Skip to comments.
Two women create a baby!!!!
Progressive U ^
| May 13, 2006
Posted on 05/22/2006 2:29:21 AM PDT by beaversmom
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
To: ProCivitas
All references to 'B' movie plots and Amazon Planets aside, some of the most vicious carriactures of men's alleged behaviour I have seen were perpetrated by the lesbians I have observed.
Hiding behind nominal femininity, they have (individually speaking) proven themselves capable of relentless predation on the emotionally weak in their own feminine ranks, and have been observed taking advantage of emotional situations no self-respecting gentleman would.
In one instance, one known to me demonstrated she knew exactly what she was doing as she sidled up to a distraught woman who had just had a nasty argument with her boyfriend/husband, and started rendering 'sympathy'. The grin she gave me when she caught me looking at her said it all. She knew I knew.
When those who blame men for their ills try to outdo the cartoonish evil they say men have perpetrated upon them, it goes beyond penis envy run amok and betrays the root selfishness and callous disregard they posess for their fellow humans of either gender.
This is just a logical extension of that selfishness.
Better they get a puppy, at least it will have a chance to find a loving home later when they discard it.
It comes to mind that there is a certain level of socialibility and deemed worthiness, whatever the standard, required for two opposite sexes to mate, at least willingly.
No such constraint is involved in parthenogenisis.
The offspring of such a self-union have the gross potential to carry on whatever traits the remainder of the population deemed so undesireable as to shun their genetics.
It is the epitomy of vanity, narcissism cubed.
41
posted on
05/22/2006 5:42:25 AM PDT
by
Smokin' Joe
(How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
To: beaversmom
Remember ladies: what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If women can grow test tube babies it won't be any big scientific leap for men to do the same.
Yet another attempt to destroy the traditional family. I'll add it as number 254,112,465,943 to the list.
42
posted on
05/22/2006 5:52:32 AM PDT
by
JamesP81
To: beaversmom
Ya gotta wonder why such experiments would be of interest to anyone and who is footing the bill and what is their agenda?
I believe that most women would still want us guys around, even if they didn't need us for procreating, just cause we are such sweet and lovable little fuzz balls.
43
posted on
05/22/2006 5:55:49 AM PDT
by
F.J. Mitchell
(A government that will not enforce the laws of the land, is a government standing on quicksand.)
To: beaversmom
And they're going to call themselves The Chicksie-Dicks.
God save us from such women.
44
posted on
05/22/2006 6:00:00 AM PDT
by
David Allen
(the presumption of innocence - what a concept!)
To: durasell
The highest concentrations of this substance known to exist are in 1) the male testes, and 2) hotel bedspreads.
To: ProCivitas
On a serious note, I suppose men don't value their chasity as much as they should nowadays.
I absolutely agree with you here. It's unusual for a guy my age to still be a virgin, but I take that seriously. When (more likely if, the way things seem to be going) I get married I want my wife to know that she is my first and only, so to speak. That's always been something very important to me, and if it sounds a little weird coming from a guy, then I guess it makes me a little weird.
46
posted on
05/22/2006 6:06:57 AM PDT
by
JamesP81
To: Smokin' Joe
What is described in the article is not parthenogenesis. When two nucleii are combined in a single ovum then stimulated to become a zygote it is somatic cell nuclear transfer with a twist. Parthenogenesis is 'spontaneous' zygote formation by a single nucleus ovum.
47
posted on
05/22/2006 6:09:26 AM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
To: David Allen
And they're going to call themselves The Chicksie-Dicks.
The pain. Make it stop :)
48
posted on
05/22/2006 6:09:58 AM PDT
by
JamesP81
To: beaversmom
A world of all females?? This gal would certainly find it boring and unexciting. What ever happened to normal human relationships? I remember that when P. Paul VI wrote the encyclical Humanae Vitae, he was derided. But this is the type of thing that he forecast. Yet, he was ridiculed then and still is today.
When sex is separated from procreation the entire civilization turns upside down on it's head. The family concept is entirely disappearing in many peoples minds, as though thousands of years of human life can be ignored for the current fashionable trends.
When will people wake up? It's all about selfishness on both men and women's part. Many men will not marry and have kids, and many women are too selfish to deny themselves so they resort to unnatural science to accomplish it.
49
posted on
05/22/2006 6:12:34 AM PDT
by
Gumdrop
To: AntiGuv
Repeat after me!
Keep religion out of the science classroom! Science is morally neutral! (Hmm, maybe should read neutered)
To: Smokin' Joe
51
posted on
05/22/2006 6:15:16 AM PDT
by
YourAdHere
(Bradypalooza. Available at Amazon.Com)
To: beaversmom
Thanks for the ping. I guess to me it's scary that scientists are even working on a project like this. The scariest thing though is that some people think it's "cool", definitely hard to figure out some people's logic.
52
posted on
05/22/2006 6:41:17 AM PDT
by
jazusamo
(-- Married a WAC in '65 and I'm still reenlisting. :-)
To: durasell
53
posted on
05/22/2006 6:41:18 AM PDT
by
Triggerhippie
(Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.)
To: beaversmom
Just crazy! Are these scientists bored or what? They should be finding cures for diseases instead of playing Frankenstein.
Thanks for pinging me to this. The comments are typical of man haters, on that blog.
54
posted on
05/22/2006 6:55:02 AM PDT
by
TheSpottedOwl
(If you don't understand the word "Illegal", then the public school system has failed you.)
To: beaversmom
No offense intended. Purely in jest.
55
posted on
05/22/2006 7:07:08 AM PDT
by
dc-zoo
To: beaversmom
Imagine if the woman does not even need another human and can use her own parts!
(talk about selfish ego.)
56
posted on
05/22/2006 7:18:28 AM PDT
by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: beaversmom; MeekOneGOP; Conspiracy Guy; DocRock; King Prout; SandyInSeattle; Darksheare; OSHA; ...
Wymyn's Studies programs everywhere welcome the new influx of students.
57
posted on
05/22/2006 8:25:19 AM PDT
by
Slings and Arrows
(When Al Franken had his bris, they threw away the baby and saved the foreskin.)
To: dc-zoo; PJ-Comix
"I thought it would be two "beavers" procreating instead of two mice."
58
posted on
05/22/2006 8:28:51 AM PDT
by
Slings and Arrows
(When Al Franken had his bris, they threw away the baby and saved the foreskin.)
To: Smokin' Joe
Or open that stuck jar? Change the oil? Deal with that mouse? Deal with no electricity? Things like that?
59
posted on
05/22/2006 9:56:18 AM PDT
by
Redcitizen
(When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk. -Tuco)
To: Allegra
The {shudder!} comments ...Misandry is on display throughout the whole posting.
60
posted on
05/22/2006 10:19:33 AM PDT
by
MichiganConservative
(Liberalism is the enemy. Government is its preferred weapon of mass destruction.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson