What Is The Flaw In This Sentence?

[martybegan]

Since they cost $50 a pop there is no frequent use to study. Dope.

Really? How do you know that? What's to stop a girl from buying a pill every time she has sex?

And $50? How will the poor get access to such pills?

Not easily. The price should be free, imo.

But then again, I'm not for forced birth.

Nothing is ever free, what you mean is someone else should pay for it.

Open up your wallet then Ravi.

 

[Ravi]

hahahahaha! I just love the stupid neaderthal logic of "conservatives," birth control is okay if the guy is buying but the women need big brother to decide for them.

 

[Pogo]

So is a BAC of .08 for DWAI and .10 for DWI. For a legal system to work there has to be set lines.

Utterly false equivalent. You're actually trying to equate a scientific measurement with a loose concept of language. That's absurd. A scientific measure is fixed; language is not.

No one commits a violation of anything by addressing an eight-year-old boy as "young man". It's figurative. Get over it already.

The measure of a BAC is rather exacting, however its INFLUENCE on a person VERY variable. the standards were set based upon emperical observations of a wide range of people.

So me at .12 may be more functional than someone at .06, however for it to work legally a standard must be made to allow comparison to the easily obtained value (a BAC) and not the arbitrary observations of a law enforcement officer that "someone is drunk" this is then codified as over X BAC is impaired, and you are criminally liable.

In the case of majority, yes some people mature faster than others, but unless we test people every year to see when they become an "adult" a standard must be applied. The issue isnt the language, its the fact that the laws want minors to have EITHER a persecription or parental permission to obtain morning after pills, and some idiot judge thinks this is a bad idea.

Irrelevant. The issue is the language. Don't believe me? Read the topic title. That's the only reason I came in here.

 

[jwoodie]

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.

It has nothing to do with encouraging carnal urges or carnal urges at all. It has to do with the reality that teenagers have always and will always have sex and allowing them access to emergency contraceptives saves them from becoming parents at, generally, far too young an age to be responsible parents.

You can't legislate morality, right?

And what do men having sex with men or men having sex with boys have to do with energency contraceptives? There are already laws against men having sex with boys, and do you think there should be laws that discourage two consenting adult men from having sex?

If you had actually read any of Descartes' work, you would know that he was a great defender of "faith," going so far as to "prove" the existence of miracles.

 

[martybegan]

hahahahaha! I just love the stupid neaderthal logic of "conservatives," birth control is okay if the guy is buying but the women need big brother to decide for them.

Women can buy condoms as well, also barriers/sponges.

This is a specifc case of an oral drug, where for some reason the monthly one is perscription, and the right after one is not, even though the right after one is a massive dose of hormones in one shot. Yet for some reason only the massive hormone shot is OTC...

I wonder why????

 

[martybegan]

Utterly false equivalent. You're actually trying to equate a scientific measurement with a loose concept of language. That's absurd. A scientific measure is fixed; language is not.

No one commits a violation of anything by addressing an eight-year-old boy as "young man". It's figurative. Get over it already.

The measure of a BAC is rather exacting, however its INFLUENCE on a person VERY variable. the standards were set based upon emperical observations of a wide range of people.

So me at .12 may be more functional than someone at .06, however for it to work legally a standard must be made to allow comparison to the easily obtained value (a BAC) and not the arbitrary observations of a law enforcement officer that "someone is drunk" this is then codified as over X BAC is impaired, and you are criminally liable.

In the case of majority, yes some people mature faster than others, but unless we test people every year to see when they become an "adult" a standard must be applied. The issue isnt the language, its the fact that the laws want minors to have EITHER a persecription or parental permission to obtain morning after pills, and some idiot judge thinks this is a bad idea.

Irrelevant. The issue is the language. Don't believe me? Read the topic title. That's the only reason I came in here.

The issue is the concept of calling a minor a woman FOR THIS ISSUE ONLY and having said pre majority female be considered pre majority for everything else.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

biology collides with legislation

If she needs contraception she is technically a woman.

Then why are there statutory rape laws?

With the way Progressives are going, men will be able to marry 12 year old girls again; but hey, as long as middle aged lesbians can marry 12 year old girls too, the feminists will embrace it!

 

[Pogo]

Or maybe you buy it ahead of time and store it in case you need it?

In your scenario one has to find a pharmacy to get it, is finding a clinic that much harder?

Looks like you think your mythological fourteen year old is crafty enough to stock up on contraception before the rape.

Jesus fucking Christ.

I've never seen such hypocrisy from someone that pretends to be a libertariani. Condoms are fine and dandy but a birth control pill isn't. What century do you live in?

My libertarianism starts at 18 years old, or wherever the age of majority starts.

A kids' ass is thier parents, unless a court says otherwise.

And who brought rape up into the picture?????
.

Uh- who brought "diddling 14 year old girls" "up into" it?

Awfully big leap to make from the distinction between the words girl and woman...

 

[Unkotare]

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.

Protect society? All members of society?

 

[Unkotare]

biology collides with legislation

If she needs contraception she is technically a woman.

Then why are there statutory rape laws?

With the way Progressives are going, men will be able to marry 12 year old girls again; but hey, as long as middle aged lesbians can marry 12 year old girls too, the feminists will embrace it!

Progressives don't want anyone to get married. Eliminating the family altogether is part of their big picture.

 

[martybegan]

Looks like you think your mythological fourteen year old is crafty enough to stock up on contraception before the rape.

Jesus fucking Christ.

I've never seen such hypocrisy from someone that pretends to be a libertariani. Condoms are fine and dandy but a birth control pill isn't. What century do you live in?

My libertarianism starts at 18 years old, or wherever the age of majority starts.

A kids' ass is thier parents, unless a court says otherwise.

And who brought rape up into the picture?????
.

Uh- who brought "diddling 14 year old girls" "up into" it?

Awfully big leap to make from the distinction between the words girl and woman...

It was to prove a point, we are talking about minor females and sex, right?

You must be a fricking English Major, too hung up on the words and not the meaning or intent behind them. Its like talking to a fucking accountant about numbers.

 

[boedicca]

Life of Julia! The Government is your life partner.

 

[Unkotare]

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.

It has nothing to do with encouraging carnal urges or carnal urges at all. It has to do with the reality that teenagers have always and will always have sex and allowing them access to emergency contraceptives saves them from becoming parents at, generally, far too young an age to be responsible parents.

You can't legislate morality, right?

And what do men having sex with men or men having sex with boys have to do with energency contraceptives? There are already laws against men having sex with boys, and do you think there should be laws that discourage two consenting adult men from having sex?

If you had actually read any of Descartes' work, you would know that he was a great defender of "faith," going so far as to "prove" the existence of miracles.

Did I miss some posts? When did Descartes come into this discussion?

 

[Pogo]

My libertarianism starts at 18 years old, or wherever the age of majority starts.

A kids' ass is thier parents, unless a court says otherwise.

And who brought rape up into the picture?????
.

Uh- who brought "diddling 14 year old girls" "up into" it?

Awfully big leap to make from the distinction between the words girl and woman...

It was to prove a point, we are talking about minor females and sex, right?

You must be a fricking English Major, too hung up on the words and not the meaning or intent behind them. Its like talking to a fucking accountant about numbers.

Fucking hey, I'm fucking just fucking going by what the fucking thread is titled and what the fucking OP fucking says. So fucking sue me.

Fucking fact refuckingmains, nothing in whether we call someone a "girl" or a "woman" fucking implies "diddling 14 year olds". Or 50 year olds. That's what I call a fucking leap.

 

[martybegan]

Uh- who brought "diddling 14 year old girls" "up into" it?

Awfully big leap to make from the distinction between the words girl and woman...

It was to prove a point, we are talking about minor females and sex, right?

You must be a fricking English Major, too hung up on the words and not the meaning or intent behind them. Its like talking to a fucking accountant about numbers.

Fucking hey, I'm fucking just fucking going by what the fucking thread is titled and what the fucking OP fucking says. So fucking sue me.

Fucking fact refuckingmains, nothing in whether we call someone a "girl" or a "woman" fucking implies "diddling 14 year olds". Or 50 year olds. That's what I call a fucking leap.

I suggest modifying your meds. The current blend isnt working the way it should.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

biology collides with legislation

If she needs contraception she is technically a woman.

Then why are there statutory rape laws?

With the way Progressives are going, men will be able to marry 12 year old girls again; but hey, as long as middle aged lesbians can marry 12 year old girls too, the feminists will embrace it!

 

[nodoginnafight]

Every drug has side effects and potential drug interaction implications.

If parents are not made aware of what medications their child is taking, there could be serious complications and dangerous interactions.

Parents should be in the loop. It's not even really a question of where you stand on contraception or abortion. This is an issue of parents' right to know what drugs are being given to their own children.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

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.

It has nothing to do with encouraging carnal urges or carnal urges at all. It has to do with the reality that teenagers have always and will always have sex and allowing them access to emergency contraceptives saves them from becoming parents at, generally, far too young an age to be responsible parents.

You can't legislate morality, right?

And what do men having sex with men or men having sex with boys have to do with energency contraceptives? There are already laws against men having sex with boys, and do you think there should be laws that discourage two consenting adult men from having sex?

If you had actually read any of Descartes' work, you would know that he was a great defender of "faith," going so far as to "prove" the existence of miracles.

Thanks, although I already knew that. Its part of why I use that particular quote in my sig.

He proved the existence of miracles? That's miraculous! Is there some conspiracy to keep that from being part of accepted scientific knowledge despite Descartes, himself, inventing the scientific method?

 

[Caroljo]

biology collides with legislation

If she needs contraception she is technically a woman.

Then why are there statutory rape laws?

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.

How about the right to protection from being aborted? Oh that's right, it isn't human until it's born....my bad!

 

[Coloradomtnman]

biology collides with legislation

If she needs contraception she is technically a woman.

Then why are there statutory rape laws?

With the way Progressives are going, men will be able to marry 12 year old girls again; but hey, as long as middle aged lesbians can marry 12 year old girls too, the feminists will embrace it!

Your post is utterly insulting and stupid (although the Ewok thing is fucking hilarious).

Who is advocating for 12 year old girls to be at legal consenting age? No one. Go ahead and try to make progreasives into the evil bogey men that Michelle Malkin tells you to while you watch Sean Hannity on Fox News and live in your delusional world where about half the population wants to rape children, destroy families, kill babies, steal your guns, impose socialism or marxism or communism on you, live off the government, use Obamaphones to call the Party commisars, force you to be atheist, make your children gay, get rid of marriage, have constant public beastiality, have abortion for fun, have never ending orgies, and be invaded by China because we naively believe we should just quit having national defense.

Quit being so fucking ignorant. Progressives have a slightly different political/social philosophy from yours. Try making friends with some of them: united we stand and all that...