twa Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 New Mexico, Virginia, and multiple other states passed laws restricting a woman's right to choose. The ultrasound law was only one example. There were many. A ultrasound was already required by Planned Parenthood before a abortion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brandymac27 Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 I love you guys more every day. Thanks. I wonder.... if it was mandated that no male children could get circumcised until they turn 13 (or could NEVER get circumcised) how many men would be in an uproar about the govt making decisions for their bodies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 A ultrasound was already required by Planned Parenthood before a abortion There are different types... also, it's one thing for a private institution to demand a procedure and quite another for a state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 The Republicans lost the "war on women" debate by being stupid, in particular 2 Senate candidates. R's need to do the following when asked about it "I am pro life and against abortion except in the cases of rape, incest and life of mother" Thats it. Never mention it again. Repeat that line over and over. And when you get in office, don't even address the issue. Go on to other more important things. Don't start passing "personhood" laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrabR Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Being pro-life and not wanting to kill babies is not waging war on women. . and no one is forcing you get to a abortion If you are a man like myself then we have no business in this argument as it a womans body. It amazes me at the amount of laws passed by old white men intended to govern a womans body In the end noone is for really for a abortion,but some for whatever reason need one. Bill Clinton said it best Safe,rare and legal PS If you are pro life how many unwanted special needs children have you adopted ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 The Republicans lost the "war on women" debate by being stupid, in particular 2 Senate candidates. R's need to do the following when asked about it "I am pro life and against abortion except in the cases of rape, incest and life of mother" Thats it. Never mention it again. Repeat that line over and over. And when you get in office, don't even address the issue. Go on to other more important things. Don't start passing "personhood" laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
endzone_dave Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 and no one is forcing you get to a abortionIf you are a man like myself then we have no business in this argument as it a womans body. It amazes me at the amount of laws passed by old white men intended to govern a womans body In the end noone is for really for a abortion,but some for whatever reason need one. Bill Clinton said it best Safe,rare and legal PS If you are pro life how many unwanted special needs children have you adopted ? So a woman should be able to terminate her pregnancy right up to the birth of the baby? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 and no one is forcing you get to a abortionIf you are a man like myself then we have no business in this argument as it a womans body. It amazes me at the amount of laws passed by old white men intended to govern a womans body In the end noone is for really for a abortion,but some for whatever reason need one. Bill Clinton said it best Safe,rare and legal PS If you are pro life how many unwanted special needs children have you adopted ? Can it with the woman's body argument. That argument would be valid if we were talking about women being forced into procedures against their will that involved her body only. Once a baby is involved, you have two bodies, not just one. That is why murderers are charged twice when they kill a pregnant woman. They get charged for what they did to the woman and baby. See Scott Peterson. You can play with the lingo all you want in regards to "pro-choice" or "woman's right to choose" to make it sound more acceptable. I won't. In response to your "how many kids have I adopted", it's not my responsibility to raise some dimwit's kid. If some idiot doesn't know how to wear a rubber or insist their partner wear one, it's on them. If a couple wanting a kid finds out theirs will be special need, they should do what is right, like Palin, and raise their special needs kid. Not kill it. I really don't care anymore. All of you on the left can have your way. Go ahead and just fund every damn thing. Hell, maybe the Fed will print so much money, they can give us all a million dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 I see against birth control, against abortion, against adoption, against supporting unwanted kids... At least you're consistent. I would think if you truly thought every life sacred you want to protect that life even after birth. Did Jesus advocate that you shouldn't care for the least among us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 . Don't start passing "personhood" laws. The POTUS used to not be a person here....some things are worth recognizing ---------- Post added November-10th-2012 at 02:20 PM ---------- I see against birth control, against abortion, against adoption, against supporting unwanted kids... At least you're consistent. I would think if you truly thought every life sacred you want to protect that life even after birth. Did Jesus advocate that you shouldn't care for the least among us? At least HE is not advocating for the right to kill them, like some people consistently do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 I see against birth control, against abortion, against adoption, against supporting unwanted kids... At least you're consistent. I would think if you truly thought every life sacred you want to protect that life even after birth. Did Jesus advocate that you shouldn't care for the least among us? Are you referring to me? Where did I say I was against birth control? I even said where you could buy it from for $9 a month. Yes, I am against abortion. I never said I was against adoption. I never said I'm against supporting kids. Kids should be supported by the parents or those who want to be adoptive parents. The only thing that's silly is your comment, which really didn't deserve a response, but you got one anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Free access to birth control should be a universal human right. This will solve a number of problems including hunger and poverty around the world.Too bad some religions oppose birth control and preach against it. I think that is highly immoral. It causes incalculable harm. Free? How is it free? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Free access to birth control should be a universal human right. This will solve a number of problems including hunger and poverty around the world. Too bad some religions oppose birth control and preach against it. I think that is highly immoral. It causes incalculable harm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Free access to birth control should be a universal human right. This will solve a number of problems including hunger and poverty around the world.Too bad some religions oppose birth control and preach against it. I think that is highly immoral. It causes incalculable harm. Free? How is it free? How will it be free? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 why not free access to food and money instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Free? How is it free? How will it be free? Developed countries should pay for it. ---------- Post added November-10th-2012 at 03:30 PM ---------- why not free access to food and money instead? You can never provide enough food and money if people keep reproducing like animals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 That's it for the "typical abortion segment" of this thread. It's not to become an ongoing tangent. How/why the GOP does or doesn't adjust it's stances on that or any issue is fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Developed countries should pay for it.---------- Post added November-10th-2012 at 03:30 PM ---------- You can never provide enough food and money if people keep reproducing like animals. Developed countries should pay for it? I thought is was for free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Developed countries should pay for it? I thought is was for free. Free to women. Nothing is free and you know it. I am talking about solving problems. You seem to suggest outlawing problems. ---------- Post added November-10th-2012 at 03:43 PM ---------- That's it for the "typical abortion segment" of this thread. It's not to become an ongoing tangent. How/why the GOP does or doesn't adjust it's stances on that or any issue is fine. I do not think the GOP will change its position on this because it is a faith based position. Same can be said about many other GOP positions, including those on the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
endzone_dave Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 I think everything should be free. Then women will have access to everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 I think everything should be free. Then women will have access to everything. Commie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 deleted post. Stupid mods went a ruined a perfectly good thread hijack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 The GOP needs a new brand and a new battle to fight if they ever want to be taken serious again. Or, they can just keep using their house majority to dull the President's efforts to get some work done :doh: Regardless, the right man is POTUS. I just couldn't picture Romney in the white house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Yahoo/AP: Obama wins Florida by razor-thin margin ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. - President Barack Obama was declared the winner of Florida's 29 electoral votes Saturday, ending a four-day count with a razor-thin margin that narrowly avoided an automatic recount that would have brought back memories of 2000.No matter the outcome, Obama had already clinched re-election and now has 332 electoral votes to Romney's 206. The Florida Secretary of State's Office said that with almost 100 per cent of the vote counted, Obama led Republican challenger Mitt Romney 50 per cent to 49.1 per cent, a difference of about 74,000 votes. That was over the half-per cent margin where a computer recount would have been automatically ordered unless Romney had waived it. There is a Nov. 16 deadline for overseas and military ballots, but under Florida law, recounts are based on Saturday's results. Only a handful of overseas and military ballots are believed to remain outstanding. More at the link. I normally try not to quote that much of an article, but I wanted to get that last paragraph in. I remember, after the 2000 fight over postmarks and absentee ballots, (background: In 2000, Florida law stated that, to be accepted, absentee ballots had to be postmarked on election day, or sooner. A big part of the legal and public battle concerned Republican efforts to ignore this law, apparently because mail from military personnel serving overseas often doesn't get postmarked, or is postmarked days after it was mailed.), Florida changed their laws to require that, to be counted, absentee ballots had to be received at the elections office, by election day. That last paragraph looks, to me, like our legislature has decided to change the law to create a special deadline, almost two weeks after the election, but only for military absentee ballots. Of course, I'm sure that their reason for this is because of their deep honor and respect for our noble fighting forces, rather than because military absentee ballots tend to favor Republicans. Frankly, I've got a problem with this. With the idea that we have different election rules for different groups of people. The old "has to get here on time" rule applied to everybody. Yeah, the further away a voter was, the earlier he had to mail the ballot. But that was a geographical/logistical distinction. It applied to everybody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Frankly, I've got a problem with this. With the idea that we have different election rules for different groups of people. The old "has to get here on time" rule applied to everybody. Yeah, the further away a voter was, the earlier he had to mail the ballot. But that was a geographical/logistical distinction. It applied to everybody. when the govt can't seem to send and return ballots in a timely manner to those further away at govt direction.......... who cares Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.