Well, I don’t know what they’re up to these days, but I was 11 or 12. Way more than old enough to know that I had a significant degree of interest in that general subject.

1) “pornhead”. Wow, seriously loaded language right there.

Whether porn is systematically destroying the moral fabric of America is a conversation for a different day

“She didn’t really mean what she said!” isn’t an especially impressive defense. Pandering to idiots may not make you one, but it’s not exactly a sign of honestly, or a willingness to make unpopular decisions when necessary.

Meanwhile, Stein remains useless, unelectable, and pandering to anti-science morons. Pointing out the flaws in other candidates (and doing a rather shit job of it, as BAM5 noted) isn’t a very effective way to address the criticisms of your own.

Jill is JAQing off.

Based on your rather embarrassing history with the argument from ignorance, maybe you should steer clear of discussing logical fallacies. You clearly aren’t very good at it.

We don’t even know how Chrons disease works.

The trick is finding some actual fucking evidence that they are harmful, or even might possibly sort of be harmful. When you get that, we can have a meaningful discussion. Until then, you have fearmongering nonsense and crazy kookery.

Gotta pander to her voting base just like everyone else. Trump is working on the evangelicals, Stein on the nutty hippy woo-woo types.

I can sympathize with objections to the incredibly sexist, and frankly batshit crazy obsession that many religious groups, Islam included, have with modesty. Women’s modesty in particular.