The Advocate

Mexico, Mexico

#230364 May 16, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
It really does amuse me to see how pathetic some people are to have be lacking so much in their own lives that they have to obsess over someone else. LIP is truly a mentally ill woman. She disguises her obsession as a religion conviction, but it is painfully obvious that she suffers from some kind of envy over MS. I'm glad she doesn't know where many of us live, because I think she is truly someone that could become mentally unhinged (even moreso than she is now) and snap.
It's funny how these "righteous" people are often among the more violent in society. She's like a frickin' caricature of everything that is wrong with that type of mindset. And the angrier she gets, the more hilarity ensues.

Since: Jul 10

Minneapolis, MN

#230365 May 16, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
This particular male is a fruit cake. It does many times come down to how men view women.
listen lil git. I'm not a male. I'm a female.
.
in fact I'm 52 years old with a 8 year old daughter. meaning I was a young girl when there were some serious debates on how we women were supposed to be like.
.
be it the marriage vows. on if the word 'obey' was supposed to be part of our vows to our husbands. there was a outrage cry by many about this. they expected us to say those words in our vows.
.
we did not get to wear pants/trousers to school until 1972. dresses/skirts in the Upper Midwest are NOT practical in the winter. nor are they practical in sports. but we were not allowed to even wear pants in gym until, as I pointed out, until '72
.
same with, a wife's duties to her husband. did we have the right to refuse sex if we were not in the mood? again, many were outraged to think that we had the right to refuse to participate in sex when our husbands were in the mood. but we were not supposed to approuch our husbands if WE were in the mood.
.
before you call anyone male or female. ask them if they are that gender instead of ASSUMING like you did.
.
by the way, that photo I have currently. is the one that was for the directory of the church I was attending at the time. I was in my early 20s at the time.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Hightstown, NJ

#230366 May 16, 2013
The Advocate wrote:
<quoted text>
It's funny how these "righteous" people are often among the more violent in society. She's like a frickin' caricature of everything that is wrong with that type of mindset. And the angrier she gets, the more hilarity ensues.
I've never in all my life seen someone so dedicated to obsessing over another person. She's definitely self-righteous. And one of the biggest hypocrites.

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Hightstown, NJ

#230367 May 16, 2013
And yet she still hovers...creepily.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#230368 May 16, 2013
Sangelia wrote:
<quoted text>
listen lil git. I'm not a male. I'm a female.
.
in fact I'm 52 years old with a 8 year old daughter. meaning I was a young girl when there were some serious debates on how we women were supposed to be like.
.
be it the marriage vows. on if the word 'obey' was supposed to be part of our vows to our husbands. there was a outrage cry by many about this. they expected us to say those words in our vows.
.
we did not get to wear pants/trousers to school until 1972. dresses/skirts in the Upper Midwest are NOT practical in the winter. nor are they practical in sports. but we were not allowed to even wear pants in gym until, as I pointed out, until '72
.
same with, a wife's duties to her husband. did we have the right to refuse sex if we were not in the mood? again, many were outraged to think that we had the right to refuse to participate in sex when our husbands were in the mood. but we were not supposed to approuch our husbands if WE were in the mood.
.
before you call anyone male or female. ask them if they are that gender instead of ASSUMING like you did.
.
by the way, that photo I have currently. is the one that was for the directory of the church I was attending at the time. I was in my early 20s at the time.
She wasn't referring to you, either as a male or a fruitcake. She was referring to Lightfarce, with whom you were discussing the issue in the first place...or worshipsthefetus, or whichever one of the SCPL you were talking to.

Geez, lighten up.

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#230369 May 16, 2013
Sangelia wrote:
<quoted text>
listen lil git. I'm not a male. I'm a female.(deleted text)
Uh, Sangelia, I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that MP was referring to either stupawilly or lightfarce, about their attitudes matching your description, NOT about YOU.
Your post was quite clear (the one to which she replied) about your gender.
I think we've had another of the same sort of mistaken point taken that someone took when I posted about carrying a pregnancy that had resulted from rape to term.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#230370 May 16, 2013
NWmoon wrote:
<quoted text>Uh, Sangelia, I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that MP was referring to either stupawilly or lightfarce, about their attitudes matching your description, NOT about YOU.
Your post was quite clear (the one to which she replied) about your gender.
I think we've had another of the same sort of mistaken point taken that someone took when I posted about carrying a pregnancy that had resulted from rape to term.
Bingo.

:)
LightForce

Warren, MI

#230371 May 16, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>I'm not a wet-wipe designed for your 'refreshment' dear.
That you don't share my opinion, is not evidence that my logic is faulty.
Paying child support? Really?
1) Paying monetary support, does not equate to paying with one's life and/or health, for the existence of a born child.
2) Monetary support is in the best interest of the BORN CHILD. You know - the child you prefer to completely discount, in your attempt to equate a father's so called 'obligatory' sacrifice of money to a mother's sacrifice of her life, health, and well-being. The reason there are laws requiring monetary support, is that so many (mostly dads, but some moms too) ignore that responsibility unless they're legally obliged to recognize it.
And three, child support is nowhere near as enforceable as you so-called 'pro-life' folks would have everyone believe. Parents are allowed to give up their parental rights, in order to avoid paying child support, and they
routinely
do.
That's one of the reasons there's a welfare system.
So you’re saying that being pregnant for nine months gives the woman all of the choices, but paying child support for eighteen years counts for nothing, except that the woman gets to choose whether he will have to pay it or not. And when you talk about child support, the topic suddenly turns to the responsibility of the parent. This seems like no coincidence.

So the woman has no responsibility to the preborn child’s well-being, but the father does only if the woman chooses it. This sounds like the child has no rights, the man has no rights, and the woman has all the rights. That definitely sounds like a double standard/contradiction to me.
LightForce

Warren, MI

#230372 May 16, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>So when did you stop beating your wife??
I am personally against wife beating, but wouldn’t you agree that nobody else can tell a man what he should do with his own body, especially if it is only to keep his own wife from getting out of line? After all HE is the one that has to put up with her, and not you. Are you for freedom of choice, or just a talker about it?

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#230373 May 16, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
I am personally against wife beating, but wouldn’t you agree that nobody else can tell a man what he should do with his own body, especially if it is only to keep his own wife from getting out of line? After all HE is the one that has to put up with her, and not you. Are you for freedom of choice, or just a talker about it?
For the record, it is possible to ask a woman whether or not she wants to be beaten....asking a fetus whether or not it wants to live, is a little tougher.

I am personally against being beaten - and if my hubby ever tried it, he would be dead.

But that's just me. I'm sure your wife is fine with it.

Since: Jul 10

Minneapolis, MN

#230374 May 16, 2013
NWmoon wrote:
<quoted text>Uh, Sangelia, I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that MP was referring to either stupawilly or lightfarce, about their attitudes matching your description, NOT about YOU.
Your post was quite clear (the one to which she replied) about your gender.
I think we've had another of the same sort of mistaken point taken that someone took when I posted about carrying a pregnancy that had resulted from rape to term.
if you take a look at the post she responded to in calling a male and fruitcake.. it was my post that I did in response to her post.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#230375 May 16, 2013
LightForce wrote:
<quoted text>
So you’re saying that being pregnant for nine months gives the woman all of the choices, but paying child support for eighteen years counts for nothing, except that the woman gets to choose whether he will have to pay it or not. And when you talk about child support, the topic suddenly turns to the responsibility of the parent. This seems like no coincidence.
So the woman has no responsibility to the preborn child’s well-being, but the father does only if the woman chooses it. This sounds like the child has no rights, the man has no rights, and the woman has all the rights. That definitely sounds like a double standard/contradiction to me.
I'm saying that my life is more important than your money - I was alive to raise my children, and I did it without benefit of child support - chiefly because my ex was never FORCED to pay child support, as you would prefer to FORCE me to gestate, even against my will.

I risked my life every time I got pregnant - so you can bet your ass I had all the choices regarding whether or not to stay that way. I really couldn't care any less what you or anyone else had or has to say in the matter. It's not a double standard, unless you men start risking your lives in service to a pregnancy.

Oh, and fuck you.

“too hard to handle”

Since: Jun 11

butler, pa

#230376 May 16, 2013
The Advocate wrote:
<quoted text>
You're entitled to your opinion. However, just because some disagree doesn't mean it's right for them to hamper the ability of women to procure an abortion.
When did I hamper anyone!

On they contrary, it is the abortionists who are quite literally throwing babies in a "hamper".
The Advocate

Mexico, Mexico

#230377 May 16, 2013
superwilly wrote:
<quoted text>
When did I hamper anyone!
On they contrary, it is the abortionists who are quite literally throwing babies in a "hamper".
Why? We're not forcing women to abort their fetuses like your kind of people are forcing women to gestate against their will. You miss the entire point about Pro CHOICE being that of women being able to DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES whether they want to be pregnant or not.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#230378 May 16, 2013
The Advocate wrote:
<quoted text>
Why? We're not forcing women to abort their fetuses like your kind of people are forcing women to gestate against their will. You miss the entire point about Pro CHOICE being that of women being able to DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES whether they want to be pregnant or not.
They don't think we have the ability to make our own medical choices...much less the right to.

At least not when we're pregnant.

They don't even think a lot of women know what they are pregnant with...

“too hard to handle”

Since: Jun 11

butler, pa

#230379 May 17, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>They don't think we have the ability to make our own medical choices...much less the right to.
At least not when we're pregnant.
They don't even think a lot of women know what they are pregnant with...
On the contrary, I DO think women are competent to make thier own medical choices, the government should butt thier heads out of that and so should everyone else, period, it's private.

Yes, I'm against abortion, but there are no simple solutions. I don't condemn or judge anyone. I don't stand there in front of an abortion clinic shouting at people, that is EQUALLY WRONG. Spend your valuable time actually doing something you aught to be doing.

I let my vote do my talking, that's it. If I go about condemning people for the choices they make, I violate the very principles I stand for, freedom and fairness.

“too hard to handle”

Since: Jun 11

butler, pa

#230380 May 17, 2013
The Advocate wrote:
<quoted text>
Why? We're not forcing women to abort their fetuses like your kind of people are forcing women to gestate against their will. You miss the entire point about Pro CHOICE being that of women being able to DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES whether they want to be pregnant or not.
I didn't say you were forcing anybody to do anything, did I? I don't force anybody to do anything, what's this "your kind" mentality. Sounds judgemental to me. I haven't missed the point. I just have an opposin point of view. I don't condemn.

“too hard to handle”

Since: Jun 11

butler, pa

#230381 May 17, 2013
Mpnf1979 wrote:
<quoted text>
James 1:26
"If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless."
I TOTALLY agree with the bible verse! Oh how i wish the "minister" with a bullhorn spouting hateful things like "killer, murderer" outside of the local planned parenthood would read this verse and take it seriously!

“too hard to handle”

Since: Jun 11

butler, pa

#230382 May 17, 2013
NWmoon wrote:
<quoted text>Uh, Sangelia, I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that MP was referring to either stupawilly or lightfarce, about their attitudes matching your description, NOT about YOU.
Your post was quite clear (the one to which she replied) about your gender.
I think we've had another of the same sort of mistaken point taken that someone took when I posted about carrying a pregnancy that had resulted from rape to term.
Yeah, "stupawilly", you'r so kind, my "attitude"????, I suppose you know me and know my attitude, my character, how I treat other people in the real world?

“Ignorance is bliss.”

Since: May 11

Hightstown, NJ

#230383 May 17, 2013
superwilly wrote:
<quoted text>
I TOTALLY agree with the bible verse! Oh how i wish the "minister" with a bullhorn spouting hateful things like "killer, murderer" outside of the local planned parenthood would read this verse and take it seriously!
A lot of people who declare their love and devotion to Christianity need to heed this. Personally, I'm not a believer, but I find it hypocritical when people proclaim themselves Christians then spend their time, as you said, spouting hateful things. It's kind of contradictory to what God said.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Second Coming of O.J Simpson 2 min Doctor REALITY 1
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 5 min Lumajuice 810,427
Resort Plans Nude 'Anything Goes' Party to Figh... (Nov '08) 6 min Bald beaver 4
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 8 min Porkpie Hat 269,056
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 8 min June VanDerMark 574,364
This ~ or ~ That? (game) (Dec '12) 8 min Lumajuice 1,644
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 9 min lisw 176,066
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 3 hr truth 608,271
Dubai massage Body To Body full service 0559... (Mar '14) 3 hr perfect massage r... 206
More from around the web