Quote Originally Posted by ajaxfetish View Post
Well, in the case of adoption, that woman whose vagina was passed through is already out of the picture. She has to be replaced. It's just a question of who should replace her.
Another woman.


Quote Originally Posted by ajaxfetish View Post
For all the talk about disrespecting mothers and how offended they would feel, I wonder how a single dad would interpret comments like these. I guess he just might as well give up already, since he can't give his kids what they need anyway.
A single mom\dad doing all they can for their kids does not negate the fact that the kids would be better off with both a mother and father.


Quote Originally Posted by ajaxfetish View Post
*psst* *They're for soaking up/holding in their blood during menstruation. Just thought you should know*
I know what they are for, I just never thought I would be having breakfast with them. Such are the surprises of life with women.

Quote Originally Posted by ajaxfetish View Post
This is the second time you've avoided describing the characteristics that make women unique by calling it ineffable. If you want to treat womankind as a religious mystery, that's all well and good, but in a country with separation of church and state such views shouldn't determine policy in state-administered adoption programs.
Oh, well then please, let us have the state describe the philosophical and existential qualities of womankind for us. I look forward to reading that gem of a report.

Some people here seem to be of the opinion that a woman can be defined in totality thusly: "A man with a vagina. No other differences noted." I wonder if the government report would share that soaring and eloquent syntax and grammar.