Newest Stupidity from the FRC

Newest Stupidity from the FRC (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Lucylastic -> Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/13/2013 6:46:33 PM)
-Ressler posted from ThinkProgress Health on Mar 13, 2013 at 6:22 pm The right-wing Family Research Council — which uses its advocacy muscle to try to block comprehensive sexual health programs in public schools — is now going a step further, suggesting the young Americans who have premarital sex should be punished because they don’t deserve the right to engage in sexual intercourse. According to senior FRC fellow Pat Fagan, the Supreme Court’s “first assault on marriage” was a 1972 case that overturned a state law banning unmarried people from purchasing birth control. Fagan claims that court decision effectively sanctioned premarital sex, “brushing aside thousands and thousands of years of wisdom, tradition, [and] culture.” Appearing on a radio show with Tony Perkins, the head of the organization, Fagan asserted that “society never gave young people that right,” and instead has an obligation to stop, punish, and shame that type of sexual behavior: FAGAN: The court decided that single people have the right to contraceptives. What’s that got to do with marriage? Everything, because what the Supreme Court essentially said is single people have the right to engage in sexual intercourse. Well, societies have always forbidden that, there were laws against it. [...] It’s not the contraception, everybody thinks it’s about contraception, but what this court case said was young people have the right to engage in sex outside of marriage. Society never gave young people that right, functioning societies don’t do that, they stop it, they punish it, they corral people, they shame people, they do whatever. The institution for the expression of sexuality is marriage and all societies always shepherded young people there, what the Supreme Court said was forget that shepherding, you can’t block that, that’s not to be done. In fact, a full 80 percent of unmarried evangelical Christians report that they are having sex. Despite the emphasis on abstinence within the evangelical community — a misguided approach to sexuality that typically shames young adults about their bodies, ignores the existence of the LGBT community, and fails to equip adolescents with the resources they need to effectively manage their sexual health — it’s clear that premarital sex is the norm, not something that threatens the very fabric of modern society. And ignoring the reality that teens are having sex has had serious consequences across the country. The states that push ineffective abstinence-only health classes have higher rates of teen pregnancy, higher rates of STDs, and higher concentrations of HIV infections. Even the evangelical community itself has started to realize that denying teens sexual health resources isn’t working, and has begun to move in the direction of supporting contraception and sex education. The United States’ teen birth rate has actually recently plunged to a record low — but that wouldn’t be the case if Fagan had his way and unmarried Americans were denied access to birth control. According to the Guttmacher Institute, that decline in unintended teen pregnancies is “almost exclusively” the result of more young people using contraception. http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/03/13/1714551/frc-premarital-sex-punish/ This must be why that republican chappie asked for abstinence funding of Half a billion dollars

muhly22222 -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 5:05:32 AM)
Let's grant, for the sake of argument, his point about societies always banning premarital sex (I have issues with that argument, too, though). What does that prove? It's easy to ban premarital sex when you're marrying your kids off at 15. The average age of marriage today is something like 25 or 26...the highest it's ever been. People reach sexual maturity around 13 years of age. That's a long time to masturbate.

jlf1961 -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 5:26:20 AM)
Why do I get the impression that the conservatives will not be happy until we have a Theocracy and a fucking state religion?

DarkSteven -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 5:37:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: muhly22222 Let's grant, for the sake of argument, his point about societies always banning premarital sex (I have issues with that argument, too, though). What does that prove? That "proves" that the US is a wild and licentious society, compared to the puritanical countries around us. Which is bullshit. Europe is far more liberal. The Arab countries and Iran are in fact way more conservative, but the FRC couldn't really use them as an example. If the FRC wants to roll back to Biblical days, fine. They can go be like Quakers and eschew electricity and gasoline power, and work their land. But they needn't drag all of us with them. It's frightening that his approach is NOT a states' right argument. He wants to replace the current SCOTUS decision requiring states to offer contraception to unmarrieds, with one denying contraception to all but marrieds, across all states.

Moonhead -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 7:46:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Why do I get the impression that the conservatives will not be happy until we have a Theocracy and a fucking state religion? Because they won't, I'd imagine. (Though I doubt even that would stop them whining like schoolgirls and playing the victim all the time...)

FunCouple5280 -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 8:51:40 AM)
First, let's face this is a fringe-coo coo group. Certainly doesn't represent the majority of Americans, and for that matter the majority of conservative leaning individuals. But I would say this is partly a consequence of our litigious society. A little too easy to sue. On the one hand you get crack mothers blaming the OBGyn for birth defects, on the other you get nuts like this getting a voice instead of a beat-down. Side bar of funny, when I hear a douche like that pontificating, I just think of Blazing Saddles. I would love to just see a group of men slap him down with their hats for blowing off like that [:)][:D]

JeffBC -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 8:57:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Why do I get the impression that the conservatives will not be happy until we have a Theocracy and a fucking state religion? ... in the name of individual freedom. That's what I love best about it all.

FunCouple5280 -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 9:06:34 AM)
If you split the conservatives between the libertarian-mided and the bible thumpers, you can get the bible thumpers to easily admit they don't give a damn about individual freedom. They don't believe it about themselves, but their nanny-state crap beliefs are too pervasive in their idiology for them to help themselves. I think the muddling occurs in the Republican tent, where you have a guy like Ron Paul who wouldn't ban the pill and Arch-bishop Santorum who would strap woment up to the breeding post.

Moonhead -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 12:58:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FunCouple5280 If you split the conservatives between the libertarian-mided and the bible thumpers, you can get the bible thumpers to easily admit they don't give a damn about individual freedom. They don't believe it about themselves, but their nanny-state crap beliefs are too pervasive in their idiology for them to help themselves. I disagree. If the GOP collectively had the balls of a gnat they'd stopped bending over, lubing their arses and grovelling like a Gorean kajira the second some cunt who wishes it was still the seventeenth century pulls out his bible. If they're not capable of objecting to that, they don't belong in government. The question is why all of these alleged libertarian and fiscal conservatives in the Republican party put up with these minority clades of fuckwits dictating their party line.

joether -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 1:15:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Why do I get the impression that the conservatives will not be happy until we have a Theocracy and a fucking state religion? Not only a theocracy but a dictatorship on top of that. Forcing their will upon everyone else. Demanding with stiff penalties that any not following their viewpoints is a traitor. Heck, I wouldn't be surprise if they use all their guns to push their political views from the end of a barrel. What do you call someone that pushes their political ideology from the end of a barrel? A Tyrant! Last I checked, Congress's approval rating is in the mid teens compared to the President whom is hovering around 48%. The common understanding is never bash someone whom is performing better than you; it just shows your a poor loser. And that's what conservatives elect to office....poor losers.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 1:22:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether Last I checked, Congress's approval rating is in the mid teens compared to the President whom is hovering around 48%. The common understanding is never bash someone whom is performing better than you; it just shows your a poor loser. And that's what conservatives elect to office....poor losers. Congress isn't just conservatives. Everyone in Congress shares that approval rating that is somewhere between that of Ebola and bedbugs.

joether -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 1:22:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead quote: ORIGINAL: FunCouple5280 If you split the conservatives between the libertarian-mided and the bible thumpers, you can get the bible thumpers to easily admit they don't give a damn about individual freedom. They don't believe it about themselves, but their nanny-state crap beliefs are too pervasive in their idiology for them to help themselves. I disagree. If the GOP collectively had the balls of a gnat they'd stopped bending over, lubing their arses and grovelling like a Gorean kajira the second some cunt who wishes it was still the seventeenth century pulls out his bible. If they're not capable of objecting to that, they don't belong in government. The question is why all of these alleged libertarian and fiscal conservatives in the Republican party put up with these minority clades of fuckwits dictating their party line. I always get a chuckle knowing it was 'fiscal conservatives' that voted for George W. Bush in two elections. The first I could understand "voting the party line"; but the re-election with a growing deficit and debt, two wars in full swing, a sagging economy, and doing a pile of unconstitutional stuff (read: torture); makes me wonder how they define 'fiscal conservative' in terms based on reality. Even further that they vote for people that wish to reduce the rate of cash flow in the economy by cutting government spending rather than upping the tax rate on the country's wealthiest whom are GAINING and not LOSING economic ground. When it comes to economics, conservatives really are behaving like out-of-control teenagers while liberals seem to be the sensible and wise parents of the metaphorical household we call the USA. An which group is worst and even more laughable on the subject of the "US Economy and How to Improve It?". Why, that would be those Tea Party morons!

joether -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 1:28:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: joether Last I checked, Congress's approval rating is in the mid teens compared to the President whom is hovering around 48%. The common understanding is never bash someone whom is performing better than you; it just shows your a poor loser. And that's what conservatives elect to office....poor losers. Congress isn't just conservatives. Everyone in Congress shares that approval rating that is somewhere between that of Ebola and bedbugs. True enough. However, less Republicans would generally equal more Democrats. Democrats, getting stuff done would improve the numbers, since they are more likely to NOT get their bills vetoed by the President. Republicans do not exactly have that luxury! When your approval numbers are in the teens, its generally either a good time to focus your efforts on improving them or getting out of office entirely. Improving those numbers means DOING STUFF AMERICANS WANT DONE! That implies serving the 99% in this country and not the 1%.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 1:31:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: joether Last I checked, Congress's approval rating is in the mid teens compared to the President whom is hovering around 48%. The common understanding is never bash someone whom is performing better than you; it just shows your a poor loser. And that's what conservatives elect to office....poor losers. Congress isn't just conservatives. Everyone in Congress shares that approval rating that is somewhere between that of Ebola and bedbugs. True enough. However, less Republicans would generally equal more Democrats. Democrats, getting stuff done would improve the numbers, since they are more likely to NOT get their bills vetoed by the President. Republicans do not exactly have that luxury! When your approval numbers are in the teens, its generally either a good time to focus your efforts on improving them or getting out of office entirely. Improving those numbers means DOING STUFF AMERICANS WANT DONE! That implies serving the 99% in this country and not the 1%. Do you honestly believe the Democratic congresspersons aren't just as deep in the pockets of the 1%? It might be different 1%ers but they're still in someone's pocket and it isn't mine or yours..

JeffBC -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 1:35:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FunCouple5280 If you split the conservatives between the libertarian-mided and the bible thumpers, you can get the bible thumpers to easily admit they don't give a damn about individual freedom. They don't believe it about themselves, but their nanny-state crap beliefs are too pervasive in their idiology for them to help themselves. I think the muddling occurs in the Republican tent, where you have a guy like Ron Paul who wouldn't ban the pill and Arch-bishop Santorum who would strap woment up to the breeding post. YOu and I see it very differently. I see the libertarian mindset as the one much, much more likely to result in mass human enslavement... in the name of freedom. Ron Paul scares the shit out of me... and he's a total hypocrite. I was actually briefly intrigued with him during the last election until I did some research. Just yesterday I was researching libertarianism. As much as the bible thumpers are scary, libertarianism in my mind is social poison that will quickly result in armed insurrection... which is exactly why libertarians decry the use of violence.

Moonhead -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 1:38:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether I always get a chuckle knowing it was 'fiscal conservatives' that voted for George W. Bush in two elections. The first I could understand "voting the party line"; but the re-election with a growing deficit and debt, two wars in full swing, a sagging economy, and doing a pile of unconstitutional stuff (read: torture); makes me wonder how they define 'fiscal conservative' in terms based on reality. Even further that they vote for people that wish to reduce the rate of cash flow in the economy by cutting government spending rather than upping the tax rate on the country's wealthiest whom are GAINING and not LOSING economic ground. When it comes to economics, conservatives really are behaving like out-of-control teenagers while liberals seem to be the sensible and wise parents of the metaphorical household we call the USA. An which group is worst and even more laughable on the subject of the "US Economy and How to Improve It?". Why, that would be those Tea Party morons! Yep. And yet the same shower of fuckwits and cretins have the brass neck to get arsey if people accuse them of supporting the talibangelicals' agenda. What the fuck else do they think voting Republican is doing at this point?

Moonhead -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 1:42:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: FunCouple5280 If you split the conservatives between the libertarian-mided and the bible thumpers, you can get the bible thumpers to easily admit they don't give a damn about individual freedom. They don't believe it about themselves, but their nanny-state crap beliefs are too pervasive in their idiology for them to help themselves. I think the muddling occurs in the Republican tent, where you have a guy like Ron Paul who wouldn't ban the pill and Arch-bishop Santorum who would strap woment up to the breeding post. YOu and I see it very differently. I see the libertarian mindset as the one much, much more likely to result in mass human enslavement... in the name of freedom. Ron Paul scares the shit out of me... and he's a total hypocrite. I was actually briefly intrigued with him during the last election until I did some research. Just yesterday I was researching libertarianism. As much as the bible thumpers are scary, libertarianism in my mind is social poison that will quickly result in armed insurrection... which is exactly why libertarians decry the use of violence. Libertarianism is an excuse for the plutocracy to reinstate feudalism without having to use all that unAmerican noise about the divine right of Kings: it's all about the economic necessities, of which the main one is people with money can do whatever the fuck they like to those without. Anybody who can't grasp that probably deserves whatever the libertarians will do to them, if we're honest.

JeffBC -> RE: Newest Stupidity from the FRC (3/14/2013 1:59:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead Libertarianism is an excuse for the plutocracy to reinstate feudalism without having to use all that unAmerican noise about the divine right of Kings: it's all about the economic necessities, of which the main one is people with money can do whatever the fuck they like to those without. Anybody who can't grasp that probably deserves whatever the libertarians will do to them, if we're honest. Said a little less diplomatically than me but yeah. Of course, in the US both parties are going down this path with wild abandon.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875