Bleeding from the Bunghole

[Gefan]

http://i.imgur.com/LeYl2UJ.jpg

The most horrifying image to come out of the shower since "Psycho".

Well done :clap:

And where the hell to did you get the idea for the duck poster? I love ducks and I still think it's magnificent.

[Sulman]

That duck is a touch of pure magic.

[Al Stefanelli]

This Friday night, please join me and Deborah Beeksma as we co-host another live episode of 'Freethought Fridays Variety Show' on God Discussion Radio.

We will be welcoming guests Becky Garrison (author, writer for WaPo, Guardian, TruthOut, etc.), EllenBeth Wachs, Matt Facciani & Jen August to talk about "The Rift," PZ Myers' accusation against Michael Shermer, #Elevatorgate, #Donglegate, #Tablegate and how the new wave of Radical Feminists are effecting the atheist/skeptic community.

You are NOT gonna want to miss this! Get your popcorn ready...

Here is a link for more information on the show, our guests and where to listen

http://websitesonadime.com/20130913Feminism.jpg

[Gefan]

This Friday night, please join me and Deborah Beeksma as we co-host another live episode of 'Freethought Fridays Variety Show' on God Discussion Radio.

We will be welcoming guests Becky Garrison (author, writer for WaPo, Guardian, TruthOut, etc.), EllenBeth Wachs, Matt Facciani & Jen August to talk about "The Rift," PZ Myers' accusation against Michael Shermer, #Elevatorgate, #Donglegate, #Tablegate and how the new wave of Radical Feminists are effecting the atheist/skeptic community...

I'm there, Al.

And thank you for the kind words on Reap's podcast.

[Southern]

This Friday night, please join me and Deborah Beeksma as we co-host another live episode of 'Freethought Fridays Variety Show' on God Discussion Radio.

We will be welcoming guests Becky Garrison (author, writer for WaPo, Guardian, TruthOut, etc.), EllenBeth Wachs, Matt Facciani & Jen August to talk about "The Rift," PZ Myers' accusation against Michael Shermer, #Elevatorgate, #Donglegate, #Tablegate and how the new wave of Radical Feminists are effecting the atheist/skeptic community.

You are NOT gonna want to miss this! Get your popcorn ready...

Here is a link for more information on the show, our guests and where to listen

http://websitesonadime.com/20130913Feminism.jpg

"Petulant Godess"... Al, was you the one that came with this slogan? Because it's genius.

[Ape+lust]

That duck is a touch of pure magic.

http://i.imgur.com/LeYl2UJ.jpg

The most horrifying image to come out of the shower since "Psycho".

Well done :clap:

And where the hell to did you get the idea for the duck poster? I love ducks and I still think it's magnificent.

Gracias guys! Lol, the duck's a hit. Didn't expect that.

So, you run across this ridiculous thing one day and who do you think of?

http://i.imgur.com/dzAETJq.jpg

[Al Stefanelli]

This Friday night, please join me and Deborah Beeksma as we co-host another live episode of 'Freethought Fridays Variety Show' on God Discussion Radio.

We will be welcoming guests Becky Garrison (author, writer for WaPo, Guardian, TruthOut, etc.), EllenBeth Wachs, Matt Facciani & Jen August to talk about "The Rift," PZ Myers' accusation against Michael Shermer, #Elevatorgate, #Donglegate, #Tablegate and how the new wave of Radical Feminists are effecting the atheist/skeptic community...

I'm there, Al.

And thank you for the kind words on Reap's podcast.

We have a chat room, and will be taking listener calls, as well. As far as the kind words, dude, that shit was fucking brilliant!

This Friday night, please join me and Deborah Beeksma as we co-host another live episode of 'Freethought Fridays Variety Show' on God Discussion Radio.

We will be welcoming guests Becky Garrison (author, writer for WaPo, Guardian, TruthOut, etc.), EllenBeth Wachs, Matt Facciani & Jen August to talk about "The Rift," PZ Myers' accusation against Michael Shermer, #Elevatorgate, #Donglegate, #Tablegate and how the new wave of Radical Feminists are effecting the atheist/skeptic community.

You are NOT gonna want to miss this! Get your popcorn ready...

Here is a link for more information on the show, our guests and where to listen

http://websitesonadime.com/20130913Feminism.jpg

"Petulant Godess"... Al, was you the one that came with this slogan? Because it's genius.

Actually, the credit for the name goes to my co-host, Deborah Beeksma.

Additionally, this is where we met Sarah Jones. She was a guest on a previous broadcast.

[welch]

when you have a ratio of 300:1 people to urinals, I don't care if you ARE checking me out. at that point it is all about efficiency, and no one wants to wait while you figure out which urinal you want to use. Farthest one down, pee, leave.

I've only ever encountered ratios like that at major sporting events and usually the men's room has a trough instead of urinals.

Go to a major computer/tech convention sometime. I wish the Moscone had a trough.

I do know the women at the WWDC love it. Because they pretty much each get their own bathroom. Friend of mine likes to joke about how she'll be decorating hers.

[welch]

Does anyone know how old Ophelia actually is? Just curious.

Sure. She probably does, and very likely her family and close friends do.

I would imagine the local DMV would know as well, along with various DHS groups.

[welch]

@SkepTicle.
I see your point but I'm having a laugh so it's all good for me. Plus I want to get a rise out of Pixlee. And I will.

Since we don't have a basketball to bounce off his head while yelling "COME ON, CRY! SQUIRT A FEW", we're left with lost twinkie jokes.

The dude is such a raging tit, I don't see any reason to take him seriously at all. Also, I'm really tired of these internet badasses running and crying to 'mommy' every time someone responds back to their idiocy in kind.

[Reap]

Seems like everyday the world loses another "skeptic" and gains another idiot then it turns out it was just an idiot in a skeptic suit the whole time.
Stupid And The Beast

[DW Adams]

Gefan: I get this....."This video contains content from Beta Film GmbH, PRS CS, ConstantinMediakraft, UMG and UMPI, one or more of whom have blocked it in your country on copyright grounds."

Is there a mirror of your latest masterpiece anywhere?

Tina,
Not as far as I know. I'd say PM me an e-mail address and I'll e-mail you an MP4 copy except I already know it's too big a file to attach. If you (or anyone else) know a way around that - let me know and I'll get on it.

Upload it here if you like:
http://atheiststoday.com/infusions/video/index.php

[TedDahlberg]

Myers could never make it my old field. People who can't handle 20-hour-a-week jobs sure as fuck can't handle the high-pressure, no-mistakes allowed, 60-hours/week field of Public Accountancy.

So what you're saying is… he hasn't got what it takes to sail the accountant sea.

[youtube]7YUiBBltOg4[/youtube]

[Dornier Pfeil]

Gefan: I get this....."This video contains content from Beta Film GmbH, PRS CS, ConstantinMediakraft, UMG and UMPI, one or more of whom have blocked it in your country on copyright grounds."

Is there a mirror of your latest masterpiece anywhere?

Tina,
Not as far as I know. I'd say PM me an e-mail address and I'll e-mail you an MP4 copy except I already know it's too big a file to attach. If you (or anyone else) know a way around that - let me know and I'll get on it.

You could send the file split into a multi part zip, or Tina could give http://keepvid.com/ a shot. No guarantees that bypasses any regional IP detection.

<tongue-in-cheek>It is not the Downfall video that is infringed. The SkepChicks are complaining about their rights.</tongue>

[yomomma]

So if you make it a life imprisonment scenario for a doctor who performs such an operation, EVEN if you allow for such exceptions, how many doctors are going to want to take that risk given how many people are gunning for them no matter what.

This is an extremely poor argument because every state in the United States already has restrictions on late term abortions. In states where late term abortions are legal, it is permitted only in small circumstances where the life of the baby or mother are in danger. This is not out of sync from other progressive first world countries like Germany, Greece, France who have much greater restrictions on abortions past 90 days than the U.S. (with Canada being the a rare outlier, with zero restrictions).

Intact dilation and extraction which is typically requited for late term abortions (how else are you gonna do it?), is already illegal in the U.S.. By comparison to progressive industrialized countries worldwide, this isn't considered radical or oppressive by any means.

However, I agree that late term abortions or abortions past viability are extremely rare, even under the legal constraints, so it's all really political showmanship but I think it's dishonest to paint laws restricting post viability abortions as radical or highly egregious when most states already have these laws on the books. Women are managing to get their abortions before these cut offs and are able to live a full and productive within the framework of a free society.

[yomomma]

*a full and productive life, within the framework of a free socieyt

[another lurker]

@yomomma

They are not restricting post-viability abortions.

They are 1) shutting down PP clinics which will help to REDUCE the number of abortions and 2) restricting pre-viability abortions - 20 weeks, 16 weeks etc.

At least in most of Canada and Western Europe, low income women will have easy access to contraception and government funded abortion. The women don't have to spend 5 months scrimping and saving. Is it any surprise that women living in poverty and immigrants were the ones who went to Gosnell? They didn't choose to because they evilly wanted to kill post-viabilty babies. They did it because they were desperate and had no other options. It also didn't help that pro-lifers were picketing all of the local PP offices - which scared many of the women off.

In addition to this, the 'post-viability' laws do have some flaws. For instance, in NYC, abortion past 24 weeks is illegal unless the mothers LIFE is in danger. I came across a post from an adamant pro-lifer who was actually complaining about this law, because her daughter's *Much wanted* pregnancy had gone wrong. The fetus had developed Potter's Syndrome - it was slowly dying, all of the amniotic fluid had leaked out, and the fetus was rubbing against the woman's uterine wall. The woman was in constant pain, had crippling labour pains for hours every day, and couldn't even walk straight. The fetus, if it even survived to birth, would have died a few hours later. But no, no abortion - because the woman was not in the process of dying. But a little pain never hurt anyone, right?

And the above is why, imo, these decisions need to be made by women and their doctors, not politicians looking to get a bump in the polls from pro-life wingnuts.

[Dornier Pfeil]

This is an extremely poor argument because every state in the United States already has restrictions on late term abortions. In states where late term abortions are legal, it is permitted only in small circumstances where the life of the baby or mother are in danger. This is not out of sync from other progressive first world countries like Germany, Greece, France who have much greater restrictions on abortions past 90 days than the U.S. (with Canada being the a rare outlier, with zero restrictions).

Intact dilation and extraction which is typically requited for late term abortions (how else are you gonna do it?), is already illegal in the U.S.. By comparison to progressive industrialized countries worldwide, this isn't considered radical or oppressive by any means.

However, I agree that late term abortions or abortions past viability are extremely rare, even under the legal constraints, so it's all really political showmanship but I think it's dishonest to paint laws restricting post viability abortions as radical or highly egregious when most states already have these laws on the books. Women are managing to get their abortions before these cut offs and are able to live a full and productive within the framework of a free society.

There is a unified strategy at work. The fact that earlier viability seems to make a reasonable case of banning earlier abortion is just icing on the cake for the anti-choicers. By making all abortions more difficult they up the chance that the woman will not succeed in getting the abortion during the window.

[Jonathan]

Richard Dawkins has written a clarification re his remarks on paedophilia:

http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundatio ... erstanding

[another lurker]

There is a unified strategy at work. The fact that earlier viability seems to make a reasonable case of banning earlier abortion is just icing on the cake for the anti-choicers. By making all abortions more difficult they up the chance that the woman will not succeed in getting the abortion during the window.

One state has just banned telemed abortions for 'safety concerns'. Nevermind that telemed services are provided for all sorts of medical problems...abortion is the only one legislators seem to care about. Telemed abortions are first trimester, and they mainly help low income, rural women (they are also the safest. the later in gestation the more dangerous the abortion is). So by lowering the viability requirements on one end, and making it really difficult to get a 1st trimester abortion, the plan is to esesntially force low income women into giving birth because they will have no other options.

[Kareem]

Richard Dawkins has written a clarification re his remarks on paedophilia:

http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundatio ... erstanding

Totally unnecessary. Those who want to understand what he said already do and those who don't never will.

Every time I think these posers can't hit a new low...

[ERV]

Richard Dawkins has written a clarification re his remarks on paedophilia:

http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundatio ... erstanding

I genuinely dont understand why he tries to engage with these idiots.

See Gumbys sig-- There is always going to be someone out there who thinks that ripping down Richard Dawkins magically makes them smarter/more accomplished/better person than Dawkins, just by virtue of their 'critique'.

Dawkins: "The sky is blue."

Asshole: "HURHURHUR STUPID DAWKINS IM LOOKIN OUTSIDE NOW AND ITS GRAY HES SO DUMB!"
Asshole: "Wow. I used to respect Dawkins so much, but now that I see him flaunting his ability to see color... Ive lost a hero."
Asshole: "The beauty of a blue sky is proof of (my) Gods existence. Dawkins arrogance prevents him accepting the Truth."
Asshole: "DID YOU HEAR ABOUT WHAT DAWKINS SAID ABOUT REBECCA WATSON???!!!???"

I love criticism. Good criticism makes me a better scientist. But bad criticism? Just makes you look like a fucking idiot.

[Gumby]

Richard Dawkins has written a clarification re his remarks on paedophilia:

http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundatio ... erstanding

Totally unnecessary. Those who want to understand what he said already do and those who don't never will.

Every time I think these posers can't hit a new low...

Agreed. Every time someone clarifies something that was already clear except to the baboons who intentionally misinterpret in order to smear their target, it gives said baboons the opportunity to accuse their target of "doubling down" and of being an unrepentant apologist for whatever sin he/she is being accused of.

That said, I haven't yet read what Dawkins wrote, but that will have to wait until later.

[Jonathan]

Richard Dawkins has written a clarification re his remarks on paedophilia:

http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundatio ... erstanding

I genuinely dont understand why he tries to engage with these idiots.

See Gumbys sig-- There is always going to be someone out there who thinks that ripping down Richard Dawkins magically makes them smarter/more accomplished/better person than Dawkins, just by virtue of their 'critique'.

Dawkins: "The sky is blue."

Asshole: "HURHURHUR STUPID DAWKINS IM LOOKIN OUTSIDE NOW AND ITS GRAY HES SO DUMB!"
Asshole: "Wow. I used to respect Dawkins so much, but now that I see him flaunting his ability to see color... Ive lost a hero."
Asshole: "The beauty of a blue sky is proof of (my) Gods existence. Dawkins arrogance prevents him accepting the Truth."
Asshole: "DID YOU HEAR ABOUT WHAT DAWKINS SAID ABOUT REBECCA WATSON???!!!???"

I love criticism. Good criticism makes me a better scientist. But bad criticism? Just makes you look like a fucking idiot.

To be honest I think the one decent point some of the critics had was that it did come across that he was speaking on behalf of his friends, that the experience wasn't a big deal for them either. I can understand why that seemed a bit iffy, and his clarification is useful for resolving that, for explaining that they did talk about it, and he's not just assuming that they were fine because he was.

However; I do agree it won't make a difference to the idiots. Nothing would. It wasn't written for them though.

[Tapir]

Should I have lied and said it was the worst thing that ever happened to me? Should I have mendaciously sought the sympathy due to a victim who had truly been damaged for the rest of his life? Should I have named the offending teacher and called down posthumous disgrace upon his head?

No, no and no.

Okay....but then....

That’s why I said only “I don’t think he did any of us lasting damage”. We discussed it among ourselves on many occasions, especially after his suicide, and there was indeed general agreement that his gassing himself was far more upsetting than his sexual depredations had been.

Can't be many of Dawkins' old teachers who gassed themselves (hopefully). But for someone wanting to avoid naming the chap involved that's fairly specific information.

[yomomma]

@yomomma

They are not restricting post-viability abortions.

They are 1) shutting down PP clinics which will help to REDUCE the number of abortions and 2) restricting pre-viability abortions - 20 weeks, 16 weeks etc.

But are they really?

I'm not being factitious, just asking.

Or is it a requirement of regulation, which demands that abortion facilities have life saving medical equipment (or be within a certain amount of miles to an ER, which I don't think is unreasonable) and expertise on the premises? This is such a slippery slope IMO, because, in theory, everyone should be on board with this. Getting an abortion, even at the end of the first trimester, isn't like getting your ears pierced.

It is an invasive procedure. I know of a friend who had an abortion at the end of the first trimester and hemmoraghed signficantly. She should have been immediately transported to a local ER, but instead they kept her there for hours (I got to go in a see her after I raised hell because they weren't going to let me in) and they were nervous as hell. Her hemorrhaging finally stopped, but she left, completely white, staggering and dizzy. She was lucky to survive. (I was only 18 at the time and she refused to go the ER. If I was wiser at the time, I would have insisted.)

At least in most of Canada and Western Europe, low income women will have easy access to contraception and government funded abortion. The women don't have to spend 5 months scrimping and saving. Is it any surprise that women living in poverty and immigrants were the ones who went to Gosnell? They didn't choose to because they evilly wanted to kill post-viabilty babies. They did it because they were desperate and had no other options. It also didn't help that pro-lifers were picketing all of the local PP offices - which scared many of the women off.

That's a different argument IMO. That's an argument for single payer healthcare. (Although, I just looked it up and in most Canadian provinces, you have to be a "landed immigrant", meaning that you have to be accepted legally by having a reason to be there, like having a job offer, and wait three months before you qualify for Canada's healthcare, otherwise you have to pay for it.) Oh, and the pro choice action network says that BC, Canada doesn't provide post viability abortions (after 22 weeks) unless the mother's life is in danger or in cases of severe fetal abnormality. So, I guess I was wrong about there being no restrictions. Maybe it differs between provinces.

In addition to this, the 'post-viability' laws do have some flaws. For instance, in NYC, abortion past 24 weeks is illegal unless the mothers LIFE is in danger. I came across a post from an adamant pro-lifer who was actually complaining about this law, because her daughter's *Much wanted* pregnancy had gone wrong. The fetus had developed Potter's Syndrome - it was slowly dying, all of the amniotic fluid had leaked out, and the fetus was rubbing against the woman's uterine wall. The woman was in constant pain, had crippling labour pains for hours every day, and couldn't even walk straight. The fetus, if it even survived to birth, would have died a few hours later. But no, no abortion - because the woman was not in the process of dying. But a little pain never hurt anyone, right?

For the most part, I agree with you on this. Nobody should be forced to be a hero or suffer needlessly.

Just an aside however, the first potter's syndrome baby has just survived and she looks normal and healthy. Coincidentally, I think the mother is a Congresswoman! A rightwingnut Congresswoman IIRC.

Now, it's still too early to know if her parent's kidney transplant will take but I believe the prognosis is good. I'm not going to make a judgement as to whether a person should continue a pregnancy because of that specific abnormality, however, science is finding new ways to help these babies which makes the abortion debate even more complex as technology progresses.

Like I said before. My doctor told me that while my son's prognosis was awesome when he was born at 30 weeks. At the time I had him, which was ten years ago, the doctor said that 20 years ago, babies born that early or a few weeks earlier were hardly given medical care because doctors believed they were a lost cause. We've come so far.

But I do agree with you -- that quality of life is important.

And the above is why, imo, these decisions need to be made by women and their doctors, not politicians looking to get a bump in the polls from pro-life wingnuts.

The prolife wingnuts are freaks, I'll grant you that, but so are those on the other side of the spectrum. I have little respect for extremists on any issue.

I'm am certainly pro choice up until viability, after that, I personally believe it to be a humanitarian issue (unless the baby or mother's life is in danger). I also agree with you that quality of life is important too. Just because a baby survives, doesn't mean she's going to have a fair quality of life. That does need to be left up to a doctor and patient.

Both political parties politicize what they consider to be humanitarian issues. It sucks, but I really try to look at the information objectively and make decisions from there and I personally believe that babies post viability should have rights. Again, JMHO.

[Dornier Pfeil]

Richard Dawkins has written a clarification re his remarks on paedophilia:

http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundatio ... erstanding

Totally unnecessary. Those who want to understand what he said already do and those who don't never will.

Every time I think these posers can't hit a new low...

Agreed. Every time someone clarifies something that was already clear except to the baboons who intentionally misinterpret in order to smear their target, it gives said baboons the opportunity to accuse their target of "doubling down" and of being an unrepentant apologist for whatever sin he/she is being accused of.

That said, I haven't yet read what Dawkins wrote, but that will have to wait until later.

To expand on that. It also give the baboons credibility in their criticisms. Why answer a nonsense critique if it was truly nonsense?

[Kareem]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/hetpat/2013 ... ompromise/

Ally Fogg writes a piece about the pros and cons of anonymity for the accused in rape trials and points out that those accused, if found innocent, are often targeted by people who refuse to accept anything other than a guilty verdict.

He's immediately accuse of being a rape apologist by Ibis3:

Why is there a need for anonymity for rape defendants? Because even when someone is acquitted, large numbers of people continue to assert their guilt, and that was vividly proven on Twitter this week.

You’re fucking kidding, right? It couldn’t be because

the innumerable tweets and message-board comments I’ve seen calling for the witness in this trial to be named and shamed, imprisoned for making false allegations or simply abused and insulted by people calling her variations on “a lying little bitch.”

and the various rape threats and other threats of violence that would be directed at a specific person–already a survivor of a traumatic experience? For fucking ever.

And the idea that just because someone’s been found not guilty in a court, we should then turn off our own reasoning faculties and assume he’s innocent, especially when it comes to cases of sexual assault (look up the reporting and conviction statistics) is preposterous. I’m not even reading the rest of this crap rape apology post.

:doh:

I thought skeptics didn't use statistics as evidence; now we're using statistics indicating that a lot of reported rapes don't end in convictions as some kind of evidence that a lot of rapists are going free.
:suimouth:

[another lurker]

But are they really?

I'm not being factitious, just asking.

Yes. 20 week ban in Texas. 16 weeks in North Dakota. And fetal heartbeat bans in many other red states - which would restrict abortion to 5 weeks roughly.

Or is it a requirement of regulation, which demands that abortion facilities have life saving medical equipment (or be within a certain amount of miles to an ER, which I don't think is unreasonable) and expertise on the premises? This is such a slippery slope IMO, because, in theory, everyone should be on board with this. Getting an abortion, even at the end of the first trimester, isn't like getting your ears pierced.

These are called TRAP laws, which strangely enough, are ONLY used against abortion clinics. Rick Perry recently enacted these laws in Texas which has resulted in the closing of just about every clinic but 3. PP clinics - most of them - clinics that did pap smears, mammograms, and handed out free or low cost contraception to low income women. Many TRAP bills grant broad authority to the state department of health to develop structural and staffing requirements for abortion clinics. Often, the resulting regulations are based on existing hospital guidelines including specific dimensions for procedure rooms and hallways, doorway widths, and complex ventilation systems. Some regulations mandate what types of medical professionals must be on staff, assign certain duties to various staff members or require patient evaluations that are not medically necessary. Instead, these regulations create a large burden for small outpatient clinics. Clinics can be forced to extensively remodel and hire new staff or even close entirely, resulting in women having to travel great distances to obtain abortion care.

In addition to the above, TRAP laws are also very clever. First require that every abortion doctor have admitting privileges in local hospitals. Then, influence the local hospitals to DENY admitting privileges to the abortion doctors. And voila...the clinics MUST shut down.

Oh, and the pro choice action network says that BC, Canada doesn't provide post viability abortions (after 22 weeks) unless the mother's life is in danger or in cases of severe fetal abnormality. So, I guess I was wrong about there being no restrictions. Maybe it differs between provinces.

Yes, and PEI, which is a very religious province, has banned abortion completely. Women must travel to the mainland. In Canada, even though there are no restrictions, the decision is still left between women and their doctors. Also, Canada actually lacks the facilities for late term abortion. If a woman needs a late term abortion they will send her to the USA - and the government will pay for it. Many Canadian women went to Dr. Tiller's office in Kansas for late term abortions - often in the cases of severe fetal abnormality - anencephaly etc.

My doctor told me that while my son's prognosis was awesome when he was born at 30 weeks. At the time I had him, which was ten years ago, the doctor said that 20 years ago, babies born that early or a few weeks earlier were hardly given medical care because doctors believed they were a lost cause. We've come so far.

Yes, as I stated, survival rates have improved. But rates of disability have remained the same. Also, I sincerely doubt that viability will change to an earlier date unless some sort of artificial womb is invented. A handful of 21 week neonates have survived, but the biggest issue with a fetus born that young is that their lungs are nearly solid. You can't inflate a solid object. Just can't be done. So, the medical advances will have to be HUGE in order to make all fetuses viable. And even then, if it turns out that every zygote can be brought to term in an artificial womb, how much bodily autonomy will women have to sacrifice in order to save every zygote? If a woman does not want to be pregnant, will she have to get a painful c-section in order to save the ZEF?*


As for what you said about extremists, show me some proof of pro-choicers bombing pro-lifers. Setting fire to pro-life headquarters, and campaigning for the right to commit infanticide. Oh, and some examples of pro-choicers assassinating pro-life doctors.

I spend a lot of time on abortion blogs/forums etc, and I have only come across a couple of people who might be classed as pro-infanticide (but only in cases of severe famine, that sort of thing, when infanticide would be the *merciful* thing to do). I have never met anyone who has endorsed violence, or who has said that women should have the right to abort while the fetus is in the birth canal. In fact, the whole 'women want to kill babies while they are mere seconds from birth' is just a bullshit pro-life canard invented to make an emotional appeal and cast all pro-choicers as psychopathic baby killers who just want to sleep around, get pregnant, stay pregnant for 9 months then KILL KILL KILL BABIES KILL BABIES KILLLLLLLLLLL.





*zygote/embryo/fetus

[another lurker]

oh, and yomomma, kudos to you for caring about quality of life

the majority of 'forced birthers' I interact with happen to be religious ,and completely lacking in empathy

they believe in forced birth for:

1) rape

2) life of mother - who cares, she spread her legs, didn't she?

3) a baby without a brain (anencephalic) might be saved at the last minute by God, so all fetii lacking brains or other organs should be born

4) suffering teaches compassion - so, forcing such sick babies to be born = Godly, because as the child slowly dies, we all learn what LOVE really means

5) only Jesus was perfect, so, creating a child that you *know* will be severely disabled is totes glorious, because it is God's will that we suffer


These people claim to know all about compassion and love, but all I see is a complete lack of empathy.

[Ericb]

Nice! :clap: Never knew that. The intricacies of Simpsons comedy and the timeless brilliance of Star Trek.

Here's another good one from Garak that seems relevent to FtB/Skepchick/A+

GARAK: You sound disappointed. I thought you enjoyed mystery novels.
BASHIR: I do. Human mystery novels. The problem with Cardassian enigma tales is that they all end the same way. All the suspects are always guilty.
GARAK: Yes, but the challenge is determining exactly who is guilty of what.

[Early Cuyler]

Hang on a sec, if PZ is no longer a part of the skeptics movement....

So don’t call me a “skeptic”. I’ll consider it an insult, like calling a writer a stenographer, a comedian a mime, a doctor a faith healer, a scientist a technician. I’m out.

....then how come he's speaking at Skepticon 6?

http://skepticon.org/speakers/

Because Skepticon has nothing to do with skepticism.

The only person there that could be called a skeptic is AaronRa. Honestly, I don't know what he's doing there.

[Service Dog]

Dear Sasha Pixlee,

We're into big, fat, hairy manly-men. You don't qualify. You are a big fat hairy whining sissy. Big difference.

Sincerely,

The Supreme High Council of Gay Bears


http://img0.etsystatic.com/014/0/767074 ... 4_lm6x.jpg

[Tapir]

Ok....what is http://www.droptheleash.co.uk ?

Because my PC is having trouble loading the forum because of it.

[yomomma]

oh, and yomomma, kudos to you for caring about quality of life

the majority of 'forced birthers' I interact with happen to be religious ,and completely lacking in empathy

they believe in forced birth for:

1) rape

2) life of mother - who cares, she spread her legs, didn't she?

3) a baby without a brain (anencephalic) might be saved at the last minute by God, so all fetii lacking brains or other organs should be born

4) suffering teaches compassion - so, forcing such sick babies to be born = Godly, because as the child slowly dies, we all learn what LOVE really means

5) only Jesus was perfect, so, creating a child that you *know* will be severely disabled is totes glorious, because it is God's will that we suffer


These people claim to know all about compassion and love, but all I see is a complete lack of empathy.

another lurker, thanks, I guess. ;) I'm not sure I'm going to be that worthy of an opponent because I think you make some very valid and fair points and I agree with many of them.

I think where we may disagree is how to determine viability, it's a gray area and I have very mixed feelings on it. While I think first trimester abortions, contraceptives and the morning after pill should be government funded and fully available, I have a hard time "blessing" post viability abortions on healthy women and babies.

Let me ask you -- at what stage of gestation do you think is a viable baby? Do you believe in imposing restrictions on any kind of abortions at all? Even if you believe most women wouldn't have late term abortions or post viability abortions (assuming it's a healthy baby and mother), are any worth the price of allowing it? Personally, I don't want any viable babies to be aborted. Again, when I say viable, I mean, they can live outside the womb, are healthy, "normal", as in they will have a reasonably good quality of life and won't risk the life of the mother.

For *me*, it's a moral, nuanced conundrum. I want women to have full access in their first trimester, but I don't think women should be allowed to have full, unfettered access for any reason other than medical reasons (including those in which a baby's quality of life is significantly diminished) based on women's rights over the life of the baby. I hope I don't sound like an extremist, it just goes against the fiber of my humanity, like enlisting child soldiers to fight a war. KWIM?

[curriejean]

<snip'd>
4) suffering teaches compassion - so, forcing such sick babies to be born = Godly, because as the child slowly dies, we all learn what LOVE really means

There isn't enough suffering in the world for us to pursue already, gotta make more. How pitifully backwards to think compassion can have any value at all when we're willing to cause great suffering just to cultivate it. Bombing for peace, fucking for virginity, harming for compassion.

[another lurker]

Let me ask you -- at what stage of gestation do you think is a viable baby? Do you believe in imposing restrictions on any kind of abortions at all? Even if you believe most women wouldn't have late term abortions or post viability abortions (assuming it's a healthy baby and mother), are any worth the price of allowing it? Personally, I don't want any viable babies to be aborted. Again, when I say viable, I mean, they can live outside the womb, are healthy, "normal", as in they will have a reasonably good quality of life and won't risk the life of the mother.

I am fine with 24 weeks. As I stated - red states are trying their damndest to get viability *lowered* to 20 weeks and below - when no baby born at 20 weeks has *ever* survived, and those born below 24 weeks often suffer from *severe* and lifelong disability.

For *me*, it's a moral, nuanced conundrum. I want women to have full access in their first trimester, but I don't think women should be allowed to have full, unfettered access for any reason other than medical reasons (including those in which a baby's quality of life is significantly diminished) based on women's rights over the life of the baby. I hope I don't sound like an extremist, it just goes against the fiber of my humanity, like enlisting child soldiers to fight a war. KWIM?

This part sort of confuses me. Are you now saying that a woman, if she wants to abort in the second trimester, must do so for the *right* reasons? Reasons that you find morally acceptable? So if she's a slut, or cannot afford another child, then it isn't *good* enough for you? And btw, not wanting to be pregnant IS a medical reason. Pregnancy is by no means a healthy state, and if a woman wishes to not have her body used against her will she has that right. Besides, as I stated earlier, the are reasons why a woman might need a second trimester abortion. Lack of funds, didn't know she was pregnant (irregular period, on birth control etc), or simply living in denial.

Now clearly, FREE and easy access to contraception and single payer healthcare, and extensive sex education should make abortions rare and hopefuly, first trimester only. This method does appear to work just fine in W. European countries. First trimester abortions are also the safest, and should be encouraged. But real life is messy, and we cannot judge another person's actions until we have walked in their shoes. Just because someone has an abortion at 16 weeks does not mean they are a selfish baby killing slut.

If I come off harsh, I apologise. It is just that the majority of sanctimonious religous fuckwits that I debate this with go on at great lengths about how women just want to party fuck kill babies party fuck kill babies party fuck kill babies. As if every woman who has an abortion is a selfish, nihiilstic baby killing slut who is too stupid and careless to use birth control or take a pregnancy test and who just loves to wait til the last minute to get a dangerous late term abortion and spend thousands of dollars... why exactly? Are women really that stupid?

[free thoughtpolice]

On a related note, in a meeting today I learned that a problem in a women's restroom lead to the discovery that the main sewage line has completely corroded, saturating the surrounding soil. The building is, in effect, floating in poo.

A veritable ship in a sea of oolon! :hankey:

[welch]

Nice! :clap: Never knew that. The intricacies of Simpsons comedy and the timeless brilliance of Star Trek.

Here's another good one from Garak that seems relevent to FtB/Skepchick/A+

GARAK: You sound disappointed. I thought you enjoyed mystery novels.
BASHIR: I do. Human mystery novels. The problem with Cardassian enigma tales is that they all end the same way. All the suspects are always guilty.
GARAK: Yes, but the challenge is determining exactly who is guilty of what.

I was watching a clip the other day and realize one of the reasons I liked DS9: they had assholes on the show. Like this clip:

[youtube]acF2f3XLfCo[/youtube]

I mean, Damar is just being such a raging jerk and it's awesome. TNG was just too...roddenberry. Everyone on the ship was so damned squeaky perfect.

Then you get DS9, and the bartender isn't some zen font of wisdom, but a drug-running, whore monger of a fence who only wants money. A first officer who doesn't give a fuck about starfleet and it's great pure purpose. A captain who does some shady-assed shit because he had to. (and punched Q right in the gob.)

They were far, far more real than TNG ever was. I mean Section 31 on TNG? Honky please.

Which is why it's the only 'new' ST series that I have paid to download. Won't even watch the others.

[Dornier Pfeil]

But are they really?

Yes they are really. When the North Carolina abortion law was signed last month we lost almost all of our clinics immediately. I can remember one that said they would most likely pass all the restriction but I haven't followed up. When protesters picketed the governors mansion, he brought them cookies.

Ok, no. Even that one closed.
http://rt.com/usa/north-carolina-closes ... inics-927/

I'm not being factitious, just asking.

Was the word you were looking for facetious? I've not encountered that one before. New word of the day for me. Thank you.

Or is it a requirement of regulation, which demands that abortion facilities have life saving medical equipment (or be within a certain amount of miles to an ER, which I don't think is unreasonable) and expertise on the premises? This is such a slippery slope IMO, because, in theory, everyone should be on board with this. Getting an abortion, even at the end of the first trimester, isn't like getting your ears pierced.

It is much like the voting restrictions the right are fawning over. Health of the patients is a fine thing to be concerned about but they never show that the older standards where actually somehow not safe. That thing called evidence. None of this legislation is evidence based.

And there are many abortion restrictions that have nothing to do with safety. Waiting periods and doctor's admittance privilege are not relevant. As I said before if you have to make a day's drive to the clinic just to be told you have to wait 3 days before you can have the abortion you just lost a day's work so you can be told you will have to lose another one. If a patient has an emergency from a complicated abortion are they really going to be turned back by a hospital because the doctor doesn't have admittance privilege?

It is an invasive procedure. I know of a friend who had an abortion at the end of the first trimester and hemmoraghed signficantly. She should have been immediately transported to a local ER, but instead they kept her there for hours (I got to go in a see her after I raised hell because they weren't going to let me in) and they were nervous as hell. Her hemorrhaging finally stopped, but she left, completely white, staggering and dizzy. She was lucky to survive. (I was only 18 at the time and she refused to go the ER. If I was wiser at the time, I would have insisted.)

That's a different argument IMO. That's an argument for single payer healthcare. (Although, I just looked it up and in most Canadian provinces, you have to be a "landed immigrant", meaning that you have to be accepted legally by having a reason to be there, like having a job offer, and wait three months before you qualify for Canada's healthcare, otherwise you have to pay for it.) Oh, and the pro choice action network says that BC, Canada doesn't provide post viability abortions (after 22 weeks) unless the mother's life is in danger or in cases of severe fetal abnormality. So, I guess I was wrong about there being no restrictions. Maybe it differs between provinces.

I agree that single payer health care is the only way to go but in the US, I am guessing you are Canadian, totally all federal public moneys and any state moneys in red states are BANNED from going to abortion services. I am very happy your friend turned out well. How much better could she have been if the clinic had access to better funding. The right wing anti-choicers aren't limiting themselves to only (questionable) safety laws. They are attacking abortion rights from every conceivable angle.

For the most part, I agree with you on this. Nobody should be forced to be a hero or suffer needlessly.

Just an aside however, the first potter's syndrome baby has just survived and she looks normal and healthy. Coincidentally, I think the mother is a Congresswoman! A rightwingnut Congresswoman IIRC.

A Congresscritter? So a person who is in the possession of the privilege of fantastic health care coverage should be looked to as an example to a nation of low income patients who would love to have any coverage at all? Assuming the laws haven't been written so that abortion services are (again, for emphasis) BANNED from any insurance that touches a government funding source.

Like I said before. My doctor told me that while my son's prognosis was awesome when he was born at 30 weeks. At the time I had him, which was ten years ago, the doctor said that 20 years ago, babies born that early or a few weeks earlier were hardly given medical care because doctors believed they were a lost cause. We've come so far.

I am equally happy for you too.

The prolife wingnuts are freaks, I'll grant you that, but so are those on the other side of the spectrum. I have little respect for extremists on any issue.

Keeping religious fanatics out from between women and their doctors is an extreme position?

I'm am certainly pro choice up until viability, after that, I personally believe it to be a humanitarian issue (unless the baby or mother's life is in danger). I also agree with you that quality of life is important too. Just because a baby survives, doesn't mean she's going to have a fair quality of life. That does need to be left up to a doctor and patient.

Both political parties politicize what they consider to be humanitarian issues. It sucks, but I really try to look at the information objectively and make decisions from there and I personally believe that babies post viability should have rights. Again, JMHO.

Like the right not to suffer? Like the right not to be a football in a religious crusade against women?

[Ericb]

I was watching a clip the other day and realize one of the reasons I liked DS9: they had assholes on the show. Like this clip:



I mean, Damar is just being such a raging jerk and it's awesome. TNG was just too...roddenberry. Everyone on the ship was so damned squeaky perfect.

Then you get DS9, and the bartender isn't some zen font of wisdom, but a drug-running, whore monger of a fence who only wants money. A first officer who doesn't give a fuck about starfleet and it's great pure purpose. A captain who does some shady-assed shit because he had to. (and punched Q right in the gob.)

They were far, far more real than TNG ever was. I mean Section 31 on TNG? Honky please.

Which is why it's the only 'new' ST series that I have paid to download. Won't even watch the others.

I love Damar hating on Weyoun. One of my favorites is the later scene when the new Weyoun clone barges in on a drunk Damar and Damar just looks at him and says "Hm? Well heloooooooooooooo" and starts cackling.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Ok....what is http://www.droptheleash.co.uk ?

Because my PC is having trouble loading the forum because of it.

Yep, same here. Very annoying!

[Dornier Pfeil]

Let me ask you -- at what stage of gestation do you think is a viable baby? Do you believe in imposing restrictions on any kind of abortions at all? Even if you believe most women wouldn't have late term abortions or post viability abortions (assuming it's a healthy baby and mother), are any worth the price of allowing it? Personally, I don't want any viable babies to be aborted. Again, when I say viable, I mean, they can live outside the womb, are healthy, "normal", as in they will have a reasonably good quality of life and won't risk the life of the mother.

For *me*, it's a moral, nuanced conundrum. I want women to have full access in their first trimester, but I don't think women should be allowed to have full, unfettered access for any reason other than medical reasons (including those in which a baby's quality of life is significantly diminished) based on women's rights over the life of the baby. I hope I don't sound like an extremist, it just goes against the fiber of my humanity, like enlisting child soldiers to fight a war. KWIM?

I think the point you are missing is that pro-choicers don't think we have the right to decide that for someone else. It is not my power, privilege, right, entitlement, what have you, to decide something that only the mother and her doctor should be deciding. Viability is situational to the pregnancy in front of the mother/doctor and not solely a function of a calender count. That is the problem with this argument. You think you should have some kind of say in deciding something you have absolutely no knowledge about--namely someone else's physical/social condition and the physical condition of the fetus in a future that hasn't happened yet. Can you possibly know every eventuality a woman is likely to face that affects viability? Why do you think you deserve that?

[JackRayner]

http://i.imgur.com/LeYl2UJ.jpg

I'm not sure how I missed it all of this time, but I'm just now realizing that the girl in the tentacle rape drawing has blue hair... :?

[Suet Cardigan]

Hello everyone.

I've posted a few times as LurkyLurkyLurker and I thought I'd register and introduce myself.


I became aware of the skeptical movement in the 90s and one of the subjects that interested me in particular was the Satanic ritual abuse panic. It seemed a particularly good example of irrationality causing serious harm. Innocent people were sent to prison, families broken up, "recovered" memories - you know the story. The Satanic Abuse myth was mainly promoted by strongly religious people, but also by gender feminists such as Gloria Steinem in America and Beatrix Campbell in the UK. The similarity in the mind-sets of the fundamentalists and the feminists was obvious.

* Irony * Thank goodness for the skeptics who pointed out that it was a witch hunt based on no evidence, that accusations do not equal guilt, that human memory is not reliable etc. * Irony *

Ok, you can tell me to fuck off now.

[Cunt of Personality]

Ok....what is http://www.droptheleash.co.uk ?

Because my PC is having trouble loading the forum because of it.

Yep, same here. Very annoying!

It's where Ericb's avatar image is hosted.

[Ericb]

Ok....what is http://www.droptheleash.co.uk ?

Because my PC is having trouble loading the forum because of it.

Yep, same here. Very annoying!

It's where Ericb's avatar image is hosted.

Sorry, did I unleash a virus or something? My avatar has been here for a year with no problem. Now it's gone.

[DW Adams]

Hey, I just found out on Twitter that The Slymepit made up a story about PZ harassing a women at a con. And AVfM picked it up and ran with it.

No seriously.

Ask Damion.

[Ericb]

I deleted it.

[ROBOKiTTY]

Sorry, did I unleash a virus or something? My avatar has been here for a year with no problem. Now it's gone.

Your avatar never would load for me. I think some people had trouble loading the page as it would get stuck trying to load your avatar.

[curriejean]

When I created the SkepticWomen facebook page and a new user account however many months ago, I got a lot of friend requests. I made the mistake of browsing my feed last night to find that it seems a name like "SkepticWomen" attracts feminists like flies to dead fish. Fun conversation today (I do not know this person):

http://i.imgur.com/vj3yat6.png

Discovered I'd been blocked when I tried to edit for clarity/sentence structure. Can't decide whether to laugh or cry, settling for slightly frustrated amusement. More evidence that one of the unstated aims of present day feminists is to control not just men, but other women. I get ultimatums like this nearly every time I challenge a feminist on facebook. Fucking SIWOTI syndrome, I should know better.

[Al Stefanelli]

When I created the SkepticWomen facebook page and a new user account however many months ago, I got a lot of friend requests. I made the mistake of browsing my feed last night to find that it seems a name like "SkepticWomen" attracts feminists like flies to dead fish. Fun conversation today (I do not know this person):

http://i.imgur.com/vj3yat6.png

Discovered I'd been blocked when I tried to edit for clarity/sentence structure. Can't decide whether to laugh or cry, settling for slightly frustrated amusement. More evidence that one of the unstated aims of present day feminists is to control not just men, but other women. I get ultimatums like this nearly every time I challenge a feminist on facebook. Fucking SIWOTI syndrome, I should know better.

Chill Girls and Sister Punishers get blocked, but you have to ask yourself this:

WHO IS PHONE!?

I just sent you a friend request. :)

[deLurch]

Fucking SIWOTI syndrome, I should know better.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=SIWOTI
"someone is wrong on the internet"

[ROBOKiTTY]

I just sent you a friend request. :)

Ditto. :dance:

[curriejean]

Fucking SIWOTI syndrome, I should know better.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=SIWOTI
"someone is wrong on the internet"

Yeppers.

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png
http://xkcd.com/386/

Living by Dawkins' example, day after day.

[Badger3k]

Skimming my feed to see if Ophie takes down PZ for his pomo bs, but ran into this bit of privilege, entitled "Brain Dead" (more accurate then he may want to believe):

You know what, guys? I’m really worn out. Wednesdays I’ve just got back-to-back-to-back teaching — I talk and coax students into talking for about 3 hours straight — and I’m planning to vegetate for a while. Maybe a glass of wine and a really bad movie, and then early to bed.
You don’t need me for anything, do you? Just talk among yourselves, in your best Boris Karloff voices.

3 whole hours? Last year I had high school kids for the first 4 periods (220 minutes total), then a half hour lunch, followed by a 65-minute class, then a break for 55, and two more classes for 110 minutes straight. And that's done every fucking day. What a wimp. Complain about three hours of college classes? Try dealing with 14 year olds you privileged ass...but then again, your fantasies would get you put in jail, so I can't see you being allowed near kids that young.

He's teaching:

2 - BIology Courses
3 - Biology Labs
1 - 1-hour 'independent study' course.

His class size for the courses -- 15. (Which is a joke.)
His class size for the labs -- 15. (Which is a joke.)
His class size for the IS course -- 6 or 8, I don't remember which. (And is a joke.)

So, yeah, he's pretty fucking lazy.

He's certainly no Charles Lamden who was an Accounting Professor where I went to college. http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~cba/news/story/Lamden.html He taught a full course load (ranging from 50-to-100 students per class) every year until he was 74 years old. Retired and died at 75. He was not only an outstanding professor, but had also made it to the highest levels of the profession, including becoming a Managing Partner (KPMG Peat Marwick -- Paris Office) in a Big 8 CPA Firm.

Myers could never make it my old field. People who can't handle 20-hour-a-week jobs sure as fuck can't handle the high-pressure, no-mistakes allowed, 60-hours/week field of Public Accountancy.

My classes ranged from 22-34 students, in a classroom set up for a maximum of 24 students (which is supposedly a legal limit somewhere). At my highest, I had around 164 kids IIRC, and the hours were easily 50+ since we had grading, setting up labs, doing research for activities, producing them, etc. I would have killed for a class with 15 kids. And I'm willing to bet I made less than he did, plus I didn't have any leeway to travel like he has. Check your privilege PZ.

[EdwardGemmer]

BTW the @WIS3CFI Twitter page is apparently blocking a whole bunch of people. I'm interested in who it is blocking, especially secular women it is blocking. Thanks for checking!

[CommanderTuvok]

Hey, I just found out on Twitter that The Slymepit made up a story about PZ harassing a women at a con. And AVfM picked it up and ran with it.

No seriously.

Ask Damion.

I presume that is the same definition of "made up" as the "made up" allegations about Shermer, Nye, Krauss, Silverman (funny how that story has gone quiet very quickly), etc.

The Baboons have a repeated history of exaggerating trivial incidents, twisting them, and then getting their minions to forward the story to media outside of the community, who then get the wrong information. If this tactic backfires on PZ from time to time, who gives a shit except Damion, who is acting like Jean Kazez 2.0. The Baboons play dirty with regard to salacious gossip and rumour, I really don't have any sympathy when it happens to crud like PZ. PZ's reputation is dirt in the A/S communities, and I will laugh my tits off if trivial stories of him being an harasser and sexist "get out" into the mainstream. For that would be richly ironic and deserved justice!

[CommanderTuvok]

BTW the @WIS3CFI Twitter page is apparently blocking a whole bunch of people. I'm interested in who it is blocking, especially secular women it is blocking. Thanks for checking!

I've seen suggestions that "@WIS3CFI" must have utilised the Block Bot!!!

Saying that, I've seen a tweet from Ron Lindsay (no friend of the Baboons) saying "they are looking into it". If that tweeter account has been signed up the Bot, then it is either a huge blunder, or CFI have removed their own spinal columns and are now brown-nosing Rebecca Watson's anal cavity.

[AndrewV69]

For *me*, it's a moral, nuanced conundrum. I want women to have full access in their first trimester, but I don't think women should be allowed to have full, unfettered access for any reason other than medical reasons (including those in which a baby's quality of life is significantly diminished) based on women's rights over the life of the baby. I hope I don't sound like an extremist, it just goes against the fiber of my humanity, like enlisting child soldiers to fight a war. KWIM?

It sounds reasonable to me. If you would care to expand a bit on this part "I don't think women should be allowed to have full, unfettered access for any reason other than medical reasons" I would be interested in reading what your reasons are.