Comments on: It’s time to blog, old school style

By: WKD

WKD — Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:10:48 +0000

It’s satire. Brought to you by some of the folks at whitehouse.org, as I understand it.

By: Paul Lyon

Paul Lyon — Thu, 20 Jan 2005 13:30:26 +0000

I read the article on the Landover Babtist Site:

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news1004/nosports.html

I have only one question: is this for real?

It looks like a satire some liberal with a bit too much to drink wrote up one day to make fun of the Christian Right. If it is not a satire, it is deserving of wider recogntion as evidence that these folks are even more crazy than one might have, naively, supposed.

By: (: Tom :)

(: Tom :) — Wed, 19 Jan 2005 09:07:36 +0000

Seb: it looks like you might have left an italics html tag open at the end of this post. Everything else below it is in italics when I look at it in Firefox.

And you are absolutely right on; the wrongwingnuts are divinely inspired and Koresh puts this kind of stuff up their bum all the time. If you don’t believe me, check out FReeperville or Little Green Fascists – but bring something to clean up with afterwards…

By: Stentor

Stentor — Wed, 19 Jan 2005 07:05:29 +0000

Yes, and here’s the really important contradistinction that most right-wingers/bible-thumpers overlook, discussing sex with children is not the same as condoning it. What is it with these idiots? Just because I talk about murder doesn’t mean I approve of it, just because I talk about terrorism doesn’t mean I approve of it, just because I talk about fisting doesn’t mean I approve of it. So why do these people lump the two just because it involves a frank discussion of sexuality with their children? They’re too embarrassed to discuss it with their children because they’re a bunch of hung-up, sexually repressed, prudish Victorians! Who should have had sexual education rammed down their throats so they wouldn’t feel so goddamned uncomfortable about it. I swear, sometimes the only way you can make people learn something is to beat them over the fucking head with it!

By: Jim

Jim — Wed, 19 Jan 2005 03:42:42 +0000

Too bad Kevin’s parents weren’t practicing contraception the night he was conceived.

By: sister of ye

sister of ye — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 15:45:47 +0000

Anyone who is around kids knows they are curious critters, and some of that curiosity will be about sex. It’s perfectly reasonable, and healthy, to deal with their questions in a way appropriate with their age and maturity.

Maybe if these right-wing moralists either a) had kids of their own, or b) dealt with them themselves instead of having nannies raise them, they’d have a clue.

By: Jimbo

Jimbo — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 14:12:35 +0000

No, it’s true about PP. My daughter just turned 6 and I bought her a big box of condoms, all colors and flavors. The folks at PP call it the “Junior Starter Variety Pack”.

It’s on their website.

By: Daddy-O

Daddy-O — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 10:44:06 +0000

Sometimes directly promoting such ventures to children as young as 6 years of age?

PP DOES encourage parents to explain anything at all about sex that kids ask them about. But this is going a little too far.

Only someone with an overactive imagination would deduce one from the other.

Me? I’m teaching my five-year-old daughter whatever she asks me about. I trust PP. It only makes sense.

If she turns into some sort of prostitute porn star, I can always become a conservative in my old age and rage and make up lies about PP. Until that happens…

Good God, it makes my head hurt just being aware of these pathetic assholes. What rock did they crawl out from under? What has happened to my country?

They belong in jail or at least hauled into court every time they slander someone. If only.

By: Avedon

Avedon — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:16:46 +0000

You have to admit, there were more blow-jobs in government documents while Clinton was president.

By: lonestar

lonestar — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:35:40 +0000

Of course he’s pulling it out of his ass… That’s the closest point to his brain, since that’s where his head is.

By: Ian Gillespie

Ian Gillespie — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:26:46 +0000

When the above wacko claims that Planned Parenthood “encourages massive sexual experimentation… to children as young as 6 years of age”, he is probably refering to the following:

Parent-Child Communication

“Talking with your son or daughter about sex.”
Ringel, Marcia.
The Female Patient Supplement, s16, 1999: 6-10.

The author argues that parents should not let embarrassment interfere with educating their children about sex, and offers recommendations on the best ways to provide this information. She explains that discussing sex with children is not the same as condoning it and urges parents to share and explain their personal values about sex with their children. In addition, she advocates an ongoing dialog about sexuality, beginning when children are five or six years old and continuing through the teenage years. Topics that require special attention include homosexuality, birth control and emergency contraception, and sexual relationships. A list of resources is provided to assist parents in educating their children about sex.

This is from an “Educators’ Update”, a series of abstracts of recent articles on sexual behaviour.

The full (lengthy) text can be found here…

http://tinyurl.com/5uyj2

This is the only reference to either “six years old” OR “6 years old” OR “six year olds” OR “6 year olds” on the entire Planned Parenthood website.

By: pbg

pbg — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:26:16 +0000

I like that phrase ‘massive sexual experimentation.’ Is that, like, sex with female bodybuilders?

By: parsec

parsec — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:08:07 +0000

Who needs facts when you practice Triumph-of-the-Will(TM)?

By: Hoosier X

Hoosier X — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:06:05 +0000

Bring back the Fairness Doctrine! That will put the Liberal Media in its place!

Stupid liberals! I can make up facts that are as good as your real ones! So there!

By: alkali

alkali — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:57:21 +0000

Disclaimer: speculation that Mr. McCullough is “pulling it out of his ass” should not be read as an endorsement of massive sexual experimentation, particularly by children as young as 6 years of age.

By: ronjazz

ronjazz — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:37:17 +0000

Facts don’t fit the Bushco agenda, so they must be ignored or lied over, that’s the new morality of the rightwing idiocracy. While they think they have won, sort of like cheating during a football game or something, no civilization (term loosely applied) can survive by ignoring facts and reality. This has been proven throughout history, and always some dumb fuckers try it anyway. They are the main reason mankind has made such poor progress as people over the past 30,000 years or so. Technology has progressed, but not humans. Just making bigger, more lethal clubs for battle.

By: mdhatter

mdhatter — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:30:35 +0000

Don’t blame the Clenis, Blame Al Gore. He invented Internets pornography.

By: Keith

Keith — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:29:35 +0000

If he was really pulling it out of his ass, I’d expect a better quality than that. In fact, I think its being pulled from thin air.

By: swifferBoat

swifferBoat — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:27:55 +0000

I suppose the World Net Daily readers would be very distressed to learn that the porn industry pretty much sets the standards for consumer video products.

Pornography drives many technologies into acceptance, if not into existence in the first place. And art for that matter. Maybe all of civlization. Hell, we probably owe our evolved state to the advanced manual dexterity achieved by monkeys through incessant masturbation.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:20:38 +0000

that landover baptist comment is just confusing.