Do you have a timer set up yet, counting backwards to "Screw You Guys, I'm Outta Here" day?

I got 7/10 on the latter, and C+ on the former.

I got a C- guessing pedophiles, and 9/10 on the Language Inventor or Serial Killer quiz.

I'm pretty much safe from strange serial killers trying to convince me they're programmers, but if I ever have kids, I should apparently never let them out of the house.

Do you have a timer set up yet, counting backwards to "Screw You Guys, I'm Outta Here" day?

Not yet. I should get on that when I have a spare second. I'm buried under a gigantor pile of work, but since I don't give a shit, it's not really bothering me that much.

Does pretty much everyone know by now that anti-abortion groups are generally anti-birth control as well?

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. - An attempt to resume state spending on birth control got shot down Wednesday by House members who argued it would have amounted to an endorsement of promiscuous lifestyles.

Missouri stopped providing money for family planning and certain women's health services when Republicans gained control of both chambers of the Legislature in 2003.

But a Democratic lawmaker, in a little-noticed committee amendment, had successfully inserted language into the proposed budget for the fiscal year starting July 1 that would have allowed part of the $9.2 million intended for "core public health functions" to go to contraception provided through public health clinics.

The House voted 96-59 to delete the funding for contraception and infertility treatments after Rep. Susan Phillips told lawmakers that anti-abortion groups such as Missouri Right to Life were opposed to the spending.

"If you hand out contraception to single women, we're saying promiscuity is OK as a state, and I am not in support of that," Phillips, R-Kansas City, said in an interview.

[link]

So we can bear arms, but not have sex? Don't they think that will lead to problems with that whole "right to life" thing in the future?

Does pretty much everyone know by now that anti-abortion groups are generally anti-birth control as well?

Yeah. That's where I go, "Oh, so it really IS about controlling women to you, isn't it?"

They usually don't say so outright like that, though.

Um, Lawrence v. Texas held that there's a right to have sex. And a couple of older decisions held that there's a right to birth control (Griswold v. Connecticut, back in the '60s, for married couples, and I can't remember name of the case for unmarrieds).

Of course, that's the right to obtain it. Not the right to have the government supply it. Kind of like there's no right to have the government pay for arms for private citizens.

Now, as a policy matter, given the government expenses avoided by preventing unwanted pregnancies (not to mention other health benefits involved by using various birth control devices), Missouri doesn't seem to be very smart there.

They usually don't say so outright like that, though.

They're getting cocky. Which is just the tiniest bit ironic.

Silly MO legislators, they haven't learned to speak in code yet.