Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
biology collides with legislation
If she needs contraception she is technically a woman.
Bullshit. Not even close.
Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed, eh? So you don't mind 50 year old men humping 13 year olds?
The ability to produce sperm or ovulate is not what makes someone an adult. The brain of a child has not developed the judgement centers to maturity. This is scientific fact. A child is literally incapable of the judgmental abilities of an adult. That is why a parent needs to be involved in their decisions.
A fifty year old can run circles around a kid mentally.
We don't let kids get tattoos without parental consent, but we are going to let them get contraceptive medication without it?
Or maybe a girl of 14 will have sex with a 14 year old boy. Or 17 year old young man. Statutory rape is beside the point.
The fertilized egg isn't even a fetus yet while the morning after pill is effective. Now the girl can avoid an abortion. Don't we all want abortions to be rare? Teenagers WILL have sex whether they have access to emergency contraceptives or not. At least this way there may be fewer abortions.
Quit being deluded puritans.
Then they wonder why so many 11,12,13 14 year olds are having sex.
It's because of stupid people like this Judge, who just gave young teens the freedom to have sex without any consequences or responsibility.
Judge strikes restrictions on "morning-after" pill
The morning after pill must now be made available to females under the age of 17 without a prescription, and without their parents' knowledge.
Currently, only women age 17 or older can obtain emergency contraception pills without a prescription. Point-of-sale restrictions require that all women present identification to a pharmacist before obtaining the drug.
In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Edward Korman said the FDA's rejection of requests to remove age restrictions was "arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable."
The Center for Reproductive Rights has given two thumbs up to this judicial ruling.
See if you can find what is wrong in the sentence I bolded:
Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, hailed the ruling. "Women all over the country will no longer face arbitrary delays and barriers just to get emergency contraception," she said
biology collides with legislation
If she needs contraception she is technically a woman.
Then why are there statutory rape laws?
A 14 year old is not a woman. That is the flaw in the idiot's statement about "women" no longer having to face barriers. Actual women have not had any such barriers. They have been able to get the drug OTC without a prescription. So this ruling has nothing to do with them. Therefore, when the asshole says "women" have had the barriers removed, she is talking about children.
Christ, she may as well have said, "Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed"!
The judge said banning children from this drug was "capricious and arbitrary". What a stupid fuck. It is no different than the drinking age, which is also arbitrary. Is he going to overrule that, too?
A great plan for liberals slutty daughters..........they must be proud
Because the age of majority is 18 and anyone younger needs to be afforded special treatment by the law. That includes the protection from being forced to give birth.biology collides with legislation
If she needs contraception she is technically a woman.
Then why are there statutory rape laws?
biology collides with legislation
If she needs contraception she is technically a woman.
Bullshit. Not even close.
Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed, eh? So you don't mind 50 year old men humping 13 year olds?
The ability to produce sperm or ovulate is not what makes someone an adult. The brain of a child has not developed the judgement centers to maturity. This is scientific fact. A child is literally incapable of the judgmental abilities of an adult. That is why a parent needs to be involved in their decisions.
A fifty year old can run circles around a kid mentally.
We don't let kids get tattoos without parental consent, but we are going to let them get contraceptive medication without it?
Or maybe a girl of 14 will have sex with a 14 year old boy. Or 17 year old young man. Statutory rape is beside the point.
The fertilized egg isn't even a fetus yet while the morning after pill is effective. Now the girl can avoid an abortion. Don't we all want abortions to be rare? Teenagers WILL have sex whether they have access to emergency contraceptives or not. At least this way there may be fewer abortions.
Quit being deluded puritans.
Bullshit. Not even close.
Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed, eh? So you don't mind 50 year old men humping 13 year olds?
The ability to produce sperm or ovulate is not what makes someone an adult. The brain of a child has not developed the judgement centers to maturity. This is scientific fact. A child is literally incapable of the judgmental abilities of an adult. That is why a parent needs to be involved in their decisions.
A fifty year old can run circles around a kid mentally.
We don't let kids get tattoos without parental consent, but we are going to let them get contraceptive medication without it?
Or maybe a girl of 14 will have sex with a 14 year old boy. Or 17 year old young man. Statutory rape is beside the point.
The fertilized egg isn't even a fetus yet while the morning after pill is effective. Now the girl can avoid an abortion. Don't we all want abortions to be rare? Teenagers WILL have sex whether they have access to emergency contraceptives or not. At least this way there may be fewer abortions.
Quit being deluded puritans.
So encouraging our young people to marshall their logic and/or ethics in order to master carnal instinct is pointless, huh?
Kids are gonna screw kids, men are gonna screw men, men are gonna screw boys .....
No sense trying to draw a line? Really?
If believing we shouldn't just surrender in the effort to control our carnal instincts makes me a "deluded puritan" then I'll wear the badge with honor.
What a retarded straw man you've constructed.biology collides with legislation
If she needs contraception she is technically a woman.
Bullshit. Not even close.
Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed, eh? So you don't mind 50 year old men humping 13 year olds?
The ability to produce sperm or ovulate is not what makes someone an adult. The brain of a child has not developed the judgement centers to maturity. This is scientific fact. A child is literally incapable of the judgmental abilities of an adult. That is why a parent needs to be involved in their decisions.
A fifty year old can run circles around a kid mentally.
We don't let kids get tattoos without parental consent, but we are going to let them get contraceptive medication without it?
Because the age of majority is 18 and anyone younger needs to be afforded special treatment by the law. That includes the protection from being forced to give birth.biology collides with legislation
If she needs contraception she is technically a woman.
Then why are there statutory rape laws?
If the parent had the control you believe the parent should have the young woman wouldn't be having sex, dope.Bullshit. Not even close.
Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed, eh? So you don't mind 50 year old men humping 13 year olds?
The ability to produce sperm or ovulate is not what makes someone an adult. The brain of a child has not developed the judgement centers to maturity. This is scientific fact. A child is literally incapable of the judgmental abilities of an adult. That is why a parent needs to be involved in their decisions.
A fifty year old can run circles around a kid mentally.
We don't let kids get tattoos without parental consent, but we are going to let them get contraceptive medication without it?
Or maybe a girl of 14 will have sex with a 14 year old boy. Or 17 year old young man. Statutory rape is beside the point.
The fertilized egg isn't even a fetus yet while the morning after pill is effective. Now the girl can avoid an abortion. Don't we all want abortions to be rare? Teenagers WILL have sex whether they have access to emergency contraceptives or not. At least this way there may be fewer abortions.
Quit being deluded puritans.
If this were about 18+ people then the puritan thing would be appropriate. This is basically a judge saying piss off to both parents and medical professionals when it comes to children. A parent should have a say in thier childs medical choices. If not let them emancipate the little rug rats when they start growing pubic hair.
The problem here is reverse puritanism, where some people feel the need to have ZERO restrictions on anything involving sex.
Bullshit. Not even close.
Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed, eh? So you don't mind 50 year old men humping 13 year olds?
The ability to produce sperm or ovulate is not what makes someone an adult. The brain of a child has not developed the judgement centers to maturity. This is scientific fact. A child is literally incapable of the judgmental abilities of an adult. That is why a parent needs to be involved in their decisions.
A fifty year old can run circles around a kid mentally.
We don't let kids get tattoos without parental consent, but we are going to let them get contraceptive medication without it?
Or maybe a girl of 14 will have sex with a 14 year old boy. Or 17 year old young man. Statutory rape is beside the point.
The fertilized egg isn't even a fetus yet while the morning after pill is effective. Now the girl can avoid an abortion. Don't we all want abortions to be rare? Teenagers WILL have sex whether they have access to emergency contraceptives or not. At least this way there may be fewer abortions.
Quit being deluded puritans.
If this were about 18+ people then the puritan thing would be appropriate. This is basically a judge saying piss off to both parents and medical professionals when it comes to children. A parent should have a say in thier childs medical choices. If not let them emancipate the little rug rats when they start growing pubic hair.
The problem here is reverse puritanism, where some people feel the need to have ZERO restrictions on anything involving sex.
A 14 year old is not a woman. That is the flaw in the idiot's statement about "women" no longer having to face barriers. Actual women have not had any such barriers. They have been able to get the drug OTC without a prescription. So this ruling has nothing to do with them. Therefore, when the asshole says "women" have had the barriers removed, she is talking about children.
Christ, she may as well have said, "Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed"!
The judge said banning children from this drug was "capricious and arbitrary". What a stupid fuck. It is no different than the drinking age, which is also arbitrary. Is he going to overrule that, too?
The problem is that there are some parents unwise enough to force a 14 year-old girl to carry a pregnancy to term. Laws sometimes must be created to protect society from its dumbest and most cruel elements.
The problem here is reverse puritanism, where some people feel the need to have ZERO restrictions on anything involving sex.
Another strawman.A 14 year old is not a woman. That is the flaw in the idiot's statement about "women" no longer having to face barriers. Actual women have not had any such barriers. They have been able to get the drug OTC without a prescription. So this ruling has nothing to do with them. Therefore, when the asshole says "women" have had the barriers removed, she is talking about children.
Christ, she may as well have said, "Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed"!
The judge said banning children from this drug was "capricious and arbitrary". What a stupid fuck. It is no different than the drinking age, which is also arbitrary. Is he going to overrule that, too?
The problem is that there are some parents unwise enough to force a 14 year-old girl to carry a pregnancy to term. Laws sometimes must be created to protect society from its dumbest and most cruel elements.
Good old governence by exception. Because of a few bad examples parents all over the place now can have no say in what medicine the children they are legally responsible for can put in thier bodies. Like I said, if progressives want to set the bar lower for this one item, set the bar lower for everything. Delcare people in the majority at 14 and release the parents from the rest of thier responsibilites in a manner consistent with their inability to control access to medication.
Or maybe a girl of 14 will have sex with a 14 year old boy. Or 17 year old young man. Statutory rape is beside the point.
The fertilized egg isn't even a fetus yet while the morning after pill is effective. Now the girl can avoid an abortion. Don't we all want abortions to be rare? Teenagers WILL have sex whether they have access to emergency contraceptives or not. At least this way there may be fewer abortions.
Quit being deluded puritans.
If this were about 18+ people then the puritan thing would be appropriate. This is basically a judge saying piss off to both parents and medical professionals when it comes to children. A parent should have a say in thier childs medical choices. If not let them emancipate the little rug rats when they start growing pubic hair.
The problem here is reverse puritanism, where some people feel the need to have ZERO restrictions on anything involving sex.
Give me a break! Who wants their to be no restrictions at all on sex? Who?
It has nothing to do with SEX! It has to do with teenagers avoiding abortions! Teenagers will have sex. Try to stop them. Should parents be allowed to force their teenage daughters to give birth to unwanted pregnancies?
Another strawman.The problem is that there are some parents unwise enough to force a 14 year-old girl to carry a pregnancy to term. Laws sometimes must be created to protect society from its dumbest and most cruel elements.
Good old governence by exception. Because of a few bad examples parents all over the place now can have no say in what medicine the children they are legally responsible for can put in thier bodies. Like I said, if progressives want to set the bar lower for this one item, set the bar lower for everything. Delcare people in the majority at 14 and release the parents from the rest of thier responsibilites in a manner consistent with their inability to control access to medication.
