I am about to go out, but I just saw this and had to share it. “Sex-Crazed Co-Eds Going Broke Buying Birth Control, Student Tells Pelosi Hearing Touting Freebie Mandate.” The sick, twisted bleeper who wrote this is named Craig Bannister. Note that; if you ever meet him, run away. He is a sick, twisted bleeper. I don’t think I have to explain why; you will see it.
This was written for CNS, which I think means Christian News Service. Thank you, Buddha, for showing me the way.
Sick. Twisted. Bleeeeeeper.
There are more of his kind in the comments section and they aren’t, apparently, all men.
Just stunning. Not hard to see why atheists are the fastest growing segment of youth when you have liars like this. That’s all coming from the christian community. Kids grow up in christian homes and when they leave, they also leave their faith. The Christians have absolutely forfeited their moral authority because of people like this. What used to be a faith that spoke to people’s needs and eternal questions, has become just more Republican talking points.
It stands for Conservative News Network, but, hey, thanks for highlighting your “tolerance” for Christians.
Anyhow, why is it so difficult for liberals to pay for their own lifestyles? Why is it necessary for Other People to have to subsidize contraception? What’s next, taxpayer funded kegs?
First of all, those “lifestyles” include most people who are faithfully married. Second, birth control is “cost effective.” There is all kinds of real-world experience showing that paying for birth control is actually cost neutral for insurance companies and sometimes even saves them money. It’s cheaper than pregnancy and abortion.
Read it and weep, dumbass.
William Teach,
I skimmed through your big n’ loud blog.
I’m a liberal. Would you please pay for all the Pepto I drank after reading your brainless crap?
Shhh . . . don’t tell Teach that the insurance companies are fine with covering birth control meds due to the fact that pregnancies are far more expensive. I wouldn’t want him to figure out that the cost of his insurance and everybody else’s (including insurance paid for by –awk!– the women) will increase without birth control coverage.
And don’t anybody point out to him that hormonal drugs not only prevent conception, they are used to prevent a number of serious illnesses from ever getting to the extremely expensive hospitalization and operation stage.
Where ignorance is bliss, you know . . .
Hey Teach, How come your photo expose of The 20 Hottest Conservative Women In The New Media doesn’t feature Ann Coulter? There aint nothing hotter than a gun toting horse faced women with an adam’s apple in my conservative opinion.
Ya gotta love their motto, “The Right News. Right Now.”
Right…
Teach: Anyhow, why is it so difficult for liberals to pay for their own lifestyles?”
Maybe because most of us live in Blue States, and in or near those horrible multi-cultural urban areas, and have to pay not only for the lifestyles of the Red States, but their very lives.
Without the filthy Liberal money from my NY, SC would be the white cracker version of Somalia.
Sorry Teach – you are way off base with your “…why is it so difficult for liberals to pay for their own lifestyles?”
I am a Conservative mother who put her (then) 14 year old daughter on birth control pills due to very heavy periods. Until you have bled through 2 maxi’s in an hour, and been doubled over with cramps from hell, you have No Idea what you are talking about. My poor girl would bleed like that for at least 3 days, with periods lasting on average 9 days. (ewe – icky girl stuff…). The BC pill allowed her to finally get through the month without missing at least a day of school, as well as the embarrassment she sometimes had to face (and every female here will know what I am talking about…;}).
As a bonus, it also saved me (and her) the possibility of having to make that other decision – the dreaded “abortion”. You see, her father (yes, biological and legitimate as we were married…coz we all know how important THAT is to the far-right) had been sexually molesting her since she was 3 years old. The rapes began at 12. So, in essence, the BC pill was a secondary ‘blessing in disguise’ in that I never had to face her aborting my ‘grand-step-child’ (wrap your head around that one…). I found all of this out 1 week shy of her 16th birthday. Needless to say, Mr. Upstanding Business Man Leader of the Community and Youth Coach is now serving time in the Pen.
Seriously, the Culture Wars have GOT to stop. There are far more important things to worry about, other than a woman’s uterus, and what she does to control it.l
I suspect Bannister has trouble understanding spending money on contraception because he’s been carrying the same condom around in his wallet for years.
Meanwhile, here in the real world, the actual testimony involved the story of a woman who had complications due to ovarian cysts that could have been, but weren’t, treated with hormonal birth control pills, and how she ended up needing surgery to have an ovary removed. Call me insane, but I don’t think wanting to have your health insurance cover the medication that could keep you from having abdominal surgery counts as being “sex-crazed.”
But then, I also think use of the word “co-ed” went out before the turn of the millennium.
Also to, this paves the way for a Romney nomination.
Sure, Newt will take some Southern states, with Santorum picking up a few more.
But don’t forget, in their infinite wisdom, neither Newt’s nor Rick’s team had the brains to make sure their candidates was on the ballot in VA, so only Mitt and Ron are there (and isn’t THAT the kind of competence we want in a President and his staff?). So, it would take a lot for Mitt to lose.
Romney’s such a really, really God-awful candidate, that he will most likely lose, even to a still beatable Obama, in a terrible, though slowly improving economy.
What will be interesting to see, is who the establishment (for who else if funding Mitt?) will saddle him with as VP. And that may have significant ramifications on the future of the party.
If they decide on a another fairly homogenous Republican (read: not completely batshit insane one), they open themselves up for even more extreme candidates in 2016. “Our candidates weren’t Conservative enough!!!”
But if they saddle him with a teabagging wingnut to “excite the base,” they may be able to blame the loss on the extremists, saying that the teabagger took away Independents. And that may lead to the shift (albeit slowly) to a more rational Republican Party. And no, I’m NOT holding my breath.
That’s what I’m thinking about today. You?
If they decide on a another fairly homogenous Republican (read: not completely batshit insane one), they open themselves up for even more extreme candidates in 2016. “Our candidates weren’t Conservative enough!!!â€
But if they saddle him with a teabagging wingnut to “excite the base,†they may be able to blame the loss on the extremists, saying that the teabagger took away Independents.
They’re going to lose either way because The Romney’s programming was apparently outsourced to the lowest bidder and lacks little things called “personality” and “likability”, so I think they’ll saddle him with a teabagger so they can blame the teabagger for his loss. So hmm, who looks sufficiently douchebaggy… Rick Santorum? Or maybe they’ll resurrect Michelle Bachman from their scrapheap and make her the Veep nominee? Democrats can dream, anyhow!
Badtux,
How about Rep. Allen West?
He’s crazy- AND he’s black?
Maybe they’ll think he’ll get the disaffected remainder of the PUMA’s, and the black folk, who they think may not be happy with Obama, based on what Sarah Pain and Herman Cain have told them?
Co-eds? Who the hell calls women students co-eds anymore? Especially law students? That term seemed archaic to me when I was a kid in the 1970s, and it hasn’t gotten any more flattering since then. In fact, I tried a Google search, and here was the number one hit:
Sounds like a destination for Craig Bannister and William Unteachable too. (Here’s a hint, guys: Women are more likely to have sex with you if you treat them like human beings. Strange but true!)
Stephen,
They wouldn’t know.
Hookers won’t even have sex with them, since even sex workers have standards.
And if inflatable sex dolls could avoid them, they would too.
Just to stick my nose in here for a second and talk to the commenters on this post, not all Christians are like that. My own church has no problem at all with contraceptives. You’re hearing from (a) ultra-conservative catholics, (b) ultra-conservative evangelical types, and (c) people who don’t really give a damn from a religious POV but see an opportunity to slam liberals.
So no, “christians” have not forfeited any moral authority, and no, being intolerant of morons like this is not being intolerant of “christians”.
In other words, please be a bit less sweeping in your statements.
-me
Ian, I only see one comment that addresses Christians. That comment correctly points out that the political Right presents itself as our “Christian” moral arbiter. That’s a situation you’d need to take up with the Righties.
As for maha’s original post, it’s been misinterpreted by a skilled professional like Teach, who still fails at it.
So… please be a bit less sweeping in your statements.