Two Thoughts on the Superbowl: Neither Involves Chicken Wings

5 Feb

The annual gathering of face-painted super fans watching large men bump into each other, also known as the Superbowl, is this Sunday in Miami. I have two thoughts on America’s biggest man-flesh fest:

Scott Fujita

1. I hope the Saints win. It’s not that I really know or care about stats, or that I have something against Peyton Manning, but I want the Saints to win simply due to the existence of Saints linebacker Scott Fujita.  The man has spoken in favor of abortion and gay rights, and he has a BA in political science and an MA in education. This guy is the unicorn of professional athletes. I am sure that many other prominent athletes share similar opinions, but Fujita gets points for actually opening his mouth and not being afraid to do so. Also, someone called him “a pinko communist fag from Berkeley”, and he doesn’t care. I’ve been called a pinko commie many a time, so I relate to him on a personal level. Go, Saints!!! (NY Times)

Tim Tebow

2. Tim Tebow, quarterback for the Florida Gators and avid painter of Bible scripture on his cheeks, is set to appear in two anti-abortion ads during the Superbowl. Where do I begin? First, the ads are sponsored by Focus on the Family, a Christian organization based in Colorado Springs, where I grew up. I could go on and on about Focus on the Family being a horrible, hateful organization, but that would waste my valuable time. Second, my problem is not with Tim Tebow. My problem stems from the misunderstanding Tebow seems to have about his very own “personal” connection to abortion. In 1987, a doctor advised Tim Tebow’s mother, Pam, that her fifth pregnancy carried extreme risk and was a possible threat to her life. She chose to carry Tim to full term. Let’s review: a doctor advised Mrs. Tebow of the risk associated with her pregnancy, Mrs. Tebow weighed her options, and chose to remain pregnant. Mrs. Tebow was given a choice. This is the key to a woman’s right to choose for herself what she will do to her body. However, Tim and his mother are taking a stance against the very choice that Pam Tebow had. This is hypocrisy at its most salient. Leave the pro-life stance behind at the Superbowl. The Superbowl is not meant to serve as a vessel for bigotry! It’s an American event, and I want to see neutral commercials for great American things like Doritos, Pepsi, and Cadillacs!

UPDATE: Someone attempted to leave a comment that said, and I quote: “Only anti-aboortionists know more than God.” Are you kidding me!?! Anyone who claims to be omnipotent in any way, shape, or form is insane. This comment was not approved due to hearsay.

Advertisements

73 Responses to “Two Thoughts on the Superbowl: Neither Involves Chicken Wings”

  1. jingle February 5, 2010 at 10:14 AM #

    wish your good luck.
    nice thinking, 😉

  2. shoutabyss February 5, 2010 at 10:59 AM #

    Woot on being a featured WP blog today. And good thing, too. It’s a beautiful post and a rockin’ blog. Now comes the fun part … exploring everything you’ve written before. Woot!

    I’m not exactly sure what this post is about though? Is some sort of big game coming up? 🙂

    Go Saints!

  3. kdiggs74 February 5, 2010 at 12:47 PM #

    I know that you won’t necessarily like this opinion, but I think its interesting that this commercial can’t simply be seen as someone who chose to have their child trying to convince other young women in the same situation to do the same thing. Just trying to influence their choice. I would say that I am pro-life but I think there will always be choice in the USA because it would be too tough to overturn Roe v. Wade. Also, best of luck to the Saints. I hope that you can enjoy a win for them.

  4. Missy February 5, 2010 at 12:51 PM #

    Go, Saints!

  5. themaskeddefender February 5, 2010 at 12:53 PM #

    I had never heard of Scott Fujita before (don’t usually follow football), but I am an instant fan! I’ll definitely be rooting for the Saints this Sunday! Also, I am a fellow Aquarius, so happy past/upcoming/present birthday!

    • fixedair February 5, 2010 at 1:47 PM #

      Happy Birthday, to you too! Thanks for reading!

  6. Zoey February 5, 2010 at 12:53 PM #

    Yes ! Thank you – excellent post. And wonderful job nailing the hypocrisy of Mr. Tebow and his ilk. I read the same NYT article on Fujita yesterday and immediately felt great respect for him after reading his (not so) common sensical comments ! Unfortunately, because of the (effective but dubious) tactics the Saints used to whupp our Vikings’ butts, specifically the dubious “strip” tactics described in Judy Battista’s 2/4/10 NYT article: “The Strip Is the Saints’ Not-So-Secret-Weapon,” it is hard for me to forgive them.

    Nevertheless – thanks and bravo for an entertaining and thought-provoking post.

  7. bronxilla February 5, 2010 at 2:20 PM #

    I don’t see how Tebow’s stance is hypocritical. It would be so if he were to turn around and support someone else’s abortion, like Ted Haggard, the evangelical pastor who is anti-gay yet was engaged in a gay affair. I believe what Tebow is coomunicating is that, from his perspective, his mother made the moral and therefore correct choice, without which he wouldn’t be here today standing on the brink of making potentially millions of dollars from professional football.

    • fixedair February 5, 2010 at 2:22 PM #

      Ah, but you see, you said it yourself: “his mother made the moral and therefore correct choice.” (emphasis mine). That’s the whole point. She had a choice.

  8. bronxilla February 5, 2010 at 3:12 PM #

    Yes, but for pro-lifers, the choice is between a moral and an immoral one and, therefore, from their point of view, not a choice between two equal goods, or between two difficult choices, but between something good and something bad. In this light, pro-lifers see this “choice” as choosing between good and evil, or right and wrong and, as such, the only correc choice is what is right. Pro-choicers see the choice between two goods – a wanted baby or the termination of an unwanted pregnancy. This may be a difficult choice, but, for pro-choicers, it’s not a choice between good or evil, or right or wrong.

  9. fixedair February 5, 2010 at 3:19 PM #

    How do you know that people who are pro-choice aren’t choosing between a moral and immoral choice? Also, whether a pregnancy is wanted or unwanted is not the only issue a pro-choice person looks at. What about rape and incest? What about whether the mother’s or child’s life is threatened? It’s not a choice between two goods!!!

    • bronxilla February 5, 2010 at 3:27 PM #

      Well, I would assume that rape and incest fall under the unwanted pregnancy category. The mother’s health probably falls under the same category, depending on when during the pregancy this becomes an issue.

      If pro-choicers are choosing between a moral and immoral choice, then that would seem kind of odd, don’t you think, that they would be advocating for a dichotomy like that. I don’t think NARAL or NOW would ever suggest that they support this kind of choice.

      • fixedair February 5, 2010 at 6:56 PM #

        Look, no one is pro-abortion. That’s why it’s called pro-choice! It’s not always an easy choice, and the guilt and moral questions women may face when considering an abortion are there!!!

    • hisfool February 7, 2010 at 4:52 PM #

      Yes, incest, rape and the like happen, however this is a very small percentage. I do not remember the actual numbers but it is around one percent or less. Of greater concern to me is the genocidal/eugenic aspect of abortion. (The roots of Planned Parenthood are found in the eugenics movement of the 30’s. Margaret Sanger was a proponent of eugenics – along with some other very scary people.

      Planed Parenthood has a history of building their clinics in minority neighborhoods. That should not be a surprise given their roots and the fact that the majority of all abortions are performed on Blacks. In other words, over 50 percent of abortions are performed on about 30 percent of the population in this country. The statistical result is that more of the Black population dies each year than are born. I don’t know about you, but that troubles me.

      These are not wild claims, but all verifiable facts that can be dug out after a little research on your favorite search engine.

      • fixedair February 7, 2010 at 5:21 PM #

        Open your eyes. Incest and rape happen ALL THE TIME. 2 in 3 women will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime. The only reason your figures seems to be ignorant of this is because countless cases go unreported.

        Oh, and using the word “Blacks” is verging on being very offensive. I suggest you drop this from your vocabulary.

  10. Tri February 5, 2010 at 5:32 PM #

    HERE-Here!!!!! I’m so over the whole Super Bowl Schoooper bowl anyways.

  11. The Harlem Yuppie February 5, 2010 at 6:49 PM #

    Good job my dear! Awesome feature

  12. La Rissa February 5, 2010 at 6:52 PM #

    I agree and support a woman’s choice. And go Saints!!

  13. carmel February 5, 2010 at 7:57 PM #

    congratulations on being featured! I too am hoping for a saints victory, but that’s mainly because they’re underdogs and I’m not a manning fan…

  14. bronxilla February 5, 2010 at 9:53 PM #

    Yes, but for pro-lifers, the choice is between a moral and an immoral one and, therefore, from their point of view, not a choice between two equal goods, or between two difficult choices, but between something good and something bad. In this light, pro-lifers see this choice as choosing between good and evil, or right and wrong and, as such, the only correc choice is what is right. Pro-choicers see the choice between two goods a wanted baby or the termination of an unwanted pregnancy. This may be a difficult choice, but, for pro-choicers, its not a choice between good or evil, or right or wrong.

    • fixedair February 5, 2010 at 9:55 PM #

      Pro-choice people do not view choosing to have an abortion or choosing not to have an abortion as choosing between two equal goods! That makes no damn sense. Goodbye.

  15. J papproth February 5, 2010 at 11:21 PM #

    Does anyone ever change their mind about the abortion issue? I think it’s not fair that NBC will take Focus on the Family money for an ad, and yet refuse money for an ad promoting a gay dating service! If you are going to open the door for certain organizations because your budget is in the toilet, why not broaden your horizons instead of showing favoritism for perceived ‘family friendly’ points of view?

    • kdiggs74 February 6, 2010 at 6:25 PM #

      Just to be clear. The game is going to be on CBS. If you are going to blame the network, then blame the network airing it.

  16. Alex Scherer February 6, 2010 at 12:40 AM #

    Heather, do not criticize Tim Tebow, pity him. During is collegiate football career Tim Tebow was hailed as the greatest college QB of all time. Now that he is done with his college football career one would think a life of hot women and lots of money awaits him in the NFL. However, that is not the case. As an avid football fan, I have been paying close attention to where Tim Tebow’s career may head. All signs point to failure. Scouts all over the NFL notice he cannot throw, take snaps or manage a game (basically he would make a great water boy in the NFL but nothing more). Image going from the greatest thing since sliced bread to as valuable as non-alcoholic beer. Tim Tebow’s greatest moments are now over and his only claim to fame will be a controversial abortion ad. Heather you are the milk to my cereal. Go Crimson Tide ( Yeah Gator fans I said it) and Tim Tebow learn to love because in 5 years no one will know who

  17. Alex Scherer February 6, 2010 at 12:42 AM #

    Imagine, who you are (typo error, I will never be a journalist)

  18. janos February 6, 2010 at 12:58 AM #

    blog regist

  19. iloveseoul February 6, 2010 at 11:17 AM #

    Actually I don’t have fun with Superball.
    In asia, soccer and baseball are popular sports.

  20. Freya February 6, 2010 at 1:22 PM #

    “Oh, and FYI, pro-lifers do not make a choice between “good and evil”. They have no choice but to keep the baby. This argument you make has glaring inconsistencies.”

    They have a choice because the government gives them one. So then they do have to choose between right and wrong. The choice exists and pro-lifers aren’t saying the choice doesn’t exist, they’re saying it SHOULDN’T exist. The argument does not have “glaring inconsistencies” because it’s based on what is real right now, and what is real right now is that everyone, pro-lifers included, is given a choice by the medical world and the government and then they make their choice. And it makes no sense to say, “They had a choice, that means it’s hypocritical for them to speak out against choice.”

    Everything is turning political these days, and it’s getting old. When I saw the title I thought it would be a fun and insightful read on the SPORTS and the differences between the Colts and Saints ON THE FIELD. Then I read it and wished I hadn’t. Thanks for dampening my excitement about tomorrow.

  21. Joseph S. February 6, 2010 at 7:45 PM #

    The only time a women should be allowed a choice for an abortion, is if the child was the result of rape or if the child threatens the life of the mother. Otherwise, it is not our human right to take away that child’s life. Adoption is the answer.

  22. Nirlap Bettenhauser February 6, 2010 at 10:14 PM #

    Go saints. From Fellow Aquarian!

    • JOE SHERIDAN February 7, 2010 at 11:47 AM #

      THE WOMAN SHOULD ALWAYS HAVE A CHOICE. MANY YEARS AGO, I WORKED WITH YOUNG MEN WHO WERE TROUBLE WITH THE LAW. SOME OF THE SADDEST CASES WERE THOSE WHERE ONE OR BOTH OF THE PARENTS DID NOT WANT A CHILD.

      CHOICE SHOULD BE AVAILABLE TO BOTH SIDES OF THIS QUESTION. ABORTION IS A MATTER OF FAITH AND NOT A MATTER OF LAW

      • Joseph S. February 7, 2010 at 5:03 PM #

        In the saddest cases where neither parent wanted the child, they could have put the child up for adoption. There is no sense in killing a helpless child.

  23. Halo Reach February 6, 2010 at 10:28 PM #

    I agree with what you’re saying, but even as a pro-life supporter I have no problem with the ad. Everyone has the right to say what they believe.

  24. Halo Reach February 6, 2010 at 10:32 PM #

    Did you hear about the gay dating service ad being denied from getting the ad space?

    • fixedair February 6, 2010 at 10:43 PM #

      Yes, a friend mentioned that to me. It’s an example of double standards in television advertising.

  25. apple February 6, 2010 at 11:22 PM #

    hello everyone!!!

  26. unfixedair February 6, 2010 at 11:56 PM #

    What kind of thinking is it that proclaims it is OK for a public personality to champion gay rights and pro choice rights but it is not OK for a public personality to champion pro life and speak out against same sex coupling? I sincerely hope this is as politilcally incorrect as possible because PC is an oxymoron.

  27. whitesketchbook February 7, 2010 at 2:06 AM #

    the topic of abortion is such a loaded issue…and unreasonably too christianized.
    but nonetheless, the public opinion always is too harsh especially on anti-abortion and anti-same-sex-marriage proponents than on the other sides. i agree with unfixedair. ‘politically correct’ is a heavily biased thing.

  28. Jim Hagen February 7, 2010 at 3:11 AM #

    Is Tiger Woods the spokesman for the anti-abortion ad?

  29. discotrash February 7, 2010 at 10:42 AM #

    Scott Fujita is amazing. I’m a Seahawks fan myself but I’m pulling for the Saints today

  30. doyoulikemyponytail February 7, 2010 at 11:09 AM #

    Hey Heather, nice to meet you and your blog! I too grew up in Colorado Springs and I wish I had the bumper sticker reading “Focus on your own damn Family.” As for this debate, I agree with you. I’m in school to be a women’s health nurse practitioner as I strongly support women’s reproductive rights. I love what you said about unwanted pregnancy never leading to any form of easy choice. This was repetitively emphasized in a women’s health conference I attended recently. Even a mormon abortion provider I met said his clients had 24-hour informed consent required by law, complete with a political video and packet, you know, to get them to really think about their choice. “But they all come back the next day,” he said. “All of them.”

    From a medical perspective, many women who are pregnant and do not desire to be at that particular time for whatever personal reason, will go to great lengths to become pregnant no longer. As in the time when abortions were illegal, banning this choice will send many women to death via sepsis from “back alley” abortions. In that scenario two lives are lost, and I wonder what pro-life supporters might feel about that. And that’s just the tip of the family planning iceberg.

    At any rate, I rarely find myself commenting on serious topics as I write a humor blog, but I enjoyed reading your post and appreciate your conviction! -Sophie

    By the way, I no longer live in Colorado, but my mother tells me Ted Haggard is back in town. After hiding out for a couple years he is now running services out of his basement, which is exactly how the New Life Church began… I’m interested to see what happens next.

    • fixedair February 7, 2010 at 4:05 PM #

      Thanks so much for you thoughtful words. It makes me feel a lot better knowing that someone like you will be working in women’s health. I don’t often comment on serious things as well, but this struck a nerve with me.
      I hadn’t heard about Ted Haggard being in the Springs right now….I doubt that he’ll be able to do anything that serious.
      Be sure to subscribe!
      – Heather

  31. Joe Sheridan February 7, 2010 at 11:10 AM #

    SCOTT: YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT MRS. TEBOW EMPLOYING THE RIGHT OF CHOICE IN DETERMINING TO FULFILL HER PREGNANCY WAS RIGHT ON TARGET. NOBODY COULD HAVE SAID IT BETTER.

    THAT IS PRECISELY WHAT WE ALL SHOULD BE SEEKING, THE RIGHT OF THE WOMAN, HER DOCTOR TO CHOOSE. GOD FORBID THAT CHOICE IS EVER FORBIDDEN IN THIS LAND

    JOE

    • Rabia February 3, 2012 at 5:09 AM #

      There’s an ienhrnet value and poeticism to finding out the intricate decisions, actions, and behaviors that deliver each of us to our respective futures. It’s not about destiny, because that suggests so much lack of agency. It’s about the causal nature of things, how different paths can converge at one point, and it’s the details of the journey that give us the necessary insight to understand it all.This time through, as I approached the end in all its inevitability, everything converging, I was reminded of A Prayer for Owen Meany.

  32. Aimee @ Ain't Yo Mama's Blog February 7, 2010 at 1:41 PM #

    Great post. I didn’t care less about who won the Superbowl until I read about Scott Fujita. Scott was also born to a mother who was faced with a choice (as a teen mom to have an abortion or give the baby up), a choice that he supports all women to make for themselves. I love when you call him the unicorn of pro athletes. And may I also suggest he is the unicorn of abortion rights as well.

    • fixedair February 7, 2010 at 4:05 PM #

      Thanks so much for reading. Yes, I will agree he is a unicorn of abortion rights as well. Please subscribe if you can!

      Thanks,

      Heather

  33. boogiestu February 7, 2010 at 4:28 PM #

    Can’t a guy watch football any more for just the fun of it? I agree with you about the choice for women. It seems so obvious yet the crazies run around “the sky is falling”. (did that make sense?) I’d like football to stay a fun past time. There are plenty of outlets for topics like abortion. Go Saints!

  34. fixedair February 7, 2010 at 5:26 PM #

    Joseph S. :

    In the saddest cases where neither parent wanted the child, they could have put the child up for adoption. There is no sense in killing a helpless child.

    So how would you be able to force a woman to become a vessel for a “child” that she doesn’t want? Women should not be forced into acting as vessels for the patriarchy. Try having a uterus and get back to me.

    • Joseph S. February 8, 2010 at 1:01 AM #

      If she didn’t want the child, she shouldn’t have had sex. If she was forced into having sex then she most definitely have the choice, or if it puts her own life in danger she should have the choice to go through with the pregnancy or not. If she wasn’t raped or in danger of losing her own life, that child should not be killed because of her mistake.

  35. Olive February 7, 2010 at 7:32 PM #

    I had no idea about any of this. In fact, before reading this article I wasn’t even sure which teams where in the SB. Now I know who to cheer for-Go Saints! Thanks for an interesting take on the big game.

  36. whitesketchbook February 7, 2010 at 10:56 PM #

    the actual ad didn’t seem very controversial at all. (you could hardly tell what they were talking about)
    it looked more like just a happy family promoting family values…or something.
    i am glad 🙂

  37. Anonymous Emailer February 8, 2010 at 8:06 AM #

    Go Saints Go!!!

  38. bronxilla February 8, 2010 at 4:06 PM #

    fixedair :Open your eyes. Incest and rape happen ALL THE TIME. 2 in 3 women will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime. The only reason your figures seems to be ignorant of this is because countless cases go unreported.
    Oh, and using the word “Blacks” is verging on being very offensive. I suggest you drop this from your vocabulary.

    Maybe you should check out the NAACP’s site and give them the same advice about the use of the word “black”.

    http://www.naacp.org/home/index.htm

    • fixedair February 8, 2010 at 5:13 PM #

      It’s not saying someone is black that is offensive. It’s saying things like “the blacks” that bothers me. I’m part black if you must know. Stop trolling around.

  39. bronxilla February 8, 2010 at 5:20 PM #

    Trolling? I have become a most devoted fan of your most excellent blog!

  40. shoutabyss February 8, 2010 at 5:26 PM #

    I have a couple of responses I’d love to share for the Timmy Tebow ad, but alas I can’t share them in mixed company. 🙂

  41. bronxilla February 8, 2010 at 5:28 PM #

    I came upon your blog while exploring the option of converting my blogger blog to wordpress. I was drawn by your super bowl headline. You are a very good writer.

  42. miscellaneoussheepery February 9, 2010 at 12:48 AM #

    So how would you be able to force a woman to become a vessel for a “child” that she doesn’t want? Women should not be forced into acting as vessels for the patriarchy. Try having a uterus and get back to me.

    I believe you should substitute “biology” or “nature” for “patriarchy” in this statement. Men did not create women. They didn’t design females to be the ones who carry the child. Let’s not blame them for an accident of nature. Many women who become pregnant say they actually enjoy the experience and find it to be quite miraculous. I would say adoption is a vastly superior option to abortion.

    Also, the Tebow ad was not controversial at all. A little corny, yes, but not “hate-filled”, “awful”, or any other words I heard used by feminists to describe it. I think perhaps the feminist movement overreacted.

    • fixedair February 9, 2010 at 1:29 AM #

      Actually, many would argue that men did create women. What about that little story about Adam and his rib?

      Pregnancy is supposed to be miraculous – I want kids someday, and I’m not knocking pregnancy, just the notion that a woman should not have complete autonomy over her own body. And you truly cannot force a woman to remain pregnant for adoptive purposes. The Tebow ad was manipulative in that it appeared cute, but once you visit the Focus on the Family website, you will see numerous biased videos and misinformation on abortion. I never said it was “hate-filled”.

      Your use of the phrase “the feminist movement” is troublesome. You seem to be treating feminism as an unfamiliar “other”. Feminism is nothing more than the notion that women should have the same rights as men. The term feminism is often misconstrued, and when I hear a woman say “No, I’m not a feminist,” I cannot help but pity her. Gender inequality is still a prevalent issue in this century, and all women should fight for their rights as human beings.

      • Joseph S. February 9, 2010 at 8:58 AM #

        Women carry children, men do not. This is what makes women, women, and men, men. I think I’m finally understanding that this isn’t about abortion for you, it is you sharing with the world that you want women, to be just like men. Not to have equal rights, which you do, but that women shouldn’t have to carry babies either.

        You really are fixed air. Fixed in your stubborn, stupid, and slurred ways.

      • miscellaneoussheepery February 9, 2010 at 7:54 PM #

        “Actually, many would argue that men did create women. What about that little story about Adam and his rib?”

        As I recall, Adam did not pull out his own rib and create a woman from it. He was actually having a nap when God took out his rib and formed Eve.

        The cluster of cells growing inside a women – fetus, baby, whatever you want to call it – is not PART of the woman’s body. It is its own separate being that simply relies on the mother for shelter and nourishment while it develops. It has its own heartbeat, which clearly indicates that it is not just an extension of the mother. Also, it takes 2 people to create a child, and I think it is unfair that men (boyfriends and husbands, specifically – I’m not talking about rapists or incestuous brothers/fathers/etc) have no say in the fate of their child. 50% of the DNA that makes up that baby is from a man, and it is wrong that he cannot have a say in whether the child lives or dies. If the argument is for equal rights, then how can women demand total control over reproductive rights and then force the father of the child to pay child support for a baby that he may have wanted to put up for adoption or abort – or, perhaps worse, suffer the pain of never meeting their unborn child.

        I realize that I cannot FORCE women to carry a child to term. If they want to get rid of it badly enough, they’ll find a way. It would be nice, however, if women WANTED to carry their children to term, and then give them up for adoption if they could not care for them.

        I did not say that YOU specifically called the Tebow ad hate-filled, just that I have heard other people refer to it with such language. Also, I doubt many people stopped in the middle of the Super Bowl to go watch online videos from Focus on the Family.

        I did not say that I am not a feminist. I just don’t consider myself to be part of the feminist movement. I suppose you could say I am a “Biblical feminist.” I think men and women should treat each other with respect. I think they each have their roles within the family, both of which are equally important. I also think that unborn children should not have to pay for their parents’ evil (rape/incest) and irresponsible (sex when you cannot afford to have a child) decisions. I do not see women in the US as being oppressed. We can vote, we can drive, we can have long and sucessful careers, etc etc. That’s a lot more than women in most countries can say. The majority of husbands in America view their wives as equals. My husband is actually in the kitchen right now making me a pizza =)

  43. shoutabyss February 9, 2010 at 11:24 AM #

    Joseph, minor correction. Men mostly do not. As time goes by I think we’re going to see more and more of that sort of thing. 🙂

    Calling someone “stupid” for an opinion on an issue like this is not very productive or nice, in my humble opinion.

    Fixed Air, you wanted an abortion thread, did you not? Well, you got it. 🙂

    My position on abortion has evolved over time. I used to be hardcore pro-choice. I’m still pro-choice, but my opinion over the allowable time periods has run decidedly conservative as I get older. It is not the sort of decision one should procrastinate about, I think.

    On the other hand, those who oppose things like contraception and the morning after pill are still taking things way too far, which, in my opinion, is purely a crass strategy to move the fall-back compromise position. Don’t waste time using what you really want as a starting point. Rather, start by asking for the moon.

    • fixedair February 9, 2010 at 1:58 PM #

      I actually didn’t want a thread. This thread annoys me, because this blog entry does not even reflect what I normally write. Not that people would be interested.

      • shoutabyss February 9, 2010 at 5:15 PM #

        I can understand that. No one enjoys being misunderstood. 😦

        And of course we’re interested. Reading the rest of your blog is on my To Do list. 🙂

    • Joseph S. February 9, 2010 at 3:20 PM #

      shoutabyss :
      Joseph, minor correction. Men mostly do not. As time goes by I think we’re going to see more and more of that sort of thing.
      Calling someone “stupid” for an opinion on an issue like this is not very productive or nice, in my humble opinion.

      How can you even smile about that? Men should not carry children, ever. Do you think it is neat to destroy the beauty that is the human body?

      She ignores everything I have said about abortion, and her ignoring everything I have to say about this discussion isn’t productive either. Also, stupid means to have a lack of perception. Which she clearly does as she won’t see the adoption angle I’ve mentioned multiple times, but rather ignored it all together.

      • shoutabyss February 9, 2010 at 5:17 PM #

        How? Mainly because it is kind of hilarious. 🙂 Whatever your personal opinion, it probably is going to happen like I predicted. That will sure muddy things, won’t it?

        My momma taught me that just because you believe something to true doesn’t mean you always have to say it. “Stupid” was a poor choice of words. IMHO. Even if you were right, which I highly doubt. Fixed Air may disagree with you on a certain topic and you might not like how she responded, but that certainly doesn’t prove she is stupid.

  44. fixedair February 9, 2010 at 1:53 PM #

    Joseph S. :

    Women carry children, men do not. This is what makes women, women, and men, men. I think I’m finally understanding that this isn’t about abortion for you, it is you sharing with the world that you want women, to be just like men. Not to have equal rights, which you do, but that women shouldn’t have to carry babies either.

    You really are fixed air. Fixed in your stubborn, stupid, and slurred ways.

    Being able to carry children should not be the only thing that defines a woman. That’s a very sexist and caveman-like evaluation. A woman is not defined by her vagina and uterus. I never said that woman shouldn’t carry babies. That makes no sense.

    Sure, maybe I’m stubborn, but so are you. I don’t even think you understand the name of this blog. I find it extremely rude that you would call me stupid. That violates basic rules of civility. Please do not return to this thread.

  45. 30 days to thin book amazon June 12, 2013 at 3:07 PM #

    Hey there! I could have sworn I’ve been to this blog before but after reading through some of the post I realized it’s new to me.
    Anyhow, I’m definitely glad I found it and I’ll be bookmarking and checking back often!

  46. baby predictor February 24, 2014 at 9:49 AM #

    I enjoy reading a post that will make people
    think. Also, many thanks for permitting me to comment!

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. how’d you get into my brain…? « random thoughts by me - February 5, 2010

    […] source. Categories: Uncategorized Comments (0) Trackbacks (0) Leave a comment Trackback […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: