Heartland

Someone posted this on the Loserz forum.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a ... xpand=true

I can't help but be appalled.

Me on other forum wrote:What a f**king dumb cow. And the mother's no better.
"I smoke 20 cigs a day but I don't find it harms my pregnancy".
"I'm proud of my daughter for getting drunk since she was ten, and in one case having drunken unprotected sex".
"I think abortion is wrong, but I don't think smoking when pregnant is harmful".

And although they're all "happy family" about it, the boy's been arrested for rape.

Daughter like mother; daughter like c**t.

edit: and I don't use that word lightly.

As a Daily Mail reader myself, the answer is obvious...

Sterilise the poor.

By the way, what effect will this have on house prices?






(I am joking!!)

I didn't think I'd get pregnant because it was my first time.

Where the fuck did she get that idea?

It can't be a coincidence that this country has the worst sex education in the west (apart from the USA) and we also have the worst teen pregnancy rates in the west (apart from the USA).

markfiend wrote: It can't be a coincidence that this country has the worst sex education in the west (apart from the USA) and we also have the worst teen pregnancy rates in the west (apart from the USA).

It's true that when I first went to the UK as a student, I was appalled at the number of young, single mothers there. There must be a reason, and Mark probably has a very good point.

Of course it's fashionable among the readership of the Daily Mail to lay the blame for teen pregnancies on sex education. Their argument seems to be "teach children about sex and they'll have sex."

Local authorities, and to a certain extent the national government, bow to this pressure and fail to enforce what standards there are in the National Curriculum. This is not helped by Muslim and Roman Catholic teachers being allowed to refuse to discuss contraception with their students.

It's blatantly obvious that people (being people) are going to have sex whatever the Daily Mail thinks about it; it makes far more sense to me to at least try to ensure they're minimising the risks they're taking.

A "return to family values" (whatever that means) strikes me as counter-productive. What do they want? Pregnant teenagers sent away to "homes for fallen women"? Shotgun weddings?

I'm sorry, there's no point having a rational discussion about these people. They lay it all out on the line for you. Shoot them all, preferably with one bullet, thus saving ammo.

Next...

This lady girl just tript ,fell and landed on his .........

i blame the shoulder length dark hair

cunning the press aren't they. there is a big difference between the masthead 'i'm proud of my daughter' and the actual statement 'i'm proud of my daughter for keeping the baby'.

still that's the jocks for ya, slappers the lot o' them

markfiend wrote:Of course it's fashionable among the readership of the Daily Mail to lay the blame for teen pregnancies on sex education. Their argument seems to be "teach children about sex and they'll have sex."

As far as I remember, sex education never made me any horny.
Mind you, they teach you about sex, they don't teach you how to have sex. Teens will be teens (i.e. horny) either way, so they don't need any class to find out about sex. And sex education is still better than porn in that respect.

There's a girl in my year who's preggers. The baby is due next month.

I was hoping she would have it in the middle of test but unfortunately it wasn't to be

I remember on the last day of term her friends got her and the baby presents and she had a bag with "Mum to be" on one side and blank on the other side. She was walking with the "Mum to be" side showing and a teacher told her to turn it round

Thing is with our school, it is a Catholic school and I don't think they're allowed to really teach about sex coz the most we ever done was one lesson in Year 9.
In fact, we did more sex education in Year 6 than we have done in 4 years of Secondary School

robertzombie wrote:Thing is with our school, it is a Catholic school and I don't think they're allowed to really teach about sex coz the most we ever done was one lesson in Year 9.
In fact, we did more sex education in Year 6 than we have done in 4 years of Secondary School

Kind of proves my point, doesn't it?

Stories like this make me so proud to be British. I mean, where else in the world would an 11-year old have the freedom to smoke, drink, and have sex? Far from being concerned we should applaud the society that gave her the liberty to choose the path that she has, unencumbered by education, reason, and common sense. Far be it from us to be among the vanguard of those countries seeking to curtail the liberties of their citizens through compulsory sex edcuation and the like - let Johnny Foreigner suffer the indignities of a declining teen birth rate (after all, isn't it in the teen years when people are at their most vital? Surely this is the ideal time to be having children) - if we look at our "partners" in Europe we see that countries like France and Germany actually have declining birth rates. The joke will be on them when the flower of British youth, unfettered by the burdens of education, literacy, and numeracy, will be at the spearhead of a new empire - all your low-skill low-status low-income no-future jobs are belong to us.

I was halfway through reading that and ready to compose a foaming-at-the-mouth rejoinder before I realised.

Likewise. Legendary, Evil.

And Marky, you're far too level headed to fire off vituperative flames, aren't you?

streamline wrote: By the way, what effect will this have on house prices?

(Prepare for stereotypical reply)

As she's probably from Niddrie, Wester Hailes or Pennywell there won't be any noticable change.

(coats on, I'm gone)

timsinister wrote:And Marky, you're far too level headed to fire off vituperative flames, aren't you?

Of course I am Timmy. Obviously.

timsinister wrote:Legendary, Evil

I exist purely to serve and amuse

markfiend wrote:

I didn't think I'd get pregnant because it was my first time.

Where the fuck did she get that idea?

A lot of people seem to think that, and I can safely say my school has never told them otherwise

My cousin believed standing up in a running shower was a form of contraception. Go figure.

Most of my STD understanding is derived from first principles and I got more ideas on physical/medical safety from OCD than from a classroom.

Go figure some more

EvilBastard wrote:Surely this is the ideal time to be having children) - if we look at our "partners" in Europe we see that countries like France and Germany actually have declining birth rates.

Not so sure about that, dude. Thanks to migrants birth rate in France might very well be on the rise again.

We've had fairly good sex ed. I dunno if it's any different in state schools. We had a whole day dedicated to learning about contraception, protection, STIs.. as well as quite a few PSHE lessons dedicated to that too.
We even had someone from a local AIDS charity come in and give a presentation to debunk some of the myths. It amazed me that people sometimes stood back from her when she told them that she worked with people with HIV. As if it could be transmitted by touching them. She actually said something like "You can't get HIV from hugging someone who is HIV-positive, and they're the ones that need all the hugs they can get."

jande wrote:
As she's probably from Niddrie, Wester Hailes or Pennywell there won't be any noticable change.

If you had added Muirhouse, Pilton, Drylaw & Rosewell you'd have covered
all my family

Dark wrote:We've had fairly good sex ed. I dunno if it's any different in state schools. We had a whole day dedicated to learning about contraception, protection, STIs.. as well as quite a few PSHE lessons dedicated to that too.
We even had someone from a local AIDS charity come in and give a presentation to debunk some of the myths. It amazed me that people sometimes stood back from her when she told them that she worked with people with HIV. As if it could be transmitted by touching them. She actually said something like "You can't get HIV from hugging someone who is HIV-positive, and they're the ones that need all the hugs they can get."

You may have been shocked at the ignorance of those taking a step back, but them taking a step back was a good thing. They had no idea about aids, and if it was transmitted by touch, which they didn’t know if it was or not, it would have been the “let’s be all caring and give them hugs� hippy douche-bags who would of got it.