Uh O'Reilly (Slams Jennifer Aniston)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

ABM

Happily Married In Music City, USA!
Joined
Sep 12, 2008
Messages
31,865
Likes
5,785
Points
113
http://www.irishcentral.com/ent/Bil...-Aniston-is-destroying-America-100438214.html


Bill O'Reilly Says Jennifer Aniston Is Destroying America

oreilly-aniston.jpg




We're not kidding. The Fox News anchor is slamming Aniston, 41, for saying that women don't need men to have kids.

'She's throwing a message out to 12-year-olds and 13-year-olds that, 'Hey you don't need a guy. You don't need a dad,' he ranted on his FOX News show this week. 'That is destructive to our society.'

O'Reilly failed to elaborate if he meant conception or fatherhood, but in either case he saw no room for debate.

Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson also chimed in, 'She is glamorizing single parenthood.'

Apparently we wouldn't want to ever celebrate that. The more appropriate response may be to feel ashamed. OK then.

In her latest romantic comedy 'The Switch' (which arrives on August 20), Aniston plays Kassie, a single woman seeking a sperm donor.

At a weekend press conference, the single actress told reporters: 'Women are realizing it more and more knowing that they don't have to settle with a man just to have that child. Times have changed and that is also what is amazing is that we do have so many options these days, as opposed to our parents' days when you can't have children because you have waited too long.'

When she's not destroying society Aniston is currently rumored to be dating Saturday Night Live star Jason Sudeikis.
 
Glad to see he's concentrating his superpowers on the Red Carpet Set and staying out of the real world's way.
 
what's wrong with what O'Reiley said?

Usually, haven't studies shown that single mother families are usually at a disadvantage?

:confused:
 
Because he is asserting that women should have to wait until a man tells them it is okay for them to have a child. All Aniston was saying is that it is now a viable option for women to have a child when they want, as opposed to when a man feels ready to settle down.
 
sure, if you can balance raising a child as a single mother. the prevailing thought though is that this is generally a bad idea.
 
I guess women do have that ticking time clock. with men, not so much. the trend is for people to get married later in life as the "benefits" of marriage are being outdated as we advance as a society ( http://nomarriage.com/ )
 
Last edited:
This is the kind of hard hitting commentary that won him the coveted Peabody award while at Inside Edition.
 
Well, if I were a wealthy 40'ish female and wanted more publicity I might find some kid and after I rejuvenated my B movie career with it, then ship him/her off to boarding school as well. Token Hollywood kids are like token dogs people throw in the back yard. They serve a purpose and then they're relegated to a life of being a Hollywood brat replete with all the drugs and booze they care to have.

That said, O'Reilly is an idiot. All those lefty & righty talking heads are.
 
More so with her terrible romantic comedies.
 
Well, if I were a wealthy 40'ish female and wanted more publicity I might find some kid and after I rejuvenated my B movie career with it, then ship him/her off to boarding school as well. Token Hollywood kids are like token dogs people throw in the back yard. They serve a purpose and then they're relegated to a life of being a Hollywood brat replete with all the drugs and booze they care to have.

That said, O'Reilly is an idiot. All those lefty & righty talking heads are.


Says the fat man with no career.
 
Aniston was just promoting her new movie. O'Reilly really shouldn't have commented.
 
I think the most important thing is for a child to be in a loving home.

Alert, Liberal thoughts coming from a conservitive mind.

I couldn't care less if it's two men, two women, a single woman or single man. A child is much better off with say two loving men than a man and woman who fight and beat the child.

That being said, I also feel it's important that a child get possitive male and female interaction as much as possible.
 
I think the funniest part is how he thinks 12 and 13 year old girls look to Jennifer Anniston for anything. She might as well be the news anchor on KING tv in Seattle, for all the average 13 year old girl cares.
 
do you guys know what the movie is about? Its about Aniston...who decides she wants to have a baby...so she throws an "insemination party"....jason batement gets wasted at this party, and somehow he drops the semen from the sperm donor in the toilet....and then he jerks off into the cup.

then the rest of the story is about him meeting his son, but Aniston doesn't know she inserted his nut into her womb! sonned!

or as Bill Simmons has tweeted: "So after her drunk friend spills the sperm sample down the drain, he switches it with his own and never tells her!!!" #hollywoodhasgivenup
 
here's the wikiplot: Kassie Singleton (Jennifer Aniston) decides she wants to have a baby. Despite the objections of her neurotic best friend Wally (Jason Bateman), she chooses to go it alone, with the services of handsome and charming sperm donor Roland (Patrick Wilson). Wally has always had feelings for Kassie, but as his friend (Jeff Goldblum) points out, he missed his chance and she put him in the "friend zone". But things don't go to plan, as Wally gets so drunk at Kassie's "insemination party" that he accidentally spills Roland's semen and replaces it with his own. Seven years later, Kassie returns to New York along with precocious-but-neurotic son Sebastian (Thomas Robinson). Wally forms a bond with this loveable mini-version of himself, but the bad news is that Roland is in the picture too.
 
I don't know, maybe I am old fashioned, but anytime I hear someone going ape-shit about a movie with an "insemination party" - I conclude that that person is an idiot.
 
meh, live out in this world and these things really aren't that far out there. people are fucking weird nowadays.
 
I was afraid to open this thread; there's all kinds of wrongness implied in the title. :smiley-scared:

Usually, haven't studies shown that single mother families are usually at a disadvantage?
I'd be interested in seeing the impact socioeconomic status has on this matter.
 
At a weekend press conference, the single actress told reporters: 'Women are realizing it more and more knowing that they don't have to settle with a man just to have that child. Times have changed and that is also what is amazing is that we do have so many options these days, as opposed to our parents' days when you can't have children because you have waited too long.'

It isn't about the movie as much as saying that, it seems.

Aniston is rich enough to raise children on her own without hardships.

I don't think a man is particularly required to raise children, but it probably does help to have two incomes to afford to raise kids in a decent environment. Though too many people do have to go with the hand they're dealt.
 
Brushing aside the snide comments and personal attacks which have thus far characterized this thread, Denny has brought the discussion back to point. O'Reilly was responding to what Aniston was saying, which was that women "don't have to settle with a man just to have that child." This comment is what was referred to as "destructive" by O'Reilly. You may or may not like Bill, personally, but what he said is substantiated by the last 75 years of psychological, educational, and sociological research.

To be more specific, the lack of a strong father figure ("strong" as in being a good role model for men) is directly tied to both a "high risk" environment as a child grows up and a lack of socialization and preparedness as that child takes his or her adult place in society. The preponderance of research indicate that the most crucial time of father-child interaction is that between the ages of eight and sixteen, but the need for a father is not restricted to those few years. During the critical first three years of life, for example, when the child requires tremendous amounts of attention and interaction from his or her mother, the father's job is to shoulder whatever burdens he can so that the mother is freed up to focus on the child.

Aniston speaks out of ignorance, and was likely motivated by her need to defend her own personal choices in life. (Most people don't like to admit that they are responsible for screwing up their own lives.) Of course it's not absolutely essential for a child to have a mother and/or father. Lots of kids manage to grow up despite being orphaned and having neither a mother nor a father. Such children usually survive to adulthood and find a way to deal with the emotional and mental scars that remain until death. If they do not, then they die off or are incarcerated and society moves on. For anyone who actually cares a lick about their child, however, this is not a desirable scenario.

Any parent who wants to provide the best possible environment for their child should be doing all they can to provide a calm, stable, loving home with a mother and father figure. Such things as violence, instability, drugs or alcohol, neglect, poverty, and missing one or more parents are hurdles to normal child development. A responsible parent does whatever he or she can to avoid them. Unfortunately, there are no requirements to being a parent other than the ability to reproduce, and the child does not get to choose his or her family.

The good news is that many parents are "waking up" to their responsibilities and are taking parenting classes and educating themselves, and it is never too late to improve a child's life. The bad news is that too many parents, these days, would rather slough the rearing of their children off on someone else. The "societal ills" we are currently suffering through in direct correlation to the amount of neglect and absence of fathers our children are suffering through during their early adolescence.

As a side note, anyone interested in reading about how environmental factors (including parenting) influence brain development in young children can check out "Rethinking the Brain" by Rima Shore.
 
Last edited:
I'm not gonna read thru all the political posts because I've had a few beers and I'm giving my brain a break. The bottom line is that I'd love to slam Jennifer Anniston. She's one of the most beautiful women alive IMO.
 
I'm not gonna read thru all the political posts because I've had a few beers and I'm giving my brain a break. The bottom line is that I'd love to slam Jennifer Anniston. She's one of the most beautiful women alive IMO.

No. Too much stuff done to her face and she is annoying as fuck. IMO!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top