I wish I could say that the most dangerous thing the Democrats push for is less dangerous than antivax, but I’d be lying. Hillary’s warmongering will kill a lot more people than a few yuppies forgoing vaccines.

Why not just have every movie take place in a perfectly pure and diverse paradise with no conflict, then? Since depiction is endorsement, after all.

If the risks associated with those things were anything close to the risks of birth defects due to excessive drinking (or smoking, for that matter!), I probably would. That isn’t the case, however.

You should write a thinkpiece about how brief email replies are the online equivalent of manspreading, and should be considered an act of violence.

What purpose would capitalizing the O serve? Is “Ok.” even a sentence? I find it baffling that anyone could care about that. But then again, I’m a dude.

Maybe you should treat work emails like work emails and not have the same level of emotional investment as you would exchanging letters with a pen pal?

Oh yeah, and I’m going to drive around a neighborhood where kids play, all while drinking booze. Don’t tell me I can’t do that, you ignorant, judgmental piece of shit. There are no studies PROVING that kids will get run over with 100% certainty if I choose to do that.

I don’t think an occasional drink leads to FAS. The comment I was replying to started off with

“How generous of you to not have a problem when I have a glass once in awhile”

The implication being that even if you objected to her downing a bottle of vodka, you have no right to voice that objection.

You’ve heard of fetal alcohol syndrome, right?

You can scream “no one can judge me!” all you want, but when you intentionally put someone else’s well-being at risk you can count on me doing just that.

“..this discussion about astrology is not as important as the discussion you want to have.” But it’s true. Just because he cares doesn’t mean his point is invalid.

You’re no different from an anti-vaxer or climate change denier... rejecting science for disproving your personal ideology.

It’s a lot more scientific than accepting what you were told without question. Which is all you’re defending. Quite ironic that you consider yourself the voice of reason when your position is in opposition to the overwhelming majority of empirical evidence.

It’s not insane, it’s well known scientifically that people express their gender at around that age and that being transgender is part of the human condition and not just a phase:

Fortunately, science has the answer:

It’s because even if you remove the baby you’ve created a distraction by bringing it in the first place. Instead of bringing it and leaving after you’ve already disrupted everything, just don’t bring it.

May I remind you that the original discussion was about video game strippers. Not nearly the same thing as any type of pornography I’ve heard of. You’re wailing about almost-nudity in a video game.

“It’s well known” i.e. commonsense that gets passed down from generation to generation but never had any basis in evidence. There are plenty of societies where kids see naked adults all the time and they aren’t scarred for life. It’s puritan nonsense that you’re spouting, disguised as “fact.”

Hey Jennifer. Thought you might like to know that Tamar Friedmann is a woman, so you should probably use the pronoun her instead of his (“Friedmann and her co-author...”).

Spotify is a terrible example, considering what a pitiful amount it pays out to the artists. “Supporting” artists through Spotify is like supporting movie studios by buying pirated DVDs.

Dear families,

It’s not impersonation any more than having an actor play a cop on TV or in a movie is.