Good Christian Upbringing
 

On 3/14/2013 4:36 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 16:13:51 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

On 3/14/2013 1:07 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 07:29:55 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 19:53:13 -0400, Wayne B wrote:

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 17:40:32 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

I believe that's where you and our new Pope disagree. He probably equates abortions with the killing
of a precious infant, whereas you seem to equate it with cutting down a weed in your yard.

You know, weed inconvenient? Kill it.

===

No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child ino the world.

Think about that.

There is always birth control and the morning after pill.


Salmonbait

There would be except that there's a pretty vocal minority on the
right that would ban those things also.


And just how do you suggest those few folks are going to succeed in
stopping even one American from access to Birth Control? It's Christian
Derangement Syndrome again...

You never heard of the fillibuster? Christian derangement is right.


Liar... filibuster (and that's how it's spelled) has to do with what.
There is nothing to filibuster, women already have open and full access
to birth control, period.

Good Christian Upbringing
 

On 3/14/2013 4:36 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 16:29:53 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

On 3/14/2013 4:09 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 15:45:52 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 12:37:30 -0700, jps wrote:

On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 10:17:40 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 03:59:33 -0700 (PDT), Tom Nofinger
wrote:

On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 2:11:23 PM UTC-5, jps wrote:

bull**** snipped

My kids are still in the me, me, me stage but they're still not as

selfish as the wingers in rec.boats.

Naturally you are talking about the selfishness of the left-wingers who enjoy pilfering from the pockets of the right and everyone in between.

Naturally you need to remove your finger from your ass. Your prostate
is fine.

These idiots can't stand that a liberal has been successful at
business and still wants to lend support to folks who haven't been as
lucky.

The Republican mantra: I've got mine, **** you.

Do you believe that liberals, in general, are more charitable than conservatives?


Salmonbait

No. I think that true conservatives (people unlike you) are equally
charitable.


Nobody asked you, we already know what you are going to say.... it's
getting old.

Too ****ing bad for you bittyballs.


Do you giggle when you type that **** kevin?

Good Christian Upbringing
 

On 3/14/13 4:35 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/14/2013 4:29 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/14/13 4:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/14/2013 3:17 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/14/13 3:14 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:24:52 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 3/14/13 1:07 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 07:29:55 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 19:53:13 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 17:40:32 -0400, J Herring

wrote:

I believe that's where you and our new Pope disagree. He probably
equates abortions with the killing
of a precious infant, whereas you seem to equate it with cutting
down a weed in your yard.

You know, weed inconvenient? Kill it.

===

No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child ino the
world.

Think about that.

There is always birth control and the morning after pill.


Salmonbait

There would be except that there's a pretty vocal minority on the
right that would ban those things also.



There are several listings of drug stores whose religious proprietors
won't sell the morning after pill.

When I was a kid in New Haven, we were allowed to work some jobs
(with a
work permit) after high school. I got a job two afternoons a week
working at a drug store in an "iffy" section of town. This was a
small,
family owned store. I was the combination stock boy and soda fountain
jerk.

Well, the drug store did a land office business selling liquor, too,
mostly cheap wine and whiskey, but it carried a reasonable variety.
The
booze was on display behind the soda fountain. Turned out that
selling
the booze was also part of my job. I was 15. :) That didn't bother
me at
all.

I also sold condoms, which, as a raunchy teen-aged boy, I thought
was a
hoot. At the time, there was some questionable legality about selling
birth control "devices" in Connecticut, or something like that.
Anyway,
that's my memory.

I also walked about the neighborhood on deliveries, usually of
prescriptions, but sometimes I delivered booze. I remember one
afternoon
I set out with a double brown bag of Four Roses whiskey, a quart of
ginger ale, and a box of condoms. The guy who answered the door and I
looked at each other and laughed. He was a regular customer who
recently
had acquired a lady friend.

We never had any trouble with anyone in the neighborhood, poor as it
was. The drug store was the only one for miles around, and I guess
everyone knew if the pharmacist-owner was robbed, he'd just close
down
and open up a shop in a safer neighborhood.

Life was simpler back in the day.


You've had some marvelous experiences. I've found that when a store
doesn't carry something I need,
I go to another store.


Salmonbait

--
Hope you're having a spectacular day!


Yeah, well, you're reasonably well off. If you are poor, carless, and
public transportation is a real hassle, and the only drug store around
is run by a religious zealot, you are S.O.L.

It's a myth... doesn't happen. When I was a kid we had to drive or take
the bus 15 miles to Hartford to do our shopping, it can be done. Now we
have a thousand stores between here and there... I can get condoms
anywhere.


Your life experience isn't relevant or even typical. There are plenty of
places where there is no public transportation or a variety of retail
stores.

At least mine life experience isn't made up...


Why would you need condoms?

What the hell kind of question is that perv?



Well, assumptive me thinks...you're in your 50's at least, your wife
likely is about the same age and is no longer dropping eggs down the
canal, and is unlikely to get pregnant. There's only one other reason
for a married couple past childbearing years to be bothering with
condoms...can you guess what it is?

So, why would you need condoms?

Good Christian Upbringing
 

On 3/14/13 4:37 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/14/2013 4:33 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 16:04:06 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

On 3/14/2013 2:29 PM, Meyer wrote:
On 3/14/2013 12:45 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 09:59:30 -0400, Meyer wrote:

On 3/14/2013 8:05 AM, Wayne B wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 07:29:55 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child ino the
world.

Think about that.

There is always birth control and the morning after pill.


====

Clearly a good start but for various reasons some women do not have
access to either option. Of course one of the reasons for limited
access is that your church has been adamant about trying to suppress
availability.


Lame excuse Wayne. If they were creative enough to gain access to the
old woodie, against church doctrine, they should be able to gain
access
to remedies for their sins.

====

And therein lies the problem: Viewing pregnancy and childbirth as a
punishment. That's a very old fasioned notion which has been
carefully fostered by various societies and religions throughout the
ages. We already have more than enough unwanted children running
around with little or no parental leadership. It is a mystery to me
why anyone would wish for more.


You weren't listening. There are remedies that make conception,
abortion
or childbirth unnecessary.

And they are available to everybody, period...

No they aren't ****forbrains.


Yeah they are sperm breath...


Sperm breath...interesting choice of words. How familiar are you with
that sort of thing?

Good Christian Upbringing
 

In article ,
says...

On 3/14/2013 3:03 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 12:45:43 -0400, Wayne B wrote:

On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 09:59:30 -0400, Meyer wrote:

On 3/14/2013 8:05 AM, Wayne B wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 07:29:55 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child ino the world.

Think about that.

There is always birth control and the morning after pill.


====

Clearly a good start but for various reasons some women do not have
access to either option. Of course one of the reasons for limited
access is that your church has been adamant about trying to suppress
availability.


Lame excuse Wayne. If they were creative enough to gain access to the
old woodie, against church doctrine, they should be able to gain access
to remedies for their sins.

====

And therein lies the problem: Viewing pregnancy and childbirth as a
punishment. That's a very old fasioned notion which has been
carefully fostered by various societies and religions throughout the
ages. We already have more than enough unwanted children running
around with little or no parental leadership. It is a mystery to me
why anyone would wish for more.

How you came to that conclusion, based on what was said, is totally beyond me. "Viewing pregnancy as
punishment"?? Who said anything close to that but you.

Exactly..


You tried to justify abortions based on limited access to birth control methods or the morning after
pill. To me, that's nonsense, unless you're talking third world countries - where abortions wouldn't
be readily available either.

He tried to justify it by blaming pregnancy on the Church which is
just... well... you know.


Salmonbait

--
Hope you're having a spectacular day!


YOU HAVE JUST PROVEN WHAT AN IDIOT YOU ARE.......

Good Christian Upbringing
 

On 3/14/13 4:39 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/14/2013 4:35 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 16:05:43 -0400, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote:

On 3/14/2013 2:29 PM, Meyer wrote:
On 3/14/2013 12:45 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 09:59:30 -0400, Meyer wrote:

On 3/14/2013 8:05 AM, Wayne B wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 07:29:55 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child ino the
world.

Think about that.

There is always birth control and the morning after pill.


====

Clearly a good start but for various reasons some women do not have
access to either option. Of course one of the reasons for limited
access is that your church has been adamant about trying to suppress
availability.


Lame excuse Wayne. If they were creative enough to gain access to the
old woodie, against church doctrine, they should be able to gain
access
to remedies for their sins.

====

And therein lies the problem: Viewing pregnancy and childbirth as a
punishment. That's a very old fasioned notion which has been
carefully fostered by various societies and religions throughout the
ages. We already have more than enough unwanted children running
around with little or no parental leadership. It is a mystery to me
why anyone would wish for more.


You weren't listening. There are remedies that make conception,
abortion
or childbirth unnecessary.

Or should I say, the church isn't stopping anybody from getting
them...The intolerant just want to force the church to offer it too,
then they will be satisifed because of course, they personally hold no
value in "our" free agency to worship as we see fit...

You're ****ing stupid. The church has nothing to do with it. It's a
requirement built into the health insurance plan, including for
non-Christians who work there.


So go to the drug store and buy them for 9 dollars a month, or have them
given to you by the clinic... nobody is being stopped from access to
birth control. You just want the church to pay for it too, because you
don't believe in their freedom to worship..


Please point out how birth control interferes with freedom to worship.

Good Christian Upbringing
 

In article ,
says...

On 3/14/2013 3:17 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/14/13 3:14 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:24:52 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 3/14/13 1:07 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 07:29:55 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 19:53:13 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 17:40:32 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

I believe that's where you and our new Pope disagree. He probably
equates abortions with the killing
of a precious infant, whereas you seem to equate it with cutting
down a weed in your yard.

You know, weed inconvenient? Kill it.

===

No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child ino the world.

Think about that.

There is always birth control and the morning after pill.


Salmonbait

There would be except that there's a pretty vocal minority on the
right that would ban those things also.



There are several listings of drug stores whose religious proprietors
won't sell the morning after pill.

When I was a kid in New Haven, we were allowed to work some jobs (with a
work permit) after high school. I got a job two afternoons a week
working at a drug store in an "iffy" section of town. This was a small,
family owned store. I was the combination stock boy and soda fountain
jerk.

Well, the drug store did a land office business selling liquor, too,
mostly cheap wine and whiskey, but it carried a reasonable variety. The
booze was on display behind the soda fountain. Turned out that selling
the booze was also part of my job. I was 15. :) That didn't bother me at
all.

I also sold condoms, which, as a raunchy teen-aged boy, I thought was a
hoot. At the time, there was some questionable legality about selling
birth control "devices" in Connecticut, or something like that. Anyway,
that's my memory.

I also walked about the neighborhood on deliveries, usually of
prescriptions, but sometimes I delivered booze. I remember one afternoon
I set out with a double brown bag of Four Roses whiskey, a quart of
ginger ale, and a box of condoms. The guy who answered the door and I
looked at each other and laughed. He was a regular customer who recently
had acquired a lady friend.

We never had any trouble with anyone in the neighborhood, poor as it
was. The drug store was the only one for miles around, and I guess
everyone knew if the pharmacist-owner was robbed, he'd just close down
and open up a shop in a safer neighborhood.

Life was simpler back in the day.


You've had some marvelous experiences. I've found that when a store
doesn't carry something I need,
I go to another store.


Salmonbait

--
Hope you're having a spectacular day!


Yeah, well, you're reasonably well off. If you are poor, carless, and
public transportation is a real hassle, and the only drug store around
is run by a religious zealot, you are S.O.L.

It's a myth... doesn't happen. When I was a kid we had to drive or take
the bus 15 miles to Hartford to do our shopping, it can be done. Now we
have a thousand stores between here and there... I can get condoms anywhere.

WHHOOOOOSHH...... you didn't even come CLOSE to getting the point.

Good Christian Upbringing
 

In article ,
says...

On 3/14/2013 4:09 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 15:45:52 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 12:37:30 -0700, jps wrote:

On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 10:17:40 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 03:59:33 -0700 (PDT), Tom Nofinger
wrote:

On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 2:11:23 PM UTC-5, jps wrote:

bull**** snipped

My kids are still in the me, me, me stage but they're still not as

selfish as the wingers in rec.boats.

Naturally you are talking about the selfishness of the left-wingers who enjoy pilfering from the pockets of the right and everyone in between.

Naturally you need to remove your finger from your ass. Your prostate
is fine.

These idiots can't stand that a liberal has been successful at
business and still wants to lend support to folks who haven't been as
lucky.

The Republican mantra: I've got mine, **** you.

Do you believe that liberals, in general, are more charitable than conservatives?


Salmonbait

No. I think that true conservatives (people unlike you) are equally
charitable.


Nobody asked you, we already know what you are going to say.... it's
getting old.

Who is "we"?

Good Christian Upbringing
 

On 3/14/2013 4:42 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/14/13 4:35 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/14/2013 4:29 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/14/13 4:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 3/14/2013 3:17 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/14/13 3:14 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:24:52 -0400, "F.O.A.D."
wrote:

On 3/14/13 1:07 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 07:29:55 -0400, J Herring

wrote:

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 19:53:13 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Mar 2013 17:40:32 -0400, J Herring

wrote:

I believe that's where you and our new Pope disagree. He
probably
equates abortions with the killing
of a precious infant, whereas you seem to equate it with cutting
down a weed in your yard.

You know, weed inconvenient? Kill it.

===

No woman should be forced to bring an unwanted child ino the
world.

Think about that.

There is always birth control and the morning after pill.


Salmonbait

There would be except that there's a pretty vocal minority on the
right that would ban those things also.



There are several listings of drug stores whose religious
proprietors
won't sell the morning after pill.

When I was a kid in New Haven, we were allowed to work some jobs
(with a
work permit) after high school. I got a job two afternoons a week
working at a drug store in an "iffy" section of town. This was a
small,
family owned store. I was the combination stock boy and soda
fountain
jerk.

Well, the drug store did a land office business selling liquor, too,
mostly cheap wine and whiskey, but it carried a reasonable variety.
The
booze was on display behind the soda fountain. Turned out that
selling
the booze was also part of my job. I was 15. :) That didn't bother
me at
all.

I also sold condoms, which, as a raunchy teen-aged boy, I thought
was a
hoot. At the time, there was some questionable legality about
selling
birth control "devices" in Connecticut, or something like that.
Anyway,
that's my memory.

I also walked about the neighborhood on deliveries, usually of
prescriptions, but sometimes I delivered booze. I remember one
afternoon
I set out with a double brown bag of Four Roses whiskey, a quart of
ginger ale, and a box of condoms. The guy who answered the door
and I
looked at each other and laughed. He was a regular customer who
recently
had acquired a lady friend.

We never had any trouble with anyone in the neighborhood, poor as it
was. The drug store was the only one for miles around, and I guess
everyone knew if the pharmacist-owner was robbed, he'd just close
down
and open up a shop in a safer neighborhood.

Life was simpler back in the day.


You've had some marvelous experiences. I've found that when a store
doesn't carry something I need,
I go to another store.


Salmonbait

--
Hope you're having a spectacular day!


Yeah, well, you're reasonably well off. If you are poor, carless, and
public transportation is a real hassle, and the only drug store around
is run by a religious zealot, you are S.O.L.

It's a myth... doesn't happen. When I was a kid we had to drive or take
the bus 15 miles to Hartford to do our shopping, it can be done. Now we
have a thousand stores between here and there... I can get condoms
anywhere.


Your life experience isn't relevant or even typical. There are plenty of
places where there is no public transportation or a variety of retail
stores.

At least mine life experience isn't made up...


Why would you need condoms?

What the hell kind of question is that perv?



Well, assumptive me thinks...you're in your 50's at least, your wife
likely is about the same age and is no longer dropping eggs down the
canal, and is unlikely to get pregnant. There's only one other reason
for a married couple past childbearing years to be bothering with
condoms...can you guess what it is?

So, why would you need condoms?



Tell us why your wife is a fat pig and then I will answer your question...

Good Christian Upbringing
 

In article ,
says...

On 3/14/2013 4:21 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 16:13:57 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 3/14/13 3:45 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 12:37:30 -0700, jps wrote:

On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 10:17:40 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 03:59:33 -0700 (PDT), Tom Nofinger
wrote:

On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 2:11:23 PM UTC-5, jps wrote:

bull**** snipped

My kids are still in the me, me, me stage but they're still not as

selfish as the wingers in rec.boats.

Naturally you are talking about the selfishness of the left-wingers who enjoy pilfering from the pockets of the right and everyone in between.

Naturally you need to remove your finger from your ass. Your prostate
is fine.

These idiots can't stand that a liberal has been successful at
business and still wants to lend support to folks who haven't been as
lucky.

The Republican mantra: I've got mine, **** you.

Do you believe that liberals, in general, are more charitable than conservatives?


Salmonbait

--
Hope you're having a spectacular day!



I's sure conservative born-agains contribute mightily to their churches,
but most of those bucks ain't going to the poor.

Have you reviewed the budgets of the churches to which you refer? What about conservatives who
aren't 'born-agains' ? Most Christians I know are not 'born-agains'. In fact, I don't believe I know
one in that category.

But, you didn't answer the question. Do you believe that liberals, in general, are more charitable
than conservatives? The question was posed because of the apparent allegation made by jps.


Salmonbait

--
Hope you're having a spectacular day!


Urine/kevin, jps, and harry just say it.. I think they have a rolodex of
lame party lines to throw out on a schedule...

Well, I guess that if you count the NRA, and religious, non-scientific
organizations then conservatives may actually contribute equally.