I get that a Shipoopi is a girl you’re glad you found. She’s hard to get, but you can win her yet. I suppose that’s all fair. So who’s the girl you wish you’d never met (and presumably does not kiss at all)? Or what about the girl who you couldn’t get, despite your best efforts?
As much as I enjoy musical comedies, and I do enjoy them, I wish they’d define their terms a little more clearly. But then, I suppose nobody would line up to buy tickets to Kant: The Musical.
Those interested in the recent media hubbub about the Catholic Church’s stance regarding condom use to prevent the spread of AIDS should give the following a read:
American Papist:
Where the condom controversy currently stands
Cardinal Martini roundup
Michael Liccione (Sacramentum Vitae):
Why the condom debate is big for the Church
The Catholic condom debate II
Jimmy Akin:
Condoms & HIV/AIDS
Contraception & Extra-Marital Sex
A recent post by a friend of mine brought back a painful memory.
"When I was 14, just a little over two months before [Rob] would have graduated from high school, he was killed. I hadn’t talked to him for some time when I just had this overwhelming need to call. His mom answered the phone and told me that earlier that day he had gone out to buy a motorcycle. As he was driving it home, he somehow lost control and wrapped himself around a telephone pole. I was frozen and utterly speechless."
My best friend in high school was pulled off a platform by a passing train and died. Getting that phonecall from my dad was one of the worst moments of my life. Anyhow, I know other folks have lost loved ones unexpectedly. We’re connected by a terrible bond, but we can use it to help each other. At the lowest points of my life I’ve found writing poetry to be very theraputic. I thought perhaps folks still mourning a loss would appreciate this poem that I wrote when my best friend died.
![[davidhasselhoff.jpg] title=](http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/images/davidhasselhoff.jpg)
It’s hard to argue with this guy’s logic. Then again, St. Anselm’s ontological argument for the existence of God sounds good at first, too. That is, until you really pick it apart. So I leave it to my compitent readers. What’s wrong with this argument?
“I usually don’t send out pure opinion pieces, but let it be said: There is not one person anywhere who can give you a good reason why it’s OK to show a man’s chest on TV, but not a woman’s chest. You can ask over 100 people why — trust me, I have — and not get a real answer. It’s just a silly superstition that some people came up with, a bunch of others went along with it, and now we’re stuck with it. Have you ever heard a real reason?”
[…]
“This is different from other issues, like abortion, affirmative action, or the death penalty — I have opinions on all of those, and probably so do you, but there are two sides to each issue, and I can at least see where the other side is coming from. But I’ve never heard the other side of the boob issue.”
“A good sign of a widespread belief that has no supporting logic is that if you ask people why they believe it, they always pass the buck on to someone else. ‘Our society has decided…’ ‘The community feels that…’ ‘Judges have ruled that…’ — except with that last one, if you listen to what judges say, they pass the buck too, saying ‘According to contemporary community standards…’ What’s missing is someone standing up and saying ‘I, yes *ME* *PERSONALLY*, I believe that seeing a mammary gland is harmful, and here’s why.’
“To people who say that inciting any male lust is bad, I tell them I grew up in Denmark (although I’m American) and there you could see bare breasts in public advertisements, on the covers of supermarket tabloids, and on the beach, and nobody cared. And, the sex crime rate is much lower there. It’s not obvious that nudity even incites much ‘lust’ once you’re used to it anyway — men live in nudist colonies surrounded by naked women and don’t get turned on. (It’s the visitors who are easy to spot, because they aren’t used to it and it makes them stick out, so to speak.)”
Read the rest here and let me know what you think.
Via the Natural Family Planning Discussion Board, here's a classic example of the general public's ignorance regarding NFP:
"How long is the Legislature of Nebraska going to do the bidding of the Vatican as expressed by the paid lobbyist of the Roman Catholic Church — Greg Schleppenbach — and the mouthpiece of the same church, Sen. Mike Foley?"
"He was supposedly elected to represent the best interests of the citizens, not the agenda of the Roman Catholic Church. His latest bill shows where his loyalties really lie — not for women but for his church. He is against any form of birth control. He would have women have babies who do not have the resources to care for them."
"If a woman does not have the financial resources to take care of a child, then the state must help with food stamps, welfare, Medicaid and a host of other services. Are the citizens of Nebraska compelled to support the agenda of the Roman Catholic Church as put forward by Foley and Schleppenbach?"
"Natural family planning does not have a successful track record. Birth control and condom use are far more effective. The state should be subsidizing those methods in the search to cut state expenditures."
"Sen. Ernie Chambers is the only person who always stands between Nebraska and the domination of our lives as dictated by the Vatican."
"If the rest of the Catholic legislators want domination of the Vatican over Nebraskans, then back Foley and Schleppenbach. If you think that one religious belief system should not be dominant in state law and practices, then send Foley and his Roman Catholic agenda to the wastebasket."
Ruth C. Snyder, Lincoln
I feel as though I can almost hear this woman snearing.