scratch-mark

So, You Think I Exaggerate?

Well, here’s data points, here, and here, that says I don’t.

REPUBLICAN (emphasis, mine) lawmakers are
drafting new legislation that will make marriage a requirement for
motherhood in the state of Indiana, including specific criminal
penalties for unmarried women who do become pregnant "by means other
than sexual intercourse."

must first file for a "petition for parentage"…

considered for the "gestational certificate"…

And I’m counting on these pricks and assorted "born-again" nutbars to keep us from becoming a totalitarian regime the likes of China? Oh, wait, don’t you have to get a license to have a child in China?

These fuckers can go straight to hell. Every last goddamned one of them.

Update:
The proposed law has been withdrawn. The outrage stands. Do you think that the legislator who dreamed this up, and her supporters, withdrew it because they had a change of heart? Of course not. They withdrew it because of the outrage over it, meaning, that if they could, they gladly would control each and every minute aspect of your life, fuckers that they are. Oh, and for the sake of search engine, let me be sure to name the chief fucker:
Patricia Miller, R-Indianapolis.

Richard Nikoley

I'm Richard Nikoley. Free The Animal began in 2003 and as of 2021, contains 5,000 posts. I blog what I wish...from health, diet, and food to travel and lifestyle; to politics, social antagonism, expat-living location and time independent—while you sleep—income. I celebrate the audacity and hubris to live by your own exclusive authority and take your own chances. Read More

12 Comments

  1. Kyle Bennett on October 6, 2005 at 10:41

    The Democrats objection to this will probably be something about how it will lead to "back-alley inseminations".

    Since the proposed bill adresses assisted fertilization, instead demanding that it be done the normal way or not at all (for unmarried women), could this be termed the "Go Get Fucked" bill?

    So much Jay Leno fodder in this one…

  2. Rich on October 6, 2005 at 12:35

    Oh fuck off!

  3. EKENYERENGOZI MICHAEL CHIMA on October 6, 2005 at 12:10

    But you could still be heared without swearing at them.

    Americans need uncommon sense since their common sense has not helped them to overcome their confusion.

  4. Doug Wolf on October 6, 2005 at 13:05

    Rich,

    Oh fuck off!

    Hmmm… "fuck off"… is that like a "bake off", but way more fun?

    🙂

    — DW

  5. mojotek on October 6, 2005 at 20:11

    Oh come on… stop swearing? Jesus, the crap we get exposed to everyday, and you expect us to just be as civil as can be? Get with it Nigerian Times.

  6. Francis W. Porretto on October 7, 2005 at 12:42

    Yes, those are outrageous proposals, but every party has its nutballs. The GOP's are nuts in one direction, the Democrats' in the other.

    Really, the only sensible thing to do is vote on character. Party-affiliation voting is just a way to persuade youself that you're doing your civic duty, when in fact you're being a lazy, unthinking bum.

    Of course, it would all be much easier and more palatable if we had "None Of The Above" on every ballot — and if it won a few contests.

  7. SianNorah on October 7, 2005 at 10:09

    Frankly, I think motherhood, itself is enough of a penalty for getting pregnant.

  8. Raven on October 7, 2005 at 18:23

    So, does that mean if you get divorced and have kids you now are a fugitive breaking the law? Motherhood doesn't end at birth. What a bunch of lunatics! Check out the link to a bumper sticker on my blog. You might enjoy it.

  9. kris on October 7, 2005 at 15:24

    This story sounds a bit far-fetched. Do you have any news stories or at least a bill number?

  10. Anders on October 8, 2005 at 10:15

    That bill was probably intended as a political statement, not a serious attempt to illegalize unmarried women getting artificially inseminated.

  11. OTTMANN on October 8, 2005 at 15:34

    Gue$$ money is your God, eh? The bill sounds wacky to me and likely was just a herring for response. Wow, You bit hard!

  12. Kevin on October 8, 2005 at 13:55

    I think Anders is right.

    Shaula Evans has covered this extensively and I think she's got a very interesting and plausible explanation for why this bill was attempted in the first place.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

YouTube1k
YouTube
Pinterest118k
Pinterest
fb-share-icon
40
45
Follow by Email8k
RSS780