Bravo!

So !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hmmm Hmmm

Well good for you …. You're not butter then??? =========> Was a joke, of course. Great if you're able to get the max and LONG LIVE SCARF PORTAGE!

I did not respond to your question, but I do not see what is disturbing to breastfeed anywhere. I certainly would not take my chip has 10 months in a park but it's my first, if I had older children, I do not deprive the theme park on the pretext that it is a baby . In short, the moment you all have fun while managing the baby during the rides is great and your two had to take great treat for the eyes!

At the same time, it must be a "turkey day" if they were bored !!!!!!! right?? truce Good joke, that's fine, you had a good time, children too, not making clear his head, everything is ok! and I find it rather good that you can breastfeed wherever you want (I personally do not breastfeed, but I remember my sister, who was outside, always trying to hide a max). And then if you look carefully, there are always places where you can breastfeed discreetly.

You surprise me that a practice … wait until I finish one, one that does not make the ride. I saw your question, I do not know if I told you … but what I said all in good time … I preferred to enjoy the sights with my older kids rather than stay with a little bit with all this noise and this world … But luckily everyone is not the same otherwise we would not emerge. .. Conclusion: you do not respect the opinions of yahooters / waitresses … po well …… lol!

it is

Bravo!! Fuck is not serious people who have never breastfed or just two months to believe that this is "good mother" YOU are the mom and YOU KNOW what to do! ement makes me congratulations, frankly I'm glad to see that there are still mothers like me! ouffffffffff

I had not seen your question but I Me, I would have done without hesitation or discomfort "Baby put in a sling and voila! I hope you have a very good time with your family! ^ ^ Hugs to you!

AHHH, I'm not for abortion or for euthanasia, but I'm not against, I am for freedom of every woman, every poor person, living his own life .. it is the sole master of its existence, and to put an end, even if it belongs first to God .. one who puts an end to life, or his life (kill or be kill or be killed) great dilemma, so I can not judge, I'm not allowed. Good evening!

against any form of donation, death is a sin that goes against the Ten Commandments of God and especially Exodus 20, 13

I do not need to "maturing capital" to get an ethics and morals. I chose to do good for me and for others … not for a reward from God. So deadly sin or not I think we should kill anyone but a fetus capable of spoiling the life of a woman and having spoiled his own too, I think it is good to have an abortion. Sin capital or not, I think that a person for whom life is a needless suffering for years from the right to dignity. And I do not need a specification to dictate arbitrarily to my conscience.

The New Testament says that he who hates his brother is a murderer! Because we can not have in life that allows us to love God and hate: 1 John 3:15 "Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him. "The bar is high for this one / who wants the life that God has for this earth and for eternity. For one / one with the law or religion, the bar is at the resulting requirements. For him / her whose conscience is not completely dehumanized, the bar is equal to what they perceive as right and wrong. For one / one who has been educated / e in no conscience / moral law – which becomes a serious generalization – he / she may be guilty of misconduct for which he / she has received the benchmarks: it often leaves only secular law (civil or criminal ). So far is varied according to what you received. But what is also clear is that ignorance does not exempt the consequences. But what is also clear is that ignorance does not exempt conséquencesfâcheuses or attacks that Satan can add to fair and just judgments interpellators … What matters, therefore, in concrete and related temptations that inevitably result is so opposite to what one knows. And so I think it is also to be light that illuminates the darkness of consciousness, so that others can access a real forgiveness of their sins, to set off against the forces of evil occult, and the perpetuation well understood and accepted their souls … Sincerely

For at least two points for which I am glad not to be religious … I'm for both. Of course, under strict control!

The color of her scarf, right?? Ok, I go out …: o)

What now for the Trotskyists "opium of the people"? We would like to know, although they have been an idea ..

in any case to the buzz in the media did not find better

No headscarf is not that a piece of cloth, it is a sign of religion very marked besancenot pretends to defend secularism, it is anti curate see his declarations, he chose to talk, I hope it will do him not happy …………. c is a zero

Religion is the purely private domain. An elected the Republic is supposed to have a neutral appearance. Women can not recognize itself in the person of another who is veiled, it is obvious. In my opinion, the veil is not really a sign of emancipation, and you can intellectualize the debate as much as you want. It is completely free to walk around with a veil, but certainly not in time as representative of the people in a secular republic. Moreover, very few young Magrébin veil. Who will recognize in the person of this woman, I wonder … Finally, the NPA, whose number of members has dropped by 1,000 in year 1, use this girl so instead touted, hoping surely win votes in neighborhoods, increasing slightly over the stigma of the latter. Besancenot has a beautiful ball …

For me, the scarf itself, first as a symbol of submission to the male gaze, totally inconsistent with a claim of feminist equality (or when imposing the veil men) and other is a stigma denoting membership of a religion. I would also be shocked by the nomination of a nun in a cornet or a rabbi to curl.

it is not shocking that a member of a list has a head covering Fusse there a scarf or a voile.Ce is shocking is that the NPA made a front and a dangerous religious overtones.

It is much easier and your reasoning is not logical that those who want to preserve their customs. We are a people with our traditions and our ways of living. We are happy with it and we do not like that they are changed or transformed by other customs that come from elsewhere that we reject and we especially want to impose by force while the majority of citizens do not approve.

See our little debate on this subject with Yin Yang Shu: http://fr.answers.yahoo.com/question/index; _ylt = Amtnozyds5FYhkGd0aGcf4k4Agx.; _ylv = 3? Qid = 20100203121720AAPaUfV There is still a contradiction on the port scarf (a symbol of submission of women) … Muslim feminists are, but how are the piece of cloth religious symbol of machismo? Anyway, we should ask him … Otherwise, Boutin feminist?? This is the best of the year! This woman is a violation of secularism and women's right to her alone … And finally, apart from a stroke as worthy of Sarkozy, what is the NPA? The government debate on the burqa after leaving its debate on national identity turn anti-Islamism primary, NPA us out of his hat showing a candidate's religion! Apart exploit Muslims, the NPA does nothing! Some of Dati said it was "the Arabic service" from the UMP, that the NPA has hers … It's pathetic! Besancenot uses the same method as. It's pathetic! Besancenot uses the same method he says quecelui fight … That would have been too complicated for him and his party to campaign solely on the ideas? If Marx was there, he would break the shit out Besancenot …

The NPA is desperate to raise some votes in Marseille and in the 93. The presence of very ugly scarred rapper whose name I forget was not enough. A veiled woman (enfoulardée) is a woman who prefers his religion, namely, submission to Allah and Islam is not really avant-garde in the struggle of women. You made a comparison with Ch Boutin but fortunately these 2 guys are not the only alternative. These are just the 2 extremes of the same problem.

What shocks me deeply is the small detail which states that the veil is thin "… It peaked there. Anything that can get angry in power is good, even jeopardize secularism. It's really small.

Olivier Besancenot forgot to ABC of Marxism …. Religion is the opium of the people ….. and that the headscarf is a symbol of submission to a religion in whatever she may have more patriarchal and reactionary …… thus the opposite of feminism, in doing so he has to deal a blow to icepick to Leon Trotsky.

Feminists in our countries do not veil, nothing that we see with this crude maneuver to win new supporters. Then we're in a secular country then the NPA goes against the values of our country. @. Fair (e) Play ► ♫ I think exactly like you. Otherwise you're right religion and feminism are not always opposed, for example, Sister Emmanuelle was declared feminist: The nun said she was not "a saint", is described as "vindictive", "angry" and "a bit feminist . The feminist just bothers me, it is feminist or you do not, but I read his book (confession of a nun) and I confirm it was a true feminist. Source: http:// www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/2008/10/20/01016-20081020ARTFIG00346-sur-emmanuelle-est-morte-.php

In politics, image is everything. And they know it. It is indeed the problem.

Atheists who are the promotion of a religion which rejects the disbelievers, it falls from the clouds.

Arzal hi! Instinctively, I want to say "Fuck". God does not exist and the republic is secular. Then, on reflection, I've kept my position: "Fuck." As the lady replied to a reporter: "I am not here to talk about religion, but policy. The republic is secular, she knows. Just tell him that God does not exist.

"What makes one believe that the process of liberation and empowerment of women should remain the preserve of militant secularists (not religious)?" I do not think that at all. Secularism is to practice their religion freely in private. This woman is Muslim, but no worries there, it involves religion in politics is one of the things that I blame him. State and religion must remain separate, I would like. In the more use of existing controversies about religion, national identity, and all these things that most troubled of reason once again resurfaced, and again by electoral calculations. And I condemn the allusions displaced religion from which they come. When Sarkozy made his remark about the "moral superiority of the priest from the teacher" or made the sign of the cross before the cameras, it does not honor the secular republic that is supposed to serve. Second thing : perhaps the veil is a symbol. Second thing may be that the veil is not a symboled'opression for this woman, she has not personally been forced to wear it and it was chosen due to its own interpretation of religion. But … is the foremost female politician, the candidate who appears veiled. For many women in France and worldwide is used as a way of bid and indoctrination. Many women are likely large, sometimes their life to be able to wear what they want without being judged. Making policy is to send a message. Perhaps there are other women who paradoxically lead some social activities for women and veil, which will see evidence that the veil is a symbol not fixed, but "what makes" . The idea could defend themselves, but must take account of reality: the veil is a way of oppression against women. In some families, girls are conditioned at puberty or even earlier. It was fortunate to be in a country where, theoretically, we did not face that. What message does this candidate. What message does this candidateenvoie it to these people? He must play down the veil? Precisely not. it can be serious.

nothing shocking about it except their challenge to try to make our country their own. Our governments, by dint of procrastinating and as we go, they will more or less long term to achieve their ends Bise Anne

You cite the example of Christine Boutin. She never called feminist and do not militate in NPA. It is at least consistent with his speech … Everyone knows that appear with a veil (or a cross or a yarmulke) when claims have responsibilities policies is not innocent. "Stop" to veil the face ", the term seems well chosen …

Let's do it very well … the NPA was credited in the previous survey to 4.8% of voting intentions. Today, it is just over 3% … Another few days and it may well disappear!

You say "Muslim, secular and feminist .." I would say: "Muslim, secular, communist and feminist …" I do not understand how a communist list may participate in a religion in its policy, as for memory , according to Karl, the brain is the material that self-consciousness (and also a lot of imagination I would say). Especially as it was in communist countries found the least disparity between rights, employment of women and men. With these irresponsible, radical Islam now has one foot in politics in this country. I call it treason. An attempted solicitation which will eventually sink the party. Because it's like that, I scratched my list of nice people. Voila, it said.

This is purely a provocation and not smart politics.

What shocks me is that we can consider these connasses wearing a headscarf. But what shocks me even more is that prohibiting those connasses to wear a headscarf. But what worse, and what shocks me even more that what shocks me more is that we would use these connasses wearing a headscarf as an electoral argument.

… it must be nice down there … Hair enclosed in a scarf all day, hello fatty! argh !!!!!!!!!!!

personally, the media context. sounds a bit too pub.

The fact simply be manipulated by the NPA