Welcome to Adobe GoLive 6

STUPIDY IS ALIVE AND WELL in O'Reilly-dom

Why does O'Reilly rely on Mother Nature and not on his religious belief? Has he come to the conclusion that that does not work here? Does not god and Jesus mandate that there be sexual copulation, but only when married to the first wife, if catholic? NO. Bozo says . . . . Nature 'dictates' . . . OK, if you want to go there. Lions kill their young in order for the female to become in heat again. Crocodiles males eat their young. Cuckoos raid other nests and throw out an egg and deposit their own, some finches throw their young overboard. There are hermaphrodites (the barnacle or the liverwort) produce both male and female sex cells. We also have asexual reproduction which does not require sperms or eggs to reproduce. Therefore a single individual can produce offspring in this way without fertilization. So you see, bozo. Mother Nature is not as narrow-minded as 'Traditional Warriors' and does not dictate your nonsense. Mother Nature is very liberal in her approach to procreation of the species, as in 'Secular Progressive'. The wind transfers pollen from bloom to bloom. Cupcakes do not work. Rumor also has it that falafels and loofahs also will not get you pregnant, but may make you $10,000,000.00 poorer. What we believe O'Reilly refers to is 'parenting' And here, O'Reilly is definitely full of crappola as you can read here, here and here. In order to be scientifically informed, rule #1 requires that you stay away from the religious bs, such as the Family Research Center and The Focus on the Family bunch. In fact, the American Psychological Association (APA), the American Academy of Pediatrics, the National Association of Social Workers (NASW), and the Child Welfare League of America, among others, have all noted that credible scientific data shows that children suffer no harm from being reared by same-sex parents. So, whom will you believe? Some credible scientists or some voodoo practitioners? If it is true, as O'Reilly claims, that a mom and a dad is the optimum, then the optimum must surely also exclude poverty, drug addiction, divorce, violence, death of a parent, etc. How many children are raised in an optimum environment. So where does O'Reilly himself fit in, with a father who he claims was very abusive to him. Some info referenced from [MediaMatters.org] Earll: "Mary Cheney's pregnancy raises the question of what's best for children. ... Just because it's possible to conceive a child outside of the relationship of a married mother and father doesn't mean it's the best for the child." [The New York Times, 12/07/06] Robert Knight, director of the Culture & Media Institute at the Media Research Center: "I think it's tragic that a child has been conceived with the express purpose of denying it a father. ... Fatherhood is important and always will be, so if Mary and her partner indicate that that is a trivial matter, they're shortchanging this child from the start." [ABC News online report; 12/06/06] *Janice Crouse, Concerned Women for America senior fellow: "They're deliberately bringing a child into the world without a father, leaving a great gaping hole. ... Father absence is the biggest problem we're facing in this country ... the root cause of all sorts of negative outcomes -- drug use, juvenile delinquency. You name it." [ABC News online report; 12/06/06]

STUPIDY IS ALIVE AND WELL in O'Reilly-dom

Why does O'Reilly rely on Mother Nature and not on his religious belief? Has he come to the conclusion that that does not work here? Does not god and Jesus mandate that there be sexual copulation, but only when married to the first wife, if catholic?

NO. Bozo says . . . .

Nature 'dictates' . . . OK, if you want to go there.
Lions kill their young in order for the female to become in heat again. Crocodiles males eat their young. Cuckoos raid other nests and throw out an egg and deposit their own, some finches throw their young overboard.
There are hermaphrodites (the barnacle or the liverwort) produce both male and female sex cells.
We also have asexual reproduction which does not require sperms or eggs to reproduce. Therefore a single individual can produce offspring in this way without fertilization.

So you see, bozo. Mother Nature is not as narrow-minded as 'Traditional Warriors' and does not dictate your nonsense. Mother Nature is very liberal in her approach to procreation of the species, as in 'Secular Progressive'.

The wind transfers pollen from bloom to bloom.

Cupcakes do not work. Rumor also has it that falafels and loofahs also will not get you pregnant, but may make you $10,000,000.00 poorer.

What we believe O'Reilly refers to is 'parenting'

And here, O'Reilly is definitely full of crappola as you can read here, here and here. In order to be scientifically informed, rule #1 requires that you stay away from the religious bs, such as the Family Research Center and The Focus on the Family bunch.

In fact, the American Psychological Association (APA), the American Academy of Pediatrics, the National Association of Social Workers (NASW), and the Child Welfare League of America, among others, have all noted that credible scientific data shows that children suffer no harm from being reared by same-sex parents.

So, whom will you believe? Some credible scientists or some voodoo practitioners?

If it is true, as O'Reilly claims, that a mom and a dad is the optimum, then the optimum must surely also exclude poverty, drug addiction, divorce, violence, death of a parent, etc. How many children are raised in an optimum environment.

So where does O'Reilly himself fit in, with a father who he claims was very abusive to him.

Some info referenced from [MediaMatters.org]

*Earll: "Mary Cheney's pregnancy raises the question of what's best for children. ... Just because it's possible to conceive a child outside of the relationship of a married mother and father doesn't mean it's the best for the child." [The New York Times, 12/07/06]

* Robert Knight, director of the Culture & Media Institute at the Media Research Center: "I think it's tragic that a child has been conceived with the express purpose of denying it a father. ... Fatherhood is important and always will be, so if Mary and her partner indicate that that is a trivial matter, they're shortchanging this child from the start." [ABC News online report; 12/06/06]

*Janice Crouse, Concerned Women for America senior fellow: "They're deliberately bringing a child into the world without a father, leaving a great gaping hole. ... Father absence is the biggest problem we're facing in this country ... the root cause of all sorts of negative outcomes -- drug use, juvenile delinquency. You name it." [ABC News online report; 12/06/06]

The way O'Reilly described his childhood on your show made it seem that his father was an abusive bully. Is that how you would describe O'Reilly himself after your encounters with him? [read]

Are you proud of having painted your father as some kind of madman when you said you would not have survived if you had done some of the things going on today? You were named after his Billy Club.