"Jane, you ignorant slut!"

[MaltonNecromancer]

"The act of sex has no inherent negative values." The funniest thing I've read on this forum to date.

But it doesn't. Well, not any more than eating or sleeping.

I'm going to assume you're on about rape. But if you want to talk about rape, well, that's about power, not sex. Perhaps I could have worded my comment more clearly (something along the lines of "consenting sex between two adults has no inherent negative values"), but I didn't see the need. I don't count rape as anything to do with sex, and I'm a little saddened anyone does.

I'm intrigued: what do you percieve as the negative values of protected sex between consenting adults? Because if everyone's enjoying it, has agreed to what's going on, and is psychologically robust enough to deal with it, I genuinely don't see the issue.

Is this another cultural thing?

[greendestiny]

why should a school or anyone else provide a contraceptive to someone else at all? If you have the ability to choose to have sex then you should have the responsibility of providing your own means of restricting pregnancy. If you don't have those means then quite possibly you should not be having sex. It irritates me to think that I am paying for someone else to have sex at all. Excepting in the cause of rape sex is always a choice. If you can't pony up the case for your own contraceptive you should probably not be making that choice.

[Grenadier]

No doubt the negative values of sex that I see every day is something entirely absent in the exalted and enlightened culture of the United Kingdom. And no doubt the only people having sex over there are consenting adults. And nobody has ever experienced a negative value as a result of having sex. After all, the English know better than we do and any American who isn't a liberal would do well to listen to them on all matters.

[Psychosplodge]

You do realise that when some body mentions a culture gap they don't mean "ha look our ignorant redneck american cousins"(<== what you basicly accused me of the other day) they simply mean the assumptions that underpin your outlook on life are different...

[eldargal]

Because there are plenty of non-sex related reasons to be on birth control.

why should a school or anyone else provide a contraceptive to someone else at all? If you have the ability to choose to have sex then you should have the responsibility of providing your own means of restricting pregnancy. If you don't have those means then quite possibly you should not be having sex. It irritates me to think that I am paying for someone else to have sex at all. Excepting in the cause of rape sex is always a choice. If you can't pony up the case for your own contraceptive you should probably not be making that choice.

[DarkLink]

[URL="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/10/condemnation-of-rush-limbaugh-shows-our-hypocrisy.html"]Here's[/URL] a funny article about Rush's comments and hypocrisy. Not Rush's hypocrisy, the hypocrisy of a lot of the people who attacked him. It also points out how stupid it is that the President of the United States of America personally called some random woman who got called a four letter word, when the middle east is up in flames and Israel/Iran are in position to make it even worse, when the world economy is still relatively in the gutter, and Russia and China are making political and military alliances with dictators and enemies of the western world.

Just keep some perspective.



Edit:
It's also worth pointing out that Rush is an entertainer. He is intentionally inflammatory and offensive, because that's what draws in the listeners.

[Drunkencorgimaster]

Necron 2.0 is right on the money on this one. Rush should have ignored Pelosi's obviously planted activist. Rush makes good points sometimes, but on other occasions he can be just petty, small-minded, and willfully-ignorant.

Now that the Genie is out of the bottle though, I am appalled that Jane Fonda and Gloria Steinem today called for Rush to be banned from public airways. This is wrong on several counts.

1) First of all (as an earlier poster commented) I do not recall Fonda or Steinem saying squat when Bill Maher called Palin the C-word. If they are the self-appointed guardians of womanhood, where were they then?

2) Does scoring a few points against an arguably-misogynist radio show host justify BANNING HIM FROM THE AIRWAYS? Can you imagine the field day the right would have with that? Really, you want to go there? Don't you find that more than a little disturbing? Who decides who gets to speak and who doesn't? The Committee of Public Safety as Determined by Jane and Gloria? Can they not see how this could backfire and potentially be used against their own darling demagogues on the left like Maher or Madow? I am appalled that former 1960s radicals with all their demands for free expression back in the day could now even CONSIDER such a draconian response. We are awash in hypocrisy.

[Grenadier]

Assumptions are the mother of misunderstanding in conversations. Furthermore, the Brits here are not the only ones I've dealt with in conversation. Virtually every one of them I'd discussed all manner of issues with have a lot of assumptions about America. Including some cousins of mine who live over there. But the worst offender was this very anti-American idiot who never once said a kind word about America and its citizens. Instead he kept on with stereotypes and the usual European criticisms of America. I remember he once was harping about how wonderful Britain is in terms of race issues. And how he claimed America is nothing but a racist country in a discussion about Obama's qualifications to be president. When I asked him "when was the last time England had a black prime minister" he quickly changed the subject. My point is, it is easy for each side to make assumptions. But I don't liken a cultural gap to an assumption. British culture is in many ways very different than American culture. But in just as many ways it is similar. I don't liken a cultural gap to an ideological gap. To me ideology, while it can influence (over time) a culture it is a distinctly separate thing. So it seems to me any of our disputes thus far have less to do with the culture of our parent country and more to do with ideological differences. For example, in my region of the state there are strong conservative values. These are ideological based and not cultural based. It is possible, though, in certain areas the culture may influence the ideology and vice versa. But they still remain distinctly separate things due to the fact that culture is comprised of many components and ideology is comprised of thought as its primary component.

You do realise that when some body mentions a culture gap they don't mean "ha look our ignorant redneck american cousins"(<== what you basicly accused me of the other day) they simply mean the assumptions that underpin your outlook on life are different...

[eldargal]

Hipocrisy doesn't excuse ignorant bigotry, but neither does ignorant bigotory warrant banning someone from expressing their opinion. It does warrant calling them out on it, though.

[Psychosplodge]

You're just arguing semantics now, it's essentially the same principle.