Awesome. Found on FB.. Both candidates have a say on your vagina, It is state property bitch Cars crashes
Upload
Login or register
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (93)
[ 93 comments ]
Anonymous comments allowed.
78 comments displayed.
#3 - sapphireblossom
-35
has deleted their comment [-]
#20 to #3 - immortalfear
Reply +1
(11/07/2012) [-]
I'm going to explain something to you about the pill, not only does it help prevent unwanted children, but it also decreases the cramps and symptoms of PMS and one's period. It also decreases acne. One of the other things it does is that over time it can stop the body from dropping eggs, which can prevent ovarian cancer.   
TLDR- there's more then one reason to be on the pill.
I'm going to explain something to you about the pill, not only does it help prevent unwanted children, but it also decreases the cramps and symptoms of PMS and one's period. It also decreases acne. One of the other things it does is that over time it can stop the body from dropping eggs, which can prevent ovarian cancer.
TLDR- there's more then one reason to be on the pill.
#16 to #3 - fennoswede ONLINE
Reply +4
(11/07/2012) [-]
i smell jealous virgin
i smell jealous virgin
#4 to #3 - gritsreborn **User deleted account**
+13
has deleted their comment [-]
#5 to #4 - anon
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
Not having sex is easy, just don't do it. If you do wear a condom.

As a side note Planned Parenthood was started by a racist to kill off the blacks.
#9 to #5 - gabrielnigro
Reply +4
(11/07/2012) [-]
so a married couple that can't afford birth control and don't want children shouldn't have sex? yea that makes sense. people who are married are totally going to remain celibate.
#26 to #5 - cirquededc
Reply +1
(11/07/2012) [-]
Login and say that like a man!
#6 to #5 - bokkos
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
Oh you're referring to Freakonomics! That's cute. You are aware that Levitt is nothing but a fraud, playing on people's predetermined prejudices to ring a few pennies out of the masses?
Take a ******* university course before you open your whore mouth on things you do not understand.
God I sound like a cunt.
#7 to #3 - bokkos
Reply +33
(11/07/2012) [-]
Let me explain something to you. Sex is by far the best thing since dinosaurs. And if you want to **** with that, with the ability for a free man to blow a load into his lady without fear of child support, then I'm going to have to kindly ask you to sincerely **** off and have a wank. This effects men and women, and just because women find you repulsive and avoid you does not give you the right to make decisions for them.   
Long live cream pies.
Let me explain something to you. Sex is by far the best thing since dinosaurs. And if you want to **** with that, with the ability for a free man to blow a load into his lady without fear of child support, then I'm going to have to kindly ask you to sincerely **** off and have a wank. This effects men and women, and just because women find you repulsive and avoid you does not give you the right to make decisions for them.
Long live cream pies.
#11 to #7 - novren
Reply +10
(11/07/2012) [-]
I disagree, it was the best thing even before dinosaurs.
#12 to #11 - bokkos
Reply +14
(11/07/2012) [-]
This changes EVERYTHING
#14 to #7 - Cloudxhigh
Reply +3
(11/07/2012) [-]
I think what Sapphire was trying to say was to refrain from having sex until you can deal with the consequences. Sex is nice, but if you can't afford to practice safe sex where it is needed, then the consequences should be understood.

If you can't contain yourself with your partner and you have no protection around, then at least have the decency to pull out well before you blow your load.

Should said man blow his load into a lady, then he should fully understand the consequences of what may happen. The problem is people are having rambunctious sex without caring about the aftermath. People that will go through with abortions and what not (i'm talking about killing an actual human being, not a body that simply has parts) just don't care about the consequences. They want to have sex, and if someone gets pregnant, then so be it. "I'll just deny a possible chance for something to have a life because i didn't want to stop him from cumming in me, and i wasn't prepared to deal with the possible consequences."

I'm pretty sure that's what sapphire was trying to say.
#58 to #7 - yourafaggotharry
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
he... has the dancing skills of a god!
#1 - mahjimmiesarusslin
Reply +22
(11/07/2012) [-]
Both candidates have a say on your vagina, It is state property bitch
#31 - Nameloc
Reply +12
(11/07/2012) [-]







I don't want this baby, let me put it up for adoption!
#32 to #31 - Nameloc
Reply -1
(11/07/2012) [-]
Sadly it's true...Do people forget this option or what? If you think you aren't going to be a fit parent or don't want it, then why not give it to people who want to be parents?
#33 to #32 - kellyrott
Reply +9
(11/07/2012) [-]
Tell that to all the children sitting in orphanages, adoption agencies and the likes who haven't been given a home. There are enough adoptable children already.
#77 to #33 - grahamernazi
Reply +1
(11/07/2012) [-]
I thought of that, and tell others. They always find it better to put them into orphanages, than use contraceptives, or abortion. Then _ I'm_ the weird one for wanting to adopt a child from the pound rather than make one...then again I just don't wanna potty-train a child. XD
#69 to #33 - ragingcacti
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
Id love to get a source on your info, sir. The number of children in homes ages 0-2 please.
#35 to #33 - Nameloc
Reply -1
(11/07/2012) [-]
There's a difference.
I'm talking about babies. Some couples are unable to create a child themselves and would love to have one starting off as a baby. Ever watch the movie Juno?

Sure life isn't perfect and there are kids waiting for homes right now, but you're going far past what I am talking about.
I'm talking about Having a Baby, not having a child/ kid. (Child/ Kid as in over the age of 2.)
Please, stop over exaggerating.
#37 to #35 - kellyrott
Reply +5
(11/07/2012) [-]
There are babies waiting for parents, RIGHT NOW. And if they aren't adopted, they will go on to orphanages, foster homes, and terrible lives without parents.

Just because they don't stay babies doesn't mean they weren't. There is already an adoption problem that needs addressed. We don't need more babies out there like that.
#39 to #37 - anon
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
so might as well kill all the unborn ones right?
#38 to #37 - Nameloc
Reply -5
(11/07/2012) [-]
Again, you're thinking far beyond the subject I started. (#31-#32.)

Just because it's "That time of the month" doesn't mean you should over-look everything and get all pissed at the slightest thing anyone's ever said.
Instead of replying to your comment in a debate type-thing, I'll just re-direct you to my previous comment #35: funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/4219392/Awesome/35#35
That's all I would have typed, anyways. You took the same context of #33 and appended to it.
#60 to #38 - kneehumper
Reply +1
(11/07/2012) [-]
What the hell are you talking about, he did reply to #35.

You said a lot of people want to adopt babies.
He said there are already a lot of babies that needs to be adopted, but not enough people that can adopt them so they grow up in orphanages etc.
You say he strayed from the subject and refuse to answer.

Learn to read.
#85 to #60 - gtaivman
Reply +3
(11/07/2012) [-]
Got you back to neutral. To add to the argument, what woman would want to go through morning sickness, pain of childbirth, stretch marks, and weight increase just to give away a baby. inb4 a moral one
#101 to #31 - gorginhanson
Reply 0
(11/09/2012) [-]
that actually happens all the time.

They put a law in place where you could instantly give up your kid without consequence to deter people from leaving them in dumpsters.
#18 - tkuja
Reply +8
(11/07/2012) [-]
#24 to #18 - orton **User deleted account**
+1
has deleted their comment [-]
#28 - thejerseyjenn
Reply +5
(11/07/2012) [-]
I am pro life simply because people just don't know how to take responsibility anymore. If the child is the result of a rape alright I would support that person getting an abortion if they wanted. But if it's because they were too lazy to use a condom or to forgetful to take the pill everyday then they should remember what comes of that. It's a child no matter how much you want to dehumanize it.
#29 to #28 - anon
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
OMFG RAPE BABIES ARE A ******* GIFT FROM GODD!!!! ALL BABIES SHOULDS BE BORN EVEN IF MOTHERSS DIEE!!!
#45 to #29 - Ruspanic
Reply +4
(11/07/2012) [-]
Did you read the ******* comment?
#59 to #28 - frenchgenocide
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
wait, you just contradicted yourself- you said it is a child yet you can still kill it if it is a result of rape/incest. I've always wondered the logic of people who say this, please (someone) explain.
#70 to #59 - lilpinkkitsune
Reply +1
(11/07/2012) [-]
Because most people can understand that some women are just not emotionally capable of carrying their rapists baby and that it might drive them over the edge of sanity so for the sake of the mothers mental health abortion could be tolerable.
#74 to #70 - frenchgenocide
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
understandable, but still many would remain normal, and it still is by all means a human life, so even though it is sad, life itself is more important than sanity
#76 to #74 - lilpinkkitsune
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
Not when the sanity is stretched so thin that the mother offs herself to escape. Don't get me wrong, I am against abortion but I understand that as regrettable as it may be sometimes extenuating circumstances are needed.
#80 to #76 - frenchgenocide
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
well, I still believe that the life is more important. at least the child has more life to live?
#84 to #80 - lilpinkkitsune
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
Again I say if the victim of the rape is so distraught that she kills herself than not only do you lose her life but the life of her unborn child as well, can't you see how it would be better to at least save the victims life?
#86 to #84 - frenchgenocide
Reply +1
(11/07/2012) [-]
you are right, but only for that instance, and this is a very rare one.
#87 to #86 - lilpinkkitsune
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
See, there are almost always extenuating circumstances.
#88 to #87 - frenchgenocide
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
explain
#89 to #88 - lilpinkkitsune
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
Most everyone always thinks in black in white, or that everything needs to have the strictest laws that constrict everything into little boxes of right and wrong. The thing people don't understand is there is a grey area and not everything fits into those little boxes.
#90 to #89 - frenchgenocide
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
I know we're ur coming from, but some things just ARE black and white
#91 to #90 - lilpinkkitsune
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
True, and that is why I said 'almost always.'
#92 to #91 - frenchgenocide
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
oh didnt catch that
#94 to #92 - lilpinkkitsune
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
Lol, quite all right.
#95 to #94 - frenchgenocide
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
**frenchgenocide rolled a random image posted in comment #1331176 at Item Discussion ** ponies and I win the argument
#97 to #95 - lilpinkkitsune
Reply +1
(11/07/2012) [-]
What were you trying to win exactly? Also, even the rolls know you lost.
#98 to #97 - frenchgenocide
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
the argument, silly goose
#99 to #98 - lilpinkkitsune
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
Ah well.... I think I won then. Lol.
#96 to #95 - frenchgenocide
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
worth a try!
#79 to #28 - joocles
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
so you'd rather bring children into the world that will just have a ****** up life
#100 to #79 - thejerseyjenn
Reply 0
(11/08/2012) [-]
anyone can make something of themselves. given the opportunity to try.
#23 - rinnutehpokemonz
Reply +5
(11/07/2012) [-]
Whores.
#34 - mynameisgeorge ONLINE
Reply -9
(11/07/2012) [-]
Well, if planned parenthood continues to exist, it is a massive bias towards women.

Without a child, sex is just for pleasure and if the government supports giving people free stuff for sexual pleasure (i.e contaceptives) , there should be government sponsored dildos and fleshlights if you want equality. "Oh, but that would be a massive waste of money" you may say. Well hypothetical commenter, that is my point, sponsoring free contraception like Obama wants to do is a ******* horrible waste of money.
"Well, sex is between two people and it is about love" you may say, well I doubt you are thinking about a girl's wonderful personality when you're plowing her from behind ( in most of your cases 2 inches deep in her). Without any other uses (i.e reproduction) sex is just glorified mutual masturbation, so it wouldn't be much different than using a dildo or fleshlightwith another person. And if you truly want "equality for all, and the rights to do what they please with their bodies", you must also realize that some people do not have sex and you are discriminating against them if you do not give out self-pleasing devices.
If teenagers want to be stupid and irresponsible, let them, but don't give them a "get out of parenthood free" card.

TL;DR Either make dildos and fleshlights free, or make people pay for contraceptives.
#36 to #34 - rachelsarusrex
Reply -3
(11/07/2012) [-]
Contraceptives also provide a form of safety against STD's and STI's.
Wouldn't you rather **** a girl and be able to go bareback without thinking ''****, imma be a dad'' or even if you are using a condom, say it breaks? Are you going to devote your life to this child despite being a teenager?
Not everybody wants a child from sex, its a recreational thing, a human thing.
Fleshlights and dildo's are recreational products, contraceptives are medicinal (well, mainly anyway)
#41 to #36 - mynameisgeorge ONLINE
Reply +3
(11/07/2012) [-]
But the purpose of having sex with contraceptives in the beginning is for the recreational, so the medicinal purposes are irrelevant.

And sex isn't a "human" thing, a large portion of animals have sex, so it's a primal thing, and if you can't control your primal urges enough to ensure that you won't have a financial burden (baby) or health burden (STD) then you are a sad excuse for a human being.
#49 to #41 - rachelsarusrex
Reply -3
(11/07/2012) [-]
why would the medicinal purposes be irrelevant? They're still relevant, condoms are used to protects against diseases as well as stop pregnancy.
I meant the recreational part of sex is a human thing, (and a dolphin thing) not the actual intercourse.
So you're saying if you don't want a baby or an STD you should just not have sex fullstop? What a stupid ass thing to say.
#51 to #49 - mynameisgeorge ONLINE
Reply +3
(11/07/2012) [-]
The medical purposes of it are irrelevant because you are having sex for recreation in the first place, you don't buy condoms and say "Oh boy, I can't wait to not get an STD" you get them to have recreational sex and that is their main purpose.

And I didn't say to not have sex. I was implying that if you are that obsessed with sex to have it while disregarding the problems it can cause, you are a ******* retard and have no self-control.
#52 to #51 - rachelsarusrex
Reply -2
(11/07/2012) [-]
Yes, the main purpose is for recreation, I'm just saying they're medically important as well. It seemed like you were completely disregarding that side of it.
I really don't understand the point you're trying to make here, are you implying... actually I don't know what the **** you're saying, can you reiterate?
#53 to #52 - mynameisgeorge ONLINE
Reply +2
(11/07/2012) [-]
I mean that people are so obsessed with sex that they expect the government to fund their need for a recreation (which isn't a real need) and they completely disregard the fact that they can ruin their lives for a good time.

That wasn't the main point of my argument, that was just social commentary.
#54 to #53 - rachelsarusrex
Reply -2
(11/07/2012) [-]
Ok, well I disagree with you but respect your opinion
(this is me leaving, we've totally veered off from the topic)
live long and prosper
#55 to #54 - mynameisgeorge ONLINE
Reply +3
(11/07/2012) [-]
Likewise, I'm glad we were able to have a civil conversation.
#40 to #34 - jlamb
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
STOP!!! THE POLITICAL BANTER!!!
#42 to #40 - mynameisgeorge ONLINE
Reply +2
(11/07/2012) [-]
Oh, sorry, I'll respond to a political post with something irrelevant next time.

Hurr durr le new me mes r grate rite guise??? XDXDXDX

Better?
#46 to #34 - bazda
Reply +2
(11/07/2012) [-]
The retarded part of the government funding companies to give out free contraception is that contraception isn't expensive. It's not something that is unattainable for anyone. If you are seriously so poor you can't afford a box of condoms, you probably should have higher priorities than sex, and you definitely should not have a girlfriend.
#8 - ballzach
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
was it too hard to crop out the two not funny comments?
#19 to #8 - sheperdofthestars
Reply +3
(11/07/2012) [-]
But the bottom one was also funny.
#72 - whyisthissohard **User deleted account**
+2
has deleted their comment [-]
#63 - biggrand
Reply +2
(11/07/2012) [-]
This image has expired
not trying to sound like a dumbass, and i could be wrong,but isnt abortion a state issue? I mean regardless of what candidates say to get votes, im pretty sure abortion, marijuana, guns, and **** like that are decided by the state or congress in general opposed to a single person.

and if im wrong well here's this conan/ natr gif
#71 to #63 - slowinski
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
in the constitution we have the right to a well regulated milita and the right to keep and bear arms (the 2nd amendment) i dont remember what amendment it is but it basicly says all powers not specifically givin to the federal government are to be given to the states.
#75 to #63 - generaljosh
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
You're right, but the government still has a lot of say in the matter. If states do something the feds really don't like, the feds can threaten to pull funding for things like education or highways
#81 to #63 - Marker ONLINE
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
Drinking age is a state mandated law, but in 1984 the Federal Government found a loophole to force all states to raise it to 21.
#64 to #63 - masterofpuppetz
Reply +1
(11/07/2012) [-]
In situations like marijuana it seems to be a grey area. For instance marijuana is not legal in some states, but it is illegal in the eyes of the federal government. So Medical marijuana shops are constantly being raided by the feds even though it is legal in their state. It is a sad sad mess. And yet this **** is OK? 'MURICA!
In situations like marijuana it seems to be a grey area. For instance marijuana is not legal in some states, but it is illegal in the eyes of the federal government. So Medical marijuana shops are constantly being raided by the feds even though it is legal in their state. It is a sad sad mess. And yet this **** is OK? 'MURICA!
#73 to #64 - thederpestest
Reply +1
(11/07/2012) [-]
Just wanted to say I rofled my ******* ass off from that gif. thumb for ya.
#67 to #64 - nadastress
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
Wow really at the same time! Mind blown!
#66 to #64 - masterofpuppetz
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
marijuana is legal in some states, my bad
#65 to #63 - nadastress
Reply +1
(11/07/2012) [-]
Well not really, you have state laws, but then you got federal laws. Like in California you can smoke weed legally according to state law, but the feds can legally bust you.
#82 to #65 - Marker ONLINE
Reply 0
(11/07/2012) [-]
In California, not with a prescription. It's legal through and through for medical uses. If you can prove that you can legally have it, you can't be busted. (Not that CA state police really give a **** either way)