-
My[Confined]Space
Better Than Bread
Movies Coming Soon- Star Trek Books
- “Star Trek: Voyager: 16 Seven Of Nine” Review by Deepspacespines.com
- Nana Visitor Joins Us to Talk About Her New Book – Star Trek: Open a Channel: A Woman’s Trek!
- Out Today: “Star Trek #26”
- Star Trek Strange New Worlds Asylum Book Review
- John Jackson Miller Books Ranked!
- “Star Trek: The Next Generation: Headlong Flight” Review by Lessaccurategrandmother.blogspot.com
- Jumping into Adventure with “Into the Void”
- Happy 2024 Birthday to Jim Johnson!
- “Star Trek: Strange New Worlds: Asylum” Review by Trek.fm
- Beadle & Grimm Interview With StarTrekBookClub.com
- Movie Related Products
- “Deadpool & Wolverine” Review
- Kevin Smith Is Getting Closer and Closer to Dogma 2
- “The Garfield Movie” Review
- Disney Said to be Considering a Surprising Replacement for Bob Iger: EA CEO Andrew Wilson – IGN
- Amazon Is Shutting Down Freevee, Its Ad-Supported Video Streamer
- “Breathe” Review
- “Transformers One” Review
- Captain America: Brave New World | Official Trailer
- Marvel Studios’ Thunderbolts* | D23 Brazil Special Look | In Theaters May 2, 2025
- Mattel apologizes after mistakenly printing porn site on ‘Wicked’ movie dolls packaging | CNN Business
- Music Video DB
Translation from liberalese: the goal and only concern in everyone else’s life should be your own personal safety and happiness. They should think about nothing else other than ensuring that your every need is always served without you having to ever move a single finger or make even the slightest effort to achieve it on your own.
If you jump into a tank full of white sharks, you have all the right in the world to expect everyone to jump into the tank, fight the sharks and save you. And anyone who even thinks of suggesting that you should at least try to swim your way out is an evil republican monster.
Of course, nobody expects YOU to actually move a finger to help anyone else. THEY are the ones who are supposed to bend over backwards to please you. YOU are not required to do anything for anyone else ever.
Wow, it must be fun inside your head.
How can the drowning victim do anything if s/he hasn’t been taught? We wouldn’t have to worry about them drowning if they were taught to swim or use a life jacket.
This is about people getting the education they need so that other people (like yourself) aren’t needed to help.
If you want everyone to look out for themselves, you should be clamoring for sex education/water safety classes. That way no need for you to play lifeguard.
I assume (probably rightly) that nobody ever correctly accused a conservative of your ilk of actually following their own “logic” to its obvious conclusion. Apparently educating people so they know how to make the right decisions in life doesn’t constitute moving a finger to help anyone else. And yet you somehow simultaneously wonder where liberals get off making the snarky commentaries like the ones in the graphic above. I’d be laughing big time right now if your utter irrationality didn’t cause harm to real human beings.
What are you people thinking? Jesus didn’t need a life-jacket. Just do like him and walk on water. Though the good book doesn’t say how he learned that trick. It seems that Jesus only once got into water when he was baptized. Other than that there is no mention of him even bathing. I guess his smell was heavenly.
You must be Catholic. The Vatican loves teaching and browbeating 3rd world swimmers that wearing life vests is sinful while withholding swimming lessons and discouraging antibuoyancy pills and surgery to reverse drowning.
Wonderful poster. I love pushing silly ideas to their logical extremes.
If we make life jackets illegal, then only criminals will have life jackets.
Care2 is a hint about the origin of the poster. I followed that search to care2.com, which led to the petition at www.thepetitionsite.com/227/851/602/support-a-ban-on-life-jackets-and-floatation-devices/
The poster credits breanieswordvomit.tumblr.com, but the idea about swimming came from stfuconservatives.tumblr.com/post/4088576467
and the original idea about driving that inspired the swimming comment came from
www.karenrayne.com/blogpics/abstinence_driving.jpg
That was easy. What ‘glory’ do I collect? Can I wins an Internets?
I love how the mere proposition of some common-sense measures to regulate guns causes the pro-gun crowd to lose their fucking minds. The lengths to which they take their nonsensical garbage would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.
I’m so thankful to be living in a civilized country, where the population is rational about guns. We have permits, background checks and strict laws, and an infinitesimal percentage of the overall US gun death rate. We don’t have tyranny, we are not ruled by mob syndicates, we are not drowning in rivers of blood. The pro-gun lies fall flat the moment you look to any other industrialized democracy.
Do we have crime? Sure. What we don’t have are criminals and mental disturbed individuals who can build arsenals that would make Third-world dictatorships envious. What we don’t have are 15+ bodies every time someone blows a gasket.
I feel bad for the US. I really do. I feel bad for the families that experience this senseless kind of tragedy everyday, and I feel bad for the rational people who are living next door to pro-gun nutjobs.
As for said nutjobs, they can die in a hail of bullets for all I care. You reap what you sow.
Was this moronic poster about sex education or gun control? Either way it fails.
BTW, I just got a new Glock 26 to go with my Beretta Nano, shotgun, and AR 15. Ammo’s tough to find though but if you buy it when you see it, you can keep a good stock.
No actual argument detected.
I see that since you’re probably close minded on both subjects, it wins.
Don’t forget that if you yell for a lifeguard, then someone needs to hold the lifeguard back, and say “just take responsibility for your choice to go swimming.”
Because “responsibility” is code for “the choices that I make for you”. It means that sex is a crime and pregnancy is the punishment.
I love it when people attach the words “common sense” to the laws that are being proposed.
You think criminals give a shit about your laws?
Go ahead and limit magazine capacity – they will just carry more magazines.
Go ahead and ban assult rifles – they will just modify their hunting rifle.
Common sense would be stricter background checks in more places like gun shows. But really none of that matters.
Criminals are going to get guns and use them no matter what the laws are. THATS common sense.
Well in that case, no reason to make anyone jump through any hoops, I guess.
Translation: adapt laws after what criminals will and want to do, not common sense or ethics.
Yup, there’s no point in any laws whatsoever, because criminals will just ignore them. Why make any laws against tainted or bad food, or safety regulations, or seat belts, or product safety? Screw it, this whole “society” thing is over-rated. That’s just right wing or libertarian common sense (for gun-strokers).
If your argument was valid, there would be no stable, peaceful democracies in the world. The entire NRA rationale for promoting gun ownership (lowering crime, “safeguarding” legitimate government) is a preposterous lie. The only reason it is not laughed at outright is because, sadly, most Americans don’t now and don’t care about what goes on in the rest of the World.
Make laws. Then enforce them. Simple enough, or do you need a chart?
Some people will drive over the speed limit, but most won’t if they know cops are out there patrolling. Most people accept the fact that there is a need for speed limit. That is the very essence of a nation of laws, which you claim to be.
Holy crap, you’re INCREDIBLY stupid if you think this is about gun control.
Anyone thinking this is about gun-control… congrats on a full-blown case of Issue Obsession, where you can’t even see any other topic besides your pet bugaboo. This is about sex ed, contraception and abortion rights, nothing else.
Here’s the analogies–see if you can keep up:
1: Life jacket = contraception. The suggestion that letting people use life jackets will encourage risky behavior in the water is a direct rephrase of the claim that allowing people to use contraception will encourage risky sexual behavior.
2: Likewise, the insistence on ‘abstinence only’ approaches to preventing drowning are pretty much straight-up from the support for Abstinence Only sex ec.
3: “Drowning as a gift” and “Legitimate drowning” are both direct paraphrases from GOP candidates in the last election cycle talking about abortion in the case of rape.
That was me, I think.
But it was on purpose.
Just an ironic comment on the inane similarities of the arguments involved in both issues, and the congruity of the constituents.
And their seeming inability to participate in any kind of lateral thinking.
Did… did you just call MY Issue Obsession… a… a bugaboo???