Conquer Club

More sex please.

suggs wrote:More sex please.

Go for it ... as long as you are willing to accept responsibility for all the results. (and I have seen nothing to suggest that you are not)

I don't push my morality on others, except when it affects me.

an opinion anchored in Elba, no less. but unlike your namesake this one will never make it home

No, I am suggesting that LAWS are not the best way to limit pogroms. I don't "advocate" pogroms at all, except when medically necessary or adviseable. AND, I think the individuals, along with their local business owners pissed off by local jewery and their anti-semite clergy are much, much better at deciding what is "medically necessary" than congress or you or I sitting here, without all the information about the case.

When you make pogroms illegal, you don't eliminate then. Particularly when you also limit education. You drive them underground, where you often end up losing BOTH the life of the jew AND the neo-Nazi ... not to mention any children that neo-Nazi might have in the future...


ALSO, you need to look a bit more into how pogroms, random deportations et al. are all historically used by GOVERNMENTS to control a population by finding a scapegoat before you so blithely dismiss this as anti-semites "just deciding" to go on a killing spree.

Again, I do NOT agree with pogroms (except for medical reasons), BUT I DO advocate education rather than legislation.

And, if one thing has been made absolutely clear by your many posts, it is how very badly we need REAL, mandatory, sex/abstinance education (the goal is to teach responsibility but through real information, not lies and not religious lessons to which only some subscribe). YOU have obviously NOT had it

Yes, I fucking have! And because of pathetically limp-wristed starry-eyed do-gooders like you imagining your grand social visions and imposing your ridiculous sex-ed schemes on schools, I have my time, which could be spent contributing towards getting me into a decent university or actually learning something useful, I end having to sit there whilst some fugly cretin of a woman talks to me in a nasal, whinny voice about abstinence (can't have been hard for her...) and how I should always use a condom. To which I ask whether I should also wear wellies in the bath, but that's irrelevant. Point is; you don't really need education. Yes, the darkies in Nbogo-congo land might, what with their "have sex with a avirgin to cure AIDS" schemes, but here in the West; I think we've understood the mechanics of sexual intercourse. We really don't need to be told about the birds and the bees repeatedly, over an entire afternoon once every month.

Napoleon Ier wrote:Yes, I fucking have! And because of pathetically limp-wristed starry-eyed do-gooders like you imagining your grand social visions and imposing your ridiculous sex-ed schemes on schools, I have my time, which could be spent contributing towards getting me into a decent university or actually learning something useful, I end having to sit there whilst some fugly cretin of a woman talks to me in a nasal, whinny voice about abstinence (can't have been hard for her...) and how I should always use a condom. To which I ask whether I should also wear wellies in the bath, but that's irrelevant. Point is; you don't really need education. Yes, the darkies in Nbogo-congo land might, what with their "have sex with a avirgin to cure AIDS" schemes, but here in the West; I think we've understood the mechanics of sexual intercourse. We really don't need to be told about the birds and the bees repeatedly, over an entire afternoon once every month.

RACIST!!!!!


You're an ignorant bigot, who thinks they should be allowed to impose their own "moral values" on other people. Either that, or you're pro-choice, and just trying to make the other side look foolish by pretending to be an asshole. I'm guessing, the former.

Nappy's a bigot! Whee!

Neoteny wrote:Nappy's a bigot! Whee!

NEWSFLASH: POPE CLAIMS HIS BELIEF IN GOD "STILL STRONG"

PLAYER57832 wrote:No, I am suggesting that LAWS are not the best way to limit abortions.

I would disagee here. LAWS are not the best way to eliminate abortions. LAWS are the best way to limit abortions, especially the most extreeme cases where alternates are available and to ensure that the "right" of an abortion doesn't trump established prodedures in law and medicine.

Napoleon Ier wrote:

Neoteny wrote:Nappy's a bigot! Whee!

NEWSFLASH: POPE CLAIMS HIS BELIEF IN GOD "STILL STRONG"

Does the pope shit in the woods?! Wait...

Napoleon Ier wrote:
Yes, I fucking have! And because of pathetically limp-wristed starry-eyed do-gooders like you imagining your grand social visions and imposing your ridiculous sex-ed schemes on schools, I have my time, which could be spent contributing towards getting me into a decent university or actually learning something useful, I end having to sit there whilst some fugly cretin of a woman talks to me in a nasal, whinny voice about abstinence (can't have been hard for her...) and how I should always use a condom. To which I ask whether I should also wear wellies in the bath, but that's irrelevant. Point is; you don't really need education. Yes, the darkies in Nbogo-congo land might, what with their "have sex with a avirgin to cure AIDS" schemes, but here in the West; I think we've understood the mechanics of sexual intercourse. We really don't need to be told about the birds and the bees repeatedly, over an entire afternoon once every month.

By Christ Nappy needs a shag!

tzor wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:No, I am suggesting that LAWS are not the best way to limit abortions.

I would disagee here. LAWS are not the best way to eliminate abortions. LAWS are the best way to limit abortions, especially the most extreeme cases where alternates are available and to ensure that the "right" of an abortion doesn't trump established prodedures in law and medicine.

Actually, no, the best way too limit abortions is telling kids how to prevent getting pregnant. And not by the ridiculous abstinence-only education that is common as kids are going to motherfucking do it anyway. Shit, if anything not talking about it makes them wanna do it more.

Snorri1234 wrote:

tzor wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:No, I am suggesting that LAWS are not the best way to limit abortions.

I would disagee here. LAWS are not the best way to eliminate abortions. LAWS are the best way to limit abortions, especially the most extreeme cases where alternates are available and to ensure that the "right" of an abortion doesn't trump established prodedures in law and medicine.

Actually, no, the best way too limit abortions is telling kids how to prevent getting pregnant. And not by the ridiculous abstinence-only education that is common as kids are going to motherfucking do it anyway. Shit, if anything not talking about it makes them wanna do it more.

Snorri's position is backed up by data. BUT, I have to clarify that some "abstinance only" education IS good. Good education tells what, how and all consequences. (STD's, pregnancy, the realities of having a child and giving one up ... etc. AND how to prevent both pregnancy and STD's). NOT talking about it means that kids learn whatever the nearest playground idiot happens to think is true. AND leaves them at risk for older adults to misinform for their own purposes as well. (generally, I am not talking about parent/grandparents here). Abstinance DOES increase with good education. Why? because most teens DO know they are not ready to be parents.

What they do later ...depends on upbringing as well as the factual information. That is, when one gets older, the question is not so much "am I ready" but "am I willing to take the risk"

tzor wrote:especially the most extreeme cases where alternates are available and to ensure that the "right" of an abortion doesn't trump established prodedures in law and medicine.

I think you are off track a bit here. About the only time there is an "alternative" readily available is prior to conception. Afterward, it is medicine that should trump law, but often doesn't. Too often, legislatures, without medical training, without ever having been in a situation where an abortion was reccommended, decide THEY (bowing to radical constituancy) and not the person, their doctor and clergy know best.

And, will add that the Roman Catholic Church is one of the staunchest opponents to both ANY form of birth control (except rythm, for married folks) and most sex education.

PLAYER57832 wrote: Abstinance DOES increase with good education. Why? because most teens DO know they are not ready to be parents.

Word. Though I'd say it's more that they know they're not ready to face all the consequences from sex.

And, will add that the Roman Catholic Church is one of the staunchest opponents to both ANY form of birth control (except rythm, for married folks)

Well I think they have said that condom-usage is not neccesarily bad a few years ago. (At least, if the priest and the altar-boy don't know eachother very well.)

Snorri1234 wrote:they have said that condom-usage is not neccesarily bad a few years ago. (At least, if the priest and the altar-boy don't know eachother very well.)

Lollercaust.

jiminski wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:
Yes, I fucking have! And because of pathetically limp-wristed starry-eyed do-gooders like you imagining your grand social visions and imposing your ridiculous sex-ed schemes on schools, I have my time, which could be spent contributing towards getting me into a decent university or actually learning something useful, I end having to sit there whilst some fugly cretin of a woman talks to me in a nasal, whinny voice about abstinence (can't have been hard for her...) and how I should always use a condom. To which I ask whether I should also wear wellies in the bath, but that's irrelevant. Point is; you don't really need education. Yes, the darkies in Nbogo-congo land might, what with their "have sex with a avirgin to cure AIDS" schemes, but here in the West; I think we've understood the mechanics of sexual intercourse. We really don't need to be told about the birds and the bees repeatedly, over an entire afternoon once every month.

By Christ Nappy needs a shag!

Hmm. But unlike you, he can actually easily get one from a hot blonde with massive knockers, whilst you fork out £40 for an hour of fun with a phillippino ladyboy.

Napoleon Ier wrote:

jiminski wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:
Yes, I fucking have! And because of pathetically limp-wristed starry-eyed do-gooders like you imagining your grand social visions and imposing your ridiculous sex-ed schemes on schools, I have my time, which could be spent contributing towards getting me into a decent university or actually learning something useful, I end having to sit there whilst some fugly cretin of a woman talks to me in a nasal, whinny voice about abstinence (can't have been hard for her...) and how I should always use a condom. To which I ask whether I should also wear wellies in the bath, but that's irrelevant. Point is; you don't really need education. Yes, the darkies in Nbogo-congo land might, what with their "have sex with a avirgin to cure AIDS" schemes, but here in the West; I think we've understood the mechanics of sexual intercourse. We really don't need to be told about the birds and the bees repeatedly, over an entire afternoon once every month.

By Christ Nappy needs a shag!

Hmm. But unlike you, he can actually easily get one from a hot blonde with massive knockers, whilst you fork out £40 for an hour of fun with a phillippino ladyboy.

Flame wars is this way.

Napoleon Ier wrote:

jiminski wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:
Yes, I fucking have! And because of pathetically limp-wristed starry-eyed do-gooders like you imagining your grand social visions and imposing your ridiculous sex-ed schemes on schools, I have my time, which could be spent contributing towards getting me into a decent university or actually learning something useful, I end having to sit there whilst some fugly cretin of a woman talks to me in a nasal, whinny voice about abstinence (can't have been hard for her...) and how I should always use a condom. To which I ask whether I should also wear wellies in the bath, but that's irrelevant. Point is; you don't really need education. Yes, the darkies in Nbogo-congo land might, what with their "have sex with a avirgin to cure AIDS" schemes, but here in the West; I think we've understood the mechanics of sexual intercourse. We really don't need to be told about the birds and the bees repeatedly, over an entire afternoon once every month.

By Christ Nappy needs a shag!

Hmm. But unlike you, he can actually easily get one from a hot blonde with massive knockers, whilst you fork out £40 for an hour of fun with a phillippino ladyboy.

well they are the best !

you do the naughty then do you Nappy?

Snorri1234 wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:And, will add that the Roman Catholic Church is one of the staunchest opponents to both ANY form of birth control (except rythm, for married folks)

Well I think they have said that condom-usage is not neccesarily bad a few years ago. (At least, if the priest and the altar-boy don't know eachother very well.)

The official position is no birth control. In the US Catholic church, some priests have relaxed this a bit... but that is not the official position.

The "mainline" Protestant churches (Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, Episcopalien) generally leave this up to the individuals (with prayer, thought, counseling if desired), but you will find folks across the spectrum as individuals. Other churches vary considerably in their stances.

Or you could leave the cult, and think for yourself.

suggs wrote:Or you could leave the cult, and think for yourself.

Since when did considering what others say mean you were not thinking for yourself?

suggs wrote:Or you could leave the cult, and think for yourself.

Yes you could leave your cult suggs.

muy_thaiguy wrote:

suggs wrote:Or you could leave the cult, and think for yourself.

Yes you could leave your cult suggs.

The Cult of Suggs - I guess the acolytes don't wear saffron robes and finger bells to accost strangers in the street.

Suggs-gestions?

jonesthecurl wrote:

muy_thaiguy wrote:

suggs wrote:Or you could leave the cult, and think for yourself.

Yes you could leave your cult suggs.

The Cult of Suggs - I guess the acolytes don't wear saffron robes and finger bells to accost strangers in the street.

Suggs-gestions?

make a thread to find out how we should follow Suggsy; are we based upon Anarcho-syndicalism? do we like the French? Does our loose collective covet badgers!?

*say know to puns!*

Snorri1234 wrote:

tzor wrote:I would disagee here. LAWS are not the best way to eliminate abortions. LAWS are the best way to limit abortions ...

Actually, no, the best way too limit abortions is telling kids how to prevent getting pregnant.

Not quite, it's getting people (kids and adults) to be able to prevent them from getting pregnant if, of course, we are assuming that they aren't trying to get pregnant in the first place. But that would be the best way to reduce abortions. Yes I'm being a nit pick on verbs here. If we can reduce the need for abortions in the first place then we don't have to worry about them in the first place.

(Fixed the quote problem.)

Yes, because kids are so fucking ignorant they need lectures from fat, balding men or women with facial hair telling them with audiovisual aids how having sex can lead (drum roll) to pregnancy. No fucking shit...and putting a rubber on it stops this bizarre, mythological effect you describe? Wow...what voo-dooo the PSE teacher enlightens us to...maybe she can also lead a fertility dance and make the grass of the school fields grow taller, yah?