pippetbagglesnack
pippetbagglesnack
pippetbagglesnack

Can we bring hat pins back? I love big hats with a wide brim, and they offer some shade, but they look stupid jammed down on your head, and they fly away to easily if you wear them just so on your head without a pin. Or maybe just a comb attached inside the brim to grab your hair.

So? I'd rather have a bunch of people saying I have autonomy over my body and its contents than a bunch of people who want to legislate their limits on what I can do based on an imaginary friend.

That's the point though. The Satanists don't want to get away with this. They are saying, "If you destroy the boundary between Church and State, you are opening the door for the Satanists."

That's how it works on Star Trek. The god-like beings who want to keep the crew trapped in their domain doing their bidding are always the bad guys.

If you read the story in Genesis of the tree of knowledge with an objective eye, it becomes abundantly clear that the guy trying to provide knowledge (the serpent) is the hero, and the guy trying to suppress it (god) is the villain.

One of my faves...

And whether or not they're fake is immaterial, as long as they have Sincerely Held Religious Beliefs! (Which, like, yeah, just try to prove ANYbody's sincerity in court.)

Satanism is by no means a blooddripping horrorshow confined to the woods on full moon thursdays. I personally find it somewhat nefarious, but only because it's philosophy of selfishness above all is inspired by Ayn Rand's Objectivism which is about as far removed from my socialist beliefs as can be. Satanism actually

This is wonderful. And if a local chapter opens up, I can tell my mother I'm going to temple with a clear conscience. Wins around.

This pandora's box the SCOTUS opened is going to be scary and amazing at the same time.

Satanism. The compassionate version of Christianity. I love it.

I'm not much on organized religion of any kind, but this stance I can get behind! I hope they take this all the way to the Supreme Court! Had a great media law class in college in which I learned that if you try to tear a hole in any amendment or law to get at someone, then beware that the group you just went after

Oopsies, someone's making the dangerous assumption in their argument that correlation proves causation. Not only do you have no proof of causation that the rate of adoptions went down directly due to abortion being legalized some statisticians and scientists lean toward the belief it was largely birth control, which

There is something wrong with you. You are delusional. You need to do a lot of research on the history of adoption in this country. At one time states would take babies away from single adult women. These babies were not given up for adoption, they were stolen. Women who became pregnant before roe v Wade lost their

For me, pregnancy would definitely be a curse. It's not about motherhood - I have a genetic disorder (that is fairly common as genetic disorders go) and pregnancy would cause me immense pain, and the long-term damage pregnancy would do to my body would most likely make it difficult to live and function as I hope to.

Sigh, ok here we go. Fanrant/nitpicks:

Then why are you coming here to post an objection to what the UN is saying. Their concern is that Ireland is making it too complicate to get an abortion that is "life saving" and Chile will not allow it all. Seems to me that you're saying you agree with them. What are you exactly objecting to here?

HAHAHAHA "simply for not having been born", like it's such a small diference, y'all. The fetus and the woman who carries it are totes the same, except, you know, one of them has not even been born and it apparently deserves more rights because of it.

Women are clearly only worth as much as a bunch of cells when they choose to become corporations. Come one. It goes

Except that shit you're promoting is lies, bullshit, sexism, and ignorance.