Today’s Lady News: Illinois’ Parental Notification For Abortion Law Is Delayed
Posted by: Jessica Wakeman
Filed in:
news
5:30PM, Tuesday November 3rd 2009
- Illinois’ controversial parental notification law for minors seeking an abortion has been delayed at least until Wednesday morning as officials meet to verify that girls can waive the notification process by petitioning a judge, who has 48 hours to rule on it. The parental notification law does not give parents consent, but requires that they be notified. An exemption is made in the case of a medical emergency or if a girl puts it in writing that she was sexually abused. [Chicago Tribune]
Note: I’ve been reading all your comments on yesterday’s Today’s Lady News post and here’s my two cents: I believe the core principle behind being pro-choice is that the decision to become a mother is one that a girl (or an adult woman) should be able to make on her own. It is her body, not her mother’s, her father’s, or her senator’s. So while this law may not require a parent’s consent, we shouldn’t kid ourselves into thinking plenty of parents won’t shame their daughters into not ending a pregnancy based on their own beliefs about abortion. They might also treat the pregnancy as a punishment for underaged/premarital sex (i.e. “Your actions have consequences…”). Thusly, I believe this law discourages girls from choosing a safe, legal abortion by requiring them to tell their parents, which in a lot of homes, can lead to verbal (name-calling, humiliation, etc.) or physical abuse. Fear of telling one’s parents absolutely could drive girls to end their pregnancies through unclean, dangerous “back alley” means. More to the point, a daughter has a right to make decisions about her own well-being, especially when it comes to such a personal matter as sexual activity. Plus, it’s totally sexist that underage boys who impregnate these girls are not required to notify their parents at all. Frankly, if a girl wants her parent or guardian to know she is getting or has had an abortion, she will tell them. In an ideal world, all girls would feel that support within the home, but we’re hardly there yet.
- “Lipstick entrepreneurs” is apparently a new term for new women-owned companies. Why is the word “lipstick” necessary? Can’t they just be “entrepreneurs” or even “female entrepreneurs”? [Financial Times]
- In the past week, two Georgetown University students have had homophobic run-ins off campus. Both victims, a male and a female student, had anti-gay slurs shouted at them and were physically attacked. [Washington Post]
- Several women studies professors at DePaul University are claiming sex discrimination after they were denied tenure and their appeals to have tenure decisions reversed were also denied. Thirty-three professors were up for tenure this year and only 26 received it, but of the seven professors who did not receive it, five were women. Eighteen men were up, compared to 15 women. [Chicago Tribune]
- Two bankers in England are suing Japanese investment bank Nomura for millions over sex discrimination. Maureen Murphy and Anna Francis were moved to Nomura after the Lehman Brothers buyout and argue that they were not promoted to similar positions within the new company. Murphy is also suing for sexual harassment after her breasts were allegedly referred to as “honkers” during a meeting and a male co-worker allegedly said women “belong at home cleaning the floors.” [Daily Mail]
- Three beefeaters at the Tower of London—you know, those guys with the silly hats!—are under investigation for bullying the first female beefer, Moira Cameron. Cameron has alleged her uniform was defaced, lewd notes were left in her locker, and someone wrote unkind things on her Wikipedia page. [NY Times]
- Today’s Lady News: Polanski’s Lawyer Says He’s Been Punished Enough For Drugging, Raping Teen
- Frisky Rant: Recommending Fewer Pap Smears Is Just Plain Nuts
- Today’s Lady News: Conan O’Brien’s Fat Jokes Get Him In, Uh, Big Trouble
- Celebrities Who Look Way Older Than They Are (Starpulse)
- Nicole Richie is Hospitalized! (Us Weekly)
TheFrisky.com is part of the Turner Sports and Entertainment Digital Network
LiciMama
wrote on November 3 2009 @ 07:36 pm: [report]
The stickler on the minor needing to notify her parents is important. Not all teens that get pregnant have awful parents. Assuming that all parents are abusive and would call their daughters names is irresponsible. If my daughter had been equipped with the knowledge of how to prevent pregnancy and failed to, I would tell her I was disappointed but that I love her and am there for her.
If something terrible happened I would want to know about it. I can’t help if I don’t know. And if she was just being a teen that made a mistake, then I would still want to know about it. Its a major medical procedure and if it was her choice, I would want to be the one that made sure it wasn’t some quack with an exacto knife. My child that is under 18 shouldn’t be able to get a major procedure of any kind because she wants to and its her body. Piercings, tattoos and boob jobs can happen with that logic too.
And if my son got a girl pregnant and didn’t tell me, I would hope the girl or her family would. He put himself in that situation, he is gonna help take care of it. Whether it is helping raising the child, or supporting the girls decision to abort and possibly paying for it. By a similar token, if he is equipped with the knowledge of how to prevent a pregnancy and fails to, I would inform him of my disappointment and love.
I am responsible for my child legally until 18 (through love… forever) I will do anything for them. Including hold their hand for an abortion. Or make them be an adult about their life decisions. Or want to kick some abuser a**. Its called being a mom/dad. And I know plenty of parents that agree.
hannahsguy
wrote on November 3 2009 @ 11:20 pm: [report]
amen licimama.
Perceptible
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 07:40 am: [report]
Re: Parental notification, yes, Jessica, you make valid points. HOWEVER, if my daughter, who is still living under my roof, depending on me for all her financial needs, and is still on my health insurance policy, decides to have a medical procedure done (moral standing aside), I ABSOLUTELY 100% should be notified. Without question. Without argument. As a mom, I can’t understand why this is even up for consideration. Yes, it’s her body, but while I’m still responsible for said body, I have a RIGHT to know what’s going on with it. It’s fully your own once you are supporting that body ON YOUR OWN. (And in NY the age of parental responsibility is age 21, not 18.) A 16 year old girl should not have the right to choose to be a mother unless she is able to make that choice without imposing on others, as in, she can support both herself and her child on her own. That’s just being responsible and considerate.
That said, I would hope my daughter (or my son!) would come to me, not because she has to, but because she knows she would have my support. If that’s not the case, then the parent has done something wrong.
And as for the teenage boys who have all the fun but carry none of the burden, it would be nice if they were also required to notify their parents, but shouldn’t hold up the procedure.
(For the record, I have both a son and a daughter so I try to be fair in seeing both sides.)
H. Blue
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 07:46 am: [report]
I think you made a very valid point on item #1 Jessica.
I also think it’s a shame that there seems to be more attention focused on the abortion issue than on the issue of unsafe teen sex. What happened to educating children so this doesn’t happen in the first place? If the mentality is “they’re gonna do it anyway” shouldn’t we be doing something to help prevent them getting knocked up and spreading diseases around?
PinkRanger
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 10:44 am: [report]
Just because your parents aren’t abusive doesn’t mean that if you were a pregnant 15 year old you wouldn’t be terrified to tell them, and go to great means to avoid doing so. I’d venture to say that the whole reason a few girls I knew in highschool even got abortions was to “get rid of it” before their parents had to find out. They do not notify the parents when sexual abuse or assault is involved, so how tempting would that explanation be to a scared teenage girl? Do we really want more false accusations of rape? Do we really need to give anti-feminists and doubters more reason to discredit rape victims and assume there are more false accusations than assaults?
Parental notification is just a bad idea, and trust me, the kids who have parents who can handle it, will tell them. How many teenagers have 500 bucks laying around to spend on an abortion?
equnsuocha
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 10:49 am: [report]
How many of you have been there? **raises hand** Ok so until you understand the sheer terror that could occur and the severe beating and subsequent trauma that could occur through FORCED notification please shut it down.
If they have a good relationship with their parents they will tell them without a law FORCING all girls to do so.
lindsmichele
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 10:52 am: [report]
Jessica, for once I think you’re completely right. Parents need to understand they aren’t always the ones who are in control. No matter how much you want to be involved in a situation like this it’s up to the child if they want to let you in. It is a very personal decision best decided by the girl herself and one she will never forget. She doesn’t need the excess pressure of her parents opinions & their expression of disappointment while she’s trying to decide if an abortion is right for her. So getting parental consent, to me, is ridiculous. Something tells me a lot more young girls in Illinois will be saying they were sexually abused or resorting to “back alley” methods to get out of telling their parents.
Perceptible
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 10:59 am: [report]
God help the doctor who lays a hand on my underage daughter without my notification. We’re not talking about a piercing, or a haircut, we’re talking a very serious medical procedure. One that occasionally has some very serious side effects. As a woman who was once a teenager, I can totally get on the “it’s my body” bandwagon, but that’s with only a teenager’s perspective. Now I’m older, wiser, and also a mom. So I’ll say it again, god help the doctor (or person) who lays a hand on my underage daughter for a medical procedure without my notification.
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 11:06 am: [report]
older and wiser. kids dont know #&@$%. when i was 15 i wanted to quit playing football. my dad wouldnt let me. i have a pro (arena) tryout coming up in february, and it was the best decision my dad ever wouldnt let me make. and this isnt even about MAKING the decision for your kid… its about being INVOLVED. maybe there should be an exception on a case by case basis, to be determined by a judge? @equn - if you could have stood before a judge and gave your story, maybe he would have made an exception in your case?
hlnbabe
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 11:10 am: [report]
@LiciMama
@Perceptible
Your high horses are quite amazing.
We can try our damndest to make our children into the people we want them to be. However, at the end of the day, they already are who they are.
Specifically at @Perceptible,
“That said, I would hope my daughter (or my son!) would come to me, not because she has to, but because she knows she would have my support. If that’s not the case, then the parent has done something wrong.
And as for the teenage boys who have all the fun but carry none of the burden, it would be nice if they were also required to notify their parents, but shouldn’t hold up the procedure.”
By your logic, your children would be telling you, otherwise you’re a bad parent. Why enforce that every child has to inform their parent? That is your, you, singular, belief. And you don’t need to worry cause you’re such an amazing parent you’ll be informed regardless. Also, “it would be nice”??? Seriously, for someone trying to look at it from both sides, you certainly are not.
hlnbabe
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 11:13 am: [report]
If we are going to make them wait until they are 18, then they can’t serve time for crimes because they are only children.
The problem with this law is the long term ramifications. It doesn’t punish the children from healthy homes, it punishes those that come from unhealthy homes. Think beyond the scope of your own situation people!!!
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 11:16 am: [report]
kids cant enlist in the military w/o parental consent before they turn 18. why should this be different?
lea322
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 11:20 am: [report]
Do parents have nothing to do with shaping their children into who they are? People are born with certain personality traits, but a lot of who we become is shaped by our families, our communities, and society as a whole. That shaping doesn’t stop when kids get into high school.
spatula
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 11:26 am: [report]
@Perceptible: your last comment is exactly how I feel.
joyy
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 11:26 am: [report]
@h1nbabe - //It doesn’t punish the children from healthy homes, it punishes those that come from unhealthy homes. // well put.
C.Munro
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 11:36 am: [report]
I find it absurd that the legal system, and apparently a large number of parents, think that children are children until they hit the age of 18, and then suddenly become adults.
Growing up is a process that is strung out over years, it happens little by little as children gain more and more responsibility over their own lives and make a larger number of decisions for themselves. A 16-year-old is vastly different from a 13-year-old, yet society is saying they’re the same. Until they’re 18, when they’re different.
In my view, a legal obligation to raise your child to the age of 18 does not entitle you to complete control or even knowledge of what that child does until that age.
equnsuocha
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 11:37 am: [report]
@Mucho maybe, but as a teenage girl who is being abused at home the thought of standing in court and accusing my mother of abuse was just as terrifying as telling her. I would have been mutilated in a “back room” or would have had a “Prom Night” baby.
This is wrong. Maybe they should give every child in Illinois the GPS panties to every parent in Illinois, that’ll show those girls whose boss of them. And what of the boys??? Where is there ANYONE trying to regulate their behavior and consequences. Immoral, illegal, sexist, and wrong.
LiciMama
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 11:39 am: [report]
@equnsuocha *raises hand* I have been there. And it sucked to tell them both. They were disappointed but supported whatever decision I came to. HOWEVER, just because something is difficult or painful to do doesn’t give someone a free pass. If they thought they were responsible enough to have sex, then they should be responsible enough to own up to their mistakes. There are always going to be some really crappy parents, but the majority of us aren’t. And just because we may not react softly at first doesn’t mean we don’t love our kids. We are, after all, only human. We make mistakes too, and a moment of anger shouldn’t be held against us like a scarlet letter forever.
The law isn’t forcing all girls to do so. There is a provision for abuse.
How many who have commented, including the writer have kids? Just try to get between me and my kids. See what happens. Cutting parents out of their children’s lives doesn’t seem like a good solution to me. People are always complaining about teens running wild and parents not being involved enough in their kid’s lives. But now we are too involved if we want to know about a major event in our MINOR childs life?
And while I am aware that, as a parent, I cannot nor do I want to control my child’s every move, we still have a right to be involved. Yes, she should make the decision, but the parent should still be told.
lea322
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 11:42 am: [report]
@C.Munro: I hope someday you have a daughter so that you can have an even greater insight into what it would mean to allow her to have a serious medical procedure without your knowledge. I don’t mean that to be condescending at all. I just mean that sometimes subjectivity changes a person’s opinion. It’s much easier (and completely reasonable) to have a solid opinion from an objective point of view, but when you’re actually the one in the situation, you might feel differently…and that’s true for myself as well.
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 11:45 am: [report]
holding teen boys accountable - agreed, but how?
and is it fair that men get no say in abortion, whether they want the baby or not?
equnsuocha
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 11:55 am: [report]
@ Mucho
I actually have a weird stance on this one. I think that it is the woman’s and ONLY the woman’s right to choose. That said I think there should be a discussion had with the father and that he should be a part of the decision process. Ultimately though it is she that will end up with the child and she who will have to carry it. Many a man has said have my baby and then disappeared. So I feel that the men should have a say but should be held WAAAAAAY more accountable than they currently are when they agree to have a child and then ditch. On the other hand, if a man says he is not ready or willing, emotionally or financially to have a child and the mother chooses to have the child, he should be able to be waived from any future claims to child support etc. Basically he would have to give up his rights at that time and would be able to walk away. I dont think it is fair for women to ignore what their men are telling them when it comes to having a child and proceed to have a child anyway and then chase him for the rest of his life for $$. Or worse, sneak off and do it, not tell him and pop up 5 years later looking for back support and what not. The decision to term should be made by the same 2 people who made the decision to have sex.
@Lici so you were physically and emotionally abused as a teenage girl by a parent who would literally beat you choke you out and call you every name in the book over offenses like leaving a towel on the floor in your room? Then you found yourself with a college acceptance letter and a positive pregnancy test? Well if you were and you did and you managed to stand up to your abuser then I applaud you. Not everyone feels that they can do so. Parent your children properly and this isnt an issue, they will want to tell you and will not have to be forced to do so.
lea322
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 11:59 am: [report]
@equnsuocha: I am genuinely sorry that horrible, horrible things happened to you. But it is not your place to judge someone else’s abuse, as you’ve done with LiciMama’s, just as no one has the right to diminish your own experience.
C.Munro
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 12:04 pm: [report]
@lea322: Thanks. I appreciate that. I do understand that perspectives change with experience. However, I’ve found that my own positions are very rarely modified with any significance, which is perhaps a result of my own rather rigid philosophy.
That said, the whole having a daughter myself thing isn’t something I’d hold my breath for. Unlike the kids this law will affect, I’m not even having sex anymore.
equnsuocha
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 12:05 pm: [report]
@Lea322 I see no indication that there was abuse in her case:
It appears she had good caring parents. So yes I stand on my comments. It is so easy to monday morning quarterback these things so I am trying to scream to you all that I am not a hypothetical, I am what happens to many girls and I know from first hand experience how awful this would be.
@Lici: If I misread your comments and there was abuse there then I apologize. Lea is right that I would not diminsh someone else’s experience.
**I do find however, that parents who grounded their kids a lot or yelled or what ever are accused of abuse or the offspring claim they were abused and that makes me crazy when there is real abuse out there.**
lea322
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 12:09 pm: [report]
@equnsuocha and LiciMama: I apologize if I misread LiciMama’s comment and interpreted it as meaning she was abused.
To modify it, I’ll say that her EXPERIENCE should not be diminished.
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 12:11 pm: [report]
@equn - we basically agree on my question. i was looking for opinions.
LiciMama
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 12:11 pm: [report]
@equnsuocha I’m sorry you had to go through that. I feel anger at your mother just hearing about it. Although, I don’t feel the need to detail my entire past here. I was merely discussing the subject of a parents rights with regards to their children. And while bad things happen to good people, I cant see how punishing good parents for bad people’s wrongs would help the situation in our society. Why give a regular teen another way to shut their good parents out?
spatula
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 12:11 pm: [report]
@equnsuocha: so Lici’s opinion is invalid unless she was abused? HOw does that make sense?
joyy
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 12:22 pm: [report]
@Lici - Why give a regular teen another way to shut their good parents out? Because legislating the opposite is a) the equivalent of government doing the parenting and b) has very negative consequences for kids not lucky enough to have supportive parents.
Laws are meant to protect people, and the unfortunate side effect of this law means that a minority of people be hurt by the law. I also think it’s a little effed up that this law is meant to protect the girl’s parents, not the girl, but that’s a bit biased because I was also raised by abusive parents and know many others who were as well. Most abuse isn’t reported, and I was lucky enough to not get pregnant while under the crushing force of my father’s rule.
joyy
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 12:23 pm: [report]
don’t mind the stilted language and awful writing, I haven’t had any coffee this morning. ugh.
equnsuocha
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 12:26 pm: [report]
I am offering you my shoes and you keep throwing them back without ever trying them on.
The point is not that opinions of people without abuse aren’t valid, the point is that UNTIL you have actually been in that situation you REALLY have no perspective on how horrible it can be. I want people who make decisions to use all the data available and I am providing you true data, first hand data, of the very type of girl who WILL BE hurt by this. This WILL cause deaths and disfigurements. Everyone is all up in arms about this notification but if it were really up to the parent then wouldn’t this debate be about parental consent and NOT a notification that will cause girls to go underground. This has not really been an issue until now and looking at it from where I stand it can only march one path, parental notification, parental consent, legal notification for adults, abortion is illegal. If you think that isnt the direction many people behind these sorts of laws are heading you are mistaken.
So for the last time, and I am done here because, for the love of God Frisky stop with the abortion/gay marriage posts or my head will explode, opinions are like @ssholes, everyone has them and most of them stink.
C.Munro
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 12:31 pm: [report]
So parents are punished by the lack of notification laws in most states? Punished?
If a teen wants to shut his or her parents out, the parents have probably earned it. For those who think of themselves as good parents, I say face up to the possibility that your kids simply don’t like you, even if you weren’t abusive. And that’s their right.
Parents whining about their “rights” to control their children disgust me. Your parental rights are entirely inconsequential when they come up against any child’s right to not be abused. They might as well not exist at all.
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 12:35 pm: [report]
since when is a kid required to LIKE their parents? a mom and dads job dont end b/c their kid doesnt like them…
lahnne
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 03:16 pm: [report]
As much as I’d like to know what’s going on in her life, I’d much rather know that my daughter could (in theory) safely and legally undergo a serious medical procedure without my permission than know that she’d have to resort to a MUCH dangerous back-ally alternative.
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 03:41 pm: [report]
she only has to resort to a back-alley abortion if shes too scared to tell you, which would be a reflection on you as a parent. notification mandates dont limit her ability to safely have the procedure done. you guys realize abortions have permanent affects on your bodies, right? dont you want to help your 15 year old decide whether its the right option, and if it is, help her through the emotional trauma?
remembercedricdiggory
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 04:47 pm: [report]
It’s just maddening that so many people have this, “I have a wonderful family, so the laws should be based on MY family and the fact that I wouldn’t punish my daughter for an abortion!”
Because, as someone in the previous post on this subject said, the law should be based on the worst possible scenario. The law is supposed to protect kids from abuse. You want to just shrug and say, “Hey, they got themselves into this situation…”
I find it very odd that, at least in my state, I can get all sorts of birth control, without anyone other than myself, my doctor, and my pharmacist knowing about it.
I also find it very odd that teens are subject to different regulations on their reproductive rights, based on where they live. This should be a right that we all have.
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 05:09 pm: [report]
the law shoudl be based on what helps society the most, which is what laws are supposed to be based on. improving parenting nation-wide would help society the most…
joyy
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 05:20 pm: [report]
@muchomacho - I agree, but not funding abortion doesn’t do anything to advance better parenting.
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 05:23 pm: [report]
mandatory parental notification might. youre right, though, i think i mixed the two topics up in my head.
joyy
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 05:57 pm: [report]
as did I apparently. I’ve been staring at a computer screen for WAY too long. Damn job/internet.
remembercedricdiggory
wrote on November 4 2009 @ 09:12 pm: [report]
@MuchoMacho; How, may I ask, would forcing teens to tell their parents about their abortion improve parenting? I’m not seeing your logic, if there is any.
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 5 2009 @ 08:58 am: [report]
@remember - by forcing parents to become involved. logical, no?
joyy
wrote on November 5 2009 @ 09:08 am: [report]
@mucho - well, if you have decent parents, that’s a possible outcome. If someone is a bad enough parent that their kid doesn’t come to them with important things, has no grasp of sex ed (which is sometimes done at school but also needs to be addressed at home), or worse yet, is terrified of them, then forcing parental involvment doesn’t necessarily mean it will improve the parenting.
IDEALLY, the person would realize that they’ve been dropping the ball and be inspired to step up to the plate and be there for a kid who obviously needs them, but that’s not guaranteed to happen by any means. You must have had good parents for you to be so oblivious to how many parents stick their head in the sand with major issues, abandon their parenting responsibilities (ususally selectively), or sometimes just act in a way that has seriously bad repurcussions for their children.
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 5 2009 @ 09:42 am: [report]
i had one parent. and she was a good one. when she was around. which wasnt often, working 2 jobs to raise my little brother and i… youre acting under the assumption that the only teens who would hide things from their parents are ones with bad parents. remember being a teenager? remember hiding things from your parents? every teenager hides things and lies to his/her parents. its the nature of being a teen.
joyy
wrote on November 5 2009 @ 09:46 am: [report]
@mucho - you’re confusing correlation with causation. Just because part of being a good parent is being involved in your kid’s life doesn’t mean that forcing the parent into the kid’s life will result in good parenting. That’s faulty logic, not sound logic.
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 5 2009 @ 09:50 am: [report]
breakthroughs happen. ignoring the problem wont make it go away, which is what youre proposing. thats faulty logic. and forcing the parent to be involved CAN result in good parenting… keeping the parent in the dark has no chance of helping.
joyy
wrote on November 5 2009 @ 09:59 am: [report]
What I am proposing is that the government not parent. That’s what mandatory notification is.
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 5 2009 @ 10:10 am: [report]
i dont see it that way. the government isnt taking any action. theyre notifying the people who should.
Riley
wrote on November 5 2009 @ 10:10 am: [report]
Judgment Day is inevitable.
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 5 2009 @ 10:16 am: [report]
i hope i come back as a terminator…
joyy
wrote on November 5 2009 @ 10:25 am: [report]
Well, a lot of people see mandatory notification as action.
And is the ‘terminator’ wish supposed to be a pun? After all, there is a shortage of abortion providers ... sorry, I had to! =P Horrid joke of the day: accounted for.
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 5 2009 @ 10:26 am: [report]
i caught that after i typed it. no i meant it in terms of the movie… sorry about that!
joyy
wrote on November 5 2009 @ 10:29 am: [report]
lol - I knew what you were referencing. It was just tooooo ironic/funny in a horrible-sense-of-humor kind of way to not point out. It’s thread interactions like this that make me glad there’s no edit button heh.
MuchoMacho
wrote on November 5 2009 @ 10:39 am: [report]
morbid humor is great humor… yeah i instantly looked for “edit” or “delete”... nsl.