Being the "I don't want to look stupid" sort of person I am, I was looking through the matrix site searching for clues. While sifting through crap, on the links page I found this [protect.org].

It's kinda scary now that a usgovt agency is making out like it's protecting children. Let's hope they don't start protecting children the same way they've tried to protect national security.

Sorry, this shoulda gone in ring of fire, damnit.

I'm just not used to so many choices.

umm....that is a lobbying group....meaning they raise funding to pay off congress members to adjust laws the way they want them....it is not a US Government Agency in any way shape or form, it is a private organization.

They're very loud about being "pro-child"... and "anti-crime"... but, what's their position on sodomy?

In Response to mjfgates (#7105):

but, what's their position on sodomy?

They're probably bottoms.

In Response to mjfgates (#7105):

but, what's their position on sodomy?

I think that's already covered by a different special interest [nambla.org] group.

In Response to zamphir (#7106):

Well, it certainly looks as though the whole site has finally gotten away from the poop jokes, for a while anyway. I leave the computer for a few days to consume slightly larger amounts of beer than usual, and my whole world goes to crap.

Anyone remember those 80's adverts avert Looney Tunes on ABC that went something like "Under the Constitution we all have rights..." and then Yosemite Same said "...even kids!"

...what constitutional rights do minors actually have? Pretty much every one I ran into as an uppity child was smacked down by the long arm of the parent! ;)

In Response to mcgrue (#7221):

But children shouldn't have rights. They should have protection. and Bertie Beetles.

In Response to unFalln (#7226):

Oh yeah... they need protection from rights because civil liberties are a dangerous thing!

Like free thought!

In fact, doesn't everyone need protection? I mean, there's no warning labels on the right-granting documents of the world... perhaps we'd better trim this all down to make it more manageable...

In Response to mcgrue (#7248):

I think it'd be nice if people stopped concentrating on what rights they have or should have and instead concentrated on what responsibilities they have or should have, and not other people's responsibilities, their own.

I realise it is a statment that is on a par with most hippie nutjobs that change things around using bizarre definitions and word play[1] however it would actually be a fairly large change in focus I think.

[1] my favorite is still that disease is caused by stress and bad feelings _because_ disease comes from dis - ease, i.e. not at ease.... Getting told that one sent me on a drinking binge to try and remove it from my mind.

national and security dont go together in a sentence...
just like charles in charge and popularity =P
=)

In Response to tor (#7258):

You know, when I'm stressed and feeling bad, I tend to get diseases. Or diseased. Or sick. Something like that. So there is some miniscule amount of merit in that statement, even if at face value it's lidicrous.

In Response to themysticalone (#7954):

It's not that stress can't contribute to incidence of disease.

It's that stress is not the *sole* cause of disease, even though some people believe it is.

But some people believe UserFriendly is funny, so it's a big wide world full of all kinds.

In Response to tor (#7258):

The disease thing just makes me want to shout, "Dumb-ass!" I knew a woman whose mother was diagnosed with breast cancer prior to menopause. The daughters of women with these types of breast cancer have a much higher likely-hood of developing breast cancer. When I heard about this woman's mother I asked the woman if she does monthly breast exams. She replied that she does not because she believes the anger and hatred her mother harbored was the cause of her cancer. Dumb-ass!

In Response to Oedipa_Maas (#7971):

She replied that she does not because she believes the anger and hatred her mother harbored was the cause of her cancer.

That seems like a very plausable and scientific theory to me. Should be easy to prove too. The AMA could put a bunch of angry monkeys together, and they should all get sick quite easily.

In Response to zamphir (#7958):

It's that stress is not the *sole* cause of disease, even though some people believe it is.

True, and I meant to imply that by saying something more or less the opposite.

I acutally believe that getting an improper amount of sleep is the sole cause of sickness. I've never gotten sick when I've been getting 8 hours (+/-30mins) of sleep consistently. Likewise bathing with the shower knob halfway between "shower" and "bath" (crazy three-knob system) must be the sole cause of sickness because I always get sick when I vist home and have to use that bathroom.

Oh, and UserFriendly is funny. Liek that strip where that thing did that... yeah i don't read it either.