Sorry My Phone Says I Can’t Sleep With You

I am a bit of a geek. By which I mean a huge tech fan, not someone who bites the heads off chickens. I love big tech, tiny tech, and all the useless things it does. I owned an Atari way back in the day. I had a Handspring Visor. I love my iPhone in ways that may one day be outlawed. I find the “disk drive imperial march” to be one of the greatest things in the history of mankind. (No I won’t link it, look it up yourself. Youtube.)

I also love to make fun of religious fundamentalists. I know that is a little like shooting fish in a barrel. A small barrel. With a tank. From point blank. But I do love it.

Sometimes those Forbidden Loves cross. That is why I knew I had to share this with you all…

Say you want to preserve a socially created pointless custom designed to ensure that men can sleep around but women who get laid get ostracized? Thats right, you want to remain a virgin until you announce your plans to spend the rest of your life (or at least that part of it between the I do and the annulment) with that someone special who is looking to get hitched young because she is horny too. But how do you remember to not have sex? What if you forget and bang your best friend out of simple absent mindedness?

Well, there is an app for that!

Because lets face it, if it is so important you need to buy a bit of code for your phone, you will keep it forever!

I imagine this will be about as successful as the real rings, and abstinence only education. Which is to say not at all.

On the plus side, the companies director makes one of the funniest statements in the history of the crusade for virginity:

“We are preaching to the converted, and we’re going for people who wouldn’t buy a ring. The app is not the be-all-and-end-all of purity pledges: it’s an entry point.”

An entry point? Really? That is how you want to phrase getting people to not, well, enter?

That is as bad as referring to a place where several tons of flying metal comes to a stop near a crowd of people as an airport “terminal.”

In the US, around 8m people have taken a purity pledge; in the UK, the figure is around 250,000. The country is regularly described as the teenage pregancy capital of Europe, and last week it was revealed that a £6m campaign to cut teenage pregnancies had failed, leading to an increase, rather than a drop, in the number of girls getting pregnant.

Yeah, not even the Jesus Phone is going to fix that guys.

Asked whether the virtual nature of the ring might lead people to forget their vow of abstinence in the heat of the moment, Bennett replied: “If you’ve taken the pledge, you’re likely to follow it through.”

he said, ignoring the statistics that just made him a liar and an ass bent on making money off of the disturbed sexual double standard message that we send our youth.

Personally I am going to write an app to help people not need sex and submit it to the iPhone App Store as well. Mine will will be more effective as I plan to make use of the “vibrate” feature of the phone.

It should be noted that thousands of teenage boys have already bought the app, knowing full well that just showing it to a girl is a great way to improve your chances of getting laid… Now if only it used the built in map function to show where all the sex starved people who owned the app were at, it would be like a world wide iPhone induced orgy.

But then the rate of STDs and teenage pregnancies is highest amongst those young people who claim to have deep religious beliefs and/or have taken chastity pledges. Maybe this app is better used to track people who might give you something you will have to see a doctor about.

…now if they made an app that gave you condoms, well that might make a difference.

,

  1. #1 by James Farmer on July 16, 2009 - 5:26 pm

    I also love to make fun of religious fundamentalists. I know that is a little like shooting fish in a barrel. A small barrel. With a tank. From point blank. But I do love it.

    Haha! I prefer using an AR-15, one of those pesky little assault rifles the wingnuts say are protected under the 2nd Amend. That way, I can pick off the wingnuts fish one at a time.

  2. #2 by Shane Smith on July 16, 2009 - 5:40 pm

    James Farmer :

    I also love to make fun of religious fundamentalists. I know that is a little like shooting fish in a barrel. A small barrel. With a tank. From point blank. But I do love it.

    Haha! I prefer using an AR-15, one of those pesky little assault rifles the wingnuts say are protected under the 2nd Amend. That way, I can pick off the wingnuts fish one at a time.
    [ Edit | Moderate | Spam | Delete ]

    Actually, if you watch mythbusters, that isn’t possible. The shock wave from the bullet entering the water kills all the fish in the barrel even if you miss. That is why it is so easy, see?

    • #3 by James Farmer on July 16, 2009 - 5:48 pm

      :)

  3. #4 by glenn on July 17, 2009 - 6:48 am

  4. #5 by Weer'd Beard on July 17, 2009 - 8:25 am

    “Haha! I prefer using an AR-15, one of those pesky little assault rifles the wingnuts say are protected under the 2nd Amend. That way, I can pick off the wingnuts fish one at a time.”

    Ahhh More “Progressives” preaching violence. Right on par! No wonder you troglodytes want to ban tools of personal protection. You just know you’d break down and use it to hurt people who don’t agree with you!

    On a less serious note, this is a damn funny post.

  5. #6 by Anonymous on July 17, 2009 - 8:43 am

    Ah Weer’d, I was going to relate that as kids we caught suckers and tested the fish in a barrel hypothesis using a .22. Unlike the mythbusters schlock no fish died if we missed, and as long as you account for the angular trajectory of shooting in water, it can be done, though you have to get it done before the few holes you shoot through the barrel drain it. That makes killing the fish even easier, and it makes me wonder who the first person was that shot a fish in a barrel.

    Just goes to show liberals can do violence when they wish, they simply preach non-violence. Who dropped the atom bomb? An extremely progressive war act really.

  6. #7 by Weer'd Beard on July 17, 2009 - 9:34 am

    Heh, well I think the discussion about killing fish with a single shot was about hydrostatic shock
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock

    Even from a carbine standard .22 loads are subsonic, or JUST BARELY going Mach 1.

    Meanwhile most center fire rifles push their bullets at Mach 2-3, which will create shock in the water that can kill. Tho depending on the size of the barrel, I’m not sure how much shock a 5.56X45mm bullet is going to kick up.

    “Just goes to show liberals can do violence when they wish, they simply preach non-violence.”

    heh, remember, Rules for Thee, not for Me! Note which party appointed a tax cheat to run the IRS…you know the agency who’s job is to make your life hell if you ever cheat on your taxes.

    The list goes on, but I’ll let others post!

  7. #8 by James Farmer on July 17, 2009 - 10:30 am

    weird:

    I think you will agree that using a standard metaphor learned by many a grade school student is far from doing violence. Go back to sleep!

  8. #9 by Weer'd Beard on July 17, 2009 - 10:52 am

    ““Haha! I prefer using an AR-15, one of those pesky little assault rifles the wingnuts say are protected under the 2nd Amend. That way, I can pick off the wingnuts fish one at a time.”

    Wasn’t a metaphor I learned. What grade school did you go to?

    • #10 by James Farmer on July 17, 2009 - 11:49 am

      Sorry. I completely overlooked the possibility probability that you never went to grade school.

  9. #11 by glenn on July 17, 2009 - 1:31 pm

    James the grown ups are talking about guns, go outside and play now.

  10. #12 by glenn on July 17, 2009 - 1:48 pm

    Imagine what peta would have thought of us Weer’d.

    Yeah growing up Lord of the Flies lite was beautiful, because later that night, Mom would bar-b-que the hamburgers and buns which were the product of an evil man taking a baby cow, growing it to large enough proportions, and then ruthlessly killing it so we could eat and he could make some dough.

    We all know what happens to suckers. Obama has been fishing them to an incredible extent, and now the barrel is well nigh full, gonna be no water, so who needs to shoot ‘em? They make great fertilizer, which what Mom did with them after we were done doing our in the field education. A win win all the way around.

    BTW Everyone was behind the shooter, with the bolt action .22, all safety precautions in place, after all this did all happen in Vermont, no concealed permit land, where I was trained in firearms safety, and concealed carry (mandatory as it was never even a question in Vermont that you could, so it must be learned) at the age of ten.

    Our trainer my friends step dad, a retired AF pilot, flew transports. Mickey began every lesson with the mantra,

    “do not point your weapon at anything you do not wish to destroy”. Common sense not being very common these days.

  11. #13 by Weer'd Beard on July 17, 2009 - 2:23 pm

    Heh, I like how the violent intolerant “Progressive” is backing down as fast as he could.

    James, best to read the post before you hit that “submit” button.

    Or post anonymously under the name “Cliff” everybody expects bigotry and stupidity from him.

    • #14 by James Farmer on July 17, 2009 - 3:36 pm

      Weird:

      Not sure at all what you are talking about – backing down from what? At any rate, if the fish-in-a-barrel story entertains you, then so be it.

      Cheers.

  12. #15 by glenn on July 17, 2009 - 6:42 pm

    “Not sure at all what you are talking about”.

    Not surprising, and that is not an insult, it is only that if things are not presented in the way you think, then you have trouble with the thought. In actuality or on purpose, it passes for intelligence when put properly, to those with an intellect similar to your own.

  13. #16 by Larry Bergan on July 17, 2009 - 11:53 pm

    Love the Imperial March thing Shane!

  14. #17 by Weer'd Beard on July 18, 2009 - 7:12 am

    “Not sure at all what you are talking about – backing down from what?”

    heh, your desires to kill those who disagree with you. Backing down so quick you’re actually changing your story.

    BTW you can see what you REALLY said by spinning that little wheel in the middle of your mouse towards the TV-thing attached to your computer-box ; ]

    It’s Ok if I was a “Progressive” and my fundamentals were challenged by facts, reason, and historical evidence If I wasn’t smart enough to make the choice I did (and switch political alignment) I’d might see physical violence as a viable alternative.

    It appears to be the method of choice of Authoritarians everywhere, as they spread “Progress” through the world, one lime-filled mass grave at a time!

    • #18 by James Farmer on July 18, 2009 - 8:58 am

      Kill those with whom I disagree? You are an idiot!

  15. #19 by Weer'd Beard on July 18, 2009 - 10:40 am

    Heh, I’m not the one who thinks calling names thinks it’ll somehow change what he said.

    “It is better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than to open it and remove all doubt.” -Samuel Langhorne Clemens (AKA: Mark Twain)

    • #20 by James Farmer on July 18, 2009 - 11:35 am

      And that, my weird friend, is advice you should take to heart.

  16. #21 by Weer'd Beard on July 19, 2009 - 4:40 pm

    Heh, James, I feel no need to further discuss this with you, but if you’d like to dig yourself a deeper hole, I have no issues with it.

    I’d say everybody else reading has firmed up their opinions.

  17. #22 by Cliff Lyon on July 20, 2009 - 7:08 am

    Weerd,

    What does it mean when you announce the end of your participation in a discussion before continuing the discussion?

  18. #23 by Weer'd Beard on July 20, 2009 - 7:14 am

    Don’t worry Cliff, you’ve done enugh to damn yourself as a man of little wit, as well as a person who frquently expresses violent desires, I won’t feel the need to single you out in an unrelated topic.

    But I certainly will point out your future transgressions when I read them.

  19. #24 by Shane Smith on July 20, 2009 - 12:51 pm

    I am just glad that while I was away for the weekend meeting actual intelligent people whom I love dearly, you were all able to fight over who is more violent and discuss guns and have a non-related diversion into whatever useless crap that money link was rather than actually discuss abstinence only, purity pledges, mindless marketing, or profit from dishonesty.

    Larry, you lose the thread, your post was nearly related to the article.

    Also, spring is rather nice. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1tatiU2ha0

  20. #25 by glenn on July 20, 2009 - 2:11 pm

    When the topics are vapid, it goes to where it goes Shane. Consider it an edit of your ideas.

    Actual intelligent people, were you hanging with your kids again?

  21. #26 by Shane Smith on July 20, 2009 - 3:14 pm

    You are cute when you try to be an ass. Oddly you are an ass when you try to mean something.

    I wonder what would happen if you tried to be cute? We may be on to something.

    Interestingly, yes, my children have both shown far more intelligence and comprehension than I have read from any of your personalities.

  22. #27 by glenn on July 20, 2009 - 3:38 pm

    You’ll go far Shane in convincing the world of your knowledge.

    Meanwhile, since we aren’t doing your topic, what would you have said if Bush had said something like this?

    Making little robots there Shane?

  23. #28 by Larry Bergan on July 20, 2009 - 10:27 pm

    glenn actually said:

    …what would you have said if Bush had said something like this?

    IF Bush had said something like that?

    It’s hard to take you seriously glenn, but thanks for using your familiar moniker.

    My God! Obama IS human! He even knocks teleprompters off his podium by accident. Hannity played the sound of the object hitting the ground about thirty times in fifteen seconds on the opening of his show the day after THE BIG EVENT; I mean, it sounded like the guy who used to spin the plates on poles on the Ed Sullivan Show messed up.

    Is this all you guys have?

  24. #29 by glenn on July 21, 2009 - 2:08 pm

    Larry, the buffoonery from the podium is only just beginning. Rather like Bush’s tenure. He is exactly where Bush was before 911, a little worse actually. You know my take, no one gets to be president anymore without the approval of those interests with the most to lose in America. He will do exactly what I expect anyway. He has so far. He is far more deadly than Bush, he is good on media. Same agenda with a few variations.

    I expect an “event” that may help our current clown look more like a ringleader of the evolving circus.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: