Liberal Forum

Huey » 30 Dec 2013 4:49 pm » wrote: The answer is you won't.

Maybe this will work.

m

Brattle Street » 30 Dec 2013 4:56 pm » wrote:
so that is your qualification? whether you ENJOY IT or not? it is irrelevant. do you enjoy paying for bullets or food for the hungry? equally irrelevant.

i think what you mean is somethings you object to subsidizing and others not. Your ancient morbid attempt to attach your complaint to some quality of sexual shame, not withstanding.

more troll crap

Str8tEdge » 30 Dec 2013 5:13 pm » wrote:m more troll crap

This is not the Men's Room Nurse Wretched.

Misty » 30 Dec 2013 5:13 pm » wrote:
Maybe this will work.

Nope.

Misty » 30 Dec 2013 5:11 pm » wrote:
I think you have a lot of hangups about sex.

Do you have school age children, and if not do you still pay school taxes?
We all pay for stuff we don't want or need.
Get over it.

See? Ok misty, I told you once before that I don't care who or what you fück. You can fück a man, a women, a goat or a pig. I don't care. That is your choice to make. It does not affect me one little bit. Again, that is your choice.

As far as getting over it, no I am not going to get over it. 200 bucks a month more for an insurance plan with shît I don't need is not something to get over at the middle income level. I am actively working with and for politicians who work to repeal this law. I am donating small ampunts of money to organizations that are working to get it overturned.

School for kids under 18 is not an elective choice. Please chose an apples to apples comparison. Taking an abortifacient is an elective choice. Having sex is an elective choice. School is compulsory. Gotta do it.

Huey » 30 Dec 2013 5:23 pm » wrote: See? Ok misty, I told you once before that I don't care who or what you fück. You can fück a man, a women, a goat or a pig. I don't care.

You need to talk to Clem. He can e-mail you some bestiality videos from his collection, since you seem to be into that stuff.

Happy New Year to you too Kitten.

Huey » 30 Dec 2013 5:23 pm » wrote:
See? Ok misty, I told you once before that I don't care who or what you fück. You can fück a man, a women, a goat or a pig. I don't care. That is your choice to make. It does not affect me one little bit. Again, that is your choice.

As far as getting over it, no I am not going to get over it. 200 bucks a month more for an insurance plan with shît I don't need is not something to get over at the middle income level. I am actively working with and for politicians who work to repeal this law. I am donating small ampunts of money to organizations that are working to get it overturned.

School for kids under 18 is not an elective choice. Please chose an apples to apples comparison. Taking an abortifacient is an elective choice. Having sex is an elective choice. School is compulsory. Gotta do it.

And if you are paying $200 more per month for something you don't need, you'll get a refund. Come up with more talking points. Yours are old and debunked already.

Huey » 30 Dec 2013 4:59 pm » wrote:
See? These idiots simply refuse to discuss the issue of subsidizing.

Subsidizing WHAT? The murder of third worlders? The acquisition of markets by multinationals?

I'm your huckleberry. Let's discuss the issue of subsidizing.

Huey » 30 Dec 2013 5:23 pm » wrote:
See? Ok misty, I told you once before that I don't care who or what you fück. You can fück a man, a women, a goat or a pig. I don't care. That is your choice to make. It does not affect me one little bit. Again, that is your choice.

No slut shaming here, folks - nothing to see. Let's just keep it moving...

bingster » 30 Dec 2013 11:09 pm » wrote:
And if you are paying $200 more per month for something you don't need, you'll get a refund. Come up with more talking points. Yours are old and debunked already.

From who? Could you link to this bit of information. And if that is true why is the administration not advertising this? Please give us theinformation.

Misty » 30 Dec 2013 11:05 pm » wrote: You need to talk to Clem. He can e-mail you some bestiality videos from his collection, since you seem to be into that stuff.

I didn't say anyone was into it. I said I could care less if you or anyone else is. Not my concern.

Huey » 31 Dec 2013 6:50 am » wrote:
I didn't say anyone was into it. I said I could care less if you or anyone else is. Not my concern.

yet you felt a need to tick off a list of various perversions - a typical attempt at slut shaming, - rather than arguing the actual issue.

I could care less if you want to murder every brown person that ever walked the face of the earth - but why should I have to pay for it?

By the way - that's my attempt at contard shaming.

Cannonpointer » 31 Dec 2013 6:57 am » wrote:
yet you felt a need to tick off a list of various perversions - a typical attempt at slut shaming, - rather than arguing the actual issue.

I could care less if you want to murder every brown person that ever walked the face of the earth - but why should I have to pay for it?

By the way - that's my attempt at contard shaming.

No, I felt the need to relay my opinion on government intrusion into sexual activities. I have stated numerous times that what one does sexually is of no concern of mine. If you feel the need to **** a women, a man, a sheep, a goat, etc. that is your choice. I don't care. Have at it.

With that said I should not have to pay for your elective choices. I should not have to pay extra for contraceptive services, abortificients, maternity, etc to subsidize your elective sexual activities. The reason I mention the above is that Prattle, Misty, and other progs turn every discussion of these services into one of having hangups about sex. They can't stay on the topic. And every time they do I will tick off a list of sexual activities that some consider perversions. The Constitution does not give the federal government the authority to be involved. So I could care less.

I hope this clears up any misunderstanding that you may have.

Huey » 31 Dec 2013 7:20 am » wrote:
No, I felt the need to relay my opinion on government intrusion into sexual activities. I have stated numerous times that what one does sexually is of no concern of mine. If you feel the need to **** a women, a man, a sheep, a goat, etc. that is your choice. I don't care. Have at it.

With that said I should not have to pay for your elective choices. I should not have to pay extra for contraceptive services, abortificients, maternity, etc to subsidize your elective sexual activities. The reason I mention the above is that Prattle, Misty, and other progs turn every discussion of these services into one of having hangups about sex. They can't stay on the topic. And every time they do I will tick off a list of sexual activities that some consider perversions. The Constitution does not give the federal government the authority to be involved. So I could care less.

I hope this clears up any misunderstanding that you may have.

The Constitution does not give the government the authority to nation build in ****, either. But you quibble on condoms...

Cannonpointer » 31 Dec 2013 7:35 am » wrote:
The Constitution does not give the government the authority to nation build in ****, either. But you quibble on condoms...

When the topic is who pays for condoms, yes that is what I discuss.

As far as your strawman, I agree with you.

Just to be clear if the conversation is about something you feel is irrelevant am I duty bound to change it? Or should I wait for you to do that? Will you post a list of authorized topics to discuss?

Just to clear up any misunderstanding on what we should be discussing.

Huey » 31 Dec 2013 7:49 am » wrote:Just to be clear if the conversation is about something you feel is irrelevant am I duty bound to change it? Or should I wait for you to do that? Will you post a list of authorized topics to discuss?

Would that be okay?

Cannonpointer » 31 Dec 2013 8:08 am » wrote:
Would that be okay?

Sure

Misty » 30 Dec 2013 4:25 pm » wrote:Hey Puss? UPS and FedEx did a great job delivering all those Christmas packages, didn't they?
Tell us again how much better it would be if we privatize the USPS.

Why is this a news story? Because it's real news when the private sector screws up.

The Post Office's reputation is so bad, it doesn't make the news when they're late.

It's to a considerable degree expected.

Why have private carriers take over 95% of the express/ 2nd Day delivery market?

Misty » 30 Dec 2013 4:33 pm » wrote:I doubt if I have any eggs that are not powdered at this point, and my husband has been snipped.

Yeah, at the very base.

Will you get over that uptight crap about sex already?
Sex is a normal and natural part of life and contraception should be considered a routine part of women's health care.

It has absolutely nothing to do with being "uptight." That's just one of your endless troll lies.

Insurance was meant to be for emergencies. Adding on endless routine care has made it unaffordable.

If someone wants birth control or any other routine, elective medicine or procedure, let them pay out of pocket or pay extra for the coverage; not have it mandated by Beltway politicians by federal law.