The Family is terrified of computers now.
This calls for exorcisms and banana phones.
Random News Article Discussion
-
-
You think that's bad? I hear that Jon Stewart eats 100 calories above the FDA's recommended daily intake. I don't think he's funny anymore…
Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.
-
If you are a grey wolf, congratulations. Not only can you surf the web, but as of now you are now no longer on the endangered species list.
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4748292.stm
Sudan man forced to marry goat after having sex with it.
-
Not really news, but I didn't want to make a new thread just for this. Heard about this on the radio today.
Here's a woman having the worst hair day of her life, on the same day she's getting married.
The bride comes in a little after 1:30, and it just gets better as time passes.
-
oh I think that was posted here already. It's a big hit on you tube aperently. Though, some people are douting if it is real or not. They say, if it is a show, that bride should get into acting. lol Also, shameful to say, but there are rumors that the bride is canadian. :(
-
President Bush plans to raise U.S. citizenship application price from $300 to $600. Not exactly a good choice in my opinion.
-
-
Yahahaha, saw that today on channel 7.
My original post said last night. That's what I get for waking up after a nap.
-
what is that?
bite me 16 char
-
Aqua Teen Hunger Force promotion.
-
Cartoon characters. Both are blocky pixellated characters, a big green and blue one named Ignignokt and a little purple and blue one named Err. Their images were made from small LED lights arranged in the pattern of them giving the pixellated finger.
-
Amazingly, something from McDonalds that isn't also in America.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,,21054830-953,00.html
The guy in the photo looks weird.
McDonalds is evil as well as stupid. Disputing the Heart Foundation. Pfft. I disbelieve the dietitian bullshit.
-
wow, I didn't know Austrailia was getting fatter faster. interesting. I don't believe Mc Donalds. Fast food isn't health food. They are only trying to follow market trends by calling their food healthy. As long as we "think" we are eating healthy, we are happy with the product.
This is why I like Subway. You know what your getting. Fresh veggies, and some meat. Of coarse, the choise is yours how healthy the meat is. Subway's meatball sub, and cold cut trio are no better than mc donalds, but you should know that, buying the sub, that they are less healthy.
-
Ugh…. I HATE subway. The first time I ate a subway sub, I threw up.
-
WHAT!? contemplates smacking Le Lawliet for naughty comment :P
-
http://www.kctv5.com/Global/story.asp?S=6019382
I'm plain disgusted by the officer's actions.
-
WHAT!? contemplates smacking Le Lawliet for naughty comment :P
Hey, man, it's true. I threw up the first time I ate a subway sub. To this date I haven't eaten a subway sub because of that.
Come to think of it, the only reason I ate that sub was because I wanted a Blues Clues toy XD
-
PTR, I am as well.
Simply let her go to the hospital, give birth, then smack her with a ping pong paddle. Rather than just talk to her and make her baby die.
She DID ave a record for mistreatment of children, right? Though I sympathise with her.
-
-
I have nothing to say except for that I love natural selection….
-
This is exactly the reason I think that every parent should have to watch the South Park movie.
-
That Snickers commercial which played during the Super Bowl featuring two men accidentally kissing while eating a snickers and ripping their chest hair off as a result has been banned from TV due to the Lesbian and Gay groups thinking it was insulting. The commercial made it seem that it wasn't manly for two men to kiss, so hence sending the message gay men are not manly.
I don't have an article, but I'm said, I thought the commercial was funny as hell. XD
-
TOKYO - A Japanese man told police he stole a patrol car that had been left idling outside a post office in Gunma, north of Tokyo, because he was too tired to walk home.
Police officers had left the vehicle in the car park with the engine running, while they investigated a report that a stolen card had been used at the post office, the Mainichi newspaper said Tuesday.
“I came out shopping by train, but I got tired walking, so I thought I would drive the police car home,” the man told police. He was apprehended about 15 minutes later in the driveway of a private home, about 2.5 miles from the post office, the Mainichi said.
Copyright 2007 Reuters Limited.
-
er… gaara, I can't seem to see the site
-
This is pretty much what the article I posted talks about, it's long tho:
If a woman consents to having sex with a man but then during intercourse says no, and the man continues, is it rape?
The answer depends on where you live. The highest courts of seven states, including Connecticut and Kansas, have ruled that a woman may withdraw her consent at any time, and if the man doesn't stop, he is committing rape. Illinois has become the first state to pass legislation giving a woman that right to change her mind. But in Maryland–as well as in North Carolina--when a woman says yes, she can't take it back once sex has begun--or, at least, she can't call the act rape.
[snip]
**The murkiness surrounding what's reasonable has deepened further with the Maryland case, which was tried in 2004. The accuser and the defendant agree that after he began to penetrate her and she wanted him to stop, he did so within a matter of seconds and did not climax. Even so, during deliberations, the jury sent a note to the judge asking if it was rape if a female changed her mind during the sex to which she consented and the man continued until climax. The judge said it was for them to decide. They convicted the defendant of first-degree rape, among other sex offenses.
But the appellate court, citing a 1980 rape ruling based on the English common-law idea of "the initial de-flowering of the woman as the real harm," unanimously ordered a new trial, essentially stating that how fast was not the issue, nor was whether the accuser had said no during intercourse. In Maryland, rape is determined at the beginning of the sex act, and therefore consent is officially given at that point. The court wrote, "It was the act of penetration that was the essence of the crime of rape; after this initial infringement upon the responsible male's interest in a woman's sexual and reproductive functions, any further injury was considered to be less consequential. The damage was done."**
Brawl FC: 3823 8204 8139
-
I just saw that, Roz, I was pretty surprised, too.
If you spoiler me, I will eat you with tater tots. -
This post is deleted!
-
Is this an old news? So lame, lol! I feel bad for New Yorkers if this really passes.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/07/national/main2443378.shtml
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,250644,00.htmlLaws on the books try to stop jaywalking, but if one New York state senator gets his way, it will also soon be illegal to bop along to your iPod while crossing the street.
Sen. Carl Kruger will propose a bill that would ban using an iPod — and any other electronic device that is a distraction — while crossing traffic, he told FOX News on Wednesday.
"I think it's necessary if we just look at the statistics that bear out the argument that people while being too into their electronic gadgetry are tuning out the rest of the world. They are becoming a statistical fatality, they are being part of an accident scene. They are basically jeopardizing their well-being as well as the well-being of others around them," Kruger, a Democrat, said.
The bill would levy a $100 fine against those who use iPods, cell phones and BlackBerrys while in a crosswalk in all of New York's major cities. WNBC reported that the ban would only be in effect in Buffalo and New York City.
-
Somebody didn't get an ipod for their birthday…
Seriously, walkmans have been around now for 30 years, I don't recall hearing about them getting banned or vausing problems. People complain about others playing their music on stereos and creating noise pollution so that would mean we can't have any music at all. What do you want us to do? Nobody talks on trains or buses anyway, with or without MP3 players. Lets just sit around in deadly silence all day long, that'll liven things up.
-
Gaara, its funny you should post that. I was having a debate with someone about that very subject.
-
This all makes me feel quite queasy.
Except for Anna Nicole's death. This means one less idiot will be clogging my TV.
-
This post is deleted!
-
http://www.comcast.net/entertainment/index.jsp?fn=2007/02/07/231440.html&cvqh=itn_snickers
Snickers Superbowl ad pulled because people thought it was being anti-gay…
(for those that haven't seen it)
I don't know about you guys but thats one of the best commericals I've ever seen.
it seems to me that people are so sensitive now that some go out of their way to be the victim
-
I didn't think that was funny. I thought it was an insult to my intelegence. Even if it wasn't offensive, it's still a stupid comercial. And btw, it IS offencive.
-
1st off I'm not gonna bother with pointing out spelling mistakes.
2nd off anyone who find that even remotly offensive in all seriousness needs to reach around and pull the stick out of their ass before it goes in deeper than it is.
-
it helps my posture.
and please, correct my spelling. It's the only way I'll learn. :P -
I thought that was damn funny. People should lighten up.
It's not crazed political correctness but I understand about what some people are saying.
I thought it was an insult to my intelegence
How? Did it say you're stupid?
-
This post is deleted!
-
A super bowl ad is supposed to be something big with a major budget. So a super bowl commercial featuring a tired, unoriginal, and predictable Mel Brookes-style joke is a major disappointment. Also, the "We just gay kissed! Gay isn't manly!" message can easily be misinterperated as homophobic.
This is old local news but no one has posted it yet. A burgular breaks into a woman's home and is greeted by a yappy little chihuahua. The burglar locks the miniature mongruel in the freezer….. for 3 hours! And the pooch somehow survives!
-
another dog story
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17074960/ (not for the weak of stomache)
why? I doubt it would even taste that good.
-
double post / bump but this article is too WTF not to post.
On March 25, 2004, Amber and Jeremy took digital photos of themselves naked and engaged in unspecified "sexual behavior." The two sent the photos from a computer at Amber's house to Jeremy's personal e-mail address. Neither teen showed the photographs to anyone else.
By a 2-1 vote, the appeals court didn't buy it. Judge James Wolf, a former prosecutor, wrote the majority opinion.
Wolf speculated that Amber and Jeremy could have ended up selling the photos (of THEMSEVLES) to child pornographers ("one motive for revealing the photos is profit") or showing the images to their friends. He claimed that Amber had neither the "foresight or maturity" to make a reasonable estimation of the risks on her own. And he said that transferring the images from a digital camera to a PC created innumerable problems: "The two computers (can) be hacked."why does it feel like I'm the only one not on drugs right now.
-
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,251296,00.html#
Couple Charged With Having Intercourse In Front of 9-Year-Old Daughter to Teach Her About Sex
PROVIDENCE, R.I. — A Woonsocket mother and her boyfriend are headed to trial on charges they had intercourse in front of the woman's 9-year-old daughter as a way to teach the girl about sex.
Rebecca Arnold, of Woonsocket, and her boyfriend, David Prata, have pleaded not guilty to felony child-neglect charges. A pre-trial conference is scheduled for next month.
When questioned by an investigator from the state Department of Children, Youth and Families, Prata, 33, said he and Arnold, 36, had sex "all the time" in front of the child and that "we don't believe in hiding anything."
He said the girl would often be on the bed watching as the couple had sex. Though they did not ask her to leave, they also did not force her to remain on the bed, Prata said.
Asked why he thought a child that age should know about sexual acts, Prata replied, "We wanted to prepare her so she would know how," according to a report from the investigator, Vanessa E. Cisela.
The girl, who is now 11, went to live with her biological father in North Adams, Mass., after spending the summer with her mother in Woonsocket.
Her teacher called the Child Abuse Hotline in December 2004 to report that the girl said her mother and her boyfriend had sex in front of her.
The child told a Massachusetts social services investigator that her mother and Prata never touched her or tried to include her in the sex.
Woonsocket police arrested Prata and Arnold in February 2005. The couple is accused of "providing an environment that is lewd and depraved in a manner that makes their home unfit for the child to live in," according to court records.
Prata and Arnold are free on bail pending a March 19 pretrial conference in Family Court. They each face one to three years in prison or a maximum $1,000 fine, or both.
Their lawyers did not return phone calls from The Providence Journal.
Thats pretty fucked up.
-
Daughters Struggling After Mom Locked Them Away for 7 Years
This is the most disturbing thing I have ever read…
EDIT: As for the Mother and Boyfriend infront of girl thing. I hope they are released free of charge. They meant good and the girl stated herself that they never touched her or had her included, and they she was watching on her own free will.
-
All this supposed sexual child violating is utter hypocrisy.
They didn't know any better so let them go and tell them not to do it again. Rather than go through a rigorous process of law and explaining what laws are and how they relate tonot committing acts of zoophilia, necrophilia, pedophilia, murder and all that.
Maybe I'm exaggerating the last bit trying to protect them from "bad things" but it actually "hurts" them all by explaining the whole damn thing.
Except those two kids who engaged in stupidity. They should be beaten.
-
Parents demonstrating sex to there children to teach them about it has to be against some kind of law. And would probably scar that child up pretty badly.
-
meh I think kids can stomache more than that and probably experiment more than that with each other so if doing it with a stranger doesn't scar them then I doubt that they're parents would scar them
people need to start giving kids more credit, than they are and to stop babying them every step of the way.
