Obama/Biden or Romney/Ryan: Who would best protect women's rights?

Last year, Akin and Paul Ryan to co-sponsored the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act", which introduced the awesome new term "forcible rape" into our vernacular. Federal funds can only be used to pay for abortion in cases when a woman is raped; the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act" sought to chip away at that exception by clarifying that only pregnancies resulting from "forcible rape" would qualify for federally funded abortions. The true meaning of "forcible rape" was never clearly defined, and the term was eventually removed from the bill.

The Official Guide to Legitimate Rape
 
In 1988, Republican Pennsylvania Rep. Stephen Freind said the odds that a woman who is raped will get knocked up are "one in millions and millions and millions" because rape causes a woman to "secrete a certain secretion" that kills evil sperm.

The Official Guide to Legitimate Rape
 
In 1995, North Carolina state Rep. Henry Aldridge told the House Appropriations Committee that "The facts show that people who are raped — who are truly raped — the juices don't flow, the body functions don't work and they don't get pregnant. Medical authorities agree that this is a rarity, if ever."

In 1990, Texas Republican gubernatorial nominee Clayton Williams told ranchers that victims should take rape in stride and try to enjoy it — like when you have picnic plans but then there's a huge thunderstorm so you decide to see a movie instead and it turns out to be a pretty enjoyable afternoon after all! Yes, Williams literally compared rape to the foggy weather that was affecting his ongoing speech by saying, "If it's inevitable, just relax and enjoy it.''

In 1997, Bush appointee Federal Judge James Leon Holmes said in an article that "concern for rape victims is a red herring because conceptions from rape occur with approximately the same frequency as snowfall in Miami."

The Official Guide to Legitimate Rape
 
Well it will give them a distraction for a few days from Obama's RECORD..

the people won't be fooled, Obama is STILL at 43% approval with the SANE AMERICAN PEOPLE

TSK TSK

You do know that Bush was in almost the exact same place in 04, right?

You do know that only ONE Democratic president has won a second term since FDR don't you?

And get this, Obama has refused to take any advice from him up to now. :clap2:
 
republicans-in-your-vagina.jpg

:lol::lol::eusa_clap::lol::lol:
 
GOP-aspirin-war-on-women-300x280.jpg


The GOP would have you believe there’s no war on women after they started the war on women.

916 Anti-Women Bills Introduced By The GOP Since March 2011 | Addicting Info

Why is it that men seem to think they know what's best for women? I haven't heard of any anti-men legislation. Have you...?

OMG! Here is one of your laws

expand the pre-abortion waiting period requirement in South Dakota to make it more onerous than that in any other state, by extending the time from 24 hours to 72 hours and requiring women to obtain counseling from a crisis pregnancy center in the interim;

72 HOUR waiting period to end an unborn childs lfe? Get a ROPE! Reps want em to wait a whole TWO more days!

What a "war"......
 
Well it will give them a distraction for a few days from Obama's RECORD..

the people won't be fooled, Obama is STILL at 43% approval with the SANE AMERICAN PEOPLE

TSK TSK

You do know that Bush was in almost the exact same place in 04, right?

You do know that only ONE Democratic president has won a second term since FDR don't you?

And get this, Obama has refused to take any advice from him up to now. :clap2:

I was just pointing out, that pointing to current polling numbers and suggesting they prove Obama will lose, is silly.

As to the rest, I think the country is more liberal now than ever before. However no president has ever won reelection with unemployment so high.... So I think it's anybodys game right now.
 
Well it will give them a distraction for a few days from Obama's RECORD..

the people won't be fooled, Obama is STILL at 43% approval with the SANE AMERICAN PEOPLE

TSK TSK

You do know that Bush was in almost the exact same place in 04, right?

You do know that only ONE Democratic president has won a second term since FDR don't you?

And get this, Obama has refused to take any advice from him up to now. :clap2:

JFK was shot.

LBJ won by a landslide.

Bush lost in 2000 by 400,000 votes.

Republicans have only won the popular presidential vote in one election in the last 20 years.....2004.

That is why they want to suppress the vote soooo bad.
 
Last edited:
There are no such things as womens rights.

Rights are only rights, by definition, if they are enjoyed by everyone.

Lakhota is sounding more and more like a cross dresser.
 
You do know that Bush was in almost the exact same place in 04, right?

You do know that only ONE Democratic president has won a second term since FDR don't you?

And get this, Obama has refused to take any advice from him up to now. :clap2:

JFK was shot.

LBJ won by a landslide.

Bush lost in 2000 by 400,000 votes.

Republicans have only won the popular presidential vote in one election in the last 20 years.....2004.

That is why they want to suppress the vote soooo bad.

Nixon beat H.H.H. Then clobered McCarthy. Reagan whomped Carter and Anihilated Mondale. Bush I then clobbered.....er....well he must have been impressive...oh yeah....Dukaka.

What was your point ?
 
You do know that Bush was in almost the exact same place in 04, right?

You do know that only ONE Democratic president has won a second term since FDR don't you?

And get this, Obama has refused to take any advice from him up to now. :clap2:

JFK was shot.

LBJ won by a landslide.

Bush lost in 2000 by 400,000 votes.

Republicans have only won the popular presidential vote in one election in the last 20 years.....2004.

That is why they want to suppress the vote soooo bad.

Everyone knows the history of LBJ and JFK. Doesn't refute my point.

And why is it that Democrats are so set on uncontrolled elections and obstructing the states in fulfilling their obligations to provide fair and accurate elections?
Give me a break with your simpleton voter disenfranchisement bullshit.
Are you REALLY that dumb or just doing your part to support the regime?
 
Most sane women DO want Obama's protections!

No, you intentionally use the wrong term "protections" to further your radical agenda. The truth behind what you really just said is:

"Some filthy liberal whores want Obama's free handouts because they can whore around without having to pay for their whoring activities themselves". Then, when they get STD's, Obama will pay for that too through Abomonation Care.

It's just the parasite class of people like Lakhota who want Obama's "protections" (ie liberal code word for handouts).


It's my understanding that many more Republican men use Erectile Dysfunction drugs than Democratic party men-----does your position on impotent mostly Republican men using ED drugs differ from your position on "Some filthy liberal whores want Obama's free handouts because they can whore around without having to pay for their whoring activities themselves".






...the obvious conclusion from the breakdown of ages is that most Republican voters are quite old. The party will probably lose over a third of its members to old age in the next 20 years and has only tiny base of younger voters to replace them.

Age RangeGraphPercent
18-27
bluebar.jpg
6%
28-37
redbar.jpg
14%
38-47
greenbar.jpg
15%
48-57
orangebar.jpg
24%
58+
graybar.jpg
37%

The Republican Party is not a party of the young. More than two thirds of those polled were over 48 years old and only 20% were in the bottom two age brackets. This raises the question of what kind of a future a party has whose membership averages close to retirement age with very few new members becoming involved at or near college age. There's not much time left for those who currently lead the party. Membership is already shrinking and the trend suggested in these polls is one which would leave the Republican party as a much smaller minority party in less than a generation.
 
Most sane women DO want Obama's protections!

No, you intentionally use the wrong term "protections" to further your radical agenda. The truth behind what you really just said is:

"Some filthy liberal whores want Obama's free handouts because they can whore around without having to pay for their whoring activities themselves". Then, when they get STD's, Obama will pay for that too through Abomonation Care.

It's just the parasite class of people like Lakhota who want Obama's "protections" (ie liberal code word for handouts).


It's my understanding that many more Republican men use Erectile Dysfunction drugs than Democratic party men-----does your position on impotent mostly Republican men using ED drugs differ from your position on "Some filthy liberal whores want Obama's free handouts because they can whore around without having to pay for their whoring activities themselves".






...the obvious conclusion from the breakdown of ages is that most Republican voters are quite old. The party will probably lose over a third of its members to old age in the next 20 years and has only tiny base of younger voters to replace them.

Age RangeGraphPercent
18-27
bluebar.jpg
6%
28-37
redbar.jpg
14%
38-47
greenbar.jpg
15%
48-57
orangebar.jpg
24%
58+
graybar.jpg
37%

The Republican Party is not a party of the young. More than two thirds of those polled were over 48 years old and only 20% were in the bottom two age brackets. This raises the question of what kind of a future a party has whose membership averages close to retirement age with very few new members becoming involved at or near college age. There's not much time left for those who currently lead the party. Membership is already shrinking and the trend suggested in these polls is one which would leave the Republican party as a much smaller minority party in less than a generation.

And the implication is that conservatives are all about "free" boner pills?
FAIL!
 
There are no such things as womens rights.

Rights are only rights, by definition, if they are enjoyed by everyone.

Lakhota is sounding more and more like a cross dresser.

Women of the 19th century fought long and hard for Woman's rights, and the right to vote.
Since then there have been many issues for woman's right.
Lakhota is Right on bringing this up, it is important.
 
There are no such things as womens rights.

Rights are only rights, by definition, if they are enjoyed by everyone.

Lakhota is sounding more and more like a cross dresser.

Women of the 19th century fought long and hard for Woman's rights, and the right to vote.
Since then there have been many issues for woman's right.
Lakhota is Right on bringing this up, it is important.

Then since Duhkota won't answer, perhaps you can tell us all what "women's rights" are currently being threatened.
 
There are no such things as womens rights.

Rights are only rights, by definition, if they are enjoyed by everyone.

Lakhota is sounding more and more like a cross dresser.

Women of the 19th century fought long and hard for Woman's rights, and the right to vote.
Since then there have been many issues for woman's right.
Lakhota is Right on bringing this up, it is important.

Then since Duhkota won't answer, perhaps you can tell us all what "women's rights" are currently being threatened.

Are you retarded, or just didn't notice my previous posts and links...?
 

Forum List

Back
Top