VIDEO: Christine O'Donnell and Her Anti-Fun Crusade
Comments (5)
"I'm a young women in my 30s and I remain chaste."
- Christine O'Donnell, Delaware Republican Candidate for United State Senate
Christine, it is great to know you are chaste and are intent on making sure all other unmarried people stay that way too. However, is that supposed to somehow endear yourself to me, the voter, as you run for one of Delaware's seats in the United States Senate?
Let's see here, according to O’Donnell, not only should we not have sex but also:
-No condoms in High Schools, and less AIDS prevention
-Mike Castle (our well respected and liked incumbent) is "un-manly".
-If I am in the 2.8% of the population in Delaware that is gay, I have an "identity disorder"
-Beacuse I think evolution exists, my parents must be monkeys (and smell like them, too)
-dabbling in witchcraft with dates on a satanic alter is all in good fun?
If you ask me, no sex, no masturbation, and—if there were to be sex—no condoms just does not sound particularly enjoyable. Aside from the mass upswing in wet dreams, it just seems like this leaves far too much pent up horniness. But that is beside the point - let's take a look at this from another perspective.
Just for fun, let us say that I am a dyed in the wool, hardcore, fiscally (but not physically) conservative Republican. This is otherwise known as the vast majority of Delaware Republicans. A person that fits this description would most likely be very receptive to a campaign based on the message of fiscal responsibility.
However, that is a hard thing to run on when you are being accused of embezzling campaign funds to pay for personal expenses by a generally non-partisan and well respected group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. This is especially potent considering your long history of personal financial troubles, including the withholding of your degree because you stiffed Fairleigh Dickinson University on tuition. And, as a fiscal conservative, I cannot say I am impressed by the fact that you not only stiffed your university on the tuition, but were sued for the $4,000 in 1994 and the debt was delinquent for nine years until settled in 2003. This is not the way I want my tax dollars managed.
This invites the question - why delinquency? Could it possibly relate to all of the promiscuous partying done in college until junior year when you were "born again?"
Honestly, even if I was a "physical conservative" I am not sure that all of that, "drinking too much and having sex with guys with whom there wasn't a strong emotional connection" really qualifies you to run on the "chastity ticket", even if you supposedly were "born again." And I really do not think that once you have had promiscuous sex, you are exactly qualified to go around bragging about your chastity. Because comments like that start to really sound like lies, something you said you would never do—even if it was to save the life of a Jew you were hiding from the Nazis during World War II.
Signed,
Aaron Perman, a very concerned (but not actually from Delaware) voter
Reach Reporter Aaron Perman here.
Sign up for Neon Tommy's weekly e-mail newsletter.
Comments
[...] becoming a senate candidate, O’Donnell did things like default on her mortgage, picnic on Satanic altars, and speak out against masturbation. These [...]
if masturbation were illegal, people would take the law into their own hands..
if masturbation were illegal, people would take the law into their own hands...
"You know full well that even if they were desirable (and they are not), laws cannot be passed to restrict private sexual behavior; they wouldn't be enforceable, and the Supreme Court would rule them unconstitutional by resting on solid precedents."
So why the hell would she campaign based on these values?
It seems as if it would be prudent to campaign on something, like the economy, that's on voters minds and you could actually make a difference with.
What she could attempt to legislate on are laws restricting federal AIDS funding and federal funding for non-abstinence based sexual education - such as restricting funds to give out condoms in high schools/public universities. The result of further restrictions is something that deeply concerns me, would negatively effect me, and I do find hypocritical considering Christine had promiscuous sex in college and most likely took advantage of free and available condoms to prevent unwanted pregnancies.
And I never said anything about other people's sexual purity bothering me, but let's look up the definition of virgin:
From Merriam-Webster: a person who has not had sexual intercourse.
She was having SEX with men in college. Hence, she is NOT A VIRGIN. I am not saying there is anything wrong with choosing not to have sex, but "born-again virginity" is simply an oxymoron. The last I recalled you can only be born once.
What's wrong with born-again virginity? I say, this Christine O'Donnell has some street cred in saying that someone who once fooled around can now be chaste. What is it about sexual purity exactly that bothers you?
Extramarital sex is dangerous. For a lot of people, it causes unwanted pregnancies, destroys relationships, breaks apart families … in short, it causes hurt and pain. Just because you may have chosen to "dabble" on this path of hurt and pain doesn’t give you the right to ridicule those of us who have made the sacrifice of giving up sex until we are in permanent, committed relationships. I respect your decisions -- and I imagine Christine, who dearly loves her lesbian sister, would too. Please grant us the same courtesy. You know full well that even if they were desirable (and they are not), laws cannot be passed to restrict private sexual behavior; they wouldn't be enforceable, and the Supreme Court would rule them unconstitutional by resting on solid precedents.
Thank you.