Monday, April 25, 2011

Woman Forced to Carry Non-Viable Pregnancy to Term

I've read this from several different places, but the basis is summarized from here:

A Nebraska woman said she was denied the ability to end her non-viable pregnancy because of state law.
In Nebraska, abortions after 20 weeks are banned based on the disputed notion that fetuses can feel pain.
Danielle Deaver, of Grand Island, told The Associated Press that she was about 22 weeks when she learned that she wouldn't be able to carry the pregnancy to term and that her child would die soon after birth.

What is the point of that? Is this a case that falls through the holes of abortion regulations, or are some people that dead set on "protecting life"?

Sunday, April 24, 2011

Well I'm back

Back from the unplanned hiatus. Wasn't much fun.

I leave this offering of Fundies Say the Darndest Things

If offers quotes like "My concern for level of pain of rape would be greater if it weren't for the fact that most American women deserve to raped because they oppose prostitution as a sexual outlet for men. Since they deserve to raped, I cannot concern myself with the pain rape causes them."


"Yes sex at six can cause psychological damage. But thats only in rare occasions. Most girls are fine. Thats a scientific fact."

Wednesday, November 24, 2010


I know I've just started this back up, but I have a chronic health condition called Interstial Cystitis. More people need to know about this condition so I'm just going to toss my personal medical information out there to you strangers. It is flaring bad. These flares will leave me bed bound for 4 months. I get it really bad and there is no cure.. I can cross my fingers and hope its only a mild flare, but it never hurts to be prepared for the worst. So until I'm better, I'll leave this to you.

Yes, these people actually do exist, or so says the Wiki. They are called "bugchasers". Are the actual posts from real people and not trolls? I'm not sure. But it sure is good rage material. And no, gay people aren't 'lolevil', like in every group in the history of mankind it's only the crazy radical ones.

Again, this isn't my own screenshot, and the words are the bottom right aren't my own.

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Giving Your Cat Antidepressants Is a Bad Idea

This screen shot wasn't taken by me, but we can at least hope it was a troll..

Source: Somewhere from Yahoo! Answers.

Friday, November 19, 2010

Family Says They Are Too Fat To Work

A family of four with a combined weight of 83 stone say they are "too fat to work" and need more than the £22,000 they currently receive in benefits.

Philip Chawner, 53, and his 57-year-old wife Audrey weigh 24st. Their daughter Emma, 19, weighs 17st, while her older sister Samantha, 21, weighs 18st.

The family from Blackburn claim £22,508 a year in benefits, equivalent to the take-home pay from a £30,000 salary.

The Chawners, haven't worked in 11 years, claim their weight is a hereditary condition and the money they receive is insufficient to live on.
Mr Chawner said: "What we get barely covers the bills and puts food on the table. It's not our fault we can't work. We deserve more."

The family claim to spend £50 a week on food and consume 3,000 calories each a day. The recommended maximum intake is 2,000 for women and 2,500 for men.

"We have cereal for breakfast, bacon butties for lunch and microwave pies with mashed potato or chips for dinner," Mrs Chawner told Closer magazine.

"All that healthy food, like fruit and veg, is too expensive. We're fat because it's in our genes. Our whole family is overweight," she added.

Each week, Mr and Mrs Chawner, who have been married for 23 years, receive £177 in income support and incapacity benefit. Mrs Chawner is paid an extra £330-a-month disability allowance for epilepsy and asthma, both a result of being overweight.

Mr Chawner gets £71 a month after developing Type 2 diabetes because of his size. He was on a waiting list for a gastric band last year, but a heart condition made the operation unsuitable. Their daughter Samantha receives £84 in Jobseekers' Allowance each fortnight while Emma, who is training to be a hairdresser, gets £58 every two weeks under a hardship fund for low-income students.

Emma, said: "I'm a student and don't have time to exercise" she said "We all want to lose weight to stop the abuse we get in the street, but we don't know how."

I've seen people far fatter than the father. In another interview he said he couldn't drive his truck because his diabetes made him fall asleep at the wheel (he was a truck driver). I'm sure he could handle a short drive to a more traditional job.. As for there diets? Um.. yeah..

Source: "Family Who Are 'too Fat to Work' Say £22,000 worth of Benefits Is Not Enough - Telegraph." - Telegraph Online, Daily Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph - Telegraph. Web. 19 Nov. 2010. <>.

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Man Faces $10,000 Fine for Leaving Airport

I'm sure you've all heard about this now, but did you know he runs a blog on here? I'm now following this guy. He has also included footage of the event on the blog. The story straight from his blog:

This morning, I tried to fly out of San Diego International Airport but was refused by the TSA. I had been somewhat prepared for this eventuality. I have been reading about the millimeter wave and backscatter x-ray machines and the possible harm to health as well as the vivid pictures they create of people's naked bodies. Not wanting to go through them, I had done my research on the TSA's website prior to traveling to see if SAN had them. From all indications, they did not. When I arrived at the security line, I found that the TSA's website was out of date. SAN does in fact utilize backscatter x-ray machines.

I made my way through the line toward the first line of "defense": the TSA ID checker. This agent looked over my boarding pass, looked over my ID, looked at me and then back at my ID. After that, he waved me through. SAN is still operating metal detectors, so I walked over to one of the lines for them. After removing my shoes and making my way toward the metal detector, the person in front of me in line was pulled out to go through the backscatter machine. After asking what it was and being told, he opted out. This left the machine free, and before I could go through the metal detector, I was pulled out of line to go through the backscatter machine. When asked, I half-chuckled and said, "I don't think so." At this point, I was informed that I would be subject to a pat down, and I waited for another agent.

A male agent (it was a female who had directed me to the backscatter machine in the first place), came and waited for me to get my bags and then directed me over to the far corner of the area for screening. After setting my things on a table, he turned to me and began to explain that he was going to do a "standard" pat down. (I thought to myself, "great, not one of those gropings like I've been reading about".) After he described, the pat down, I realized that he intended to touch my groin. After he finished his description but before he started the pat down, I looked him straight in the eye and said, "if you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested." He, a bit taken aback, informed me that he would have to involve his supervisor because of my comment.

We both stood there for no more than probably two minutes before a female TSA agent (apparently, the supervisor) arrived. She described to me that because I had opted out of the backscatter screening, I would now be patted down, and that involved running hands up the inside of my legs until they felt my groin. I stated that I would not allow myself to be subject to a molestation as a condition of getting on my flight. The supervisor informed me that it was a standard administrative security check and that they were authorized to do it. I repeated that I felt what they were doing was a sexual assault, and that if they were anyone but the government, the act would be illegal. I believe that I was then informed that if I did not submit to the inspection, I would not be getting on my flight. I again stated that I thought the search was illegal. I told her that I would be willing to submit to a walk through the metal detector as over 80% of the rest of the people were doing, but I would not be groped. The supervisor, then offered to go get her supervisor.

I took a seat in a tiny metal chair next to the table with my belongings and waited. While waiting, I asked the original agent (who was supposed to do the pat down) if he had many people opt out to which he replied, none (or almost none, I don't remember exactly). He said that I gave up a lot of rights when I bought my ticket. I replied that the government took them away after September 11th. There was silence until the next supervisor arrived. A few minutes later, the female agent/supervisor arrived with a man in a suit (not a uniform). He gave me a business card identifying him as David Silva, Transportation Security Manager, San Diego International Airport. At this point, more TSA agents as well as what I assume was a local police officer arrived on the scene and surrounded the area where I was being detained. The female supervisor explained the situation to Mr. Silva. After some quick back and forth (that I didn't understand/hear), I could overhear Mr. Silva say something to the effect of, "then escort him from the airport." I again offered to submit to the metal detector, and my father-in-law, who was near by also tried to plead for some reasonableness on the TSA's part.

The female supervisor took my ID at this point and began taking some kind of report with which I cooperated. Once she had finished, I asked if I could put my shoes back on. I was allowed to put my shoes back on and gather my belongs. I asked, "are we done here" (it was clear at this point that I was going to be escorted out), and the local police officer said, "follow me". I followed him around the side of the screening area and back out to the ticketing area. I said apologized to him for the hassle, to which he replied that it was not a problem.

I made my way over to the American Airlines counter, explained the situation, and asked if my ticket could be refunded. The woman behind the counter furiously typed away for about 30 seconds before letting me know that she would need a supervisor. She went to the other end of the counter. When she returned, she informed me that the ticket was non-refundable, but that she was still trying to find a supervisor. After a few more minutes, she was able to refund my ticket. I told her that I had previously had a bad experience with American Airlines and had sworn never to fly with them again (I rationalized this trip since my father-in-law had paid for the ticket), but that after her helpfulness, I would once again be willing to use their carrier again.

At this point, I thought it was all over. I began to make my way to the stairs to exit the airport, when I was approached by another man in slacks and a sport coat. He was accompanied by the officer that had escorted me to the ticketing area and Mr. Silva. He informed me that I could not leave the airport. He said that once I start the screening in the secure area, I could not leave until it was completed. Having left the area, he stated, I would be subject to a civil suit and a $10,000 fine. I asked him if he was also going to fine the 6 TSA agents and the local police officer who escorted me from the secure area. After all, I did exactly what I was told. He said that they didn't know the rules, and that he would deal with them later. They would not be subject to civil penalties. I then pointed to Mr. Silva and asked if he would be subject to any penalties. He is the agents' supervisor, and he directed them to escort me out. The man informed me that Mr. Silva was new and he would not be subject to penalties, either. He again asserted the necessity that I return to the screening area. When I asked why, he explained that I may have an incendiary device and whether or not that was true needed to be determined. I told him that I would submit to a walk through the metal detector, but that was it; I would not be groped. He told me that their procedures are on their website, and therefore, I was fully informed before I entered the airport; I had implicitly agreed to whatever screening they deemed appropriate. I told him that San Diego was not listed on the TSA's website as an airport using Advanced Imaging Technology, and I believed that I would only be subject to the metal detector. He replied that he was not a webmaster, and I asked then why he was referring me to the TSA's website if he didn't know anything about it. I again refused to re-enter the screening area.

The man asked me to stay put while he walked off to confer with the officer and Mr. Silva. They went about 20 feet away and began talking amongst themselves while I waited. I couldn't over hear anything, but I got the impression that the police officer was recounting his version of the events that had transpired in the screening area (my initial refusal to be patted down). After a few minutes, I asked loudly across the distance if I was free to leave. The man dismissively held up a finger and said, "hold on". I waited. After another minute or so, he returned and asked for my name. I asked why he needed it, and reminded him that the female supervisor/agent had already taken a report. He said that he was trying to be friendly and help me out. I asked to what end. He reminded me that I could be sued civilly and face a $10,000 fine and that my cooperation could help mitigate the penalties I was facing. I replied that he already had my information in the report that was taken and I asked if I was free to leave. I reminded him that he was now illegally detaining me and that I would not be subject to screening as a condition of leaving the airport. He told me that he was only trying to help (I should note that his demeanor never suggested that he was trying to help. I was clearly being interrogated.), and that no one was forcing me to stay. I asked if tried to leave if he would have the officer arrest me. He again said that no one was forcing me to stay. I looked him in the eye, and said, "then I'm leaving". He replied, "then we'll bring a civil suit against you", to which I said, "you bring that suit" and walked out of the airport.

This is his address and the source of the above:

Students Would Rather Update Twitter than Help Bill Nye

Title says all.

Television host and science educator Bill Nye collapsed late Tuesday as he gave a presentation at the University of Southern California (USC), the Los Angeles Times reported.

According to a student who attended the lecture, Nye collapsed mid-sentence as he was walking toward the podium.

“Then after about 10 seconds, he popped back up with much gusto and asked everybody how long he was out for and went on with a story about how a similar thing happened to him that morning,” USC senior Tristan Camacho said, according to the Times.

Nye, 54, continued with the presentation but began slurring his words and stumbled against his laptop, according to Camacho, who said that when Nye first collapsed, students were “texting and updating their Twitter statuses” instead of going to Nye’s aid.

Nye refused the offer of a chair but was eventually removed from the stage. The Los Angeles Fire Department and USC’s department of public safety were called to the scene at Bovard Auditorium, but it was unclear whether Nye received medical treatment.

Nye is best known for hosting the “Bill Nye the Science Guy” television series, which originally aired from 1993 to 1997 and won multiple Emmy awards.

Source: "TV 'Science Guy' Bill Nye Collapses during Los Angeles Presentation: Report -" New York News | Gossip | Sports | Entertainment | Photos - New York Post. Web. 17 Nov. 2010. <>.