4parents.gov is a government website run by the Department of Health and Human Services that is meant to provide parents with “information” to help “teens make healthy choices.”
But this “information” is not grounded in science. A recent federal report concluded that abstinence-only programs have had “no impacts on rates of sexual abstinence.” Yet the latest public service announcement by 4parents.gov “encourages parents to talk with their kids about waiting to have sex.”
In the ad, various children say that they want their parents to talk to them about sex and tell them to “wait.” Near the end, the narrator says, “Tell your kids you want them to wait ’til they’re married to have sex.” Watch it:
In July, ThinkProgress noted that 4parents.gov revised its website to include ideological, unscientific claims about abortion, stating that “some women” feel “sad and some use more alcohol or drugs” after having an abortion.
Additionally, when the site launched in 2005, it told parents “to convince their teens to stop having sex by telling their children that they are ‘worth it.’” But no resources were provided for “parents whose teen remains sexually active, implying that these youth are not ‘worth it.’”
(HT: The Bellows)
Yeah, like that’ll work. Like that’s EVER worked!
October 8th, 2007 at 9:06 amI have a feeling drugs and alcohol usage are what led to the need for the abortion in the first place, not the after-effect of the procedure.
October 8th, 2007 at 9:08 amhave jenna and notjenna abided by this policy?
October 8th, 2007 at 9:09 amIf this was about health, they’d be promoting the practice of safe sex.
This is not about health. This is about the Fundies cramming their twisted, dysfunctional “morality” down our collective throats.
October 8th, 2007 at 9:10 am4 parents? now kids need 4 parents? what’s up with that?
October 8th, 2007 at 9:11 amIf only Dumbya’s parents had employed such a policy…
October 8th, 2007 at 9:11 amAs though we need to be spending more money we do not have on a program which puts the government into our children’s personal lives and into the bedrooms of this country?? This is just another “abuse” by the Bush Administration.
October 8th, 2007 at 9:15 amI would think that the teens in this country will view this as a huge personal intrusion into the intimate parts of their lives. Again - neo-fascism at it’s finest.
October 8th, 2007 at 9:16 amConsidering the amazing unpopularity of this administration, it’s even more unlikely that kids are going do as they are told…and even more likely that they will do the exact opposite, either as a semi-conscious protest of this administration, or simply for spite.
I short, I wouldn’t be surprised to see teen sexual activity rise as a result of this ill-conceived campaign.
October 8th, 2007 at 9:20 amI agree that parents should talk to their children about sex. Part of the conversation must include the consequences that can ensue, pregnency, std’s et al, if they were to have sex.
The dicussion MUST end with the insistence that if they do give in, that condons are the best defence against the consequences of unprotected sex.
I am curious as to how many 35-40 year old grandmothers are conservative christians?
October 8th, 2007 at 9:20 amAvoid post natal depression - have an abortion.
As equally valid as their claims
October 8th, 2007 at 9:25 amGood Morning all, good post’s……This is just more of this administration’s intrusion attempt’s……They will do or say anything at this point to keep their tiny base glued to them….Mean while we see where they realy stand or sit as the case may be with the adult’s that represent them..What they should be doeing is making up flash card’s with all their rep’s faces on them to hand out to children and adult’s…..Poster’s of their pictures should be plastered in public restroom’s and especiely in air port’s…Now that may do some real good..Seems to me they will do anything to distract from the war and big issues…..Blessings.Peace
October 8th, 2007 at 9:26 amApparently, St. Daryll has the day off. I can’t imagine him recusing himself from this thread… ^_^
October 8th, 2007 at 9:31 amHere’s the dirt on Larry Craig:
October 8th, 2007 at 9:36 amhttp://friendlyatheist.com/ 2007/ 10/ 05/ senator-larry-craig-visited-mike-jones-aka-ted-haggards-male-escort/
Maybe these bastards should promote “Bathroom Foot-Tapping” skills as a viable alternative to heterosexual contact! That way the population remains low (just like they want) and no one gets held accountable for their actions!
St. Daryll hasn’t awoken yet to pull himself off his cross-shaped Seally Posturpedic Bed yet.
When his Voice of Angles Announcing the Rapture alarm goes off, he will be here! oh joy.
please read my article on who we are about to face off with in the Middle East called “A Line in the Sand” at my site,
http://willyloman.wordpress.com/
the best blogg that no-one reads. I’m soooo lonely…..
October 8th, 2007 at 9:38 amProgressives should be nailing the admin. for their hypocracy on several levels here: that they show how they “care about the children” by DENYING HEALTHCARE COVERAGE to millions, while insulting their intelligence with this abstinence b.s., and also on the financial level, as in HOW MUCH IS THIS REDICULOUS PROGRAM COSTING THE TAXPAYERS. How many children’s lives could we really be helping by ditching this for schip?
October 8th, 2007 at 9:39 amIt would appear to me that “well intentioned Repukes” (isn’t that a contradiction in terms?) are digging and dishing on their compadre, Bathroom Queen Craig. I find it amusing how the crime house is attempting to spin this abstinance program since they’ve been “outed totally” for having amoral values. They ran on “family values” and “moral values” and their house of perverted horrors is being exposed - thus, making them totally hypocritical fools. Frankly, I can’t see how any Republican can imagine that they will be elected to office unless they become Independent and run on that tickets.
I’m betting that both the Dems and the Repukes will proffer a second candidate to run as an Indy in order to get two horses into the race in 08.
October 8th, 2007 at 9:40 amAs Bush screws millions of our children out of healthcare, he’s condoning abstinance in an attempt, albeit futile, to give the impression that he gives a flying $hit about our kids! How transparent can he get? Answer: So transparent that he’s become both a national and international pariah.
October 8th, 2007 at 9:42 am…“some women†feel “sad and some use more alcohol or drugs†…
Who are these mysterious women and how is it that Bush knows so many of them?
October 8th, 2007 at 9:46 amCome one guys. Think for a second.
What exactly is wrong with abstinence?
Sure kids will continue to have sex. Sex feels good. However, abstinence helps you avoid the consequences of sex: disease, pregnancy, emotional conflict, etc…
If more kids (even adults) practiced abstinence, rather than think the key to all happiness is the satiation of all their impulses, a lot of problems could be solved.
It blows my mind that you people are reacting so strongly to this.
October 8th, 2007 at 9:46 amHey, where is the ThinkFast thread this morning?
October 8th, 2007 at 9:47 amBush has already said that he doesn’t want this to be the first step toward nationalizing health care. He is out front and honest about that much of it, but then he weasels and spins the numbers from his AEI handlers to try and make it look like it will help these kids.
Check the new SCHIP plan when a new compramize comes out. I bet they have even more options for the states to elect to “Privatize” the new money and the existing money for this program to the for profit insurance companies.
October 8th, 2007 at 9:49 am“Tell your kids you want them to wait ’til they’re married to have sex.â€
yeah… don’t discuss their own thoughts with them…
October 8th, 2007 at 9:54 amChris L,…maybe on vacation…Columbus Day observed today instead of Friday the 12th…It’s all about sales ya know…..
October 8th, 2007 at 9:55 am“you people”? nice.
The problem with the Abstinance Program is that it doesn’t work.
Of course that puts it right on par with almost every other program the Bush Administration has created!
Show me a Bush Program that HAS worked!
Abstinance is fine and dandy if this is a morality that the parents “choose” to teach their kids.
My highschool girlfriend waited until she got married. And I was fine with that. It was just a part of who she was.
The probelm is that government shouldn’t be trying to force someones version of morality down the throats of the populus.
No murder is fine. No drugs is fine. No pre-marital sex is a personal preference with religious connotations and our govenement has no business selling one position or the other on the issue.
that’s the problem.
October 8th, 2007 at 9:55 amFrom the Administration who brought you The Iraq War, Alberto Gonzolez, the suspension of habeus corpus, and Abu Ghraib comes:
Sex advise for Teens!!!
Watch as your incompetent president and his bumbiling administration try to get your kids not to have sex. Will they succeed or will they fail as usual?
October 8th, 2007 at 9:56 am#21 - I’ll field that question… it’s ok, but if you do it for the right reasons… meaning, you genuinely want to wait… if you abstain due to what a partisan, non-scientific group tells you, you are doing so out of ignorance… if kids decide to wait in full view of the facts, that’s one thing… many of us object to kids only getting part of the story… further, we object to our tax dollars being used for such misinformation…
October 8th, 2007 at 9:57 amComment by detroitsuperfly
It’s the program that’s messed up. If you look at the article above (and related research) you’ll find that it has no effect on teen sexual activity.
Abstinence should be taught as part of a balanced sex education program that includes a frank discussion of sexually transmitted diseases and all of the means to prevent them (as well as their merits) “Abstinence only” programs not only leave out important information that teens need to make informed choices about sexual activity, they frequently leave the program with false information. How is this education?
October 8th, 2007 at 9:58 amThe PR Administration continues…
Has anyone seen “WeDontServeTeens.gov” ?
What exactly is an industry trade group doing with an implicit government endorsement and a .gov address?
October 8th, 2007 at 9:58 amOctober 8th, 2007 at 9:58 am
Sorry, it is “dontserveteens.gov
October 8th, 2007 at 10:00 amIf you have been arrested for peaceful demonstrations against the bush admin, you just might not be allowed into Canada.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:00 amThis administration has screwed everything up!
If they start a program to teach kids the joys of abstinance, TEEN pregnancy will SKY-ROCKET off the charts.
Kids will watch the videos and then rape the family dog!
Either that or they will begin to secretly hate themselves in their repressed little minds and start tapping their feet in bathroom stalls.
Get used to it; this administration is inept! That’s what you get when you hire ‘C” students because they are “Bushies”!
October 8th, 2007 at 10:06 amWhat everyone is missing here is the money (tax money, yours and mine) that Bush is shoveling to his Christian supporters. The abstinence only business is a racket and a lucrative one at that.
Oh yeah, and one without oversight, peer review or cost benefit analysis, naturally.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:09 amSo your against telling our children to wait? WOW
October 8th, 2007 at 10:13 amA nation of morons. What next? A video of how to flush the toilet.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:16 amI prefer the term “chastity.” It’s better captures the program’s goals and lacks the feel-good sound of “abstinence.” “Abstinence” is often used to describe refraining from things that hurt us, like drink or drugs and carries good connotations.
“Chastity” better captures the prudish, medieval approach to human sexuality practiced by the whacked out right.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:16 amOff topic, but who cares?
Via Yahoo news.
A report by the Oxford Research Group (ORG) said a “fundamental re-think is required” if the global terrorist network is to be rendered ineffective.
“If the al Qaeda movement is to be countered, then the roots of its support must be understood and systematically undercut,” said Paul Rogers, the report’s author and professor of global peace studies at Bradford University in northern England.
“Combined with conventional policing and security measures, al Qaeda can be contained and minimized but this will require a change in policy at every level.”
October 8th, 2007 at 10:17 am“‘Chastity’ better captures the prudish, medieval approach to human sexuality practiced by the whacked out right.”
//laughs
October 8th, 2007 at 10:21 amHey! Halliburton could get the “Chastity Belt” contract!
(cost plus 4% profit margin, and performance bonuses, open bids will not be accepted)
Blackwater could get the Marshalling Contract!
(they go around “checking for intact Hymins. cost plus 5%, plus performance bonuses and all the tasers they need for the job)
October 8th, 2007 at 10:25 amCraig / Foley ‘08!
We’ll take a wide stance on immigration while protecting America’s kids!
October 8th, 2007 at 10:32 amAs Bush screws millions of our children out of healthcare, he’s condoning abstinance in an attempt, albeit futile, to give the impression that he gives a flying $hit about our kids! How transparent can he get? Answer: So transparent that he’s become both a national and international pariah.
Comment by Veritas — October 8, 2007 @ 9:42 am
I wish I could even say that Bush is pushing abstinence-only out of concern for America’s youth. But it’s just noise to appease the Rabid Christian Right (and he’s trying like mad to keep his base loyal). Because it’s just hot air, it’s not even important whether or not this ad campaign has any effectiveness, and I would be willing to bet that no measurements will be taken.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:34 amTell your kids nobody ever got pregnant getting a blow-job in a public restroom.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:36 amWhat’s up, TP? It’s 10:30 EDT, there’s no ThinkFast thread, and only one other thread.
Slow news day? Given who’s currently occupying the WH, I don’t see how that’s possible…
October 8th, 2007 at 10:37 amOf course, “no sex before marriage” leaves gay men and lesbians, who don’t happen to live in Massachussetts, shit outa luck.
But I guess that’s exactly how they want it, except for the occassional getting your groove on in public parks, rest stops and airport bathrooms; it’s the family values Republicans’ way!
Next thing you know the government will be sponsoring, and spending millions to advertise, “ex-gay” reclosetization therapy.
Is it 2009 yet????????
October 8th, 2007 at 10:38 amIt is astonishing to me that on the site 4parents.gov it list “birth control” under “Sex and Risky Youth Behaviors” How irresponsible is that. Telling kids that using birth contraol is acting irresponsibly.
This administration is sick.
Apwu
October 8th, 2007 at 10:41 amI agree with the commenters who say this is just “noise” to distract from the real news about Blackwater Committing Murder in Iraq.
check that story out.
anyone who seriously thinks that the Republicans have any moral authority left, should be left to their own devises to bumble through life anyway.
natural selection will deal with them anyway…
October 8th, 2007 at 10:43 amHow UTTERLY stupid. I wonder if these morons even HAVE kids. (I have 6 and 2 grandkids). Biology is not a moral issue. You explain to kids the consequences of their choices, explain safe sex, explain the problems with sex too young, and it works out 9 times out of 10. I’ve got 6 success stories with that approach. No moralistic religious Repub bullshit.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:50 amAbstinence before marriage is an excellent goal and something to be encouraged–by parents and family. I am very much against my tax dollars going toward a(nother) demonstrably ineffective and dishonest religious federal program.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:52 amAs long as Republicans are practicing abstinence I guess that is a good thing.
However, once Republicans get married they tend to breed like they’re in a third world country.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:55 amOur society has been telling teens not to have sex for many generations now. We tell them today, we certainly told them when I was a teen, and we were telling people of my parents’ and grandparents’ generations not to have sex. They do (and have always done) anyway. We need to wake up to the reality here and deal with it with a little more creativity than the “just say no — OK, my job here is done” approach.
There’s nothing wrong with abstinence. Abstinence is the most effective method of birth control, and the most effective way to avoid STDs. I doubt teens would mind being told this information, as it is factual.
Teens need other factual information, too. They need to know about ALL methods of birth control, their effectiveness rates, their side effects (if any), and their appropriateness for their situation. (For example, sterilization is second only to abstinence for birth control effectiveness, but probably the least appropriate method for teenagers.) Using a condom has less risk for complications and is much more convenient than getting an abortion. You get the idea.
The quickest way to derail teens from ANY message is to lie. When society decides to make up information in order to scare teens into a desired behavior (such as suggesting to teens they will be more likely to use drugs and alcohol after an abortion without any factual basis), we lose them. It’s like when kids discover they DON’T really go blind if they masturbate, they know they’re being sold a bill of goods and tend to discredit the entire package.
When we tell them that condoms aren’t worth it because “they can fail”, we wind up with teens having unprotected sex (why bother with a condom — it’s just going to fail anyway), not abstinent teens.
When we tell teens that they are somehow superior if they are abstinent, we are essentially telling teens who DO have sex that they are inferior.
Teens also know that adults from generations before them weren’t abstinent until marriage. I wonder when Dubya lost his virginity? Was he pure on his wedding night? And is this the reason he grew up to be President? Teens aren’t that stupid. They know BS when they hear it.
October 8th, 2007 at 10:56 amIt’s nearly 11:00 a.m., and so far, nothing on TP about the below issue..so sorry this is off topic, but this needs to be discussed.
“House Democrats plan to introduce a bill this week that would let a secret court issue one-year “umbrella” warrants to allow the government to intercept e-mails and phone calls of foreign targets and would not require that surveillance of each person be approved individually.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2007/ 10/ 06/ AR2007100601265.html?wpisrc=newsletter
October 8th, 2007 at 10:58 amDistract with sex while the world burns…
October 8th, 2007 at 10:59 amTelling kids not have sex if fascism?
That is the problem with the far left. They don’t know real “fascism” and instead are way to quick to brand any traditional values with the label “fascism.”
Is telling kids not have sex a good thing? Of course it is. Parents should be doing that.
Is abstinence better than non-abstinence outside of marriage? Sure it is.
There should be no real debate over whether abstinence is good. The real question should be “Is this an effective use of our money and will it lead to the result we desire?” Unfortunately, like so much of the Bush budget bloating social program, the programs as structured have not been shown to be effective.
We need to train parents how to talk to their kids instead of creating programs for the government to do it for us.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:00 amno resources were provided for “parents whose teen remains sexually active”
The Bush preferred web site for these kids is GO-ARMY.GOV.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:00 amIs TP on vacation today?
October 8th, 2007 at 11:03 amDaryll! Glad to see you made it, buddy! I knew you wouldn’t want to miss this thread… ^_^
October 8th, 2007 at 11:05 amLeave it to you and your party to try to leave a sinful stain on Generation X. I love President Bush for creating and implementing this campaign to celebrate the sanctity of marriage and praising the protecting of their virginity. We need to tell this generation to keep their pants zipped and their skirts up until marriage. We were put on this earth to marry and procreate. Libs, God is not pleased with your negative response towards this ad.
Comment by Daryll — October 8, 2007 @ 11:03 am
Really? Because God told me he’s sick of you sitting in judgment on other people’s behavior, Daryll.
And “skirts up” isn’t conducive to abstinence, Daryll. You need to get out more.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:07 amMean while, from CNN:
October 8th, 2007 at 11:07 amBreaking News Prime Minister Gordon Brown says Britain will cut its troops in Iraq to 2,500 starting in spring.
Telling kids not have sex if fascism?
That is the problem with the far left. They don’t know real “fascism†and instead are way to quick to brand any traditional values with the label “fascism.â€
Comment by Skeeter1 — October 8, 2007 @ 11:00 am
You’re the ONLY one who’s used the word ‘fascism” in conjunction w/ this topic, on this thread. It is not used in TP’s lead article here either.
Just pointing it out…
October 8th, 2007 at 11:07 am“We need to tell this generation to keep their pants zipped and their skirts up until marriage. ”
Comment by Daryll
FREUDIAN!!!!!!
LOL
October 8th, 2007 at 11:08 amThanks for spending our hard earned money asking kids to go against their biological imperative. What’s next… a video for cancer sufferers advocating they pound their heads against a wall?
October 8th, 2007 at 11:08 amIt is not the government’s role to do the job parents should be doing.
Comment by ARealAmerican — October 8, 2007 @ 11:02 am
That is the endless GOOPer mantra, is it not?
October 8th, 2007 at 11:08 amI’m willing to risk the wrath of a non-existent sky-god.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:09 amLibs, God is not pleased with your negative response towards this ad.
Comment by Daryll — October 8, 2007 @ 11:03 am
This has GOT to be a joke.
“Sinful stain”??? This isn’t a real poster. “Libs”???
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHA…
October 8th, 2007 at 11:10 amWe need to tell this generation to keep their pants zipped and their skirts up until marriage.
When I was in High School Daryll, I would definitely have supported the ’skirts up’ theory, but I’m not sure it would enhance abstinence.
Any other fantasies you’d like share?
October 8th, 2007 at 11:10 amTeenagers, with no impulse control and mighty powerful sex drive are told to abstain while the world turns around sex. Sex sells. Our kids are bombarded with it. I see nothing wrong with it either.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:10 amI see nothing wrong with sex. Premarital sex is an ancient taboo that men foisted on women because they wanted to be sure who the kids were fathered by.
Now, of course, we have AIDS and STDs, but proper use of condoms will protect against them, as well as unwanted pregnancies.
Promoting abstinence only is promoting a religious belief… and should be found unconstitutional.
Isn’t it funny how the trolls start showing up almost right on the hr?
It’s like they’ve clocked in, gotten a cup of coffee, discussed today’s talking points, and now it’s time to earn their measly troll paychecks.
Where’s Li’l Footie? Takin’ the day off?
October 8th, 2007 at 11:12 amThe disagreeable part is that it is a known fact that abstinence only programs don’t work and it’s a waste of tax dollars that could be used in some other productive way. Of course, there are those in Bush’s base that make money off of this. Abstinence only programs are a business.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:13 am“their skirts up”…
that’s all anyone should need to know it’s a fool…
and to argue with a fool is foolish…
but kids must play… the parody trooll has arrived…
this thread is now officially trashed…
g’day.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:17 am.
I do think it’s an intrusion on my privacy. I’m happy that my school teaches comprehensive health education, as opposed to another local district that teaches abstinence only. The teacher frequently talks about how what he’s teaching isn’t allowed in the other school district (to be testament to the absurdity of such a policy), and (thankfully) actively persues to keep comprehensive education in this district, by having a poll at the end of each semester requesting (anonymously) information about the required class’s sexual past.
It proves every year that comprehensive is necessary and far superior to any religious program like abstinence only.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:19 amSenator Larry Craig waited until he was married to have toe-tapping bathroom sex. He should be doing the commercials instead of the kids, as he’s become the number one Republican role model.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:36 amTo bad George Sr. and Babs didn’t practice it.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:44 amSenator Larry Craig waited until he was married to have toe-tapping bathroom sex. He should be doing the commercials instead of the kids, as he’s become the number one Republican role model.
Comment by Starve-A-Bush_Feed-A-Beaver — October 8, 2007 @ 11:36 am
When did he ever molest children? Stop accusing/judging others. You are not without sin.
Comment by Daryll
_____________________
Apparently that Congressional Page scandal back in the 80s completely slipped your mind.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:54 amSweet. Sex. Always a favorite subject.
First, I don’t think you need to teach teenagers about abstinence. I remember being a teenager (just a mere 25 years ago). I didn’t need to be taught abstinence. I already knew about abstinence. IT SUCKED!
Seriously, teaching kids about abstinence is one aspect of discussing sex, but the misinformation is just plain wrong. I have never heard a teenager claim to want their parent’s to discuss “waiting”.
Daryll of Parodyll, here’s a fun question:
Why did God create the male physiology to release sperm? You just don’t get to store “it” until your wedding night (Oh lawdy, wouldn’t that be fun for the wife). You release it every so often such that your body can create stronger, more viable, “swimmers”. Now, if I have to explain how you “release” said older sperm, you my friend, are in big trouble. Why would God create this mechanism if you couldn’t use it?
And I wonder, how many posters here actually waited until marriage?
I’m going to guess…NONE!
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the Catholic Church (A pope, or bishop) designate premarital sex as sinful.
October 8th, 2007 at 11:57 amRepublic of Stupidity:
What an appropriate name.
You might want to check out comment #9.
Dwstar (comment #64): Asking to go against a biological imperative? Get real. We ask people to control impulses all the time.
The real issue here is not the ultimate goal, but the means to get there.
October 8th, 2007 at 12:00 pmYeah. Groovy. Wow.
My tax dollars at work - promoting stupidity.
Thanks, Chimpy. I wish your mother and father had practiced abstinence.
October 8th, 2007 at 12:03 pmSkeeter1 sez:
Hey, if Larry Craig couldn’t “control his impluses”, what chance does a horny teen have?
October 8th, 2007 at 12:05 pmBlack is White, up is down, war is peace, torture is moral, murder is freedom, corruption is….and on and on and on we go with repukian propaganda.
Remember when you were a teen? What was it that you were after 24/7? That’s right, the drive to mate. Mother Nature takes over and nothing in the world is gonna stop teens from doing what Nature tells them to do.
Bush a corrupt, mass murder and a war criminal, so how is that suppose to be a example for teens?
October 8th, 2007 at 12:06 pmTripmaster,
The day I live by Larry Craig’s standard is the day I give it all up.
Are you really suggesting that, because Larry Craig is a pig, we should just give up on morality?
October 8th, 2007 at 12:12 pmSkeeter1 sez:
I’m saying that if you Repukes could stop being such gigantic hypocrites and lead by example once in a while, you might be taken a tiny bit more seriously.
October 8th, 2007 at 12:15 pmQUIT WASTING -MY TAX MONEY ON THIS BULLSH*T.
October 8th, 2007 at 12:16 pmAnd another thought here, more than HALF of Americans now are not married. So are they saying don’t have sex if you never want to get married?
My daughter, age 23, never wants to get married and never wants to have kids. Doesn’t want to have the legal responsibility of any male, when you marry, you marry their financial and legal responsibilities, she has been screwed on credit standings now 2 times because of boyfriends and will not marry because of she sees now how the system works.
So this RELIGIOUS superstition of MARRIAGE is total BS, leave the Religious stuff to the unevolved.
Buck Fush
October 8th, 2007 at 12:17 pmTripmaster,
October 8th, 2007 at 12:18 pmYour post is ridiculous. It shows that the far left is at least as ignorant as the far right.
Try this — READ the posts, and then come back and tell me what you think.
Try this: Read what has been written, and THEN comment.
CoulterIsamAnn sez:
Funny, isn’t it, how when one of their own falls from grace, he’s ejected from the dialog at Mach 3, without ever acknowledging the hypocrisy.
Meanwhile, Larry is The Thing That Wouldn’t Leave, stubbornly insisting on keeping his Senate seat, to the horror and chagrin of all the other hapless Repukes. It’s a beautiful thing…
October 8th, 2007 at 12:21 pmToo funny.
Based upon my posts above, I’ve been accused of being a GOP wingnut. Makes my day.
Disgusting attitude about sex? Believing that we should strive to prevent teen pregnancy is a “disgusting attitude about sex”?
That’s an interesting view.
October 8th, 2007 at 12:22 pmSkeeter1 sez:
Congrats, dolt. You’ve managed to say nothing at all. Are plans to run for Congress in your future?
Until you can scrape together enough neurons to cogently refute my post #98, it continues to stand. Let me know when you’re up to debating me.
October 8th, 2007 at 12:23 pmHave Jen and Tonic twins abided to that ad?
October 8th, 2007 at 12:23 pm… whew…
thanks for proving me wrong… mostly…
good comments… mostly…
…
gotta say - h/t to drxj - “parodyll”… LOL…
October 8th, 2007 at 12:29 pm.
If Republicans start practicing what they preach, America could start catching up with the rest of the world.
October 8th, 2007 at 12:29 pmCoulterIsamAnn sez:
Exactly. As I said way back in post #5, this isn’t about health concerns. This is about using our taxes to push their demented Fundie ideology.
The really funny thing is that the administration doesn’t give a flying fsck at a rolling donut about “values”, Fundie or otherwise. They’re just pandering to their base, as usual, and as usual, their base is too stupid to realize they’re being played yet again.
October 8th, 2007 at 12:31 pmAbstinence is the ONLY 100% effective method to prevent unwanted pregnancy and prevent STD’s.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — October 8, 2007 @ 11:53 am
Technically true. As long as abstinence doesn’t fail. It seems the issue here is the “failure rate” of abstinence — and yes, there is one.
Just as fasting is easy until you get hungry, abstinence gets more difficult as hormones kick in. It’s not surprising that some fall off the abstinence wagon. And then what?
October 8th, 2007 at 12:38 pmWe need to tell this generation to keep their pants zipped and their skirts up until marriage.
Comment by Daryll — October 8, 2007 @ 11:03 am
We’ve been telling every generation that for decades now — even centuries. People still have sex before they get married. How do you propose telling this generation not to have sex in a way that will be different? And effective?
October 8th, 2007 at 12:42 pmJUST SAY NO” to having any fun whatsoever
October 8th, 2007 at 12:50 pmTrip,
October 8th, 2007 at 12:54 pmYou need to make a point before it can be reputed.
“Republicans are bad” isn’t much of a point.
Also, if you read the posts, you would discover why I find your comment abusing.
So try this, Trip. Instead of just rambling on, try doing some reading.
With regard to Coulter, #107:
Please tell me where I have written anything against either birth control or sex education.
Your posts prove my point: The far left as as many uneducated windbags as the far right.
October 8th, 2007 at 12:56 pmI don’t believe that premarital sex is either immoral or unhealthy. I don’t want my government promoting this view with my taxpayer dollars.
October 8th, 2007 at 1:04 pmWith ‘W’, it’s always do what I say; not what I do. He sends folks off to war, but he himself was unwilling to go to Vietnam. He wants teenagers to not have sex, but he himself did not practice abstinence. He claims he does not approve torture, yet we find that he does approve torture. The list goes on and on.
October 8th, 2007 at 1:05 pm#77 Daryll
“An idol mind is the devil’s workshop.”
More accurately.
October 8th, 2007 at 1:06 pmAn vacuous mind is the devil’s workshop.
I find this entire relegious imposed ideal as bizzar as the people that preach it out of two sides of their mouth’s…As an Indian once said, ? “white man speak with forked tounge”. May I add my view, especiely relegious zealiot’s..While they preach all this nonscence they use their bible…Well use it all you want but (obstain) from using it on the populace please…..Educate and inform the children and leave out the fear and god stuff, please..
I think the craziest thing of all are 1.the virgin birth…..Believe what you will, I find it terribley suspect that a woman is visited by a spirit and (raped) in a dream and then gives birth to a child…2…I also find it equaly odd that 26% of suposed thinking adult’s that troll post here are follower’s of an idiot who paid for his girl friend at the time to have an abortion and now profeses to be a christian, engages in mass killing of innocent’s, ignore’s his own countries need’s and all the people that reside here, has been linked with evil all his life and people think he is normal?.
The troll’s and radical relegious reich will have all believe what their representative’s do is O,K, just as long as Clinton’s name doesn’t follow the deed……Kind of remind’s me of other odd chapter’s in the bible like Lott’s wife being turned into a piller of salt and then Lott laying with his daughter’s to create son’s…..Geeeees….I don’t care who your god’s are or are not or if you believe in the tooth fairy, just dont demand we all think the same…….Educate and then show compassion, stop the war’s……Blessings
October 8th, 2007 at 1:09 pmSkeeter1 sez:
As it is this Republican administration that is pushing an abstinence program that is doomed to failure, it’s a very relevant point.
And BTW, it still stands, your histrionics notwithstanding.
“Abusing”? My comments are “abusing”? I can imagine how you might think that…
I will…just as soon as you write something. ^_^
October 8th, 2007 at 1:09 pmSkeeter1 sez:
The irony is delicious… ^_^
October 8th, 2007 at 1:10 pmConservatives are always trying to change the natural order of things. All adolescents have hormones and they are going to want to have sex. It’s natural; we are all built that way, so that we can reproduce as a species. The only fear we should have here people, is this:
some teenagers will be misinformed about abortion, condoms, and birth control;
October 8th, 2007 at 1:13 pmhave sex;
get pregnant;
and then the right blames the left for such immoral behavior.
Trip master:
October 8th, 2007 at 1:14 pmMy word was a typo.
Your comments were uniformed rambling, apparently done on purpose and as a matter of policy.
There is a significant difference.
Technically true. As long as abstinence doesn’t fail. It seems the issue here is the “failure rate†of abstinence — and yes, there is one.
Comment by missmolly — October 8, 2007 @ 12:38 pm
This is so true. The right labels abstinence as the only 100% way to prevent an unwanted pregnancy and/or an STD. But what happens when that fails? It certainly doesn’t prevent an unwanted pregnancy or STD 100%.
I’m not against abstinence, but to say that it is the only method, then only educate our children about that method, is, in my opinion, irresponsible.
October 8th, 2007 at 1:19 pmSkeeter1 sez:
And a pretty funny typo, too. Keep ‘em coming, Skeeter….at least you’re amusing…
If my comments were so “uninformed” and such “rambling”, it should be easy for you to dispute them. Please stop stalling and do so now.
October 8th, 2007 at 1:33 pmthe youth of america is far more sophisticated about sex than we adults give them credit for. they rarely enter into monogamus relationships preferring to “hook-up” instead. who over 40 has been to a rainbow party? wake up, we should be providing free condoms, not another pie in the sky waste of tax dollars.
October 8th, 2007 at 1:34 pmWhat do you mean “abstinence doesn’t work”?’
Of course abstinence works.
If abstinence is practiced, it is 100% effective by definition.
Of course, if you have read my posts, you would know my thoughts on government funded abstinence education, which is a different altogether.
Butyou didn’t read the posts, did you?
Of course not.
Which proves my larger point: The far left can be as dangerously ignorant as the far right.
When ignornant little twerps like “Coulter” speak, Democrats lose votes. In fact, I suspect that “Coulter” is actually a Rovian plant designed to provide quotes that will any reasonable voters.
Coulter, it O.K. Rove put you up this, didn’t he?
October 8th, 2007 at 1:37 pmI KNEW IT!
Trip,
October 8th, 2007 at 1:39 pmI can’t make the slightest sense of any point that you might be attempting to raise.
Educate me. Flesh out your point.
Until then, there is nothing that I can do to respond.
I actually like this type of ad better than the “This is your brain on drugs” kind of ads. Parents know they should be talking to their kids about drugs and sex. After seeing a few of these ads they might go ahead and do that. It’s a lot more plausible scenario than a teenager seeing a guy frying an egg and deciding not to try pot.
That said, I find the idea of abstinence until marriage hopeless. What are gay people to do? They can’t get married!
October 8th, 2007 at 1:47 pmComment by Skeeter1 — October 8, 2007 @ 1:39 pm
Comment by CT_V1 — October 8, 2007 @ 1:45 pm
If all you boys are going to do is run away, why don’t you just run away and spare us all your theatrics?
October 8th, 2007 at 1:51 pmTrip,
October 8th, 2007 at 1:52 pmDo you have a point or not?
They launched this commercial out here in Sarasota County a couple of weeks ago.
It’s silly for anyone to presume that teenagers are not going to have sex when they want to. There are a lot of teenagers who make the decision to wait to have sex and there are those that don’t want to wait.
I say, teach them all about safe sex whether it is abstinence or birth control methods. They aren’t stupid. They are capable of making some decisions for themselves. Teach them and let them make the decision that is right for them because if they want to have sex, there is nothing that a parent is going to be able to do to stop them unless they are with the teenager 24/7 and that’s not gonna happen.
October 8th, 2007 at 1:57 pmAm I safe in assuming that most TP posters would, and are, happily paying for all those “little mistakesâ€, all those youthful indiscretion, and all those illicit moments of teenage pleasure that put single mothers and fatherless children on the welfare rolls. Where one of the most common stories is the endless repetition of the welfare cycle with the offspring trying to escape but only producing another welfare family.
There’s a very practical side to this issue in addition to the moral one.
Who wants to pay for some irresponsible man’s pleasure especially if means the fiscal and emotional poverty of the woman and her children?
If a sex class is not teaching all the risk in underage, illicit sex ( sex between people who aren’t married to each other ) then they students are being cheated. Cheated like in robbed. They’re just being more susceptible.
Among humans there’s no such thing as sex without consequences.
October 8th, 2007 at 1:57 pmSkeeter1 sez:
I do, which I outlined quite clearly in post #98…pity you “can’t make the slightest sense” of it.
Do want to dispute it now, or will you just flee again?
October 8th, 2007 at 1:57 pmCT_V1 sez:
Unlike you, I’m not trying to “sell” anything.
Just reminding idiots like you and Skeeter1 where the debate stands…I find that if I don’t keep you mouthbreathers focused, you fall off task with depressing speed and regularity.
October 8th, 2007 at 2:00 pmBitblt sez:
If that’s intended to be a question, the answer is no.
Indeed…just as they are cheated by being taught that only abstinence can keep them safe, while disregarding safe-sex practices.
In that, we are in total agreement.
October 8th, 2007 at 2:04 pmDon’t the people putting these “ads” realize that the kids are snickering AT them and not WITH them?
“Tell me to wait!”
Please.
Kids are smarter than they give them credit for. Show them the truth and they’ll listen.
The egg in the frying pan “brain on drugs” commercial was just laughed at when I was in school. But later on I remember a series of commercials where they showed this heroine addict totally tweaking out in a grungy dirty bathroom. That, imho, would have done more to scare me from drugs than an egg in a frying pan. But that commercial wasn’t on too long. I guess it was too realistic.
Anyway, this abstinence commercial is completely laughable. Show the kids the truth. They’ll listen.
October 8th, 2007 at 2:04 pm#98 was directed to Republicans, and claimed, bascially, that all Republicans are bad?
Is that really the argument you are asking me to refute?
You have made about six posts since then, in order to get a response to that?
October 8th, 2007 at 2:15 pmCoulter,
Once again, what have I said about the value of abstinence education?
If you would stop whining and respond, then this “debate” could move forward.
October 8th, 2007 at 2:16 pmHey look, Mr. Preznut criticizes posters, yet offers nothing to debate within the topic of the thread.
Surprise, surprise, surprise!
So, CompTroller V-1nut, I’ll ask you what I ask’d Parodyll:
October 8th, 2007 at 2:24 pmWhy did God create a mechanism for man (every man) to release?
I don’t know why people in the U.S. can’t take an enlightened clue from other countries/continents that don’t have a problem with teenage pregnancy. In Europe, for example, several countries have intelligent and informative sex education all the way from elementary school through high school. Yes, elementary school. So when they get into the sexually active years, they are prepared ahead of time.
As a result, kids there actually are less sexually active, and the ones that are, know what they’re doing, in order to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
In Europe (and other places around the world), they don’t only offer kids marriage as being the “only” option for sex, fill their heads with nonsense about condoms “never” working, nor do they try to convince gay kids that there is something “wrong” with their orientation, with the implication being that religion “solve” their problem.
We have an overidealized perception about young people in this country, an overidealized notion of their absolute “innocence” (which we project onto them), and see them as “babies with hormones”, instead of young adults.
The benefits of a realistic approach to young people and sex are obvious. The only places that have out-of-control teenage pregnancies are third world countries, and the U.S.
The idealogues in the Bush administration refuse to be objective or to learn anything which is not in their own set of rigid beliefs. No surprise there. But a new administration, and a more thoughtful approach, to sex education, which compliments the intelligence of young people, would benefit them tremendously.
We only have the world as an example…
October 8th, 2007 at 2:27 pmCT_V1 sez:
You can dispute the statement I made back in post #98 any time you like, CT. Funny how you shy away from an honest debate, instead preferring to stand back and sling ad hominems.
Amusing, how you contrive to use the italic and bold tags in a single sentence…Perhaps this post to CoulterIsamAnn might shed some light on this:
Trying to steal my mojo, CT? Hate to disappoint you, but the bold and italics tags are secondary to you being able to form and express a cogent thought, which is sadly beyond the reach of the average troll…and you’re significantly below average. ^_^
First of all, if you don’t know how to close your tags properly, don’t try to use them. You only succeed in making your already disjointed posts even more confusing.
Second, it’s pretty pathetic when you interpret my simple statement of where the debate stands as “inflating claims of my ‘greatness’ “. You really ought to do something about that crippling lack of self-worth you’ve got going on there. Try taking a pottery class.
October 8th, 2007 at 2:31 pmSkeeter1 sez:
Wow, Skeeter. You’re right.
You really can’t “make the slightest sense of any point”.
How sad for you.
October 8th, 2007 at 2:33 pmTrip,
October 8th, 2007 at 2:36 pmReferencing your post 157 –
Once again, I don’t have a clue as to what, if anything, you are trying to say.
Make a point and I will do what I can to respond. Until then, nice talking.
Skeeter1 sez:
I can’t tell if you’re actually this stupid, or if you’re merely being deliberately obtuse in an attempt to escape an argument you know you can’t win, but either way, it amounts to the same thing. You’re not worth the effort.
Take some reading comprehension classes and get back to me.
October 8th, 2007 at 2:41 pmMr. Preznut,
October 8th, 2007 at 2:43 pmMy question is NOT off topic, and yet, you avoided it.
I also see you went into “attack the children of a poster” phase.
I’ll give you a little hint:
More than likely, my twins (age 5) will be sex obsessed, just like all teens are/will be. They’re human, after all.
It will be my responsibility to address those issues when they arise, as I’ve already done with my oldest. I’m just against the misinformation associated with this organization.
…and just FYI, I would never blame my short comings as a parent or a person on a particular party. I take full responsibility for all my actions.
You and your cohorts may want to take that advice to task. Look at how many times you or they post “Liberalism causes this, or it’s because of the Left that…”
Coulter,
Please read the posts. I make my views pretty clear. It is there. But you have to read. I know that reading is more difficult than just typing about your hatred for the GOP, but it is worth it in the end. Knowledge beats ignorance. Try it.
After doing so, please show where I have advocated “abstience only.”
Further, please explain how “abstinence” doesn’t work. Of course it works. By definition it works.
Now go back and see what was written by me about abstinence education, which is another matter completely.
You ignorance (and frankly, lack of effort as the posts are pretty clear) is appalling. You are living up to what Rove says.
Coulter, you ARE Rove, aren’t you? Welcome to the debate, Karl.
October 8th, 2007 at 2:45 pmTrip,
October 8th, 2007 at 2:46 pmI’ve asked you to flesh out your point.
You’ve refused.
I don’t have a clue as to what, if any, point you are trying to make.
Coulter,
Let me get this right.
You claim that when you say “abstinence doesn’t work” and I interpret that as “abstinence doesn’t work” rather than “abstinence education only doesn’t work” I am the “tard”?
Nice try, Karl. We are on to you. Post under your own name for a change.
October 8th, 2007 at 2:54 pmThe left may have a few random numbskulls running around, but the left isn’t that insane. Nobody is. Now go back to Texas or wherever you have decided to retire and leave the fine people of this forum alone!
CT_V1 sez:
“Everybody”? Addressing the entire thread, CT? Who’s indulging in “theatrics” now?
Actually, I just turned Independent, not that it’s any of your business, and 50 is still far in the future. Was there a point to that little ad hominem spat?
Better people than you (which would be most of the posters here) disagree. In light of their opinions, I am forced to conclude that yours is false, motivated soley by envy, and of no value. Sorry.
Nearly every post you’ve written in this thread have been unprovoked attacks of me…this last post of yours is no exception.
Who’s “obsessed”, again? ^_^
October 8th, 2007 at 2:54 pmCoulter,
1. Was the study mentioned about “abstinence” or was it about “abstinence only education”?
2. Have I defended the program?
3. Is there a difference between “abstinence” and “abstinence only education”?
Really, you’ve gone from merely lazy to rambling and pathetic. You are everything that Rove accused the left of. You are doing a fine job of living up to his example. Democrats lose elections because of people like you. Nice work.
October 8th, 2007 at 3:04 pmCoulter,
It is difficult to respond to your posts without using terms like “YOU HALFWIT.”
Please point out where I have made one comment critical of sex education.
Your ignorance is just stunning. You are a pathetic example of what the left should stand for. You are lazy and ignorant. What a disgrace.
October 8th, 2007 at 3:20 pmAnswering further,
Let’s just hope our friend Coulter doesn’t get his hands on studies showing how well American kids are learning math and English.
If so, Coulter would come out against math and English.
Coulter, there are a lot of things that are abstractly good but are difficult to teach. That makes the teaching bad, but it doesn’t make the subject bad.
October 8th, 2007 at 3:33 pmCoulter,
* * *
2. Have I defended the program? Comment by Skeeter1 — October 8, 2007 @ 3:04 pm
yes, by implying that abstinence is an effective strategy. You certainly haven’t attacked abstinence only - I’m waiting. Do it now!
O.K. since you are too lazy to read the posts yourself — -please read comment #54 above.
October 8th, 2007 at 3:59 pmSo, Johnny Swank, are you advocating yourself as the arbiter of morality…?
No?
Well, all right. If not you, then who…?
George Bush? James Dobson? Larry Craig? Mark Foley? Ted Haggard? The Catholic Church? Who?
That’s what they’ve got set up in Saudi Arabia, where adulterers are stoned, and Afghanistan, where the Taliban forces women to walk around with bags over their heads.
Is that your idea of “morality,” Johnny boy?
Who decides? You?
I don’t think so. You need to stop focusing on running everyone else’s life - and focus on running your own. And mind your own damn business. If I want to have hot monkey sex with 3 women I meet at a lesbian bar and a guy I picked up off the street - that’s MY business. NOT yours. If I want to raise my children that way - again, it’s MY business and NOT yours.
You and your judgmental faux Christian pals need to mind your own business - and stop peering into other peoples’ bedrooms.
October 8th, 2007 at 4:58 pmWell. Christ is quoted in Matthew 19, where he alludes to Genesis, that the Creator intended that there human sexual expression to be one man one woman.
If you have better advice than this why don’t you present it?
Of course, one has to believe in God the Creator and Jesus Christ the Son of God to value advice from the Bible.
Based on your response I believe I would prefer Johnny Swank making the morality rules.
It seems you know what you don’t like but don’t have a clue as to what you like.
Is this the best we can offer to anyone on how to best live their life? Mind your own business.
Ever heard the adage, “If you don’t teach your children, the devil will.†It’s popular among Evangelical Christians. We have variations on this adage like, “If you don’t teach your children, advertisers will.â€
BTW, have you ever wondered why the penalty for adultery is so severe in Saudi Arabia?
October 8th, 2007 at 5:53 pmWow, what a nice Christian response, Johnny! Overreact much?
Jesus loves you, buddy.
And you too, Rory, dear.
There is no MORAL/IMMORAL position in teaching kids about birth control and protecting themselves against STD’s.
It’s simply information.
As opposed to the moral stance of telling them that the “only” right way is “saving yourself til marriage”…and teaching nothing but that.
Give teenagers the correct and scientific information - and let them decide what to do with it.
But I guess that makes you crazy, huh?
October 8th, 2007 at 5:55 pmAnd you’re right - I don’t believe in God. There is no God.
October 8th, 2007 at 5:57 pmJohnny, don’ t you hate them for *their* “morality”…? Puh-lease. That’s a lame argument.
October 8th, 2007 at 5:57 pmAnd another thing - tell me, how is your evangelical fundamentalist Christianity different from the Islamic beliefs you’re railing against…?
October 8th, 2007 at 5:59 pmLAME, Rory. LAME. Apples and oranges.
October 8th, 2007 at 5:59 pmJohnny, I don’t give a damn whether you think I’m intelligent or not. That’s not your call anyway.
I refuted your argument. You got pissed off. Not my problem.
I don’t give a damn whether your kids practice abstinence or “save themselves for marriage.” That’s fine. Goodie-goodie for you.
My beef is with the GOVERNMENT going all Christian fundie on us and forcing what I consider to be a hypocritical and perverse set of values down *everyone’s* throat.
My beef is with the hypocrites in the Republican party (and like you, Johnny Swank) - they are the ones having hot monkey sex with underage pages and in public bathroom stalls - and all the while proclaiming that the rest of us *must* practice “Christian” fundamentalist values and abstain from sex - all sex except the man/woman variety - unless we’re married. Oh, and spending our tax dollars to promote that very same set of “Christian” fundamentalist values to our kids.
I was very clear about the problem I have with that, Johnny. You’re the one who overreacted.
By the way, did it ever occur to you that the Christian fundamentalists in this country promote the *exact* same set of moral values that the Islamic fundamentalists do…?
October 8th, 2007 at 6:13 pmAnd another thing, Johnny - not ONCE did I even MENTION our involvement in Afghanistan. I was in favor of it, by the way.
However, the Bushcons have effed it up there, too. Women are absolutely NO better off now than they were before.
And not in Iraq, either. Women in Iraq were doctors and lawyers when Saddam was in power. Now they’ve been re-relegated to bag-wearing ghosts who are afraid to venture out-of-doors, just like their sisters in Afghanistan.
“Freed millions of women”…? BULLSH*T. You need to get current, Johnny, you’re way behind in the news.
October 8th, 2007 at 6:18 pmIt is, Rory. That’s just more Christobabble BS.
Dr. Kevorkian was about helping terminally ill ADULTS - adults who consciously chose to end their suffering through suicide. (Which I fully support, by the way, being the degenerate liberal that I am.)
What the hell does that have to do with teaching abstinence only to our kids…??
And thank you, Probus. ;o)
October 8th, 2007 at 6:37 pmSo, I’m guessing that for RepubliCONs, it’s okay to use children as propaganda for (the failed) abstinence-only programs but NOT to speak out on behalf of health insurance programs for children.
October 8th, 2007 at 6:44 pmYep, typical right-wing hypocrisy.
So what do you tell your gay kids? How can they wait till they are married when they can’t legally be married in most states? An honest question.
October 8th, 2007 at 7:02 pmWomen in the Soviet-friendly government of Afghanistan in 1978-79 were making fine progress before the US began backing Taliban/mujahadeen/al Qaeda forces with probably well over a billion dollars in arms, mostly funnelled through Pakistan. The CIA knew the Soviet Union could not allow a fundamentalist Islamic country smack on its border. We knew they would have to send in troops. It’s important to remember that first we began funding such groups and secondly the Soviets came in. That was exactly what we wanted–to get them bogged down in a war of occupation. Kinda like what W got us in today. Bin Laden’s greatest wish.
More on topic: just because “just say no” hasn’t worked for the past two million years, what makes you think it won’t work now? (Those of certain beliefs should substitute 6,000 for two million)
October 9th, 2007 at 1:33 am