-
Tibet and Xinjiang are better off as parts of China
-
Some Jews do exploit the guilt goyim feel about the Shoah for their own benefit
-
Gun control is stupid
-
Calling something or someone “gay” does not automatically make you homophobe
Sorry, the guilt who feel about the what now?
While yes, after European settlement in the New World the American Indians suffered for centuries at the hands of the white man, but for the last 40 years or so the reservation system has allowed the Indians to show the world that they are every bit as ecologically disfunctional, inherently selfish and self destructive as any other group of people, (not the noble eco-warriors/spiritual Children Of The Sun that they are often portrayed as these days) and are obviously content to live under a self-governing system worse than anything ever visited on them by the hands of outsiders.
Indian reservations are usually cesspools of violence, indolence, addiction and dispair…
ETA—Happy Columbus Day
goyim= non Jews.
Shoah= Holocaust.
Ok, but if the slapping leads to punching, and punching leads to a baseball bat to the face, that’s ok too?
Yes, and so far all the double-blind independently-conducted research studies that take into account the placebo effect have found that both eastern and western “holistic,” “alternative,” or whatever you want to call it “medicine” doesn’t work.
The New York State Thruway is mostly free of billboard blight. That is, except through the Seneca Indian Reservation Irving and Silver Creek, where the forest lands along the Thruway were cut down for tens of billboards advertising cigarettes, cheap gasoline, and the like, in violation of state and federal law, thanks to “sovereign immunity.” Such eco-warrior using-the-whole-buffalo one-with-nature behavior. :rolleyes:
Over half the time, exactly the same assertion could be made of mainstream Western medicine:
Right, and if she’s so Catholic that she’s not allowing herself to use birth control, why isn’t she Catholic enough that she is not abstinent from sex altogether, as an unmarried woman.
Color me surprised that we have made it to 4 pages without anyone mentioning the un-PC belief that, most of the time, overweight people are so because they need to eat less and move more. I know it’s nothing new around here, but I’m amazed that I’m the first person to bring “calories in, calories out” to this party.
HEY! I’m just big boned, OK?!
I’m not sure that the excuse-making for being fat is so much “politically correct” as it is just plain lying to oneself.
It’s not like being fat is celebrated in popular culture.
Perhaps not celebrated, per se, but there’s a lot of hand-wringing about size acceptance and not making assumptions and predjudice against the obese and whether willpower or self-control are things we should mention with regards to overweight individuals.
There are a lot of things I can’t link to right now because they are blocked at work, but just Googling size acceptance brings up quite a few links which suggest that there is a big PC push not to tell people to just put down the cupcakes.
Let’s see…
-
Abortion is awesome. Forced sterilization doesn’t have to be a bad thing, either, for those citizens with IQ’s that fall a little too short of average and can’t figure out how to operate free birth control. The majority of people who have children really, really shouldn’t. Babies suck and there are too many of them being raised by hapless nitwits and/or bible-thumping maniacs.
-
I do not care about the famine/war/horrific genocide/natural disaster occurring in <insert country>. I could pretend otherwise but what’s the use?
-
Children benefit from a well deserved spanking.
-
They also benefit from truth - none of this Santa/Easter Bunny/Jesus/you’re always a winner as long as you try nonsense.
-
Laws that attempt to protect us from ourselves are pure lunacy. Stupidity should have painful and dire consequences.
-
Fat people are usually fat because they’re lazy and apathetic towards their health.
That’s all I can think of immediately. Cheers.
She’s not Catholic in America, where she can go to Planned Parenthood or a Minute Clinic and walk out with (in many states) access to $4/month birth control. In the US, most Catholics treat Catholicism like a great big buffet they can pick and choose from. She’s in a Catholic Latin American country where it is extremely difficult to get birth control.
In the US, after your second out of wedlock child, you shouldn’t be able to get welfare, WIC, and whatever programs exist to keep you at home and out of work.
If you receive public assistance, such as section 8 housing and the like, you should have to live in barracks or dorm-style living. Some people on welfare live better than poor recent college grads.
But I do agree with the child support measure. A child conceived in a marriage is both of yours, unquestionably. But outside a marriage, it’s ambiguous, and you either have control of your body or you don’t. Shit or get off the fence. As it stands, men are suing for the right to demand a baby be carried to term even if the mother doesn’t want it because women’s rights aren’t clearly defined. If they choose to carry it, they choose 100% fiduciary responsibility if the man doesn’t want the child.
And those % are per YEAR of use, not per sexual encounter.
Okay, 85% improperly, which is to say, typical use. It’s not like you can take a class to show you proper use of condoms in the first place. Still a very, very bad choice for someone not in a committed LTR/marriage. 85% isn’t a B average, it’s you failing if you’re in the 15%. It’s much easier to set a cell phone alarm for the same daily taking of a BC pill (rendering it nearly 100% effective) than it is to effectively use a condom each and ever time in the heat of the moment.
I think many families would be less stressed if one member of the family stayed home to take care of the kids and the house. Yes, that would probably fall to the woman, given the ownership of boobs and all (plus the fact that, in general, women are taught more domestic skills from an earlier age than men tend to be), though that could certainly change based on the kids’ age. I’m not saying women shouldn’t be allowed to have a career and forced to stay barefoot and pregnant, but if one person could do the full-time job of managing home and kids and the other could manage the full-time job of earning income, I think life would be much better.
Many of my more hardcore feminist friends thing that such an attitude is just unthinkable.
Huh. Why should I feel guilty about the Holocaust? I can see older Germans feeling bad about it, but it certainly had nothing to do with me.
I have some un-PC beliefs about the prison system. I think prisoners should have the option of a simple, painless suicide at any time. A noose in every cell, so to speak. I’m not sure how much that option would reduce the prison population, but I know if I had a prison term much more than 5 years, I’d rather be dead. Surely others feel the same. We have way too many people locked up in this country.
I also think for non-violent crimes, we should look more into humiliation/shame techniques than incarceration.
Everyone, if they are physically capable, should join the military of their respective country for 4 years.
I could agree with your prison / suicide idea for non-violent offenders, but for violent offenders I’d prefer to see some Saw style sadistic form of suicide option. IOW, fine you want out, then here’s a very painful method to get out! I’m picturing one of the really nasty devices on Saw (was it 4?). Not going to squick anyone out with the details - if you’ve seen the movies, pick your favorite device!
A couple of mine:
-
There are genuinely evil people, and we’d be better off without them. I don’t care what kind of horrible childhood they had, how much they were denied Mommy’s love, or whatever other crackpot excuse they have for their deplorable behavior. Even worse if they’re evil and didn’t have such an upbringing. There are plenty of people out there who had lousy childhoods and turned into decent people. Example of genuinely evil people: the two kids who lured Jamie Bulger (a 2 year old child) off and murdered him in the UK many years ago. There’s just really no excuse other than “they’re irrevocably broken–get them out of the gene pool pronto.”
-
I don’t think that heroic measures and vast amounts of money should be spent on propping up children/adults who are so profoundly mentally disabled that they can’t even comprehend the fact that they’re alive. If all they’re going to do is lay in a bed and essentially be a living vegetable, then what’s the point of keeping them alive? They’re not getting anything out of life, and they’re costing a fortune to maintain. I’m not talking about physically disabled folks, or even the mentally disabled who can still enjoy their lives in their own limited way. I’m talking about vegetables with no measurable mental functions who could not maintain bodily activity without being hooked up to machines that keep them going.
-
I think if churches are going to lobby politically or attempt to push their political agendas on the rest of society, they should be taxed. I’m fine with tax breaks for churches that focus on helping their congregation/the poor/the community at large, but as soon as they become political organizations, they should have to pay up just like any other similar organization.
-
I think that once a person is convicted of an impaired driving offense such as drink or drugs, applying makeup, etc. (particularly one in which one or more people are injured), he or she should lose driving privileges for a minimum of ten years (in addition to whatever jail time they have to serve). Driving is a privilege, not a right, and people need to realize that they’re piloting a multi-ton death machine if they’re not paying attention to what they’re doing.
-
I think euthanasia should be legal and permitted, but only under very specific circumstances. The tough part is identifying those circumstances. I would like for a terminally ill person to be able to choose to die with dignity (following counselling to ensure that their reasons are sound), but I don’t want a situation where a family can pressure 87-year-old Grandma with cancer to off herself so they can get her inheritance faster. This one is hard to figure, which is probably why it’s still such a sticky one. But the religious “every life is sacred and we’re going to do everything technologically possible to prolong life, regardless of the person’s desire to have it prolongued” idea is just wrong.