. Humans can have sex with just about anything whether they are really “oriented” that way or not. Straight men have sex with other men in male dominated environments, it’s been pretty well documented for centuries. Not something I would do but whatever floats their boat. Women have sexual experiences with other females in female dominated environments. Gay men and lesbians sometimes sleep with those of the opposite gender for whatever reasons, religious suppression of homosexuality has been a big factor in that. Oh, and bisexual exist too. But anyway, homosexuality isn’t dependent on behavior, it’s an orientation. Even some religious organizations acknowledge that some people are born attracted to the same gender, even if they advocate for suppressing that attraction. I think it’s weird that people deny that people are either bent one way or the other, even if they choose to ignore that orientation.
When did you make the choice to be primarily attracted to women, Ken? Could you choose to be primarily attracted to men?
” Mom knew the world was a sphere, but the ‘spirit of contention’ overruled her reason.
The same could be said of you when you want to joust with the self evident truth, that females as a whole are kinder and gentler, than males.
Maybe you know of a third gender who is kinder and gentler?”
I’m not expressing a “spirit of contention”, I am basing my opinion that women are not naturally “kinder and gentler” (whatever that’s supposed to mean) on evidence. Women commit most child abuse, except for sexual abuse supposedly. Women are the aggressors in about half of domestic violence cases in straight relationships, and violence in lesbian relationships exists and isn’t lower than relationships that involve men. Women are predominately the murderers of infants under the age of one and are equally the murderers of children under the age of five. Men do dominate other murder and aggravated assault, as far as actual arrests go, but considering that men are usually bigger and socialized to be more aggressive, I doubt that’s much of an inborn inequity as it is societal. Plus, it’s pretty well documented that women are less likely to be arrested in violent crime, and are less likely to be even suspected (mostly due to assumptions by people like yourself). I don’t see much evidence that women are naturally so much less violent and are “kinder” than men. It’s not self-evident to me.
Honestly, being a woman myself, I don’t really agree that women are “kinder and gentler.” Sure, we may be less aggressive overall, but go to any teacher of middle school girls and they will tell you that girls can be vicious! While I think there are gender differences, I think that relegating men and women to gender stereotypes and roles is complete hogwash. People should be able to be what they want to be (well as long as it doesn’t hurt others), regardless of gender.
Reality 5:23PM
LOL. Nice try Reality.
That presenting the opinion of someone else who happens to agree with your opinion is not evidence is self-evident Mary.
Try harder.
Reality,
LOL
That’s ok Mary, you’ll have opportunities to try again :-)
Reality,
LOL. Whatever.
Mary, I hate to say it but I agree with Reality about your links. It’s just some people that are putting forth claims, it’s not evidence. And plus in your second link, in his “liberal destruction” diatribe, he calls Detroit “communist”. I can’t really take someone seriously that misunderstands what communism is so completely. If anything, the closest any city in America gets to communism is democratic socialism.
Hi Jack,
The fact we don’t paritcularly like a source doesn’t make it wrong. As I pointed out to Reality, the fact he used NBC as a source, the same NBC that distorted a 911 tape so as to inflame a racial incident, does not make what was said by the NBC source wrong.
Also Jack, I was born and raised in the city of Detroit and can verify that much of what this source is saying is true. I watched the slow destruction of the city for years. Also, I remember the reign of Coleman Young, and it only accelerated the downward slide of the city. The man was corruption incarnate.
So, let’s see all of Reality’s sources that prove me wrong and I’ll pick and choose the ones I consider valid. I think that’s fair, don’t you?
” The fact we don’t paritcularly like a source doesn’t make it wrong. As I pointed out to Reality, the fact he used NBC as a source, the same NBC that distorted a 911 tape so as to inflame a racial incident, does not make what was said by the NBC source wrong.”
No, you’re right. I hate FOX and MSNBC just about equally (I consider them the media arms of the Repubs and Dems, respectively), but that doesn’t mean that FOX and MSNBC never report anything truthfully or accurately. It does mean that I take everything either of them report with a grain of salt, and attempt to verify it through other sources as well.
And I will immediately discard sources (at least that specific article) when they post blatantly false information, like calling Detroit “communist”.
“Also Jack, I was born and raised in the city of Detroit and can verify that much of what this source is saying is true. I watched the slow destruction of the city for years. Also, I remember the reign of Coleman Young, and it only accelerated the downward slide of the city. The man was corruption incarnate.”
Well, no offense because I do respect your opinion, it’s just your opinion. I am of the opinion that Republicans have trashed my state (Florida), but I wouldn’t expect someone to take my word for it just because I have grown up here.
” So, let’s see all of Reality’s sources that prove me wrong and I’ll pick and choose the ones I consider valid. I think that’s fair, don’t you? ”
Sounds good. The equivalent of the type of sources he would put up, the ones close to yours, would be bloggers who make claims and don’t back it up with hard data. I wouldn’t judge you for rejecting such sources.
“let’s see all of Reality’s sources that prove me wrong” – how about you provide some that prove your initial claims right first. All you’ve provided so far is your own opinion and a matching opinion from some far right blogger.
Hey Reality,
Any time you want to present sources that support your case, please do so. But like you, I get to pick and choose those I consider valid. Fair is fair.
Any time you want to present sources that support your case, please do so, particularly when you’re the one making the initial claim.
“But like you, I get to pick and choose those I consider valid. Fair is fair.” – so far you’ve demonstrated an inability to recognise what is valid and what isn’t.
Hi Jack,
The only reference I could find to Detroit being “communist” was the author referring to the “pro- industrial” “pre-communist” era of Coleman Young. He did not say the city was now communist. This just sounds more like he is being facetious as the city went headlong into the crapper when Young start his reign, which lasted 20 years. It has yet to recover.
No Jack, my years in Detroit, and I was a city kid, give me first hand knowledge and experience. I watched this city go down the crapper. I remember the power, corruption, and greed of the unions. I remember a city that was once vibrant, diverse, and economically sound that has now become a city with a 46% functional literacy rate, or maybe its 49%.
If you think Republicans trashed your state, fine. Present sources that make your argument. BTW, can I pick and choose those I consider valid?
Reality challenges my sources. So, present sources to prove me wrong. Again, like the both of you, I have the option of deciding which are valid or not.
Whatever Jack, the fact remains Detroit has been under Democrat control for 50 years. Draw your own conclusions.
Reality,
Let’s see your sources. You claim I’m wrong in what I said about Detroit, you don’t agree with my sources, so go for it. Show me your sources.
You made an opinion-based claim. I called you on it. Provide valid unbiased evidence for it or admit that it is merely your opinion. It is not up to me to disprove your initial non-evidential claim.
Shall I claim that a secret enclave of unicorns runs the republican party and proclaim that I am right until and unless you can prove me wrong?
Reality,
I consider my claim fact based and you do not. I consider my sources unbiased support. It is only your biased opinion that they are not. So let’s see your sources that prove mine wrong. Not rocket science Reality. In fact, I would think you’d jump at the opportunity. People on this blog present sources and counter sources all the time.
Shall you claim a secret enclave of unicorns runs the Republican Party? If you can find a valid source, go for it.
jb,
We can choose with whom we want to have sex and we can choose how we have sex.
We do not get to choose our gender.
That is determined for us at conception.
So called ‘gender re-assignment surgery’ is a misnomer or better yet a deliberate and calculated euphemism. It cannot change whatr chromosomes have pre-determined.
There may be some individuals whose reproductive organ never develop enough during gestation to unambiguously reflect their gender and a skilled surgeon may be able to reconfigure flesh to resemble genitalia of his/her choosing, but it does nothing to change what chance or divine choice determined at conception.
What you are arguing for is an evolutionary humanist version of Flip Wilson’s, “The devil made me do it.”
Evolution does not make homosexuals.
The notion is counterintuitive to the evolutionary model.
Even if it were true, the gene for homosexuality would disappear from the gene pool in just a few generations for obvious reasons. Do the math.
Mary,
Are you arms getting tired from beating up on that dead jackass?
Your reason, logic, wisdom, knowledge, understanding are no match for someone who refuses to jeopardize the bliss of their willful ignorance.
There really are some people who hate the truth and love the lie, who call wickedness good and who hate GOD/LIFE and love death.
Real-stupid-ity is one of those folks.
” We can choose with whom we want to have sex and we can choose how we have sex.”
No, we can’t actually choose who we want to have sex with. Attraction is primarily instinct, not cognitive. We can choose to not express that attraction with sex, but we can’t choose to not have a sex drive without extraordinary means like chemical castration or hormonal therapy. I can’t choose not to want to have sex with Jessica Simpson, I can’t magically not be attracted to her, but I can choose not to have sex with her (har! in some alternate world where she would have me in the first place).
I thought I had heard everything from anti-gays before the “you can choose to not have attraction”.
I haven’t mentioned anything about gender reassignment surgery or transsexuals, so I have no idea what you are going on about there.
“Evolution does not make homosexuals.
The notion is counterintuitive to the evolutionary model.
Even if it were true, the gene for homosexuality would disappear from the gene pool in just a few generations for obvious reasons. Do the math.”
Pure silliness. There are mutations and variations in all types of species that continue in the genome for generations upon generations. Some of these variations are neutral (left-handedness) or actively damaging (some genetic diseases). For all we know, homosexuality is on a recessive allele and to get a “pure gay” you have to have two recessives have a baby together. Anyway, most research has indicated evidence for genetic predisposition for homosexuality combined with biological factors, and in some cases environmental. It takes an extremely limited understanding of genetics to think that homosexuality couldn’t be genetic because gays can’t make babies.
Answer my question. When did you choose to be attracted to women, and could you choose to be attracted to men?
“I consider my claim fact based and you do not.” – correct.
“I consider my sources unbiased support.” – it is the opinion blog of a far right person with the same opinion as yourself. There is no actual evidence in what he presents.
“It is only your biased opinion that they are not.” – it is blatantly obvious that your source is biased.
“So let’s see your sources that prove mine wrong.” – you haven’t provided one yet.
“Not rocket science Reality.” – no it certainly isn’t.
“In fact, I would think you’d jump at the opportunity.” – indeed I would.
“People on this blog present sources and counter sources all the time.” – yes, sources of evidence, sources of proof, not sources of matching opinion.
I think you been spending too much time riding unicorns with Big Joe.
” waffle waffle…..The notion is counterintuitive to the evolutionary model.
Even if it were true, the gene for homosexuality would disappear from the gene pool in just a few generations for obvious reasons. Do the math” – you obviously know next to nothing about this topic.
“reason, logic, wisdom, knowledge, understanding” – you wouldn’t recognise such things if they bit you on the backside ken.
Reality, do me a solid and go to this thread and see what people on your side say about sexual abuse victims who choose to keep their babies that resulted from the abuse:
http://www.jillstanek.com/2013/02/raped-impregnated-13-year-old-keeps-baby
Reality,
Interesting you mention Big Joe. Since you are beginning to babble incoherently, I realize it is now time to heed his very great words of wisdom.
“Since you are beginning to babble incoherently…” – beginning? I’m that far behind you am I?
My side? I don’t know what side magma is on Jack. The outside maybe? The far side? I wouldn’t make reference to any ‘pit of hell’. Comes across as more of a ‘concern troll’ to me.
“My side? I don’t know what side magma is on Jack. The outside maybe? The far side? I would make reference to any ‘pit of hell’. Comes across as more of a ‘concern troll’ to me.”
You know I’m not one to just constantly bash on pro-choicers just for being pro-choice, you know that. I would rather talk to people and try to get them to see my side. But magma’s opinions are ones I have seen time and time again from pro-choicers. They usually don’t put it so bluntly, but they are common. Sexual abuse victims are irreparably damaged, those with rapists for parents are doomed to be bad people, it would be better for all if those girls in those situations are always encouraged to abort, etc, etc, etc. I find it pretty disgusting.
I wouldn’t call magma a pro-choicer Jack, I’d call him/her/it a lunatic. Such rants aren’t usually from someone with a specific position on a particular topic, they’re just someone who thinks they’ve found an appropriate venue in which to shout at the audience in the most offensive way they can. So they choose the stance most likely to do so.
I like the message in the first one, but I feel like the cat one was the funniest.