Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Outrage?!
Bwahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!
I'm laughing my ass off at the bumbling Republican party!
I am too, along with the dems for demanding that we pay for other's bedroom pleasures.
This is definitely an issue you guys need to take a stand on. It's going to be a big winner for you, I can tell.
Both parties now, full throttle ahead, in the bedroom, screwing us all up the ass as they try to avoid the pertinent issues.
(AP) OKLAHOMA CITY - The Oklahoma Senate has overwhelmingly approved an anti-abortion "personhood" bill that declares life begins at conception.
The vote Wednesday upset doctors who fear the proposed law will jeopardize reproductive medicine.
The bill now heads to the House, where it is expected to pass. Republican Gov. Mary Fallin typically won't comment on pending legislation, but she has described herself as strongly "pro-life."
The bill provides embryos and fetuses with "all the rights privileges, and immunities" of other citizens.
Republican Sen. Brian Crain says it's modeled after a 1986 Missouri law that was later determined by the U.S. Supreme Court to be constitutional.
The bill is opposed by the Oklahoma State Medical Association, because of concerns it could affect reproductive medicine and ban certain forms of birth control.
"Personhood" bill gains momentum in Okla. - CBS News
The only form of "birth control" that could possibly be affected would be abortion. Abortion is not contraceptive birth control. Contraceptive birth control prevents pregnancy. Abortion ends an active pregnancy. Apples and oranges. No one in the GOP is against contraception. But nice try at a failed boogey man.
No one in the GOP is against contraception?
Seriously? Are you daft? The CATHOLIC CHURCH is against contraception.
Are you claiming there are no Republicans, not a single one, who is Catholic???
...lol, I'd beg to differ...
(AP) OKLAHOMA CITY - The Oklahoma Senate has overwhelmingly approved an anti-abortion "personhood" bill that declares life begins at conception.
The vote Wednesday upset doctors who fear the proposed law will jeopardize reproductive medicine.
The bill now heads to the House, where it is expected to pass. Republican Gov. Mary Fallin typically won't comment on pending legislation, but she has described herself as strongly "pro-life."
The bill provides embryos and fetuses with "all the rights privileges, and immunities" of other citizens.
Republican Sen. Brian Crain says it's modeled after a 1986 Missouri law that was later determined by the U.S. Supreme Court to be constitutional.
The bill is opposed by the Oklahoma State Medical Association, because of concerns it could affect reproductive medicine and ban certain forms of birth control.
"Personhood" bill gains momentum in Okla. - CBS News
The only form of "birth control" that could possibly be affected would be abortion. Abortion is not contraceptive birth control. Contraceptive birth control prevents pregnancy. Abortion ends an active pregnancy. Apples and oranges. No one in the GOP is against contraception. But nice try at a failed boogey man.
All forms of birth control that adversely affect the fertilized egg's ability to survive would be subject to this law,
since conception occurs BEFORE implantation, and implantation is necessary for the 2 celled PERSON to survive.
From the national cancer institute: Oral Contraceptives and Cancer Risk: Q & A - National Cancer Institute
We shouldn't contribute, in monies, to someone else's cancer. That decision should be their own.
You should take the time to actually read your link.
Or, if you are lazy, just read the bullets.
I did. There are some links between birth control and cancer. What part did you not understand?
The only form of "birth control" that could possibly be affected would be abortion. Abortion is not contraceptive birth control. Contraceptive birth control prevents pregnancy. Abortion ends an active pregnancy. Apples and oranges. No one in the GOP is against contraception. But nice try at a failed boogey man.
All forms of birth control that adversely affect the fertilized egg's ability to survive would be subject to this law,
since conception occurs BEFORE implantation, and implantation is necessary for the 2 celled PERSON to survive.
Dimwit........contraception prevents the fertilization of the egg. Any form that affects a fertilized egg is not contraception, but abortion. An IUD scraping the uteran wall to keep the egg from implanting is no different than a doctor scraping the uteran wall to remove it. You are intelligent enough to know the difference aren't you? There are plenty of reputable medical websites that will explain the difference between contraception and abortion. Google is your friend.
The only form of "birth control" that could possibly be affected would be abortion. Abortion is not contraceptive birth control. Contraceptive birth control prevents pregnancy. Abortion ends an active pregnancy. Apples and oranges. No one in the GOP is against contraception. But nice try at a failed boogey man.
No one in the GOP is against contraception?
Seriously? Are you daft? The CATHOLIC CHURCH is against contraception.
Are you claiming there are no Republicans, not a single one, who is Catholic???
...lol, I'd beg to differ...
Are you daft? Tell me which of the Catholic heirarchy are elected officials in the federal or state legislatures and can make law regarding contraception. .
Mississippi's attempted personhood amendment. Every Mississippi Republican who supports it.
He said who has tried to ban "BIRTH CONTROL". You are talking about something completely different.
In an election year, the GOP has come out in support of allowing birth control coverage for Americans to be denied.
That is factually incorrect. In fact, you could hurt yourself stretching that far without warming up first.
So the GOP hasn't taken the stance that employers should be able to deny birth control coverage?
Have you been shipwrecked the last week or so?
All forms of birth control that adversely affect the fertilized egg's ability to survive would be subject to this law,
since conception occurs BEFORE implantation, and implantation is necessary for the 2 celled PERSON to survive.
Dimwit........contraception prevents the fertilization of the egg. Any form that affects a fertilized egg is not contraception, but abortion. An IUD scraping the uteran wall to keep the egg from implanting is no different than a doctor scraping the uteran wall to remove it. You are intelligent enough to know the difference aren't you? There are plenty of reputable medical websites that will explain the difference between contraception and abortion. Google is your friend.
So your position is that the personhood amendment would ban the IUD on the grounds that it is in fact an abortion device, and not a contraception device??
No one in the GOP is against contraception?
Seriously? Are you daft? The CATHOLIC CHURCH is against contraception.
Are you claiming there are no Republicans, not a single one, who is Catholic???
...lol, I'd beg to differ...
Are you daft? Tell me which of the Catholic heirarchy are elected officials in the federal or state legislatures and can make law regarding contraception. .
Gee, I must have gotten confused. I thought you said no Republican opposed contraception.
I must have misunderstood your statement:
No one in the GOP is against contraception.
You should take the time to actually read your link.
Or, if you are lazy, just read the bullets.
I did. There are some links between birth control and cancer. What part did you not understand?
Slight increase in risk for a benign hepadenomas. No increase in risk for breast cancer. DECREASE in ovarian cancer. Increase in cervical cancer. However since cervical cancer is the virus HPV, birth control is a confounding factor. Birth control itself has nothing to do with the pathogenesis of cervical cancer.
You obviously were trying to use medical science to support the position you already had. In doing do, you look silly. That's usually the case ehrn people shoot from the hip.
You could have used "blood clots" and had a point.
But that would have required some actual work on your part and not just linking the first thing that popped up on your google.
Are you daft? Tell me which of the Catholic heirarchy are elected officials in the federal or state legislatures and can make law regarding contraception. .
Gee, I must have gotten confused. I thought you said no Republican opposed contraception.
I must have misunderstood your statement:
No one in the GOP is against contraception.
Ahhhh, the old Truthdoesntmatter tactic where you nitpick words when you don't have an argument. So, if you want to use your criteria, then Democrats, whites, blacks, elderly, children, etc. are all opposed to contraception because they are represented in the Catholic Church. Nice move. I declare Democrats are opposed to contraception because there are Democrats in the Catholic church. Boob!
Gee, I must have gotten confused. I thought you said no Republican opposed contraception.
I must have misunderstood your statement:
No one in the GOP is against contraception.
Ahhhh, the old Truthdoesntmatter tactic where you nitpick words when you don't have an argument. So, if you want to use your criteria, then Democrats, whites, blacks, elderly, children, etc. are all opposed to contraception because they are represented in the Catholic Church. Nice move. I declare Democrats are opposed to contraception because there are Democrats in the Catholic church. Boob!
Quoting you verbatim is nitpicking?
We've proven HERE that Republicans oppose contraception. The fact that you are trying to redefine contraception as abortion is irrelevant.
I did. There are some links between birth control and cancer. What part did you not understand?
Slight increase in risk for a benign hepadenomas. No increase in risk for breast cancer. DECREASE in ovarian cancer. Increase in cervical cancer. However since cervical cancer is the virus HPV, birth control is a confounding factor. Birth control itself has nothing to do with the pathogenesis of cervical cancer.
You obviously were trying to use medical science to support the position you already had. In doing do, you look silly. That's usually the case ehrn people shoot from the hip.
You could have used "blood clots" and had a point.
But that would have required some actual work on your part and not just linking the first thing that popped up on your google.
Obviously not. Your miscomprehension of disseminated facts is in question though. I simply claimed that there were links between the two...and there are. Sorry that it upsets. Just an aside though, the buffoon show includes Romney, O, and Santorum.
Rick Santorum said that birth control was "harmful to women."
Was that an opinion or legislation? You do know the difference don't you?
Mississippi's attempted personhood amendment. Every Mississippi Republican who supports it.
He said who has tried to ban "BIRTH CONTROL". You are talking about something completely different.
SNIPThe only form of "birth control" that could possibly be affected would be abortion. Abortion is not contraceptive birth control. Contraceptive birth control prevents pregnancy. Abortion ends an active pregnancy. Apples and oranges. No one in the GOP is against contraception. But nice try at a failed boogey man.
No one in the GOP is against contraception?
Seriously? Are you daft? The CATHOLIC CHURCH is against contraception.
Are you claiming there are no Republicans, not a single one, who is Catholic???
...lol, I'd beg to differ...
Dimwit........contraception prevents the fertilization of the egg. Any form that affects a fertilized egg is not contraception, but abortion. An IUD scraping the uteran wall to keep the egg from implanting is no different than a doctor scraping the uteran wall to remove it. You are intelligent enough to know the difference aren't you? There are plenty of reputable medical websites that will explain the difference between contraception and abortion. Google is your friend.
So your position is that the personhood amendment would ban the IUD on the grounds that it is in fact an abortion device, and not a contraception device??
An IUD is not a contraceptive device as it does not PREVENT pregnancy. You need to do some Googling and understand the definitions of the terms you are arguing.
