Jewish Barbie dolls, with their revealing clothes and shameful postures, accessories and tools are a symbol of decadence to the perverted West. Let us beware of her dangers and be careful," said a poster on the site
"It is no problem that little girls play with dolls. But these dolls should not have the developed body of a woman, and wear revealing clothes," al-Merdas said.
"These revealing clothes will be imprinted in their minds and they will refuse to wear the clothes we are used to as Muslims," the sheik said.
Time to send in the troops. On a serious note though, I was walking with my daughter through the toy isles at Target the other day and she asked for this particular barbie that had a newborn baby in tow with Ken. I snatched it out of her hand with a quick wtf from my wife and I, and saw that they both had wedding rings on. I was almost impressed at their audacity. I'll get flamed for it from the anti-religious establishment, but hey, I don't want my girl thinking its ok to have babies out of wedlock, but my views are religiously slanted so bear with me.
My wife and I stood there talking about it for so long that she lost interest and picked out a slip and slide. To be honest, my wife and I did not come to a decision about it and were glad she lost interest. On one hand little girls play with dolls, on the other hand, buying a shake and bake family for a 4 year old is borderline on the types of questions that may get asked.
-edit I most likely would have just bought it, guess it's no different than the questions that get asked from baby dolls in general.
Got to say I was pretty surprised by the news this week that a lot of 9-11 victims are exchewing govt compensation in favour of suing Airlines, Intelligence Services and the operators of the WTC.
I found that. . .disgusting is too strong a word but I thought it was pretty low. I mean I think I'm right in saying that nobody in the world, anywhere, ever thought this kind of thing was a possibility. How can you sue for negligence in such a case? Sue someone for failing to foresee the unforeseeable? A lot of the people being sued, especially the WTC operators, must have been traumatised that day. I would have taken the govt compensation and moved on but that's just me.
I think it's going to cause a lot of unneccessary heartache, raking over the incident again and again looking for blame just to screw a few more shekels out of whatever organisation.
Sad.
Dammit. Sleep deprived fool that I am, I just realised the anniversary is tomorrow. I won't edit my post but I won't be entering into any stupid arguments either.
Sometimes, when I read about a rediculously stupid lawsuit. I want to sue the person for sueing on such stupid grounds. They're causing societal damage and contributing to the decaying intelligence of minors.
It just might work.
Not really.
No, it might work, but I don't really want to do it. It would be counterproductive.
Dude, you have no idea. My mother-in-law for the past few years has been trying every scam under the sun to sucker her husband into letting her stop working. She finally got her wish by falling at a Cracker Barrel. She sues and wins. He let her stop working. Ok, fine. Then she wants to draw disability for shopping money. She gets denied because her injuries are not severe enough. I KID YOU NOT SHE GOES INTO THE SAME EXACT CRACKER BARREL AND PULLS THE SAME CRAP BY FALLING AND HURTING HURSELF ON THEIR PROPERTY AGAIN!. She's approved for disability this time and is suing them again, grats you.
-edit- when I heard she had fallen, I told my wife what she was going to do. She has a ready made sympathy kit she keeps on hand. I told my wife she would put on her neck brace, wrist brace, leg brace, and would break out her crutches, and the sugar on top would be her voice would be magically gone and she would be whispering. I visited the same day and I had to leave the room from laughing at my prediction as I had it down 100%.
Krim, It's people like your mother-in-law who make a good arguement to have public stoning to be brought back into fashion. That way her litigious nature will be taken for granite.
Krimson Klaw wrote:Dude, you have no idea. My mother-in-law for the past few years has been trying every scam under the sun to sucker her husband into letting her stop working. She finally got her wish by falling at a Cracker Barrel. She sues and wins. He let her stop working. Ok, fine. Then she wants to draw disability for shopping money. She gets denied because her injuries are not severe enough. I KID YOU NOT SHE GOES INTO THE SAME EXACT CRACKER BARREL AND PULLS THE SAME CRAP BY FALLING AND HURTING HURSELF ON THEIR PROPERTY AGAIN!. She's approved for disability this time and is suing them again, grats you.
-edit- when I heard she had fallen, I told my wife what she was going to do. She has a ready made sympathy kit she keeps on hand. I told my wife she would put on her neck brace, wrist brace, leg brace, and would break out her crutches, and the sugar on top would be her voice would be magically gone and she would be whispering. I visited the same day and I had to leave the room from laughing at my prediction as I had it down 100%.
Wham-O also claims the scene violates the product's safety guidelines, which limit the use of Slip 'N Slide to children between the ages of 5 and 12 weighing less than 110 pounds and under 5 feet tall.
Well David Spade has about the same physique so I don't see a problem...
That won't save McDonalds from having to put HOT! stickers on everything that's hot, or Theme parks from putting 'prosthetic limbs may fall off' signs on roller coaster rides. Everyones looking to get rich quick, 20 bucks is nothing when everyone is suing for 10 billion because their feelings got hurt and they think they have pain and suffering.
heh, and i had my bloody gun loaded action figures when i was 4 years old killing eachother, and people bitch about barbies being revealing, when in places like spain and italy a shampoo comercial on a childrens TV show is as revealing as a latenight cinimax porno
godda love american morality
