kjun Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 "Oh, exactly- but why confine the baby killings to the womb? If the parents have the baby and then, say, a few months later or a year later after the baby is out of the womb, they feel like it's too much trouble to raise it, why not just bash its skull in or feed it some poison?" You should be careful with advocating this. Your own mother will probably have to resist the urge with someone like you.}( the Cajun There is no such thing as paranoia. Your worst fears can come true at any moment. Hunter S. Thompson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug69 Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 >You should be careful with advocating this. Your own mother >will probably have to resist the urge with someone like you.}( Good one. I'll be willing to bet you a lot of money that if you gathered 100 pregnant women in a room, and one-by-one, showed each of them the picture of that big fat bloated man-girl which accompanies your posts, and said to them: "This is what your baby is going to look like; do you want to bring this thing into the world or slaughter it now?," over 90% would insist on eradicating it, even if it meant shoving a wire hanger in them. The only ones who wouldn't opt for that choice would be the small number of women who are huge Julia Child fans, and would love to have a son who looks just like her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjun Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 Aw, you hurt my feelings. But, then, I do like Julia. the Cajun There is no such thing as paranoia. Your worst fears can come true at any moment. Hunter S. Thompson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shy Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 RE: Newspaper headlines <<Pravada engaged in nothing more noble than malicious rumor-mongering and smear campaigns?>> propaganda???????? from PRAVDA??????????????????????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted December 30, 2003 Share Posted December 30, 2003 >The only ones who wouldn't opt for that choice would be the >small number of women who are huge Julia Child fans, and would >love to have a son who looks just like her. Doug, food-related insults seem to come naturally to you. Remember the one you hurled at Lucky about being a Jewish grandmother making for the cut-rate senior buffet or some such? Could it be your chronic dyspepsia is borne of anorexia? "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler. If we knew what we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" Einstein "The Universe is not only queerer than we imagine; it is queerer than we can imagine." J.B.S. Haldane "If the idea is not at first absurd, then there is no hope for it." Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trixie Posted December 31, 2003 Share Posted December 31, 2003 RE: Newspaper headlines > >"The U.S. Government (under Democratic Administrations) once >lied before about war (35 years ago). Therefore, we are >justified in asserting that Government officials are lying any >time they talk about war, even when we have no evidence that >they are lying. The fact that the Government lied before >means that they always lie." ...Not once, Doug69. The American Government has manufactured excuses for declaring war and/or invading sovereign nations for a good part of it's history as a nation. Although I am bad with dates (historical, not social), I might invite you to look into the following military actions: The war with Mexico. The Spanish-American War, and the resulting occupation of the Philippines, during which it's estimated that over 200,000 civilians were killed. The two invasions of Nicaragua (Nicaragua may well have become a state, if it were not for Walker's pro-slavery leanings) The occupations of Haiti, & the Dominican Republic The seizure of Hawaii. The division of Samoa. All of these military actions were instigated, not because of any hostile action by the foreign governments involved, but to either expand American territory, or to ensure American economic superiority. Right or wrong, it's all just textbook history now. Someday, the occupation of Iraq will be in textbooks too. One wonders if "Weapons of Mass Destruction" will be the 21st century's version of the 19th's "Manifest Destiny". La Trix (ever hoping for greater aspirations from our government) > Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts