Weekly B4V Sucks Thread

Posted: July 5, 2014 by Marner in Open Thread
Tags:

Sorry I was late with this. I’ve been working on a lawnmower.

Advertisements
Comments
  1. Tired thinks he has a “gotcha” in that Democrats and liberals who now decry the Hobby Lobby decision once supported the highly dubious basis for that decision, the Congressional Religious freedom Restoration Act. Of course, as usual, he’s wrong. The Hobby Lobby decision is actually a ridiculous interpretation of the RFRA. And there is absolutely no hypocrisy in holding those two positions as they relate to completely different situations. The RFRA originated to protect an age old religious custom that was not harming anybody (peyote munching); The Hobby Lobby decision confuses private businesses with religious organizations and asserts the right of corporations to interfere with an individual’s basic health care on religious grounds. Big, big difference.

    This article from Slate explains just how far this court has strayed from what the real precedents for religious freedom have been in this country:

    By reading RFRA as creating a total break from decades of First Amendment jurisprudence, the court has freed itself from any precedent that would otherwise have blocked the outcome in Hobby Lobby. Before the Smith decision and the adoption of RFRA, every single free-exercise suit brought by a business was rejected by the court. The most important precedent is United States v. Lee, which rejected an Amish employer’s claim for an exemption from paying Social Security taxes. In Lee, the court wrote that “[w]hen followers of a particular sect enter into commercial activity as a matter of choice, the limits they accept on their own conduct as a matter of conscience and faith are not to be superimposed on the statutory schemes which are binding on others in that activity. Granting an exemption from social security taxes to an employer operates to impose the employer’s religious faith on the employees.” It hard to imagine a precedent more directly foreclosing Hobby Lobby’s exemption to paying for contraceptive coverage under the Affordable Care Act.

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/07/after_hobby_lobby_there_is_only_rfra_and_that_s_all_you_need.html

    As disgusting as the Supreme Court’s decision is, I suspect this is going to turn out to be a net win for liberals. The White House will come up with a work around to provide female employees with the basic health care needs they’re currently denied. Obama could probably do this immediately, but he won’t. A delay will allow Democrats to pound conservatives for their incessant war on women right up to November.

    The bigger issue will be to develop a saner, more secular Supreme Court to reverse our present march toward theocracy. As it stands, this conservative court is a disgrace and makes a mockery of the founding principles of this country.

    • Marner says:

      I see they are busy perpetuating the lie that it only affects 4 types of birth control. Apparently, they didn’t catch the ruling the following day that allowed a religious exemption for ALL types of birth control (Wheaton). Let’s also not forget that Hobby Lobby also won the right to not provide insurance that covers any type of abortion counseling. If their employees want to discuss or get a recommendation for any birth control options, they have to pay for it out of their pocket.

      • rustybrown2012 says:

        And let’s not mention that Hobby Lobby has long been paying for these particular forms of contraception and only realized they make the baby Jesus cry and are anathema to their deeply held, sincere religious convictions when the ACA came into existence and they were presented with an opportunity to grandstand their silly superstitions.

    • rustybrown2012 says:

      Cluster the coward sniped at me from the behind the secure wall of censorship at bfv:

      …it’s important to note that another progressive is hoping that Obama will “work around” the law and the constitution and impose progressive ideals.

      Of course, I never said anything of the kind. There are plenty of solutions to the wrongheaded Hobby Lobby decision which would flout neither the law nor the constitution. This administration will enact one of them.

      …the “basic health care needs” women are denied are the 4 contraceptives that kill their fertilized egg – now I am not sure that those 4 contraceptions can be called “basic healthcare needs”…

      Cluster may not be sure but thankfully medical professionals and global health studies are. Access to a broad range of birth control is good for a woman’s health, public well being, and reduces abortions. The four contraceptives in question are indeed contraceptives, not abortifacients (dumbass Cluster should look up the definition of “contraceptive”, the word he used to describe the four methods in question. A contraceptive prevents conception or pregnancy; therefore, by his own admission these methods do not terminate a pregnancy. What an idiot. He claims to care so much about the issue but doesn’t even understand the terms) So yes, it’s a basic fact that access to all methods of birth control, including and especially the most modern and effective ones, is a basic health care need.

      Now Cluster will sit in his corner and pretend he never read this. He should start a new blog: “Political Debate for Pussies”.

  2. 02casper says:

    I wonder which site Tired “borrowed” his post from. It’s way above his writing level.

    • Casper, he ripped off this article:

      http://americanthinker.com/blog/2014/07/democrats_were_in_favor_of_religious_freedom_before_they_were_against_it.html

      I was tempted to say that tired is occasionally capable of decent writing, but he undermines himself with sophomoric quips like pResident and the ever-popular mindless drones. But then, after reading the American Thinker article, it is obvious that tired is just a sophomoric plagiarist.

      • rustybrown2012 says:

        Jesus, that’s too funny. I like how he cribbed the entire thing uncredited and just peppered it with his retarded little insults to ‘make it his own’. What a douche.

      • I mean, I would respect him more if he just copied and pasted the thing verbatim like his pal NeoClown does. Instead, he tried to disguise his plagiarism, and did such a poor job of it that he was found out in about 15 seconds. I guess he thinks B4V readers are clueless, mindless drones who will believe anything. Oh, wait…

      • Marner says:

        guess he thinks B4V readers are clueless, mindless drones who will believe anything. Oh, wait…

        Well, Retired Spook did tell him it was one of his best posts ever.

      • Haha. Maybe he should tell Brian C. Joondeph.

      • Meanwhile, Spook is pontificating again. “As long as they can continue to convince the majority of voters that they care about solving problems, and that they’re reeeeeeealy trying to solve problems, they don’t have to ACTUALLY solve problems.” Yeah, they solve fake problems like lack of health care for millions Americans. Meanwhile, all those upstanding conservatives have is attempting to prevent other Americans from voting. Charming.

  3. 02casper says:

    Watson,
    I’m not surprised tired plagiarized the article. At least the other posters there link to articles they use. He probably failed middle school English.

    • meursault1942 says:

      From the looks of it, he failed English in middle school and then just gave up on it. He clearly doesn’t really understand what he’s talking about when he vomits up his plagiarized talking-points-o-rama (hell, he doesn’t even understand the definitions of a lot of the words he uses). This is why I assume he’s just an underachieving adolescent–everything about him, from his laziness to his poor language skills to his almost complete lack of familiarity with basic logic, points to that being the case.

      But then again, Amazona–supposedly one of the “smart ones” over there–doesn’t even understand how human reproduction works, so they’re not exactly boasting great intellectual horsepower in general.

  4. rustybrown2012 says:

    Ama, ever the astute political strategist:

    So the Left is going to hitch its wagon to that ridiculous WAR ON WOMEN !!!!” nonsense again? Good for them. If I were advising their campaign—as someone wanting it to fail—–I would suggest the same thing.

    As long as Republicans continue to belittle and denigrate women, you bet your ass Democrats are running on it. Ama seems to be the only person in America who sees this as a bad strategy – everybody else takes takes into account the facts that Democrats have won five of the last six presidential elections by popular vote while Republican pole numbers continue to plummet among women.

    • It’s hilarious. They’re falling all over themselves congratulating tired for “writing” such an excellent post that he ripped off from the American Thinker. Such are the standards of B4V, I guess.

  5. rustybrown2012 says:

    Hey Tired,

    Love you too, baby! Although your posts are a bit hard to read when you’re not plagiarizing other writers and taking credit for their work. Don’t forget pal, elementary education is always available for adults no matter what age; you can wear your depends if you’re worried about the frequent trips to the bathroom. After basic grammar you might consider a class on ethics.

  6. rustybrown2012 says:

    I love how when we effectively rebut their ignorant posts their only response is to characterize our winning posts as “melt downs” and “attacking”. I guess that’s what you do when you can’t keep up.

    And what gullible children. As has been pointed out, they’re all taking turns giving Tired hand jobs for plagiarizing a shitty article. They love their red meat so much, they don’t care where it comes from.

  7. mitchethekid says:

    And yours needs a microscope and a set of tweezers to locate. By the way, when was the last time you used it? Or do your partners fellate your tiny metal varmint eradicator? You’re more pathetic than Logan. Btw. Cluster and I laugh at you guys behind your back. And collectively your’re to stupid to know you’re being punked. Ted Neugent for president!

  8. meursault1942 says:

    Awwww, tired’s such an angry little pussy! Wassamatta, tired, grounded for flunking English again? Or is it just that the truth hurts your feelings so much because you know you can’t answer to it and have to hide from it? Go join Cluster behind Amazona’s skirt–neither of you are man enough to deal with the real world. That has been abundantly proven time and again.

  9. 02casper says:

    Tired,
    Pointing out that you plagiarized the article is not an insult. It’s a fact. And saying you probably failed middle school is a guess based on the writing you have done over the years. If you find that insulting, then prove me wrong.

  10. Watty you are the pussy, too cowardly to let any differing opinion comment on this pathetic excuse for a blog. That is the difference between you and your crowd and the non-left. You ban people because you are incapable of intelligent arguments. We ban people because they are nothing but little pricks.

    Huh? I haven’t deleted any of your comments, tired, nor have I banned you. But speaking of pricks…

    • Marner says:

      I have happily deleted every comment tired has tried to post. I have little patience for him. If you guys want to play for a while, have at it.

      • 02casper says:

        Please let Tired on. It screws up his entire argument and he has to actually defend his posts.

        So tired, explain to us why you think it’s ok to post other people’s writing as your own?

      • mitchethekid says:

        Not really. I approved it for the pornographic thrill of seeing him torn to pieces.

  11. Marner says:

    Sorry, but my patience ran out.

  12. Ya gotta love the way the B4V so-called moderator has to inject into Casper’s post some nonsense about teacher tenure in a weak attempt to threaten him. That’s the way the right operates, I guess: All threats and innuendo when they can’t argue the points rationally.

  13. rustybrown2012 says:

    Ama:

    The beloved WAAAAAR ON WOMENNNNNNN !!! chant of the RRL. You have probably noticed that there is no actual discussion of acts against women purported to come from the Right

    If she can’t find ‘actual discussion of acts against women purported to come from the Right’, she needs to look a bit farther than her own flat, desiccated tits. Here’s part of what I wrote a short while back:

    “There are probably other areas where Romney was a douche about women’s rights, but the one that stands out for me is contraception. Although better access to contraceptives is a win for everybody, they are particularly beneficial to the health and well being of women. As we all know, Obamacare mandates coverage for contraceptives, thus categorizing them as a part of basic preventative care as they should be. Romney firmly opposed the mandate, making it more difficult for women to get basic care. Women understandably took exception to that.

    Further, Romney said repeatedly that he was committed to not only eliminating funding for Planned Parenthood, but eliminating all federal family planning funds under the Public Health Service Act which have been available, and have undoubtedly helped reduce abortions, since the Nixon administration. The federal dollars that go to PP are used for cancer screenings, breast exams and other care to lower income women, none of it is used for abortion services.Yet apparently for Romney and other pro-life idiots, giving the impression your goal is to reduce abortions is much more important than actually reducing abortions.”

    Think that might be specific enough for the stupid cunt? No? Maybe she could try a five minute search on google to come up with scores of ‘actual discussions of acts against women purported to come from the Right’ in articles like this:

    http://www.politicususa.com/proof-war-women-2

    One of Ama’s many, many faults is her belief that everybody is just as ignorant and ill-informed as she is.

    • rustybrown2012 says:

      Ama:

      (Casper) does seem to have found a home with kindred spirits, God-haters and God-deniers and lovers of baby-killing, creatures who share his disdain for the freedom to practice ones’religious beliefs.

      No Ama, the lovers of baby killing reside at bfv, where you stridently advocate denying women easier access to abortion reducing contraceptives. If you actually cared about reducing the number of abortions in this country, you would be a staunch supporter of the contraceptive mandate of the ACA, as all liberals are. We are the ones who are in the business of reducing abortions, not hypocritical snake handlers such as yourself. If you weren’t ensconced in a blanket of ignorance I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t be able to sleep at night.

      And liberals are fine and dandy with the freedom to practice one’s religious beliefs, however idiotic. Just keep the lunacy to yourselves as our founders clearly intended.

  14. rustybrown2012 says:

    Cluster:

    The Agnostic Athiest is still bleating on about denying women access to contraception, and as Amazona so succinctly pointed out – not having someone else pay for it is not denying them access.

    It most certainly is if you understand English. The Oxford dictionary defines ‘deny’ as:

    Refuse to give or grant (something requested or desired) to (someone)

    The word ‘deny’ simply means one party refusing something to another party. It in no way implies that the denied party has no other way of achieving the thing that has been denied, as the retards at bfv seem to believe. So it’s clear that it is definitively and syntactically accurate to say “the Hobby Lobby decision denied women access to contraceptives”, which is what we’ve been saying all along.

    Shit, this is getting rather embarrassing for them. I’m used to proving them wrong on philosophical, scientific and political issues, but it’s incredible I have to increasingly correct them on their misunderstanding and misapplication of simple vocabulary. For chrissakes, a second grader knows what ‘deny’ means. And just yesterday I pointed out that Cluster doesn’t understand what ‘contraceptive’ means. People this stupid should not be allowed to vote.

    • mitchethekid says:

      lol. Vote?! How about operating machinery. Like a computer. And how can one be both an agnostic and an atheist? Obviously they don’t understand what an atheist is. Which is someone who requires evidence before faith.

      • rustybrown2012 says:

        Sorry Mitch, agnostic atheist is a valid philosophical position, and has been for some time. Did you miss my schooling of Cluster on this issue? In fact, the overwhelming majority of modern atheists, myself included, are agnostic atheists, although just “atheist” will do. I suspect you’re one as well.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism

      • mitchethekid says:

        Tired the dipshit! Like Toad and the Wet Sprocket. You are a funny guy Rusty. As far as being an atheist, I’m not sure what I am.(Ain’t that an understatement) Did you see True Detective? I’m like the character Mathew McConaughey portrayed. “I’d consider myself a realist, alright? But in philosophical terms I’m what’s called a pessimist. I think human consciousness is a tragic misstep in evolution. We became too self-aware. Nature created an aspect of nature separate from itself. We are creatures that should not exist by natural law. We are things that labor under the illusion of having a self, a secretion of sensory experience and feelings, programmed with total assurance that we are each somebody, when in fact everbody’s nobody. I think the honorable thing for our species to do is to deny our programming. Stop reproducing. Walk hand in hand into extinction. One last midnight, brothers and sisters opting out of a raw deal.”
        A secretion! Man that went off like a visual bomb in my head.
        I was talking to my son a few weeks ago and he had an interesting idea. You know how humanity is freaked by the thought of aliens coming to enslave or eat us? Or both. He said the alien is technology and human history has been the incubating period. What we are living through now is the transition from the analog (carbon based organic life) to the digital. Silicon based “life” or intelligence. He pointed out that there is no space in cyberspace and like a transistor, the universe could be binary. The concept of god, or nirvana or the Tao or any word for “it” is part of the trinity between the analog and the digital.Consciousness and awareness isn’t like some “thing” it is as some “thing”. Maybe that’s why I like Wittgenstein so much. The metaphorical nature of words and all of that.

      • rustybrown2012 says:

        Mitch,

        As far as McConaughey’s philosophy, I agree that human’s level of self-awareness is probably evolutionarily unique on our planet and is fraught with many existential challenges, but I wouldn’t go down the road of nihilism and characterize it as a tragic misstep. As mysterious as it is, I disagree with the notion that consciousness is separate from nature and feel it’s quite likely that other forms of advanced mammals, such as dolphins or apes perhaps, possess their own rudimentary forms of consciousness. As Pollock replied in response to an inquiry about his paintings relationship to nature: “I am nature!” Rather than bemoan our consciousness and all the attending angst and difficulty it brings, I prefer to celebrate it as an evolutionary gift. After all, being a human being in 21st century America is pretty cool has it’s distinct advantages; probably far better than being a salamander in 17th century Indonesia.

        As far as atheism is concerned, it is principally a question of belief. I don’t actively believe there is a god, therefore I’m an atheist. The matter of agnosticism is raised with matters of knowledge. I don’t know for certain there is no god, therefore I’m an agnostic to that question. Agnostic atheist, quite the most sensible position, in my opinion. Dawkins’ formulation is a nice summation. From Wiki:

        “Dawkins posits that “the existence of God is a scientific hypothesis like any other.” He goes on to propose a continuous “spectrum of probabilities” between two extremes of opposite certainty, which can be represented by seven “milestones”. Dawkins suggests definitive statements to summarize one’s place along the spectrum of theistic probability. These “milestones” are:

        1.Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: “I do not believe, I know.”

        2.De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. “I don’t know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there.”

        3.Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. “I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.”

        4.Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. “God’s existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.”

        5.Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. “I do not know whether God exists but I’m inclined to be skeptical.”

        6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. “I don’t know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.”

        7. Strong atheist. “I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one.”

        Dawkins argues that while there appear to be plenty of individuals that would place themselves as “1” due to the strictness of religious doctrine against doubt, most atheists do not consider themselves “7” because atheism arises from a lack of evidence and evidence can always change a thinking person’s mind. In print, Dawkins self-identified as a ‘6’, though when interviewed by Bill Maher and later by Anthony Kenny, he suggested ‘6.9’ to be more accurate.”

        Now, number 7, “strong atheist” is these days pretty much an archaic characature of atheism which nevertheless is still very prominent in people ignorant to the nuances of philosophy, like Cluster.

      • mitchethekid says:

        I’m a huge Maher fan. Didn’t Dawkins write The God Particle? And wasn’t there a lecture series with Dawkins and Christoper Hitchens?
        What do you do? I mean, are you involved in academia or research or are these interests just that. Interests.

      • rustybrown2012 says:

        I am the Prince of the Powers of the air, the spirit who works in the sons of disobedience and can only exist at one place at one time. I presently preside to deny the evil broth which pours forth from the mouths of those who were born with congenital defects and/or never paid attention in school. Though their meager powers of obfuscation flow readily from their cheeto-stained fingers, I shall not be removed from my divine ordinance to illuminate the dark recesses of their souls. I also loved “Breaking Bad” and am fond of long walks in the forest among whispering rainfalls. I’m also fond of home-made pesto; you can put it on anything.

      • mitchethekid says:

        The question remains, do you grow your own Basil? I have found that cashews and pistachios are far more flavorful than the traditional pine nuts. A dash of lemon adds as well.

      • mitchethekid says:

        Look what I found. Best description of her yet.

        “Princess Dumbass Of The Northwoods is typing resumes again.

        Any interest in doing a political talk show, either on TV, radio or the Internet?
        Maybe. But the politics would have to be interspersed with a whole lot of fun and real life and inspiration showcasing American work ethic, because those topics are all pretty much the antithesis of today’s politics, which I find incorrigibly disastrous! It’d be so much fun to shake it up taking on issues that make audiences objectively consider all sides, and I’d do it with my own real-life groundedness, candor and commonsense that I’m known for. Media needs that today, versus the condescension that oozes from TV and radio. I hear everyone recently got canned from The View, maybe a show like that needs a punch of reality and a voice of reason from America’s heartland to knock some humble sense into their scripts. You know, someone willing to go rogue.
        So wonderful. Subjects and verbs that not only do not agree, but do not seem ever to have been introduced to each other. The profound reverence paid to one’s own idiot clichés. The word-like collection of letters—”groundedness”—that seem to have been translated from the original Moron. And, especially, a citation of the “American work ethic” from a woman who quit her actual job halfway through the gig and who has been on the grift ever since John McCain, that fathead, foisted her on the world. America is, indeed, amazing.”

    • meursault1942 says:

      The other big problem they’re running into is that it’s not as though employees are just demanding out of the clear blue sky their employers buy stuff for them; this is part of their compensation package. In other words, it is earned (earning, of course, being something with which conservatives are extremely unfamiliar, them being moochers and deadbeats and all). For their labor, employees receive compensation in the form of salary and benefits. Part of that benefits package is health coverage; part of that health coverage is contraception. It’s not difficult to understand, assuming you are familiar with the real world, and therein lies the problem: Conservatives have angrily withdrawn from the real world.

      “My employer doesn’t buy me beer, hurr durr!” they retort. Well, see, your employer buying you beer isn’t an agreed-upon part of your compensation package. That’s how this whole “compensation” thing works. Nice to see conservatives speaking out against people receiving their due compensation, though. That’s “freedom” in their parlance.

      I swear, you have to explain even the most basic things to conservatives–and then either they pretend not to get it or, in the case of genuine dumbasses like tired, they actually don’t get it.

      • meursault1942 says:

        And here I predicted CSL’s statements without even meaning to.

        Me, three days ago:

        “My employer doesn’t buy me beer, hurr durr!” they retort. Well, see, your employer buying you beer isn’t an agreed-upon part of your compensation package. That’s how this whole “compensation” thing works.

        CSL, today:

        I went on to say what I had said here—-that throughout my life I have had things that were not provided by any employer, but never felt that this meant any boss was trying to DENY MY ACCESS to any of them. I asked “Did you ever have a boss who provided you with beer? No? Did you still have access to beer?

        Is she the least self-aware person on the face of the earth? It would be irresponsible not to speculate!

    • rustybrown2012 says:

      It occurs to me that Cluster’s (and Ama’s) embarrassing misunderstanding of the word ‘deny’ should be no impediment to their ignorant beliefs. This is a man who thinks he knows climate science better than the world’s leading climate scientists. He thinks he knows evolution better than the world’s leading evolutionary biologists. He thinks he knows the meaning of atheism better than the world’s leading atheist philosophers. I shall fully expect him to claim he knows the meaning of English words better than the the people compiling the Oxford Dictionaries.

      What is it they like to say? You can’t fix stupid? I’m inclined to agree.

  15. It cracks me up that they don’t allow non-conservatives to post over there, and yet they can’t help themselves from continuing to have half-conversations with us. What is it they say ad infinitum? That we’re in their heads? That is obvious.

    As for tired, after Mitch allowed his comment to go through last night, he attempted to follow up with a vile comment, replete with expletives and the whole works. We don’t need that here, tired. For the record, I have never resorted to that kind of language and filth at your place. Try conversing like a mature adult and you might get further.

  16. rustybrown2012 says:

    I see Tired is babbling about some imagined victory he had over me in debating the fact that contraceptives reduce abortions – must be in his own head because I’ve never lost a debate to any one of those cretins, most certainly not to him. As usual, he’s pulling this straight out of his ass and his assertions are without any validating citations.

    Since I know he’s reading this, let me take this opportunity to give him a lesson on the proper way to win a debate using reputable sources to back up your arguments. Here, dipshit, this is the way you do it:

    It is my contention that greater access to a wider range of birth control will substantially reduce the abortion rate! I submit the following evidence, thusly:

    Free birth control led to dramatically lower rates of abortions and teen births, a large study concluded…When price wasn’t an issue, women flocked to the most effective contraceptives — the implanted options, which typically cost hundreds of dollars up-front to insert…The effect on teen pregnancy was striking: There were 6.3 births per 1,000 teenagers in the study. Compare that to a national rate of 34 births per 1,000 teens in 2010.

    There also were substantially lower rates of abortion, when compared with women in the metro area and nationally: 4.4 to 7.5 abortions per 1,000 women in the study, compared with 13.4 to 17 abortions per 1,000 women overall in the St. Louis region, Peipert calculated. That’s lower than the national rate, too, which is almost 20 abortions per 1,000 women.

    In fact, if the program were expanded, one abortion could be prevented for every 79 to 137 women given a free contraceptive choice, Peipert’s team reported in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/study-free-birth-control-leads-to-way-fewer-abortions/

    Note that the very methods Hobby Lobby are denying women are the ones that are most effective in reducing abortions. Bfv should rename itself to bfbk – Blogs For Baby Killing.

    • Damn, Rusty, you’re using data and stuff. Perhaps you need to back up and explain to Tired what data is and how it can be used to generate information. These concepts seem lost on him.

  17. rustybrown2012 says:

    Spook:

    it all comes back to education. You educate a couple generations of women that recreational sex is one of the most important of human rights and shouldn’t come with any consequences, then it’s a pretty simple step to get them to believe that anyone who suggests that the avoidance of consequences shouldn’t have to be paid for by someone else is simply evil and must be defeated and/or marginalized. Conservatives have sat back and watched it happen, convincing ourselves that millions of women just couldn’t be that stupid. The 2012 election proved just how wrong we were.

    Aside from the fact that, as Meursault pointed out, nobody else is paying for these women’s contraceptives, the women themselves earn these benefits through their labor – Holy Shit, Spook just comes right out and says that sex is not an important “human right” (at least not for women) which should come with consequences, and women are stupid to think otherwise.

    What conservative war on women? What woman wouldn’t be absolutely delighted to hear that?

  18. rustybrown2012 says:

    Spook at dinner conversation:

    “Excuse me Miss, are you under the impression that your freedom to have consensual sex whenever you like is a vital human right? Not so fast there, slut….”

  19. rustybrown2012 says:

    Well, looks like Tired is trying his very best to play but is still woefully inadequate when it comes to debating with adults. He has a long, syntactically challenged and sporadically referenced post at bfv about the issue of contraceptives, unwanted pregnancy, and abortion that is so convoluted as to be virtually impossible to untangle. He is a true believer in bombarding your opponent with such a large hailstorm of crazy shit that they won’t know how to respond. It’s a common tactic of creationists and others who don’t know what the fuck they’re talking about. His one and only source is from an anti-abortion site which cherry picks and distorts data from reputable studies, and from which he mindlessly duplicates, ever the plagiarist.

    Sorry, Tired, I won’t play. If you want to refute my specific contention and supporting study, do so singularly and coherently. I’m not willing to chase you down the rabbit hole of your insane biased websites. My last post on this subject is an example for you on how adults debate: clearly, definitively and with supporting evidence.

    In this spirit, I’ll address the one phrase from your post that directly references my post and the study I cited:

    At the other blog, Agnostic Atheist presents a “study” that does exactly what the study above warns against “hypothetical saves” – IF contraceptives were used then a percentage of abortions could be avoided. It is nothing more than a WAG disguised as “science”.

    I don’t know why you have the term “study” in parens, but I intuit it’s an innuendo that the study is illegitimate. Please elaborate and provide evidence for your skepticism. And there are no “hypothetical saves” in this study. It was tightly controlled and clearly showed that the women given free access to the most effective (and expensive) forms of birth control (the type Hobby Lobby and bfv are against) had about two thirds less abortions than the women in the study’s same metro area had without that access. The study group had even less abortions when compare to the national average. So there’s no “IF” involved – contraceptives were used and they reduced abortions. Balls in your court.

    • As best I can tell, he cobbled it together by copying and pasting from other posts, but yeah, it’s kind of hard to follow.

      Let’s give credit to tired, though, for the revelation that not having sex is the only sure way to avoid getting pregnant. Who knew?!

      • rustybrown2012 says:

        Yeah, no shit. I’m grateful he could inform me that abstinence is the safest rout for avoiding std’s and pregnancy. Nobody here ever disagreed with that. Abstinence ONLY, now that’s a different can of worms. Not that he could ever distinguish the difference.

  20. The B4V moderators will be too chicken to leave this up, so here is my response to Cluster. We know he reads this blog with a fine tooth comb.

    Cluster, with all respect, you again miss the point entirely.

    First, I didn’t post my in-depth contraceptive analysis. I quoted from a State of Colorado press release describing the results of a Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment initiative that helps low-income women get long-acting reversible contraceptives.

    Second, the Colorado program demonstrates that providing young women with access to contraception reduced the number of unintended pregnancies as well as the number of abortions. This directly contradicts the conclusions of tiredoflibbs above.

    Third, it doesn’t follow that you can conclude from the Colorado program that women are not being denied access to healthcare. The program applied to parts of Colorado over a four-year period. You can conclude, however, that we just make such a program available nationally because of the undeniable benefits as cited by the State of Colorado.

    Fourth, it is conservatives who refer to women as “sluts,” with no regard to the fact that they are having sex with men. You are absolutely right that men bear responsibility for unwanted pregnancies. I they were made to own up to that responsibility, conservative attitudes towards contraception would change dramatically.

    Fifth, it is mind-boggling that contraception is such a controversial topic in America in the twenty-first century.

    • meursault1942 says:

      We all know tired’s too much of a pussy to let this comment stand, so start your countdown!

      “3. Regarding the left lying about the Hobby Lobby decision, take it up with them. If I’ve said something about that case that is a lie, please quote me and I’ll respond.”

      As you can see, tired can’t come up with any actual lies you’ve told. So perhaps we should instead talk about the many lies that conservatives–including tired–have told about the Hobby Lobby case. The two biggest are the notion that it was about “freedom of religion” (it wasn’t) and that women were demanding “free stuff” from Hobby Lobby (they aren’t). I’ll let LGM do the honors for those two:

      First of all, Hobby Lobby was not a 1st Amendment case. Hobby Lobby (unlike some of the litigants) didn’t even raise a 1st Amendment claim, because any such claim would be farcical under the controlling precedent, authored by noted whining anti-Catholic Trotskyite Antonin Scalia. Secondly, the only people asking for “free stuff” here are the owners of Hobby Lobby, who want the tax breaks they get for compensating their employees with health insurance rather than cash but don’t want to comply with the relevant regulations. The employees earned the benefit.

      After conservatives explain why they think employees should be denied earned compensation, we can dig into other lies, such as the notion that contraceptives are “abortifacients.”

  21. I see tired and his fellow moderators choose to remove most of my comments. C’est la vie.

  22. rustybrown2012 says:

    Cluster:

    How many lies can you pick out in the following PP statement:

    “With this bill, Congress can begin to fix the damage done by the Supreme Court’s decision to allow for-profit corporations to deny their employees birth control coverage. The Supreme Court last week opened the door to a wide range of discrimination and denial of services. This bill would help close the door for denying contraception before more corporations can walk through it,” said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Action Fund.

    …zero, shit for brains. Still having trouble with the definition of ‘deny’, eh? Wow.

  23. rustybrown2012 says:

    Ama:

    Spook, I think we can look at what happened in junior high and high schools around the country, when girls started to take a very casual attitude toward giving oral sex to boys, because Clinton had explained that oral sex is not really sex. Suddenly this became quite acceptable behavior, because of the way it had been identified.

    Yeah, I’m sure there was a paucity of hummers in high school before Clinton gave them the green light. I guess the girls I had the good fortune of knowing in Pre-Clinton High were just ahead of the curve.

  24. Amy on her hapless cousin: “She is not a stupid woman, but she is gullible, and when she was fed this crap by someone she trusts—-Lefty talking heads—–she simply accepted it.”

    Well… I think she may be both gullible and stupid from the way you describe her.

  25. rustybrown2012 says:

    Well Meursault, count me as an atheist who is ‘impressed by your bluster and enjoys your spite and malice.’ It’s obvious from her tone that you’ve driven Ama to hysterics, and that gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling.

    I actually think this whole exchange has been enlightening, and I credit Ama and the rest of them for being forthright and clarifying their position: they clearly admit they’re religious extremists, and wish to enforce their extreme views on secular society at large, much like is done in theocracies. They clearly think their nonsensical superstitions trump science and the health and well being of the public. We’ve always known this about them, of course, but it’s edifying to see them state it so clearly. Now, if only we can get their politicians to be so publicly candid.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s