Tag Archives: condoms

Nuggets For Sluts Outreach Initiative

New Feature: A soundtrack to enhance your reading experience. Just open the link in another tab on your browser and enjoy the totally relevant song whilst enjoying the article. Today’s soudtrack. For the sake of our nation’s unplanted waves of fertile uteri, responsible, concerned, white, male Congressmen decided last week to selflessly put aside the debt and unemployment issues they really wanted to be talking about, and focus on what really matters: baby makin’. The problem? We are not doing enough of it, and all these rubber gadgets and magic pills are not helping. Did you know condoms are sometimes made out of the skin of sheep? What’s next? Kitten intestine lampshades? I smell an unmissable opportunity for a Hitler comparison. Let’s watch: Sandra Fluke, a student at Georgetown Law School, was supposed to be the Democratic witness at a Congressional hearing about the Obama administration’s contraception policy. However, Darrell “Sweet Mel” Issa, the committee chair at the hearing, prevented her from speaking, while only allowing a series of men to testify about the policy. (Huffpost, more or less) Hunny, the men are talking. Steak and BJ Day (ladies) is right around the corner. Maybe you should be loosening your jaw, or practicing char vs. warm pinkness ratio (sweet, that actually works both ways). You can throw the practice steaks to homeless people if you want, hippie. We got you that nice sheer dressing gown for V-day. You liked that right? What the hell do women of child-bearing age even know about contraception anyway? God gave us male politicians so you don’t have to hurt yourself with thinking. Your turn, Rushizzle. Tell the bitch. “What does it say about the college co-ed Susan Fluke [sic] who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to … Finish reading this sumbitch!

Share
2 Comments

Daddy Issues

By Sean “Abort ´Em Til You Can Aford ´Em” Torrie Ok folks, let me explain a few things. I’m open to missing a point somewhere in here, maybe it’s me in my youth not understanding some key element of existence, but I do believe our good Mark Hurley nailed it in regards to Obama´s Mandate and the Catholic reaction.  We want to live in a free country, you want to have a business that is religion related, but not a church, you’re going to have to risk employing a person of a different faith, who’s philosophies you’ll have to endorse. Tough shit. Enjoy your parent company not paying taxes. Here’s my follow up to the question at hand. You’re a religion related organization, right? So you love babies, right? Know what I’ll bet you hate? Abortion. Know what I’ll bet you hate almost as much? Unwed mothers. Because they’re gonna happen. All of ´em. Unwed mothers who’ve had abortions previously, and presently have more than one child from more than one ‘sperm donor’. You know what’s gonna have to happen after that? You’re gonna have to provide medical coverage for those kids, because there ain’t no babydaddys doin’ it. Better still, guess what follows? Government subsidies that will pour in; and you just really, really aren’t changing that part of the safety net, buddy. That part of the safety net is there because, while your parent company doesn’t have to pay taxes, it’s also lost popularity, doesn’t have quite the same income it used to, and is no longer the go-to place for aid. I present exhibit A to everything you just said wasn’t gonna happen when you finished the last paragraph: For Women Under 30, Most Births Occur Outside Marriage (NYT) And just when you think I’m gonna say … Finish reading this sumbitch!

Share
2 Comments

Hardcore Hypotheticals

When I cast my vote for Barack Obama, I admit to a certain amount of bandwagoning, and not a little political masturbation. I imagined our fresh, young, muscly president mounting the podium in Congress on his first day and proceeding to rip assholes left and right, like a blind Incredible Hulk at an orgy. Against gay marriage? “You’re a curmudgeonly old bigot,” Barry would lay it out, street like, and fix the bullshit laws. Slave to lobbyists? “You’re a friggin’ traitor, and your votes won’t count until you shed the corporate weight.” Just firing off the shocker left and right with his other two arms. Are you drafting laws in the face of scientific fact like global warming and evolution? “Hey, from now on, asshole, we listen to experts, and not greedy dumbfucks with something to gain.” Spewing hyperbolic, partisan doomsday language on either side of the isle? “I order you to smoke two joints a day until you learn to calm the fuck down.” The big climax would come when he said, “Just because you have an opinion doesn’t mean it deserves any credence.” Just splooging rationalism all over the front rows of the gallery like the sexiest Gallagher show ever. Money shot. Sometimes, if I had trouble getting to philosophical nirvana, I’d have him throw in something about how European Socialism is pretty neat, and that, no, in fact, he’s not a Muslim, he’s an atheist. “Can’t do nothin’ about it now, sucka. I already got the keys!” Since then, even though pundits love to call Obama a radical secular leftist with no concern for process, he’s been everything but what we elected him to be. If you seriously think Obama is radical, you should see the alternate universe where he actually did what we hired him to … Finish reading this sumbitch!

Share
4 Comments

This Man Is A Teacher

My dearest Tom Hoopes: I first encountered your work when a Catholic friend of mine pointed me toward an article in which you speak briefly about Christopher Hitchens, a great hero of mine who recently passed away. It was condescending as all get out, but it was chock full of underhanded compliments, and seemed to be relatively thoughtful. It is, of course, gratifying to see a great American champion of humanist ideals remembered fondly by members of the non-secular class, so I decided I might read some more of your work. The first article I read was entitled “Six Myths About Atheism,” and I have to say, the title excited me, because I assumed you were a man of thought, and perhaps you’d be spending your time dispelling some of the myths that are propagated amongst the religious about non-believers. The article turned out to be the epitome of those very lies: a carelessly thought out bigoted bit of blatant propaganda, a brainwashing tool to keep the hate for atheists alive among the religious. My first thought was of completely ignoring it. After all, ignorance abounds in your community, trying to change one mind in the sea of under-used brains you call a church leaves one feeling impotent and frustrated. As my beautiful wife put it, quoting someone else: “Never argue with an idiot. They´ll drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience.” On the other hand, several of my friends and readers across Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc. expressed concern that I said that all of your points were entirely wrong, your research was ass-on-fire, and your intentions were entirely malicious, so I decided that I might address your points and show you why you’re an untalented, proselytizing asshole.  After all, even you said in your article … Finish reading this sumbitch!

Share
2 Comments