Hello:

ALL of us can feel the rumblings of this coming war. This one is shaping up to be like the war on cigarettes. Or, at least I hope so. We WON that war.

This one is going to be tougher. The direct link between tobacco use and death is clear. It's NOT so clear that empty calories contribute, or are DIRECTLY responsible, for our epidemic of obesity..

Yes, it's VERY nanny state to prevent people from buying HUGE, LARGE cups of sugary empty calories, but we ALL pay the cost when obese people get sick, so why ISN'T it our business?

Here's the problem. Healthy foods are MUCH more expensive than empty calorie food. Secondly there are what's called "food deserts" in the poor neighborhoods... That means, even IF a poor family wanted to feed their kids healthy foods, there are NO STORES in their neighborhoods to shop at. Whole Foods does NOT have stores in the hood, and even if they did, nobody would shop there because it's TOO expensive.

So, the problem is NOT about lousy poor people who don't love their kids, but it's a STRUCTURAL problem that is easily fixed.

Finally, if fruits and vegetables were subsidized like sugar, corn, soybeans and wheat, they WOULDN'T be so much more expensive... That's another easy fix.

What are we waiting for?

excon

Time to take off the Tin foil hat.

http://www.the-peoples-forum.com/images/tinfoil_hat_shazam.png

Hello smoothy:

I should have said SOME of us can feel the rumblings. It's true, smootho, I AM a few years ahead of you..

excon

These same people that "don't have money for good food" somehow seem to have money for expensive shoes and jackets they create a sport in killing each other to steal from one another... and it happens every day.

Whatever happened to personal responsibility? THEY buy the food.. THEY cook the food... THEY have control over what they buy and cook...

Frozen vegis beat cheese puffs and gummi bears... and they are cheaper... but like crap for brains Bloomberg learned... its not his job to play food cop.

All of that sounds nice but what you're really trying to do is regulate behavior. You don't want anyone telling you not to smoke a doobie, but you're fine with saying I can't have a Big Gulp.

Hello again, smoothy:

Let's, for a minute, pretend you're right.. Since WE pay for their medical costs, would it be cheaper for us to intervene IN FRONT, or just continue paying the bills?

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

Let's, for a minute, pretend you're right.. Since WE pay for their medical costs, would it be cheaper for us to intervene IN FRONT, or just continue paying the bills?

excon

They shouldn't get a welafre check... or anything else until they have been sterilized... so they don't continue to breed. If they can't properly feed themselves... they shouldn't be having any more kids.

We do it to pets because it's the humane way to control strays... time to apply it the non-productive part of the population.

Hello Steve:


but you're fine with saying I can't have a Big Gulp.I'm for choice. If we LEVELED the playing field, the free market MIGHT have a chance to work.

You SAY I want to stop you from drinking a Big Gulp, but since we SUBSIDIZE corn, the main sweetener in your Big Gulp, it looks like the government is ENCOURAGING you to drink one. I'd be happy with the government being OUT of the equation, ENTIRELY.

I'm just looking for the free market to work... What's wrong that?

excon

For what it's worth ;I oppose subsidizing... period . But what do you have against soy beans ? Soy is healthy . Judge Tingling called nanny-bloomy's dictates arbitrary and capricious . You do realize of course that straight up fruit juice is also loaded with sugary calories ? It just isn't cain sugar or corn sugar. So what you are really for is for the government to enforce portion control in everyone's diet.

I will also like to mention that Bloomy's conclusions weren't scientificly based . For the last 10 year period ,purchase and consumption of sugary soft drinks declined 12.5% while obesity rates went up. People more often have been consuming water and sugar substitutes (much worse than sugar in my humble opinion) . What they didn't do was stop eating carbs and other high calorie foods. Sugar beverages like sodas, juice drinks, sports drinks, and teas account for only 7% of calories in the average American diet. 93% of calories come from other foods and beverages.
During a more sober moment ,Nanny Bloomy once told David Letterman "I think that it is incumbent on government to tell people what they're doing to themselves and let people make their own decisions" . He was right then.He was wrong to try to impose it on his city .

Hello Steve:

I'm for choice. If we LEVELED the playing field, the free market MIGHT have a chance to work.

You SAY I want to stop you from drinking a Big Gulp, but since we SUBSIDIZE corn, the main sweetener in your Big Gulp, it looks like the government is ENCOURAGING you to drink one. I'd be happy with the government being OUT of the equation, ENTIRELY.

I'm just looking for the free market to work... What's wrong that?

excon

Since you're a businessman you open a store in a food desert. Set the example.

Or go to San Fran and open a Micky D's... for an extra 10 cent charge ,parents can buy a toy with the happy meal!

1. I continue to gain weight without consuming a single sugary soft drink or patronizing fast food places or any eateries. I just eat too much in my sedentary 60s, a lot of it ice cream - want to limit checkout to one half gallon? What if I went shopping again the next day?

2. It's a fallacy to say that it costs extra to eat a healthy diet. I agree about the grocers in poor neighborhoods, but I don't shop at Whole Foods, just a regular Stop and Shop, and it's full of healthy food. I can challenge anyone to a month of my healthy picks vs theirs and still be cheaper. My meals won't include prime rib and asparagus, but I will leave out the hot dogs and air bread.

3. There's only so much regulation of healthy habits for the good of the taxpayer. Definitely stop those damn corn subsidies and let the consumer buy all the crap he wants. Handle nutrition in the school cafeterias - those are paid for by us.

Hello again, Steve:


Since you're a businessman you open a store in a food desert. Set the example.I don't know what you missed or don't understand about the government subsidizing empty calorie food.

Ok, here's what it means... From a business standpoint, trying to sell NON subsidized foods in competition with GOVERNMENT subsidized foods is a loser. That's WHY nobody is doing that. IF the playing field were LEVELED, then I MIGHT just do that.

Excon

If its subsidized... why do Cheetos and Doritos cost so damn much?

Hello again, Steve:

I dunno what you missed or don't understand about the government subsidizing empty calorie food.

Ok, here's what it means... From a business standpoint, trying to sell NON subsidized foods in competition with GOVERNMENT subsidized foods is a loser. That's WHY nobody is doing that. IF the playing field were LEVELED, then I MIGHT just do that.

excon

Is that why milk is $6.00 a gallon, the government is leveling the playing field?

Hello again, Steve:


Is that why milk is $6.00 a gallon, the government is leveling the playing field?If and when the government STOPS subsidizing dairy products, your gallon of milk will cost $12.00. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/02/milk-prices-farm-bill_n_1933217.html)

For a right winger, you really don't understand how markets work. Uhhh, by subsidizing milk, the government ISN'T leveling the playing field.. It's TILTING the market in favor of dairy farmers.

Excon

I think we need to make a distinction between "subsidized " and "price supports" . Price supports if I understand them makes the foods from the commodity more expensive for the consumer . That is why milk would cost so much.

But then Speech makes an interesting point . As I understand it ,cane and corn are price support commodities . That means consumers are paying more than what they would if the free market price prevailed . Corn as an example has had it's price rise considerably since the government discovered they could corrode the internal combustion engine with a corn derivitave . I guess the justification is that without the price support then farmers couldn't make a profit and we'd have to import sugar instead of growing it domestically.. To that I say "so what ? "

I pay just over $3.00 a gallon for milk where I buy it..

Hello again, Steve:

If and when the government STOPS subsidizing dairy products, your gallon of milk will cost $12.00. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/02/milk-prices-farm-bill_n_1933217.html)

For a right winger, you really don't understand how markets work. Uhhh, by subsidizing milk, the government ISN'T leveling the playing field.. It's TILTING the market in favor of dairy farmers.

excon

The problem with the dairy cliff was that price supports would go to 1949 levels and that is why the price was going to go up . The price of milk is in fact artificially high .
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323530404578207621700492206.html?m od=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

Hello again,

Call 'em price supports, or subsidies.. It doesn't matter. The bottom line is, the GOVERNMENT is manipulating the market, and the FOOD industry is the beneficiary. I simply suggest that if they DIDN'T do that, healthy food MIGHT be made more available. In fact, I PROMISE you that it will. That IS how markets work, after all.

excon

Ohhhh.. the evil Government is actually prohibiting healthy food from being sold in entire regions...

Yet these are the very same people you want to have complete control over your health care?

And those subsidies are tilting the market in favor of large corporate farms, not the family farmer it was intended to help. More of those unintended consequences libs can't seem to get enough of.

You'd think that all that corporate farm welfare would have your panties in a wad, why should we be giving some multi-billion dollar corporation taxpayer dollars to keep their profits up - or not to farm at all?

Hello again, smoothy:


Ohhhh.. the evil Government is actually prohibiting healthy food from being sold in entire regions... **GREENIE**

Excon

Helllo again, righty's:

When the government tilts the market, it's creating winners and losers... I thought right wingers HATED when the government did that. Guess not, huh?

excon

Joy was quite correct in saying that health food is no more costly than any other food . Carrots, onions, pinto beans, lettuce, mashed potatoes, bananas and orange juice are all less expensive per portion than soft drinks, ice cream, chocolate candy, French fries, sweet rolls and deep-fat fried chicken patties and other processed foods .
Low-Cost Healthy Foods: USDA Report Finds Healthy Food Is Cheaper Than Junk Food | TIME.com (http://business.time.com/2012/05/18/now-youve-got-no-excuse-government-report-shows-healthy-food-doesnt-cost-more-than-junk-food/)

Hello again, Steve:


And those subsidies are tilting the market in favor of large corporate farms, not the family farmer it was intended to help. More of those unintended consequences libs can't seem to get enough of. I've had enough. You seem to be having trouble with me AGREEING with you.

Excon

We can start by eliminating the Ethanol subsidy... that makes food available for humans again. And your car, motorcycle and lawn tools will ALL appreciate the change. Ethanol is NOT kind on internal combustion anything.

So are you arguing for or against subsidies, it's hard to tell?

Hello again, Steve:


So are you arguing for or against subsidies, it's hard to tell?I'm AGAINST subsidies that favor big business at the EXPENSE of the consumer. And, I'm FOR subsidies that favor the people OVER big business.

Tom asked earlier, what exactly is included in the word "subsidy"? It's a good question... I've told the story about how, in the beginning, the markets were fair. Then a failing businessman called up his congressman and suggested that the congressman pass a law to make it easier for the failed businessman to make money.. And, the congressman DID...

Once those floodgates were open, COMPETITION was OUT, and BRIBING your congressman was IN.

Frankly, I liked it BETTER when the government didn't involve itself in those matters. So, I don't like ANY subsidy that distorts markets. That would INCLUDE, of course, the handout the government gives to YOU to convince you to buy your home.

Excon

He's for handing money to Liberals and minorities and businesses that should be allowed to fail... but not conservatives or successful businesses.

I think a lot of people on welfare are conservatives, and not just lazy minorities. I think a lot of rich people are on welfare, and not just liberals. Would farms and oil survive in a free market without subsidies? Lets find out. Can people buy a house without subidies? Lets find that out too!

You can't have a free market with just supply side, and no demand, no circulation, and NO RULES that apply to everybody. You want a free market solution to affordable anything? Read that last sentence again.

Bloomy had good intentions but his implementation sucked.

I think a lot of people on welfare are conservatives, and not just lazy minorities. I think a lot of rich people are on welfare, and not just liberals. Would farms and oil survive in a free market without subsidies? Lets find out. Can people buy a house without subidies? Lets find that out too!

You can't have a free market with just supply side, and no demand, no circulation, and NO RULES that apply to everybody. You want a free market solution to affordable anything? Read that last sentence again.

Bloomy had good intentions but his implementation sucked.

Lets end the housing subsidies, baby subsidies (welfare based on head count) and food stamps that Obama has made a hallmark of his presidency. See who's paty suffers worse... I'm willing to take that chance. Are the Democrats?

I am, you go first. Then we let the voters decide. Those are the rules under the Constitution. You got a problem with voting? Of course you probably do. You still think 5 million people cheated your guy in the last election.

But none of that talk about government support really addresses the issue. I've already shown that health food is no more expensive than junk food. The issue is much more complex. I think the real issue is the culture of convenience. It's just easier to run into a fast food place or a grocery store ,and grab packages of prepared meals ;wrapped to go ,or microwave ready .

A recent study by the' Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine,University of Minnesota Medical School' found that frequency of fast-food intake was found to be significantly associated with age , gender ,and marital status of the participants .Additionally, frequency of fast-food intake was also found to be significantly associated with perceived convenience of fast food, and dislike toward cooking ,but not with perceived unhealthfulness of fast food.

but none of that talk about government support really addresses the issue. I've already shown that health food is no more expensive than junk food. The issue is much more complex. I think the real issue is the culture of convenience. It's just easier to run into a fast food place or a grocery store ,and grab packages of prepared meals ;wrapped to go ,or microwave ready .

A recent study by the' Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine,University of Minnesota Medical School' found that frequency of fast-food intake was found to be significantly associated with age , gender ,and marital status of the participants .Additionally, frequency of fast-food intake was also found to be significantly associated with perceived convenience of fast food, and dislike toward cooking ,but not with perceived unhealthfulness of fast food.

Yeah in talking to real people I have found that single females with kids and a low wage job don't have time to cook a proper meal, especially add to that weird hours, and high gas and babysitters, they are priced out of the markets anyway.

I guess Mickey D's looks good after a hard day and 2 hungry kids. I totally agree with the complexity of the issue.

I am, you go first. Then we let the voters decide. Those are the rules under the Constitution. You got a problem with voting? Of course you probably do. You still think 5 million people cheated your guy in the last election.

Really? Where in the constitution is there a right to foodstamps, subsidized housing and welfare? I had that in Civics and I was really good in that class...

Yeah in talking to real people I have found that single females with kids and a low wage job don't have time to cook a proper meal, especially add to that weird hours, and high gas and babysitters, they are priced out of the markets anyway.

I guess Mickey D's looks good after a hard day and 2 hungry kids. I totally agree with the complexity of the issue.

Then you will find it further complicated to know that it has nothing to do with income.

Hello again, tom:

It's true.. My focus on subsidies is but one small part. I didn't think we'd solve it here... There are MANY components, and there's plenty of fault to go around.. I'm not looking to place blame. I want to FIX it. The first thing we need to do, is AGREE that we have a problem.. I don't see much agreement...

excon

Maybe if we spent more time teaching kids to cook and less time teaching comprehensive sex ed they might eat healthier.

Maybe if we spent more time teaching kids to cook and less time teaching comprehensive sex ed they might eat healthier.

They really aren't doing a very good job on the sex ed part either based on a lot of the posts on this site.

Really? Where in the constitution is there a right to foodstamps, subsidized housing and welfare? I had that in Civics and I was really good in that class....

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


then you will find it further complicated to know that it has nothing to do with income.

More income, more choices, not just with the food, but where you live, and the schools you go to. CHOICES, and more options. Just ask the CEO of Google. Income matters, so doe education.

Poverty is the underlying factor in all our lives.


Maybe if we spent more time teaching kids to cook and less time teaching comprehensive sex ed they might eat healthier.

How about more of BOTH? Why sacrifice one for another?

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.



More income, more choices, not just with the food, but where you live, and the schools you go to. CHOICES, and more options. Just ask the CEO of google. Income matters, so doe education.

Poverty is the underlying factor in all our lives.



How about more of BOTH? Why sacrifice one for another?

I think its time you open up a dictionary and take a read.. after you blow the dust off...

Because contrary to what you might think... provide the general welfare does NOT mean free handouts to the welfare bums... in fact welfare didn't even exist until well into the 1900's.

Americans shouldn't starve is a function of government for whatever reason, be it droughts, or famine, wars, storms, or corporate malfeasance.

Funny how you think a right to own a gun is more important than a right for food clothing and shelter. What do you have against men and women with kids and nomoney, since most single able bodied people with no kids have very little food stamps given to them

Originally Posted by tomder55
Then you will find it further complicated to know that it has nothing to do with income.

More income, more choices, not just with the food, but where you live, and the schools you go to. CHOICES, and more options. Just ask the CEO of Google. Income matters, so doe education.

Poverty is the underlying factor in all our lives. then why are there so many obese middle income ? Your rhetoric flies in the face of the facts.
There is very little difference in obesity rates due to socio-economics .
Rich-Poor Gap Narrowing in Obesity (http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20050502/rich-poor-gap-narrowing-in-obesity)

More income, more choices, not just with the food, but where you live, and the schools you go to. CHOICES, and more options. Just ask the CEO of Google. Income matters, so doe education.

Poverty is the underlying factor in all our lives

Every time we try to give them choices in schools your side throws a fit... usually some black leader obstructing choice for poor black kids. But you can't say that without it being racist or something (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/14/chris-christie-race-remark_n_2879695.html).


How about more of BOTH? Why sacrifice one for another?

Teaching them to cook is more useful and less ideological.

Americans shouldn't starve is a function of government for whatever reason, be it droughts, or famine, wars, storms, or corporate malfeasance.

Funny how you think a right to own a gun is more important than a right for food clothing and shelter. What do you have against men and women with kids and nomoney, since most single able bodied people with no kids have very little food stamps given to them

How many of them own a car... at LEAST one TV.. cable TV, internet, a microwave... an a compouter and one or more cell phone? How many of them have a pair of athletic shoes that cost well over $100 or a Jacket that did?

Where will they grocery shop?

Evidently not at Walmart,
John Tamny: Wal-Mart ban hurts Big Apple to the core | wal, businesses, mart - Opinion - The Orange County Register (http://www.ocregister.com/articles/wal-287886-businesses-mart.html)
They instead have to shop in the more expensive neighborhood bodega

Where will they grocery shop?

I tried to get ex to open a market in the hood but he won't do it without subsidies. But who would?

I tried to get ex to open a market in the hood but he won't do it without subsidies. But who would?

Walmart would if they were permitted to do so.

Walmart would if they were permitted to do so.
Walmart patooey!!

Walmart would if they were permitted to do so.

Yes they had plans to open stores in some of those "food deserts" (http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/22/news/la-heb-fruits-vegetables-poor-communities20110722) but I don't know how many have been blocked by the locals.

What would solve the problem is that $22 per hour minimum wage.

Elizabeth Warren Asks: Why isn't the Minimum Wage $22 an Hour? (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/343240/elizabeth-warren-asks-why-isnt-minimum-wage-22-hour-eliana-johnson)

Yes they had plans to open stores in some of those "food deserts" (http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/22/news/la-heb-fruits-vegetables-poor-communities20110722) but I don't know how many have been blocked by the locals.

What would solve the problem is that $22 per hour minimum wage.

Elizabeth Warren Asks: Why isn't the Minimum Wage $22 an Hour? (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/343240/elizabeth-warren-asks-why-isnt-minimum-wage-22-hour-eliana-johnson)

They would be complaining about $6 tomatoes and $12 a gallon milk then... if the minimum wage went up... they don't grasp the prices of everything will have to go up to pay for it... then we are back at square one again...

But they don't grasp that because so few of these people learned much in school... other than how to roll a joint. And use saran wrap for a condom.

Yes they had plans to open stores in some of those "food deserts" (http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/22/news/la-heb-fruits-vegetables-poor-communities20110722) but I don't know how many have been blocked by the locals.
I hope a lot. There are much better ways to go than Walmart.

I hope a lot. There are much better ways to go than Walmart.

Such as? You're opposed to people spending less on groceries? Perhaps if their had been a Walmart near Georgetown Law School Sandra Fluke might have gotten her pills for $4 instead of making us pay for them.

Yeah but the day of the small grocery owner being able to pay NY rents and still be price competitive are long gone.

yeah but the day of the small grocery owner being able to pay NY rents and still be price competitive are long gone.
It doesn't have to be a small grocery store owner. It can be a major chain such as Wegman's or Shoprite or Dominick's. In Chicago, public land is being turned into neighborhood gardens, and police are being "undesked" and assigned to low-income neighborhoods so residents feel free to venture out..

Wegmans isn't a Cheap store... the other two aren't in my area nor do I know them.

Hello smoothy:


Really? Where in the constitution is there a right to foodstamps, subsidized housing and welfare?The same place the oil depletion allowance is, the Wall Street bailouts are, and subsidies to the MASSIVE food industry...

Excon

Hello smoothy:

The same place the oil depletion allowance is, the Wall Street bailouts are, and subsidies to the MASSIVE food industry...

excon

You mean right next to the part where we HAVE to spend BIllions to send our best Military weaopns to known Terrorists in Egypt.. The Muslim Brotherhood?


Incidentally your average family farmer doesn't get rich even with subsidies. In fact they rarely make enough on a good year to cover their losses on a bad year. That's why fewer and fewer of them remain every year. Many of my childhood friends and relatives were farmers... I have an adult friend who gave it upa couple years ago because there isn't enough money in it to make a living on. He leases out the property for others to farm each year. He makes more money that way..

It doesn't have to be a small grocery store owner. It can be a major chain such as Wegman's or Shoprite or Dominick's. In Chicago, public land is being turned into neighborhood gardens, and police are being "undesked" and assigned to low-income neighborhoods so residents feel free to venture out..

So you'd welcome one big box store but not the other ? Why ? I could easily do all my grocery shopping in Walmart ,and still have healthy meals all week.. . and there'd be neighborhood jobs .

Here is NY there was a period when new Korean immigrants were opening grocery stores in the hood .They were considered "interlopers " by our local community agitators . Their children of course got sick of the whole gig and if they remained in business at all ;moved out of the communities. Oh yeah the big box groceries do open in NY (not necessarily in the hood ) ;but their pricing reflects the fact that rents are high ;Nanny Bloomy is likely to put new restrictions on you... or the many other challenges to make things work in this "blue" city .

Did closing the WH tours also close the veggie garden?

Did closing the WH tours also close the veggie garden?

I think Obama went out and stomped on all the broocholli and Cabage one night when he was having a tantrum...

And tried to blame it on Sarah Palin.

then why are there so many obese middle income ? Your rhetoric flies in the face of the facts.
There is very little difference in obesity rates due to socio-economics .
Rich-Poor Gap Narrowing in Obesity (http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20050502/rich-poor-gap-narrowing-in-obesity)


See a doctor for guidance to get started.

Difference in chosing not to, and can't afford to.


Every time we try to give them choices in schools your side throws a fit... usually some black leader obstructing choice for poor black kids. But you can't say that without it being racist or something (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/14/chris-christie-race-remark_n_2879695.html).



Teaching them to cook is more useful and less ideological.

Since the entire neighborhood benefits from good schools, wouldn't that be a good place to rebuild a neighborhood? Moving the kids out does nothing for where they live.

But it does bring more money to those better choices, and not knocking that, just saying the problem is with those left behind. You mean there is room for all the urban kids to go to better schools? I don't know if the evidence even shows that's the case. If you have some, please show me.

There is no ideology of the scientific fact where babies come from, nor is there an argument against knowing how to use contraceptives properly would lower the need for abortions. Legal or otherwise. So teaching them to cook, and teaching them the facts about the birds, and bees, has nothing to do with ideology, and goes hand in hand with a quality education to benefit their futures.

The ideology you speak of is your notion that NO ONE should have sex until they get married OR have a civil union. That's great for Sunday School at YOUR church,or religious schools, but Public School? Not so much.

They would be complaining about $6 tomatos and $12 a gallon milk then.....if the minimum wage went up.....they don't grasp the prices of everything will have to go up to pay for it....then we are back at square one again....

But they don't grasp that because so few of these people learned much in school.....other than how to roll a joint. and use saran wrap for a condom.

Wonder if everybody working for minimum wage would bring the prices down?

Since the entire neighborhood benefits from good schools, wouldn't that be a good place to rebuild a neighborhood? Moving the kids out does nothing for where they live.

Keeping kids in failing schools does nothing for them either.


There is no ideology of the scientific fact where babies come from, nor is there an argument against knowing how to use contraceptives properly would lower the need for abortions. Legal or otherwise. So teaching them to cook, and teaching them the facts about the birds, and bees, has nothing to do with ideology, and goes hand in hand with a quality education to benefit their futures.

The ideology you speak of is your notion that NO ONE should have sex until they get married OR have a civil union. That's great for Sunday School at YOUR church,or religious schools, but Public School? Not so much.

Dude, parents should be the main provider of sex education, and if you believe there's no ideology in sex ed in public schools I'd like to offer you a deal on some nice property.

Well Ex there is nothing else for it, close down macca's, close down KFC, close down Pizza Hut and of course all the look alikes, then close down all the manufacturers of JUNK and soft drinks. Coca Cola must be the first to go, quicly followed by its look alike Pepsi. I'm glad to have you on board in the campaign to shut down these multinational obesity purveyors

Clear the way for Donut King (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donut_King)to expand.

Keeping kids in failing schools does nothing for them either.



Dude, parents should be the main provider of sex education, and if you believe there's no ideology in sex ed in public schools I'd like to offer you a deal on some nice property.

Wonder why they fail? Wonder why they can't be made to succeed?

Explain that ideology thing about sex education to me and how much is that property you have for me. I can't help it if you are SMARTER than me, and know more about educating kids about sex.

I mean how did you educate your own? What should a young guy or girl be told about sex that isn't about ideology?

Clear the way for Donut King (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donut_King)to expand.

Did I leave someone out, yes add Donut King and Crispy Crème to the list. I havlent got to the chocolate manufacturers, the coffee manufacturers and all those who are hiding loads of sugar in their wares. It is really sugar we have to eliminate

Wonder why they fail? Wonder why they can't be made to succeed?

Maybe if your side would see them as children and not future Democrat voters.


Explain that ideology thing about sex education to me and how much is that property you have for me. I can't help it if you are SMARTER than me, and know more about educating kids about sex.

I mean how did you educate your own? What should a young guy or girl be told about sex that isn't about ideology?

If it's the parents doing the teaching that's up to them, but the school has no business springing things like anal and oral sex on 5th graders.

If it's the parents doing the teaching that's up to them
Most parents (like mine, and probably yours) didn't teach sex ed at home. In fact, my parents figured the less I knew, the less trouble I would get into.

If parents and schools don't teach it, guess who does?

The question is where do you draw the line at school? Or do you draw a line?

The question is where do you draw the line at school? Or do you draw a line?
Where would you draw the line?

Most parents (like mine, and probably yours) didn't teach sex ed at home. In fact, my parents figured the less I knew, the less trouble I would get into.

If parents and schools don't teach it, guess who does?

I doubt you can spring anal, and oral sex on most 5th grader, since chances are they have a friend that knows already. Why ask an adult when you can ask a friend?

Do they even tach sex ed in the 5th grade?

Most parents (like mine, and probably yours) didn't teach sex ed at home. In fact, my parents figured the less I knew, the less trouble I would get into.

If parents and schools don't teach it, guess who does?

Looking at the teen pregnancy rates... and the posts on this forum... they are doing an even worse job teaching sex ed than they are math and reading.

Looking at the teen pregnancy rates...and the posts on this forum...they are doing an even worse job teaching sex ed than they are math and reading.
And what kept us pure?

And what kept us pure?We actually got better educations then they are getting today... meaning we weren't dumb as stumps. And that let us have rational thought and actually make fewer huge mistakes...

I grew up in the boonies... we weren't what you would call pure.

When WE were in school... the curriculum wasn't vetted for political correctness and approved by the propaganda ministry. Today by the time that is... there is nothing left for learning.

We actually got better educations then they are getting today....
I meant about sex ed.

I'm all for bring back Palmer Penmanship, Phonics, and memorizing of times tables, poetry, and certain Bible verses/Psalms. Education was even better in my day than in yours. After I graduated from high school, they broke the education mold

I doubt you can spring anal, and oral sex on most 5th grader, since chances are they have a friend that knows already. Why ask an adult when you can ask a friend?

Do they even tach sex ed in the 5th grade?

Boy do they...


“One of the other parents said it well – they raped the minds of the ten year old, eleven year old kids,” he told Fox News Radio. “Children were traumatized. (http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/parents-furious-after-school-teaches-5th-graders-about-oral-anal-sex.html)”

The Pannkuk and Gilliland families said they knew something was wrong when the daughters came home from school. They were quiet and withdrawn.

“You could tell she was embarrassed,” Jean Pannkuk told Fox News Radio. “She didn’t want to have to repeat what had been said. It was really sad to see her struggle with feeling like she was responsible.”

I meant about sex ed.

I'm all for bring back Palmer Penmanship, Phonics, and memorizing of times tables, poetry, and certain Bible verses/Psalms. Education was even better in my day than in yours. After I graduated from high school, they broke the education mold

We had sex ed.. but it was hidden in what they called Health class at the time... I remember it back as early as the 8th grade... but it might have been the 7th grade. I'm younger than you... so that was the early 70's.

Boy do they...
Nah. My kids knew more than I did (from their friends who had big brothers and sisters) by the time they were in 6th grade. The kids sat in sex ed class and giggled at how stupid the teacher was.

So in other words because let your kids hang out with bad influences we should just teach them all about rimming say, in the 2nd grade?

So in other words because let your kids hang out with bad influences we should just teach them all about rimming say, in the 2nd grade?
My kids hung out with other kids in their Lutheran school.

And what kept us pure?

Oral sex, and anal sex? NO? Aspirin between the knees? No? Saran wrap condoms? NO??
Don't ask don't tell? NO?? I give what kept us pure??

CDC - About Teen Pregnancy - Teen Pregnancy - Reproductive Health (http://www.cdc.gov/TeenPregnancy/AboutTeenPreg.htm)

While the population is growing, pregnancy rates are going down. Some faster than others.

And what kept us pure?

Oral sex, and anal sex?? NO? Aspirin between the knees? No? Saran wrap condoms? NO???
Don't ask don't tell?? NO???? I give what kept us pure?????

CDC - About Teen Pregnancy - Teen Pregnancy - Reproductive Health (http://www.cdc.gov/TeenPregnancy/AboutTeenPreg.htm)

While the population is growing, pregnancy rates are going down. Some faster than others.

That has more to do with STDS than anything else... I wish that chart went back to before the era of AIDS.

I meant about sex ed.

I'm all for bring back Palmer Penmanship, Phonics, and memorizing of times tables, poetry, and certain Bible verses/Psalms. Education was even better in my day than in yours. After I graduated from high school, they broke the education mold

Yup ;at least then kids knew how to spell sugar and salt before they graduated .

I grew up in the boonies.....we weren't what you would call pure.
I grew up in a rural area where the village was maybe 500 people and 90% of the residents were farmers. I dated farmers' sons who knew a thing or two. So what kept us pure?

If fear of STD's makes the rates keeps going down, lets scare 'em some more. If they use condoms and contracepion ALL the time that's cool too. But lets not assume/pretend 11 and 12 year olds don't have a natural curiosity about sex, because I did at that age and so were the girls, farmland sex education notwithstanding.

Yeah they masturbate at that age too.

I grew up in a rural area where the village was maybe 500 people and 90% of the residents were farmers. I dated farmers' sons who knew a thing or two. So what kept us pure?

You need to define what you consider pure I guess. I grew up in a place where the closest high school was in a town 4 times that size.

We didn't have girls that had the entire football teams up her behind in a single night pretending to be a virgin... or girls the gave oral to every jock in the class claiming to be a virgin...

But then... rates of HPV infections reflect the reality...

But lets not assume/pretend 11 and 12 year olds don't have a natural curiosity about sex
During the '70s and '80s, I taught a Sunday School class of 5th and 6th graders (no else wanted to deal with that age group). I'm easy to talk with, so often a lesson was interrupted with questions about sex (as pertained to the Bible lesson for the day). When I mentioned this to the superintendent, she told me to go with it and answer them honestly and accurately, figuring their parents were too shy to deal with it themselves (and that was the case according to the kids). No parent ever complained.

You need to define what you consider pure I guess. I grew up in a place where the closest high school was in a town 4 times that size.
Me too -- in fact it was a SUNY town where I went to high school.

We didn't have girls that had the entire football teams up her behind in a single night pretending to be a virgin... or girls the gave oral to every jock in the class claiming to be a virgin...
There was no AIDS back in my day or VD to speak of, no threats. So why were we so pure?

This conversation has drifted far from the nanny state's imposing restrictions on the consumption of sugar... then again... maybe not.
With sex ,the nanny state don't care if the kids indulge ;or what price to repair irresponsible behavior... They give that service away for free or low cost... parents don't even have to know the nanny state Is providing that service But... that same kid has hyper-tension ? The death panel cometh .

this conversation has drifted far from the nanny state's imposing restrictions on the consumption of sugar...
Over-interest in sex is the fault of sugar and corn syrup in our foods.

During the '70s and '80s, I taught a Sunday School class of 5th and 6th graders (no else wanted to deal with that age group). I'm easy to talk with, so often a lesson was interrupted with questions about sex (as pertained to the Bible lesson for the day). When I mentioned this to the superintendent, she told me to go with it and answer them honestly and accurately, figuring their parents were too shy to deal with it themselves (and that was the case according to the kids). No parent ever complained.

Parents Furious After School Teaches Graphic Sex Class | FOX News & Commentary: Todd Starnes (http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/parents-furious-after-school-teaches-5th-graders-about-oral-anal-sex.html)

What do you tell these parents?

Parents Furious After School Teaches Graphic Sex Class | FOX News & Commentary: Todd Starnes (http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/parents-furious-after-school-teaches-5th-graders-about-oral-anal-sex.html)

What do you tell these parents?
I would mention that "parents were sent a notice informing them about the program – and that they had a right to review the curriculum. But ... only three parents showed up."

I never got a chance to be graphic. :D

I would mention that "parents were sent a notice informing them about the program – and that they had a right to review the curriculum. But ... only three parents showed up."

I never got a chance to be graphic. :D

Neither should the substitute even if he was a principle. He got played by a few students it seems.

He wasn't smarter than a 5th grader. I hope the little girls parents can talk to their traumatized child.

My kids hung out with other kids in their Lutheran school.

They teach rimming in the Lutheran church to 5th graders?

this conversation has drifted far from the nanny state's imposing restrictions on the consumption of sugar... then again.... maybe not.
With sex ,the nanny state don't care if the kids indulge ;or what price to repair irresponsible behavior ... They give that service away for free or low cost ... parents don't even have to know the nanny state Is providing that service But..... that same kid has hyper-tension ? The death panel cometh .

Ironic isn't it?

They teach rimming in the Lutheran church to 5th graders?
Nope. Conversations between students at recess.

They teach rimming in the Lutheran church to 5th graders?

Not in church,or a class, classes have teachers, but in the bathroom, the bus, or the "playground". Or your backyard.

Over-interest in sex is the fault of sugar and corn syrup in our foods.

Nope... don't buy that argument... but there ARE other reasons than that.

Like Hormones... I remember being and early teen... at 13 and 14 having a very good interest in sex... despite NOT having Cable TV at the time... (mid 70's) and a whopping 7 channels on TV to choose from. Back then Corn Syrup meant Karo Syrup... father loved it... I hated it.

Yes this was the days before Atari... and long before home video cassette players.

Yes this was the days before Atari...and long before home video cassette players.
I was that age during the time of manual typewriters. And the kiddos today think they invented sex.

This has al lot to do with food

Nope. Conversations between students at recess.

Uh, back in the day we didn't talk about rimming at church, recess or ever.

this has alot to do with food

It has more to do with the general lack of discipline...

this has a lot to do with food
All those hormones are pumped into livestock that we eventually eat -- along with the hormones that are making us reach puberty earlier than ever before and get fat too.

It has more to do with the general lack of discipline...

Certainly agree with that both in school and in the home, ah for the good old days of the draft and national service when those unrully kids were whipped into shape and learned to make their bed

certainly agree with that both in school and in the home, ah for the good old days of the draft and national service when those unrully kids were whipped into shape and learned to make their bed

Worked for us... threaten the wimps today and they threaten to call CPS or the police on you. None of them have the fortitude to deal with a real punishment.

It has more to do with the general lack of discipline.....
Tell that to the visual media. Then ban all TVs and feature only 1930s-1950s movies.

Tell that to the visual media. Then ban all TVs and feature only 1930s-1950s movies.

Didn't say it would be easy to reverse... cats out of the bag already.

Didn't say it would be easy to reverse....cats out of the bag already.
As I have said a thousand times before, it all goes back to parenting. Public libraries are jumping on the bandwagon with teaching young parents how to parent their little kids. There needs to be more outreach by churches and schools and various agencies and organizations.

How does a parent who has never known discipline discipline their kids, it just doesn't happen

All those hormones are pumped into livestock that we eventually eat -- along with the hormones that are making us reach puberty earlier than ever before and get fat too.

That's kind of scary.

How does a parent who has never known discipline discipline their kids, it just doesn't happen
All the more reason for the village to dig in and help raise the children.

All the more reason for the village to dig in and help raise the children.

Who gets to dictate the moral standards... Hillary Clinton and her village? I sure as hell hope not. And I sure as heck hope it's not Moochelle Obama either...

Who gets to dictate the moral standards....Hillary Clinton and her village? I sure as hell hope not. And I sure as heck hope it s not Moochelle Obama either...
You and I will be on a committee. We're part of the "village."

Scary

scary

Just think... Bill Clinton could be teaching your daughter sexual morality.

Funny, but am I the only one seeing the disconnect between the one saying it's about patenting being the one excusing poor parenting?

Funny, but am I the only one seeing the disconnect between the one saying it's about patenting being the one excusing poor parenting?
Patenting and parenting... just one letter different. God bless the FDA!

Didn't say it would be easy to reverse....cats out of the bag already.

So you do want to go back to the good old days before TV at least.


How does a parent who has never known discipline discipline their kids, it just doesn't happen

Parenting classes.


Who gets to dictate the moral standards....Hillary Clinton and her village? I sure as hell hope not. And I sure as heck hope it snot Moochelle Obama either...

They both seem to be great moms to me. Great kids too!

Getting back to the OP sort of, Nanny Bloomberg's latest foray into nannyism is forcing stores to hide cigarettes. Yeah, if they don't see them no one will buy them. Got to hand it to Bloomy, he's trying to single-handedly save New York from itself.

Hello again, Steve:


he's trying to single-handedly save New York from itself.The problem with right wingers is you aren't able to PROJECT. Maybe it's the genes, I don't know.. To ME, he's trying to save you a nickel or two.

Even before Obamacare, your position was that EVERYBODY gets health care. Consequently, YOU and I pay for an unhealthy lifestyle. Therefore, your support of that lifestyle costs us LOTS of money. I don't understand the disconnect over there.

I'm not disconnected, though. There's TWO solutions to the problem as I see it.. We can SUPPORT healthy living, or we can STOP paying for it and let these people die on the street.

I have a hunch which one you'd pick.

Excon

You don't think you need permission from the government to smoke a joint, I don't think I need permission from the government to eat fried chicken.

For all the blunder I hear from your side about how the right loves imposing our will on everyone you sure expend a lot of energy and resources imposing your will on us. You do know that people are making healthier choices now don't you? You do know that restaurants are expanding their healthier menus don't you? You do know that more and more people are reading labels, and that stores are pushing healthier alternatives don't you? I don't think people are as stupid as you do so I feel no compulsion to ban them from buying a soda. That and it's not about money, it's about freedom.

See we CAN project but every time I do you mock us. We see you coming after our guns, and you are, and you say "no one is coming after your guns."

I see Bloomy doing these half-a$$ed bans and know there's more to it. If he can get us to accept a ban here and a ban there, and desensitize us to his incremental approach to the nanny state then before you know it, it's here. You're doing it with healthcare, you're doing it with energy - you're trying to control our lives. And I say, back off.

So you do want to go back to the good old days before TV at least.





I remember the days before most people had a Color TV... I even remember before all network TV shows were broadcast in color. I however am not nearly old enough to remember days before TV. That was way before my time.

Those days are gone, nice memories but we ain't going back.

Pity the struggling bodega grocer in NY . One of the best markups is the sale of tobacco products ,and Nanny Bloomy would prohibit the display of a legal product .Of course the same businessperson can display a large assortment of condoms ,porn ,and OTC cold remedies that don't work. But... no cigarettes (fat cigars are OK because Bloomy's gumbas smoke them) ;and no salt packets for the food the store is permitted to sell .

Maybe the store owner should break open the packs and sell the cigarettes in baggies . That type of transaction happens routinely in NYC ,and it's largely tolerated .

And the Obama's got the kiddies covered.. like the soup Nazi... "no Rice Krispies for you !!" Snap! Crackle! Pop!: Rice Krispies May Be Banished From Schools - Law Blog - WSJ (http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2013/03/13/snap-crackle-pop-rice-krispies-may-be-banished-from-schools/)

My friend at Kellogg's is not going to be happy. First she learns they're a weapons manufacturer after the Pop Tart gun incident, now no Rice Krispies in school?

I remember the days before most people had a Color TV....I even remember before all network tv shows were broadcast in color. I however am not nearly old enough to remember days before TV. That was way before my time.

Strange, I can hear violins playing that haunting refrain memories... and what's her name singing in the background

strange, I can hear violins playing that haunting refrain memories........................... and what's her name singing in the background

Hey... just answering Tals question...

The same refrain to you both, I am probably older than both of you, but I try to live in the present

They shouldn't get a welafre check....or anything else until they have been sterilized....so they don't continue to breed. If they can't properly feed themselves...they shouldn't be having any more kids.

We do it to pets because its the humane way to control strays...time to apply it the the non-productive part of the population.

Great idea. Let's revise the Pre-World War 11 part of your eugenics history.

Please, give us all a break.

Let's not revive any part of pre WWII american history

Lol, but the record for sterilization after WW2 was just as bad. And they call Obama a nazi.

The American eugenics movement after World War II (part 3 of 3) | News Feature | Indy Week (http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/the-american-eugenics-movement-after-world-war-ii-part-3-of-3/Content?oid=2498320)

Bad Blood: The Tuskegee Syphilis Study | www.hsl.virginia.edu (http://www.hsl.virginia.edu/historical/medical_history/bad_blood/)

Great idea. Let's revise the Pre-World War 11 part of your eugenics history.

Please, give us all a break.

Lets try and revise your treatment of the Aborigines while we are at it.

And one of the biggest proponents of eugenics in this country was the founder of the left's most cherished organization, Margaret Sanger.

Sorry, you cannot tell the difference between birth control, and sterilization.

Sorry, you cannot tell the difference between birth control, and sterilization.

Not only was Sanger a proponent of eugenics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger#Eugenics), so was another of her cohorts your side idolizes, Alan Guttmacher. Birth control was but one method of achieving her goal eliminating the unfit.


As part of her efforts to promote birth control, Sanger found common cause with proponents of eugenics, believing that they both sought to "assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit."[83] Sanger was a proponent of negative eugenics, which aims to improve human hereditary traits through social intervention by reducing reproduction by those considered unfit. Sanger's eugenic policies included an exclusionary immigration policy, free access to birth control methods and full family planning autonomy for the able-minded, and compulsory segregation or sterilization for the profoundly retarded.[84][85] In her book The Pivot of Civilization, she advocated coercion to prevent the "undeniably feeble-minded" from procreating.[86] Although Sanger supported negative eugenics, she asserted that eugenics alone was not sufficient, and that birth control was essential to achieve her goals.[87][88][89]

You should probably be asking yourself about now why PP is involved in so many abortions for poor black women.

They shouldn't get a welafre check....or anything else until they have been sterilized....so they don't continue to breed. If they can't properly feed themselves...they shouldn't be having any more kids.

We do it to pets because its the humane way to control strays...time to apply it the the non-productive part of the population.


Smoothy, I don't really want to be the one to tell you. But the reason I revived your quote is to demonstrate that no one here would come near it with a ten foot pole.

Aren't the reasons obvious?Do you need me to spell it out?

Smoothy, I don't really want to be the one to tell you. But the reason I revived your quote is to demonstrate that no one here would come near it with a ten foot pole.

Aren't the reasons obvious?Do you need me to spell it out?


I'm not sure you are able to understand the subtitles of that post, meaning it means things beyond what you might think... and quite honestly I don't have the time or patience to explain them.

I'm not sure you are able to understand the subtitles of that post, meaning it means things beyond what you might think...and quite honestly I don't have the time or patience to explain them.

I think we understand the subtitles only too well Zeig Heil

I think we understand the subtitles only too well Zeig Heil
I doubt it... the American English dialect is a bit more complex than some non-Americans can grasp.

I doubt it... the American English dialect is a bit more complex than some non-Americans can grasp.


They shouldn't get a welafre check... or anything else until they have been sterilized... so they don't continue to breed. If they can't properly feed themselves... they shouldn't be having any more kids.

We do it to pets because it's the humane way to control strays... time to apply it the non-productive part of the population.

Ah the complexities of racism
Let us examine the subtitles

They; inferiors, blacks, hispanics, unemployed
Welafare check; government handout
Sterilized; a procedure much favoured by the nazi for dealing with inferiors
Non-productive part of the population; see they

How will you resolve the welafare question? Move them to labour camps?

Ah the complexities of racism
Let us examine the subtitles

they; inferiors, blacks, hispanics, unemployed
welafare check; government handout
sterilized; a procedure much favoured by the nazi for dealing with inferiors
Non-productive part of the population; see they

how will you resolve the welafare question? move them to labour camps?

Not what your people did to the Aborigines even in recent years...

How will I solve the welfare problem... the government needs physical labor done... you need a paycheck... therefore you perform the physical labor or you don't collect a paycheck.

They have the option of sitting at home until they get evicted and not eat. Nobody is forcing them to work. No work.. no money... see how good they are at foraging.


The rest of us have to work... so should they.

Not what your people did to the Aborigines even in recent years...

What did we do to the aborigine in recent years

Gave them free medical examinations
Built houses
Insisted on educating their kids
Gave them welfare; let me qualify that, we managed their welfare payment

And even earlier, left them alone until the stench could no longer be tolerated.


How will I solve the welfare problem... the government needs physical labor done... you need a paycheck... therefore you perform the physical labor or you don't collect a paycheck.

No problem with work for the dole, we do it here and surprise we have less unemployed than you do


They have the option of sitting at home until they get evicted and not eat. Nobody is forcing them to work. No work.. no money... see how good they are at foraging.


The rest of us have to work... so should they.

Now eviction, that is a horse of a different colour, we don't want the streets littered with homeless, makes the place look untidy, no, as long as they stay in their homes...

What did we do to the aborigine in recent years

gave them free medical examinations
built houses
insisted on educating their kids
gave them welfare; let me qualify that, we managed their welfare payment

and even earlier, left them alone until the stench could no longer be tolerated.



No problem with work for the dole, we do it here and surprise we have less unemployed than you do



now eviction, that is a horse of a different colour, we don't want the streets littered with homeless, makes the place look untidy, no, as long as they stay in their homes.........

Try going back a little earlier before it became politically correct in recent years to be nice to the people you abused basically since you first colonized the place...

Living in a dumpster would be great incentive for them to go to work... I have to bust my butt to pay my mortgage... others bust their butts to pay their rent... why should the welfare degenerates get free housing?

Try going back a little earlier before it became politically correct in recent years to be nice to the people you abused basically since you first colonized the place...

Living in a dumpster would be great incentive for them to go to work...I have to bust my butt to pay my mortgage...others bust their butts to pay their rent...why should the welfare degenerates get free housing?

Living in a dumpster is no incentive to do anything but exxist, once you have reached that level you are not going to rise quickly

I recall the day when money was scarce and life was hard, don't want to inflicit that unnecessarily on anyone. Yes all should have meaningful work even if it is sweeping the streets but to make that possible you would have to undo many of the advances that have made the existing society possible. The malaise is because we have automated all the meniel tasks and left those who used to do them unemployed

I think you are a trogladite, your thinking needs to lift beyond and lift some people with you

Living in a dumpster is no incentive to do anything but exxist, once you have reached that level you are not going to rise quickly

I recall the day when money was scarce and life was hard, don't want to inflicit that unnecessarily on anyone. yes all should have meaningful work even if it is sweeping the streets but to make that possible you would have to undo many of the advances that have made the existing society possible. the malaise is because we have automated all the meniel tasks and left those who used to do them unemployed

I think you are a trogladite, your thinking needs to lift beyond and lift some people with you

The troglodytes are the people that think they are entitled to a free ride and despite a complete lack of job skills... consider themselves too good for manual labor.

Troglodytes refuse to support themselves or their basturd offspring...

And I've been so far down where I arranged a deal to work a few hours a day in exchange for room and board... and I did that for almost a year. True it was on a small private hotel with a private beach on the Mediterranean where I could watch the sun set ever night over the Med through the window..

And I've been so far down where I arranged a deal to work a few hours a day in exchange for room and board... and I did that for almost a year. True it was on a small private hotel with a private beach on the Mediterranean where I could watch the sun set ever night over the Med through the window..

So beachcoming then and the odd wealthy widow no doubt

So beachcoming then and the odd wealthy widow no doubt


Nope... grunt work around the hotel and grounds the women that worked there couldn't handle or was outside the gardeners scope of responsibility..

Not only was Sanger a proponent of eugenics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger#Eugenics), so was another of her cohorts your side idolizes, Alan Guttmacher. Birth control was but one method of achieving her goal eliminating the unfit.



You should probably be asking yourself about now why PP is involved in so many abortions for poor black women.

I think the females, black and white, and otherwise, spoke their minds in the last election quite clearly. The candidate that was going to abolish PP LOST, remember?

Last I checked, abortions (and contraceptives) were also legal and even poor black women don't like white guys telling them what THEIR rights are.

I suggest you come to terms with Sanger stand on negative eugenics in context to the time and medical technology of the beginning of the century in which she lived.

I think the females, black and white, and otherwise, spoke their minds in the last election quite clearly. The candidate that was going to abolish PP LOST, remember?

Last I checked, abortions (and contraceptives) were also legal and even poor black women don't like white guys telling them what THEIR rights are.

I suggest you come to terms with Sanger stand on negative eugenics in context to the time and medical technology of the beginning of the century in which she lived.

Blacks are doing far more to themselves than the KKK lefties ever dreamed of doing in their wildest dreams.. .

Yeah, they got to because those lazy fat a$$ed whitemen won't do it for them

yeh, they got to because those lazy fat a$$ed whitemen won;t do it for them

Some studies indicate roughly half of all blacks pregnancies are terminated by abortions...

Blacks killed more blacks last year alone than whites have killed in the last 400 years.

Now if we can figure out what caused that.. and we get the Hispanics to do it to themselves... our illegal immigrations problem is solved.

Some studies indicate roughly half of all blacks pregnancies are terminated by abortions....

Blacks killed more blacks last year alone than whites have killed in the last 400 years.

Now if we can figure out what caused that..and we get the Hispanics to do it to themselves....our illegal immigrations problem is solved.

Think on this; Hispanics are catholics, blacks are not, so won't happen

WorldWide Count of Black Catholics : Black Catholics : NBCC (http://www.nbccongress.org/black-catholics/worldwide-count-black-catholics-01.asp)

I'm not sure you are able to understand the subtitles of that post, meaning it means things beyond what you might think...and quite honestly I don't have the time or patience to explain them.

That post doesn't have any subtitles that I can see.

Other than that I have lots of time. Please go ahead. I do struggle with the intricacies of the English language at times.

WorldWide Count of Black Catholics : Black Catholics : NBCC (http://www.nbccongress.org/black-catholics/worldwide-count-black-catholics-01.asp)

So it says there are maybe 3 million black catholics and about 40 million blacks in the US but significant numbers of hispanics are catholic some 29 million

I think my contention stands

That post doesn't have any subtitles that I can see.

Other than that I have lots of time. Please go ahead. I do struggle with the intricacies of the English language at times.

If they were obvious they wouldn't be subtlties.

That post doesn't have any subtitles that I can see.He can't type worth a damn (and apparently has one of the few browsers that does not have built-in spellcheck) - I'm pretty sure he meant "subtleties".

so it says there are maybe 3 million black catholics and about 40 million blacks in the US but significant numbers of hispanics are catholic some 29 million

I think my contention stands

Why should it matter if they are all Americans?

I think the females, black and white, and otherwise, spoke their minds in the last election quite clearly. The candidate that was going to abolish PP LOST, remember?

Last I checked, abortions (and contraceptives) were also legal and even poor black women don't like white guys telling them what THEIR rights are.

I don't recall Romney planning on abolishing PP, but that's OK, I get that your side can't keep a constituency without lying to them, fear-mongering and buying their votes.


I suggest you come to terms with Sanger stand on negative eugenics in context to the time and medical technology of the beginning of the century in which she lived.

LOL, so somehow her views on eugenics were less evil back then?

And... the Twinkie is coming back!

And..... the Twinkie is coming back!

Lets hope Ho Ho's are too... I miss those.

QUOTE by speechlesstx;
I don't recall Romney planning on abolishing PP, but that's OK, I get that your side can't keep a constituency without lying to them, fear-mongering and buying their votes.

Mitt Romney Clarifies Abortion Stance, Re-Affirms Desire to Defund Planned Parenthood - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/mitt-romney-clarifies-abortion-stance-re-affirms-desire-to-defund-planned-parenthood/)

I can understand your confusion trying to keep a flip flopper straight.


LOL, so somehow her views on eugenics were less evil back then?

Actions speak louder than words, so show me where she was involved in any involuntary sterilazation when it wasn't considered evil after WW2, and was prevalent as recently as the 80's?

Compulsory sterilization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization)

Eugenics in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States)

So yes, back then it was a practice already and was the model for the nazis program.

Mitt Romney Clarifies Abortion Stance, Re-Affirms Desire to Defund Planned Parenthood - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/mitt-romney-clarifies-abortion-stance-re-affirms-desire-to-defund-planned-parenthood/)

I can understand your confusion trying to keep a flip flopper straight.

And I understand your confusion between "abolish (http://www.bing.com/Dictionary/search?q=define+abolish&qpvt=abolish&FORM=DTPDIA)" and "defund (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/defund)." I see no reason to taxpayer dollars to a group making a killing on abortion (and I thought you hated obscene profits).


Actions speak louder than words, so show me where she was involved in any involuntary sterilazation when it wasn't considered evil after WW2, and was prevalent as recently as the 80's?

Do you not see the irony in whining about words then immediately excusing the vile things Sanger espoused verbally?

You don't jump on Smoothy when he talks his sterilization crap. So don't jump on me for pointing out what was widespread thinking of the time.

The left doesn't grasp irony very well.

You don't jump on Smoothy when he talks his sterilization crap. So don't jump on me for pointing out what was widespread thinking of the time.

You guys handle smoothy just fine on your own. But I am interested to hear how widespread Sanger's thinking was how that justifies the insult to humanity.

It was the law in many states, and around the world, didn't you read the links I provided?



The 27 states where sterilization laws remained on the books (though not all were still in use) in 1956 were: Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin.[45]

It was the law in many states, and around the world, didn't you read the links I provided?

And that justifies it, how?

The same way slavery, and prejudice, and Jim Crow, was justified in its day. We have moved beyond those social structures and Sanger died in 1966. Like you young guys always say you weren't here when such things were reality, and don't support it now, so why should I justify something that was normal before I got on this planet?

Its history, and not all of it was an example of our best behavior as a nation.

The same way slavery, and prejudice, and Jim Crow, was justified in its day. We have moved beyond those social structures and Sanger died in 1966. Like you young guys always say you weren't here when such things were reality, and don't support it now, so why should I justify something that was normal before I got on this planet?

Its history, and not all of it was an example of our best behavior as a nation.

As if you guys decouple the past from anything Republicans do?

P.S. And yet "Planned Parenthood" is still making obscene profits killing babies, largely those of poor black women.

As if you guys decouple the past from anything Republicans do?

Not when you are doing it NOW........................that makes it current, not past.

P.S. And yet "Planned Parenthood" is still making obscene profits killing babies, largely those of poor black women.

Now they are making obscene profits??? Get out of that far right blogosphere or provide a link.

P.S. And yet "Planned Parenthood" is still making obscene profits killing babies, largely those of poor black women.
I thought you said those poor black women keep their babies so they can milk the government coffers. Now they are aborting them?

I thought you said those poor black women keep their babies so they can milk the government coffers. Now they are aborting them?

I think you have me confused with Smoothy.

I think you have me confused with Smoothy.
So whom do I believe--you or smoothy? (Smoothy is awfully cute... )

P.S. And yet "Planned Parenthood" is still making obscene profits killing babies, largely those of poor black women.

Now they are making obscene profits??? Get out of that far right blogosphere or provide a link.

It's in their annual report (http://issuu.com/actionfund/docs/ppfa_ar_2012_121812_vf/1). $1.2 billion in income, $150 million in profit, a record 333,964 million abortions.

Hello again, Steve:


a record 333,964 million abortions.Wow. That's a BIG number - 333,964,000,000 to be exact.. I don't think there are that many women in the whole world.

Excon

Hello again, Steve:

Wow. That's a BIG number - 333,964,000,000 to be exact.. I don't think there are that many women in the whole world.

excon

Typo, it happens.I started with a "quarter million" but it was higher than that... just not THAT high.

$1.2 billion in income, $150 million in profit, a record 333,964 abortions.

Funny how you missed the rest of the report, and the chart on page five that says abortion was but 3% of the total services of PP.

I mean almost 11 million clients, and a third of a million for abortions??

Funny how you missed the rest of the report, and the chart on page five that says abortion was but 3% of the total services of PP.

I mean almost 11 million clients, and a third of a million for abortions???

Nothing funny about killing a third of a million babies in a year. And as I said before, I thought you hated obscene profits.

Abortionists should be put out of business, this business is obscene and unnecessary. Contraceptives have been available for a long time and any female engaging in sexual activity should have the good sense to use them

abortionists should be put out of business, this business is obscene and unnecessary. Contraceptives have been available for a long time and any female engaging in sexual activity should have the good sense to use them

I'll tell you what, other than making the church pay for them, I'll back off on the contraception mandate if we can put them out of business. Here's a perfect example of WHY they need to be put out of business:

Abortionist Joked: 'This Baby Is Big Enough to Walk Around With Me or Walk Me to the Bus Stop' (http://cnsnews.com/news/article/abortionist-joked-baby-big-enough-walk-around-me-or-walk-me-bus-stop)

Of course our president will not offer a moment of national healing for his victims.


Do Gosnell's Victims Matter, Mr. President? (http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/03/21/Do-Gosnell-s-Victims-Matter-Mr-President)
By John Sexton 21 Mar 2013 View Discussion

In response to The media shapes public perception with the stories it chooses not to tell (http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/03/21/The-media-shapes-public-perception-with-the-stories-it-chooses-not-to-tell):

I could not agree more with your observations about the media's interest in Kermit Gosnell. Imagine for a moment that the man on trial had killed an abortion provider. Somehow I think the major media would find time to mention his trial. But a man who is arguably the worst serial killer in U.S. history, who operated a clinic that is straight out a horror film with freezers full of body parts, a man who actually groomed his subordinates to kill, a man who smiled after he was arrested and believed he would be cleared to return to his important work--amazingly that's of no interest (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-balan/2013/03/20/big-three-punt-covering-pennsylvania-abortionists-murder-trial).

And it's not just the media that's taking a pass. President Obama has made a habit of offering words of comfort when tragedy occurs, especially tragedy that involves children. He traveled to Tucson and spoke movingly of the 9 year old girl who was killed by Jared Loughner. He had great compassion for the young victims of Adam Lanza and promised to work to change the laws that, he claimed, allowed those killings to take place.

So where is Obama on the 7 infants killed in Philly (really it's many, many times that number)? Why are there no teachable moments this time? Why no national dialogue about the grim reality of late term abortion? No discussion of the razor thin line between constitutional rights and murder from the First Lawyer. No vow to prevent this happening again by banning scissors or, more to the point, working to eradicate illegal late-term abortions (which like gun crimes are already illegal but still happen). Don't Gosnell's victims deserve a vote?

The President will not offer nationally televised words of healing at any of the funerals (complete with souvenir t-shirt). He will not stare into the rafters, pause dramatically and stage whisper something about Kermit Gosnell failing to live up to our best ideals. In short, he will not capitalize on the deaths of these innocent children. And no one in the media seems to have noticed his unusual disinterest in doing so.

I keep returning to this point because it matters. Gosnell is charged with eight murders but it's likely the true number of victims--over two decades--is in the hundreds. For perspective, consider that Gosnell's clinic may well have murdered more infants than the total number of people killed in the Oklahoma City bombing. He certainly killed far more than Adam Lanza or Jared Loughner. My point is, by any measure this is a national tragedy not a local crime story.

Add to the scale of the crimes the fact that Gosnell's murder clinic flourished in the long political shadow of an industry the President enthusiastically supports and defends. The President himself voted to defended partial-birth abortion, which is one technicality away from the crimes Gosnell committed. Given all this, shouldn't the President at least be asked to comment? Even if he wants to remain silent, for obvious reasons, how can the media allow him to do so?

He's obviously a monster who should be put out of business and prosecuted to the fullest extent... just like any other doctor or professional or other murderer. No need for sweeping generalizations.

He's obviously a monster who should be put out of business and prosecuted to the fullest extent...just like any other doctor or professional or other murderer. No need for sweeping generalizations.

Sure there is, it's an attitude. Not all are as callous as this man but our society has turned into one where children are disposable. That's reprehensible.

I'll tell you what, other than making the church pay for them, I'll back off on the contraception mandate if we can put them out of business. Here's a perfect example of WHY they need to be put out of business:
The best way to put them out of business is to teach our children to respect their bodies and not have sex until they are in a stable, financially secure, committed relationship.

The best way to put them out of business is to teach our children to respect their bodies and not have sex until they are in a stable, financially secure, committed relationship.Totally agree. It's a supply/demand business, need to reduce the demand.

The best way to put them out of business is to teach our children to respect their bodies and not have sex until they are in a stable, financially secure, committed relationship.

I think we should encourage more of it.. since its mostly the liberals that are killing their own offspring... that equates to fewer mini-libtards that can vote in the future.






Of course my sarcasm font is MIA.

I think we should encourage more of it..since its mostly the liberals that are killing their own offspring.....that equates to fewer mini-libtards that can vote in the future.






Of course my sarcasm font is MIA.
Then we're good to go!

Then we're good to go!

Every cloud has a silver lining... and that's the silver lining to the abortion issue.

Hoping they have responsible sex takes parenting, but you better have a reasonable option for the ones that slip through the cracks and have no parenting, and DON'T have sex responsibly.

Federal law allows for abortion in the first trimester. Me, I would be comfortable if a female would have regular checks for pregnancy if she was sexually active. That's how I expressed it to the females in my own family as a gynecologist is preferable to a preacher, or abortionist.

Every cloud has a silver lining.....and thats the silver lining to the abortion issue.
And I just finished a fantastic novel called Silver Linings Playbook! What synchronicity! So sex ed teachers should encourage experimentation if the children have Democrat/liberal parents?

They do...
Yale University Hosts Workshop Teaching Sensitivity to Bestiality, Incest (http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/education/yale-university-hosts-workshop-teaching-sensitivity-bestiality-incest)

And I just finished a fantastic novel called Silver Linings Playbook! What synchronicity! So sex ed teachers should encourage experimentation if the children have Democrat/liberal parents?

Only if they tell them just get an abortion... the taxpayers will pay for it... why use condoms or other birth control. (again I can not locate my sarcasm font to use).


I'll have ot look a synopsis up on that book and see if its something that I might find interesting to read.

Edit... I'm only finding reference to the movie... and we all know movies rarely give the book justice.

I'll have ot look a synopsis up on that book and see if its something that I might findz interesting to read.
I wish I had written that book. You and I have different tastes, but you might like its wry humor. It's a fast read.

The movie is different from the book, I've heard. It's not as sappy as it soundsd --

From Publishers Weekly
Pat Peoples, the endearing narrator of this touching and funny debut, is down on his luck. The former high school history teacher has just been released from a mental institution and placed in the care of his mother. Not one to be discouraged, Pat believes he has only been on the inside for a few months––rather than four years––and plans on reconciling with his estranged wife. Refusing to accept that their apart time is actually a permanent separation, Pat spends his days and nights feverishly trying to become the man she had always desired. Our hapless hero makes a friend in Tiffany, the mentally unstable, widowed sister-in-law of his best friend, Ronnie. Each day as Pat heads out for his 10-mile run, Tiffany silently trails him, refusing to be shaken off by the object of her affection. The odd pair try to navigate a timid friendship, but as Pat is unable to discern friend from foe and reality from deranged optimism, every day proves to be a cringe-worthy adventure. Pat is as sweet as a puppy, and his offbeat story has all the markings of a crowd-pleaser.

they do...
Yale University Hosts Workshop Teaching Sensitivity to Bestiality, IncestHow do you know that that seminar wasn't hosted of conservatives? 'Cause I think it was.

How do you know that that seminar wasn't hosted of conservatives? 'Cause I think it was.

They interviewed that person that gave that course on the radio in the last two days and I heard most of it... she clearly was no Conservative.

Because it was hosted on an exclusive Ivy League University ?

Hearsay. I heard it too and she was very conservative.

They interviewed that person that gave that course on the radio in the last two days and I heard most of it.....she clearly was no Conservative.
Apparently, Dr. Jill is this millennium's Dr. Ruth.

Hearsay. I heard it too and she was very conservative.

So... you listen to Sean Hannity?

because it was hosted on an exclusive Ivy League University ?That same one Bush graduated from?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush#Education

Or maybe it's people from this group:
https://www.facebook.com/yalecollegerepublicans

Or their Twitter feed: https://twitter.com/YaleGOP

So... you listen to Sean Hannity?No.

Hearsay. I heard it too and she was very conservative.

There is nothing conservative about teaching sensitivity to bestiality and incest.

No.

The interview I listened to was live on Sean Hannity's radio show.

They interviewed that person that gave that course on the radio in the last two days and I heard most of it.....she clearly was no Conservative.

The Leadership Institute | Training conservative activists, students, and leaders since 1979 (http://www.leadershipinstitute.org/)

There is nothing conservative about teaching sensitivity to bestiality and incest.Nor is there anything liberal about it either. Individuals choose to host and attend that seminar, not political party groups.

The Leadership Institute | Training conservative activists, students, and leaders since 1979 (http://www.leadershipinstitute.org/)

Conservatives aren't allowed in Yale.

Just like a Conservative journalist will never get a job with most of the lame stream media. You have a to be a proven liberal before you get in the door. THey check and see if you are a registered democrat as a condition for employment.

Nor is there anything liberal about it either. Individuals choose to host and attend that seminar, not political party groups.

Dude, liberalism isn't a party, and to claim there's nothing liberal about it is pretty darn funny.

It was a discussion and survey of attitudes not a class. Of course the right wing never wants to discuss things rationally and reasonably, just holler about how wrong it is and label it liberal.

And you wonder why people run from you and think your crazy, all except your most hard core far right brethren.

It was a discussion and survey of attitudes not a class. Of course the right wing never wants to discuss things rationally and reasonably, just holler about how wrong it is and label it liberal.

And you wonder why people run from you and think your crazy, all except your most hard core far right bretheren.

They liked to discuss how many people had incest and liked it and how many had sex with their pets... and liked it...

Only a try lefty would do tha, particularly in a captive audience where few if any were of legal age to buy a beer.

They liked to discuss how many people had incest and liked it and how many had sex with their pets... and liked it... Can you spout any more bull$hit? I don't think so. Methinks you are projecting.

Can you spout any more bull$hit? I don't think so. Methinks you are projecting.

Did you check into the course at all... they actually discussed this and took polls on it in the class.

It was a discussion and survey of attitudes not a class.

Um, no, that was part of the workshop/seminar.


Last Saturday, Yale University hosted a seminar that instructed students to be "sensitive" to bestiality, incest, and accepting money for sex.

According to CampusReform.org, the 'Sex: Am I Normal' workshop was taught by Dr. Jill McDevitt (pictured).

Students answered questions about sex using their cell phones and viewed the responses in real time.

The survey revealed that nine percent of the students had been paid for sex, 3 percent engaged in sex with animals and 52 percent had participated in "consensual pain" during sex.

Event director Giuliana Berry told CampusReform.org that the workshop was supposed to teach students to respond with “understanding” and “compassion” to taboo and even illegal sex acts.

What part of "teach" are you missing?


Of course the right wing never wants to discuss things rationally and reasonably, just holler about how wrong it is and label it liberal.

Listen to yourself, Tal. I'm not hollering but you sure do whenever we point out the nonsense on your side.


And you wonder why people run from you and think your crazy, all except your most hard core far right brethren.

Hey, if libs think it's "normal" to have sex with animals I hope they run away from me, I don't want to be anywhere near them.

Conservatives aren't allowed in Yale.Oh dear, you're not the bright one are you?

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/coming-food-wars-739704-21.html#post3425044

Oh dear, you're not the bright one are you?

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/coming-food-wars-739704-21.html#post3425044

I'm far brighter than you... and have the benefit of actually living in this country and not relying on what the some news editor decides you are going to be told about something.

In most Universities if you disagree with the professors obvious leftist agenda... you will in all likelihood fail the class... and even if you are lucky your grades will suffer asa result.

Um, no, that was part of the workshop/seminar.
It wasn't coursework, part of a course or class.

What part of "teach" are you missing?
I taught my children and new library hires and also court-ordered community service workers how to do stuff. You teach us all the time here on this site.

Hey, if libs think it's "normal" to have sex with animals I hope they run away from me, I don't want to be anywhere near them.
I don't think that was said. Do you know who attended this seminar? I went to a similar one back in the late '80s while attending grad school for a counseling degree.

not relying on what the some news editor decides you are going to be told about something.
Haha, you don't even bother looking at the content I provided you; you dismiss it without looking and continue foaming at the mouth.
Continue foaming, I got a wonderful promotion at work at the beginning of this week so your knee-jerking is simply entertaining to me. :D

It wasn't coursework, part of a course or class.

I never said it was a class or coursework. I said "teach" and that is indisputably the goal of the "seminar/workshop" according to the "Event director Giuliana Berry."

Now, everyone continue on with your misdirection.

Oh dear, you're not the bright one are you?

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/coming-food-wars-739704-21.html#post3425044

That only proves they attended. Lots of conservatives attend universities but their ideas and point of view are typically not welcome and in fact, the schools are often quite openly hostile toward conservatives (while pretending to welcome diversity of course).

Also In fact as I've posted twice now, Harvard Law School's paper penned an op-ed telling them not to apply there should you someday have the gall to criticize them.

Warning: Do Not Enroll (http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/2/28/do-not-enroll/)

Now give us your "why is it conservatives are powerless to change them" routine.

Bush graduated from there LOL!

And ? We already went over this with Ted Cruz graduating from Harvard. It's not like there are many alternative elite schools in the country to choose from . Most of them have liberal mind bending cr@p like this or "stomp on Jesus " diversity instruction.
Florida Atlantic Univ. student claims he was suspended for not stomping on Jesus [VIDEO] | The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2013/03/21/florida-atlantic-univ-student-claims-he-was-suspended-for-not-stomping-on-jesus-video/)

I never said it was a class or coursework. I said "teach" and that is indisputably the goal of the "seminar/workshop" according to the "Event director Giuliana Berry."

Now, everyone continue on with your misdirection.
The attendees (there were only 55 of them) were anonymously surveyed by cellphone as to sexual practices or happenings, then the results were tabulated and distributed to the group. One of the attendees said, "The point of the workshop was to bring up things we thought were so taboo and desire or urges we criticize are just regular parts of sexual psychology [and activities humans willingly or unwillingly engage in].” It was later said that some of the cellphone responses were made in jest.

Yeah if I was their parent ,I'd be thrilled they paid $40 grand a year to attend such seminars.

yeah if I was their parent ,I'd be thrilled they paid $40 grand a year to attend such seminars.
Actually, it might have been a good thing to open one's eyes about how some people act and live. Why walk through life with blinders on? It wasn't until I attended college (a Lutheran one, at that) that I found out there are people in the world who don't think and act like my family and I did.

http://rlv.zcache.com/horse_with_blinders_cards-p137601110474256247bf10p_210.jpg

Like I said... mind bending cr@p. This so called professor no doubt has her own fee for service "clinic " for them to learn . It doesn't belong in an institution of higher learning .

The ones who need to open their eyes are those who think we need to teach kids sensitivity to bestiality and incest or excuse those who do.

Like I said .... mind bending cr@p. This so called professor no doubt has her own fee for service "clinic " for them to learn . It doesn't belong in an institution of higher learning .
She isn't a professor there or associated with that university.

The ones who need to open their eyes are those who think we need to teach kids sensitivity to bestiality and incest or excuse those who do.
That is not what was done in this seminar.

Teaching young adults to be able to discuss things they don't understand rationally is the beginning of independent thought and fact finding to make reasonable decisions about lifestyle with out prejudice.

More rational thought and actions and better ways to communicate would probably lead to less divorces is my hope and more productive interactions with each other as a whole.

That is not what was done in this seminar.

What part of "Event director Giuliana Berry told CampusReform.org that the workshop was supposed to teach students to respond with “understanding” and “compassion” to taboo and even illegal sex acts" are you having trouble understanding?

Come on - it's in plain English, stop the denial.

Denial is in not being able to talk about things and reaching a resolution. You can't tell a young adult something is illegal without reasons they are.

The attendees (there were only 55 of them) were anonymously surveyed by cellphone as to sexual practices or happenings, then the results were tabulated and distributed to the group. One of the attendees said, "The point of the workshop was to bring up things we thought were so taboo and desire or urges we criticize are just regular parts of sexual psychology [and activities humans willingly or unwillingly engage in].” It was later said that some of the cellphone responses were made in jest.

How can a personal cell phone call be considered anonymous? Nothing done on a cell phone or regualr phone is truly anonymous.

Nor are internet forums truly anonymous for that matter either.

How can a personal cell phone call be considered anonymous? Nothing done on a cell phone or regualr phone is truely anonymous.
Nor are internet forums truely anonymous for that matter either.
There is no/or at least rare caller ID for cell phones. (Call me on your cell, and I will tell you what shows up.) "Sexologist Dr. Jill McDevitt hosted the session where around 55 students used their cellphones to answer questions about sex. The results were then published in real time on a screen."

There is no/or at least rare caller ID for cell phones. (Call me on your cell, and I will tell you what shows up.) "Sexologist Dr. Jill McDevitt hosted the session where around 55 students used their cellphones to answer questions about sex. The results were then published in real time on a screen."

My point being you never really know what data they are harvesting, and saving... they aren't always up front and honest about 100% in fact I'd go as far as saying they very rarely are.

I know what's possible... and what's practical.. and if its possible... someone is doing it... and exactly who you will rarely ever know.

Denial is in not being able to talk about things and reaching a resolution. You can't tell a young adult something is illegal without reasons why they are.

Denial is repeatedly ignoring facts written in plain English. You apparently think denial is facts not in evidence.

There is no/or at least rare caller ID for cell phones. (Call me on your cell, and I will tell you what shows up.) "Sexologist Dr. Jill McDevitt hosted the session where around 55 students used their cellphones to answer questions about sex. The results were then published in real time on a screen."

You should see her credentials.. She's a sexologist like a madam is . Here is the good professor .
http://www.thecollegefix.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/small-Jill-McDevitt.jpg

And here is her business poster .
http://photos1.meetupstatic.com/photos/event/3/a/1/8/event_155714872.jpeg

Get it ? Get your heart on

And here is the good professor's office where students can come for more a more personal education experience .
http://s3-media1.ak.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/7JVgzyukQFOtZzirMpQejA/l.jpg

So let's dispense with the nonsense that what this "professor " is teaching is legitimate .

this "professor"
She isn't a professor at Yale (or any university). She has her own business.

You want women to be dumb about their bodies?

You want her to be ugly?

No ;obviously she is dressing appropriate for her profession... I was not commenting on her "looks " .

She isn't a professor at Yale. She has her own business.

I never said she was a professor "at Yale," did tom? She IS a professor and the SEMINAR/WORKSHOP was intended to TEACH sensitivity to TABOO sex. Can we end this charade that it was otherwise?

no ;obviously she is dressing appropriate for her profession...I was not commenting on her "looks " .

I'm sure her mother is proud.

I never said she was a professor "at Yale," did tom? She IS a professor and the SEMINAR/WORKSHOP was intended to TEACH sensitivity to TABOO sex. Can we end this charade that it was otherwise?
Why are you being so obstinate? I had added "(or any university)." You can have a Ph.D. and not be a teacher. She is a researcher. And that wasn't the purpose of the seminar, to "teach" about sex! Read the link that someone (you?) posted.

I'm sure her mother is proud.
And is probably driving an expensive car given to her by her daughter.

Why are you being so obstinate? I had added "(or any university)." You can have a Ph.D. and not be a teacher. She is a researcher.

I'm not the one being obstinate. That she isn't presently employed as a professor at Yale or any other university is irrelevant to the point made, it's just a distraction.


And that wasn't the purpose of the seminar, to "teach" about sex! Read the link that someone (you?) posted.

Tom linked to it and I've posted the quote on the purpose of the seminar in the words of the "event director" twice and you still deny it?? Good Lord woman... what part of "teach students" and "taboo and even illegal sex acts" are you misunderstanding? For a librarian you sure seem to have trouble with words.


Event director Giuliana Berry told CampusReform.org that the workshop was supposed to teach students to respond with “understanding” and “compassion” to taboo and even illegal sex acts.

I'm not the one being obstinate. That she isn't presently employed as a professor at Yale or any other university is irrelevant to the point made, it's just a distraction.
She is making gobs of money as a businesswoman. Why on earth would she want to get the pathetic pay a teacher gets?

For a librarian you sure seem to have trouble with words.
Ah, the putdown.

I'm lost, what does any of this have to do with food wars