What Do You Think?
Yesterday;s What Do You Think provoked some very interesting comments. Today, I think there will probably be much of the same. Former and probable future Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee slammed Natalie Portman for getting pregnant out of wedlock. In a radio interview earlier this week, Huckabee said that he was troubled when Natalie Portman or some other "Hollywood starlet," boasts of being pregnant, but not married. Every year or so, it seems like some politician goes out and says something like this. First of all, it is not like Natalie Portman has given birth out of wedlock. She is engaged and still has a chance to get married before she gives birth. Second, I always wonder if politicians really feel this way or it is something they know will give them some free publicity for a few days. Buying ad time is expensive, but saying something controversial is free and gets you way more than a 30 second spot during Ernest Celebrates Christmas.
It seems that Natalie is in a loving relationship, although I think she still may dump the guy now that awards season is over. I just think there are more important things to discuss in this world than the relative merits of whether Natalie Portman should be celebrating her pregnancy because she is not married. What do you think?
I think he's making a push for a run at the presidency in 2012. He (or his people) are not dumb.
ReplyDeleteAnd I could care less about the marital status of people who have children. All I care about is that kids are raised in loving, happy households.
he's full of it. this is the same guy that praised Britney Spears'
ReplyDeletesister for having her baby.
She is having a baby, it isn't the end of the world and frankly as long as it is loved and well cared for than who gives a damn.
I'm going to say the exact same thing I said in my FB status when I saw this this morning. Shove it up your ass Mike Huckabee. A baby is a beautiful thing whether youre married or not. She's 29 years old, she's engaged and has a ton of money. This is probably one of the happiest times of her life and he's gotta put a damper on it with his nonsensical right wing bullshit. Asshole. There I'm done now =)
ReplyDeleteAmen Sue Ellen! Welcome to 2011. She should celebrate her pregnancy. Who cares if you are married or not as long and the kids are raised in loving and happy homes, that should be the only thing that matters.
ReplyDeleteWhy didn't he go after Bristol Palin? A little too close to home?
ReplyDeleteLOVE IT!@Stacy
ReplyDeleteI am always weary of folks who protest too much, I wonder what secrets he is hiding in his closet?!!?
Ethics is something you apply to your own life, morality is something you shove down someone else's throat. It's no one's business what a woman does with her body, or if she choses to raise a child with a partner or alone. She has the money, and that is the #1 issue with single parenthood - mothers or fathers, and even sometimes in two-parent households is not being able to provide adequately for their kids.
ReplyDeleteI abhor this sort of wedge issue being shoved in our faces every time some schmuck wants to run for office on 'morals'. Maybe the morality gang out to focus on themselves - there is enough cheating on spouses, stealing, hypocrisy and pedophilia within their own ranks to keep them busy for a long, long time.
His point isn't that her situation is such that she cannot raise the child well. It is that she is an example for many young women who want to emulate her and they are NOT in the position that she is in financially and do not have the kind of support she obviously does.
ReplyDeleteNatalie is an Academy Award winning actress and make public statements on political and sensitive issues and is very open about her family situation, so she is certainly fair game for him to criticize.
And he's right. In my opinion, the perfect home to raise a child in is 2 loving committed married parents on the whole. Now 2 loving non married parents trumps an unhappy marriage and one or more non loving parents of course. But in my heart, I believe the nuclear family is categorically, at least, the most advantageous way to raise a family.
When did it become wrong to feel that way and why should anyone be shamed into changing their beliefs and values to go along with what is new and popular?
I wonder if he has the same thoughts about Bristol Palin.
ReplyDeleteHypocrite.
I read the Superficial's article on this today and thought it was dead on. They're giving Natalie a hard time despite the fact she is an accomplished, wealthy, engaged woman nearing age of 30 who can actually care for a child that is wanted?? His WHATEVER should be directed at the stars of producers of 16 and pregnant. Fuck off, Huckabee.
ReplyDeleteKeep morality and religion out of politics.
Huckabee is an idiot, as he's proven more than once this week. It's hard to decide where to begin discussing the sheer level of stupidity in his remarks. First of all, Portman is hardly an air-headed starlet and I don't think we have to worry about her pulling welfare scams to feed her child in a few years from now. And what does he think of Bristol Palin, the unmarried pregnant teenager who proudly graced his party's convention with her family and now, two years later but still unmarried, rides her dubious status as a "star" from one easy paycheck to the next? In Huckabee's defense, he's got a book to promote. Having launched it with foot-in-mouth over his confused account of Obama's personal history, he had to find something to do with his other foot.
ReplyDelete@Mad-I don't see it as a "moral" issue but rather a "social" issue. Women who get pregnant without the benefit of marriage, particularly those that are dependent upon the financial resources of the father, are at a great disadvantage than those who are in a legal union. I don't care what someone does with their bodies and love children and they are always a blessing. Sometimes things happen and voila, you're pregnant! But in a lot of cases that even I know of personally, these were planned events and very poor choices.
ReplyDelete@ Ice Angel: It didn't become wrong to support the nuclear family. It's wrong for a politician to use someone's private life as a chance to promote morality as politics. The fact is, Natalie is a grown woman and she can decide to raise whatever type of family she wants. It's not political, it's personal.
ReplyDeleteMike Huckabee can shove it up his ass until he gets a uterus and has the slightest fucking inkling what it is to be pregnant and have to make truly hard decisions.
Mike Huckabee can't have it both ways. When Portman found out that she was pregnant, she had two choices: Have the baby or get an abortion. Huckabee is pro-life. He needs to shut up about this. Portman, a successful, wealthy woman, is in a far better position to be a "good" mother than Bristol Palin was at 17. Since he didn't blast Palin, he shouldn't blast Portman. I doubt that teens look at Natalie and think "Man, I should get pregnant, too. Maybe I'll win an Oscar!" Now if wants to rant about bad influences, how about those horrible tabloids that keep putting Teen Moms on their covers?!
ReplyDeleteOh, and another thing - wedge issues get the one-issue voters out to the polls. Most of the time these same people never bother to read a newspaper or try and form an opinion that comes from their own life experience. They would put Hitler into office if he were against abortion or gays, because whether or not the person they are voting for is actually qualified and competent enough to hold public office is irrelevant. THIS is why I detest wedge issues and those who use them to pander to the willfully ignorant (and there are plenty) in this country.
ReplyDelete@RJ - Excellent point, and there lies the hypocrisy. If it's one of their own, they give them a pass, if it's a person known to hold differing political views, they make them a pariah.
ReplyDelete@Ice Angel - I see what you're saying, but frankly, I can't agree. A friend of mine with two kids is going through a nasty divorce right now and is wishing to GOD she'd never married him in the first place when she found out she was pregnant. Of course, they both have well-paying jobs and the kids are better out of that "married" home. Oftentimes, children are better in a home with a single, solid parent than in a chaotic home of two.
ReplyDeleteMy bf and I are in a long-term relationship and are planning to get pregnant probably within the next year. And no, we will not be married. And yes, we will be great parents without a license.
I think I'm sick to death of sanctimonious assholes like Mike Huckabee and his uber-Conservative penis-having brethren and the way they are OBSESSIVELY fixated on how women choose to deal with our reproductive systems, contraceptive choices, pregnancies, and motherhood in general.
ReplyDeleteAnd until he magically acquires a uterus and/or actually gets to know a few single moms, I think that Mike Huckabee should shut his patronizing piehole. Or, alternatively, I want him to spontaneously combust during The Rapture and leave us forever.
Sorry for the rant, people. In case you can't tell, I deeply dislike Huckabee and most of the GOP in general. I DREAD the next election cycle here in the U.S.
The Virgin Mary (an unwed single mother) issued this response to F**kabee's claims:
ReplyDelete"Jesus, what an Idiot."
Beyond denying them the opportunity to choose to have an abortion, I'm also willing to bet that Huckabee doesn't support giving any of these poor women who can't afford birth control any sort of subsidized access. I have zero facts to back this up, but I am willing to bet my life he is in support of shutting down all government funding of Planned Parenthood. So, let's do the math: Huckabee's politics say that:
ReplyDelete1.)poor women can't get any financial assistance with birth control
2.)they get pregnant
3.) they can't have abortions because the GOP thinks life is so "precious"
4.) so they have the baby and are slammed by Huckabee
5.) that so "precious" life doesn't get any welfare or food stamp support because that's big government handouts opposed by tehse "pro-lifers".
That makes sense. OK, now i'm mad.
Would Huckabee say that about Bristol Palin, the princess of hypocrites? All of this is a bunch of BS just like the anti-gay GOPers that are later exposed to be...gay. Ugh.
ReplyDeleteWho the hell is anyone to go after Portman because she isn't a good role model is really being misogynist. This is a woman who, despite having a lucrative career and many opportunities as an actress, pursued and achieved a difficult degree from one of the nation's top universities and has now received many of the top honors available for that acting thing. She now has a steady relationship and is having a baby, and is fully capable of providing a safe and stable home for that child no matter what happens to that relationship.
ReplyDeleteWhile a large family support system is probably best for all children (not just two people, but beyond that), no one should bring a child into the world without some ability to raise it on their own - not when the divorce rate is so high.
As for glamorizing unwed pregnancy for young women, do you really think that Portman does that more then teen mom Bristol Palin who has appeared on television, goes to big parties, now has a big home, and is writing a memoir at twenty and has all this because of that baby? (And who her mother is, but seriously would Bristol have a memoir without the kid?) NO, this is the person who is glamorizing teen pregnancy no matter how much she gives lip service to the opposite.
He can comment when he grows a fucking uterus.
ReplyDeleteNot a fan of Natalie Portman but she is obviously overjoyed about her pregnancy. Should she be hiding in shame? She is well able to support her child and that nimrod should STFU and find a real issue to bleat about.
I would seriously kiss every one of you for these comments, mainly because it's a civil dialogue with no name calling which has become seemingly impossible in our current climate.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ice Angel that a loving family unit is the best way to raise a child, but the reality is that the makeup of that family unit is varied in our society, and many of those varieties are very successful. The choice to raise a child, in whatever way, is a very personal choice until that child becomes a burden to the rest of us in some way. Therefore, leave Natalie the hell out of it, and address the policy issue of welfare reform or whatever without personally attacking someone who doesn't deserve it.
Yes, Natalie speaks out on some issues, so debate her on those issues. I guess Huckabee's decision to go after her is based on his belief that it worked so well when Quayle attacked Murphy Brown (a fictional character). Hopefully, he'll weigh in on Bristol's decision too, and why one is so much better than the other.
Sorry this got so long.
*LOL @ nate F*
ReplyDeleteI wonder if Huckabee ever watches MTV.
He also said Obama was
ReplyDeleteborn in Kenya...I really don't care...
But I think you're right about Natalie, I think she used the whole baby/baby daddy thing for the award season...
And there was a time that an unwed mom was a stigma, I'm glad that's over...but please don't shove it in my face.
heatherhug....
I'm with you...
Charlie Sheen and Brooke Mueller were married when they had the twins. Which childhood does he think will have a better chance?
ReplyDeleteAlso, I love how red state after red state is trying to make it more and more difficult to get an abortion, but Huckabee attacks a woman for having the baby. If men were the ones having the babies, I doubt any of this would be happening.
Nate F FTW :)
ReplyDeleteNatalie would be damned by Mike if she had an abortion and he is damning her for having the baby. This baby could be a birth control accident and she might want to make sure that she is marrying her boyfriend for the right reasons. I did not hear anyone damning Bristol did we? Fox News is a GOP driven joke. Where is my moderate third party when I need one?
ReplyDeleteWhat is this, the 50s? Should her mother have sent her away to stay with a relative for 9 months? FFS! She's not 15! Also she isn't the first celebrity to do this (Nicole Richie had 2 kids before she got married and before she turned 29). Most people that give a crap about this issue are Christian, and Natalie's hebrew! WTF? Get over it.
ReplyDeleteI too am glad for the mostly respectful dialogue. Being a conservative on gossip websites typically is unpopular, but here I am and we are being asked for our opinions. It is nice to be able to listen to others opinions respectfully. I do know many great families that have different structures out of the norm. No one is saying it can't be done. My niece is living with and pregnant with her boyfriend and is very excited. I am proud of her and she is a great girl and will be a wonderful mother. I just worry a bit about her in that if her boyfriend decides one day to just decide to kick her out of his house (he owns it) that she doesn't have the means to care for her child on her own. As a family we would pitch in the best we could, but it would be difficult. Going through a divorce would tough but at least she would have a lot more legal rights. I don't think that will happen, as he seems like a great guy, but I would much rather her be married.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFew married people make it ten years these days, and divorce tears apart a child's psyche. Is it really better to put children through the misery of court-ordered visitation, psychological testing, hearings, challenges, and the confusion of being shipped back and forth between parents on a schedule written by lawyers and signed by a judge? Really, Huckabee?
ReplyDeleteYou have to remember that Huckabee last week announced that Obama had grown up in Kenya. A majority of Republican primary voters are birthers, so Huckabee has to work hard to please them in their delusions about Obama and about "marriage."
@Ice Angel Your niece's boyfriend could still just kick her out one day, even if they are married. A piece of paper doesn't make a whole lot of difference if people don't believe in it.
ReplyDeleteIce Angel - I understand your concern for your niece, particularly if she doesn't have an education or career to fall back on if it doesn't work. I and my friend are lucky because we are educated women with great careers (I make more than my bf), and if anything, her divorce has created a TON of expensive paperwork and protracted asset separation - custody has already been agreed upon between them, it's the separation of assets and agreement on child support that is taking forever. I believe in Canada child support would be the same whether you're married or not, so she really just sees having gotten married as a big pain in the ass right now. *shrug* Her experience has certainly influenced my decision not to wait for marriage.
ReplyDeleteMy parents are not married, never where. They have four happy, well-adjusted kids and are still together.
ReplyDeleteEvery single marriage in our extended family (uncles, aunts, cousins) has ended in divorce.
Being married or not doesnt mean shit. It is about committment, respect and love.
The Virgin Mary was an unwed single mother? Really? Is that in the bible or in your imagination, NateF? Because according to the bible, Mary was betrothed to Joseph when she conceived and was married to Joseph by the time Jesus was born.
ReplyDeleteSo the Blessed Mother was somebody's baby's mama? LMAO!
ReplyDeleteUh, no, she was married when she delivered Jesus. St. Joseph took financial and emotional support of a child that wasn't biologically his.
Unfortunately, two friends I love have kids and broken relationships. Very sad situations for all but there is no denying that the one who had that meaningless piece of paper has much more leverage financially than the second.
off topic: has anyone heard from Ryan lately? I have read this blog for years now and I miss him. I hope you are well!
take care!
Agree 100% Enty-he's said this for free publicity. You make an excellent point-controversial statements cost nothing.
ReplyDeleteHe's a nut job, plain and simple. Loathe him.
Also, it's no one's damn business how a child is conceived-in or out of wedlock. And at least Natalie Portman can afford a child. If the GOP has their way, women will not have access to affordable reproductive health care, birth control or abortion and will have babies they cannot afford.
In sum- STFU Huckabee.
For anyone who is judgmental about this sort of thing--Focus On Your Own Damn Family!
Loving all the comments. My husband and I couldn't have children, so I look at pregnancy a bit differently from going through that. As long as a child is loved and looked after, that to me is the main thing. Children don't think they are different unless it is pointed out to them. If love thy neighbour was actually practiced, then children that come from homes that are't the traditional Mum, Dad and 2 kids would never feel out of place. Congratulations to Natalie and all the other soon to be parents out there, whether they be male, female, gay, straight etc. Finally, teenagers need their role models to be the adults in their lives, not a manufactured image they see on film and television. If people are worried about teenagers emulating Natalie, get them in the car and drive around and talk to them. Great opportunity for an open dialogue.
ReplyDeleteThe last politician that made a stink about unwed pregnancy drifted into obscurity -- and that was 20+ years ago -- Huckabee needs to realize that history will repeat itself.
ReplyDeleteAfter MK pointed out that this same idiot applauded Jamie Lynn Spears giving birth as an unwed 16 year old, I quit reading.
ReplyDeleteWhile I don't plan on getting into a theological discussion, Mary was not unwed at the time of Jesus's birth, and to imply that she was in some way a sinner is perverse.
ReplyDeleteThough 99% of all politicians disgust me, and I don't think they are usually in a place to push their "morality" on any of us, I do generally want to know their views on moral issues. Whether they vote in line with what they claim to believe is always a matter that remains to be seen. I don't think that it is wrong for them to comment on moral issues--it is, in fact, what many voters expect to know about their representative, so I don't think that he can be at fault for commenting on the subject.
As for the topic, statistically unwed mothers receive more support from the state than mothers who are wed. There are exceptions to every rule, but they are much more likely to live in poverty than their wed counterparts.
That said, when someone complains about "people having babies out of wedlock," I don't think that they are saying the mother should've gotten an abortion--I think they are implying that the mother should've been more prepared before she began having unprotected (or any) sex to thereby support the child. Most of the time, that means marriage, but I don't think that these dissenters would be as vocal if there was a rise of successful, educated, unmarried women having children.
Personally, I believe that a nuclear family is something that is in the best interest of a child, but to think that that is the only way to successfully raise a child is ridiculous.
There are so many factors involved, and I think it comes down to the fact that many people are stretched thin and they see their own and their neighbors standard of living decreasing while those elected to advocate for us are more and more in a different class than the rest of us financially. When people feel like they are trying their damndest and then they see a young sixteen year old having babies and getting a check from the state, they get pissed, feeling like they are trying to do right while others (those higher and lower than them, financially speaking) continue to take what little they have. I think many of these "morality issues" will get less divisive when the standard of living for the huge portion of lower and lower-middle class population is increased, and they feel less like gerbils on wheels.
@Meghan You are not correct. There is a lot of debate on whether Mary and Joseph were married by the time Jesus was born. The books of Matthew and Luke have differing accounts, so anyone who says Mary was an unwed mother has just as much chance as YOU of being correct. You should probably learn your Bible a little bit better if you want to go lecturing people about it.
ReplyDeleteDid he praise Bristol Palin for keeping the baby? What a douche! He needs to mind his own business - I'm sure there are a few skeletons in his closet.
ReplyDeleteHe parised Bristol for not aborting/murdering her baby, but to encourage children to not have a child at 17 is some totally different.
ReplyDeleteI've been a young woman with friends who had babies out of wedlock. Y'all fail to see how the babies get fed, or if they do. I saw it firsthand with 17 year olds going to the back door of the health department begging for a case of baby milk. Or prostituting for diapers.
Some of you seem to think that he is actually talking about Natalie Portman, when I know who he is actually talking about is somebody whose kid will go unfed tonight.
Okay. You guys are welcome to play Scripture Wars all day long, but for some of us, you may as well be debating about the exact height of Mt. Olympus.
ReplyDeleteTHAT is why I'm scared about the non-separation between church and state in this country, and why I'd love to have an Atheist sit in the Oval Office.
Women are being denied health coverage and reproductive guidance because of powerful politicians like Huckabee who interpret the Bible as they see fit, and I'm furious about it.
More science and less mythology, please.
@Stacy: I am not sure why my 2 sentences about BVM and St. Joe constitute "lecturing". I would also respectfully disagree that there is a lot of debate about this. I know you are referring to the word "espoused" in Luke, however, it is clear in the Scriptures that Joseph "took unto him his wife". before the birth of Christ. There is also the point that Joseph took a very pregnant woman with him to Bethlehem to account for his family in the census. Wouldn't she have gone with her father is she weren't married?
ReplyDeleteWhat I am trying to say is that I have heard of this argument before but from what I've read it was that it was never a serious academic argument.
take care..and I promise, no more lectures : )
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete@Meghan. No real debate, seriously? Perhaps your church preferred unquestioning belief, but the one I grew up in invited free debate. There has always been debate on the differing accounts and which is more meritous. Either way, i agree with the poster who said religion never beongs in politics, so I'll drop it there.
ReplyDeleteIt is just such a dumb thing to say. If, as a politician you want to discuss the merits of the traditional family structure vs. single motherhood, fine. But to pick Portman as an example is absurd. First of all, she is not a single mother. She is in a committed relationship with the father of her baby. She is an unwed mother at this point, true, but single mothers and unwed mothers are not the same thing. Many women who are divorced are single mothers depending on the level of support from their husbands. Are they better or more moral than a woman who got pregnant before she got married? Or got pregnant and then didn't get married Many divorced women live in poverty and need assistance. Also I doubt that Natalie Portman is "glamorizing" unwed motherhood for the youth of America. If you want to make that point why not talk about Teen Mom and all those tabloid covers they seem to get.
ReplyDeleteOK, I have had it up to here with people claiming that conservatives all want to deny people easy and affordable access to birth control. That's absolutely untrue. I am a conservative/libertarian, and I and many of my conservative family members believe that birth control should be GIVEN away by any medical or health practitioner. Yes, I am opposed to abortion -- but I am absolutely, 100% in favor of sex education, free birth control, etc. To make blanket statements that "Republicans are all opposed to birth control," etc., just shows how ignorant you are. People can't all be lumped together like that. I know many conservatives who are mega liberal on birth control.
ReplyDeleteThis guy is a prick, he damns women that abort and slams women when they choose to have their baby, either way you can't win with him, that is unless you stop having pre-marital sex or just get married because you got pregnant.
ReplyDeleteI agree that a stable marriage is best, but plenty of kids grow up just fine without it.
@Stacey, I never said the debate didn't exist but rather I thought it was more of an exercise in polemics. Please let me know if this is wrong? In order to get my undergrad degree I had have 3 theology and 3 philosophy credits. I can assure you that Jesuits provide an incredible forum for debates. I just thought it odd that 2 other posters were longer in their thoughts than I but I was the one you singled out.
ReplyDeletetake care!
My family had a big discussion a few years ago about whether or not Mary and Joseph were married when Jesus was born. It came up because on Christmas morning we always read the Nativity story. My gramps, a pastor, said that when Mary and Joseph were engaged, she became pregnant. "Engaged" at that time meant that a wedding contract had been signed and, basically, the couple were considered all but married. By the time they went for the census, they were married. Otherwise Mary would not have accompanied Joseph.
ReplyDelete@Texshan -- that's nice and all, but the Republican party has done PLENTY to dismantle the paths which grant easy access to contraception, let alone abortion. Witness their recent relentless attack on Planned Parenthood, for instance.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate that you claim to think differently, and you can claim that you'd toss out pills, rubbers, and IUDs for free all day long, but the fact remains that the lawmakers you've probably voted for would strongly disagree with that stance.
@Meghan That's quite a backpedal, particularly when the evidence of you insisting that there was a pre-birth marriage rather than inviting discussion is right here in black and white.
ReplyDelete"Meghan said...
So the Blessed Mother was somebody's baby's mama? LMAO!
Uh, no, she was married when she delivered Jesus. St. Joseph took financial and emotional support of a child that wasn't biologically his. "
That doesn't sound like you were inviting discussion to me, but rather belittling someone else's belief and attempting to trump it with your own. And belief it is, as the "facts" show two differing and meritous accounts. I believe the Jesuits educate better than that, I know the Benedictines who educated me were.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAmoteafloat, I don't think you can cite Republicans' "attack" on Planned Parenthood to prove your argument. PP has made providing abortions their bread and butter over the last few decades. Do they do other work that I strongly support? You bet. But as long as they focus their energies on providing abortions, they are always going to be a target of the GOP. If there were another organization that did the great work PP does -- providing birth control, sex education, women's health checkups, etc., without providing abortions, I don't think you'd see the same reaction on the part of the GOP. Are there always going to be jerks who want to appeal to the hard right? You bet. But again, you can't paint all Republicans with the same brush. Should all Democrats be associated with the "lunatic left fringe" of the Democratic party? Probably not. Because they are just a portion of it. They don't speak for the majority.
ReplyDeleteAnd by the way, I can't stand Huckabee. But for completely unrelated reasons. And I think that as long as a child is born into a loving, supportive environment, that's all that matters.
Texshan, I think when people use the term "Republicans want to..." or "Democrats want to..." they are refering to the power structure, the electeds in Washington or our state capitals, they are not referring to individual citizen members of either party such as the posters at this blog.
ReplyDeleteI have four words.
ReplyDeleteDan Quayle Murphy Brown.
That is all.
@Texshan -- "PP has made providing abortions their bread and butter over the last few decades."
ReplyDeleteNo. They really haven't. Plenty of women give their dollars to Planned Parenthood for monthly prescriptions, annual exams, STD tests, as well as pre-natal counseling. A common misconception, so to speak, surrounding Planned Parenthood is that they only exist to terminate life. They *really* exist to make life easier for women, for expectant mothers, and for women who simply aren't prepared to be mothers. But it's not as if they're greedily pushing abortions on people to make a profit, and if you think this is the case, then your information is grossly biased towards the right.
I'm sorry. You cannot simultaneously be gung-ho about contraceptive use and disparaging towards places like Planned Parenthood. Facilities like PP are integral in ensuring that abortions happen LESS.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete@Jamie's Girl - did Huckabee say abortion was murder or are YOU saying abortion is murder? Either way, not everyone agrees with that characterization of pregnancy termination, and I personally do not appreciate that sort of inflammatory language.
ReplyDelete@Stacy. Seriously, what backpedalling? You insiuated that I didn't know such a debate existed and I informed you that not only do I know it exists, I am pretty sure that it is not a serious theological debate since the Scripture evidence is overwhelming that they were married.
ReplyDeleteAgain, I stated that they were married and you stated that I am "not correct". This implies that you feel they were not married. You are the one that brought up the debate over their marital status but you didn't say I was mis-informed or that I was possibly wrong. You said that I am NOT CORRECT. Stacy, that means that you consider it proof that they were not married and according to your latest post, you are as guilty as I am in the belittling department.
Another poster asked if it was in someone's imagination and yet another wrote a lenghty (and IMO, beautiful) post that would also represent a belief in their marriage and yet you single me out and as being egregious. Why, Stacy?
take care!
oh, brother, RQ. If this:
ReplyDeleteThe Virgin Mary (an unwed single mother) issued this response to F**kabee's claims:
"Jesus, what an Idiot."
isn't inflammatory language which you had to support: "Nate FTW" har har har! then saying "abortion/murder" cannot possibly be worse. *eyeroll*
Fuck off, chihuahuaense. There. Now I've said told you to fuck off as you've claimed so many times before, while claiming to want to stop communicating with me.
ReplyDeleteIf you really don't see the difference between those two statements and their meanings (much in the way you don't see the difference between telling someone they're "on the rag" and calling someone a "douchebag"), we really have nothing to talk about.
I'd ask if you're on the rag, but that's rude.
Happy Friday to the rest of you!
I'm sure there are a few skeletons in his closet. I
ReplyDelete@ Dijea - I for one am anticipating the delicious moment when he is busted after tapping another man's foot in an airport bathroom, or schtupping some college-age campaign staffer. When someone is so obsessed about controlling what goes on in other bedrooms there's oftentimes a public sexual disgrace in their future. I'm counting the minutes.
@ Meghan
ReplyDelete1. There is no 'e' in my name.
2. You are not actualy reading what I wrote, instead you are assuming a lot. I never said I believed they were not married, I said there is a debate and the other side could be just as correct as you assumed yourself to be. You imputed that I thought they were not. If you must know, I don't believe in the virgin birth or Bethleham story at all
3. You are backpedaling when you make a statement like that and then imply that you never said it. I provided an actual quotation of yours that shows otherwise.
4. I object to your high-handed dismissal of another poster's comment, without definitive evidence to back it up, in an incredibly belittling manner, a denial that there was a debate regarding whether mary and Joseph were married, and an insinuation that since you allegedly possess theological degrees from jesuits that your OPINION is unassailable. This thread was quite an amicable debate until you barged in with a "LMAO that the blessed mother was a baby mama", which is NOT a proven fact, its a belief.
I am singling you out because other posters stated they believed Mary was married without acting superior.
There, is that clear enough?
um, hello? Do you live in bizarro world? I don't place the superficial "I'm not talking to you anymore" at the end of every discussion. That's you, friend.
ReplyDeleteI rather enjoy pointing out the fact that you claim insult to anyone with a dissenting opinion of yours yet you go around trashing anyone/any opinion as you see fit.
But to save everyone else from listening to the tiresome back and forth, I'll let it go.
ReplyDeletechihuahuaperson and rocket queen you are both sanctimonious asses.
ReplyDeletechihuha you with your constant bible thumping and rocket you can't have much of a career if you are blogging all day.
step off both of u!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI really don't know what's wrong with you, chihuahua, I really don't. You told me only DAYS ago you wish I wouldn't address you directly, then YOU address ME only days later...and here we are.
ReplyDeleteWith regards to this post, I told Jamie's Girl I don't appreciate her characterization (or Huckabee's - I don't know who said it) of abortion as "murder". I find it offensive. Much as you have said OVER AND OVER that you will defend your religion if someone ever insults it. I, too, am offended by things, and will bring it up when I see fit.
Now then, if you won't abide by your own request to stop communicating with me, I will. See ya.
I love how he simplifies it into blaming her for being an unwed mother. There are a ton of social issues leading to the prevalance of non-nuclear families in our country, and people like him seem to think the answer is "don't have sex, or marry the first person who comes along that you feel horny for." Because that obviously is going to work. Idiot.
ReplyDeleteAmoteafloat -- PP performs well over 305,000 abortions per year, according to its own annual report. Say they charge $450 per. That means abortions generate almost $1.38 million dollars a year, almost 38% of all the revenue from its "health centers." That's just for one type of procedure. So I'd say it's pretty important to PP to keep those numbers up, as the unvarnished truth is that abortion is a money-maker for PP and very important to their bottom line. So YOUR contention that PP is really interested in fewer abortions taking place doesn't add up. I'd made it very clear that with the one huge exception of abortion, I am supportive of PP's services, if not the organization itself. So yes, I can be simultaneously "gung-ho" about contraception while disparaging PP.
ReplyDeleteWho cares what Huckabee said. Huckabee is being... Huckabee. http://www.salon.com/entertainment/movies/oscars/index.html?story=/ent/tv/feature/2011/02/28/natalie_portman_most_important_role
ReplyDeleteThe above article is actually, in my opinion, offensive. If Natalie Portman views motherhood as HER most important role, then that is her opinion and she is entitled to it.
@Stacy:
ReplyDelete1. I am sincerly sorry that I misspelled your name. I mean that. As someone whose name is often misspelled. I cringe when I do it to others.
2/3. Stacy, would you really attack someone for stating that the world is round because there have been debates disputing this in the past? No, of course not. Can you not admit that the so-called debate over their marriage is a tempest in a teapot. There is no merit. They are not equal arguments. I cannot stress that to give them any weight is akin to telling people to be careful about calling the world round. Are there two sides? Yes. Is there a correct side Yes. Do you want to keep giving the substantially less factual side any merit?
By the way, none of what we believe matters when it comes to interpreting the Bible as a historical document that can be studied and debated. One may not believe that Christ ressurected but the Bible and other documents (e.g. Josephus) irrefutebly prove his existence. You may not believe in the Virgin birth but what part of the Bethlehem story would be factually wrong?
4. I really am at a loss that I was high-handed. I didn't even directly reply to someone. I was replying to the comments laughing about Mary being unmarried. As someone said, I guess not as dismissively as I, it was a perverted comment to the topic.
You said that I should learn my bible better (and that's a fair statement) and yet you don't seem to know that there IS overwhelming evidence of their marriage before Christ was born. Again, sigh, that debate has been won.
Also, my undergrad degree was in biology (SJU '89). Those 6 classes I spoke about were requirements for all undergrads. If this led to your assuption that Theology was my major, I apologize.
I have read this blog for so long that I am startled that my first posts on here were taken as so vitriolic. Stacy, they weren't.
Your stating that someone's niece could be dumped and a little paper wasn't going to much for her is amicable and I came along and ruined it with my lousy attitude. I think your issue is you thought someone new might be fun to argue with and I am happy to oblige.
take care, Stacy
@Texshan Planned Parenthood is non-profit. The only "bottom line" is that they provide health care for women who need it. Republicans are actively attempting to defund PP. Period.
ReplyDeleteHuckabee is a hypocrite.
Oy.
ReplyDelete@Meghan Really? Stating the fact that a married person can be dumped just like an unmarried person is mean? Really? You're grasping at straws.
ReplyDeleteI disagree wholeheartedly re your tempest in a teapot statement, and that YOUR BELIEFS have overwhelming merit. Can YOU admit its just what you believe and not necessarily fact, cause really, that's all I pointed out. As far as the Bethleham story being factually wrong, seriously? There are multiple accounts by multiple "eyewitnesses" that contradict each other. How can there not be a debate re the facts? And I also never said Jesus didn't exist, more assumptions by you.
Regarding your being highhanded, I guess a fox really can't smell its own.
And of course, all I do is lie in wait for newbies to torment. In fact I plan my whole day around it. Doesn't everyone? Of course, you're operating under YET ANOTHER ASSUMPTION that I'm a regular poster.
Funny how he didn't go after Bristol Palin. Scumbag.
ReplyDeleteBTW, I'm also irritated that Huckjbee is singling out Natalie because she
ReplyDeletes female. Why not berate her finance for getting someone pregnant out of wedlock? Of course its always the woman's fault. He's a misogynistic jackass.
after the hell my husband put me through, i sincerely hope my daughters DO NOT get married. there is nothing in marriage for women anymore.
ReplyDeleteand really, as if people aren't having sex (at what is natalie, 30?) when they aren't married.
sigh-- These asshat politicians need to not speak out of their anal oriface.
ReplyDeleteCharlie Sheen and Brooke were married and had twin boys. Does this idiot think those boys were better off in that "loving" family?
@Stacy: I never said that your didn't believe that Jesus didn't exist. Please read it again. You offered some of your beliefs and I merely pointed out that it doesn't matter what we believe and gave some examples such as Christ not living. That is why I wrote *one* may not and not Stacy doesn't. What matters for this debate is where the preponderace of facts lie and that is why I am firmly in the "married" camp.
ReplyDeleteAgain, you may believe or not, but I am informing you that there is enough scriptual evidence that my original post is not in error.
Stacy, I was giving you an out. What is it about that post that bothered you? I see ad hominem attacks and vulgur language being spewed in other post and all I wrote was a fact (and I will stand by that) and a note about 2 friends in bad situations. And then I really was cruel and asked about a poster that I haven't seen in awile.
The only thing I can see is that you had a little knowledge about theological polemic that is sometimes used and you wanted to share. You did and I thank you because I have not had such a dialogue in a couple of weeks and I am really enjoying it. But I already knew about it and it means so little to me that, as you correctly assumed, I did not consider it when I stated the fact that Mary and Joesph were married.
I was going to apologize to everyone for pushing this discussion over the slippery slope as a joke, but I guess that would be petty.
take care.
So, 16-year-old unwed mom Jamie Lynn Spears having a baby is OK! But a grown woman with a fiance having a baby is an abomination and sends the wrong moral message. Got it, Mike. Good luck with that presidential run of yours *heh*
ReplyDeleteGood night, All and take care! Gotta get the family settled for the evening.
ReplyDeleteGivine me an out? Thanks so much, you're so generous. And yes, I'm an asshat for pointing out that not everything in the Bible is true. I'm such a jackass.
ReplyDeleteI wish it would have been an option for my mom to have been unwed too.
ReplyDeleteUgh .. Huckabee = Asshat, IMHO.
ReplyDeleteBut .. perhaps he picked her instead of Bristol because Natalie is a Jew?? Certainly would not put it past him, or any other Republican for that matter, seeing as they are the party hand picked by G*d to run this country. *GAG!!*
Planned Parenthood is not in "the business" of performing abortions. It is a nonprofit women's health organization that does provide abortions as well as many other procedures regarding women's health. It does not "make a profit" doing abortions. This is such a misconception. And since, as of today, abortion is LEGAL, what is so wrong about providing it.
ReplyDeleteEXACTLY
ReplyDeletewhat rocketqueen said
you are my hero
oh!
ReplyDeleteand amoteafloat
<3
since it has calmed down a little I will say this:
ReplyDeleteRQ, when did I ask you not to communicate with me? I said that I wished you would go back to "ignoring" me. Why? Because you have two modes: hateful and ignore. I chose ignore.
I get your point that you were offended so you chose to speak up. What is laughable, and I don't even expect you to catch this, is that you malign others for their opinions. There is a way to discuss an issue without talking to those with differing opinions like they are trash, and you don't.
and to Jasmine-all this shit starting and "oooh, she told you" "so and so won that arguement" etc etc is.so.lame. Grow the fuck up.
Sorry for everyone else having to read this bullshit. It's too bad so many around her thrive on this. What the fuck ever, I don't give a shit, but I also won't be back. Not only is the content of the blog becoming more and more lame, this whole fighting bullshit, can't disagree with certain people without causing a shitstorm bullshit, name-calling bullshit is tired.
Hope this group-think works out for you.
@kariodi, I agree. 3% of Planned Parenthood's budget involves abortion. When people start quoting rightwing talking points about reproductive health, you have to wonder, hey?
ReplyDelete@Barton Fink, I hate that everything Planned Parenthood does gets distorted by the abortion microscope. It is a vital service, but such a small part of their value to women's health.
ReplyDelete@Chihuahua -- "and to Jasmine-all this shit starting and "oooh, she told you" "so and so won that arguement" etc etc is.so.lame. Grow the fuck up."
ReplyDeleteI love the rich aroma of irony on a rainy Saturday morning...
You know, for the most part, I'm honestly pretty amazed at how respectful the dialogue is in this thread. Given how the topic of the post was a dogmatic politician's opinion on abortion, I expected a gigantic cybershitstorm. I was almost afraid to read the comments, to be honest. But I was pleasantly surprised.
It's obvious that an entire range of views was represented here, and given how this kind of topic can really produce ire, I think most people were careful not to harangue each other to death.
I'll probably never agree with Ice Angel or Texshan, and we can dispute facts and statistics all day long, but I appreciate people who can discuss this topic both passionately and rationally.
That's all I wanted to say. Time to get back to listening to that radio show with the dude who's pretending to be Enty. ;-)
@RocketQueen, MadLyb, Barton Fink, heatherbug, Stacy, Mooshki and especially amoteafloat:
ReplyDeleteITA and cosign everything you say... i just wish people would stop trying to impose their BELIEFS, especially religious beliefs, on everyone! as long as people treat each other with respect - LIVE AND LET LIVE FFS!!
@amoteafloat: No kidding. His FB info page says he was born on 7/7/34...he doesn't sound 76!
ReplyDeleteI think Enty was answering the blind about the person who was waiting for award results before deciding about dumping a partner. Or was that about a married someone?
ReplyDelete@Robert -- that means that Enty and I have the same birthday!! A few years ago, though, he claimed to be a Sagittarius. Maybe he just doesn't know anything about astrology? ;-)
ReplyDeletelulz chihuahua! You just can't help yourself, can you? Then let's forget this whole "ignoring" thing since you're clearly incapable. Consider dialogue between us fully open despite your previous requests (some of us remember them even if you don't), but if we could keep discussions civil (e.g. I don't care for the "are you on the rag?" childish shit), I'd appreciate it.
ReplyDeleteNow then, I'll explain it to you like this: while you may interpret my questioning of Jamie's Girl as "trashing her opinion", I view it as holding up the LAW. Ever heard of Roe vs. Wade? Abortion is NOT murder and women are free to decide what they want to do with their own bodies without being branded a "murderer" by the state. I get that your religion might say it's murder, but that's simply the opinion of your religion, and I think a lot of women would take exception to being called murderers because they had an abortion.
You know what IS called murder by several states (e.g. Texas), though. Execution. Did you know that the ME is required to write "murder" as cause of death for executed prisoners? Your tax dollars pay for that, too. But I'd bet dollars to doughnuts you're in favour of capital punishment, aren't you?
In closing, don't piss down my back and tell me I'm trash talking when I'm defending women. I'd be surprised if many people other than you found me' to be a "hateful" poster. You clearly see me' that way, but what the fuck do I care about your opinion? You think that women who have abortions are murderers.
Your turn.
I don't care if someone is married or not. If they are a loving parent and can afford to raise their child in a loving, healthy home that is all that matters. There are plenty of married couples who are awful parents.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteKariodi and Tripel, please go back and re-read my last post. Nowhere did I use the word "profit." I used the word "revenue." Totally different. PP has to make enough to keep its doors open and staff paid, etc. In order to do that, it charges for most services. Abortions alone currently account for 38% of the revenue from the health centers. This isn't a "profit," and I never claimed it was. But it is very important to PP that it continue to generate revenue from providing abortions, because that accounts for a huge slice of their revenue. Lots of things are nonprofit -- like the university I work at; that doesn't mean they don't make money.
ReplyDelete