When I get mad, I stop posting. I’ve walked away from a lot of Pit threads until I cool down and can reread the thread word-for-word. And apologize if needed (but hopefully, by then, the thread has moved on past my faux-pas, and nobody cares).
Wait, I was responding to the “respond in kind” comment, but I just realized what you said before that: You “don’t care what those folks are saying” in a discussion?
Really?
Then get out of it immediately.
Did you notice the difference there? Most of the folks didn’t respond matter-of-factly.
I have admitted I goofed at least twice. Given the response I got to making a mistake, I don’t think grace has been deserved.
I don’t get mad at anything that goes on in here - if nothing else, I don’t tend to get mad all that often in real life, so what strangers on the internet say? Pfft. Irritated or impatient, maybe but mad? Naw.
You missed the “When that shit happens” part - those are the folks that I don’t care what they are saying. Regular discussion, sure. People acting like assholes just because? No.
Speaking of those assholes - hey! Do you all notice that digs here misunderstood my post? Do you see how a lack of perfection should be responded to? Sheesh.
We are interrupting the Curlcoat Hijacks Another Thread Show to bring you an update:
Not amazingly, the same politicians that passed this abomination are now noticing what an spectacularly bad idea it was.
I disagree with this somewhat as I do find it amazing that people who would push through a provision like this would admit to any second thoughts about it.
FYI, your link takes me to a page of linked headlines, none of which appear to be about this story.
I was hoping to find a whole story, as the excerpt you chose doesn’t particularly support your conclusion. The one particular senator says one part of the constitution is more important than another part – does he have some special judicial authority because of his role as president of the Dominican senate? Are there quotes from other elected official about the overreach of the amendment? I would love to see some stories suggesting that the legislature is considering amending or abolishing the definition of when life begins.
Rather more likely, they are embarrassed now that it has become an international story. I’m sure that this kind of thing is exactly what they wanted; they just wanted the girl to quietly and obscurely die in agony somewhere, instead of becoming a news story. Cruelty to women is the point of the anti-abortion movement.
“The controversy has led the authorities to reevaluate the strict laws about abortion rights in their country.”
“Authorities” is a little too vague. At least two senators seem to have buyer’s remorse now. Or so they say. The senator in charge of the whole circus at the time, and the minister of health have both said it needed “reevaluating”. The medical association always opposed it.
When the constitution was amended one of the senators who voted for the ammendment said that there was no chance a woman would be in danger because of it, since they all knew how to get an abortion anyway. :rolleyes:
The news are on the front page for one day, then it goes into the paid archives. Sorry.
As for a new amendment, well, I won’t hold my breath. The RCC has them by the balls. Who cares if some poor sluts die?
I am still trying to get a cite (in Spanish) of the two senators (heard it on a radio show) who have said this may need reevaluation. One thing I have to say is: never read the comments on a news site. For Og’s sake, don’t.
You called (your misreading of) Boyo Jim’s post “assholish” and called the foetus a parasite twice. When Boyo Jim corrected you (and called you an idiot), you responded in kind.
I called the idea that a fetus has the same rights as a real person asshole-ish, and as far as I am concerned a non-viable, unwanted fetus is a parasite.
As for me responding in kind, yup. When someone’s go-to response is to call me an idiot or whatever, I don’t feel like making the effort to be any nicer than they were. There are so many people here whose sole purpose seems to be to look for posts from their pet projects and start a fight that I just cannot be bothered to be polite to them.
Sometimes the Letters to the Editor in print newspapers is bad enough…and those are the ones that the editor decides are good enough to print. When I read unmoderated comments, I start to think that the gene pool needs a little chlorine. Maybe a lot of chlorine.
Well, she is dead now. 
I was not going to comment on this depressing item, but if a law like that was in the books* in the old country and Doctors had to wait for a church priest to decide if they needed to operate when my twin in an ectopic position and my mother bleeding. It is very, very likely that I would not be here letting you know how idiotic laws like this are.
*
(and IIRC a similar law is now in the books in the old country)
Another link:
Sad.