Madonna has never changed a diaper
PUSSSYKATT
Madonna changes her costumes 18 times during her Drowned World Tour concerts,
yet the mother of two has never changed a diaper!
The Material Girl shocked pals at a dinner party when she told them that diaper
duty just isn't her thing, and she's never soiled her manicured mitts cleaning
up after either daughter Lourdes, 4, or son Rocco, 1.
Do we smell a diva?
And don't think hubby Guy Ritchie, 32, gets his hands dirty either -- they have
nannies for that!
The bottom line is that prima donna Madonna, 43, has hired and fired a string
of child-care pros to make sure Rocco's tender tush is kept pampered and
powdered.
And that leaves the megastar mom plenty of time to do what she DOES enjoy --
playing with her kids and taking them on outings. Must be nice!
SEND EMAIL TO PUSSS...@aol.com
AGC FAQ and FUN STUFF
http://members.aol.com/pusssykatt/agcfaq.html
BLIND ITEM REHASH:
http://members.aol.com/agcgossipqueen/mainpage.html
Sophie
Are we supposed to be surprised??? <eyeroll>
--
Sophie
See us at www.mcgehees.com
Aabz
>yet the mother of two has never changed a diaper!
but has she breastfed in a Kmart?!
that is the more important question.
aabz
Ron Turner
HA!
But I do think Madonna should have changed at least one freakin diaper. I hate
fake mothers. Act like they're the best mommies in the world just for show,
but turn the kid over to others for the real parenting.
**************************************************
Reading "To Shining Sea" (big history of the US Navy)
Wull
Most men do not change diapers. That does not make them a bad father. Likewise
changing or not changing diapers does not make or unmake a good mother.
There are people who actually cannot stand the smell from diapers. And it makes
them throw up. It never bothered me.
Wull
@rmta.org some misplaced joan of arc
wrote:
>>yet the mother of two has never changed a diaper!
>
>Are we supposed to be surprised??? <eyeroll>
i really hate madonna. just thought i'd share.
samantha
--
"i hear she still grants forgiveness..."
++tori amos, liquid diamonds++
RJRSJ1
>Most men do not change diapers. That does not make them a bad father.
>Likewise
>changing or not changing diapers does not make or unmake a good mother.
Well, hell! I guess the baby's *really* screwed if neither of them likes to
change diapers!
>There are people who actually cannot stand the smell from diapers. And it
>makes
>them throw up. It never bothered me.
I think if it's another baby's diapers, it would make me somewhat nauseous. The
fact that it's my own baby's - doesn't bother me in the least. It kinda goes
with the territory, ya know?
Ed
"Aabz" <aa...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010810115550...@ng-ci1.aol.com...
She probably has, but it more than likely it WASN'T a baby she was feeding
strange cargo
>
>Are we supposed to be surprised??? <eyeroll>
i really hate madonna. just thought i'd share.
And I'm sure she's devistated over it. Just thought I'd share.
Matt Madison-Clark
the time and sick with the flu. She had to throw up and didn't quite get to
the toilet in time. I cleaned it up and then my sister-in-law kept gushing
that neither my brother or my father would have done that.
What was I going to do. Just leave it there until they came home?
"Ron Turner" <rbt...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010810121214...@mb-mf.aol.com...
Sherman Potter
She let the whole world stare into her birth canal for the price of that
rotten "Sex" book.
Sophie
>it is to being a "working mom," it's an insult to real working mothers
>-- the ones who have to do all that stuff themselves.
Hear, hear!! Yes like how poor Nicole Kidman will be a single Mom - with
her nannies, housekeeper, cook, driver, etc...My heart really bleeds. The
worst to me was how Cindy Crawford got dubbed Super Mom just cos she was
(supposedly) a Super Model. <gag> When celebrities have babies people act
like no one else has ever done it before. Ugh.
Ron Turner
>Most men do not change diapers. That does not make them a bad father.
>Likewise changing or not changing diapers does not make or unmake a good
mother.
I didn't say anything about fathers being excluded. They should change the
damn diapers too. And I do think most parents have changed at least one
diaper. All I'm asking is for one round, folks. Can't be selfish, now.
>There are people who actually cannot stand the smell from diapers. And it
>makes
>them throw up. It never bothered me.
If there is an allergic "I Just Can't Do It, God" reaction then that's
different. But I hate fakes who do all the cute stuff, act like they're the
best parents in the whole wide world.......then have others do the shitty
stuff.
Ron Turner
>doesn't hand off her kids (or crotch critters) to the nearest nanny
>every time something unglamorous needs to be done. I'm sick and tired
>of hearing and reading about what "wonder women" these celebrities
>mothers are. Yeah, they work hard at their careers, but they have
>people to raise their kids for them, shop for them, do their laundry,
>pick up the dry cleaning, and so on. When they talk about how *hard*
>it is to being a "working mom," it's an insult to real working mothers
>-- the ones who have to do all that stuff themselves.
>
I know. They're all like little Martha Stewart Mommies. They treat kids like
it's a freakin hobby. Go through the motions just for show. But when it comes
to the shitty stuff of parenting, the stuff that aint cute and cuddly......they
pass the buck.
Wull
How many children do you have?
After I find out, I will really ask you a question.
TIA
Wull
Fystydub
bull*%$@ rag.
"What goes around, comes around"
Michelle
PUSSSYKATT wrote in message <20010810090937...@mb-fd.aol.com>...
>STAR MAGAZINE/JANET CHARLTON....
>
>>
Madonna changes her costumes 18 times during her Drowned World Tour
concerts,
>yet the mother of two has never changed a diaper!
>
I'm stunned! That's an incredible accomplishment ~ the nannies are around
24/7? Babies aren't always on a *schedule*! I find it hard to believe that
she never once found herself having to change either of the children!
(LOL!)
Michelle
-----
http://www.ednasgifts.com/ Beautify your home without spending a fortune!
Galawag
woman enough to change their shitty diapers. I've said it before and I'll say
it again...it's a shame that pretentous skank was able to spawn in the first
place.
galawag
Keeper of Madonna's crotch critters (someone's got to!)
Jamie
> PUSSSYKATT wrote in message <20010810090937...@mb-fd.aol.com>...
> >STAR MAGAZINE/JANET CHARLTON....
> >
> >>
> Madonna changes her costumes 18 times during her Drowned World Tour
> concerts,
> >yet the mother of two has never changed a diaper!
>
> >
> I'm stunned! That's an incredible accomplishment ~ the nannies are around
> 24/7? Babies aren't always on a *schedule*! I find it hard to believe that
> she never once found herself having to change either of the children!
> (LOL!)
She probably has live-in nannies. Come on, you honestly believe Madonna is
getting up at 2 a.m. to take care of a crying baby? I bet she rents separate
suites for the kids and the nannies in hotels.
--
~Jamie
M Aurelius SPQR
higher human quality.
Heather
"PUSSSYKATT" <agcgoss...@aol.com> wrote >the mother of >two has never
>changed a diaper!
Untrue! She goes over to Bob Hope's house once a day!
Bethany
> You are being very intolerant Ron.
> Most men do not change diapers. That does not make them a bad father.
>Likewise changing or not changing diapers does not make or unmake a good
mother.
I don't personally know of *any* fathers that don't/didn't change diapers.
I would certainly think a father that refuses to change a diaper- well, I
would think that's pretty weak.
> There are people who actually cannot stand the smell from diapers. And it
makes them throw up. It never bothered me.
Your own baby's shit doesn't smell so bad. :O)
The point is, if she's *never* changed a diaper, that means she didn't get
up with them in the middle of the night, or undress them and get them ready
for their bath... Weeks worth of serious parent bonding time- the baby's
entire, well, babyhood- :::poof::: gone, and she didn't get a chance to
share because she was afraid of getting a little baby doody on her perfectly
manicured thumbs. Weird and sad.
~Bethany
DianeC746
>Your own baby's shit doesn't smell so bad. :O)
>The point is, if she's *never* changed a diaper, that means she didn't get
>up with them in the middle of the night, or undress them and get them ready
>for their bath... Weeks worth of serious parent bonding time- the baby's
>entire, well, babyhood- :::poof::: gone, and she didn't get a chance to
>share because she was afraid of getting a little baby doody on her perfectly
>manicured thumbs. Weird and sad.
>~Bethany
I was thinking along those same lines. She must be very selfish. If she won't
be a "hands on" mom with a tiny baby, just wait for the hard stuff, like when
their teenagers. She seems a little Joan Crawford-like.
Di
Bigolhomo
Michelle <emg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:BDZc7.3039$mo3.7...@nntp2.onemain.com...
>
> PUSSSYKATT wrote in message
<20010810090937...@mb-fd.aol.com>...
> >STAR MAGAZINE/JANET CHARLTON....
> >
> >>
> Madonna changes her costumes 18 times during her Drowned World Tour
> concerts,
> >yet the mother of two has never changed a diaper!
>
> >
> I'm stunned! That's an incredible accomplishment ~ the nannies are around
> 24/7? Babies aren't always on a *schedule*! I find it hard to believe
that
> she never once found herself having to change either of the children!
> (LOL!)
>
> Michelle
>
>
Ain't it amazing how people accept this as gospel truth? I guess the source
is pretty impeccable - pals at a dinner party. How could she deny it with
such solid documentation? Seriously people, do you really think Madonna has
had a nanny with her through EVERY SECOND of her children's diaper years?
Use a little common sense.
Bigolhomo
Sophie
>had a nanny with her through EVERY SECOND of her children's diaper years?
Yes I really think someone like Madonna would.
Diana
I agree totally. Baby shit is minor league compared to when they get
older.
Diana, who speaks with more experience than God about teenagers :)
Note to self: Buy more brimstone
---------------
Keeper of Joaquin Phoenix
Mark Stringer
That's just wrong.
DianeC746
>
> So she'll do it for Dennis Rodman but she won't for her own daughter?
>That's just wrong.
That's hilarious. I bet she's done a lot of things more gross than changing a
diaper!! Di
>
Jeg7777
"Bigolhomo" <readyr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9l42ee$783la$1...@ID-84325.news.dfncis.de...
>
> Ain't it amazing how people accept this as gospel truth? I guess the
source
> is pretty impeccable - pals at a dinner party. How could she deny it with
> such solid documentation? Seriously people, do you really think Madonna
has
> had a nanny with her through EVERY SECOND of her children's diaper years?
> Use a little common sense.
What? Use common sense when you can slam Madonna for every possible reason
instead? What kind of freak are you??? :-)
--
Joe
Pinky: "Brain, I was wondering...if somewhere over the rainbow bluebirds can
fly, why can't I?"
Brain: "Because you're a MOUSE."
Pinky: "Oh, well when you put it that way it all makes sense, doesn't it?"
DepressdGrl
>
> I know. They're all like little Martha Stewart Mommies. They treat kids like
> it's a freakin hobby. Go through the motions just for show. But when it comes
> to the shitty stuff of parenting, the stuff that aint cute and cuddly......they
> pass the buck.
>
Oh, so you're bringing Martha Stewart in this huh?? You haven't even
bothered to post about her in the loooong Martha Stewart thread ;)
DG
P's beloved gf
Spyder
of hearing and reading about what "wonder women" these celebrities
mothers are. Yeah, they work hard at their careers, but they have people to
raise their kids for them, shop for them, do their laundry, pick up the dry
cleaning, and so on. When they talk about how *hard*
it is to being a "working mom," it's an insult to real working mothers -- the
ones who have to do all that stuff themselves."
Well put Leslie! I'm also very annoyed when these women who have someone to
clean their homes, take care of their children, cook and do the marketing, to
take the kids whereever they need to go, persinal trainers to keep them in
shape, or plastic surgeons to suck out any fat or unslightly bulge. What
bothers me is when these women say,"It's hard doing it ALL, but its so
rewarding!!!"
RRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGGHHHHTTTTT
Janine Lauper
her some time ago (In Style? Not sure) in which the interviewer
mentioned that at one point Madonna excused herself to change her
son's diapers. The nanny was in the yard with Lola and Guy Ritchie. I
believe the interviewer mentioned she was impressed by how quickly
Madonna did it, too.
Also, Madonna's husband said once that she forced him to change
diapers - which he didn't want to - because she believes it's an
important part of the bonding proccess.
I'm sure that if Madonna did make that comment about never having
changed a diaper, it was made in jest.
I know a lot of you abhor the woman, but maybe, just maybe, she is
capable of loving her won children like the rest of you. Just a
thought.
"Bigolhomo" <readyr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<9l42ee$783la$1...@ID-84325.news.dfncis.de>...
Rina J.
>I'll have to step in and defend the woman. I read an interview with
>her some time ago (In Style? Not sure) in which the interviewer
>mentioned that at one point Madonna excused herself to change her
>son's diapers. The nanny was in the yard with Lola and Guy Ritchie. I
>believe the interviewer mentioned she was impressed by how quickly
>Madonna did it, too.
>
>Also, Madonna's husband said once that she forced him to change
>diapers - which he didn't want to - because she believes it's an
>important part of the bonding proccess.
>
>I'm sure that if Madonna did make that comment about never having
>changed a diaper, it was made in jest.
>
>I know a lot of you abhor the woman, but maybe, just maybe, she is
>capable of loving her won children like the rest of you. Just a
>thought.
>
Thanks, I thought I was the only one who recalled this interview. I think that
in this instance Madonna is getting a bad rap for pretty much nothing. It also
seems that people are kind of resentful of the fact that she can afford to hire
a full-time nanny to help out. Quite honestly, if I ever hit it rich I'm damn
sure going to get what help I can when I decide to have kids. Why let it be
harder than it has to be if you can afford help?
>"Bigolhomo" <readyr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:<9l42ee$783la$1...@ID-84325.news.dfncis.de>...
>
>> Ain't it amazing how people accept this as gospel truth? I guess the
>source
>> is pretty impeccable - pals at a dinner party. How could she deny it with
>> such solid documentation? Seriously people, do you really think Madonna
>has
>> had a nanny with her through EVERY SECOND of her children's diaper years?
>> Use a little common sense.
>>
>> Bigolhomo
>
>
>
>
>
>
~~Pete Sampras: In a class all his own~~
"and he thought he heard the echoes of a pennywhistle band, and the laughter
from a distant caravan"
Wull
I think I know your cousin Cindi? :-)
Regards
Wull
Ron Turner
>
>How many children do you have?
>After I find out, I will really ask you a question.
>
>TIA
>Wull
None that I know of. But I HAVE done the shitwork of parenting before.
Serving as the perpetual Mr. Nice Guy babysitter for half my damn family.
But what's with your defense of fake parents? I'm not talking about average
folks who work their asses off and can't do a 101 things at once. Just annoyed
with the phonies. People like Madonna, Rosie, etc. who brag 24/7 about how
great parents they are........without doing a damn thing but trotting the
kiddies out for the public, while letting others do the real shitwork.
Wormwood
wrote:
>STAR MAGAZINE/JANET CHARLTON....
>
>Madonna changes her costumes 18 times during her Drowned World Tour concerts,
>yet the mother of two has never changed a diaper!
>
>The Material Girl shocked pals at a dinner party when she told them that diaper
>duty just isn't her thing, and she's never soiled her manicured mitts cleaning
>up after either daughter Lourdes, 4, or son Rocco, 1.
>
>Do we smell a diva?
>
>And don't think hubby Guy Ritchie, 32, gets his hands dirty either -- they have
>nannies for that!
>
>The bottom line is that prima donna Madonna, 43, has hired and fired a string
>of child-care pros to make sure Rocco's tender tush is kept pampered and
>powdered.
>
>And that leaves the megastar mom plenty of time to do what she DOES enjoy --
>playing with her kids and taking them on outings. Must be nice!
What a lazy slob she is. Wonder if she's got someone on payroll to
wipe her *own* ass. <sternly claps hands three times rapidly>
"Wipers!"
--worm
Remove IAM to reply via email
Bigolhomo
Wormwood <tanta...@xoasis.com> wrote in message
news:7eecntcmpqeot2g40...@4ax.com...
That is too funny. If I had coffee, it'd be a spewin
Bigolhomo
Bigolhomo
Janine Lauper <janine...@bol.com.br> wrote in message
news:fcb17046.01081...@posting.google.com...
> I'll have to step in and defend the woman. I read an interview with
> her some time ago (In Style? Not sure) in which the interviewer
> mentioned that at one point Madonna excused herself to change her
> son's diapers. The nanny was in the yard with Lola and Guy Ritchie. I
> believe the interviewer mentioned she was impressed by how quickly
> Madonna did it, too.
>
> Also, Madonna's husband said once that she forced him to change
> diapers - which he didn't want to - because she believes it's an
> important part of the bonding proccess.
>
> I'm sure that if Madonna did make that comment about never having
> changed a diaper, it was made in jest.
>
> I know a lot of you abhor the woman, but maybe, just maybe, she is
> capable of loving her won children like the rest of you. Just a
> thought.
>
Also, remember she is the oldest girl of 8 kids. That alone tells me she's
changed her share of diapers in her life.
Bigolhomo
Janine Lauper
> Thanks Janine for a sensible and informative post and without vitriol.
> I think I know your cousin Cindi? :-)
related to a luckier (ie. richer) celebrity :)
Bethany
~Bethany
Janine Lauper <janine...@bol.com.br> wrote in message
<snipped>
> I'm sure that if Madonna did make that comment about never having
> changed a diaper, it was made in jest.
<snipped>
SGH Esquire
She dated Warren Beatty.
// I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it
until threatened with some small object, such as a spoon. //
Certified Harley-Riding Yuppie Swine
'01 FLSTC
'00 Moto Guzzi Jackal
Top Sirloin
>You are being very intolerant Ron.
>Most men do not change diapers.
I don't know of a father who doesn't. You know any couples that just had kids?
-Scott Johnson
Fry Mumia
http://www.danielfaulkner.com
All Eyes On Faye
>
> > Bigolhomo said: Seriously people, do you really think
> > Madonna has had a nanny with her through EVERY SECOND of
> > her children's diaper years?
>
>
> Yes I really think someone like Madonna would.
>
>
on her lifestyle when he was waiting to exit her Hell-Hole, that she
could say how much she wished he would hurry up and get out of her,
because she needed to "party" ... yes, I think she would be selfish
and lazy enough to have planned for 24/7 turd cleaners (including Guy
Ritchie) to be part of her "Army Of Assistants".
Kristina
Faye) wrote:
>If she could be so put-out and disturbed about Rocco putting a cramp
>on her lifestyle when he was waiting to exit her Hell-Hole, that she
>could say how much she wished he would hurry up and get out of her,
>because she needed to "party" ...
Because God knows, no pregnant mother has *ever* said that before now.
Kristina
Really Great Stories Not Written By Me:
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~jerlapoint
**Keeper of Peter Wingfield and Tim McGraw**
All Eyes On Faye
saying it ... or are they drinking alcohol at the time, like Madonna
did? And after the birth ... don't they feel like holding their baby
and *accepting* it? Why does Madonna always make Guy hold Rocco? Also,
why did Madonna admit in a recent interview that Rocco and Lourdes
were both "Unplanned Pregnancies"? Well, at least she let *these*
unplanned pregnancies live, instead of just having them flushed down
the toilet ... like all her other unplanned pregnancies.
"I'm not going to be one of those mothers that need an army of
assistants to raise my child, because what's the use of even being a
mother if you can't even raise your own child?!"
--Madonna, right before she hired "an army of assistants" to raise her
child; admitting that she had no "use of even being a mother".
Kristina
Faye) wrote:
>Kristina <Careless...@aol.comgoaway> wrote in message news:<vmamntclrohtp54bd...@4ax.com>...
>Yes, but are they just frustrated with the *fat look* and jokingly
>saying it ... or are they drinking alcohol at the time, like Madonna
>did?
Funny...that's the first I've heard that she was drinking while she
said it. I wonder what the next evolution of this statement will be.
And why does it matter whether it was serious or joking? My sister
*meant* it when she said it - she's also a very good mother.
>And after the birth ... don't they feel like holding their baby
>and *accepting* it? Why does Madonna always make Guy hold Rocco?
Uh oh - my husband also always carried the kids when we went out
before they could walk...guess that means I don't accept them. I hope
they never find out.
>Also, why did Madonna admit in a recent interview that Rocco and Lourdes
>were both "Unplanned Pregnancies"?
What the hell has that got to do with anything?
>"I'm not going to be one of those mothers that need an army of
>assistants to raise my child, because what's the use of even being a
>mother if you can't even raise your own child?!"
>--Madonna, right before she hired "an army of assistants" to raise her
>child; admitting that she had no "use of even being a mother".
I wonder if she makes that army practice marching, too...
All Eyes On Faye
>
>From: Kristina Careless...@aol.comgoaway
>
>>Yes, but are they just frustrated with the *fat look* and jokingly
>>saying it ... or are they drinking alcohol at the time, like Madonna
>>did?
>
>Funny...that's the first I've heard that she was drinking while she
>said it. I wonder what the next evolution of this statement will be.
>
>
she made sure Rocco was still inside her, with the booze, and she made
sure that she didn't wait till after he was born to say that she
needed to start partying again ... guess if she waited, it wouldn't
sound selfish enough.
>And why does it matter whether it was serious or joking? My sister
>*meant* it when she said it - she's also a very good mother.
>
>
Yes, but did she go a-gainst her announced beliefs about motherhood
... like Madonna did? Madonna did exactly what she claimed she would
*not* do.
>>And after the birth ... don't they feel like holding their baby
>>and *accepting* it? Why does Madonna always make Guy hold Rocco?
>
>Uh oh - my husband also always carried the kids when we went out
>before they could walk...guess that means I don't accept them. I
hope
>they never find out.
>
>
If you pattern yourself after Madonna ... and go a-gainst your
*intended* beliefs, then maybe you're right; only you would know if
your own actions coincide with your beliefs.
>>Also, why did Madonna admit in a recent interview that Rocco and
Lourdes
>>were both "Unplanned Pregnancies"?
>
>What the hell has that got to do with anything?
>
>
That maybe the *reason* that she hired an "Army Of Assistants" to
raise her children, after she publicly announced that she would not
depend on outside help to raise her children, just might mean that she
doesn't place the highest possible priority on "unplanned" children
... all of her other "unplanned" children managed to get themselves
aborted; at least *these* were allowed to live. Oh well...
>>"I'm not going to be one of those mothers that need an army of
>>assistants to raise my child, because what's the use of even being a
>>mother if you can't even raise your own child?!"
>>--Madonna, right before she hired "an army of assistants" to raise
her
>>child; admitting that she had no "use of even being a mother".
>
>I wonder if she makes that army practice marching, too...
>
>
Yeah, marching to the store for diapers...
>Kristina
>
<sigh>
Jamie
> Also, remember she is the oldest girl of 8 kids. That alone tells me she's
> changed her share of diapers in her life.
>
> Bigolhomo
I thought the above was incorrect, so I looked it up on a Madonna site.
http://www.geocities.com/madonnabiopictures/madonnamusic.html
She's actually the third oldest of eight kids, and the only siblings she would
have possibly changed the diapers for are Jennifer and Mario, since the other
siblings were born either before her or within 1, 2, and 4 years after her.
--
~Jamie
Kristina
Faye) wrote:
>>And why does it matter whether it was serious or joking? My sister
>>*meant* it when she said it - she's also a very good mother.
>>
>>
>Yes, but did she go a-gainst her announced beliefs about motherhood
>... like Madonna did? Madonna did exactly what she claimed she would
>*not* do.
I think a lot of parents do..."oh, I'll never [fill in the blank]".
Then reality gets ahold of you, and realize exactly why it is that so
many people do whatever it was you said you weren't going to do.
>>>And after the birth ... don't they feel like holding their baby
>>>and *accepting* it? Why does Madonna always make Guy hold Rocco?
>>
>>Uh oh - my husband also always carried the kids when we went out
>>before they could walk...guess that means I don't accept them. I
>hope
>>they never find out.
>>
>>
>If you pattern yourself after Madonna ... and go a-gainst your
>*intended* beliefs, then maybe you're right; only you would know if
>your own actions coincide with your beliefs.
Pattern myself after Madonna...ROFL...hardly. My hubby carrying the
kids more had nothing to do with belief, and everything to do with him
being helpful and stronger than I am.
>>>Also, why did Madonna admit in a recent interview that Rocco and
>Lourdes
>>>were both "Unplanned Pregnancies"?
>>
>>What the hell has that got to do with anything?
>>
>>
>That maybe the *reason* that she hired an "Army Of Assistants" to
>raise her children, after she publicly announced that she would not
>depend on outside help to raise her children, just might mean that she
>doesn't place the highest possible priority on "unplanned" children
>... all of her other "unplanned" children managed to get themselves
>aborted; at least *these* were allowed to live. Oh well...
>
Or it could mean none of that. LOL. You seem to know an awful lot of
intimate details of Madonna's life - maybe you were the one who tipped
the Star off to the "never changed a diaper" scandal, huh?
>>>"I'm not going to be one of those mothers that need an army of
>>>assistants to raise my child, because what's the use of even being a
>>>mother if you can't even raise your own child?!"
>>>--Madonna, right before she hired "an army of assistants" to raise
>her
>>>child; admitting that she had no "use of even being a mother".
>>
>>I wonder if she makes that army practice marching, too...
>>
>>
>Yeah, marching to the store for diapers...
So how many assistants make an "army" anyway?
>
>>Kristina
>>
>
><sigh>
What's the matter? Is finding reasons to dislike Madonna's parenting
wearing on you?
All Eyes On Faye
> On 16 Aug 2001 15:37:40 -0700, faye...@my-deja.com (All Eyes On
> Faye) wrote:
>
> > Yes, but did she go a-gainst her announced beliefs about
> > motherhood ... like Madonna did? Madonna did exactly what
> > she claimed she would *not* do.
>
> I think a lot of parents do..."oh, I'll never [fill in the
> blank]". Then reality gets ahold of you, and realize
> exactly why it is that so many people do whatever it was
> you said you weren't going to do.
>
>
While you're busy making excuses for Madonna, I still think it's
interesting to learn that Madonna considers that she has no "use of
even being a mother" ... probably thinks she's unfit to even be a
wife.
"On a scale of 1 - 10, I rate myself, ah ... ZERO, as a wife!"
--Madonna
> > If you pattern yourself after Madonna ... and go a-gainst
> > your *intended* beliefs, then maybe you're right; only
> > you would know if your own actions coincide with your
> > beliefs.
>
> Pattern myself after Madonna...ROFL...hardly. My hubby
> carrying the kids more had nothing to do with belief, and
> everything to do with him being helpful and stronger than I
> am.
>
>
So ... even if you refused to hold your baby very often, you might be
considered a more caring and devoted mother than Madonna is ...
especially if you don't have a history of abortions, like Madonna
does.
> > That maybe the *reason* that she hired an "Army Of
> > Assistants" to raise her children, after she publicly
> > announced that she would not depend on outside help to
> > raise her children, just might mean that she doesn't
> > place the highest possible priority on "unplanned"
> > children ... all of her other "unplanned" children
> > managed to get themselves aborted; at least *these* were
> > allowed to live. Oh well...
> >
>
> You seem to know an awful lot of
> intimate details of Madonna's life
>
>
And the reason for your defense of Madonna's **no "use of even being a
mother"** and her multiple abortions is based on ... your limited
information about her?
> >>> "I'm not going to be one of those mothers that need an
> >>> army of assistants to raise my child, because what's
> >>> the use of even being a mother if you can't even raise
> >>> your own child?!" --Madonna, right before she hired "an
> >>> army of assistants" to raise her child; admitting that
> >>> she had no "use of even being a mother".
> >>>
>
>>> I wonder if she makes that army practice marching, too...
>>>
>
> > Yeah, marching to the store for diapers...
>
> So how many assistants make an "army" anyway?
>
>
Yes, and every single one that she hired to raise Lourdes and Rocco
... she first promised herself that she would never hire.
> >>Kristina
> >>
> >
> ><sigh>
>
> What's the matter? Is finding reasons to dislike Madonna's
> parenting wearing on you?
>
> Kristina
>
>
"You seem to know an awful lot of intimate details of Madonna's life"
--Kristina
What's the matter Krissy, are you running out of excuses for Madonna
... is that why you need to bring your "Husband" and "Sister" into it;
is your "intimate" knowledge and information about Madonna running
low? BTW, since you've used your sister as an excuse and as a defense
for Madonna's actions ... did your sister's and Madonna's pregnancies
have any other common similarities, besides wanting the baby to hurry
up and get the Hell out of their bodies; was your sister also
unmarried when she became pregnant?
<rolls @@ eyes>
Kristina
Faye) wrote:
You're awfully interested in getting this crossposted as many places
as possible, aren't you? We've gone from two to four.
>Kristina <Careless...@aol.comgoaway> wrote in message news:<67gpntgv5asknd1rr...@4ax.com>...
>> On 16 Aug 2001 15:37:40 -0700, faye...@my-deja.com (All Eyes On
>> Faye) wrote:
>>
>> > Yes, but did she go a-gainst her announced beliefs about
>> > motherhood ... like Madonna did? Madonna did exactly what
>> > she claimed she would *not* do.
>>
>> I think a lot of parents do..."oh, I'll never [fill in the
>> blank]". Then reality gets ahold of you, and realize
>> exactly why it is that so many people do whatever it was
>> you said you weren't going to do.
>>
>>
>Wonder if Madonna ever said "oh, I'll never have an abortion..."
>
>While you're busy making excuses for Madonna, I still think it's
>interesting to learn that Madonna considers that she has no "use of
>even being a mother" ... probably thinks she's unfit to even be a
>wife.
I guess I better keep up - I didn't realize I was 'making excuses for
Madonna'. I thought I was pointing out how ridiculous your claims
that "[X] statement = bad parenting" are. *shrug* Better luck next
time, I suppose.
>"On a scale of 1 - 10, I rate myself, ah ... ZERO, as a wife!"
>--Madonna
>> > If you pattern yourself after Madonna ... and go a-gainst
>> > your *intended* beliefs, then maybe you're right; only
>> > you would know if your own actions coincide with your
>> > beliefs.
>>
>> Pattern myself after Madonna...ROFL...hardly. My hubby
>> carrying the kids more had nothing to do with belief, and
>> everything to do with him being helpful and stronger than I
>> am.
>>
>>
>So ... even if you refused to hold your baby very often, you might be
>considered a more caring and devoted mother than Madonna is ...
>especially if you don't have a history of abortions, like Madonna
>does.
So we've gone from 'my husband carried the kids more than I did to
help me out' to '{I} refused to hold {my} baby'. That's funny - I
can't wait to see what's next. This whole evolution of statements
things has been a theme with you from the beginning of this
conversation, I've noticed. See, I *am* paying attention.
>> > That maybe the *reason* that she hired an "Army Of
>> > Assistants" to raise her children, after she publicly
>> > announced that she would not depend on outside help to
>> > raise her children, just might mean that she doesn't
>> > place the highest possible priority on "unplanned"
>> > children ... all of her other "unplanned" children
>> > managed to get themselves aborted; at least *these* were
>> > allowed to live. Oh well...
>> >
>>
>> You seem to know an awful lot of
>> intimate details of Madonna's life
>>
>>
>And the reason for your defense of Madonna's **no "use of even being a
>mother"** and her multiple abortions is based on ... your limited
>information about her?
And I defended her "multiple abortions" [there go those personal
details you're so privy to again] where, exactly?
>> >>> "I'm not going to be one of those mothers that need an
>> >>> army of assistants to raise my child, because what's
>> >>> the use of even being a mother if you can't even raise
>> >>> your own child?!" --Madonna, right before she hired "an
>> >>> army of assistants" to raise her child; admitting that
>> >>> she had no "use of even being a mother".
>> >>>
>>
>>>> I wonder if she makes that army practice marching, too...
>>>>
>>
>> > Yeah, marching to the store for diapers...
She really must be a bitch. I'd think she'd let them take a car, at
least.
>> So how many assistants make an "army" anyway?
>>
>>
>Yes, and every single one that she hired to raise Lourdes and Rocco
>... she first promised herself that she would never hire.
So I asked "how many?", and your answer is "yes". I'm sorry, I don't
know what number "yes" represents, exactly.
I promised myself something once. I promised that I would never sit
on a different couch than my husband to watch TV like my parents
did...but...oh no! I have! Eek! I wonder what deep meaning *that*
has!
>> >>Kristina
>> >>
>> >
>> ><sigh>
>>
>> What's the matter? Is finding reasons to dislike Madonna's
>> parenting wearing on you?
>>
>> Kristina
>>
>>
>"You seem to know an awful lot of intimate details of Madonna's life"
>--Kristina
>
>What's the matter Krissy,
Feel better now?
>are you running out of excuses for Madonna
>... is that why you need to bring your "Husband" and "Sister" into it;
"Husband" and "Sister"? I must have made them up, huh? Cool, I guess
this means I don't have to buy them presents for Christmas any more.
>is your "intimate" knowledge and information about Madonna running
>low? BTW, since you've used your sister as an excuse and as a defense
>for Madonna's actions ... did your sister's and Madonna's pregnancies
>have any other common similarities, besides wanting the baby to hurry
>up and get the Hell out of their bodies;
Unlike any other woman that's ever been pregnant - you know, most
pregnant women just *loooooove* those last couple of months of
pregnancy.
>was your sister also
>unmarried when she became pregnant?
Oh look...yet *another* evolution in the "Madonna is an evil useless
mother" argument. Maybe I should keep count.
><rolls @@ eyes>
Be careful, they might get stuck that way.
All Eyes On Faye
> On 17 Aug 2001 16:02:03 -0700, faye...@my-deja.com (All Eyes On
> Faye) wrote:
>
> You're awfully interested in getting this crossposted as
> many places as possible, aren't you? We've gone from two
> to four.
>
>
<spank>
> > Wonder if Madonna ever said "oh, I'll never have an
> > abortion..."
> >
> > While you're busy making excuses for Madonna, I still
> > think it's interesting to learn that Madonna considers
> > that she has no "use of even being a mother" ... probably
> > thinks she's unfit to even be a wife.
>
>
> I guess I better keep up - I didn't realize I was 'making
> excuses for Madonna'. I thought I was pointing out how
> ridiculous your claims that "[X] statement = bad parenting"
> are.
>
>
So, you think Madonna is a *good* parent? Yes, you "better keep up -"
a-Gain, what were your *points* that proved Madonna to have good
"parenting" skills ... with her admitted abortions, drinking while
pregnant, never holding Rocco and admitting that she's "never changed
a diaper"? Here's something else for you to "point out"/make excuses
for ... why did Madonna say that she *would* take Lourdes shopping,
but she refused to play with her?
"I don't do that PLAYGROUP SHIT!!" --Madonna, trying to explain *why*
the "Army Of Assistants" were hired to play with Lourdes
> *shrug* Better luck next time, I suppose.
>
>
Keep protecting Madonna's "bad parenting" skills, if you need to.
> > So ... even if you refused to hold your baby very often,
> > you might be considered a more caring and devoted mother
> > than Madonna is ... especially if you don't have a
> > history of abortions, like Madonna does.
>
>
> So we've gone from 'my husband carried the kids more than I
> did to help me out' to '{I} refused to hold {my} baby'.
>
>
No, I said "if you refused..."
So, since you're getting so defensive ... did you refuse?
> This whole evolution of statements things has been a theme
> with you from the beginning of this conversation, I've
> noticed.
>
>
Yes, I've noticed that when you first brought it up, in defense of
Madonna never holding Rocco, you made it sound like you *never* held
your baby in public, but now you've downplayed it to your husband just
holding "more often" than you.
BTW, you refused to comment about the "history of abortions, like
Madonna does" ... and I tried to hint that you probably *didn't* make
the same mistakes that Madonna did; you ignored the statement ... why?
> >> You seem to know an awful lot of
> >> intimate details of Madonna's life
> >>
> >>
> > And the reason for your defense of Madonna's **no "use of
> > even being a mother"** and her multiple abortions is
> > based on ... your limited information about her?
> >
>
> And I defended her "multiple abortions" [there go those
> personal details you're so privy to again]
>
>
A-Gain ... your protection of Madonna, and the need to defend her is
based on what ... your lack of knowledge?
>>> I wonder if she makes that army practice marching, too...
>>>
>
> > Yeah, marching to the store for diapers...
>
> She really must be a bitch.
>
>
Yes ... I'd bet that she has them trained real good, so they'll have
to deal with the greasied manure ... and she wouldn't have to try and
be a mother to her children.
> >> So how many assistants make an "army" anyway?
> >>
> >>
> > Yes, and every single one that she hired to raise Lourdes
> > and Rocco ... she first promised herself that she would
> > never hire.
>
>
> I'm sorry, I don't know what number "yes" represents,
> exactly.
>
>
Is that your best defense for Madonna ... or are you going to bring
your husband into it?
> I promised myself something once. I promised that I would
> never sit on a different couch than my husband to watch TV
> like my parents did...but...oh no! I have! Eek! I wonder
> what deep meaning *that* has!
>
>
Now you're bringing your parents in as part of *your* defense for
Madonna?
I'm more concerned about the "deep meaning" to why you ignored the
statement about the abortions that you may or may not have had...
> > "You seem to know an awful lot of intimate details of
> > Madonna's life" --Kristina
> >
>
> > What's the matter Krissy,
>
> Feel better now?
>
>
Feel like bringing more of your family members into the conversation
... to protect Madonna?
> > are you running out of excuses for Madonna ... is that
> > why you need to bring your "Husband" and "Sister" into
> > it;
>
> "Husband" and "Sister"? I must have made them up, huh?
>
>
You're denying that you used them ... to protect and defend Madonna's
actions?
<rolls @@ eyes>
> > BTW, since you've used your sister as an excuse and as a
> > defense for Madonna's actions ... did your sister's and
> > Madonna's pregnancies have any other common similarities,
> > besides wanting the baby to hurry up and get the Hell out
> > of their bodies;
>
>
> Unlike any other woman that's ever been pregnant - you
> know, most pregnant women just *loooooove* those last
> couple of months of pregnancy.
>
>
But like I said (guess you forgot) before, when you brought your
sister in to defend Madonna, it's a lot different if your sister was
just getting tired with her new "fat look" when she "wanted the baby
out", than to have someone like Madonna that drank during the
pregnancy, admitted that the baby was an "Unplanned" baby, wanted to
"party" ... and had a history of abortions; sure hope you can tell the
difference.
> > was your sister also unmarried when she became pregnant?
> >
>
> Oh look...yet *another* evolution in the "Madonna is an
> evil useless mother" argument.
>
>
Oh look...sounds like you're protecting Madonna's actions a-Gain.
"I'm not going to be one of those mothers that need an Army Of
Assistants to raise their child, because what's the USE of even being
a mother if you can't raise your own children?!" --Madonna, admitting
that she had no "USE of even being a mother" to her own children.
BTW, a-Gain, you sneaked away from another topic. So, was it just a
shack-job for your sister when she got herself all knocked-up?
> Maybe I should keep count.
>
>
For how many times you need to protect Madonna?
> > <rolls @@ eyes>
>
> Be careful, they might get stuck that way.
>
> Kristina
>
>
Be careful, if you keep standing on the same side that has a history
of abortions, drinks while pregnant, unwed pregnancies, that said both
of her living (non-aborted) children were "Unplanned (ooops)
Pregnancies", won't change diapers, refuses to "play" (but will go
shopping) with their own children ... you might make yourself out to
be a scunt.
Oh well...
Kristina
Faye) wrote:
>Kristina <Careless...@aol.comgoaway> wrote in message news:<4e9rntkbloto5bgc1...@4ax.com>...
>> On 17 Aug 2001 16:02:03 -0700, faye...@my-deja.com (All Eyes On
>> Faye) wrote:
>>
>> You're awfully interested in getting this crossposted as
>> many places as possible, aren't you? We've gone from two
>> to four.
>>
>>
>And you got real skeered and trimmed it back to one group...
That would be because I don't think alt.bible or alt.abortion really
cares about Madonna, frankly. Since I live here, I'll post here,
thanks for asking.
><spank>
>
>
>> > Wonder if Madonna ever said "oh, I'll never have an
>> > abortion..."
>> >
>> > While you're busy making excuses for Madonna, I still
>> > think it's interesting to learn that Madonna considers
>> > that she has no "use of even being a mother" ... probably
>> > thinks she's unfit to even be a wife.
>>
>>
>> I guess I better keep up - I didn't realize I was 'making
>> excuses for Madonna'. I thought I was pointing out how
>> ridiculous your claims that "[X] statement = bad parenting"
>> are.
>>
>>
>So, you think Madonna is a *good* parent?
This reminds me of the post where I asked you how many an "army of
assistants" is and you replied "yes".
>Yes, you "better keep up -"
Or???
>a-Gain, what were your *points* that proved Madonna to have good
>"parenting" skills ...
Again [you really should check the spelling of that word, btw] I'm not
trying to make *points* that Madonna is a good parent. You're the one
with the Madonna jones, honey, not me.
>with her admitted abortions, drinking while
>pregnant, never holding Rocco and admitting that she's "never changed
>a diaper"? Here's something else for you to "point out"/make excuses
>for ... why did Madonna say that she *would* take Lourdes shopping,
>but she refused to play with her?
I wouldn't know - why don't you ask her? [Hint: I don't really care,
either]
>"I don't do that PLAYGROUP SHIT!!" --Madonna, trying to explain *why*
>the "Army Of Assistants" were hired to play with Lourdes
I'm so impressed. You have now proven that Madonna is the true source
of all evil in the world.
Or maybe she did just fire you at some point and you "get back at her"
by flaming her all over Usenet.
>> *shrug* Better luck next time, I suppose.
>>
>>
>Keep protecting Madonna's "bad parenting" skills, if you need to.
Oh yes - it's all I live for.
>> > So ... even if you refused to hold your baby very often,
>> > you might be considered a more caring and devoted mother
>> > than Madonna is ... especially if you don't have a
>> > history of abortions, like Madonna does.
>>
>>
>> So we've gone from 'my husband carried the kids more than I
>> did to help me out' to '{I} refused to hold {my} baby'.
>>
>>
>No, I said "if you refused..."
>
>So, since you're getting so defensive ... did you refuse?
Uh oh, there I go not keeping up again. *tsk tsk* I didn't know I
was defensive. Thanks for filling me in, O Keeper of All Knowledgee.
>> This whole evolution of statements things has been a theme
>> with you from the beginning of this conversation, I've
>> noticed.
>>
>>
>Yes, I've noticed that when you first brought it up, in defense of
>Madonna never holding Rocco, you made it sound like you *never* held
>your baby in public, but now you've downplayed it to your husband just
>holding "more often" than you.
Ooops...you caught me. I better check my notes before I post, huh?
Just so I can keep all my lies straight, you understand.
>BTW, you refused to comment about the "history of abortions, like
>Madonna does" ... and I tried to hint that you probably *didn't* make
>the same mistakes that Madonna did; you ignored the statement ... why?
Lessee...because I wanted to? Um...how about...because I don't
know/don't care about Madonna and any abortions she may or may not
have had? Because I could give a shit about what you think about me?
Or...hrm...because I wanted to? Ooops, said that already, didn't I?
>> >> You seem to know an awful lot of
>> >> intimate details of Madonna's life
>> >>
>> >>
>> > And the reason for your defense of Madonna's **no "use of
>> > even being a mother"** and her multiple abortions is
>> > based on ... your limited information about her?
>> >
>>
>> And I defended her "multiple abortions" [there go those
>> personal details you're so privy to again]
>>
>>
>A-Gain ... your protection of Madonna, and the need to defend her is
>based on what ... your lack of knowledge?
There's that weird version of again, again...there really is a theme
to this, isn't there? Is there a test? Do I pass?
I'm still waiting to find out where I've defended her - I lost my
script and can't find it anywhere.
>>>> I wonder if she makes that army practice marching, too...
>>>>
>>
>> > Yeah, marching to the store for diapers...
>>
>> She really must be a bitch.
>>
>>
>Yes ... I'd bet that she has them trained real good, so they'll have
>to deal with the greasied manure ... and she wouldn't have to try and
>be a mother to her children.
>
>
>
>> >> So how many assistants make an "army" anyway?
>> >>
>> >>
>> > Yes, and every single one that she hired to raise Lourdes
>> > and Rocco ... she first promised herself that she would
>> > never hire.
>>
>>
>> I'm sorry, I don't know what number "yes" represents,
>> exactly.
>>
>>
>Is that your best defense for Madonna ... or are you going to bring
>your husband into it?
I'm still waiting for that number...
And I can't bring my "husband" [you forgot the quote marks this time,
silly] into it - he doesn't exist, remember?
>> I promised myself something once. I promised that I would
>> never sit on a different couch than my husband to watch TV
>> like my parents did...but...oh no! I have! Eek! I wonder
>> what deep meaning *that* has!
>>
>>
>Now you're bringing your parents in as part of *your* defense for
>Madonna?
Nope. They don't exist, either. We're all figments of your
imagination. You're really just talking to yourself, you know.
>I'm more concerned about the "deep meaning" to why you ignored the
>statement about the abortions that you may or may not have had...
And there it is, folks.
I can't believe you'd say such a thing! *sniffle* After all that
time we spent outside those houses of death together, just waiting for
those sluts to come in and have their precious infants murdered, so we
could videotape each and every one of them...you forgot me already!
I'm so disappointed.
>> > "You seem to know an awful lot of intimate details of
>> > Madonna's life" --Kristina
>> >
>>
>> > What's the matter Krissy,
>>
>> Feel better now?
>>
>>
>Feel like bringing more of your family members into the conversation
>... to protect Madonna?
I wonder how many more I could possibly cram into this post. I have
aunts, uncles, cousins...do you have a preference?
>> > are you running out of excuses for Madonna ... is that
>> > why you need to bring your "Husband" and "Sister" into
>> > it;
>>
>> "Husband" and "Sister"? I must have made them up, huh?
>>
>>
>You're denying that you used them ... to protect and defend Madonna's
>actions?
Oh, they don't care. I use them all the time. It's why my mom had my
sister, don't you know. To be my personal servant for life. That's
why I got married, too. There...truth in advertising. Aaah, feels
great.
><rolls @@ eyes>
I'm warning you...they're going to get stuck that way.
>> > BTW, since you've used your sister as an excuse and as a
>> > defense for Madonna's actions ... did your sister's and
>> > Madonna's pregnancies have any other common similarities,
>> > besides wanting the baby to hurry up and get the Hell out
>> > of their bodies;
>>
>>
>> Unlike any other woman that's ever been pregnant - you
>> know, most pregnant women just *loooooove* those last
>> couple of months of pregnancy.
>>
>>
>But like I said (guess you forgot)
Well I told you already I lost my notes.
> before, when you brought your
>sister in to defend Madonna, it's a lot different if your sister was
>just getting tired with her new "fat look" when she "wanted the baby
>out", than to have someone like Madonna that drank during the
>pregnancy, admitted that the baby was an "Unplanned" baby, wanted to
>"party" ... and had a history of abortions; sure hope you can tell the
>difference.
Blah blah blah blah....do you have that somewhere all written down so
you can just copy/paste, or do you really have to type it all out each
time? If you're typing it out, I must say, you're really
obsesse^H^H^H^H^Hdedicated, aren't you?
>> > was your sister also unmarried when she became pregnant?
>> >
>>
>> Oh look...yet *another* evolution in the "Madonna is an
>> evil useless mother" argument.
>>
>>
>Oh look...sounds like you're protecting Madonna's actions a-Gain.
Where *are* my notes, anyway? Maybe it's really a fayenatic to
English dictionary that I need. And I thought Gain was a laundry
detergent. Who knew?
>"I'm not going to be one of those mothers that need an Army Of
>Assistants to raise their child, because what's the USE of even being
>a mother if you can't raise your own children?!" --Madonna, admitting
>that she had no "USE of even being a mother" to her own children.
>
>BTW, a-Gain, you sneaked away from another topic. So, was it just a
>shack-job for your sister when she got herself all knocked-up?
I wouldn't know. I made her up, remember? Or did I make my mother
have her so I could use her as my servant? *shaking head* Silly ol'
me, there's just too many things to keep straight here.
>> Maybe I should keep count.
>>
>>
>For how many times you need to protect Madonna?
Purple.
Hey, if you can make "yes" stand for a number, I get one too.
>> > <rolls @@ eyes>
>>
>> Be careful, they might get stuck that way.
>>
>> Kristina
>>
>>
>Be careful, if you keep standing on the same side that has a history
>of abortions, drinks while pregnant, unwed pregnancies, that said both
>of her living (non-aborted) children were "Unplanned (ooops)
>Pregnancies", won't change diapers, refuses to "play" (but will go
>shopping) with their own children ... you might make yourself out to
>be a scunt.
I'm sorry, I can't find that word in the dictionary. Is it a number,
too?
>Oh well...
Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers.
All Eyes On Faye
> On 18 Aug 2001 05:50:13 -0700, faye...@my-deja.com (All Eyes On
> Faye) wrote:
>
> >Kristina <Careless...@aol.comgoaway> wrote in message news:<4e9rntkbloto5bgc1...@4ax.com>...
> >> On 17 Aug 2001 16:02:03 -0700, faye...@my-deja.com (All Eyes On
> >> Faye) wrote:
> >>
> >> You're awfully interested in getting this crossposted as > >> many places as possible, aren't you? We've gone from
> >> two to four.
> >>
> >>
> > And you got real skeered and trimmed it back to one
> > group...
>
> That would be because I don't think alt.bible or
> alt.abortion really cares about Madonna, frankly.
>
>
abortions?
> >> I guess I better keep up - I didn't realize I was
> >> 'making excuses for Madonna'. I thought I was pointing
> >> out how ridiculous your claims that "[X] statement = bad
> >> parenting" are.
> >>
> >>
> >So, you think Madonna is a *good* parent?
> >
>
> This reminds me of the post where I asked you how many an
> "army of assistants" is and you replied "yes".
>
>
This reminds me of all the times that you protect Madonna, and when I
ask you to explain you just change the subject ... or ignore the
question.
> > Yes, you "better keep up -"
>
> Or???
>
>
You're too stupid to remember that you said "I guess I better keep
up"? Why would you say that you better keep up ... then pretend that
you don't know your reason for saying it?
> > a-Gain, what were your *points* that proved Madonna to
> > have good "parenting" skills ...
>
> Again [you really should check the spelling of that word,
> btw] I'm not trying to make *points* that Madonna is a good
> parent. You're the one with the Madonna jones, honey, not
> me.
>
>
Then why have you been defending her and protecting her ... and why
did you say that it was wrong for me to question Madonna's parenting
skills? Also, why do you counter my facts and direct quotes about
Madonna with your "you seem to know a lot about Madonna" type reply
... instead of addressing the subject?
> > with her admitted abortions, drinking while
> > pregnant, never holding Rocco and admitting that she's
> > "never changed a diaper"? Here's something else for you
> > to "point out"/make excuses for ... why did Madonna say
> > that she *would* take Lourdes shopping,
> > but she refused to play with her?
> >
>
> I wouldn't know
>
>
Then why do you keep protecting and defending her on these issues?
Just wondering ... since you keep showing that your knowledge of
Madonna is limited, but you're still hanging around to defend, are you
really defending your beliefs in abortion, unwed pregnancies, nannies
to be the "mother" ... and drinking during pregnancy?
> [Hint: I don't really care, either]
>
>
<looking around>
You're replying because you don't care? Oh ... okay.
> > "I don't do that PLAYGROUP SHIT!!" --Madonna, trying to
> > explain *why* the "Army Of Assistants" were hired to play
> > with Lourdes
>
>
> I'm so impressed. You have now proven that Madonna is the
> true source of all evil in the world.
>
>
So ... by you refusing to see anything wrong with Madonna not playing
with Lourdes (but she will go shopping), it appears that you approve
of mothers not playing with their children. Thanks!
> > Keep protecting Madonna's "bad parenting" skills, if you
> > need to.
>
> Oh yes - it's all I live for.
>
>
>
No ... did you forget that you didn't "care"? Guess your not caring
won't stop you from pretending that you "don't care" when you make
your next reply.
<chortle>
> >> So we've gone from 'my husband carried the kids more
> >> than I did to help me out' to '{I} refused to hold {my}
> >> baby'.
> >>
> >>
> > No, I said "if you refused..."
> >
> > So, since you're getting so defensive ... did you refuse?
>
> Uh oh, there I go not keeping up again.
>
>
D'Oops, it looks like you're not taking your own advice about keeping
up. Neat! 8)
> Thanks for filling me in, O Keeper of All Knowledgee.
>
>
"Knowledgee"? D'Oh!
<giggle>
> >> This whole evolution of statements things has been a theme
> >> with you from the beginning of this conversation, I've
> >> noticed.
> >>
> >>
> > Yes, I've noticed that when you first brought it up, in
> > defense of Madonna never holding Rocco, you made it sound
> > like you *never* held your baby in public, but now you've
> > downplayed it to your husband just holding "more often"
> > than you.
>
> Ooops...you caught me.
>
>
<Spank>
> > BTW, you refused to comment about the "history of
> > abortions, like Madonna does" ... and I tried to hint
> > that you probably *didn't* make the same mistakes that
> > Madonna did; you ignored the statement ... why?
>
> Um...how about...because I don't know/don't care about
> Madonna and any abortions she may or may not have had?
>
>
That's why you keep defending her, and why you think it's wrong for me
to question her admitted abortions ... because you don't "care"?
> Because I could give a shit about what you think about me?
>
>
So, your reason for defending Madonna and yourself, and for explaining
yourself to me ... is?
> > A-Gain ... your protection of Madonna, and the need to
> > defend her is based on what ... your lack of knowledge?
> >
>
> There's that weird version of again, again...there really
> is a theme to this, isn't there? Is there a test? Do I
> pass?
>
>
A-gain, it appears that your lack of knowledge has forced you to avoid
the question ... Thanks! 8)
> I'm still waiting to find out where I've defended her - I
> lost my script and can't find it anywhere.
>
>
Because every single time I mention something about her, you defend
and never seem to find anything wrong with abortions, drinking while
pregnant, etc... So, if you're not defending Madonna, are you
defending yourself? Oh, that's right ... you "don't care".
> > Is that your best defense for Madonna ... or are you
> > going to bring your husband into it?
>
> I'm still waiting for that number...
>
>
Of how many times you've been forced to explain yourself ... or how
many times you've defended something that you claim to "not care"
about?
> And I can't bring my "husband" [you forgot the quote marks
> this time, silly] into it - he doesn't exist, remember?
>
>
You're pretending that you never said "husband"? BTW, why would you
need to pretend that your husband doesn't exist ... just because I
*quoted* your *use* of the word?
> > Now you're bringing your parents in as part of *your*
> > defense for Madonna?
> >
>
> Nope. They don't exist, either. We're all figments of
> your imagination. You're really just talking to yourself,
> you know.
>
>
And you're pretending that you "don't care" even if you claim to "live
here", right?
<LMAO>
> > I'm more concerned about the "deep meaning" to why you
> > ignored the statement about the abortions that you may or
> > may not have had...
>
> And there it is, folks.
>
>
That your lack of knowledge and your not caring, forced you to defend
and make more excuses?
> >>> are you running out of excuses for Madonna ... is that
> >>> why you need to bring your "Husband" and "Sister" into
> >>> it;
> >>
> >> "Husband" and "Sister"? I must have made them up, huh?
> >>
> >>
> > You're denying that you used them ... to protect and
> > defend Madonna's actions?
>
>
> Oh, they don't care.
>
>
And you "don't care" ... oh well.
> >> Unlike any other woman that's ever been pregnant - you
> >> know, most pregnant women just *loooooove* those last
> >> couple of months of pregnancy.
> >>
> >>
> >But like I said (guess you forgot)
>
> Well I told you already I lost my notes.
>
>
You also said that you've been keeping up.
> Where *are* my notes, anyway?
>
>
Don't worry; you "don't care" about them.
> > BTW, a-Gain, you sneaked away from another topic. So, was
> > it just a shack-job for your sister when she got herself
> > all knocked-up?
> >
>
> I wouldn't know.
>
>
Then why do you keep using your sister's pregnancy as your defense?
> I made her up, remember?
>
>
You're pretending that you never said "sister"? BTW, why would you
need to pretend that your sister doesn't exist ... just because I
*quoted* your *use* of the word?
> >> > <rolls @@ eyes>
> >>
> >> Be careful, they might get stuck that way.
> >>
> >> Kristina
> >>
> >>
> > Be careful, if you keep standing on the same side that
> > has a history of abortions, drinks while pregnant, unwed
> > pregnancies, that said both of her living (non-aborted)
> > children were "Unplanned (ooops) Pregnancies", won't
> > change diapers, refuses to "play" (but will go shopping)
> > with their own children ... you might make yourself out
> > to be a scunt.
> >
>
> I'm sorry, I can't find that word in the dictionary.
>
>
That's okay, I'll just take your refusal to deny that you're any of
the above ... as your admission to being all of the above.
<cachinnating>
CoCo loves life sooooooo much! :
>
> And why does it matter whether it was serious or
> joking?
>
You don't see a difference between a joke and being serious?
Oh my goodness...
> My sister *meant* it when she said it - she's also a
> very good mother.
>
We're not talking about your sister...but since you brought her into
this, does Madonna remind you of your sister?
And how do you *know* [since you said "also"] that Madonna is a "very
good mother"?
[pointing at bicep]
CoCo loves life sooooooo much! :
>
> Pattern myself after Madonna...ROFL...hardly.
>
So, you're not a "great mother" like Madonna and your sister?
> ><sigh>
> >
>
> What's the matter? Is finding reasons to dislike
> Madonna's parenting wearing on you?
>
> Kristina
>
You seem to be here to defend Madonna [the parent] and you consider
her and your sister to be *great mothers* [you said also]...so, what
are some of your reasons for liking Madonna [the parent]?
[kissing left bicep]
CoCo loves life sooooooo much! :
>
> I guess I better keep up - I didn't realize I was
> 'making excuses for Madonna'. I thought I was
> pointing out how ridiculous your claims that "[X]
> statement = bad parenting" are.
>
You claim [defend] that [X] statements about Madonna = "Great Mother"
...just like your sister [you said also] ;)
> So we've gone from 'my husband carried the kids more
> than I did
>
That's not what you said in your original statement. You said that he
"always carried the kids" ...guess that means that you *never* carried
the kids...
[knocking on bicep]
CoCo loves life sooooooo much! :
>
> I'm not trying to make *points* that Madonna is a
> good parent.
>
You're not?
You said that Madonna and your sister were "great mothers" [you said
"also"] ;)
To make that statement, you need reasons...what are they?
> I can't believe you'd say such a thing! *sniffle*
> After all that time we spent outside those houses of
> death together, just waiting for those sluts to come
> in and have their precious infants murdered, so we
> could videotape each and every one of them...you
> forgot me already!
> I'm so disappointed.
>
Are you trying to be sarcastic? You must think that Madonna's
abortions are a laughing matter. Is that why you think Madonna is such
a "great mother", like your sister?
CoCo loves life sooooooo much! :
>
>From: Kristina Careless...@aol.comeandgo
>
>On 19 Aug 2001 06:15:37 -0700, letemk...@leesmail.com (CoCo loves
>life sooooooo much! :) wrote:
>
>>Are you trying to be sarcastic?
>>
>
>I would never do such a thing.
>
>Kristina
>
Kristina, in her defense of Madonna as a "great mother," is forced to
lie, of course. ;)
You're sure not being honest. So, if it's not sarcasm, what is it?
[pointing at bicep]
......
>From: Kristina Careless...@aol.comeandgo
>
> I can't believe you'd say such a thing! *sniffle*
> After all that time we spent outside those houses of
> death together, just waiting for those sluts to come
> in and have their precious infants murdered, so we
> could videotape each and every one of them...you
> forgot me already!
> I'm so disappointed.
>
Are you trying to be sarcastic?
CoCo loves life sooooooo much! :
>
>From: Kristina Careless...@aol.comeandgo
>
>On 19 Aug 2001 05:58:59 -0700, letemk...@leesmail.com (CoCo loves
>life sooooooo much! :) wrote:
>
>>That's not what you said in your original statement. You said that he
>>"always carried the kids" ...guess that means that you *never* carried
>>the kids...
>
>You're right, of course.
>
I know...facts are facts. ;)
>We would go out - all 5 of us. He'd have a
>kid in each arm, and one clinging on to each leg, too. I made him
>carry the diaper bags and my purse around his neck just because I
>could. Sometimes I'd make him carry me piggyback at the same time.
>
>We didn't march, though.
>
You got caught lying, now you're just getting defensive...thanks.
[knocking on bicep]
CoCo loves life sooooooo much! :
>
>From: Kristina Careless...@aol.comeandgo
>
>On 19 Aug 2001 05:32:11 -0700, letemk...@leesmail.com (CoCo loves
>life sooooooo much! :) wrote:
>
>*snip*
>
[pointing at bicep]
>I already had this conversation with one of your personalities,
>darlin'. If you need a refresher, just read it again.
>
>Kristina
>
I never saw your answer...fact. And I don't believe that you actually
gave a direct answer, the first time. ;)
So...
*******
From: letemk...@leesmail.com (CoCo loves life sooooooo much! :)
Newsgroups: alt.gossip.celebrities, alt.fan.madonna
Date: 19 Aug 2001 05:32:11 -0700
Kristina <Careless...@aol.comgoaway> wrote in message news:<ssaont0lhvleaddsi...@4ax.com>...
>
> And why does it matter whether it was serious or
> joking?
>
You don't see a difference between a joke and being serious?
Oh my goodness...
> My sister *meant* it when she said it - she's also a
> very good mother.
>
We're not talking about your sister...but since you brought her into
this, does Madonna remind you of your sister?
And how do you *know* [since you said "also"] that Madonna is a "very
good mother"?
[pointing at bicep]
*******
[I'm waiting]
CoCo loves life sooooooo much! :
>
>From: Kristina Careless...@aol.comeandgo
>
>On 19 Aug 2001 14:21:40 -0700, letemk...@leesmail.com (CoCo loves
>life sooooooo much! :) wrote:
>
>> So, if it's not sarcasm, what is it?
>>
>It's a light romantic comedy with just a touch of pathos.
>
>Kristina
>
You think abortions are *romantic*? No wonder you say that Madonna is
a great mother; w/ reasoning like that.
CoCo loves life sooooooo much! :
>
>From: Kristina Careless...@aol.comeandgo
>
>On 19 Aug 2001 14:27:33 -0700, letemk...@leesmail.com (CoCo loves
>life sooooooo much! :) wrote:
>
>>You got caught lying, now you're just getting defensive...
>
>BTW - I'm not Howdy Doody. I'm Little Lulu.
>
>Kristina
>
Great, you're getting completely away from trying to defend Madonna...thanks. ;)
[pointing at bicep]
CoCo loves life sooooooo much! :
>
>From: Kristina Careless...@aol.comeandgo
>
>On 19 Aug 2001 14:38:10 -0700, letemk...@leesmail.com (CoCo loves
>life sooooooo much! :) wrote:
>
>>[I'm waiting]
>
>If you're waiting for me to take this seriously, you're going to be
>waiting a long time.
>
Sounds like you're feeling super-stupid for saying that Madonna was a
"great mother" [you said "also"]...and for *trying* to defend Madonna
[the parent] on this thread. I knew that you would..thanks.
[kissing left bicep]
CoCo loves life sooooooo much! :
>
>From: Kristina Careless...@aol.comeandgo
>
>On 19 Aug 2001 14:48:10 -0700, letemk...@leesmail.com (CoCo loves
>life sooooooo much! :) wrote:
>
>>You think abortions are *romantic*? No wonder you say that Madonna is
>>a great mother; w/ reasoning like that.
>
>Whooo boy, you really are a one note song.
>
>Kristina <bored>
>
Giving up, so soon? ;)
[knocking on bicep]
All Eyes On Faye
> On Fri, 03 Aug 2001 19:59:07 -0500,
> eagle1 <eag...@grapevine.net> wrote:
> > Craig Chilton <xana...@home.com> wrote:
> >> "Jane Doe" <janed...@altavista.com> wrote:
> >>> Craig Chilton <xana...@home.com> wrote:
> >>>> janed...@altavista.com wrote:
> >>>>> Craig Chilton <xana...@home.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> janed...@altavista.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> Mark Sebree <seb...@fortwayne.infi.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> Terry says that his job is to teach, as evidenced by the passage in
> >>>>>>>> Matthew 28 that he keeps tossing around as his authority. Well first,
> >>>>>>>> he better learn how to teach, because he is not doing it. All he is
> >>>>>>>> doing is trying to shove doctrine down our throats.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Christ's teaching had to do with love and compassion for all people...
>
> >>>>>>> Did they?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 20
> >>>>>>> I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel,
> >>>>>>> who calls herself a prophetess. By her teaching she misleads
> >>>>>>> my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food
> >>>>>>> sacrificed to idols.
> >>>>>>> 21
> >>>>>>> I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is
> >>>>>>> unwilling.
> >>>>>>> 22
> >>>>>>> So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those
> >>>>>>> who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they
> >>>>>>> repent of her ways.
> >>>>>>> 23
> >>>>>>> I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know
> >>>>>>> that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay
> >>>>>>> each of you according to your deeds.
>
> >>>>>> "Vengeance is MINE, sayeth the Lord."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> But he appointed NO ONE to act as His GESTAPO. The Bible
> >>>>>> authorizes NO ONE to be ENFORCERS of its precepts upon society
> >>>>>> at large.
>
> >>>>> But that's not what you said. Your statement was:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> " Christ's teaching had to do with love and compassion for all
> >>>>> people.."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And wasn't it God who told the Israelites to kill the Canaanites
> >>>>> rather than inhabit the same land with them?
>
> >>>> So NOW we're supposed to hunt down all surviving "Canaanites"
> >>>> and kill them?
>
> >>> No. You said Christ's teaching had to do with love and compassion for
> >>> all people. There are quite a number of instances in the Bible where
> >>> love and compassion were not indicated. The issue with the Canannites
> >>> was one of them.
>
> >> Uh-huh. And what did JESUS have to do with that?
>
> >>>> If we use YOUR logic, then we can say that God tells us
> >>>> that we should now... TODAY... be killing babies that have
> >>>> been BORN, simply because He ordered that done in *other*
> >>>> UNIQUE and SPECIFIC instances, such as these:
> >>>>
> >>>> Isaiah 13:16 -- Their children also shall be dashed to
> >>>> pieces before their eyes...
> >>>>
> >>>> 1 Samuel 15:3 -- ...Do not spare them; put to death men
> >>>> and women, children and infants...
> >>>>
> >>>> Hosea 13:16 -- ...they shall fall by the sword: their infants
> >>>> shall be dashed in pieces, and their
> >>>> women with child shall be ripped up.
> >>>>
> >>>> The above *are* commands, and each passage is in
> >>>> context with the rest of the portion from which it was taken.
>
> >>> Commands for a particular people at a particular time. Certainly
> >>> instances where God's "love and compassion" did not extend to "all"
> >>> people.
>
> >> Which JESUS never did.
>
> >>>> It would be ludicrous infer from such instances that anyone today
> >>>> has ANY authority to ENFORCE biblical precepts upon society in
> >>>> general.
>
> >>> All Christians have authority to vote with their conscience.
>
> >> Voting and actively promoting repression are two different things.
>
> >>>> As for Jesus -- He DID clearly command His followers to show
> >>>> love and compassion to their neighbors.
>
> >>> Yes, and sometimes there's a conflict such as in the issue of
> >>> abortion.
>
> >> NO conflict whatsoever. The Bible says NOT ONE WORD against,
> >> or even about abortion. And abortion is an extremely beneficial
> >> remedy. It harmleesly and immediately puts millions of women's lives
> >> back on track, and RESTORES their well-being and full range of future
> >> opportunities to PRE-ill-timed-pregnancy levels. It UNDOES the damage
> >> done by the ill-timed pregnancy.
> >>
> >> If a person does ANYTHING that would DENY this valuable
> >> human right to ANY woman, he/she is in direct violation of Jesus'
> >> Prime Directive. TRASHING one's neighbor, and imposing immense
> >> hardship upon her by FORCING 9 months of gestation upon her
> >> against her will, is the OPPOSITE of showing love and compassion
> >> to her.
>
> > I agree with you 100 %, ...
>
> No, you don't, or you wouldn't be such an ignoramus, as you've
> proven in other posts. Since everything I present in this topic is
> FACT-based. And you don't know the first thing about facts. You're a
> typical bigot, and I haven't seen a bigot YET that has enough brains
> to recognize facts.
>
> > ...and so I think we should ok abortion for those which are
> > BORN as well, SO LET US BEGIN WITH YOU ! HE said "Thou
> > shalt not murder; murder is premeditated killing. But alas, YOU
> > can have it your way...
>
> Yep. You're just a clueless and mindless, pathetic bigot. But
> so are most of the others of your hateful ilk, in the small and
> malcontented Anti-Choice microcosm of control-freaks. A loser.
>
> >> No -- there is NO conflict whatsoever.
> >>
> >> Roe vs. Wade was possibly the MOST sensible and
> >> compasionate decision ever made by the U.S. Supreme Court.
>
> AND... in their intelligence (when they still knew how to
> display that, back in 1973), they HUGELY benefitted ALL
> of America. (See sig.) ---
>
> -- Craig Chilton xana...@home.com
>
> ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
>
> PREFACE to This SIG -- The following 8/27/2000 ABC News story...
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
> Record Drop in Violent Crime
>
> W A S H I N G T O N, Aug. 27 -- Violent crime dropped
> for the sixth straight year in 1999, taking overall crime rates to
> their lowest in 27 years, the U.S. Justice Department said today.
> The Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics said the total
> number of non-lethal violent crimes, which includes rape,
> robbery and assault, fell by more than 10 percent in 1999 from
> the year before, a record one-year drop, according to the
> bureau's National Crime Victimization Survey.
>
> Today's report confirmed the overall drop in crime
> across the country has continued.
>
> Property crime also fell 9 percent, led by a drop in
> burglaries and household thefts, continuing its downward
> trend from 1974.
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
> ABORTION'S GREAT FRINGE BENEFIT!
>
> WHY is America doing so fabulously well, lately, with an unheard-of
> economy? There are MANY interacting factors. But one factor that
> CAN'T HURT is THIS one: In tens of millions of cases over the last
> 27 years, children have NOT been born into hardship in such great
> numbers as would have occurred without Roe vs. Wade, and a higher
> percentage of children HAVE been born into loving, and stable homes.
> That cannot have helped but to have been of HUGE benefit to society,
> in terms of productivity and as a major contributor to the steeply-
> declining crime rate, as more and more of those WANTED children (who
> replaced the UNwanted ones who would otherwise have been born)
> have been reaching adulthood and entering the workforce. Can I
> PROVE that? No. I don't know how we could generate such
> statistics. But common sense tells us that this MUST be so. To what
> degree, we don't know. But ANY degree is worthwhile and beneficial.
>
> God never gave the SLIGHTEST indication that abortion was wrong,
> or that we couldn't make such reproductive decisions. He DID give us
> brains, though, presumably with some expectation that we would use
> them intelligently within the parameters that He DID establish for us.
>
> We've been doing just that. And there's no reason to change it.
> ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
>
> Kristina <Careless...@aol.comgoaway> wrote in message news:<3oatnt47trd5klr9c...@4ax.com>...
> >
> > I'm not trying to make *points* that Madonna is a
> > good parent.
> >
>
> You're not?
>
> You said that Madonna and your sister were "great mothers"
> [you said "also"] ;)
>
> To make that statement, you need reasons...what are they?
>
> > I can't believe you'd say such a thing! *sniffle*
> > After all that time we spent outside those houses of
> > death together, just waiting for those sluts to come
> > in and have their precious infants murdered, so we
> > could videotape each and every one of them...you
> > forgot me already!
> > I'm so disappointed.
> >
>
>
> Are you trying to be sarcastic? You must think that
> Madonna's abortions are a laughing matter. Is that why you
> think Madonna is such a "great mother", like your sister?
>
>
Kristina just appears to be *lost* on a thread that she claims to not
"care about", making excuses; caring.
All Eyes On Faye
> On Sat, 18 Aug 2001 20:25:21 -0500, "Jeff ®\(¤§¤\)®"
> <pitsaregreatREMOVE¤TH...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> >"stillsunny" <sun...@sccoast.net> wrote in message
> >news:2e9qntg6k4tpeq15j...@4ax.com...
> >> On Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:23:56 -0500, "Jeff®¤\(accept no
> >> substitutions\)¤" <pitsaregreatREMOVE¤TH...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"vkd" <vk...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:cdQe7.16049$L9.42...@news1.rdc1.md.home.com...
> >> >> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ew...@lexideb.athghost7038suus.net> wrote
> in
> >> >> message news:slrn9nn64c...@lexideb.athghost7038suus.net...
> >> >> > >> And these are relevant to the abortion debate precisely why?
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >Lack of legal representation (if any are necessary at all) for a
> fetus.
> The
> >> >> > >arguments are very similar. What is a fetus, does it have rights
> (and
> not
> >> >> > >really religious rights but rather legal rights).
> >> >> >
> >> >> > OK, I'll ask you, then. Does a z/e/f have any rights? Why?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Bear in mind that one reason I snipped the Bible passages is
> >> >> > because of Amendment I of the U.S. Constitution.
> >> >>
> >> >> As I understand, z/e/f doesn't have any legal rights until the end of
> the
> >> >> second trimester. I think that is what the ruling of Roe v Wade
> emplies. A
> >> >> z/e/f is not a fully formed person and therefore, in my opinion, can't
> be
> >> >> equated to one. But there does come a period after which it is a
> distinct
> >> >> individual. After that time it should, in my opinion, have some rights.
> I
> >> >> think the end of the second trimester is as good a mark as any.
> >> >
> >> >But even at the 2nd trimester its not fully human... Its only fully
> human
> >> >after its born.
> >> >
> >> >Jeff
> >>
> >> Jeff, please explain that. That sentence is driving me crazy.
> >>
> >> A z/e/f *is* fully human from the moment of conception. That's not
> >> the same as saying it's fully a citizen, or fully sentient, or
> >> anything else. But it is a unique genetic entity, in the *first*
> >> stages of what it means to be human. It doesn't become *more* human
> >> as it evolves, nor *less* human as it declines with age. It simply
> >> becomes more developed, or less sentient.
> >
> >Alright, let me start by explaining that when I say someone is fully human I
> >mean someone with human value. I know that didn't help but bear with me.
> >There's something that gives US value that say, an ant doesn't have. Its
> >not our DNA, or our cells or anything. Its our intelligence, our sentience
> >and conciousness. A brain-dead human IMO isn't fully human anymore. Sure,
> >they have the DNA of a human being, being they don't have what makes us
> >fully human, what gives us value, hence they're incomplete.
>
> I do understand what you're saying. Do you understand that by
> determining in that way, at least at this level of scientific
> knowledge, still renders any judgement arbitrary as to what's "fully"
> human and what isn't?
>
> "Values" are arbitrary as well, and only relevant in the context of
> the human perspective. (We've had this discussion before, with
> respect to dogs, remember?). It is not that one thing or other is
> inherently more or less valuable in the overall scheme of the
> universe; it's that it's more or less valuable in relationship to
> *us*, the ones assigning the value.
>
> If you can follow this train of thought, I'll tell you why I resist
> your delineation. To say that something (someone) does or doesn't
> have enough "value" to be considered human is vastly different than
> starting from a proposition that, to humans, *all* humans have value.
> In the first instance, the logical extension of that thought can lead
> to *any* person being considered valueless based on majority opinion,
> and therefore not deserving of equal protection under the law,
> irrespective of their status as outside a womb somewhere. The second,
> that all humans have value, leaves room to question and debate what is
> practical, reasonable, and fair to *all* the humans involved in the
> process. In essence, basing our thinking on what's best for *all*
> humans, what will do the least harm, then we can talk about when
> abortion may or may not be reasonable and a lesser harm than carrying
> to term; what purpose two cells in a petri dish have; whether a man
> who assaults a nine months pregnant woman and kills the fetus should
> be tried for the wrongful taking of a human life; when it is ethical
> and moral to allow a suffering person at the other end of the spectrum
> to be assisted in ending their existence; that sort of thing. Those
> are all necessary questions, and we don't serve the questions nor
> ourselves well when we start with the premise that a human isn't a
> human until we say it is.
>
> >> Otherwise, we're just arbitrarily picking a point where a human
> >> becomes a human,
>
> >That's my problem with saying a second trimester fetus is a full person with
> >protections under the law. My immediate response is "on what grounds?!"
>
> Because at some point mid second trimester, it exhibits all the
> qualities you've associated with being fully human, with the exception
> of actually being outside the womb. It's capable of surviving (with
> some assistance); it demonstrates ability to feel pain (and,
> presumably, pleasure); and to learn (in a very basic way). It doesn't
> just get there overnight, and though it's convenient to divide a
> pregnancy into threes, it's a continual progression and development.
>
> >> which is vastly different than trying to choose a
> >> reasonable point where that evolving human merits legal
> >> consideration/rights. And you yourself have said before that a fetus
> >> that *can* be delivered and live, if unwanted, *should* be delivered
> >> and live.
>
> >Yep.
>
> >> Which means you've already conceded some support to the
> >> notion that it has some rights incrimentally increasing as it grows.
> >
> >Consider this: A fetus at a certain point (the 3rd trimester) reaches a
> >point where it has the potential for being fully human, if it is born alive.
> >That potential is worth something. Logically, I'm not sure why, come to
> >think of it... But I'll accept that it does. Well, here's an idea of why
> >it might: its wrong to even kill an ant for no reason. Life has value even
> >if it isn't fully human. Anyway, if we attempt to deliver it alive (ableit
> >early) we have BOTH satisfied the mother's rights to her body, and another
> >life's rights to not be killed for no reason (before, it would have died
> >because of its inability to survive and because the mother had a right to
> >her own body. At this point both are more or less satisfied).
>
> Again, I understand, but you've still made it arbitrary, because the
> age of viability of a fetus keeps getting pushed back with increasing
> technology. By making it arbitrary, you've increased the potential
> for those which you presumably *would* consider fully human to be
> aborted (while capable of living, feeling pain, and learning).
>
> By saying that "live has value," you concede that a z/e/f has value.
> By it exhibiting a distinct genetic individuality, that value is
> necessarily human.
> The trouble with the approach, although I understand why you use it,
> is that it's logically inconsistent.
>
> Sunny
>
> >Did that make any sense?
> >
> >Jeff
> >
> >>
> >> Sunny
but it sure hasn't stopped her from defending Madonna's abortions, her
"unplanned" (Rocco and Lourdes) pregnancies and also Madonna's
drinking while pregnant, she probably won't give you any "reasons".
Kristina is probably just defending her *own* mistakes ... instead of
actually defending Madonna, since her knowledge of Madonna seems to be
so limited.
Sarah
what Madonna does or doesnt do? None of you know shit about her
anyway; just cuz she gets written about in supermarket tabloids, you
think you know something. Blah blah blah blah blah.
All Eyes On Faye
>
> OMG I cant believe this stupid post.
>
>
> Who in hell gives a damn about what Madonna does or doesnt
> do?
>
>
You ... or you wouldn't have replied?
> None of you know shit about her anyway
>
>
You don't know that, unless you're Madonna...
> ; just cuz she gets written about in supermarket tabloids,
>
>
No, except for the title of the thread, I've been referring to *real*
books, film, and quotes directly from her 'ermied mouth; all that she
refuses to deny. If you can prove that ... what Madonna refuses to
deny ... *isn't* true, we'll wait right here for your proof.
> you think you know something. Blah blah blah blah blah.
>
>
Are you proving that you're unknowing, or that you need for all of it
to be untrue; why did you *arrive* ... did you think Madonna and her
low morals needed your protection?
Son of a Preacher Man
>
>From: wulf...@hotmail.com (Sarah)
>
>Who in hell gives a damn about
>what Madonna does or doesnt do?
>
>
"Who in hell gives a damn about what Madonna does or doesnt do?" --Sarah
caring; pretending to not care
>> Group: news:alt.fan.madonna
>>
> JR_C...@webtv.net (PORFie JR) wrote:
>
>
> Hmm why do I look so queer?
>
>
> http://community-2.webtv.net/JR_CO_22/ABOUTME/media/captureD33.jpg
>
>
Bigolhomo
Sarah <wulf...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:df7a8b8e.01081...@posting.google.com...
My favorite part is when Madonna is accused of drinking while pregnant.
Apparently, someone saw the "Music" video and decided there must have been
real booze in the glass she drank out of. Too funny. Especially since
Madonna is not much of a drinker in real life anyway, I can't imagine she
would start to booze it up once she became pregnant.
Bigolhomo
All Eyes On Faye
From: "Bigolhomo" readyr...@hotmail.com
> My favorite part is when Madonna is accused of drinking while pregnant.
>
>
You know that she didn't, or are you just allowing your lack of
knowledge to *guess* your way through your response?
> Apparently, someone saw the "Music" video and decided there must have been
> real booze in the glass she drank out of.
>
>
You *know* it wasn't real, or are you just guessing? Now, here's "My
favorite part" ... it's when some "Bigolhomo" flops on a thread and
fluffs his way throught it and *thinking* that he's got it figured
out; actual knowledge not needed. BTW, thweer, no ... I wasn't talkin'
'bout the "Music" video, I was referring to the fact that she admitted
to drinking Guinness during her pregnancy. Thanks for not allowing
your non-knowledge of the situation to stop you from rolling in and
pretending that you had it all figured out.
> I can't imagine she would start to booze it up once she became pregnant.
>
>
But that didn't stop you from thinking/needing for it to not be true,
thanks! 8)
> Bigolhomo
>
>
Translation: Madonna's newest Knight In 'erming Armor
M Aurelius SPQR
come for being a no class white trash
skank. That's too bad because she can sing.
Jáy
"All Eyes On Faye" <faye...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:4b4da220.01082...@posting.google.com...
AnthonyM1970
White trash with a phoney British accent.
Sarah
CELEBRITY for chrissakes. You MORONS. You act like you know anything
at all about her. How full of yourselfs can you get?
Hiyachick
You're new here, aren't you? :)
All Eyes On Faye
>
> Ok I cant believe I have to say this:
>
>
really don't care *how* you get knocked-up, even if you're "raped" ...
it's still kew-L?
> how lame can you get?
>
>
How whorishy can you get?
> She is a CELEBRITY for chrissakes.
>
>
Did you just have a stunning revelation?
> You MORONS.
>
>
"I don't CARE how I get that baby inside of me ... even if it's RAPE!"
--Sarah, whorishy moron
> You act like you know anything at all about her. How full
> of yourselfs can you get?
>
>
No, not all, just what she *admits* to in text and on film ... but
even if you know much less about her than we do, you still feel like
you need to protect her. Oh well...
All Eyes On Faye
>
>
That's your best excuse for Madonna admitting to having never changed
a diaper?
> This is "stunning" indeed.
>
>
That you're too stupid to quote? No, from you, it's not stunning.
"I don't CARE how I get that baby inside of me ... even if it's RAPE!"
--Sarah, a desperate scrunt
All Eyes On Faye
> >Who in hell gives a damn about
> >what Madonna does or doesnt do?
>
>
>
You've watched her ... or really, are you just *needing* for her
admission to having "never changed a diaper" to not be true?
> For about 2 hourz before everyshow, NOONE is allowed in her
> room while she gitz her hair done but Lourdes, Rocco &
> Guy!!
> kyle.
>
>
You **really** think that Madonna is going to get up out of her chair,
and play with Rocco's manure ... when Guy is in the same room???
<LMAO>
All Eyes On Faye
ci...@aol.com (kyle.)
>> You've watched her ...
>>
>
> I didn't watch her change a diaper!
>
>
That stands to reason, since Madonna said she's "never changed a
diaper".
> But I did watch her with her children & she wuz just like
> any normal mother
> kyle.
>
>
You mean like "any normal mother" that's never changed a diaper and
refuses to "play" with Lourdes because it's "boring" and admitted that
both Rocco and Lourdes were nothing more than just "unplanned
pregnancies"; like "any normal mother" that had her *other* "unplanned
pregnancies" flushed down the crapper by admitting to having (at
least) 3 abortions?
<sigh>
-----
RJRSJ1
>refuses to "play" with Lourdes because it's "boring" and admitted that
>both Rocco and Lourdes were nothing more than just "unplanned
>pregnancies
Lourdes was unplanned??? I could have sworn that I remember reading all over
the place that Madonna specifically sought out a Carlos Leon type beforehand to
father her child because she wanted her to have an ethnic look?
All Eyes On Faye
>
> >You mean like "any normal mother" that's never changed a diaper and
> >refuses to "play" with Lourdes because
>
> wouldn't let them gO!!
>
>
"You seem annoyed" --Kyle
Maybe it erases some of her guilt for saying that playing with Lourdes
is "boring" and that she doesn't "do that playgroup SHIT" ... or maybe
for her announcing to the world that Lourdes and Rocco were unplanned?
Why are you screaming ... and why do you keep snipping Madonna's
admitted (at least 3) abortions?
BTW, I haven't seen you this frothied and "annoyed" ... since you
defended "Dirk's Erection" in alt.tv.survivor
<cachinnating>
Dwb0102
>refuses to "play" with Lourdes because it's "boring" and admitted that
>both Rocco and Lourdes were nothing more than just "unplanned
>pregnancies"; like "any normal mother" that had her *other* "unplanned
>pregnancies" flushed down the crapper by admitting to having (at
>least) 3 abortions?
where did you find all this information?
CoCo loves life sooooooo much! :
> indeed.
>
You seem pretty proud of the fact that Madonna has such little
control, of her personal life, that she's forced to destroy her
babies...and even admit to the world that Lourdes and Rocco were both
unplanned.
[moment of silence for Madonna's shredded Catch-Colts]
BTW, not too many "human" mothers can say that they've never changed
their babies diapers, I fear.
[rolls eyes]
All Eyes On Faye
>From: rjr...@aol.comzyxqyzx (RJRSJ1)
AOL Member Name: "Russell and Joanna"
>Date: 21 Aug 2001 18:22:31 GMT
>Message-ID: <20010821142231...@mb-co.aol.com>
>
>
>
>>You mean like "any normal mother" that's never changed a diaper and
>>refuses to "play" with Lourdes because it's "boring" and admitted
that
>>both Rocco and Lourdes were nothing more than just "unplanned
>>pregnancies
>
>Lourdes was unplanned???
>
>
How does that shock you ... when she's needed/elected to abort soooo
many "unplanned" **Oooops** in the past? BTW, she said Rocco was also
"unplanned".
> I could have sworn that I remember reading all over the place that Madonna
> specifically sought out a Carlos Leon type beforehand to
> father her child because she wanted her to have an ethnic look?
>
>
Did you not *see* in her filmed interviews where she admitted that
"Lourdes came at a difficult time, during the filming of Evita, and
that it was absolutely not "planned"? Did you also fail to "remember
reading" where Madonna further announced her "unplanned pregnancy"
dilemma, soon after Rocco was born, that not *only* was Lourdes
unplanned ... but Rocco was also an "unplanned pregnancy"?
<cachinnating>
All Eyes On Faye
>From: dwb...@aol.com (Dwb0102)
>Message-ID: <20010821223044...@mb-mp.aol.com>
>
>
>
>>You mean like "any normal mother" that's never changed a diaper and
>>refuses to "play" with Lourdes because it's "boring" and admitted
that
>>both Rocco and Lourdes were nothing more than just "unplanned
>>pregnancies"; like "any normal mother" that had her *other*
"unplanned
>>pregnancies" flushed down the crapper by admitting to having (at
>>least) 3 abortions?
>
>where did you find all this information?
>
>
You're trying to say that you haven't watched any of Madonna's
countless hours of "live" and taped (from her own mouth) interviews
... or read any interviews about her ... or haven't even read her
Biography? Your lack of knowledge is your defense?
((( rolls @@ eyes )))
All Eyes On Faye
>
>>From: dwb...@aol.com (Dwb0102)
>
>>>You mean like "any normal mother" that's never changed a diaper and
>>>refuses to "play" with Lourdes because it's "boring" and admitted
>that
>>>both Rocco and Lourdes were nothing more than just "unplanned
>>>pregnancies"; like "any normal mother" that had her *other*
>"unplanned
>>>pregnancies" flushed down the crapper by admitting to having (at
>>>least) 3 abortions?
>>
Dwb0102 wrote:
>>where did you find all this information?
>>
>>
**********
From: thesn...@aol.comegetsome (Zhang Kaige)
Message-ID: <20010821184505...@mb-ci.aol.com>
>Subject: Re: Madonna has never changed a diaper
>
>From: ci...@aol.com (kyle.)
>
>>having 3 abortions and saying that both Rocco and
>>Lourdes were unplanned.
>
Kyle wrote:
> I admit that I have **read** Madonna **admit** shez' had abortionz. & Saying
> that both Rocco & Lourdes wuz **unplanned** :)
> kyle.
Zhang Kaige wrote:
Good, now maybe Madonna's fthags will stop denying those facts, like they
always have in the past.
[sigh]
--
Madonna, CoCo looks waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay prettier AND happier than
you...thanks. :)
http://www.geocities.com/cometotheweb/gallerys/geisha/i.JPG
http://community-2.webtv.net/cocoloveslife/LetemknowCoCo
[giggle]
RJRSJ1
>
>>From: rjr...@aol.comzyxqyzx (RJRSJ1)
>
>AOL Member Name: "Russell and Joanna"
>
print for me again!
>>Date: 21 Aug 2001 18:22:31 GMT
>
>>Message-ID: <20010821142231...@mb-co.aol.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>>You mean like "any normal mother" that's never changed a diaper and
>>>refuses to "play" with Lourdes because it's "boring" and admitted
>that
>>>both Rocco and Lourdes were nothing more than just "unplanned
>>>pregnancies
>>
>>Lourdes was unplanned???
>>
>>
>How does that shock you ... when she's needed/elected to abort soooo
>many "unplanned" **Oooops** in the past? BTW, she said Rocco was also
>"unplanned".
Not shocking - just perplexed. Who *are* you anyway? Carlos Leon?
>
>
>> I could have sworn that I remember reading all over the place that Madonna
>> specifically sought out a Carlos Leon type beforehand to
>> father her child because she wanted her to have an ethnic look?
>>
>>
>Did you not *see* in her filmed interviews where she admitted that
>"Lourdes came at a difficult time, during the filming of Evita, and
>that it was absolutely not "planned"? Did you also fail to "remember
>reading" where Madonna further announced her "unplanned pregnancy"
>dilemma, soon after Rocco was born, that not *only* was Lourdes
>unplanned ... but Rocco was also an "unplanned pregnancy"?
>
Musta missed that interview. I just saw the ones where she said Lourdes *was*
planned. That crazy girl - she keeps us guessing all the time, doesn't she??
><cachinnating>
>
>
>
>
>
>
All Eyes On Faye
>
>From: rjr...@aol.comzyxqyzx (RJRSJ1)
>
Marital Status: Happily...so far! ;-)
>>>Lourdes was unplanned???
>>>
>>>
>>How does that shock you ... when she's needed/elected to abort soooo
>>many "unplanned" **Oooops** in the past? BTW, she said Rocco was
also
>>"unplanned".
>
>Not shocking - just perplexed.
>
>
You're perplexed because she *tries* to pretend she's a "good mother";
a mother that had the majority of her *other* "unplanned pregnancies"
forked to death?
>>Did you not *see* in her filmed interviews where she admitted that
>>"Lourdes came at a difficult time, during the filming of Evita, and
>>that it was absolutely not "planned"? Did you also fail to "remember
>>reading" where Madonna further announced her "unplanned pregnancy"
>>dilemma, soon after Rocco was born, that not *only* was Lourdes
>>unplanned ... but Rocco was also an "unplanned pregnancy"?
>>
>
>Musta missed that interview. I just saw the ones where she said
Lourdes *was*
>planned.
>
>
How could you have missed so many interviews; the newest one dating
back to just after Rocco's birth?
> That crazy girl - she keeps us guessing all the time, doesn't she??
>
>
No ... just you; her story hasn't changed since Lourdes was born.
Wildfire Tommy Rich
>
>>From: rjr...@aol.comzyxqyzx (RJRSJ1)
>
>> Musta missed that interview. I just saw the ones where she said
>> Lourdes *was* planned.
>>
>Subject: Re: Madonna has never changed a diaper
>From: ci...@aol.com (kyle.)
>Message-ID: <20010821174858...@ng-cl1.aol.com>
>
>
> I admit that I have read Madonna admit shez' had abortionz. & Saying
> that both Rocco & Lourdes wuz unplanned :)
> kyle.
>www.kylemcmahon.com
>
"I have read Madonna admit shez' had abortionz. & Saying that both Rocco &
Lourdes wuz unplanned :)" --Kyle, Madonna fan
<chortle>
RJRSJ1
>>
>
>>From: rjr...@aol.comzyxqyzx (RJRSJ1)
>>
>Marital Status: Happily...so far! ;-)
Honey, just list the whole profile - you're *teasing* everyone.
>
>>>>Lourdes was unplanned???
>>>>
>>>>
>>>How does that shock you ... when she's needed/elected to abort soooo
>>>many "unplanned" **Oooops** in the past? BTW, she said Rocco was
>also
>>>"unplanned".
>>
>
>>Not shocking - just perplexed.
>>
>>
>You're perplexed because she *tries* to pretend she's a "good mother";
>a mother that had the majority of her *other* "unplanned pregnancies"
>forked to death?
>
>
>>>Did you not *see* in her filmed interviews where she admitted that
>>>"Lourdes came at a difficult time, during the filming of Evita, and
>>>that it was absolutely not "planned"? Did you also fail to "remember
>>>reading" where Madonna further announced her "unplanned pregnancy"
>>>dilemma, soon after Rocco was born, that not *only* was Lourdes
>>>unplanned ... but Rocco was also an "unplanned pregnancy"?
>>>
>>
>>Musta missed that interview. I just saw the ones where she said
>Lourdes *was*
>>planned.
>>
>>
>How could you have missed so many interviews; the newest one dating
>back to just after Rocco's birth?
>
>
>> That crazy girl - she keeps us guessing all the time, doesn't she??
>>
>>
>No ... just you; her story hasn't changed since Lourdes was born.
Of course I am! Why else would I be a member of AGC, pumpkin??
>
>
>
>
>
>
All Eyes On Faye
>
> > You're trying to say that you haven't watched any of
> > Madonna's countless hours of "live" and taped (from her
> > own mouth) interviews ... or read any interviews about
> > her ... or haven't even read her Biography? Your lack of
> > knowledge is your defense?
>
>
>
So, that's why your postings are in defense of Madonna?
> I simply asked where you got
> all this information?
>
>
I gave you all the answers ... were you too insecure and defensive to
accept them; were you too insecure to accept the fact that I also
posted that others *have* read the same sources ... and confirmed my
statements?
> If you don't want to point to a verifable source (or
> can't), then I can't help that, little one.
>
>
I gave the sources and you were just too defensive and insecure, I
fear; your lack of knoweledge and your insecure inability to accept
the "varifable" sources that others *have* read ... and confirmed what
Madonna has admitted, must be your excuse and defense. Oh well...
All Eyes On Faye
> In article <20010821221932...@mb-mc.aol.com>, ci...@aol.com (kyle.) wrote:
> >>Why are you screaming ... and why do you keep snipping Madonna's
> >>admitted (at least 3) abortions?
> >
> >
> >>BTW, I haven't seen you this frothied and "annoyed" ..
> >
> >kyle.
> >www.kylemcmahon.com
>
> Kyle,
> Why do you even bother replying to this idiot?
>
>
Because he was "agreeing" with a statement that you're probably way
too weak and insecure to admit about Madonna.
BTW, Did BlisteredButtinTampa get sucked-in?
Yes, and it appears that you're just using Kyle as an excuse to simper
about TH3, with your "ignore them" cry ... oh well.
Do you think you'll ever be able to overtake Danny Splotch's place as
the #1 lurker-turned-feeder of AFM? We currently have a 4-way tie
(BlisteredButt, JBQGGIE, PORFie and NavyGuy) for 2nd place.
"I will unfortunately not be wasting any more of my *precious* time
replying... (and you can quote me on that... perhaps put it in your
signature line)" --BlisteredButtinTampa, making a promise to AFM...
that he would never again reply to TH3
It's really neat how ***all*** of TH3's pawns have made that exact
same promise, but their weak-will just keeps forcSSSing them to make
liars of themselves.
<chortle>
All Eyes On Faye
> >Subject: Re: Madonna has never changed a diaper
> >
>
> >
>
> >In article <20010821221932...@mb-mc.aol.com>, ci...@aol.com
> >(kyle.) wrote:
> >>>Why are you screaming ... and why do you keep snipping Madonna's
> >>>admitted (at least 3) abortions?
> >>
> >>I'm not screamin! & i DID admit that Madonna admited that she had
> >>abortionz!!
> >>
> >>>BTW, I haven't seen you this frothied and "annoyed" ..
> >>
> >>Im not frothied or annoyed! Im agreeing with u
> >>kyle.
> >>www.kylemcmahon.com
> >
>
> >Kyle,
> > Why do you even bother replying to this idiot?
>
>
> that you knew what you were doing -
>
> "I've been lurking here and watching you guys for months. I
> know what I'm doing" --BodyBuilderinTears [Ms. Mann],
> *thinking* that s/he stood a chance.
>
> [rolls eyes]
>
> BTW, I'm not too sure if Kyle will reply to you, Ms.
> Mann...he said that he hoped that he wouldn't be seeing
> *your kind* at the concerts...remember him saying that, Ms.
> Mann? I do. ;)
>
> >Complete waste of your time.
> >
>
> Sure doesn't keep you from being FORcssssssssssed to simper
> about us, when others reply to us, directly...does it? ;)
>
> "When someone replies to me, directly or indirectly, I will
> always reply back."
> --BodyBuilderinTears [Ms. Mann], *thinking* that s/he stood
> a chance.
>
>
"I will unfortunately not be wasting any more of my *precious* time
replying... (and you can quote me on that... perhaps put it in your
signature line)" --BlisteredButtinTampa, making a promise to AFM...
that he would never again reply to TH3
Sure does look like BlisteredButtinTampa was forcSSSed to reduce
itself ... after it's "months in the making" plan of attack failed it
so miserably.
> [rolls eyes]
>
>
> I don't think you'll ever be able to forget about how you
> fought us, the best way you knew how, and ended up getting
> completely spanked-away, bigtime. You tried about 4
> different tactics against us, at least, now you're reduced
> to simpering on the shoulders of others, fact.
>
>
> > Note: Post was addressed to Kyle. No need for a troll
> > barrage of posts, as they won't be read.
> >
>
> Of course you'll read it...that's why you sniveled on
> Kyle's shoulder...so you could continue your sniffing and
> scratching, w/o actually being energetic enough to speak to
> us, directly. ;)
>
> Stay blistered...and skeered...'kay? ;)
>
> "OUCH!!" --BodyBuilderinTears [Ms. Mann], *thinking* that
> s/he stood a chance.
>
> [giggle]
>
>
<cachinnating>
All Eyes On Faye
> > Madonna's countless hours of "live" and taped (from her
> > own mouth) interviews ... or read any interviews about
> > her ... or haven't even read her Biography? Your lack of
> > knowledge is your defense?
> >
>
> can't), then I can't help that, little one.
>
>
that's not stuck in a *lack of knowledge/denial defense* ... like
Dwb0102 is.
BTW, a-Gain, is your insecure denial and lack of knowledge about the
given sources the best defense you can come up with?
<chortle>
Dwb0102
>Date: 8/23/2001 5:42 AM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <4b4da220.01082...@posting.google.com>
Again, it was a simple question. If you answer is that you were referring to
another person's posting for your quotes, well, then that speaks volumes about
you.
RJRSJ1
>>given sources the best defense you can come up with?
>>
>><chortle>
>
>Again, it was a simple question. If you answer is that you were referring to
>another person's posting for your quotes, well, then that speaks volumes
>about
>you.
>
I think this person's whole obsession with Madonna speaks volumes about them.
Unless they're just trolling.............*nah*. ;-)
RJRSJ1 - waiting for one of fayenatic's oh-so-piercing comebacks...
CoCo loves life sooooooo much! :
>
>From: dwb...@aol.com (Dwb0102)
>
>Your mom is still ugly, sailorboy.
>
No, reduced-liar, you don't have a photo...but you **did** see a photo
of Madonna [fact] and it FORcssssssssssssssed you to try and hide it
and make up lies, as your **only** insecure defense for Madonna's
ugliness...fact. :)
[giggle]
>[cachinating]
>
Suggestions for cachinating:
1. cachinnating
2. checkmating
3. cachinnation
4. cachinnated
5. cachinnates
6. cachinnations
7. cochampioning
8. chicken-and-egg
9. kitchen-sink
10. Khachaturian
You failed at *trying* to be like TH3...thanks. :)
[chortle]
All Eyes On Faye
>
>From: dwb...@aol.com (Dwb0102)
>
>
>Your mom is still ugly, sailorboy.
>[cachinating]
>
>
Why did your defense of Madonna, and the need to run skeered from her
Hellish photos...
<<< http://img.iskon.hr/kl/2001/05/08/0002026.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/cometotheweb/gallerys/geisha/i.JPG
http://www.geocities.com/cometotheweb/gallerys/geisha/m.JPG >>>
...force you to lie, and to even try hiding your (Scream)
beggin'-for-dollars posting?
-----
From: Dwb0102 (dwb...@aol.com)
<<<Subject: ALL TY BEARS MUST GO!>>>
<<<LOOK AT ALL THESE TY BEANIE BABY BEARS ALL FOR SALE! HERE'S WHAT
YOU GET. ALL ARE MWMTS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
1 NF TEDDY
1 BRITANNIA
1 GLORY
1 97 TEDDY
1 98 TEDDY
1 99 TEDDY
1 PINK FACED SPANGLE
1 THE END
1 FUZZ
EMAIL ME IF INTERESTED!
1 PRINCESS
1 BB BEAR
1 MILLENIUM
1 WALLACE
1 CLUBBY II
1 FORTUNE
1 ERIN
1 VALENTINA
1 GROOVY
1 PEACE
1 TY2K
1 OSITO
1 99 SIGNATURE BEAR
1 KICKS
1 VALENTINO
1 HALO
1 RAGTIME CURLY
1 CLUBBY 01 (TAG HAS SMALL WHITE LINE BETWEEN THE T AND THE Y--A
PRINTING ERROR, NOT A SCRATCH)
1 SET OF MCDONALD'S INTERNATIONAL BEARS (GLORY, ERIN, BRITANNIA AND
MAPLE)>>>
----------
*Scream* begging?
"I'm not a beggar!" --Dwb0102
<chortle>
"[cachinating]" --Dwb0102, inept.
<cachinnating>