i gave up masterbating in theaters years ago my friend. but thanks for the well wishes. merry christmas to you as well

then can we discount yours as well? regardless im happy to hear that you are one of the few happy ones:)

You're free to do as you wish.

I hope happiness finds you as well.

already there as well my friend, guess you and i are a couple of the lucky ones. merry christmas

you have a point but my belief is that one who is honorable, self reliant and self directed are more likely to be happy. take me for instance:) merry christmas and have one for me

will do ! +^d

no doubt, and since you grew up in the shelter of country living you must be in heaven

Are you proposing that country people are ignorant?

nope, just the liberal/progressive ones

actually if you deduct all the leftylib graduates who wasted their time, scholarship and grant money on liberal arts, polisci, and english majors. the skewed results you show would be significantly lower

"who wasted their time, scholarship and grant money on liberal arts, polisci, and english majors"
How, exactly, are any of those things a waste of time or money?
The most prestigious accredited colleges in the nation are liberal arts universities.
The relatively few members of Congress (mostly democrats) who have postgraduate college and university degrees have at least some education in Political Science.
English majors are largely responsible for the contents of every public library in America.

you made my point. an education in a liberal arts college is also a total waste of time, scholarship and grant money. "English majors are largely responsible for the contents of every public library in America." no wonder kids prefer online gaming"

Actually, although hatred isn't something that most people associate with being happy; in this case, if the study results are correct happiness does equal hatefulness, since the majority of the hate generally is on the right (particularly the reactionary regressive evangelical religious fundamentalist neoconservative "Teabagging Party" "Republican" right wing), where, seemingly paradoxically, according to this study, the majority, however slim, of the happiness also just so happens to be.

What, do you live in some parallel universe?? How in the world can you even say this???? If you really believe this you need a twelve step program. The left has refined, polished, taken to a new art form and perfected character assassination, class warfare and hatred. Go read some of the replies to my posts. As far as that goes read your own and your referring to the Tea Party as "Teabagging party". Res ipsa loquitur.

i believe unhappiness breeds hatefulness and vice versa

"your referring to the Tea Party as "Teabagging party"
They actually called themselves that.
[http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/04/freedomworks-long-history-of-teabaggi...]
[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/a-teabagger-timeline-koch_b_187312.ht...]

"The left has refined and perfected class warfare"
WRONG
the reality is that those most in favor of class warfare are one the right, not the left.
->Class warfare is abolishing the working class's ability to negotiate for better working conditions and higher wages. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41774667/ns/politics-more_politics/t/wis-assembly-pa....Tu9zsiNWq7o]
[http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wisconsin-assembly-approves-bill-stripping-union-....Tu9z0SNWq7o]
[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/25/wisconsin-assembly-passes-anti-union-bi...]
->Class warfare is staying silent about an unelected authoritarian regime that increases budget deficits by trillions of dollars while causing a collapse of the western developed world's economic system by deregulating multi-trillion dollar trans-multinational for-profit corporate conglomerations, just so long as said regime slashes taxes by billions of dollars on the wealthiest 1% of all Americans [http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/12/04/381510/upton-cant-explain-tax-cuts-j...] [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-13/rich-americans-save-money-from-tax-cuts...], so that those same multi-billionaire industrialists, while profiting billions of dollars into their personal wealth, can then proceed to lay of thousands of American workers from their companies; [http://www.mediaite.com/tv/maddow-draws-contrast-between-kochs-record-revenue-an...] but decrying and an attempt by a democratically majority-elected administration to put millions of people back to work which would DECREASE budget deficits by billions of dollars, [http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/186307-cbo-obama-jobs-bill-reduces-...] while reducing taxes for the overwhelming majority of all Americans. [http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jan/28/barack-obama/tax-...]
->Class warfare is pressing for the elimination of public health and safety regulations that save millions of lives on a nearly daily basis [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-conyers/eliminating-regulations-t_b_1111356.h...], and of the agencies to enforce them [http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/03/sen-paul-unveils-5-year-budget-plan...], because they cost too much of a reduction in the multi-billion-dollar profits of the most profitable industries and corporation the world has ever seen.
->Class warfare is staying silent about super-massive increases in budget deficits when they are caused by super-massive tax cuts to the wealthiest 1% by an unelected authoritarian regime of your own political ideological party [[http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2011/apr/29/dennis-kucinich/rep-dennis...], but decrying an attempt by a democratically majority-elected administration to provide life-saving medical coverage to the overwhelmingly vast majority of all Americans [http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/03/cbo_health-care_reform_bill_...] which, according to every non-ideologically-driven independent analysis, would actually result in a net DECREASE in deficits of billions of dollars for years to come [http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/03/18/us-usa-healthcare-idUSTRE61O4NV2010031...].
->Class warfare is repeatedly insisting that billions of dollars in tax slashing for multi-millionaires are "free" or "pay for themselves (in blatant contradiction of facts) [http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/13/can-tax-cuts-pay-for-themselves/], while insisting that benefits for unemployed must be "paid for" [http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2010/07/bachmann-pay-for-unemployment-benef...] by slashing sociological safety net benefits and raising taxes on the poorest of all citizens.
->Class warfare is the elimination of Social Security [http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/house-republicans-look-to-privatize-s...] and Medicare [http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/25/us-usa-budget-medicare-idUSTRE7443Q320...], the sociological infrastructure of the western democratic industrialized developed "first" world.
->Class warfare is forcing tax increases on 90% of all Americans [http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/09/07/why-the-republicans-want-to-ra...] in order to hold the American Representative Democratic Republic hostage [http://www.examiner.com/economic-policy-in-national/republicans-offer-to-raise-t...] for billions of dollars in tax cuts for multi-billion-dollar industries and corporations and the wealthiest 1%. [http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2011/08/25/do-republicans-really-want-to-cut...]
->Class warfare is giving multi-billion-dollar tax slashing to multi-billionaires. [http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/11/23/375654/bush-tax-cut-one-percent/]
[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/14/tax-cuts-for-wealthy-americans_n_101160...]
->Class warfare is giving multi-trillion-dollar trans-multinational corporate conglomerates the voting power of american citizens in elections. [http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/supreme_court_dispatches/2010/01...]

wow, for a self proclaimed brainiac you dont know jack

I know who is waging the real class war in this country.

He's a legend in his own mind already! I'll bet if he was limber enough, he'd reach around and kiss his own ass!

english majors?

English majors aren't rich enough to wage war on the poor, and we're too poor to wage war on the working class.
We're also too smart to have any desire whatsoever to oppose the 99% of all of the people in this world who aren't rich.

"He's a legend"
No,
I'm just not willfully blind.

wow! and you consider yourself intelligent? compared to most of the world americas so called, self titled and delusional 99% are the 1%

so it comes naturally then?

"you consider yourself intelligent"
Demonstrably, provably both qualitatively and quantifiably nearly exponentially more so than an ignorant anti-education anti-intellectual ideologue such as yourself could ever possibly dream of being
(that is not to say that actually being intelligent is or would ever be something that those, like yourself, whose willfully-ignorant reactionary religious-fundamentalism-motivated ideology is in diametric opposition to intellect and education, in and of themselves, would ever have any desire whatsoever to aspire to)

"so it comes naturally then"
What does?
Being educated?
No, education doesn't.
If you haven no desire whatsoever to ever learn anything, then i can guarantee to an absolute certainty, and without fear of contradiction, that learning of any kind whatsoever will never, ever come to you.
And if you never learn anything, then you can never know anything.
And so you get to stay ignorant forever.
If, like yourself, you oppose education in and of itself, then there is quite literally no conceivable possible way that you ever can be, nor ever will be, educated.
If, like yourself, you are opposed to intellect, and indeed to the very concept of knowledge, then you could never, ever be anything even remotely approaching being considered "intelligent" by any reasonable definition of that term.
In order to be intelligent, you have to know facts.
You have repeatedly demonstrated your religious-fundamentalism-motivated anti-education and anti-intellectual ideology's diametric opposition to the concept of facts, and your more general zealotry against the idea of learning.
If you don't believe in facts, as you have repeatedly demonstrably shown yourself not to, then you can never know anything.

youre correct education doesnt come naturally, although something you sorely lack does, intelligence and common sense. but if one is genuinely happy and gets laid often, what more in life is there?

wow, you know more words than i do. you win!

"you know more words than i do"
What's because i am educated, whereas your ignorant reactionary regressive anti-intellectualist ideology diametrically opposes the very idea and concept of education in and of itself in its entirety as a whole.

"although something you sorely lack does, intelligence and common sense"
This is not a sentence.
This is a non sequitur.
Care to try that again in english?

"if one is genuinely happy...what more in life is there"
The correct term for what you call being "genuinely happy" is actually "blissfully oblivious"
Such oblivion derives from utter in-cognizance.
Empty-mindedness and happiness are not one and the same thing, nor are they interchangeable.
The reality is that you just simply don't know enough to really be happy.
In order to be happy, one must actually know how the world works and what is going on in it.
Paranoid delusional schizophrenic deranged insanity, or evangelical religious fundamentalist zealotry, does not qualify as that.
The fact is that you are "happy" for no other reason than only because you are ignorant.
You ask what more to life there is, and indeed you answer your own question.
We should all strive to be, as you say, "genuinely happy".
This requires each and every single one of us to learn as much as we possibly can about the world around us and its happenings.
It also, not coincidentally, requires that we utterly reject incognizant obliviousness outright, as being satisfied or contented with being ignorant will never gain us anything on our path to happiness.
So what else to life is there besides being incongnizantly oblivious?
There is learning.
And then, and only then, there is happiness.

wow, whatever you just said, my guess is that it is somehow a slam and an attempt to be offensive? so from what i gather you voted for obama and will do so again?

who needs to know all about the world outside of my own? i enjoy a good beer, and get laid more than a man deserves. if there is more to happiness than that i would prefer my sweet ignorance thank you.

Question: "who needs to know all about the world outside of my own"
Answer: Anyone who does not wish to remain ignorant and blind for the rest of their lives.

"if there is more to happiness than that i would prefer my sweet ignorance"
There can be no happiness without knowledge.
Stupidity is not happiness.

"so from what i gather you voted for obama and will do so again"
Once more again, its a little something we like to call "progress"
and it is something that is not, and indeed cannot be, gained from electing anti-government regressives to run our government.
Personally, i believe that opposing the idea and concept of governance in and of itself, as the reactionary regressive neoconservative Teabagging Party "Republican" GOP does, should, by all rights, automatically disqualify any given person from holding public office.
The simple reality is that It will gain us nothing to elect people who do not believe that this nation should be governed in any way at all to run this nation's government.
If anything, electing people who believe that the country should not be governed to govern the country is downright counterproductive.
The fact is that the reactionary regressive neoconservative Teabagging Party "Republican" GOP IS anti-government, as the Teabgging Party itself is and has always been since its invention.
Being anti-government is something which i earnestly and steadfastly believe should automatically disqualify and individual from ever being any part OF the government.
Again, electing people who are anti-government into our government can yield no good things.
Even if i had no other reason to vote to reelect the President of the United States (i have many, many more than that besides), i would still vote for Barack Obama for President merely because he is now, as he has been since this campaign began, the only candidate for the Presidency who actually earnestly believes that the United States of america should even have a government of any kind at all.
Being pro-government is one thing that i, personally, believe to be indispensable in any legitimate candidacy for the highest elected office IN government.
None of the other candidate for the Presidency (the rest being, to a man, Evangelical Religious Fundamentalist Neoconservative Teabagging Party Right-Wing "Republicans") believe that the United States of America should be governed in any way, nor (specifically in the case of Ron Paul in especial) that the United States of America should have a government of any kind.
Since, as i have stated repeatedly previously, i believe being opposed to governance, either in concept or in practice (or both), to disqualify one from being elected to or holding public elected government office, President Obama, being the only candidate for the Presidency who believes that the nation should, in fact, have a government and be governed, is thereby, as far as i can see, the only legitimate candidate for the elected public government office that is the Presidency of the United States of America.
Since there is, therefore, only one genuine and legitimate candidate for President, who to vote for in the election fo the office of the Presidency becomes self-evident.
It's a non-question.
There is only one candidate who believes that there should be a government.
Anyone who opposes government has no place in government.
ERGO: there is only one candidate for President.
If there is only one candidate, who else is there to vote for?

wow, youre as bad at misportraying the tea party and the right as the main stream media you choose to believe in. in short, the tea party and the right are not anti government they are anti nanny state government which is what progressives and many others on the left choose to prefer. why work hard for a living when those who do can provide you with your needs? its like the story of the ant and the grasshopper. the right being the ants and the left being the grasshoppers.

pussy and beer. all a real man needs

" the tea party are not anti government"
WRONG
The Teabagging Party is Anti-Tax.
To be anti-tax is to be anti-government, as there can be no government without taxes.

"nanny state government which is what progressives and many others on the left choose to prefer."
What the reactionary regressive neoconservative religious fundamentalist far right wing radically misdefines as being a "nanny-state" actually just so happens to be exactly precisely what the Constitution of the United States of America states is the purpose of any representative democratic government: "To Establish Justice" "To Ensure Domestic Tranquility", "To Promote the General Welfare", and "To Secure the Blessings of Liberty".
These are the functions of a government.
So really, what the reactionary regressive religious neoconservative "Republican" right wing is referring to by a "nanny state" is the institution of government in and of itself.
As you yourself have already previously repeatedly stated, what you call the "nanny state" is something that your fundamentalist reactionary regressive ideology diametrically opposes.
Since, according to the constitution, what you refer to at being the "nanny state" IS government itself, then being, as you have stated you are anti-"nanny-state" IS being anti-government.
So yes, the reactionary regressive neoconservative right wing IS anti-government.

just like most people of above average intelligence i know, you excel in one topic. the rest of the world is just media hand fed propaganda

"most people of above average intelligence"
So by that you mean liberal progressives who vote democratic (who have been proven to be better educated)

"Republicans are significantly more likely than Democrats to have 4-year college degrees. "
This is factually incorrect.
Democrat Republican
College: 55% 45%
http://www.gallup.com/poll/112132/Election-Polls-Vote-Groups-2008.aspx

"Republicans tend to be...better educated"
This, too, is factually incorrect:
Grad School: 67% 33%
Post Grad School: 65% 35%
http://www.gallup.com/poll/112132/Election-Polls-Vote-Groups-2008.aspx

only in your hypocritical, rewritten and misspoken world. now move on to one of my other posts. this one is old and i bore of it. i will not answer any more comments from you on this one my lost, self limiting, and non spirtual friend

thanks for speaking out for black americans and others who rely on you to do so since they are incapable of voicing it themsleves

Wow! Is there no end to the mindless, meaningless, empty dribble that spews fourth from so many of those of the Leftist ilk? I have no clue where this creaton got the idiotic points for this ignorant and verbose rant, but geeze, would be nice if we could all just stick to the facts.

congoboy:Wow! Is there no end to the mindless, meaningless, empty dribble that spews fourth from so many of those of the Leftist ilk? I have no clue where this creaton got the idiotic points for this ignorant and verbose rant, but geeze, would be nice if we could all just stick to the facts.

bullshit would be the more appropriate term, if it applied

That's not Gingrich, silly.
It's Boehner.

hmmm, no more or less accurate than the publications you choose to get your reliable info from. so whats the latest on that lohan chic anyway? merry christmas to you as well and i hope you find a real man to make you happy someday my depressing,unnatural, and in denial friend

no doubt my enabling friend

Liberals are Sympathetic.
Conservatives are Apathetic.

exacerbating? i dont think thats legal in most states

nyuk nyuk.

its also because we tend to see our glasses half full whereas the liberals tend to see theirs half empty. optimism=happy pessimism=unhappy

Congrats Ian, you stuck something on the wall that is informative! I have one point to make, and there will be no bloviating on my part, first I'll include a clip from your fine research:

"It is true that conservatives tend to be less concerned about income inequality. The reason that conservatives tend to be less concerned with income inequality has to do with the fact that they see the world differently. Conservatives think that fairness is one in which outcomes are based on merit and people start with more or less equal opportunities. If you believe those things, and you see that some person makes more than others or the top 1 percent is breaking away than the bottom 99 percent, that's not going to affect your happiness very much at all."

This being said, conservative/normal people, as with wild animals, are not concerned about what the other guy has, they are concerned with themselves and their own survival. If a bear is fatter than all the other bears when they go into hybernation, the other bears could care less, they are all about to go through the same thing, and next year they will remember to fatten up better. As with natural human behavior and the laws of nature, we all want to take care of ouselves and pay our own bills, not everyone elses, and we don't really care how easy it is for the next guy to pay his bills. When you have that outlook, it is understandable why "conservatives" are much happier than those with left leaning tendencies. Chow

It's not like it comes from nowhere.

"normal people, as with wild animals, are not concerned about what the other guy has"
If that were true the entire capitalist economic system as we know it would collapse.

Well, you know what they say:
An optimist will tell you that the glass is half-full.
A pessimist says the glass is half-empty.
A pragmatist/realist knows that the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

then they should look at the federal budget in the same way.

"then they should look at the federal budget in the same way."
You mean the United States Federal Government Annual monetary Budget, over 53% ($600+ Billion [As of FY 2008 (not including 2 previously unpaid-for wars in Iraq & Afghanistan] of which goes to the Department of Defense (the most wasteful government agency in history) alone?
The budget of which Health ($62 Billion [5% A/O FY 2008]) and Education ($54 Billion [3% A/O FY 2008]) put together combined are less than one tenth?
You mean THAT Federal Budget?
Since more than half of it goes out the window right straight away off the bat, I think its safe to say it's always halfway empty (the DOD drinks half the water each and every single year)

yup the very same one. your buddy in the white house sure likes keepin that afghan thing goin as well as keeping up justifiable torture for enemy combatants. one of the few policies i admire him for. peace

thanks ian, youre a constant reminder as to why i never date english majors

true enough -I personally just think both approaches have strengths and weakness. +^d

I have read short essays/reports to that effect. +^d

"youre a constant reminder as to why i never date english majors"
You don't date English majors because anyone with the intellect of an english major is smart enough to know better than to associate with someone as ignorant and bigoted as you.

hey, women are women, intelligent or otherwise and it doesnt matter to color or race. ive been persued, ive chased, and catered to many. they always leave happy:)

"women are women, intelligent or otherwise"
Yes, but the intelligent ones generally don't find themselves to be all that particularly attracted to an willfully-ignorant and militantly bigoted misogynistic religious fundamentalist far-right-wing zealot (such as yourself) who fervently and unwaveringly believes, for no particular readily apparent rational reason whatsoever, that all women are inherently inferior, in whatever way, to himself and all others of his particular gender identification and sexual orientation; and that all those of his particular gender are, somehow, inherently superior to all those who would find themselves attracted to them for whatever reason.

" they always leave happy"
Or maybe they're just too afraid for their own health, safety and well being, of offending a potentially-violent pathologically willfully blindly ignorant and bigoted misogynistic xenophobic militant religious fundamentalist paranoid delusional schizophrenic reactionary sadistic misanthropic psychotic sociopathic far radical right wing extremist zealot such as yourself to dare risking appearing displeased with you in any way while still in your presence.
Just some thoughts for you to ponder over
(or rather your can try to at least [i do understand, an even accept, that rational thought and reasoning are not particular strengths of anti-education anti-intellectual ignorant ideologues such as yourself]).

so its not just the explosive multiple orgasms that keep them happy and coming back then? then it must be my wit, humor, and ability to cook like a chef. but its been my experience that the more intelligent women arent bigoted lock stepping partisans like yourself. you'd probably finally lose your virginity if you took a few lessons on how to treat women from me

"if you took a few lessons on how to treat women from me"
You mean treating them like your inferiors?
or treating them like second-class people?
or just denying that they are your equals?
What lessons could i learn from your bigoted xenophobic sexist misogyny?
I'd quite frankly rather not learn to be a sexist misogynist like yourself, if that's alright with you.

in bed some men are created more equal than others, but i treat all women equally and respectfully. most women enjoy a man who can take charge over an ultra sensitive effeminate metrosexual, although a good dominatrix can be fun from time to time. either way, real women prefer real men who can lead the way to real freedom and if im happy and theyre happy who are you or i to complain? merry CHRISTmas!

" i treat all women equally and respectfully"
Just not equally to men, and not respectfully enough to consider them as worthy as yourself.

"real women prefer real men who can lead the way to real freedom"
Just not the freedom to make their own decisions.

boy you have a lot to learn about women, they are not equal to men, in many ways they are superior to men and im just the guy to show them how. but hey, i dont make them fuck me. its their own personal decision and a freedom of choice they never forget nor regret

"in many ways they are superior to men"
so being capable of making their own decision for themselves just isn't one among those ways?

"its their own personal decision and a freedom of choice"
You just don't believe that they should get to make the same decisions about their lives and their bodies that men get to make.

wow, you are one powerful propaganda machine. good work

I am correct in stating you are anti-choice, as that is what you have repeatedly stated throughout our exchanges in the past.
The anti-choice argument, at its core, essentially boils down to the concept that women are incapable of making the same decisions about their lives, their futures, their families, their health, their safety, their well-being, and their bodies that men make on a very nearly daily basis; and so women must have someone else (namely the government) make such decisions for them.
For example, the ideology, now put into law in several states, of forcing women to wait a number of days or weeks after seeking to end a pregnancy before recieving the life-saving pregnancy termination procedure is founded upon the idea that any women wishing to terminate an unwanted pregnancy does not really actually know what she is doing, and must be forced, by law, to take a predetermined set amount of time to think about it.
Likewise, the ideology, instituted into the laws of several states, of forcing women to sit through, watch, and listen to a religiously-motivated scientifically-unfoundded and factually baseless reactionary regressive right being ideological lecture from an anti-choice activist before being considered for the life-saving ending of an unwanted pregnancy is similarly based in the concept that women seeking such procedures have not really thought about what they are doing, or worse, do not actually know what it is that they really want.
In both cases, quite literally nothing could possibly be any further from the truth.
So both ideological zealotry-driven doctrines exhibit a dogmatic and bigoted xenophobic misogyny on the part of male lawmakers and legislators.
In addition to the bombing of medical health care clinics and the assassination of medical doctors inside of churches, the anti-choice movement, which you have consistently and repeatedly subscribed yourself to, in your very own words, has now most recently moved beyond merely prohibiting the life-saving terminations of unwanted pregnancies, to criminalizing the use of medically-prescribed contraceptives and birth control medications.
This is based in no small part on the conceptualization that women who get pregnant against their will should not have the same rights to make the same decisions as to whether or not to have children as every single man in the world does.
There is no man who has ever been legally forced, under penalty of criminal persecution, to have a child.
Yet that is exactly precisely what the anti-choice movement that you yourself personally subscribe to advocates for every single woman in the United States of America.
I can therefore state as a provable demonstrable fact, and without fear of reasonable or rational contradiction, that you, like all you subscribe to your religious-fundamentalism-motivated reactionary zealotry, ARE a bigoted xenophobic misogynist.

again, wrong, wrong and wrong again. you learn well grasshopper from your media gods in misrepresenting and misportraying either intentionally or through your own ingnorance the intent of not only myself but the right in general. my prediction is that with the presidential election less than a year away the main strem media and ignorant selfish, self centered folks like yourself with no real knowledge outside of your self prescribed mastery of the english language will turn up the rhetorical volume of unabashedly bashing the right. this worthless tactic is often used to disparage conservatives in an election year in an attempt to sway public opinion. this is a losing proposition being that the left are already indoctrinated and manipulated by their leadership into believing said leadership actually care beyond their own megalomanical desire to stay in power at any cost, the right who already are aware of the presses leftest leanings and cannot be tricked into voting a liberal ticket and the independents who are smarter than both parties and tend to vote for who they believe to be the best candidate based on research and candidate record as opposed to walking in lockstep and voting with a particular partisanship. i have always said that a womans decision to murder her baby was between her, god, her significant other and her doctor. as it is the mans responsibility to provide an effective means of birth control and to provide a safe sexual environment i have always advocated the use of and have personally used condoms unless any of the particular woman ive encountered prefered their own method. but since pumping artificial hormones into ones body is not only stupid but dangerous i still believe its the mans duty to use the safest method of safe sex and birth control, the condom. in my opinion if a man gets a woman pregnant then he should take the honorable approach and take responsibility for that child and should be legally forced, under penalty of criminal persecution, to have and support said child. most of us arent anti choice as the leftylibs prefer to falsely portray the right. we are pro life as we hold it dear to our hearts as opposed to the left, the worshippers of death. everyone is bigoted to one degree or another so this tired old label thrown about by liberals should be put to rest as it is hypocritical to continue using it as an empty weapon. also your misportrayal of me being a misogynist has repeatedly been disproven as ive explained to you my love of all women and all those who have ever had the pleasure of my company will attest to as well. most real women prefer a man to care for them and grasp them gently by the hand and take charge as opposed to having some metrosexual pansy as a bff, its called chivilry and honest, real women prefer it. i also have no unreasonable fear of foreigners nor do i fear any man. most who are honest though do believe we need to take proper measures to protect innocent american citizenry from those who wish to do us harm even if it requires a bit of profiling. that is not Xenophobia, it is common sense, something you and most on the left sorely lack. peace

First of all, proper english language spelling grammar, punctuation, and capitalization never hurt anyone.
Secondly:
" i have always said that a womans decision to murder her baby was between her, god, her significant other and her doctor."
1.) No, actually you haven't always said that, as you have repeatedly and explicitly identified yourself as being what you laughably refer to as "pro-life" (if you were really pro-life, then you would be pro-abortion, since abortion saves lives). To you, being "pro-life" means being anti-choice (in reality, quite literally nothing could possibly b any further from the truth, as quite the opposite is, in fact, true: being pro-choice IS being pro-life).
2.) "murder her baby"
In the english language, the word "baby" is used o describe avery young child. Likewise, the word "child" describes a person between birth and adulthood. So no, ending an unwanted pregnancy is not "murdering a baby", since there will no baby until AFTER it is born, and pregnancy termination occurs many months before birth occurs.
3.) "God" does not enter into it anywhere, as no such thing exists.
4.) The "significant other", unless that just so happens to also be a woman herself as well (which is improbable), should not have any part to play in the process either, as decisions regarding the health of the woman in question are up to her and her alone to decide.
5.) The doctor only role in the process should be a purely professional one, in that he is the one who performs the medical procedure when the woman decides to have it done, and does so without questioning the woman's decision, as that would be a fairly blatant violation of professional medical ethics.

"effective means of birth control...i have always advocated the use of and have personally used"
So i take it then that you do not support any of the several neoconservative "Republican" candidates for the Presidency who have explicitly thrown their personal endorsements behind state laws to criminalize the use of contraceptives and birth control medications?
That wouldn't leave on with very many options.
In terms of candidates, especially.

"pumping artificial hormones into ones body is not only stupid but dangerous"
WRONG
There is no scientific or medical evidence to support this claim.

"the safest method of safe sex and birth control, the condom"
Actually, the safest method is a combination of contraceptives, birth control medications, and male and female condoms.
Condoms are prone to failure, and without other forms of birth control, such a condom failure could have tragic consequences.

"if a man gets a woman pregnant then he should take the honorable approach and take responsibility for that child and should be legally forced, under penalty of criminal persecution, to have and support said child"
UNLESS, the woman chooses not to have the child, a decision that he should have no part in.

Thirdly:
"we are pro life as we hold it dear to our hearts as opposed to the left, the worshippers of death."
You are going to have to explain this one to me, (if you can).
First of all, you are going to have to explain just how exactly being a "worshipper of death" meets the definition of the world "liberal"?
Secondly, by "worshippers of death", are you referring to Christians, who worship the crucifix, an ancient Roman method of brutal, savage, and barbaric torture and execution (as well as ancient Egyptian symbol of death and the underworld)?
Third off, if you "hold life dear to your hearts" does that include ALL life?
For example, do you by chance hold the lives of Malaria Parasites, which kill more people than all diseases combined, "dear to your heart"?
->Do you hold the lives of leaches and mosquitoes, which feed on human blood, "dear to you heart"?
->Do you hold the lives of lampreys, which drain their unsuspecting victims of all bodily fluids while they are still alive, "dear to your heart"?
->Do you hold the "life" of the flu virus "close to your heart"?
->Do you hold the lives of cancerous tumors "close to your heart"?
->Do you, by chance hold the "life" of the Human Immunodeficiency Virus, which causes Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome, "close to your heart"?
Fourthly, if you are saying that the "pro-life" movement holds life dear, i have evidence that proves otherwise: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence

"your misportrayal of me being a misogynist has repeatedly been disproven as ive explained to you my love of all women"
You do not believe women to be your equals.
You therefore believe that women are, somehow, inherently inferior to yourself for some reason.
So yes, you ARE, by definition, a sexist misogynist.

"most real women prefer a man to take charge"
I would like to see your evidence to support this claim, as i do not believe that most people, women included, would, given any other choice, "prefer" to be subjugated or submissive to anyone else.
I'm pretty sure that goes against human nature.

"its called chivilry"
BTW: FYI: "chvlry" is not a word in the english language (nor in any other that i am aware of)
And no, "taking charge" of women is most definitively NOT "chivalry" [which is, i believe, what you meant to write, is it not?]
Chivalry is generosity.
"Taking charge" of someone, unless they happen to be a very young child, is definitely NOT a generous thing to do.

"everyone is bigoted to one degree or another"
WRONG
Actually, the words "bigoted liberal" an oxymoronic contradiction in terms.
Also, you will notice that i explicitly used the term "dogmatic bigotry".
This therefore applies solely and exclusively to religious fundamentalist zealots such as yourself, and not to those who lack any such irrational, borderline insane/schizophrenic, belief system, such as myself.

"we need to take proper measures to protect innocent american citizenry from those who wish to do us harm even if it requires a bit of profiling. that is not Xenophobia, it is common sense, "
Profiling, which, as i have already demonstrated, has been proven NOT to keep people safe.
I ahve already shown the poof that profiling does not protect anyone.
So yes, that IS, in fact, xenophobic, as the only rationalization for the use of demonstrably ineffective profiling is, as you put it, and " unreasonable fear of foreigners". There quite simply can be no other conceivable justification of profiling which has been shown not to work.

wrong again on all accounts. for someone without any experience with women, what would you know? comparing human life to parasites and viruses is stupid. you havent proven anything other than you have an opinion. you as anyone are welcome to your opinion but it doesnt make you right. as i stated before, beyond your self imposed mastery of the english language you know nothing. see you in the after life my ignorant and self centered friend

"again, wrong, wrong and wrong again."
"wrong again on all accounts"
Please cite to me one thing that i have stated that is factually inaccurate or incorrect.
i can wait.

"someone without any experience with women, what would you know"
Religious-fundamentalist-zealotry-motivated Bigoted xenophobic sexist misogyny does not count as "experience".

"comparing human life to parasites and viruses is stupid"
What's the difference?
So... You're NOT "Pro-Life"?

"see you in the after life"
No such thing exists.

"in many ways women are superior to men"
So, if it is men who are inferior to women, then it should be men who should be having their life-saving reproductive health care services and right to private personal individual independent choice taken away instead of women.

"in many ways they are superior to men and im just the guy to show them how"
If they are our superiors, then they shouldn't need to be "shown" anything by one of their inferiors.

as i said, you know nothing about women.

nice spin