Public Breastfeeding
#161
Posted 12 August 2010 - 12:01 PM
Children have a right to be fed mother's milk. Anyone who interferes should pay the penalty for such stupidity.
#162
Posted 12 August 2010 - 12:07 PM
Children have a right to be fed mother's milk. Anyone who interferes should pay the penalty for such stupidity.
Thank you.
Victoria current weather by neighbourhood: Victoria school-based weather station network
Victoria webcams: Big Wave Dave Webcams
#163
Posted 12 August 2010 - 02:31 PM
Reminds me of that old George Carlin routine in the early 1970's about public morals, which referred to banning kids from watching a film of two people making love but "hey it's ok!" allowing them to view a piece on two people trying to kill one another. Why is that allowed? What message is being sent in that case? Healthy sexual relations (or breasts) are BAD but killing is alright? Hm.
#164
Posted 12 August 2010 - 06:02 PM
Breast feeding has nothing to do with sex.
#165
Posted 12 August 2010 - 07:09 PM
Breast feeding has nothing to do with sex.
Unless you're role playing
Victoria current weather by neighbourhood: Victoria school-based weather station network
Victoria webcams: Big Wave Dave Webcams
#166
Posted 12 August 2010 - 07:19 PM
#167
Posted 13 August 2010 - 07:57 AM
All I can say Victorian Fan is "wow". Stterrrrrrrrrrike THREE. Swing and big miss. You completely, utterly missed my point. Re-read and try again. Jeez....
ooops
My apologies. The words just jumped off the page and I missed the George Carlin reference. Sorry.
#168
Posted 13 August 2010 - 08:40 AM
Seriously. What century is this...did we suddenly and collectively warp back to the 1700's?
Reminds me of that old George Carlin routine in the early 1970's about public morals, which referred to banning kids from watching a film of two people making love but "hey it's ok!" allowing them to view a piece on two people trying to kill one another. Why is that allowed? What message is being sent in that case? Healthy sexual relations (or breasts) are BAD but killing is alright? Hm.
True. It reminds me of an error that movie theatres did a few years back. A WWE feature was inadvertently crossed with the feed of a soft-core **rn film feed for about 30 or 60 seconds. Parents complained. Really, guys crashing each other over the heads with chairs was deemed OK, but the **rn was bad.
#169
Posted 13 August 2010 - 08:43 AM
#170
Posted 13 August 2010 - 04:31 PM
#171
Posted 13 August 2010 - 08:50 PM
Why are some people offended by the sight of a baby at a mothers breast, not not so offended at the sight of only the breast?
I'm not not sure I know how to not not answer that.
BUT... See the article "Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence", available online at http://www.violence....in/article.html - jaw dropping percentages, and conclusions.
The original article (in 1975) outlined a method of prediction for violence/non-violence within a culture with ~98% accuracy, later someone realized that the "raw data" that Prescott had drawn from was inaccurate. Once corrected data was substituted, it became 100% predictive.
#172
Posted 13 August 2010 - 11:28 PM
I'm not not sure I know how to not not answer that.
BUT... See the article "Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence", available online at http://www.violence....in/article.html - jaw dropping percentages, and conclusions.
The original article (in 1975) outlined a method of prediction for violence/non-violence within a culture with ~98% accuracy, later someone realized that the "raw data" that Prescott had drawn from was inaccurate. Once corrected data was substituted, it became 100% predictive.
Sounds like a wardrobe robe mal mal function...
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users