Why Won't These Evil Sluts Have My Kids?

not particularly odd... (0.00 / 0)

neocons are hypocritical. nothing odd about that. in fact, i would call it stereotypical...

United we stand, divided we fall.

power to the polite people!

---

by: wolverine6 @ Sun Feb 01, 2009 at 20:20:09 PM UTC

Next up... (0.00 / 0)

legislation saying it is illegal to have sex out of wedlock, contraceptives are illegal, sex is only for the purpose of procreation, and you can't get divorced or have an abortion.

Oh, wait a minute. We already have that, sans legislation. It's called the Catholic Church.

---

by: JC @ Sun Feb 01, 2009 at 21:09:04 PM UTC

Somewhat unfair (0.00 / 0)

It isn't just the Catholic church, JC.  In fact, compared to their evangelical brethren, the Catholics are downright enlightened (at least among the American diocese.)

But you did hit the target, if not the bullseye.  What Steyn is calling for is what many in the conservative movements already consider an axiom:  that public policy and (sexual) morality are one thing, a Chimera of terrible power. The root of that is not in religious teaching but in the assumption of white male privilege.  The dogma of the former has been bent to serve the latter, not vice versa.  Because of that, the churches can only call passively for what Steyn calls for aggressively and overtly.

That women be slaves to their male masters, publicly, politically, financially and physically.

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Sun Feb 01, 2009 at 21:19:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Misogyny (0.00 / 0)

    i hope this Repug description for women is posted far and wide. i wish i knew where the original post from this Wolfgar ??? Repug was so i could post it to a few thousand sites. They don't get it they never will; they are Narcissistic Authoritarians and because of this Character Defect/Disorder they are incapable of recognizing their genetic inequities.
   This is Repugs at their best.

       

---

by: Darwin26 @ Sun Feb 01, 2009 at 21:23:38 PM UTC

Ask (0.00 / 0)

and ye shall receive.  Steyn is syndicated, so you should be able to find it several places. Here is where I read it.  Expect complete and utter silence from the right.  They will,

a)  Feel shame at agreeing with Steyn, knowing that his honesty is dangerous to their holding power, or

b)  blame us for noticing their their lack of moral standing as regards those who are 51% of our society (women).

And please, in the future, read things carefully and follow links.  I am not a "Repug", nor did I advocate in any way the BS that Steyn put forth.

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Sun Feb 01, 2009 at 21:31:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The link (0.00 / 0)

Here.  I guess I pooched it the first time.

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Sun Feb 01, 2009 at 21:34:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I took it as sarcasm. (0.00 / 0)

**shrug**

- Keeping the Left honest since 2001

---

by: sydney@alias @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 18:06:04 PM UTC

If that's the case (0.00 / 0)

Rustysyd, then you understand 'sarcasm' in the same manner as Alanis Morissette understands 'irony', which is to say "not at all".

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 19:18:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Whatever. (0.00 / 0)

If you didn't get it, there's nothing to argue or comment on.

- Keeping the Left honest since 2001

---

by: sydney@alias @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 19:47:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

By all means (0.00 / 0)

Please educate me, Rustysyd.  Do you agree with Steyn that woman are sluts?  Do you agree with Steyn that health care stimulus spending shouldn't include STD prevention, and why?  

Quit hiding behind your 'whatevers', coward.  Make an argument.  Take a stand.  You choose to comment here.  You choose to take a view.  Which means clearly that you have chosen discussion, debate, argument.  But yet you consistently blame others that you haven't presented anything.

Use your words, Rustysyd. Is Steyn right?  Is Steyn wrong?  What is he right about?  What is he wrong about?  And you, Ms. supposed ex-military death machine*, why are you so worried about us weak libs that you can't even present a cogent point?

* That would be sarcasm, Rustysyd, in case you missed it.

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 20:50:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I give answers (0.00 / 0)

to people who actually want to discuss the issue.  I'm not going to answer any questions.  And as I've mentioned before, I rarely read what you write anymore.

You are only interested in one-upping someone else, and being rude.

So no thanks.

- Keeping the Left honest since 2001

---

by: sydney@alias @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 01:04:20 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Which part? The sluts or the evil? (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Matt Singer @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 19:58:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I took the comments by (0.00 / 0)

Steyn to be sarcasm.  Or some variety of that.  Once he referred to the "jukebox industry", it should have been obvious to (nearly) everyone.

Honestly, Matt, there are plenty of issues for us to disagree on, no need to trump up humor into something "real".

- Keeping the Left honest since 2001

---

by: sydney@alias @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 20:21:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Devils in the details, huh? (0.00 / 0)

Rustysyd, you can't whitewash his entire argument because he applied sarcasm to the image of beernuts and jukeboxes as consumer product.

In order for sarcasm to work, it has to show the ridiculous nature of the object to which it is applied. Pelosi was arguing that spending for women's health and STD prevention was an appropriate form of stimulus.  If one is to take you seriously (which gets more difficult by the moment) then you feel that Steyn was mocking that with talk of bars and jukeboxes, in order to argue against women's health and STD prevention.  That's pretty shallow (and stupid and extremely sexist).  The whole point of sarcasm is to take the center of a contention and show it's absurdity.  Which means, quite clearly, that Steyn was showing that concern for women's sexual choices and health issues is, in his mind, absurd.  Yours too, apparently.

No, Steyn was being sarcastic about the hook-up-bar-scene, but his argument against women was anything but sarcastic.  That's the part he has to take seriously in order to make his 'joke'.

---

by: Rob Kailey @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 20:40:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]