Comments on: Plans

By: Justin

Justin — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 19:40:06 +0000

I entirely agree with the rebublicans.
Their views on abortion and abstinence are correct and allign with the laws of God.
Holly, I applaud you for sticking to the straight and narrow and I agree that not everyone will follow those laws. But if they did, it would be right.
Grimalkin, that statement’s purpose was to reveal that a lot of people are having children before getting married and then abondoning the welfare of their kids for their own greedy and self-gratifying ways. The idea is so people get married and are absolutely certain that they can care for a child. But government cannot moniter the latter and in their haste, lawmakers have forgotten it. For the most part, people who are born to unwed couples live a life as displayed daily on the Maury show, but there are few who sincerely love their child enough to devote their lives to their baby, without getting married. They see the danger when they don’t care enough. But I do agree with your thoughts on sex ed, evolution, and the triangle. Because God can make that triangle have four edges. :)
LadyTess, no he isn’t joking. Over all the majority of people are just as you put it. They are, in fact, stupid. And they are building a civil society based on the Truth. They are in no way calling anybody stupid. They are just giving children a chance to live. And compassion is something all humans have capacity for, not just terrorists.
Sophist, who is the real asshole here? Is it the people poking fun and name-calling? Or is it the child’s absent father? Anyway, you are sadly mistaken. You took a statement that supports the idea the EVERY CHILD SHOULD HAVE A SUPPORTIVE FATHER and completely took it out of context.
Christine, no one is trying to steal away independence from women. That is a paranoid statement. They are only marketing for a change to do what is right. And I personally believe that is something every person with political power is obligated to do. It doesn’t matter what people think about sex being in or out of the binds of marriage. All that matters is reality.
For example: the 9/11 terrorists thought it was right and just to bomb the WTC, but in reality they weren’t. Hitler thought he was accomplishimg a great deed by eliminating over 6 million Jewish people from the face of the planet, but he wasn’t.

By: I Voted Obama

I Voted Obama — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 17:00:58 +0000

[...] is weak and Obama is strong (immegration). And there are even more areas where they come together (family planning). For me there is no clear cut winner, both would be great Presidents. Though, my feelings lean [...]

By: Christine

Christine — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 01:24:03 +0000

Romney and Huckabee speak code words for a return to 1950′s society where women were not independent. I am reading between the lines and I am not hearing them want to remove divorce laws, just make single mothers pariahs of society. Any vote for a republican is anti-woman and anti-family.

So parents are responsible for educating their children about sex. So what about parents that think sex is natural regardless of marriage. And parents that want to promote abstinence to their kids are up against film, tv and internet – media loaded with everything about sex. Good luck conservatives in a return to Pleasantville.

By: Sophist, FCD

Sophist, FCD — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 19:31:23 +0000

“It’s time to make out-of-wedlock births out-of-fashion again,” he said.

Yes, because the most helpful thing we can do for our country is return the word “bastard” to it’s original usage. If we’d just demonize illegitimate children hard enough, I guess the dollar would rise and Osama bin Laden would spontaneously combust. Or something.

By: LadyTess

LadyTess — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:40:14 +0000

Since other commentors adressed the “out of wed-lock threat” I’m going to adress this part:

“The pro-life movement has done tremendous work in building and reinforcing the infrastructure of civil society,” his Web site reads. “This work must continue and government must find new ways to empower and strengthen these armies of compassion.”

“civil society”? Is he joking? I hope he is. I seriously must question anyone who thinks women are too stupid to decide for themselves etc. is the making of a “civil society”.

“armies of compassion” I hope this doesn’t refer to the terrorist organisations Army of God and Operation Rescue because then he is supporting terrorism against the american people/women. Mainly women although men are affected by these stupidities too. I think it is known what I am referring to.

By: Grimalkin

Grimalkin — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 17:37:26 +0000

Jade – While we’re at it, why is sex ed any different from math, science, or English? Teaching Sex Ed in schools is about giving kids the foundation they need to lead successful and healthy lives. That’s what all school classes are for. But suddenly, because one group “disagrees” with a class, it becomes the parent’s responsibility? The default, IMO, is providing kids with everything they need to know to get adulthood off to a good start – that includes sex ed. At home, parents who really care that much, can talk to their children and explain that while condoms are all well and good, Jesus wants them to save themselves so that they can give their future husband’s their right to deflower a virgin bride (cause Jesus is always looking out for those poor men who get these sorts of rights taken away from them routinely!). While they are at it, they can explain to them that the evolution they learned about in school isn’t real and that despite what secularists might say, triangles actually have four edges rather than three.

By: Jade

Jade — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 17:20:27 +0000

““One of the biggest threats to the fabric of our society is out-of-wedlock childbirth.”

I guess my decision not to marry my son’s father will destroy society, too. The fact that I’m actually happy with that choice and am thankful that I won’t have to go through a nasty divorce now that the relationship has soured due to factors that have nothing to do with the child means I’m an evil harlot. Then again, they’d want me to stay in an unhealthy marriage because Jesus really hates divorce and I should just try to work it out.

In responding to a query from the Christian Broadcast Network last year, [Huckabee] said, “I do not believe in teaching about sex or contraception in public schools. That is the responsibility of parents.”

What if the parents had abstienence only education too and don’t know anything about contraception? Where are the children supposed to get accurate information regarding sext that could likely affect their sexual and reproductive health later in life?

*sighs* When will logic ever enter the picture?

By: Grimalkin

Grimalkin — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 16:53:09 +0000

“One of the biggest threats to the fabric of our society is out-of-wedlock childbirth.”

Really? I’m one of the biggest threats to the fabric of our society because I had two loving and devoted parents who just didn’t love each other enough to get married and stay together? Never mind that they were both an active and integral part of my life, never mind that they worked together to raise me (being a single mom is made quite a bit easier when dad is perfectly willing to come babysit whenever needed). Heck, I’d go so far as to say that they acted more like a partnership in raising me than most married couples do! But I’m the biggest threat to the fabric of our society…

What gets me is that parents who molest their children, parents who think of their children as property and stifle them by withholding information they need to make good choices, parents who abuse their children, parents who are drunk and take no real interest or participation in their children’s lives, parents who just put their kids in front of the TV so that they can leave them unattended, parents (fathers especially, though I am sure some mothers do this too) who leave the entire responsibility of raising the kids on the other parent while they go out and have fun and live like teenagers – all of these, assuming they are and stay married, are less of a threat to society (and, I suppose, to the children they have) than my parents who just decided that “staying together for the kids” was just about the stupidest thing to do and instead “stayed apart for the kids.”

By: Astraea

Astraea — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:39:44 +0000

I hope for a time in this country when we can see people in the mainstream able to argue for sexual agency and access to sexual health information as a human rights issue. Sadly, it seems the pearl clutchers are able to get everyone worked up in a frenzy and they have the mainstream media in their laps. We also have this children-as-property philosophy in the US that backs up the notion that parents have a right to keep information from teenagers about their own bodies and health, as if they will magically have everything they need to be adults the moment they turn 18 or get married and have all the blessings of society to go forth and f*ck.

By: Holly

Holly — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 15:02:51 +0000

One of the biggest threats to the fabric of our society is out-of-wedlock childbirth.

Jeez… it’s that bad? My mommy didn’t marry my daddy and somehow I’ve avoided becoming a terrorist, a drug dealer, or a welfare queen. Of course, they were in their late twenties at the time. The idea that marriage is the solution to teen pregnancy wouldn’t give you anything but a bunch of miserable marriages.

Anyway, I don’t know how you can be against teen/unwed childbirth and in almost the same breath condemn abortion. Are they nuts enough to think they could actually stop people (including, sheesh, plenty of unwed people who are not teenagers) from having sex? That’s crazy, won’t work, and wouldn’t be right if it did.