No more segregated bathrooms. No more segregated sports teams. That's what the Maine Human Rights Council has ruled. All because of some gender-confused 12-year-old boy who wants to use the girl's bathroom. You would think that something like this would get tossed out on it's ear. But no, little Johnny's complaints were given due notice and then this stupid ruling was delivered. C'mon, couldn't someone just have told Johnny to suck it up and use the boy's room? He's twelve! No doubt there's some stupid mixed up parent driving this. We don't want little Johnny's feelings to be hurt. Gimme a break. I'm going to pass on the stupidity of the unisex bathrooms. 'nuff said. But unisex sports teams don't fly at all. What you end up with is a mixed team and a women's team. You see, it's simple to start off with unisex teams, but then the women want to branch off and create their own league because the men are too rough. No kidding. And as usual, the girls can do this because they're girls. Under this type of system, do you think there's any kind of chance that the boys would be able to break off? No way. Just look at the YMCA and the YWCA.
Hopefully, the Maine Human Rights Council has as much bite as the Canadian Human Rights Council. They make rulings that involve judgements or money, but they have no real teeth. Their biggest proponent is that they get lots of air time in the news. The Canadian HRC until recently had a 100% guilty rate. That's right, all you had to do was make a complaint and the Council said that your rights were being infringed. If your feelings were hurt, seek restitution from the HRC. What a joke. Meaningless and a waste of time. Bil An Outraged Dad |
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Gender Bending Nuttiness
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
No More Recreational Fishing
This isn't a political blog and I really want to stay away from politics completely. But there is always so much junk coming out of government regardless who is in power or whose side you are on. I couldn't resist this story because it is making the rounds just this afternoon. ESPN is making a big splash with it because it affects the many recreational fisherman and the whole industry. No Fishing off the Dock The report hasn't come out yet stating there will be a ban, but the discussions have been closed. According to the different recreational sports fishing groups, the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force is highly influenced by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) which recently were successful in convincing Ontario to ban bear hunting. Now I'm not against hunting or fishing, but if the fish or bears are in danger, then they should be protected. But to ban ALL sports fishing? Where is the sense of that?
This isn't really a story yet because no bill has been passed. But it sure looks like it is headed that way. The Obama administration seems to be headed in this direction because of different actions they have taken already. Expansion of the Clean Water Act In July of 2009 an expansion of the Clean Water Act was introduced that effectively gave the government control over that pond you have out back on your own farm: "Right now, the law says that the Environmental Protection Agency is in charge of all navigable water," said Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., chairman of the Senate Western Caucus and an opponent of the bill. "Well, this bill removes the word 'navigable,' so for ranchers and farmers who have mud puddles, prairie potholes -- anything from snow melting on their land -- all of that water will now come under the regulation of the Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency," he said. The EPA's Man-Made Drought And then there was the man-made drought this summer in San Joaquin Valley, California's bread basket. The canals to supply water to the thousands of acres have been in place for years and it is a big employer in the debt-ridden state. But the EPA said the 3-inch delta smelt was in danger and diverted all the water to the ocean. Farmers complained all summer but with little fanfare on the TV news. Schwarzenegger said there was nothing he could do. The EPA priorities seemed to be very skewed. It is easy to see why the recreational sporting industry is worried. Bil An Outraged Dad |
Monday, March 1, 2010
The Planet of Promiscuous Women
Here's another case of scientists with their head up there ass. It seems that there's this disease in some men that kills off the male Y-chromosome leaving only the X-chromosome. Which means that he will only produce female children. So in order to ensure the future of all humanity, women need to have sex with as many different guys as they can. You see, if she stays with one guy who has this disease, she will only have girls. So in order to ensure there will also be boys, she should spread the loving around. University of Playboy? I confirmed and no, it was NOT the University of Playboy that produced the study, it was the Universities of Exeter and Liverpool. The study does not give a time estimate for the downfall of humanity, but I think it is safe to say that you won't have to start preaching promiscuity to your daughter any time soon. I mean, we will probably have nuked ourselves or destroyed the atmosphere long before we have to worry about this. I wonder what other solutions they came up with to head off this disaster? I guess we could round up all these damaged Y-killers and shoot them. Okay, sterilizing them would probably do just as well. But since what the scientists are actually talking about a form of eugenics, why not just give a test to all pregnant woman and kill off these Y-killers in the womb, just in case some of them get away from the sterilizing police. Huh? Come on! How many women were part of this study? Or rather, how many were part of writing the conclusion? This is one of the most stupid conclusions I've heard. And I'm not talking about the moral or disease issues here. Think about it for a minute. You want women to have sex with more than one man to get a variety of genes to ensure she has sex with someone who is clean. But let's suppose the man she would have married didn't have the disease. All her children would have been Y-killer free. But now she's having sex with multiple guys and some of them are probably going to have the disease. Where is the plus side to promiscuity? What were they thinking? And who gave them money for this study? I guess the real stupidityy would be giving them any additional money. Read the whole article for yourself.
Bil An Outraged Dad |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)