Please read them. They are filled with hilarity.
The "After-Birth Abortions" article criticizes a recent publication in an Australian medical ethics journal. The ethics article is fairly philosophical. The two authors try to make a case for allowing "abortion" after the birth has occurred. Naturally, The Blaze, the Glenn Beck-created conservative website, suggests that this is the next step for abortions in the United States.
First, calling a woman student a "co-ed" is inherently sexist. It suggests that she does not belong in higher education or that her presence is a novelty. It is not a neutral term. Otherwise, men would be co-eds as well.
Anyway, this nutty article appears in CNS News, an arch-rightwing website that often reports misleading, false and otherwise inaccurate information.
This story mocks the congressional testimony of a young woman who discussed the issue of birth control costs. The GOP House leadership conducted hearings on this issue without any women contributing testimony. Nancy Pelosi held a separate hearing to hear from a living and breathing woman (what a communisti). The witness, Sandra Fluke, who studies law at Georgetown University Law Center, described the expense of paying for birth control (because Georgetown student health insurance denies coverage).
Reacting to Fluke's testimony, CNS writer Craig Bannister portrays Georgetown women students as "sex-crazed," another sexist description. Unless these women are also lesbian, then there are a lot of sex-crazed men at Georgetown or in the DC area.
The article concludes with this comment: "If these co-eds really are this guy crazy, I should've gone to law school." Thankfully, the author did not go to law school and instead settled on being a writer for a right-wing website.
Jim Crow for Poor People
Media Matters for America published a critique of a shocking and disgusting column in the Dally Caller. The column, written by Brion McClanahan, makes a number of ludicrous proposals for persons who receive welfare.
McClanahan, who wrongfully contends that welfare is unconstitutional, argues that persons who receive welfare should feel "humiliation and pain." To accomplish this goal, McClanahan argues that the government should create a special brand of food and should sell that food in decaying store fronts. Anyone on welfare would have to shop at these stores; no "private" stores could accept food stamps.
McClanahan also describes welfare recipients as "wards of the state" and "slaves to the government." Apparently, they have no rights (like actual slaves). For example, McClanahan argues that welfare recipients should submit to monthly tobacco and drug tests. Furthermore, he believes welfare recipients should lose their right to vote. Why not reenact a poll tax instead? What a patriot.