Https
Https

Https

Cities
Cities

Cities

Are
Are

Are

With
With

With

The
The

The

Veterans
Veterans

Veterans

Last
Last

Last

That
That

That

When
When

When

Age
Age

Age

🔥 | Latest

Animals, Bad, and Cars: 366 WTNT41 KNHC 102055 TCDAT1 Hurricane Florence Discussion Number 46 NWS National Hurricane Center Miami FL 500 PM AST Mon Sep 10 2018 AL062018 Unfortunately, the models were right. Florence has rapidly intensifled into an extremely dangerous hurricane, with 30-second GOES-16 visible imagery showing well-defined eyewall mesovortices rotating inside of the eye. A NOAA Hurricane Hunter aircraft found peak SFMR winds of about 120 kt, with flight-level winds and dropsonde measurements also supporting that value for the initial wind speed estimate. Notably, the aircraft data also show the size of the hurricane-force winds has doubled in the past 12 hours thehmarie1089: your-reference-here: This is from the forecast discussion of Major Hurricane Florence from this afternoon. As a meteorologist, when I saw this, my heart sank. They don’t use wording like this for every storm. Florence is going to be a devastating. There will be huge amounts of flooding, both from inland rain and from costal storm surge. Winds are going to be some of the strongest you can get from a hurricane. People within the path of this storm could lose everything. If you know anyone who lives on the North or South Carolina coast, tell them that if there’s an evacuation ordered, they need to get the hell out. Do not take chances with this one. Reblogging again to add a list of things/essentials from a friend who lives on the NC coast and has weathered hurricanes and other bad weather: - toiletries (paper towels, toilet paper, baby wipes for “bathing” in case power water go out) - water, 1 gallon per person for at least 7 days (err on the side of caution if possible); more if you have animals!! - non perishable food items, if you get canned food make sure you have a can OPENER - pet food supplies, if you’re really worried about flooding it may be beneficial to get life vests for your pets, also find a way to put identification information on them! - batteries - flashlights - battery packs for cell phones charged up in case of loss of power - filled cars with gas filled gas can(s) - get all essentials like passports, important docs, and cherished items together ready to go - just in case, determine a way to get onto your roof safely - fill bathtubs with water so if water isn’t available you can refill the toilets to keep flushing and keep waste to a minimum - if you have dogs look up how to make a makeshift potty, you can use a hard baby pool and some sod potentially - check your prescriptions and get them refilled now if necessary - if you’re taking insulin and lose power, fill a separate cooler for your insulin than the one you would use for food. Insulin food If your place begins to flood get the hell OUT of the water!!! There is no telling if you have a live electrical charge in there! Do not cross any water you cannot see the bottom of the ground in. I’m serious. Read up on flash floods and common safety tips.
Animals, Bad, and Cars: 366
 WTNT41 KNHC 102055
 TCDAT1
 Hurricane Florence Discussion Number 46
 NWS National Hurricane Center Miami FL
 500 PM AST Mon Sep 10 2018
 AL062018
 Unfortunately, the models were right. Florence has rapidly
 intensifled into an extremely dangerous hurricane, with 30-second
 GOES-16 visible imagery showing well-defined eyewall mesovortices
 rotating inside of the eye. A NOAA Hurricane Hunter aircraft found
 peak SFMR winds of about 120 kt, with flight-level winds and
 dropsonde measurements also supporting that value for the initial
 wind speed estimate. Notably, the aircraft data also show the size
 of the hurricane-force winds has doubled in the past 12 hours
thehmarie1089:
your-reference-here:

This is from the forecast discussion of Major Hurricane Florence from this afternoon. As a meteorologist, when I saw this, my heart sank. They don’t use wording like this for every storm.
Florence is going to be a devastating. There will be huge amounts of flooding, both from inland rain and from costal storm surge. Winds are going to be some of the strongest you can get from a hurricane. People within the path of this storm could lose everything.
If you know anyone who lives on the North or South Carolina coast, tell them that if there’s an evacuation ordered, they need to get the hell out. Do not take chances with this one.


Reblogging again to add a list of things/essentials from a friend who lives on the NC coast and has weathered hurricanes and other bad weather:

- toiletries (paper towels, toilet paper, baby wipes for “bathing” in case power  water go out)
- water, 1 gallon per person for at least 7 days (err on the side of caution if possible); more if you have animals!!
- non perishable food items, if you get canned food make sure you have a can OPENER
- pet food  supplies, if you’re really worried about flooding it may be beneficial to get life vests for your pets, also find a way to put identification information on them! 
- batteries
- flashlights
- battery packs for cell phones charged up in case of loss of power
- filled cars with gas  filled gas can(s)
- get all essentials like passports, important docs, and cherished items together  ready to go 
- just in case, determine a way to get onto your roof safely
- fill bathtubs with water so if water isn’t available you can refill the toilets to keep flushing and keep waste to a minimum
- if you have dogs look up how to make a makeshift potty, you can use a hard baby pool and some sod potentially 
- check your prescriptions and get them refilled now if necessary
- if you’re taking insulin and lose power, fill a separate cooler for your insulin than the one you would use for food. Insulin  food
If your place begins to flood get the hell OUT of the water!!! There is no telling if you have a live electrical charge in there! 
Do not cross any water you cannot see the bottom of the ground in. I’m serious. 
Read up on flash floods and common safety tips.

thehmarie1089: your-reference-here: This is from the forecast discussion of Major Hurricane Florence from this afternoon. As a meteorologis...

Birthday, Church, and England: Monty Python too white for today's BBC uihew Moore MedireondentT guys who move to London n a nat Theyre even Church of England once The sketch show, which television to denounce a diverse enough, the BBCS nHele o ce sa oho sa resticulate. Of course, not same estimate, Peter share, thejokes feel quite familiar andit feels like you're not breaking any new ground or telling or a new story then like Monty Python that feature goes off at the hauled themselves on to starred Michaet Pain ls not bidge white blokes would not funny stimate. hetn looks very tawa, yu ponations head of comedy has to start aonder ronrlates have omedy stars from John Cleese and auit suceessful television carers James Marttéor e head of comedy said brand of comedy that modern eyes. What, you outraged prelates have by the BBCtoday, the Headded Its about how originalthe yoice you have, rather than what school of which are now more than 50 years old, have many years of laughter Enic ldie to Stephen Fry and Hugh Lau- unveiled by the BBC Henry birthday special hosted by Sir Trevor McDonald and a lowe'en episode of Inside No 9, the hit their sell-by date. Nowadays, Monty honing their craft at Cambridge Comment live Hal- Footlights, but thenational broadcaster Monty Python. If the surreal brand of humoursilliness, I wonder how 5o now looking for more diversity senes Pemberton and Reece Shearsmith from The Leugue of Gentlemen, BBC Three has also handed three pilots to ri gave a break to Tim omedy doesn't age was groundbreaking and many well. Ask any innovative back in the Sixties, it doesn't look that age of 30 like me can sit through nonsense about Bill Oddie, who went on to form The and Olivia Colman nd crave sketchh shows and sitcoms dies. Other former members in actor. Gags that must have way today, As times have knights who say "ni or a Hounslow Girtby Ambreen Raz- ia, the Welsh coming-of-age story In My Skin by Kayleigh Peter Cook, Emma Thompson had the groundlings splitting their sides back has lost the shock factor much more than a changed. Monty Python dead parrot and raise ers had heard enough about the in the Bards day leave on which a lot of its and success depended. It reflect that bishops of the James Marriott is metropolitan, educated experience modern audiences stoney faced, however hard the show Tash and EBie by Natasi Demetriou and Ellie Whit Last year the media res lator Ofcom told the BBC seems almost quaint to The Times vith a sense of place", claimed Shane actors g llen, controller of BBC comedy e who reflect modern world and have got something to say that's different and we haven't seen The show's stars, David Mitchell and Robert Webb, were both members of the Footlights comedy group at Cam His, comments came as the BBC range of its led a seri mes fronted by female and ethnic es of new comedy pro- ge been told When you look at the ones recent comedies) that have done well caster's shows as too tr tional and risk-averse Asked if the drive risked discrimina-It's about telling stories that havent ting against teenagers who happenedto win a place at Oxbridge, Mr Allen in- fr Allen cited recent BBC Three etch show Fiamalam, which has an all- ack cast orporation was giving a platform to sisted there was no class war ban on they've got a really specific sense of ewtalent. Hesaid it had been 50 years "posh people" appearing on television place," he said, picking out award-win- t as an example of how the April that a row overal 35 Python, which he de However, he indicated that shows ning mockumentary This Country, set s The Young Offenders in a deprived Cotswolds village, and ducer-led gang show like Channel 4's acclaimed Peep Show, pres resign. ing to assemble a team about the lives of two middle-class BBC "If a sitcom comes in about three ow it's not going to be six Oxbridge graduates who share a flat after uni about two miscreant Irish teenagers versity, were not a priority for the BBC going to be a diverse <p><a href="http://friendly-neighborhood-patriarch.tumblr.com/post/175181203677/nunyabizni-this-is-the-most-wrong-thing-i-have" class="tumblr_blog">friendly-neighborhood-patriarch</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="https://nunyabizni.tumblr.com/post/175181186232/this-is-the-most-wrong-thing-i-have-ever-laid-eyes" class="tumblr_blog">nunyabizni</a>:</p><blockquote><p>This is the most wrong thing I have ever laid eyes on</p></blockquote> <p>*pours myself a full pint of bourbon*</p></blockquote>
Birthday, Church, and England: Monty Python too white for today's BBC
 uihew Moore MedireondentT
 guys who move to London n a nat
 Theyre
 even
 Church of England once The sketch show, which
 television to denounce a diverse enough, the BBCS
 nHele o ce sa oho sa
 resticulate. Of course, not
 same
 estimate, Peter
 share, thejokes feel quite familiar andit
 feels like you're not breaking any new
 ground or telling or a new story then
 like Monty Python that feature
 goes off at the hauled themselves on to starred Michaet Pain ls not
 bidge white blokes would not funny stimate. hetn looks very tawa, yu
 ponations head of comedy has to start aonder ronrlates have
 omedy stars from John Cleese and
 auit suceessful television carers James Marttéor e
 head of comedy said
 brand of comedy that
 modern eyes. What, you
 outraged prelates have
 by the BBCtoday, the
 Headded Its about how originalthe
 yoice you have, rather than what school
 of which are now more
 than 50 years old, have
 many years of laughter
 Enic ldie to Stephen Fry and Hugh Lau-
 unveiled by the BBC
 Henry birthday special hosted by Sir
 Trevor McDonald and a
 lowe'en episode of Inside No 9, the
 hit their sell-by date.
 Nowadays, Monty
 honing their craft at Cambridge
 Comment
 live Hal-
 Footlights, but thenational broadcaster
 Monty Python. If the
 surreal brand of humoursilliness, I wonder how
 5o
 now looking for more diversity
 senes
 Pemberton and Reece Shearsmith from
 The Leugue of Gentlemen, BBC Three
 has also handed three pilots to ri
 gave a break to Tim
 omedy doesn't age was groundbreaking and many
 well. Ask any
 innovative back in the
 Sixties, it doesn't look that
 age of 30 like me can sit
 through nonsense about
 Bill Oddie, who went on to form The
 and Olivia Colman
 nd crave sketchh shows and sitcoms
 dies. Other former members in actor. Gags that must have way today, As times have knights who say "ni or a
 Hounslow Girtby Ambreen Raz-
 ia, the Welsh coming-of-age
 story In My Skin by Kayleigh
 Peter Cook, Emma Thompson
 had the groundlings
 splitting their sides back has lost the shock factor much more than a
 changed. Monty Python
 dead parrot and raise
 ers had heard enough about the in the Bards day leave
 on which a lot of its
 and
 success depended. It
 reflect that bishops of the
 James Marriott is
 metropolitan, educated experience modern audiences stoney
 faced, however hard the
 show Tash and EBie by Natasi
 Demetriou and Ellie Whit
 Last year the media res
 lator Ofcom told the BBC
 seems almost quaint to
 The Times
 vith a sense of place", claimed Shane actors g
 llen, controller of BBC comedy
 e who reflect modern
 world and have got something to say
 that's different and we haven't seen
 The show's stars, David Mitchell and
 Robert Webb, were both members of
 the Footlights comedy group at Cam
 His, comments came as the BBC range of
 its
 led a seri
 mes fronted by female and ethnic
 es of new comedy pro-
 ge
 been told When you look at the ones
 recent comedies) that have done well
 caster's shows as too tr
 tional and risk-averse
 Asked if the drive risked discrimina-It's about telling stories that havent
 ting against teenagers who happenedto
 win a place at Oxbridge, Mr Allen in-
 fr Allen cited recent BBC Three
 etch show Fiamalam, which has an all-
 ack cast
 orporation was giving a platform to sisted there was no class war ban on they've got a really specific sense of
 ewtalent. Hesaid it had been 50 years "posh people" appearing on television place," he said, picking out award-win-
 t as an example of how the
 April that a row overal
 35
 Python, which he de However, he indicated that shows ning mockumentary This Country, set
 s The Young Offenders
 in a deprived Cotswolds village, and
 ducer-led gang show like Channel 4's acclaimed Peep Show,
 pres
 resign.
 ing to assemble a team about the lives of two middle-class BBC
 "If a sitcom comes in about three
 ow it's not going to be six Oxbridge graduates who share a flat after uni about two miscreant Irish teenagers
 versity, were not a priority for the BBC
 going to be a diverse
<p><a href="http://friendly-neighborhood-patriarch.tumblr.com/post/175181203677/nunyabizni-this-is-the-most-wrong-thing-i-have" class="tumblr_blog">friendly-neighborhood-patriarch</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p><a href="https://nunyabizni.tumblr.com/post/175181186232/this-is-the-most-wrong-thing-i-have-ever-laid-eyes" class="tumblr_blog">nunyabizni</a>:</p><blockquote><p>This is the most wrong thing I have ever laid eyes on</p></blockquote>
<p>*pours myself a full pint of bourbon*</p></blockquote>

friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: nunyabizni:This is the most wrong thing I have ever laid eyes on *pours myself a full pint of bourbon*

Fresh, Ken, and Love: We're oontractually obligated to lat you know every time the Banana Bunker is featured on our ste.httpo/gr.pn/1NeSOlt Like 2,588 people like this You know what that looks Ike dont you haha. Like a sound investment, Ken! 3 minut 3g My friend said her banana was too curvyis this the only shape it comes in? is it a flexible container? Hahal Groupon The soft plastic reservoir, located in the midcle is able to expand and twist to suit all bananas Thanks for asking What if our bananas are to big?? I can imagine the face on the teachers when my child puls this out of his lunch bag 7 ho mago. Edted Lke 310 Reply That face of an education professional who is happy to see their student is eating well and also taking responsible steps to make sure that their snack fruits are as fresh and unbruised as they were when picked in South or Central What is the effective rate when used correctly 8 hours ago uke山11 nephy 99.9% banana protection, of course! No one can be perfect hours ago Like 6 999% reliable? But what is the plan b? Plan B for Plan Banana for long) is that you risk axposing your banana to the elements. Any responsible snack fruit fan knows better than that. And to think I've been unprotected this whole hour ago Lie 0-Reply Groupon It's never too late to start, Courtney! This has got to be an early April fools joke!! hours ag Like 15 Raply No chance, Heather! Protection is no joke (for your bananal s this ribbed for the bananas pleasure? That's a complicated question, Heather Bananas dont exactly feel" Ske we humans do, but our scientists estimate that they heaviy anjay the comfort of the banana bunker Rbbed for her.., NM hours ag Like 13 Rply -.more sizeable bananas! hours ago e 51 Danica Overly ribbed! Looks painful hours ago e 26 Reply Sorry for any confusion! You' remove that part ot the bunker (as well as the skin of the banana) Looks like it has double duty to ma Yescan also be used tor smal cucumbers or very wide carrots hours ago Le s that a Banana Bunker in your pocket or are you just happy to see me? Groupon Why not both?: A well-protected snack is a good present for a great friend. 9 hours ago Lik 6-Roply We just checked, and it tastes like plastic 0 Lke 79 Tricia So does this banana bunker only house one banana or can you put two slim bananas in Groupon C It just depends on what size and type of banana, Tricial Latundan bananas are an excellent example of a smaller,but equally delicious always worried about the size of the banana it's the quality not the quantity that counts right groupon! Some think two is better than one. These comments have me WEAK hours ago Like 56 Reply Groupon Sounds like you could use some more Potassium in your diet! 7 hours ago Like 244 Ryneu 7 hours ago Like 4 I love you, Groupon employee 7 hours ago Like 61 srsfunny:This Employee From Groupon Is A Genius
Fresh, Ken, and Love: We're oontractually obligated to lat you know every time the
 Banana Bunker is featured on our ste.httpo/gr.pn/1NeSOlt
 Like
 2,588 people like this
 You know what that looks Ike dont you haha.
 Like a sound investment, Ken!
 3 minut 3g
 My friend said her banana was too curvyis this
 the only shape it comes in? is it a flexible
 container? Hahal
 Groupon
 The soft plastic reservoir, located in the midcle
 is able to expand and twist to suit all bananas
 Thanks for asking
 What if our bananas are to big??
 I can imagine the face on the teachers when my
 child puls this out of his lunch bag
 7 ho mago. Edted Lke 310 Reply
 That face of an education professional who is
 happy to see their student is eating well and
 also taking responsible steps to make sure that
 their snack fruits are as fresh and unbruised as
 they were when picked in South or Central
 What is the effective rate when used correctly
 8 hours ago uke山11 nephy
 99.9% banana protection, of course! No one can
 be perfect
 hours ago Like 6
 999% reliable? But what is the plan b?
 Plan B for Plan Banana for long) is that you risk
 axposing your banana to the elements. Any
 responsible snack fruit fan knows better than
 that.
 And to think I've been unprotected this whole
 hour ago Lie 0-Reply
 Groupon
 It's never too late to start, Courtney!
 This has got to be an early April fools joke!!
 hours ag Like 15 Raply
 No chance, Heather! Protection is no joke (for
 your bananal
 s this ribbed for the bananas pleasure?
 That's a complicated question, Heather
 Bananas dont exactly feel" Ske we humans do,
 but our scientists estimate that they heaviy
 anjay the comfort of the banana bunker
 Rbbed for her.., NM
 hours ag Like 13 Rply
 -.more sizeable bananas!
 hours ago e 51
 Danica
 Overly ribbed! Looks painful
 hours ago e 26 Reply
 Sorry for any confusion! You' remove that part
 ot the bunker (as well as the skin of the banana)
 Looks like it has double duty to ma
 Yescan also be used tor smal cucumbers
 or very wide carrots
 hours ago Le
 s that a Banana Bunker in your pocket or are
 you just happy to see me?
 Groupon
 Why not both?: A well-protected snack is a
 good present for a great friend.
 9 hours ago Lik
 6-Roply
 We just checked, and it tastes like plastic
 0 Lke 79
 Tricia
 So does this banana bunker only house one
 banana or can you put two slim bananas in
 Groupon C
 It just depends on what size and type of banana,
 Tricial Latundan bananas are an excellent
 example of a smaller,but equally delicious
 always worried about the
 size of the banana it's the quality not the quantity
 that counts right groupon!
 Some think two is better than one.
 These comments have me WEAK
 hours ago Like 56 Reply
 Groupon
 Sounds like you could use some
 more Potassium in your diet!
 7 hours ago Like 244
 Ryneu
 7 hours ago Like 4
 I love you, Groupon employee
 7 hours ago Like 61
srsfunny:This Employee From Groupon Is A Genius

srsfunny:This Employee From Groupon Is A Genius

Alive, Anaconda, and Apparently: Barber: "what you want?" Him: "give me the most dystopian shit possible" Barber: "got ya fam" LifeNews com LifeNews.com @LifeNewsHQ Follow British Govt Encouraging Women to Give Birth to Disabled Babies to Harvest Thei Organs buff.ly/2Fuaepo <p><a href="http://krungle.tumblr.com/post/171933983002/libertarirynn-matt-ruins-your-shit" class="tumblr_blog">krungle</a>:</p><blockquote> <p><a href="https://libertarirynn.tumblr.com/post/171933218134/matt-ruins-your-shit-kajiosblog-this" class="tumblr_blog">libertarirynn</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://matt-ruins-your-shit.tumblr.com/post/171925993106/kajiosblog-this-articles-title-is-rather" class="tumblr_blog">matt-ruins-your-shit</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://kajiosblog.tumblr.com/post/171917720473/this-articles-title-is-rather-misleading-they" class="tumblr_blog">kajiosblog</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>This article’s title is rather misleading.  They aren’t encouraging women to somehow disable their fetuses in order to use them for organs or something like that.  They aren’t encouraging anything.</p> <p>The truth of the matter is that expecting mothers who find out that their baby will be born with fatal defects will be given the option to carry out the birth, rather than terminate early, in order to allow for organ donation.  Note this this is simply an option, and there is no incentive or penalty for either choice.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/650467/NHS-to-harvest-babies-fatal-defect-foetus-donate-organs-mothers-option-terminate-birth">https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/650467/NHS-to-harvest-babies-fatal-defect-foetus-donate-organs-mothers-option-terminate-birth</a></p> </blockquote> <figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="200" data-orig-width="370" data-orig-src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/e52518448e2c705676d57e41594cdcb7/tumblr_inline_p5oc0lNajE1si8t7m_540.gif"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/e52518448e2c705676d57e41594cdcb7/tumblr_inline_p5p3fvAsQ11rw09tq_540.gif" data-orig-height="200" data-orig-width="370" data-orig-src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/e52518448e2c705676d57e41594cdcb7/tumblr_inline_p5oc0lNajE1si8t7m_540.gif"/></figure><p>I don’t think a single other person read that headline and thought they were “encouraging women to somehow disable their fetuses in order to use them for organs.” That’s not why people find it incredibly disturbing and I’m astounded those were the conclusions you drew and thought it needed to be corrected. No seriously where did you get the idea that it was being claimed that mothers were being told to disable unborn children so they could be harvested? That makes no sense, that’s like the logic of Ricky from Trailer Park Boys who thinks that as long as you drag stolen goods down to the curb it becomes garbage and it’s not illegal to steal garbage. The very idea of a baby needing to be disabled in order to justify harvesting it’s organs should be offensive, it implies disabled people have less right to be alive and have their organs inside their own fucking bodies. The article title wasn’t misleading your terribly needless strawman explanation of the title was misleading. This is the exact reason I hate “fact checkers” you need fact checkers for the fact checkers they can be so bogged down in spin and semantics and dumb bullshit like this. The problem is with the harvesting of organs from disabled babies full stop. I didn’t think this needed to be explained but here goes.</p> <p>First of all it turns human life into a commodity, and not just a commodity but a commodity that would be controlled by the medical system of an increasingly fascist socialist government. What could go wrong?</p> <p>Like for example it hasn’t even happened yet and already there seems to be confusion about what exactly constitutes fatal defects. A system that always is going to want more organs is going to determine for themselves what is disabled enough? And what level of disabled is enough that you should be determined as scrap parts instead of a person? How do you know the baby will die? Doctors tell people their kids will be born dead or will die soon all the time that live full lives. One of my best friends parents were told he wouldn’t make it past a few weeks and he’s in his late twenties now. Really glad this wasn’t the policy back then.</p> <p>“will be given the option to carry out the birth, rather than terminate early” No, carrying out the pregnancy has always been an option it’s the harvesting of organs that would be the new factor here. If it’s as you said that they are being given the option to carry out the pregnancy does that mean that right now women are being forced to have abortions? No giving birth is and always has been the default option. I find it gross that you think the only thing people do when they find out a baby will have serious defects is just abort it. These fatal defects represent a percentage chance of survival not a guarantee, so while yes a lot of people just say fuck it and abort at any sign of a problem there are also lots of people that take the risk give birth because worst case scenario the baby dies naturally best case scenario it survives. Medium case scenario it survives but raising it is costly and they have a lower quality of life…but it’s still a life and it should be up to a person to decide if their quality of life is low enough that they would rather not have it at all. <br/></p> <p>The horrifying part is they are not talking about stillborns, they’re not talking about babies that died in the womb. They’re talking about babies they believe will die eventually after being born. Who makes that determination? You trust the NHS… a system so shitty they amputate the wrong limbs on people to decide what babies are basically done for before they’re even born. Especially when they will benefit from every single baby a parent decides to allow be harvested. If there is room for corruption there will be corruption.</p> <p> So what happens once those babies are born and they’re alive? Do they start up a daycare center thats whole purpose is to wait for babies to die so they can be harvested? I’m sure the care there would be super humane and hospitable. What do they do with the ones that survive? By that point they would have become property of the NHS because they’re not babies they’re just living organ donations that haven’t had the courtesy to die naturally yet. Do they call up the mother and say hey so remember when you told us we could harvest your dead baby…well can you come by and pick up your two year old… that fucker is being really stubborn about not dying like we promised. Or much more likely they’ll just kill the babies immediately to avoid that burden and complication and not give them the chance to survive. I’ve already heard the term post birth abortion or as someone with a soul left would call it baby murder. </p> <p>They try to get around this by claiming the harvesting wont be an option until they are told the mother wants to have an abortion. What a great failsafe right? Well except that they can tell the mother whatever they want to get her to say she wants an abortion. They can tell her that her baby will definitely die when it might have a good chance of living. Which happens already without the added incentive of wanting to harvest the organs.</p> <p>Where would the oversight be. The NHS is already overwhelmed you think there’s going to be someone checking to make sure nobody is telling mothers their babies have fetal defects when they don’t? You think the system is going to check every single case, especially when every single case is going to benefit them? What fairy tale world do you live in. It’s the setup for a system where you give a doctor the power to say to himself this baby has a 10-60% chance of survival this mother is being a real bitch…and we’re in need of organs right now…maybe I tell her the lowest number in that estimate. Which is all it will be…fucking estimates. I have a member of my family that was pronounced dead four times and lived another twenty years. These people can’t even figure out when a person is dead and you want to give them 100% authority to determine who will die. Fuck that, fuck this. If they do this there will be horror stories rolling out within the week.</p> </blockquote> <p>Imagine fucking reading this and being like “no guys you don’t understand nobody’s asking the mother’s to disable the babies, just to give birth to disabled babies instead of murdering them in the womb so we can chop them up for parts! Because that’s so much better!”</p> </blockquote> <p style=""> “ babies diagnosed with fatal illnesses “</p> <p>That is a pretty high bar if you ask me. The kid will die anyway, sometimes destroying the organs in the process and often involving massive pain while being kept alive for enormous sums of money on machines. At least in this way the poor kid doesn’t have to suffer and some other kid gets a chance to end their suffering, as well, when they receive their transplants.</p> <p>The entire conversation on this started with fetuses that developed with no brain.</p> <p>You all that say this is wrong because of ‘compassion’ are showing no compassion for either the pain and suffering of the baby or the pain and suffering of the kids who will be able to live a much more normal and longer life once they get transplants. It isn’t ‘compassion’ you are showing but a strict adherence to a moral code and be damned how much pain and suffering it causes others.</p> <p>You people would show more compassion for your dog than you would for another human being.<br/></p> </blockquote> <p>“No YOU guys are actually the cruel ones for not wanting to murder sick babies to harvest them for parts!“</p><p>Are you fucking serious? First of all apparently it’s no longer possible to harvest organs after natural death despite the fact that it’s done all the time? “They’re going to die eventually anyway“ I’ve got a newsflash for you pal, so are you. I like how you think this is completely justified based on your assumption that all babies born with fatal illnesses are in constant pain and should therefore be exterminated for their own sake. This is post is a hot mess in every way.</p>
Alive, Anaconda, and Apparently: Barber: "what you want?"
 Him: "give me the most
 dystopian shit possible"
 Barber: "got ya fam"
 LifeNews
 com
 LifeNews.com
 @LifeNewsHQ
 Follow
 British Govt Encouraging Women to Give
 Birth to Disabled Babies to Harvest Thei
 Organs buff.ly/2Fuaepo
<p><a href="http://krungle.tumblr.com/post/171933983002/libertarirynn-matt-ruins-your-shit" class="tumblr_blog">krungle</a>:</p><blockquote>
<p><a href="https://libertarirynn.tumblr.com/post/171933218134/matt-ruins-your-shit-kajiosblog-this" class="tumblr_blog">libertarirynn</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="http://matt-ruins-your-shit.tumblr.com/post/171925993106/kajiosblog-this-articles-title-is-rather" class="tumblr_blog">matt-ruins-your-shit</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="http://kajiosblog.tumblr.com/post/171917720473/this-articles-title-is-rather-misleading-they" class="tumblr_blog">kajiosblog</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This article’s title is rather misleading.  They aren’t encouraging women to somehow disable their fetuses in order to use them for organs or something like that.  They aren’t encouraging anything.</p>
<p>The truth of the matter is that expecting mothers who find out that their baby will be born with fatal defects will be given the option to carry out the birth, rather than terminate early, in order to allow for organ donation.  Note this this is simply an option, and there is no incentive or penalty for either choice.</p>
<p>Source: <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/650467/NHS-to-harvest-babies-fatal-defect-foetus-donate-organs-mothers-option-terminate-birth">https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/650467/NHS-to-harvest-babies-fatal-defect-foetus-donate-organs-mothers-option-terminate-birth</a></p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="200" data-orig-width="370" data-orig-src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/e52518448e2c705676d57e41594cdcb7/tumblr_inline_p5oc0lNajE1si8t7m_540.gif"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/e52518448e2c705676d57e41594cdcb7/tumblr_inline_p5p3fvAsQ11rw09tq_540.gif" data-orig-height="200" data-orig-width="370" data-orig-src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/e52518448e2c705676d57e41594cdcb7/tumblr_inline_p5oc0lNajE1si8t7m_540.gif"/></figure><p>I don’t think a single other person read that headline and thought they were “encouraging women to somehow disable their fetuses in order to use them for organs.” That’s not why people find it incredibly disturbing and I’m astounded those were the conclusions you drew and thought it needed to be corrected. No seriously where did you get the idea that it was being claimed that mothers were being told to disable unborn children so they could be harvested? That makes no sense, that’s like the logic of Ricky from Trailer Park Boys who thinks that as long as you drag stolen goods down to the curb it becomes garbage and it’s not illegal to steal garbage. The very idea of a baby needing to be disabled in order to justify harvesting it’s organs should be offensive, it implies disabled people have less right to be alive and have their organs inside their own fucking bodies. The article title wasn’t misleading your terribly needless strawman explanation of the title was misleading. This is the exact reason I hate “fact checkers” you need fact checkers for the fact checkers they can be so bogged down in spin and semantics and dumb bullshit like this. The problem is with the harvesting of organs from disabled babies full stop. I didn’t think this needed to be explained but here goes.</p>
<p>First of all it turns human life into a commodity, and not just a commodity but a commodity that would be controlled by the medical system of an increasingly fascist socialist government. What could go wrong?</p>
<p>Like for example it hasn’t even happened yet and already there seems to be confusion about what exactly constitutes fatal defects. A system that always is going to want more organs is going to determine for themselves what is disabled enough? And what level of disabled is enough that you should be determined as scrap parts instead of a person? How do you know the baby will die? Doctors tell people their kids will be born dead or will die soon all the time that live full lives. One of my best friends parents were told he wouldn’t make it past a few weeks and he’s in his late twenties now. Really glad this wasn’t the policy back then.</p>
<p>“will be given the option to carry out the birth, rather than terminate early” No, carrying out the pregnancy has always been an option it’s the harvesting of organs that would be the new factor here. If it’s as you said that they are being given the option to carry out the pregnancy does that mean that right now women are being forced to have abortions? No giving birth is and always has been the default option. I find it gross that you think the only thing people do when they find out a baby will have serious defects is just abort it. These fatal defects represent a percentage chance of survival not a guarantee, so while yes a lot of people just say fuck it and abort at any sign of a problem there are also lots of people that take the risk give birth because worst case scenario the baby dies naturally best case scenario it survives. Medium case scenario it survives but raising it is costly and they have a lower quality of life…but it’s still a life and it should be up to a person to decide if their quality of life is low enough that they would rather not have it at all. <br/></p>
<p>The horrifying part is they are not talking about stillborns, they’re not talking about babies that died in the womb. They’re talking about babies they believe will die eventually after being born. Who makes that determination? You trust the NHS… a system so shitty they amputate the wrong limbs on people to decide what babies are basically done for before they’re even born. Especially when they will benefit from every single baby a parent decides to allow be harvested. If there is room for corruption there will be corruption.</p>
<p> So what happens once those babies are born and they’re alive? Do they start up a daycare center thats whole purpose is to wait for babies to die so they can be harvested? I’m sure the care there would be super humane and hospitable. What do they do with the ones that survive? By that point they would have become property of the NHS because they’re not babies they’re just living organ donations that haven’t had the courtesy to die naturally yet. Do they call up the mother and say hey so remember when you told us we could harvest your dead baby…well can you come by and pick up your two year old… that fucker is being really stubborn about not dying like we promised. Or much more likely they’ll just kill the babies immediately to avoid that burden and complication and not give them the chance to survive. I’ve already heard the term post birth abortion or as someone with a soul left would call it baby murder. </p>
<p>They try to get around this by claiming the harvesting wont be an option until they are told the mother wants to have an abortion. What a great failsafe right? Well except that they can tell the mother whatever they want to get her to say she wants an abortion. They can tell her that her baby will definitely die when it might have a good chance of living. Which happens already without the added incentive of wanting to harvest the organs.</p>
<p>Where would the oversight be. The NHS is already overwhelmed you think there’s going to be someone checking to make sure nobody is telling mothers their babies have fetal defects when they don’t? You think the system is going to check every single case, especially when every single case is going to benefit them? What fairy tale world do you live in. It’s the setup for a system where you give a doctor the power to say to himself this baby has a 10-60% chance of survival this mother is being a real bitch…and we’re in need of organs right now…maybe I tell her the lowest number in that estimate. Which is all it will be…fucking estimates. I have a member of my family that was pronounced dead four times and lived another twenty years. These people can’t even figure out when a person is dead and you want to give them 100% authority to determine who will die. Fuck that, fuck this. If they do this there will be horror stories rolling out within the week.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Imagine fucking reading this and being like “no guys you don’t understand nobody’s asking the mother’s to disable the babies, just to give birth to disabled babies instead of murdering them in the womb so we can chop them up for parts! Because that’s so much better!”</p>
</blockquote>
<p style="">
 “ babies diagnosed with fatal illnesses

“</p>
<p>That is a pretty high bar if you ask me. The kid will die anyway, sometimes destroying the organs in the process and often involving massive pain while being kept alive for enormous sums of money on machines. At least in this way the poor kid doesn’t have to suffer and some other kid gets a chance to end their suffering, as well, when they receive their transplants.</p>
<p>The entire conversation on this started with fetuses that developed with no brain.</p>
<p>You all that say this is wrong because of ‘compassion’ are showing no compassion for either the pain and suffering of the baby or the pain and suffering of the kids who will be able to live a much more normal and longer life once they get transplants. It isn’t ‘compassion’ you are showing but a strict adherence to a moral code and be damned how much pain and suffering it causes others.</p>
<p>You people would show more compassion for your dog than you would for another human being.<br/></p>
</blockquote>
<p>“No YOU guys are actually the cruel ones for not wanting to murder sick babies to harvest them for parts!“</p><p>Are you fucking serious? First of all apparently it’s no longer possible to harvest organs after natural death despite the fact that it’s done all the time? “They’re going to die eventually anyway“ I’ve got a newsflash for you pal, so are you. I like how you think this is completely justified based on your assumption that all babies born with fatal illnesses are in constant pain and should therefore be exterminated for their own sake. This is post is a hot mess in every way.</p>

krungle: libertarirynn: matt-ruins-your-shit: kajiosblog: This article’s title is rather misleading.  They aren’t encouraging women to so...

Alive, Anaconda, and Bailey Jay: Barber: "what you want?" Him: "give me the most dystopian shit possible" Barber: "got ya fam" LifeNews com LifeNews.com @LifeNewsHQ Follow British Govt Encouraging Women to Give Birth to Disabled Babies to Harvest Thei Organs buff.ly/2Fuaepo <p><a href="http://matt-ruins-your-shit.tumblr.com/post/171925993106/kajiosblog-this-articles-title-is-rather" class="tumblr_blog">matt-ruins-your-shit</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://kajiosblog.tumblr.com/post/171917720473/this-articles-title-is-rather-misleading-they" class="tumblr_blog">kajiosblog</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>This article’s title is rather misleading.  They aren’t encouraging women to somehow disable their fetuses in order to use them for organs or something like that.  They aren’t encouraging anything.</p> <p>The truth of the matter is that expecting mothers who find out that their baby will be born with fatal defects will be given the option to carry out the birth, rather than terminate early, in order to allow for organ donation.  Note this this is simply an option, and there is no incentive or penalty for either choice.</p> <p>Source: <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/650467/NHS-to-harvest-babies-fatal-defect-foetus-donate-organs-mothers-option-terminate-birth">https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/650467/NHS-to-harvest-babies-fatal-defect-foetus-donate-organs-mothers-option-terminate-birth</a></p> </blockquote> <figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="200" data-orig-width="370"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/e52518448e2c705676d57e41594cdcb7/tumblr_inline_p5oc0lNajE1si8t7m_540.gif" data-orig-height="200" data-orig-width="370"/></figure><p>I don’t think a single other person read that headline and thought they were “encouraging women to somehow disable their fetuses in order to use them for organs.” That’s not why people find it incredibly disturbing and I’m astounded those were the conclusions you drew and thought it needed to be corrected. No seriously where did you get the idea that it was being claimed that mothers were being told to disable unborn children so they could be harvested? That makes no sense, that’s like the logic of Ricky from Trailer Park Boys who thinks that as long as you drag stolen goods down to the curb it becomes garbage and it’s not illegal to steal garbage. The very idea of a baby needing to be disabled in order to justify harvesting it’s organs should be offensive, it implies disabled people have less right to be alive and have their organs inside their own fucking bodies. The article title wasn’t misleading your terribly needless strawman explanation of the title was misleading. This is the exact reason I hate “fact checkers” you need fact checkers for the fact checkers they can be so bogged down in spin and semantics and dumb bullshit like this. The problem is with the harvesting of organs from disabled babies full stop. I didn’t think this needed to be explained but here goes.</p> <p>First of all it turns human life into a commodity, and not just a commodity but a commodity that would be controlled by the medical system of an increasingly fascist socialist government. What could go wrong?</p> <p>Like for example it hasn’t even happened yet and already there seems to be confusion about what exactly constitutes fatal defects. A system that always is going to want more organs is going to determine for themselves what is disabled enough? And what level of disabled is enough that you should be determined as scrap parts instead of a person? How do you know the baby will die? Doctors tell people their kids will be born dead or will die soon all the time that live full lives. One of my best friends parents were told he wouldn’t make it past a few weeks and he’s in his late twenties now. Really glad this wasn’t the policy back then.</p> <p>“will be given the option to carry out the birth, rather than terminate early” No, carrying out the pregnancy has always been an option it’s the harvesting of organs that would be the new factor here. If it’s as you said that they are being given the option to carry out the pregnancy does that mean that right now women are being forced to have abortions? No giving birth is and always has been the default option. I find it gross that you think the only thing people do when they find out a baby will have serious defects is just abort it. These fatal defects represent a percentage chance of survival not a guarantee, so while yes a lot of people just say fuck it and abort at any sign of a problem there are also lots of people that take the risk give birth because worst case scenario the baby dies naturally best case scenario it survives. Medium case scenario it survives but raising it is costly and they have a lower quality of life…but it’s still a life and it should be up to a person to decide if their quality of life is low enough that they would rather not have it at all. <br/></p> <p>The horrifying part is they are not talking about stillborns, they’re not talking about babies that died in the womb. They’re talking about babies they believe will die eventually after being born. Who makes that determination? You trust the NHS… a system so shitty they amputate the wrong limbs on people to decide what babies are basically done for before they’re even born. Especially when they will benefit from every single baby a parent decides to allow be harvested. If there is room for corruption there will be corruption.</p> <p> So what happens once those babies are born and they’re alive? Do they start up a daycare center thats whole purpose is to wait for babies to die so they can be harvested? I’m sure the care there would be super humane and hospitable. What do they do with the ones that survive? By that point they would have become property of the NHS because they’re not babies they’re just living organ donations that haven’t had the courtesy to die naturally yet. Do they call up the mother and say hey so remember when you told us we could harvest your dead baby…well can you come by and pick up your two year old… that fucker is being really stubborn about not dying like we promised. Or much more likely they’ll just kill the babies immediately to avoid that burden and complication and not give them the chance to survive. I’ve already heard the term post birth abortion or as someone with a soul left would call it baby murder. </p> <p>They try to get around this by claiming the harvesting wont be an option until they are told the mother wants to have an abortion. What a great failsafe right? Well except that they can tell the mother whatever they want to get her to say she wants an abortion. They can tell her that her baby will definitely die when it might have a good chance of living. Which happens already without the added incentive of wanting to harvest the organs.</p> <p>Where would the oversight be. The NHS is already overwhelmed you think there’s going to be someone checking to make sure nobody is telling mothers their babies have fetal defects when they don’t? You think the system is going to check every single case, especially when every single case is going to benefit them? What fairy tale world do you live in. It’s the setup for a system where you give a doctor the power to say to himself this baby has a 10-60% chance of survival this mother is being a real bitch…and we’re in need of organs right now…maybe I tell her the lowest number in that estimate. Which is all it will be…fucking estimates. I have a member of my family that was pronounced dead four times and lived another twenty years. These people can’t even figure out when a person is dead and you want to give them 100% authority to determine who will die. Fuck that, fuck this. If they do this there will be horror stories rolling out within the week.</p> </blockquote> <p>Imagine fucking reading this and being like “no guys you don’t understand nobody’s asking the mother’s to disable the babies, just to give birth to disabled babies instead of murdering them in the womb so we can chop them up for parts! Because that’s so much better!”</p>
Alive, Anaconda, and Bailey Jay: Barber: "what you want?"
 Him: "give me the most
 dystopian shit possible"
 Barber: "got ya fam"
 LifeNews
 com
 LifeNews.com
 @LifeNewsHQ
 Follow
 British Govt Encouraging Women to Give
 Birth to Disabled Babies to Harvest Thei
 Organs buff.ly/2Fuaepo
<p><a href="http://matt-ruins-your-shit.tumblr.com/post/171925993106/kajiosblog-this-articles-title-is-rather" class="tumblr_blog">matt-ruins-your-shit</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="http://kajiosblog.tumblr.com/post/171917720473/this-articles-title-is-rather-misleading-they" class="tumblr_blog">kajiosblog</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This article’s title is rather misleading.  They aren’t encouraging women to somehow disable their fetuses in order to use them for organs or something like that.  They aren’t encouraging anything.</p>
<p>The truth of the matter is that expecting mothers who find out that their baby will be born with fatal defects will be given the option to carry out the birth, rather than terminate early, in order to allow for organ donation.  Note this this is simply an option, and there is no incentive or penalty for either choice.</p>
<p>Source: <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/650467/NHS-to-harvest-babies-fatal-defect-foetus-donate-organs-mothers-option-terminate-birth">https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/650467/NHS-to-harvest-babies-fatal-defect-foetus-donate-organs-mothers-option-terminate-birth</a></p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="200" data-orig-width="370"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/e52518448e2c705676d57e41594cdcb7/tumblr_inline_p5oc0lNajE1si8t7m_540.gif" data-orig-height="200" data-orig-width="370"/></figure><p>I don’t think a single other person read that headline and thought they were “encouraging women to somehow disable their fetuses in order to use them for organs.” That’s not why people find it incredibly disturbing and I’m astounded those were the conclusions you drew and thought it needed to be corrected. No seriously where did you get the idea that it was being claimed that mothers were being told to disable unborn children so they could be harvested? That makes no sense, that’s like the logic of Ricky from Trailer Park Boys who thinks that as long as you drag stolen goods down to the curb it becomes garbage and it’s not illegal to steal garbage. The very idea of a baby needing to be disabled in order to justify harvesting it’s organs should be offensive, it implies disabled people have less right to be alive and have their organs inside their own fucking bodies. The article title wasn’t misleading your terribly needless strawman explanation of the title was misleading. This is the exact reason I hate “fact checkers” you need fact checkers for the fact checkers they can be so bogged down in spin and semantics and dumb bullshit like this. The problem is with the harvesting of organs from disabled babies full stop. I didn’t think this needed to be explained but here goes.</p>
<p>First of all it turns human life into a commodity, and not just a commodity but a commodity that would be controlled by the medical system of an increasingly fascist socialist government. What could go wrong?</p>
<p>Like for example it hasn’t even happened yet and already there seems to be confusion about what exactly constitutes fatal defects. A system that always is going to want more organs is going to determine for themselves what is disabled enough? And what level of disabled is enough that you should be determined as scrap parts instead of a person? How do you know the baby will die? Doctors tell people their kids will be born dead or will die soon all the time that live full lives. One of my best friends parents were told he wouldn’t make it past a few weeks and he’s in his late twenties now. Really glad this wasn’t the policy back then.</p>
<p>“will be given the option to carry out the birth, rather than terminate early” No, carrying out the pregnancy has always been an option it’s the harvesting of organs that would be the new factor here. If it’s as you said that they are being given the option to carry out the pregnancy does that mean that right now women are being forced to have abortions? No giving birth is and always has been the default option. I find it gross that you think the only thing people do when they find out a baby will have serious defects is just abort it. These fatal defects represent a percentage chance of survival not a guarantee, so while yes a lot of people just say fuck it and abort at any sign of a problem there are also lots of people that take the risk give birth because worst case scenario the baby dies naturally best case scenario it survives. Medium case scenario it survives but raising it is costly and they have a lower quality of life…but it’s still a life and it should be up to a person to decide if their quality of life is low enough that they would rather not have it at all. <br/></p>
<p>The horrifying part is they are not talking about stillborns, they’re not talking about babies that died in the womb. They’re talking about babies they believe will die eventually after being born. Who makes that determination? You trust the NHS… a system so shitty they amputate the wrong limbs on people to decide what babies are basically done for before they’re even born. Especially when they will benefit from every single baby a parent decides to allow be harvested. If there is room for corruption there will be corruption.</p>
<p> So what happens once those babies are born and they’re alive? Do they start up a daycare center thats whole purpose is to wait for babies to die so they can be harvested? I’m sure the care there would be super humane and hospitable. What do they do with the ones that survive? By that point they would have become property of the NHS because they’re not babies they’re just living organ donations that haven’t had the courtesy to die naturally yet. Do they call up the mother and say hey so remember when you told us we could harvest your dead baby…well can you come by and pick up your two year old… that fucker is being really stubborn about not dying like we promised. Or much more likely they’ll just kill the babies immediately to avoid that burden and complication and not give them the chance to survive. I’ve already heard the term post birth abortion or as someone with a soul left would call it baby murder. </p>
<p>They try to get around this by claiming the harvesting wont be an option until they are told the mother wants to have an abortion. What a great failsafe right? Well except that they can tell the mother whatever they want to get her to say she wants an abortion. They can tell her that her baby will definitely die when it might have a good chance of living. Which happens already without the added incentive of wanting to harvest the organs.</p>
<p>Where would the oversight be. The NHS is already overwhelmed you think there’s going to be someone checking to make sure nobody is telling mothers their babies have fetal defects when they don’t? You think the system is going to check every single case, especially when every single case is going to benefit them? What fairy tale world do you live in. It’s the setup for a system where you give a doctor the power to say to himself this baby has a 10-60% chance of survival this mother is being a real bitch…and we’re in need of organs right now…maybe I tell her the lowest number in that estimate. Which is all it will be…fucking estimates. I have a member of my family that was pronounced dead four times and lived another twenty years. These people can’t even figure out when a person is dead and you want to give them 100% authority to determine who will die. Fuck that, fuck this. If they do this there will be horror stories rolling out within the week.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Imagine fucking reading this and being like “no guys you don’t understand nobody’s asking the mother’s to disable the babies, just to give birth to disabled babies instead of murdering them in the womb so we can chop them up for parts! Because that’s so much better!”</p>

matt-ruins-your-shit: kajiosblog: This article’s title is rather misleading.  They aren’t encouraging women to somehow disable their fetus...