• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bull Gator

GOP's war on women

Recommended Posts

Apparently the Republicans thought they could, after having thousands witness them voting after midnight, alter the records to say they got their vote in on time. Which party was it complaining about voter fraud again?

 

Though, I don't know why I'm surprised the GOP is pretending they voted on time. They also pretend they represent people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently the Republicans thought they could, after having thousands witness them voting after midnight, alter the records to say they got their vote in on time. Which party was it complaining about voter fraud again?

 

Though, I don't know why I'm surprised the GOP is pretending they voted on time. They also pretend they represent people.

 

Last night, when I read that they altered the record to make it seem like they had, in fact, voted on time, it seemed like I was dreaming.

 

Turns out, I wasn't dreaming.

 

No doubt we will be treated to cries of outrage at the protesters who caused the ruckus.

 

Causing a disruption is bad. Sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the "war on fetus."

 

The ultimate showdown - Women vs. fetus who will win?

 

stay tuned.......... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would support an abortion bill that required DNA testing of the fetus after the abortion and identifying the male responsible. Then mandatory castration of the male. That would reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. The abortion rate would drop to the point of only medically necessary ones would be observed. Men who wish to engage in casual sexual encounters will be encouraged to take the responsibility of birth control upon themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forced castration? hmmm. is that your idea of personal responsibility?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On this I will concur... However in most countries that do not allow abortions in general this is considered special circumstance and requires a police report. Just "fucking around" and after four months is not... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would support an abortion bill that required DNA testing of the fetus after the abortion and identifying the male responsible. Then mandatory castration of the male. That would reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies. The abortion rate would drop to the point of only medically necessary ones would be observed. Men who wish to engage in casual sexual encounters will be encouraged to take the responsibility of birth control upon themselves.

 

 

That's pretty sexist comment. It seems to me that the prevailing argument is that abortion is a woman's decision based on the woman's right to choose because it is her body and no one else (especially a man) should have any influence on her decision to abort. If that is the case, does it not make sense that the woman should accept the responsibility for protecting her body from pregnancy in the first place?

 

Please not that may comment/question is based on "casual sexual encounters".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cut the nutz off a few baby daddies and you will see the sales of condoms go up.

 

 

There are plenty of men out there who didn't want to be daddies after a casual encounter but they didn't have an equivalent choice that the woman did. A woman's choice is costing those men a big chunk of their incomes for 18 years to support a child they didn't want.

 

The deterrent for an unwanted pregnancy already exists --- for a man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Cut the nutz off a few baby daddies and you will see the sales of condoms go up.

 

 

There are plenty of men out there who didn't want to be daddies after a casual encounter but they didn't have an equivalent choice that the woman did. A woman's choice is costing those men a big chunk of their incomes for 18 years to support a child they didn't want.

 

The deterrent for an unwanted pregnancy already exists --- for a man.

If those men didn't want to have the responsibility of children, they should have put a jimmy hat on. If they choose not to support them, OFF WITH THEIR NUTS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes and make soup for the poor... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Cut the nutz off a few baby daddies and you will see the sales of condoms go up.

 

 

There are plenty of men out there who didn't want to be daddies after a casual encounter but they didn't have an equivalent choice that the woman did. A woman's choice is costing those men a big chunk of their incomes for 18 years to support a child they didn't want.

 

The deterrent for an unwanted pregnancy already exists --- for a man.

If those men didn't want to have the responsibility of children, they should have put a jimmy hat on. If they choose not to support them, OFF WITH THEIR NUTS!

 

If those women didn't want to have responsibility for children, they should have taken precautions. But, lucky for them - they get to take a Mulligan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Cut the nutz off a few baby daddies and you will see the sales of condoms go up.

 

 

There are plenty of men out there who didn't want to be daddies after a casual encounter but they didn't have an equivalent choice that the woman did. A woman's choice is costing those men a big chunk of their incomes for 18 years to support a child they didn't want.

 

The deterrent for an unwanted pregnancy already exists --- for a man.

If those men didn't want to have the responsibility of children, they should have put a jimmy hat on. If they choose not to support them, OFF WITH THEIR NUTS!

 

If those women didn't want to have responsibility for children, they should have taken precautions. But, lucky for them - they get to take a Mulligan.

Not If tea bagger regressives have their way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Cut the nutz off a few baby daddies and you will see the sales of condoms go up.

 

 

There are plenty of men out there who didn't want to be daddies after a casual encounter but they didn't have an equivalent choice that the woman did. A woman's choice is costing those men a big chunk of their incomes for 18 years to support a child they didn't want.

 

The deterrent for an unwanted pregnancy already exists --- for a man.

If those men didn't want to have the responsibility of children, they should have put a jimmy hat on. If they choose not to support them, OFF WITH THEIR NUTS!

 

If those women didn't want to have responsibility for children, they should have taken precautions. But, lucky for them - they get to take a Mulligan.

Not If tea bagger regressives have their way

 

 

As a progressive, would you support a man's right to walk away from all responsibility for a fetus he was half responsible for if the woman chose to have a baby - assuming he had up until the same date a woman has to get an abortion to file the paperwork?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Cut the nutz off a few baby daddies and you will see the sales of condoms go up.

 

There are plenty of men out there who didn't want to be daddies after a casual encounter but they didn't have an equivalent choice that the woman did. A woman's choice is costing those men a big chunk of their incomes for 18 years to support a child they didn't want.

 

The deterrent for an unwanted pregnancy already exists --- for a man.

If those men didn't want to have the responsibility of children, they should have put a jimmy hat on. If they choose not to support them, OFF WITH THEIR NUTS!

Equal Abortion Rights!

 

Franks and Beans! No taking the beans!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Cut the nutz off a few baby daddies and you will see the sales of condoms go up.

 

There are plenty of men out there who didn't want to be daddies after a casual encounter but they didn't have an equivalent choice that the woman did. A woman's choice is costing those men a big chunk of their incomes for 18 years to support a child they didn't want.

 

The deterrent for an unwanted pregnancy already exists --- for a man.

If those men didn't want to have the responsibility of children, they should have put a jimmy hat on. If they choose not to support them, OFF WITH THEIR NUTS!

Equal Abortion Rights!

 

Franks and Beans! No taking the beans!

 

Equal right to choose. I'm not suggesting a future father should be able to force a woman to have an abortion, I'm just suggesting that equal protection should afford the sperm donor an equitable ability to bail out as the egg holder has.

 

BG has nothing more than a very strong opinion without any rationale. Are you on the same level, but using sarcasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any man who fathers an unwanted child should have his nuts cut off. He has complete control of the situation.

 

Any woman who chooses to have a child should accept full responsibility for that child and the government should not be allowed to hold the paternal father responsible.

 

Is it a woman's choice or not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll give it a shot.

 

Any guy who wants to avoid a pregnancy knows what to do. If he decides to ride bareback and loses, he needs to own up to the life he helped create.

 

Women have exactly the same rights and responsibilities - the only difference is they have an "after the fact" option that men don't have - BUT - men do have the ability to choose not to knock up a gal.

 

So - both have the ability to choose - simple really.

 

 

50+ years of angst will hopefully die down as surgical procedures drop dramatically due to easy access to the morning-after pill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll give it a shot.

 

Any guy who wants to avoid a pregnancy knows what to do. If he decides to ride bareback and loses, he needs to own up to the life he helped create.

 

Women have exactly the same rights and responsibilities - the only difference is they have an "after the fact" option that men don't have - BUT - men do have the ability to choose not to knock up a gal.

 

So - both have the ability to choose - simple really.

 

 

50+ years of angst will hopefully die down as surgical procedures drop dramatically due to easy access to the morning-after pill.

 

 

Do you not see how those two arguments are diametrically opposed?

 

Can anyone else do better? Bueller?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how are they opposed? Give it a shot.

 

A man wears a condom

a woman takes a pill

 

Diametrically opposed?

A woman just has one more option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you mean the option to "kill"? I guess this is true, after all if the man was to kill the fetus he'd be sent to prison for life.... :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you mean the option to "kill"? I guess this is true, after all if the man was to kill the fetus he'd be sent to prison for life.... :ph34r:

 

My understanding is he would go to jail for what he did to the woman. As the foetus is not legally a person, it wouldn't be murder. Which law/case are you talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll give it a shot.

 

Any guy person with a womb who wants to avoid a pregnancy knows what to do. If he decides she allows him to ride bareback and loses, he needs to own up to the life he helped create she needs to accept responsibility for allowing the natural reproductive process to take place within her own body, the one over which she demands total control: either become the mommy she knew she might become, give it up to adoption, or practice that hard fought-over "womens' health" that the abortion clinic offers.

 

So - both have the ability to choose - simple really though of the two, the one who can become pregnant needs to consider her right to decide under what conditions she is willing to get laid - as much as a matter of socioeconomic survival as anything. Given that she has ultimate ("ultimate", not sole) power over whether to become pregnant or not, and ultimate power over whether to remain pregnant or not, it's stupid in this day and age to attach legal responsibility to those who have no legitimate control over another person's uterus (the Tea Party's agenda not withstanding).

 

Modified for practical accuracy.

 

To add: in a co-ed softball game where all have fun with each other, when someone beans the other player by accident, society doesn't attach 18 years of indentured servitude to the person who threw the ball. Wear (or require) a helmet, or get beaned.

 

Medical practice gave up on the use of leeches long ago, to "cure" people. It's about time the family courts did the same once affordable b/c becomes the norm. For the time being, a guy (or gal) can get rubbers at Wawa, for Christ's same.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't be silly, the fetus is magically granted life or "babyhood" upon exiting the birth canal by a little fairy. Until then it does not have a life... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Do you mean the option to "kill"? I guess this is true, after all if the man was to kill the fetus he'd be sent to prison for life.... :ph34r:

My understanding is he would go to jail for what he did to the woman. As the foetus is not legally a person, it wouldn't be murder. Which law/case are you talking about?

Practising medicine without a license, may be....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't be silly, the fetus is magically granted life or "babyhood" upon exiting the birth canal by a little fairy. Until then it does not have a life... :lol:

 

Doesn't answer the question. What crime is it that the man is convicted of in your example that results in him being "sent to prison for life"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how are they opposed? Give it a shot.

 

A man wears a condom

a woman takes a pill

 

Diametrically opposed?

 

A woman just has one more option.

 

So, the male should be able to demand she have an abortion and if she refuses, it's all her responsibility to raise the little bastard.

 

It's an equality of outcome thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Team Red has been busy this week!

 

Rubio to Introduce Bill to Ban Abortions

 

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2013/07/03/rubio_to_introduce_bill_to_ban_abortions.html

 

North Carolina Lawmakers Push Surprise Abortion Bill

 

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2013/07/03/north_carolina_lawmakers_push_surprise_abortion_bill.html

 

Ironically, the NC law is tacked onto an anti-Sharia Law. And who says Team Red doesn't have a sense of humor?

 

http://editors.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/07/because_why_not_2.php

 

And the One Star State passed its anti-abortion law through the Senate.

 

http://editors.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/07/latest_from_texas.php

Jesus loves you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, nothing to punish men for their involvement. Seems like the American Taliban are earning their name.

 

"Punish" is a pretty loaded word. Texas passed a law that says a woman has 20 weeks to choose. That seems reasonable to me, and the majority of Americans agree that there should be a restriction on late term abortions.

 

Here's the punishment men face if a woman chooses to have a baby he doesn't want -- Texas child support laws

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hmmm, nothing to punish men for their involvement. Seems like the American Taliban are earning their name.

 

"Punish" is a pretty loaded word. Texas passed a law that says a woman has 20 weeks to choose. That seems reasonable to me, and the majority of Americans agree that there should be a restriction on late term abortions.

 

Here's the punishment men face if a woman chooses to have a baby he doesn't want -- Texas child support laws

After 20 weeks, is it punishment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Team Red has been busy this week!

 

Rubio to Introduce Bill to Ban Abortions

 

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2013/07/03/rubio_to_introduce_bill_to_ban_abortions.html

 

North Carolina Lawmakers Push Surprise Abortion Bill

 

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2013/07/03/north_carolina_lawmakers_push_surprise_abortion_bill.html

 

Ironically, the NC law is tacked onto an anti-Sharia Law. And who says Team Red doesn't have a sense of humor?

 

http://editors.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/07/because_why_not_2.php

 

And the One Star State passed its anti-abortion law through the Senate.

 

http://editors.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/07/latest_from_texas.php

Jesus loves you!

 

Jesus loves fetuses. Once they are up and around, the R's don't care if they starve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Hmmm, nothing to punish men for their involvement. Seems like the American Taliban are earning their name.

 

"Punish" is a pretty loaded word. Texas passed a law that says a woman has 20 weeks to choose. That seems reasonable to me, and the majority of Americans agree that there should be a restriction on late term abortions.

 

Here's the punishment men face if a woman chooses to have a baby he doesn't want -- Texas child support laws

After 20 weeks, is it punishment?

 

Punishment is your word, not mine. When a woman is 5 months pregnant, she might have a clue that she is pregnant and even have had a couple minutes to make her choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Team Red has been busy this week!

 

Rubio to Introduce Bill to Ban Abortions

 

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2013/07/03/rubio_to_introduce_bill_to_ban_abortions.html

 

North Carolina Lawmakers Push Surprise Abortion Bill

 

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2013/07/03/north_carolina_lawmakers_push_surprise_abortion_bill.html

 

Ironically, the NC law is tacked onto an anti-Sharia Law. And who says Team Red doesn't have a sense of humor?

 

http://editors.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/07/because_why_not_2.php

 

And the One Star State passed its anti-abortion law through the Senate.

 

http://editors.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/07/latest_from_texas.php

Jesus loves you!

 

Jesus loves fetuses. Once they are up and around, the R's don't care if they starve.

 

Really? Show us a pile of dead babies due to GOP neglect that is 1% the size of aborted fetuses.

 

Cheers, Mate. Got nothing to do tomorrow except a bit of drywall work. What are you up to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Hmmm, nothing to punish men for their involvement. Seems like the American Taliban are earning their name.

 

"Punish" is a pretty loaded word. Texas passed a law that says a woman has 20 weeks to choose. That seems reasonable to me, and the majority of Americans agree that there should be a restriction on late term abortions.

 

Here's the punishment men face if a woman chooses to have a baby he doesn't want -- Texas child support laws

After 20 weeks, is it punishment?

 

Punishment is your word, not mine. When a woman is 5 months pregnant, she might have a clue that she is pregnant and even have had a couple minutes to make her choice.

If she can find a clinic to extract the unviable tissue mass. Not in these states. How about some GOP love for the baby batter donors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once the GOP proposes a castration law to deal with unwanted pregnancies, it will no longer be just a war on women.

 

 

Never happen. These are the same people who wanted medical privacy so nobody knows which of them uses boner pills...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Team GOP seems to think unwanted pregnancy is a woman's health issue.

 

And poor mothers and their children should not be helped, nor seen, nor heard. What would Jesus say about that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how are they opposed? Give it a shot.

 

A man wears a condom

a woman takes a pill

 

Diametrically opposed?

 

A woman just has one more option.

That's not fair. It is SO Unfair. A man following the ways of a higher power (after being temporarily lured off of that righteous path by a demonsluttywhore), should have the equal abortion rights to demand that the loaf be fully cooked before leaving the oven, in the name of the Baby Jesus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Hmmm, nothing to punish men for their involvement. Seems like the American Taliban are earning their name.

 

"Punish" is a pretty loaded word. Texas passed a law that says a woman has 20 weeks to choose. That seems reasonable to me, and the majority of Americans agree that there should be a restriction on late term abortions.

 

Here's the punishment men face if a woman chooses to have a baby he doesn't want -- Texas child support laws

After 20 weeks, is it punishment?

 

Punishment is your word, not mine. When a woman is 5 months pregnant, she might have a clue that she is pregnant and even have had a couple minutes to make her choice.

If she can find a clinic to extract the unviable tissue mass. Not in these states. How about some GOP love for the baby batter donors?

 

A woman has a right to choose her contraception or even ......not to have sex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A woman has a right to choose her contraception or even ......not to have sex.

And that differs from the man? Why no laws to control the man?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Team GOP seems to think unwanted pregnancy is a woman's health issue.

 

 

Simple concept. We have a woman, we have a man, and we have a fetus. All three of them have a heartbeat, but only one has a choice.

 

Limiting her choice so we don't have someone snipping the back of a baby's neck as it enters the world is supported by almost everyone - including the women in their bunkers.

 

Texas says 20 weeks. How many weeks would you like to give a woman to choose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Team GOP seems to think unwanted pregnancy is a woman's health issue.

 

 

Simple concept. We have a woman, we have a man, and we have a fetus. All three of them have a heartbeat, but only one has a choice.

 

Limiting her choice so we don't have someone snipping the back of a baby's neck as it enters the world is supported by almost everyone - including the women in their bunkers.

 

Texas says 20 weeks. How many weeks would you like to give a woman to choose?

Prevention would be a conservative position and more effective than dealing with the outflow. Why are there no laws to keep men from causing these abortions? Like a bad marksman, the GOP just keeps missing the target.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A woman has a right to choose her contraception or even ......not to have sex.

And that differs from the man? Why no laws to control the man?

 

Indeed it does. Please see the above link to the Texas Child Support laws. All things being equal at the time of conception, the man has no choice whatever. Many feminists and abortion rights advocates have supported equal rights, for women only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Team GOP seems to think unwanted pregnancy is a woman's health issue.

 

Simple concept. We have a woman, we have a man, and we have a fetus. All three of them have a heartbeat, but only one has a choice.

 

Limiting her choice so we don't have someone snipping the back of a baby's neck as it enters the world is supported by almost everyone - including the women in their bunkers.

 

Texas says 20 weeks. How many weeks would you like to give a woman to choose?

26

I would also not require doctors to have privileges at nearby hospitals which is the real issue in Texas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Child support is after the fact. How about GOP law to keep men from impregnating women who might seek an abortion?

 

 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The number of weeks is irrelevant. It isn't a human until its born. Until then its an unviable tissue mass. Even if it masturbates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The number of weeks is irrelevant. It isn't a human until its born. Until then its an unviable tissue mass. Even if it masturbates.

Ya got a pretty good point there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Team GOP seems to think unwanted pregnancy is a woman's health issue.

 

Simple concept. We have a woman, we have a man, and we have a fetus. All three of them have a heartbeat, but only one has a choice.

 

Limiting her choice so we don't have someone snipping the back of a baby's neck as it enters the world is supported by almost everyone - including the women in their bunkers.

 

Texas says 20 weeks. How many weeks would you like to give a woman to choose?

26

I would also not require doctors to have privileges at nearby hospitals which is the real issue in Texas.

 

 

One issue at a time, please. I would expect that at least 95% of people who support a woman's right to choose would not favor pithing a baby on the way out of the birth canal at 8.5 months.

 

I don't have a problem with the Texas restriction. It is not a war against women - it is protecting the rights of what some consider a human.

 

Access to abortions is another argument and as long as the SCOTUS does not rule otherwise, those decisions are left to the states. Roe v. Wade does not guarantee access to abortion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The number of weeks is irrelevant. It isn't a human until its born. Until then its an unviable tissue mass. Even if it masturbates.

 

That is your opinion, but your opinion is the opposite of the SCOTUS. "Viability" is now the law of the land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose viability improves year by year. So next year, we should enforce something like 19 weeks.

 

Progress marches on.

 

This%20Way%20to%20Progress%20-%20Flickr%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once the GOP proposes a castration law to deal with unwanted pregnancies, it will no longer be just a war on women.

 

Also, once there are women in the GOP, it will no longer be a just a war on women.

 

I would like anyone touting the "war on women" bullshit line to not respond to that statement above, until they read it three times, then take at least 10 minutes to formulate a thought.

 

I know. A flaming hoop. But bear with me here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Ben? They've got women!! Palin and Bachman, and whats-her-name who beleives that a rape kit prevents pregnancy!! ; - )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Ben? They've got women!! Palin and Bachman, and whats-her-name who beleives that a rape kit prevents pregnancy!! ; - )

 

You didn't follow the rule and count to three, douche.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ever heard of the term self hating Jews?

 

That generally applies to women in the GOP.

 

Another in a long line of posts that convince me you must to be a plant for conservatives.

 

No one else could make a progressive look so fucking stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Team GOP seems to think unwanted pregnancy is a woman's health issue.

If only abortion would have been an option when you were a fetus. ..;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you retarded?

 

I am a political centrist. Though I despise regressives slightly more than far leftists - I despise them both.

 

 

When have you ever suggested a tip-of-the-hat to anyone in the middle of the political spectrum, like Lieberman?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warmonger Lieberman? You must be joking...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Once the GOP proposes a castration law to deal with unwanted pregnancies, it will no longer be just a war on women.

Also, once there are women in the GOP, it will no longer be a just a war on women.

 

I would like anyone touting the "war on women" bullshit line to not respond to that statement above, until they read it three times, then take at least 10 minutes to formulate a thought.

 

I know. A flaming hoop. But bear with me here.

Just let women control their own bodies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Are you retarded?

I am a political centrist. Though I despise regressives slightly more than far leftists - I despise them both.

 

When have you ever suggested a tip-of-the-hat to anyone in the middle of the political spectrum, like Lieberman?

 

Are you retarded?

I am a political centrist. Though I despise regressives slightly more than far leftists - I despise them both.

When have you ever suggested a tip-of-the-hat to anyone in the middle of the political spectrum, like Lieberman?

Liarman is an Israeli Firster not a centrist. I could on the other hand support Christie...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But Ben? They've got women!! Palin and Bachman, and whats-her-name who beleives that a rape kit prevents pregnancy!! ; - )

 

You didn't follow the rule and count to three, douche.

 

 

forgot to mention, that since what's her name beleives that rape kits prevent conception that she and Bachman and Palin are all co-sponsoring a bill outlawing rape kits......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warmonger Lieberman? You must be joking...

 

 

have to agree with my Regresive friend, RD on that one....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Hmmm, nothing to punish men for their involvement. Seems like the American Taliban are earning their name.

 

"Punish" is a pretty loaded word. Texas passed a law that says a woman has 20 weeks to choose. That seems reasonable to me, and the majority of Americans agree that there should be a restriction on late term abortions.

 

Here's the punishment men face if a woman chooses to have a baby he doesn't want -- Texas child support laws

After 20 weeks, is it punishment?

 

Punishment is your word, not mine. When a woman is 5 months pregnant, she might have a clue that she is pregnant and even have had a couple minutes to make her choice.

 

The way the Texas laws are written she might NEED all of that five months to actually procure an abortion now. If she's rich enough, the poor...not so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Team GOP seems to think unwanted pregnancy is a woman's health issue.

 

 

Simple concept. We have a woman, we have a man, and we have a fetus. All three of them have a heartbeat, but only one has a choice.

 

Limiting her choice so we don't have someone snipping the back of a baby's neck as it enters the world is supported by almost everyone - including the women in their bunkers.

 

Texas says 20 weeks. How many weeks would you like to give a woman to choose?

 

20 weeks isn't the problem with Texas' new laws. Its ACCESS to the abortion, they will be shutting down all but a few of the abortion providers in the state. And many of those shut down places do a lot more than provide abortions, they provide breast and pelvic exams and other low cost women's health care to poor women. Of course Texas already took a lot of that away in 2011, but it's only getting worse.

 

Texas is going to find itself with a whole pack of Kermit Gosnells popping up in the next decade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Team GOP seems to think unwanted pregnancy is a woman's health issue.

 

 

Simple concept. We have a woman, we have a man, and we have a fetus. All three of them have a heartbeat, but only one has a choice.

 

Limiting her choice so we don't have someone snipping the back of a baby's neck as it enters the world is supported by almost everyone - including the women in their bunkers.

 

Texas says 20 weeks. How many weeks would you like to give a woman to choose?

 

20 weeks isn't the problem with Texas' new laws. Its ACCESS to the abortion, they will be shutting down all but a few of the abortion providers in the state. And many of those shut down places do a lot more than provide abortions, they provide breast and pelvic exams and other low cost women's health care to poor women. Of course Texas already took a lot of that away in 2011, but it's only getting worse.

 

Texas is going to find itself with a whole pack of Kermit Gosnells popping up in the next decade.

 

Many states and municipalities have different laws on everything from gun sales/possession to limits on purchasing alcohol (there are still dry counties).

 

Constitutional legality does not guarantee convenient access.

 

Are Planned Parenthood clinics the only place for a poor woman to get pelvic and breast exams? Of course not, so lets not try and make this about access to those kinds of health services when this is about abortion. If it wasn't about abortion, the clinics in Texas would remain open to provide everything but abortion services to women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ever heard of the term self hating Jews?

 

That generally applies to women in the GOP.

 

Another in a long line of posts that convince me you must to be a plant for conservatives.

 

No one else could make a progressive look so fucking stupid.

Sometimes I wonder the same thing, and about Happy as well. Speaking of, Happy 4th RD. And I mean that in the good Happy kind of way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are Planned Parenthood clinics the only place for a poor woman to get pelvic and breast exams? Of course not, so lets not try and make this about access to those kinds of health services when this is about abortion. If it wasn't about abortion, the clinics in Texas would remain open to provide everything but abortion services to women.

 

No, but they are a huge provider of those services for poor, uninsured and underserved women. And Texas is doing everything to take these places down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

BJ steps in to point out what I have already pointed out earlier.

 

Sigh........

 

That must have been in your head, because you posted nothing even close.

 

Maybe...I wouldn't really know. Though he's not on ignore or anything I rarely read what Gator posts unless I am actively involved in taunting him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

BJ steps in to point out what I have already pointed out earlier.

 

Sigh........

 

That must have been in your head, because you posted nothing even close.

 

I would also not require doctors to have privileges at nearby hospitals which is the real issue in Texas.

 

You were just too dim witted to understand the implications of that measure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites