Stillbirth is a crime in America

[Sean Renaud]

Your existence makes me wish for the return of Oliver Wendell Holmes.

Your existence makes me wish there were two of you so you didn't have to work so hard at being awesome. I think I know two people who aren't getting their wish today.

 

[mark_j]

i'm not calling it 'super special weed'- but it's not the same gear that i used to smoke back when or what was still prevalent even 8 or so years back... the london market's now flooded with skunk. perhaps there's some difference between what you and i call weed - 'regular' weed over here was called hash.

from personal observations of regular weed v skunk, the difference is clearly seen: the silly, mellow, giggly, munchies, temporary high of weed, when you feel your mind's seeing all new things and being so creative, is replaced by a harder, faster high, with much more scope for anger than regular weed ever inspires, more inflated sense of being right, above the judgement of others (while it lasts), increased 'darker' thoughts/visions such as demons/possession (i'm not joking) more risk-taking dangerous behaviour, more crime to support the habit, etc..., etc..., etcetera. when so many local kids were using it was quite eye-opening. the paranoia, depression and anger were probably the most noticeable and worrying. weed used to be relatively happy n harmless indulgence. don't even think you can buy that now.

from what i've read/heard, it's more to do with the balance between the thc and cbd: in 'regular' weed, there's supposedly a good balance,with the cbd cock-blocking the psychosis-inducing thc's. with skunk, the thc rate is way higher with very little cbd content at all.that alone would be responsible for the more dramatic effects i've seen.

I'd say it was more likely that the weed had "something else" doctoring it. You don't get that kind of psychotropic response from any sort of normal cannibus. Even the stuff grown for maximum THC doesn't do that. That includes the stuff grown generational under halide (or any other artificial lighting). Granted YMMV, but I'd be willing to bet that if you were to do a chemical analysis of the stuff you call "skunk" you'd find it has been laced with something else.....

 

[warrior queen]

I'm sorry that's just not how genetics work.

If dad doesn't carry a fuck up and mom does, and mom's fuck up is dominant dad is 0% responsible on a genetic level as he didn't contribute any of the shit DNA fucking up the progeny. Dad can have perfectly healthy genes and mom's mutant shit can and sometimes does totally trump it.

That's not an opinion that is irrefutable, repeatedly provable, got pictures of the shit in biology books the world over, scientific fact.

Like I said, not necessarily, no matter how bad you want to believe otherwise

I draw your attention to this article......http://www.theguardian.com/society/2008/feb/19/health.drugsandalcohol
And that is 7 yrs ago.....there's a lot more that a quick google search shows up.

 

[Sean Renaud]

That article has nothing to do with your point WQ.

You claimed that if anything happens to that fucking retard Smooth's kids that the problem is 50% his.

There is absolutely no way you can know your sperm is fine.
My son didn't develop UC till he was 19.
If anything genetic happens to your kids down the track, your sperm is at the very least, 50% responsible!

This statement is simply false. You get 50% of your genetic material from each parent. Then you get a lot of other stuff from your mother while in the womb so if we're nitpicking you're slightly more your mother than your father. That however isn't the point.

So if a problem comes from your mother's family the man is not 50% responsible (unless we're going as far as to say I should look into a woman's family history prior to fucking her and if I don't it's equally my fault for not doing a DNA test) otherwise the fault of mine is 0%. And the same would be true in the opposite direction.

It's not genetic but if Magic Johnson's kids had been born with HIV that wouldn't be 50% his wifes fault. Her only mistake was sleeping with a sports star who could (and apparently did) have any woman he wanted.

 

[warrior queen]

That article has nothing to do with your point WQ.

You claimed that if anything happens to that fucking retard Smooth's kids that the problem is 50% his.



This statement is simply false. You get 50% of your genetic material from each parent. Then you get a lot of other stuff from your mother while in the womb so if we're nitpicking you're slightly more your mother than your father. That however isn't the point.

So if a problem comes from your mother's family the man is not 50% responsible (unless we're going as far as to say I should look into a woman's family history prior to fucking her and if I don't it's equally my fault for not doing a DNA test) otherwise the fault of mine is 0%. And the same would be true in the opposite direction.

It's not genetic but if Magic Johnson's kids had been born with HIV that wouldn't be 50% his wifes fault. Her only mistake was sleeping with a sports star who could (and apparently did) have any woman he wanted.

My original point was that men ingesting dangerous substances made them just as likely to be responsible.
If he was drinking or doing drugs when his little swimmer made it into the egg, he's equally responsible if something fucks up with the child.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

That article has nothing to do with your point WQ.

You claimed that if anything happens to that fucking retard Smooth's kids that the problem is 50% his.



This statement is simply false. You get 50% of your genetic material from each parent. Then you get a lot of other stuff from your mother while in the womb so if we're nitpicking you're slightly more your mother than your father. That however isn't the point.

So if a problem comes from your mother's family the man is not 50% responsible (unless we're going as far as to say I should look into a woman's family history prior to fucking her and if I don't it's equally my fault for not doing a DNA test) otherwise the fault of mine is 0%. And the same would be true in the opposite direction.

It's not genetic but if Magic Johnson's kids had been born with HIV that wouldn't be 50% his wifes fault. Her only mistake was sleeping with a sports star who could (and apparently did) have any woman he wanted.

Dude, WQ is kinda right here.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I draw your attention to this article......http://www.theguardian.com/society/2008/feb/19/health.drugsandalcohol

Which doesn't dispute anything I said.

It is still possible and does happen that a genetic fuck up/mutation is entirely one parents fault. ESPECIALLY if the parent's aren't from a rather homogeneous population.

Just like 3+5 does NOT =12......50/50 responsibility is NOT how genetics always work, not even on paper where there is the biggest line. In reality you can't even really look at it like that it doesn't even make sense to try and apply that kind of logic to what happens with regard to what genetics parents pass to their progeny.



In fact technically speaking women donate a larger portion of the genetic material in the first place PLUS the mitochondrial DNA....so...there really is NOTHING 50/50 about genetics. That is a mental construct you somehow got in your head and you need stop spreading that ignorance.
http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/57278829.jpg

NOW, that's not to say it can't be both parents 'fault' because they both carry the fucked up gene bot dominantly or recessive. And this in no way alleviates men of being in good physical condition for breeding purposes....send healthy sperm...not fucked up on medications and recreations sperm know what I mean? Eat right, do some fucking PT...don't be a lazy ignorant piece of shit.
http://41.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lmxlul7wvW1qgfo5ao1_500.png

 

[Sean Renaud]

My original point was that men ingesting dangerous substances made them just as likely to be responsible.
If he was drinking or doing drugs when his little swimmer made it into the egg, he's equally responsible if something fucks up with the child.

Except again that's not how genetics work. He could be high, drunk, 80 years old and dying of cancer and still be 0% at fault. It's unlikely sure but that's the reality of how this functions.

Again if Magic Johnson's wife or child had gotten HIV would they both be equally responsible? No. It would be 100% his fault. If the kids turn out fucked up and DNA tests show that whatever it is is carried on the mother's side then it's the mother's "fault" all the way. I have to quote that because 'fault' is a strong word for this.

IF the bad genes are from the woman it's the woman's fault no matter what the man was up to. And if the bad genes came from the man it's the mans' fault no matter what the woman was up to. If the bad genes came from them both THEN and only THEN is it 50/50 who's at fault.

Seriously this is like 6th grade biology. . .except if we're part of the Jesus rode dinosaurs club in which case yes it is 50/50.

 

[neci]

I'm not abusive. I'm not just going to tolerate someone abusing my child.

i've got a pair of scissors, if you're ever down this way.

 

[warrior queen]

You have totally missed my point.
Never mind...... I'll just take off my shoes and go cook dinner, ok?

 

[BotanyBoy]

My original point was that men ingesting dangerous substances made them just as likely to be responsible.
If he was drinking or doing drugs when his little swimmer made it into the egg, he's equally responsible if something fucks up with the child.

Dude, WQ is kinda right here.

From a legal perspective....yea.

From a biological one? No, he's more likely to be the cause if he's all trashed out and mom is healthy.

IF they are both healthy or both trashed then we are back to square 1....genetics don't work 50/50 that's just some arbitrary buu shit made up because close enough that however is not what determines who's genes caused what fuck up.

Got lil Mutant Jr right?
http://i584.photobucket.com/albums/ss290/jumper4evr1/goonies-sloth.gif

His slothness might be 68% dad and 32% mom.....or 25% dad's trash and 75% mom's.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You have totally missed my point.
Never mind...... I'll just take off my shoes and go cook dinner, ok?

No you failed to convey your point then refused to admit you're wrong, correct yourself and try to more accurately communicate your message.

But if you want to be a bitch about instead of just clarifying with "I meant legally/socially 50/50 responsible" instead of insisting that dad (or mom) is specifically, genetically 50% responsible.

......don't let the door hit ya cupcake!

Jesus Christ, can't believe I burned nap time on this shit I gotta go to work.

Later GB.
http://i.imgur.com/DccPI5Z.gif

 

[warrior queen]

His slothness might be 68% dad and 32% mom.....or 25% dad's trash and 75% mom's.

Because there is absolutely no way of determining percentage of responsibility, it has to be 50% responsibility.
Sometime..... 100 years from now.....we may be able to apportion blame to the n'th percentage....
Until then, stating otherwise is simply 'doin a smoothe' and advocating the superiority of men.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Because there is absolutely no way of determining percentage of responsibility, it has to be 50% responsibility.
Sometime..... 100 years from now.....we may be able to apportion blame to the n'th percentage....
Until then, stating otherwise is simply 'doin a smoothe' and advocating the superiority of men.

Nope. How is it the superiority of men that somethings are one person's fault not the other?

Wait. . .do we live in a world where DNA testing hasn't become possible yet? I mean is that the world where you're communicating from. Here on this world we do have tests that can show what you inherited from each parent.

Now somethings "just happen" and figuring out who's fault that was or wasn't is near impossible. (As Bot points out that doesn't actually make it 50/50 but if you can't prove who was at fault you may as well treat it as such.) But lots of things are just in the genes and finding out whos fault it is that you have this or that trait is really just about going and getting the tests done. At least in my world.

Please tell me yours has those neat rainbow farting unicorns I've heard so much about. Evil people called Republicans claim that they exist in some fantasy world where being a good person counts for something other than coming in last.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Because there is absolutely no way of determining percentage of responsibility, it has to be 50% responsibility.
Sometime..... 100 years from now.....we may be able to apportion blame to the n'th percentage....
Until then, stating otherwise is simply 'doin a smoothe' and advocating the superiority of men.

Legal responsibility or social responsibility I'll give you.

But you SPECIFICALLY said, genetic responsibility.

https://media.giphy.com/media/11QyQIYJ3PQKIM/giphy.gif
http://25.media.tumblr.com/6e19ff2689b7f0e7defa134495f82fcc/tumblr_mf1e80uzwv1qces3co1_r2_500.gif

 

[smoothg103rd]

i've got a pair of scissors, if you're ever down this way.

I got a hell of a left hook right hand, if you think you are going to use those scissors.

 

[butters]

I'd say it was more likely that the weed had "something else" doctoring it. You don't get that kind of psychotropic response from any sort of normal cannibus. Even the stuff grown for maximum THC doesn't do that. That includes the stuff grown generational under halide (or any other artificial lighting). Granted YMMV, but I'd be willing to bet that if you were to do a chemical analysis of the stuff you call "skunk" you'd find it has been laced with something else.....

wouldn't be in the least surprised. i'm only glad he's clean and has cut off all contact with those he used to smoke it with.

Well....sounds infinitely more like a meth/heroine junkie than a pothead.

But I'm not going to argue it, but I will say there is no special skunk...I think you've been lied to about that, and CBD doesn't block a high LOL it alters it but it sure as fuck doesn't block it.

oh, i'm not saying it blocks the high - but the cbd suppresses the psychosis-inducing properties of thc. cbd/thc exist in a good balance in 'regular' weed, but the low cbd value in skunk sold over here means it's more damaging to the (mainly) teenaged users.

 

[smoothg103rd]

Butters, do you I'm a horrible person for thinking the way that I do.

 

[BotanyBoy]

wouldn't be in the least surprised. i'm only glad he's clean and has cut off all contact with those he used to smoke it with.


oh, i'm not saying it blocks the high - but the cbd suppresses the psychosis-inducing properties of thc. cbd/thc exist in a good balance in 'regular' weed, but the low cbd value in skunk sold over here means it's more damaging to the (mainly) teenaged users.

As far as all skunk goes with regard to CBD and THC ratios/potency skunk is 'regular' weed LOL

Believe the reefer madness....I'm pretty sure your mind is set.

SO....I'm going to go roll an all natural super low 0.3% CBD 27% THC monsta doob and drink demonic coffee while playing some violent video games. Wait...maybe there is something to this theory....
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1991958186/parrot.jpg

 

[Jennifer]

I don't give two fucks about what she do with her pussy. But I give a lot of fucks about what she does what my baby. WEED FUCKS PEOPLE UP.

Not always. I'm a prime example.

 

[seamus221]

She should be glad she isnt stoned to death in the town square...that's her female privilege

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...t-pregnancy-amanda-kimbrough?CMP=share_btn_tw


the profound legal issues raised by the case would rise up through appeals all the way to the Alabama supreme court, the highest judicial panel in the state, where it would set a new precedent. In effect, it renders all pregnant women vulnerable to prosecution for any harm they might cause their fetus at any time after the moment of conception.
Advertisement

At her trial, Kimbrough was warned that if she was found guilty, she would face a mandatory sentence of 10 years to life in prison. In the end, though, she felt the deck was too stacked against her to take that risk.

When her trial lawyer asked the court to be allowed to call an expert medical witness to testify that Kimbrough’s drug problems were not responsible for her son’s stillbirth, the request was denied. So she pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 10 years.

So this illegal drug user gets knocked up and killers her baby and you want to defend her retard baby killing choices ?

Drugs don't make you use them ,its a choice and a very well known cause of death and bad things, so anyone using illegal drugs is doing something known to be bad ,illegal and killing yourself it does not free you of being responsible for your actions while high or trying to get high.

So defending this baby killing woman is sick and she should be killed not locked up in the State lesbian factory.

You need help if you thinks she's a victim and not a killer!