I don't get to say "how people build their own families is their own business" unless I mean it all the time.

There is a huge huge difference between my judging someone's life choices, and the government taking away those choices. When someone's church speaks out against gay people adopting children, I think they're wrong-headed, and get on with my life. If the government says gay people can't adopt, that's a problem. Of course it's their business how they build their family (or, I would suggest, a decision made with the family, their doctor, their clergy [if any]), but I can still feel free to think it's a bad choice.

I'm sure this woman's family planning is none of business but I do have an opinion on it.

It may seem like hypocrisy to say I'm fully pro-choice while thinking this woman has made a fucked up decision. But it isn't any more hypcritcal than someone who spends the money and goes through extreme medical intervention to get pregnant, stay pregnant and to end up delivering eight kids to a NICU while refusing selective reduction because it's not in God's plan.

I do respect Kat's stance and understand why she wouldn't want strangers judging her decisions.

My own sense of judgement comes from watching my niece have three kids on public assistance and to continue to not be able to provide adequately for them.

But I could just be irrationally bitchy this morning.

I'd have a hard time doing a selective reduction and there's nothing religious about that. Honestly, I don't know if I could do it.

Here's a CBS news article that includes a reproductive specialist blasting whoever implanted that many embryos: [link] You'll note that they're reporting that it's her father who's going as a contractor to Iraq, not the babies' father.

It is sort of our business, in that the hospital and/or her insurer are out tons of money; the kids may go to public schools; and they have an impact on the environment. I agree that I'd be uncomfortable having the government choose who can or cannot have children, but I'm perfectly free to be morally outraged.

points above

What everyone else said about there also being a difference between me/us being judgey on this and government intervention. I'm not the government and am not trying to be, but I do have the right to an opinion.

I also judge people's clothing choices ALL THE TIME.

And sometimes their lunch choices.

I am judgey.

So, better or worse than Clocky? Smash Clock is just begging to be punched

Alarm clocks are probably the most hated of all electronic devices, due to their sole purpose being to wake you up from a restful slumber. Your first instinct when it goes off, more often than not, is to punch the thing as hard as you can. Which is why this Smash Clock makes so much sense.

To turn off the Smash Clock's alarm, you simply punch it. Yep, it has a nice, soft top, and you're actually supposed to slam your fist down on top of it. It'll help wake you up as well as get that aggression you have built up towards your alarm out of your system. That's called good design, my friends.

I'd be uncomfortable having the government choose who can or cannot have children, but I'm perfectly free to be morally outraged.

check

and I'm ok with people judging me. Lots of people hate single parents by choice. Not once have I seen a study that shows a kid doing better with no parents than with just one. Lots of studies showing how a change in parenting is hard on a kid. And I do not think large families are necessarily bad for the kids, not at all.

But there are too many people on the planet.

I'm not the government and am not trying to be

yes you are Perkins - those people in Washington and in Sacramento and down at City Hall, they are just your representatives - YOU ARE government, we all are. (rising music) and if we don't take it upon ourselves to stand up.....

@@@

oh look I've eyerolled myself by being so ridic .

IONonjudgeyNews: My Buffy Staked Edward t-shirt came today! My mood has improved.

Does someone want to come and pack for our weekend trip?