Insane Freaky Conservative Kid

Jun 28, 2000, 12:13 AM ET13 posts by 6 postersalt.tv.daria
13 posts
dsteineralt.tv.daria

How can they keep track of you to stop you?

of up to 1 year

What about the birth controll pill for purposes other than preventing pregnancy? Some doctors prescribe this pill for hormone controll or adjustment.

What if you aren't married?

What if you don't want kids?

' What if the male has a medical problem that prevents him from acheiving orgasm in that position?

There's only two main reasons for a woman to have sex: pregnancy, and orgasmic pleasure. They could also want to trap their partner, express their love, or use it as revenge against someone else, but this is less common.

The fact of the matter is, any bill for this would never pass because the government can surveil you in your own home or in a hotel room without your permission. They can't even get in your house/car without a warrent or your express permission. So how would they check for the missionary position, female orgasm, or any of that? Would they even want to?

So this kid is a smug ass hole who wants to be a pimp. He can't get anywhere.

On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 19:11:35 -0700, [email] wrote:

Don't have sex.

Not your choice. It's a fairly wide-spread legal principle that individual rights can be trampled on for the good of the species.

Tough noogies.

Pimp?

Kyl� The Jeff Huson of alt.sports.baseball.chicago-cubs

dsteinerKylealt.tv.daria

With the way you respond, you either ARE the kid in question or you are in full support of him. Stupid Males.

"Kyl�" wrote:

I'm sorry, I guess I'm just some guy trying to be a "pimp".

Who would have though sarcasm would go over someone's head on this board? We used to have higher standards....

On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:57:48 -0700, [email] wrote:

Kyl� The Jeff Huson of alt.sports.baseball.chicago-cubs

dsteinerKylealt.tv.daria

How about if you don't pull a Lerman. And in case you don't know what that means, it means you shouldn't make slang so subtle that the average fourteen year old will take it seriously. Geez...

"Kyl�" wrote:

[email] of writes:

Average fourteen year olds have no business reading atd. It is strictly for the un-average of any age group.

-Shez.

Insanity is the final defense ... It's hard to get a refund when the salesman is sniffing your crotch and baying at the moon. Take a break at the Last Stop Cafe: http://www.xerez.demon.co.uk/
Lady InterferenceShezalt.tv.daria

Shez wrote:

*guffaw* @ Shez.

I consider myself pretty normal.

Well...not normal at all for a 21-year-old, but normal in general.

Okay...not normal considering the social constraints which define us and rate us in terms of "normalcy", but I'm sure as hell more well-adjusted than any of those freaks of nature society would have me believe are "normal" for people like me.

Erm...so...what about them Dallas Stars? *weak grin*

LI

Lady Interference (http://www.ladyinterference.com/) member, Nick Rhodes Worshippers Unlimited "reinvent the human race, you just got the invitation"

My audience generally isn't average 14 year olds. They were fun when I was that age, but now they annoy me. i leave them alone and they leave me alone, and all are better served by this arrangement.

On Sat, 01 Jul 2000 19:14:30 -0700, [email] wrote:

Kyl� The Jeff Huson of alt.sports.baseball.chicago-cubs

Glenn Olsondsteineralt.tv.daria

On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 19:11:35 -0700, [email] wrote:

Bearing in mind the title of the thread...

Then you can't.

Then don't.

Then don't.

And obviously, the only acceptable reason is...

Sssshhh! Don't mention stuff like thta, or he'll add in proposals to remove the reasons for that.

It was a joke. I'm not supporting the kid. I'm also not supporting attempts to villify religious people, or to try to pretend this extremist is somehow representative of Christians or Christianity. I'm not supporting anti-religious slurs. I'm not supporting insane liberal rantings on how bad all religous people are, or how stupid they are.

On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:58:37 -0700, [email] wrote:

Kyl� The Jeff Huson of alt.sports.baseball.chicago-cubs

Martin SylvesterKylealt.tv.daria

"Kyl�" wrote in message news:8jgdta$pso$[email]...

Well put, Kyl�. I don't know that anyone here was trying to pretend that he is, but it's important to say he isn't!

When I saw the original posting my first view was that rules were a poor attempt at a Pythonesque parody of Christian sexual ethics (cfr the "Every sperm is sacred" song).

It's hard to see how 3 and 4 could co-exist in the same mind. Those missionaries who used to encourage face-to-face intercourse were attempting to teach something about mutuality and equality: they objected to doggie-style because they took the view that in that position the woman could more easily be treated as a sex object rather than an equal partner. Wheras 4 is clearly, at least in my mind, the fruit of misogyny.

FWIW, only rule 1 is an accurate representation of (part of) the position (sorry!) of Catholic Christians. I'm not going to add a lecture about Catholic sexual ethics! If you're interested, look at http://www.sylvesternet.freeserve.co.uk/catholic-books/0009.htm or at the Catechism: in print http://www.sylvesternet.freeserve.co.uk/catholic-books/0003.htm or online (not very well indexed, IMHO). http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/ccc.html

Martin. (Call me a Jesus freak if it makes you feel better!)

I do not intend to imply that any views expressed above represent the policy of any organisation, nor do I warrant any information to be accurate. URL: http://www.sylvesternet.freeserve.co.uk/martin/ for: Daria books/video; Parish of St Peter & St Paul, Swadlincote, Derbyshire, UK; Catholic books.

[email] of writes:

You mean you're not?

-Shez.

All the world's a stage and most of us are desperately unrehearsed. -- Sean O'Casey Take a break from Daria: http://www.xerez.demon.co.uk/dokic/