Things you secretly oppose, but don't want other people to know:

[Anonymous]

Baptisms

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't take when parents with kids in daycare or with a nanny say "they really do love my child". Umm, no they don't. They most likely enjoy your child and care for him / her but if they were not paid to watch your child they simply would not do so. It isn't love that keeps a non-parent caregiver from doing their job.

I used to be a nanny and I truly, truly loved my charges. Adored them and cried when I had to move away and leave them. You are making a universal statement. This may be true of some but it certainly is not true of all.

Agreed.

I am a nanny and I truly do love my charges, like for real.

If you don't think people can love children they aren't related to, than maybe you have your own set of issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I oppose Gay Marriage.

I LOVE that marriage equality has become so accepted that you don't want others to know how you truly feel!

Me too, as a lesbian I love to hear that I'm finally going to maybe possibly be treated as a human.

Oh, stop with the pity party. It's annoying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with all the hate for IVF? Because I can't get pregnant naturally I should just accept that? By that line of reasoning I should decline treatment for a cancer dx.

I realize that this may sound harsh, but a lot of people think of infertility as an evolutionary mechanism. I realize that isn't an emotionally acceptable idea for those struggling with infertility, but such evolutionary mechanisms are evident in all species.

new poster here. But then isn't any disease, especially cancer also an evolutionary mechanism? Especially cancer in childhood and young adulthood.

Natural selection is a very slow, very gradual process, over thousands and thousands of years. There may very well be mechanisms already working within us to counter those diseases, and they may very well be a part of infertility. I know it doesn't make it easier to bear for those that wish to pass on their genes and have biological children, but infertility can serve a greater species purpose and benefit.

uhmm, ok, pps point still stands that childhood cancer is an evolutionary adaption as well. The children who die are serving the "the greater species purpose" as you so eloquently put it.

It may very well be. That doesn't mean that as humans, we abandon our adaptive duty to do all we can for our children when they get sick - that's an evolutionary response, too. People who smoke a pack a day and live till their 90's aren't just "lucky" - for whatever reason, they have some kind of fitness that enables them to still thrive. These things tend to be genetic, and there's some validity to those trends. Obviously doesn't mean everyone should smoke a pack a day, but one can't deny the genetic components that guide all our lives to some extent - or combination of nature vs. nurture.

How is that different from an "adaptive duty" to procreate using IVF? IVF offspring will likely inherit a strong desire to leave offspring - an adaptation if ever there was one. The point is - there is abolutely no logic by you can argue against IVF as somehow working against evolution (as if that were even possible!) while defending treatments that help children survive.

[Anonymous]

Those who insist gay rights=black civil rights and when you disagree, they lash out and start saying racist shit about black people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I oppose Gay Marriage.

I LOVE that marriage equality has become so accepted that you don't want others to know how you truly feel!

Me too, as a lesbian I love to hear that I'm finally going to maybe possibly be treated as a human.

Oh, stop with the pity party. It's annoying.

I don't care what it is? Are you gay? Do you know what it's like walking around knowing half the people want you dead or to just disappear?

Fuck you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pooping at work. I know sometimes you have to go, but I'd rather you pucker up until you get home.

Yeah, save that shit for later.

DH saves it for work. Where else can you get paid to take a shit?

I think a lady on Cheapskates poops at work so she can save on water and toilet paper.

Finally, something on this thread that's worth a laugh.
That lady must be really lucky if she can poop on cue.

[Anonymous]

Moms who do not even try to BF.

Moms who BF for less than a year.

Baby registries.

Destination weddings.

People who dress their infants (esp boys) in mini-adult clothing (button-down and khakis for a baby)

People who use ridiculous spelling for their tacky baby names (e.g. "Baylee")

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with all the hate for IVF? Because I can't get pregnant naturally I should just accept that? By that line of reasoning I should decline treatment for a cancer dx.

I realize that this may sound harsh, but a lot of people think of infertility as an evolutionary mechanism. I realize that isn't an emotionally acceptable idea for those struggling with infertility, but such evolutionary mechanisms are evident in all species.

new poster here. But then isn't any disease, especially cancer also an evolutionary mechanism? Especially cancer in childhood and young adulthood.

Natural selection is a very slow, very gradual process, over thousands and thousands of years. There may very well be mechanisms already working within us to counter those diseases, and they may very well be a part of infertility. I know it doesn't make it easier to bear for those that wish to pass on their genes and have biological children, but infertility can serve a greater species purpose and benefit.

uhmm, ok, pps point still stands that childhood cancer is an evolutionary adaption as well. The children who die are serving the "the greater species purpose" as you so eloquently put it.

It may very well be. That doesn't mean that as humans, we abandon our adaptive duty to do all we can for our children when they get sick - that's an evolutionary response, too. People who smoke a pack a day and live till their 90's aren't just "lucky" - for whatever reason, they have some kind of fitness that enables them to still thrive. These things tend to be genetic, and there's some validity to those trends. Obviously doesn't mean everyone should smoke a pack a day, but one can't deny the genetic components that guide all our lives to some extent - or combination of nature vs. nurture.

How is that different from an "adaptive duty" to procreate using IVF? IVF offspring will likely inherit a strong desire to leave offspring - an adaptation if ever there was one. The point is - there is abolutely no logic by you can argue against IVF as somehow working against evolution (as if that were even possible!) while defending treatments that help children survive.

How in the world will IVF cause an adaptation for offspring to abandon offspring??

You're welcome to use the Google to Google thoughts about infertility and possible evolutionary mechanisms. In all species, there are reasons why some can procreate more, and others can't.

Though to be fair, the Duggars are clearly an exception. Ugh.

[Anonymous]

I can't stand people in D.C. They think they are something they are not. Actually, I *do* appreciate how much entertainment value they provide. Especially the ones who think they are making you wait for something (you see this in traffic or parking lots in certain areas here).

Another reason I hate them is because they clearly can't stand people who have more than them. It kills them.

But generally, I hate how bitter they are. Thanks for the proof - thanks for all this proof, OP!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What's with the hate for vegans?
I ask because I am one, but doubt that many people know or care.

Here's a post from someone who's a vegan, on Facebook.
The woman is in her 30s, child-hating, and cat-crazy.

"What do you do with a waiter who, after you ordered the only thing on the menu, the vegan dumpligs, being also the ONLY person in a restaurant, serves you PORK dumplings and then after you made one bite and, terrified, asked what it was tells you: "pork". What can you do, besides running to a bathroom and puking your guts out, while screaming and crying in agonizing hysteria, and after an hour of brushing your teeth STILL feeling the taste of dead animal in your mouth?!?
This day turned out to be a complete epitomy of horror, shock, pain, betrayal and vomit for me. I'm off to bed. Please no phone calls today."

I dunno what you do. Shoot the waiter, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those who insist gay rights=black civil rights and when you disagree, they lash out and start saying racist shit about black people.

+1000!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with all the hate for IVF? Because I can't get pregnant naturally I should just accept that? By that line of reasoning I should decline treatment for a cancer dx.

I realize that this may sound harsh, but a lot of people think of infertility as an evolutionary mechanism. I realize that isn't an emotionally acceptable idea for those struggling with infertility, but such evolutionary mechanisms are evident in all species.

new poster here. But then isn't any disease, especially cancer also an evolutionary mechanism? Especially cancer in childhood and young adulthood.

Natural selection is a very slow, very gradual process, over thousands and thousands of years. There may very well be mechanisms already working within us to counter those diseases, and they may very well be a part of infertility. I know it doesn't make it easier to bear for those that wish to pass on their genes and have biological children, but infertility can serve a greater species purpose and benefit.

uhmm, ok, pps point still stands that childhood cancer is an evolutionary adaption as well. The children who die are serving the "the greater species purpose" as you so eloquently put it.

It may very well be. That doesn't mean that as humans, we abandon our adaptive duty to do all we can for our children when they get sick - that's an evolutionary response, too. People who smoke a pack a day and live till their 90's aren't just "lucky" - for whatever reason, they have some kind of fitness that enables them to still thrive. These things tend to be genetic, and there's some validity to those trends. Obviously doesn't mean everyone should smoke a pack a day, but one can't deny the genetic components that guide all our lives to some extent - or combination of nature vs. nurture.

How is that different from an "adaptive duty" to procreate using IVF? IVF offspring will likely inherit a strong desire to leave offspring - an adaptation if ever there was one. The point is - there is abolutely no logic by you can argue against IVF as somehow working against evolution (as if that were even possible!) while defending treatments that help children survive.

How in the world will IVF cause an adaptation for offspring to abandon offspring??

You're welcome to use the Google to Google thoughts about infertility and possible evolutionary mechanisms. In all species, there are reasons why some can procreate more, and others can't.

Though to be fair, the Duggars are clearly an exception. Ugh.

Who said anything about abandoning offspring? By 'leave' I meant 'have'.

I don't need to google anything because I know a lot about evolution. And the thing is 1) you cannot beat evolution beacause those who procreate (and have theor children procrate etc) are ipso facto the fittest 2) a trait is always adaptive only within a given environment. so infertility or a big nose or shortsightedness might have been a major liability at some point but doesn't mean it will remain so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with the hate for vegans?
I ask because I am one, but doubt that many people know or care.

Here's a post from someone who's a vegan, on Facebook.
The woman is in her 30s, child-hating, and cat-crazy.

"What do you do with a waiter who, after you ordered the only thing on the menu, the vegan dumpligs, being also the ONLY person in a restaurant, serves you PORK dumplings and then after you made one bite and, terrified, asked what it was tells you: "pork". What can you do, besides running to a bathroom and puking your guts out, while screaming and crying in agonizing hysteria, and after an hour of brushing your teeth STILL feeling the taste of dead animal in your mouth?!?
This day turned out to be a complete epitomy of horror, shock, pain, betrayal and vomit for me. I'm off to bed. Please no phone calls today."

I dunno what you do. Shoot the waiter, I guess.

"No phone calls. Just comment on this status about the most 'terrible' thing thats ever happened to me!"
Hate dramatic FB posts...losers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with all the hate for IVF? Because I can't get pregnant naturally I should just accept that? By that line of reasoning I should decline treatment for a cancer dx.

I realize that this may sound harsh, but a lot of people think of infertility as an evolutionary mechanism. I realize that isn't an emotionally acceptable idea for those struggling with infertility, but such evolutionary mechanisms are evident in all species.

new poster here. But then isn't any disease, especially cancer also an evolutionary mechanism? Especially cancer in childhood and young adulthood.

Natural selection is a very slow, very gradual process, over thousands and thousands of years. There may very well be mechanisms already working within us to counter those diseases, and they may very well be a part of infertility. I know it doesn't make it easier to bear for those that wish to pass on their genes and have biological children, but infertility can serve a greater species purpose and benefit.

uhmm, ok, pps point still stands that childhood cancer is an evolutionary adaption as well. The children who die are serving the "the greater species purpose" as you so eloquently put it.

It may very well be. That doesn't mean that as humans, we abandon our adaptive duty to do all we can for our children when they get sick - that's an evolutionary response, too. People who smoke a pack a day and live till their 90's aren't just "lucky" - for whatever reason, they have some kind of fitness that enables them to still thrive. These things tend to be genetic, and there's some validity to those trends. Obviously doesn't mean everyone should smoke a pack a day, but one can't deny the genetic components that guide all our lives to some extent - or combination of nature vs. nurture.

How is that different from an "adaptive duty" to procreate using IVF? IVF offspring will likely inherit a strong desire to leave offspring - an adaptation if ever there was one. The point is - there is abolutely no logic by you can argue against IVF as somehow working against evolution (as if that were even possible!) while defending treatments that help children survive.

How in the world will IVF cause an adaptation for offspring to abandon offspring??

You're welcome to use the Google to Google thoughts about infertility and possible evolutionary mechanisms. In all species, there are reasons why some can procreate more, and others can't.

Though to be fair, the Duggars are clearly an exception. Ugh.

There are no exceptions in evolution and Duggars are no different. Evolution is not this great moral force that you appear to think it is (and then selectively judge others for apparently messing with it)