He has to do something to pass the time while the pizza cools.
Maybe he’s Herman Cain? Pizza guy, long-winded, tedious…?
Nah. He’s too intelligent and right to be Herman.
Only thing I’ll say in criticism of askthepizzaguy’s post is that it might have been more courteous to have put the TL;DR part FIRST…
Nonsense. His prologue clearly implied that he intended the post to be cathartic (as well as vituperative). Catharsis takes as long as it takes, and editing is inappropriate.
Disgusting ? Well, it’s *kinda *close to slavery. Which some say is morally questionable a practice.
But stupid ? Oh yes, that certainly. Economically speaking, forced labour is exactly like slavery. It’s, in fact, why it was stopped - the convict labour force, being paid peanuts and working in abysmal conditions they had exactly zero say in (no union in prison !), was unfair competition to the max, leading “regular” companies in the same field to torpedo salaries or just shut the doors, and so on.
It also gave the state incentives to incarcerate people so they could be used as cheap and disposable (but super profitable) labour. Can you say moral hazard ? Cue backroom deals between judge, chief warden and whoever needs some bodies to work… Ain’t y’all seen *Shawshank *? 
So, yeah. That’s why today, prison workers get to stamp licence plates, sew flags or soccer balls, paint dolls and generally speaking only do the kind of penny work that would otherwise be outsourced to China anyway. Where, poetically enough, it would *also *be done by convicts. But no “hard labour”. Just “shoot yourself in the face labour”.
[QUOTE=LavenderBlue]
Yeah. As I wrote in that thread, I have a shitty neighbor. He has all these anti-abortion signs plastered over his front lawn and his car. For a while, he also had a number of no to prop so-and-so signs all over his lawn as well. That particular prop was to help improve our local elementary school. It involved a tiny increase that ultimately cost me about ten bucks when it was approved. But ten bucks is apparently too much for the old fart.
Hypocritical fuckhead.
[/QUOTE]
“Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don’t want to hear about you. They don’t want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no maternity leave, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no NOTHING. If you’re preborn, you’re fine. If you’re preschool, you’re fucked.” - Georges Carlin
God damn. PizzaGuy, that was one hell of a rant.
Pizzaguy, I love you but - seriously - have you had your blood pressure checked?
Hey, there are plenty of women out there in the pro-life ranks just as there are many men on the side of the angels, ie pro-choice. This isn’t a gender thing and it’s a little sexist to imply that it is.
This is the pit so I’m going to say it. I hate anti-abortion men. I loathe them. I despise them. They’re smug fucking assholes. I don’t ever want to hear from a man who has not spent a single second being pregnant about how women should remain pregnant when they don’t want to be.
I understand pro-life women. I understand that you get pregnant and it can be wonderful. I understand getting caught up in the euphoria that can be pregnancy. I understand because, like the majority of women, I’ve been pregnant.
But if you’ve never been there – if you never will experience morning sickness so bad you have thrown up sixteen times in a single hour, pregnancy tiredness that means you get up from a two hour nap and you’re still tired, the last two weeks of pregnancy where you can’t really do much of anything but pray labor will start as soon as possible – THEN SHUT THE FUCK UP!
Askthepizzaguy, that was an awesome rant. I just think you shouldn’t be so unkind to Neanderthals by comparing them to the evil hypocrites you so well and aptly skewered.
I don’t hate all anti-abortion men, just the creepy fucking ones who are so incredibly invested in something that doesn’t affect them, that are completely and totally misogynistic assholes, who view women exactly as Askthepizzaguy. Gah. I wish they’d take their imbecilic positions and shove them up their urethra, gestate it for 9 months, then be emotionally, physically and morally responsible for it for at least the next 18 years. Fucking fucktards.
Worst cowboy band ever.
Well, yeah, but it’s not exactly reasonable to compare someone who is awake and competent to make his own medical decisions with someone who barely has detectable brain waves and claim that these two people must be given identical rights and protections. A fetus, especially a first-trimester one, is much much more similar to Terri Schiavo than to Christopher Reeve. We wouldn’t have condoned killing Christopher Reeve or saving/prolonging his life, unless that was what he wanted–he was capable of making and communicating his own medical decisions and that trumps all other considerations. By contrast, we did condone killing Terri Schiavo. She was awake but unable to make or communicate her medical decisions, so her husband was legally entitled to make decisions about her care on her behalf up to and including taking her off life support. That decision was challenged and upheld by the courts.
If we can draw legal distinctions between Christopher Reeve and Terri Schiavo, of course we’re going to draw them between him and any given first-trimester fetus. To treat them identically is nonsensical and inconsistent with our position on born people who need life support but are unable to make their own decisions.
There’s probably also an argument to be made that a fetus is going to “recover” from its dependent state, while Terry Shiavo was not (confirmed by autopsy, if anyone wants to look it up). But I’m going to pre-empt that argument by reasserting that the life support a fetus requires is another person’s body. While Terry Shiavo certainly used resources that might have been better-allocated, and her continuing to live had a detrimental, emotional impact on her husband, and IMO, her other family members as well, it didn’t require any of them to be physically connected to her to keep her alive, and for that person connected to her to plan her (or his) life around this connection-- to consider how every activity, every choice of food, every choice of what to take for a headache, or how to treat any medical condition in the host, would affect Ms. Shiavo. And suppose on top of that, being the host gave you nausea, sciatica, fatigue, stretch marks, and varicose veins, not to mention leaving a scar when the ordeal ended.
If at any time in the future, it becomes possible to remove unwanted embryos at 4 to 12 weeks, and transplant them into artificial wombs where they will be carried to term and put up for adoption, I’ll listen to the arguments for mandating this for women who don’t want to be pregnant (I doubt I’ll buy them, but I’ll listen); however, I have a feeling that this won’t satisfy most anti-choicers. They want women to be pregnant and go through childbirth, and the more difficult, the better.
And yes, I really think that. I was told by an anti-choicer at a rally where I was counter-demonstrating, that women shouldn’t be allowed to have pain medication during childbirth, because G-d didn’t intend for it, and it was “against the bible.”
<Pumpkin Escobar>
Man… I don’t know what the FUCK you just said, Little Kid, but you’re special man, you reached out, and you touch a brother’s heart.
</Pumpkin Escobar>
Yeah, yeah, another pitting of a pro-life poster based entirely on quoting his pro-life positions. Nothing in the pitting even so much as acknowledging the belief that a fetus is a living human being. Of course, by recognizing such a thing, your entire position goes to shit, so naturally you dodge it.
But I’m not really here to rehash that well documented pro-choice disingenuity. What I came here to ask is why do y’all continue to repeat the lie that anti-abortion protesters don’t care for the the children once they’re born? You know full well there is no shortage of faith-based womens shelters and adoption-as-alternative programs.
Best I can tell, it’s based on some absurd caricature of Republicans and/or conservatives. Or something.
Let me ask directly: Why do you embarrass yourself with the bald faced lie that the pro-life don’t support infants and children?
The fetus can be a living human being and that impacts my position not at all.
Every fetus could be fifty living human beings and that would impact my position not at all.
I didn’t pit his abortion beliefs, you lying moron. I pitted startling statements like the one that said not everyone should have a vote or a voice, that women should feel shame and guilt for an abortion (no matter the cause) and a whole host of other batshit insane ideas. Good to know that you fall on the same side as his “moderate middle” thinking, so I can assign you to my ignore list just as easily and know that I didn’t miss a damn thing. Nothing intelligent to see here, folks. Just another fucking brain dead freak. Good show when you’re the only one who can white knight such a piece of shit.
In other words, “Not ALL pro-life conservatives” ? :dubious:
“Abortion is worse than slavery”
“Women shouldn’t vote”
Hey, if you want to call that your typical pro-life position… Well, okay, but don’t expect me to ever take anything you or any other pro-lifer says seriously. And of course, it’s been argued at length that even if you consider a fetus a living human being worthy of the same rights as the rest of us, the rights of the mother supercede it (seriously, have you read the thread? There’s quite a lot of that going on). And of course, there’s a lot of the pitting having to do with the inherent hypocrisy in the “pro-life” position, and how well it intersects with straight-up misogyny - none of which has anything to do with whether or not a fetus is a human being or not. Did you even read the thread?
Because when it comes to political parties in the USA, there’s one which is in favor of improved education, child services, social security, welfare, food stamps, and assorted other things that help children, especially the children of low-income parents or single mothers (which applies quite heavily to unwanted and unexpected children)… And there’s one which favors banning abortion. And they’re not the same party.
An absolutely accurate representation of the hilarious disconnect between the party’s stance of “every child must be saved” and “oh, you’re born? Well, you’re on your own!”
Because that is directly reflected by their policy decisions. Every single time the right wing has the option to make having children less painful or to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies or to support children after birth. Every. SINGLE. TIME. They fall on the wrong side of the issue. Birth control. School funding. Welfare. Food stamps. Sex education. Maternity leave. You name it, they went the direction that makes it more likely for someone to get pregnant and less likely for them to be able to support that mistake. You want less abortions? Vote democrat!