ravan | More Lameness

Aww, gee, I'm special! Fuckwit

elorie has decided to refer to me by name in her little fief. That means I got to her, pricked her in the ego! I should have saved the comment for posterity! That's a better prize than having a community named after me!

Awww, and she accuses me of conflating '"debate" with "verbal abuse"'. Stupid girl. I wasn't trying "debate" with her, I don't think she has the intellect to comprehend it, much less respond to it in a rational manner. Her knee jerk stereotyping is proof of that, along with her innane "They say *all* the same things...almost word for word...and make the same specious arguments that are either blatantly untrue, make no damn sense, or BOTH." Sorry, but it's only 'the same' if you are unable to consider and comprehend things other than your own narrow, knee-jerk, point of view. So no, I was not attempting to debate with her, I was flaming her. Too bad she's too dumb to realize it.

Furthermore, she is responding to a comment that she did not allow to be seen by anyone else, thus looking even more capricious and insane. ROTFLMAO!

I was wondering if she was smart enough to cut her losses and get back to her regular community business. She's not - she won't be happy unless she thinks she's "won" by having the very last word, and can get all of what she believes are her fans to help. What a little wankette. The "neener, neener, neener" at the end is just classic wank, too.

Dang, I need to filch

kshandra's "LOLLERSKATES" icon. May I? Pleeeeease?

BTW, I will probably still read

note_to_asshat from time to time, as well as

note2asshat. Some of the posts in there are great, prime snark, quintissential flambe. Why? For the same reason I read

kittypix and

kitty_luff_only - it makes me smile. Why should I let the fact that the moderator is immature and chickenshit bar me from reading fine snark by other people?

Note: this post left public out of fairness. Apologies to those who are tired of the wank stuff.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

My own sister, who has turned into a religious right dittohead like her husband, doesn't want real sex ed for her kids. Even though she had the truth about birth control and STDs. She thinks it "gives kids permission". Nevermind that the forbidden fruit is always sweeter to a teenager. I end up incoherent with anger at the stupid every time she comes up with that tripe.

I hear ya. Because we all know that providing a kid with information about BC is going to result in some kid out there going, "Well, hot diggity damn! I was fixing to sign that 'Jesus wants you to wait' abstinence pledge thing, but then I found out about rubbers, and now I can’t wait to go out and get all jiggy with anyone who’ll poke me!"

Providing information does not make people who would otherwise not have sex have sex. And denying access to birth control does not prevent kids from having sex. Particularly if they’ve been filled with misinformation, or given *no* information.

The high school I went to refused to teach sex ed, claiming it would “give good kids bad ideas.” Of course, during my time there, 1 out of every 32 students there was a *parent* (no, I’m not guessing on that statistic). They already had their own bad ideas.

More Lameness

Re: So freaking long it's two parts!