In response to Sally Kern’s proposed HB 2279!

January 8, 2010

~The following has been deemed ‘Comment of the Decade’ by the Progress on the Prairie administration (Beamish and Spring):

Poor Beamish. Another tragic child of divorce who has thrown away her life to be a burden on the system by becoming nothing but a PhD educated, socially conscious teacher that volunteers with underprivileged children. If only mama Beamish had stuck it out, we wouldn’t have to look at this tragedy.

And Spring’s poor baby! Have you ever seen such an unhappy, maladjusted, illiterate, ignorant, self-loathing child in your life? Every time I see her tragically curling her lanky form into the lap of her adoring mother as she reads Greek mythology with an infectious grin on her face I shed a tear. Those horrifying photos her father took of her in the art museum he took her to in New York just so she could see her favorite painting {Van Gogh’s Starry Night} make me want to vomit with rage at his neglect.

4 out of 5 people who get divorced don’t want to? I think that’s a little conservative. I’ma say 5 out of 5 people don’t want to discover that the commitment they hoped would last a lifetime would, for whatever reason, ultimately cause more harm and pain to all parties involved and that in order to dissolve this state-created union they must go through an emotionally and financially draining process that leaves them both tainted in the eyes of a hypocritical public. But hey, I’m one of those wackos that says nobody WANTS to get an abortion.

Anyone want to go in on some quicklime so we can write CORRELATION =/= CAUSATION on her lawn?

~Posted by the one-and-only MizH

Advertisements

4 Responses to “In response to Sally Kern’s proposed HB 2279!”

  1. vmt Says:

    Love it! Makes me want to puke with joy, in fact!

  2. Miz H Says:

    Aw shucks. I see flattery gets you everywhere.

  3. beamish Says:

    cheers, miz H!

  4. sheila black Says:

    The thing that gets me about absolutes and being right is that my examples of marriage, my own and my parents, were just the opposite of Ms. Kerns idealized version of marriage. My parents were married for fifty years and I was married for 12 years. You would think that sterling example of longevity, fidelity, etc might have taught me some rules on marriage. However, there are no guarantees in life just like there’s “no crying in baseball” and just because you’re standing next to someone who has a long marriage, doesn’t mean we will do the same. So why torture someone after ten years if they know things aren’t working out? Its possible there is something suspicious about the Kerns argument. Like some of the more dogmatic fallacies, at least one of them must fit here. Not slippery slopes or red herrings more like faulty causality?? I don’t know really–I just cannot get my head around why ten years is a magic number and that after ten years, couple ought to know how to stay together. Don’t even get me started on children of divorce. Your above Swiftian references to children who so-called “survive” their parent’s divorce.. C’MON! Who needs all that guilt anyway???


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: