Now that I know what a rape kit is (thanks Sparkybuzzed) I can say that no one should be charged for one. I thought they were some kind of kit you kept on hand in case you were raped. Sort of like those kits you put in your car with a camera and forms in case you get in a car accident.
Now that I know what a rape kit is (thanks Sparkybuzzed) I can say that no one should be charged for one. I thought they were some kind of kit you kept on hand in case you were raped. Sort of like those kits you put in your car with a camera and forms in case you get in a car accident.
Now that I know what a rape kit is (thanks Sparkybuzzed) I can say that no one should be charged for one. I thought they were some kind of kit you kept on hand in case you were raped. Sort of like those kits you put in your car with a camera and forms in case you get in a car accident.
I thought they were some kind of kit you kept on hand in case you were raped. Sort of like those kits you put in your car with a camera and forms in case you get in a car accident.
OMG, what do you think would be included in such a "kit"?
Seriously, I think this is why you have such silly opinions. You honestly don't know what you're talking about half the time. You'll bang on about something like a "rape kit" without really having a clue as to what it actually is.
I thought they were some kind of kit you kept on hand in case you were raped. Sort of like those kits you put in your car with a camera and forms in case you get in a car accident.
OMG, what do you think would be included in such a "kit"?
Seriously, I think this is why you have such silly opinions. You honestly don't know what you're talking about half the time. You'll bang on about something like a "rape kit" without really having a clue as to what it actually is.
I think the objective was to rant about Sarah Palin, not other forumgoers. Also, notice how he typed "I thought"!
Yeah, I noticed that, and it has to be the silliest "thought" I've heard this week.
I think it is fairly reasonable to think that a rape kit was a collection of things used to prevent rape (mace, etc.), to one who had no idea what it was. What I don't think is reasonable, though, is Palin's insistence upon charging people for 'em (even after a law was passed outlawing it).
20/20 or something interviewed Palin, and she basically ended up stating that she wouldn't allow a woman to get an abortion even if she's a victim of rape or incest. What. the. FUCK.
Now that I know what a rape kit is (thanks Sparkybuzzed) I can say that no one should be charged for one. I thought they were some kind of kit you kept on hand in case you were raped. Sort of like those kits you put in your car with a camera and forms in case you get in a car accident.
Seriously? Are you retarded or something?
I find the Repeatican VP completely (wait for it)...
OMG, what do you think would be included in such a "kit"?
A gun and a clip and a license to kill one rapist with it. That, or an arsenal of knives. Or perhaps a wiresaw, allowing the victim to saw of the offenders you know. Or perhaps a few cans of tear gas. Oh, and of course a build in mobile that calls 911 and sends the GPS coördinates the moment the kit is opened. Yes, that would work perfectly... [/Steve thinking pattern] Wait, don't most rapists grab hold of their victims wrists? Darn it, and it was such a great idea too! [/Hoped progress in Steves thinking patterns].
Except that the teleprompter was clearly visible in CNN coverage of the speech. You could even read the prompter in certain shots and see that Palin was reading directly.
Hmmm... Can you link to the "lie"? The only mention I have heard is that the teleprompter went down for about 5-10 seconds. Just enough time to throw in the lipstick joke.
I'm also still waiting for gomidog to list the "rights" she thinks Palin is going to do away with.
Well, let's start off with a big one: The right to the control of your own body functions. I'm worried that she will not only try to bring about a complete ban of all abortions, but will also have an administration that fights strongly against contraception. She is a strong proponent of abstinence only education, and based on her religious beliefs, I would not be surprised if she fought against the pill as well, taking the stance of the Christian pharmacists at Rite Aid. She has been consistently unsupportive of domestic violence programs and women's shelters, and has made many remarks that chafe against anyone with women's lib sensibilities. She is Phyllis Schlafly, version 2.0.
The rational feminists are pointing to her as a beacon of success.
Which "rational feminists?" You mean the ones who AREN'T ACTUALLY FEMINISTS? Go on, tell me what feminism means to you, Steve. The thing with Palin is she is marketing herself with FEMININITY. You know that feminism has truly succeeded when a female gets in power and no one discusses her gender, but instead focuses on her policies.
A proposition for a better and more enjoyable forum: Whenever a new point is being discussed, which introduces new terms previously unspecified, and the user currently known as 'HMTKSteve' posts a response and utilizes these terms, the next question directed at this user should be of the form: "Steve, do you know what [insert term here] means?"
Accepting this proposition would allow the forum and its members to become less stressed and annoyed by the actions of the specified user. Any thoughts or other input? Perhaps someone better capable of formulating propositions could rewrite it where needed to clear out potential loopholes and/or interpretations that might go against the goal of this proposition.
Which "rational feminists?" You mean the ones who AREN'T ACTUALLY FEMINISTS
It's funny: next Steve will tell us he thought feminists were just trying to reinstate the age-old ideal of a woman in the kitchen, but don't worry! He'll put a rape kit in the hands of each one of them.
-Supports parents choice in saying their child can't be taught from a book they find offensive. Including your history book
-Supports teaching intelligent design along with evolution. How do you teach something not based on anything other than facts or at least backed up by theories. Say that you believe in just because the teacher told you so is going to detract from the education process and make teachers worry that they would get sued and/or fired.
She is just Neo-Con Barbie and she was mayor of the "Meth Capital" of Alaska. She is so right, she makes most conservatives look like Greenpeace activists. I can't say that I hate her, I just have very little respect for her.
Comments
Seriously, I think this is why you have such silly opinions. You honestly don't know what you're talking about half the time. You'll bang on about something like a "rape kit" without really having a clue as to what it actually is.
I find the Repeatican VP completely (wait for it)...
aPalin'...(rimshot)
Dentata, anyone?
Bulldookie.
I'm also still waiting for gomidog to list the "rights" she thinks Palin is going to do away with.
I'm worried that she will not only try to bring about a complete ban of all abortions, but will also have an administration that fights strongly against contraception. She is a strong proponent of abstinence only education, and based on her religious beliefs, I would not be surprised if she fought against the pill as well, taking the stance of the Christian pharmacists at Rite Aid. She has been consistently unsupportive of domestic violence programs and women's shelters, and has made many remarks that chafe against anyone with women's lib sensibilities. She is Phyllis Schlafly, version 2.0. Which "rational feminists?" You mean the ones who AREN'T ACTUALLY FEMINISTS? Go on, tell me what feminism means to you, Steve. The thing with Palin is she is marketing herself with FEMININITY. You know that feminism has truly succeeded when a female gets in power and no one discusses her gender, but instead focuses on her policies.
Accepting this proposition would allow the forum and its members to become less stressed and annoyed by the actions of the specified user. Any thoughts or other input? Perhaps someone better capable of formulating propositions could rewrite it where needed to clear out potential loopholes and/or interpretations that might go against the goal of this proposition.
As an afterthought: Alaska leads the nation in terms of rape and deals with a terrible domestic violence problem. All this while Palin slashes funding to a shelter for pregnant teens, pumps up abstinence only education and calls abortion an "atrocity". Hate to say it, but this one is pretty open-and-shut.
http://www.issues2000.org/Sarah_Palin.htm#Welfare_+_Poverty
-Supported By Ted Stevens
-Supports parents choice in saying their child can't be taught from a book they find offensive.
Including your history book
-Supports teaching intelligent design along with evolution.
How do you teach something not based on anything other than facts or at least backed up by theories. Say that you believe in just because the teacher told you so is going to detract from the education process and make teachers worry that they would get sued and/or fired.