Women's Rights and the GOP

[logical4u]

the right doesnt need voters they have cheating to win elections

Why doesn't the left want voter ID, the dead people cleaned off the roles or voter intimidation investigated? Yeah, get back to me on that....

 

[Wry Catcher]

the right doesnt need voters they have cheating to win elections

Why doesn't the left want voter ID, the dead people cleaned off the roles or voter intimidation investigated? Yeah, get back to me on that....

Why are you trying to change the conversation? Facts annoy you?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Wry must think if he acts like a vagina, he'll get a date with Fluke

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is the 'Big Tent' shrinking?

Tell me something, what rights are you talking about? Are there rights women have that I, as a man, don't? If there are, wouldn't that be discrimination, and thus illegal, immoral, and illiberal?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Rights Windbag? I suggest you read your signature line. In fact, Windbag, you've answered the question better then anything I might write.

"I will accept the rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do."

Do these ideals you hold so high apply only to men?

Women are free to choose, by law, and all the efforts to roadblock their access to a legal medical procedure by men like you and Republican legislatures around the nation are "too obnoxious".

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Rights Windbag? I suggest you read your signature line. In fact, Windbag, you've answered the question better then anything I might write.

"I will accept the rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do."

Do these ideals you hold so high apply only to men?

Women are free to choose, by law, and all the efforts to roadblock their access to a legal medical procedure by men like you and Republican legislatures around the nation are "too obnoxious".

Only to men? You are the one that is talking about rights like they are based on sex, not me. Apparently you misunderstood my signature. Rules are for people who are not free, not for people who are. people who are free acknowledge that others need rules, and chose for themselves whether to pay attention to them, or not. That would include women.

Rules cannot prevent anyone from doing anything, if they could we wouldn't have prisons.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Rights Windbag? I suggest you read your signature line. In fact, Windbag, you've answered the question better then anything I might write.

"I will accept the rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do."

Do these ideals you hold so high apply only to men?

Women are free to choose, by law, and all the efforts to roadblock their access to a legal medical procedure by men like you and Republican legislatures around the nation are "too obnoxious".

Only to men? You are the one that is talking about rights like they are based on sex, not me. Apparently you misunderstood my signature. Rules are for people who are not free, not for people who are. people who are free acknowledge that others need rules, and chose for themselves whether to pay attention to them, or not. That would include women.

Rules cannot prevent anyone from doing anything, if they could we wouldn't have prisons.

Honestly, that's a nutty thing to post. In context, what you are saying is that a rule requiring a women to undergo a non medically necessary invasive procedure before she is able to receive a legal abortion isn't repressive. Because under your rather bizarre thinking if she were free she could choose to conspire to break the law and have an abortion possibly in a 'back alley'.

And you reserve your right to nullify the law. For example, you might choose to obey a speed limit in the afternoon, but in the early morning hours you feel no obligation to obey the law and will at your whim speed excessively.

 

[logical4u]

the right doesnt need voters they have cheating to win elections

Why doesn't the left want voter ID, the dead people cleaned off the roles or voter intimidation investigated? Yeah, get back to me on that....

Why are you trying to change the conversation? Facts annoy you?

If women's votes are lost to democrat fraud at the election, doesn't that mean the democrats are "warring" against women?

 

[logical4u]

Rights Windbag? I suggest you read your signature line. In fact, Windbag, you've answered the question better then anything I might write.

"I will accept the rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do."

Do these ideals you hold so high apply only to men?

Women are free to choose, by law, and all the efforts to roadblock their access to a legal medical procedure by men like you and Republican legislatures around the nation are "too obnoxious".

"Blocking" a medical procedure is totally different than being "forced" to pay for said medical procedure, but don't let facts get in your way of a biased opinion.

 

[logical4u]

Rights Windbag? I suggest you read your signature line. In fact, Windbag, you've answered the question better then anything I might write.

"I will accept the rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do."

Do these ideals you hold so high apply only to men?

Women are free to choose, by law, and all the efforts to roadblock their access to a legal medical procedure by men like you and Republican legislatures around the nation are "too obnoxious".

Only to men? You are the one that is talking about rights like they are based on sex, not me. Apparently you misunderstood my signature. Rules are for people who are not free, not for people who are. people who are free acknowledge that others need rules, and chose for themselves whether to pay attention to them, or not. That would include women.

Rules cannot prevent anyone from doing anything, if they could we wouldn't have prisons.

Honestly, that's a nutty thing to post. In context, what you are saying is that a rule requiring a women to undergo a non medically necessary invasive procedure before she is able to receive a legal abortion isn't repressive. Because under your rather bizarre thinking if she were free she could choose to conspire to break the law and have an abortion possibly in a 'back alley'.

And you reserve your right to nullify the law. For example, you might choose to obey a speed limit in the afternoon, but in the early morning hours you feel no obligation to obey the law and will at your whim speed excessively.

Well ...., let's lie to her instead and explain that "scientifically" she is not murdering her unborn child, so that she (usually young and naive) will not realize that she killed an innocent life until she is much older, and will carry that "guilt" for the rest of her life. Let's not explain to her that receiving an abortion will increase her risks of certain of cancer later in life, and for clinical depression. Let's not mention that there is a risk that she will never be able to have another child if the "procedure" is not done correctly. Let's just make sure that she is available as a penis receptacle for as long as possible, don't let her be elevated to the "status" of "mother" (one of the greatest jobs there is).

 

[Wry Catcher]

Only to men? You are the one that is talking about rights like they are based on sex, not me. Apparently you misunderstood my signature. Rules are for people who are not free, not for people who are. people who are free acknowledge that others need rules, and chose for themselves whether to pay attention to them, or not. That would include women.

Rules cannot prevent anyone from doing anything, if they could we wouldn't have prisons.

Honestly, that's a nutty thing to post. In context, what you are saying is that a rule requiring a women to undergo a non medically necessary invasive procedure before she is able to receive a legal abortion isn't repressive. Because under your rather bizarre thinking if she were free she could choose to conspire to break the law and have an abortion possibly in a 'back alley'.

And you reserve your right to nullify the law. For example, you might choose to obey a speed limit in the afternoon, but in the early morning hours you feel no obligation to obey the law and will at your whim speed excessively.

Well ...., let's lie to her instead and explain that "scientifically" she is not murdering her unborn child, so that she (usually young and naive) will not realize that she killed an innocent life until she is much older, and will carry that "guilt" for the rest of her life. Let's not explain to her that receiving an abortion will increase her risks of certain of cancer later in life, and for clinical depression. Let's not mention that there is a risk that she will never be able to have another child if the "procedure" is not done correctly. Let's just make sure that she is available as a penis receptacle for as long as possible, don't let her be elevated to the "status" of "mother" (one of the greatest jobs there is).

Wonderful. You've convinced me, the moral decline in our culture is all the fault of women, premarital sexual relations and the billions of women who use abortion as a means of birth control.

This all began with granting women the right to vote. Had we not allowed them this privilege - denied them by the founders, BTW, and hence an unconstitutional act of a radical liberal Congress and a socialist president supporting the femanazi cabal - we would be the moral leader in a world of debauchery, our military would police the world so the world would be safe for theocracy.

Thank you for enlightening me, later today I will go to the elections office and registered to vote as a Republican. I will work hard with you and other patriots to return our nation to the 10th Century, when men were men and women were kept barefoot, pregnant and silent.

 

[logical4u]

There's no war on women and no reproductive rights are under attack.

Don't forget, there's no such thing as climate change or dirty coal or acid rain or smog. Of course if any of this does occur it is not caused by human behavior. Cow farts?

So.... how "clean" are countries that don't use electricity? How "clean" do you think this country would be if water wasn't pumped (electrically) into residences? How "clean" do you think cities would be if sewage was not pumped (electrically) to facilities to filter and clean the "waste"?

Are you suggesting we "eliminate" the population of cities to make the world a cleaner place? Who gets to determine which peoples are "exterminated"?

Climate "change" happened long before there were large populations of people (does ice age ring a bell? Have you heard of tropical plants being found under the artic?). Today, climate change is the "elites's way" of controlling the "masses" (that includes you). They cannot do anything to change the climate, it is just an excuse to "tax" and control. Ignore that if you want, but, it will be used to control what you and yours are "allowed" to do (in the way of "productivity"). Maybe you want to be a "slave" and give others control over your life, and how you live it, I prefer to make and live with my own decisions.

 

[logical4u]

Don't forget, there's no such thing as climate change or dirty coal or acid rain or smog. Of course if any of this does occur it is not caused by human behavior. Cow farts?

Florida has VICTIM'S RIGHTS; no recent changes. I do not think the so called "War on Women" will carry Democrats into office this year.

This link describes TRAP laws, "Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers":

Mississippi cracks down on abortion providers | Florida Independent


These are more Trap laws. I would post more but there are some who will never believe a war on women exists and it is an unwritten policy of the GOP.

Oklahoma committee advances ‘personhood’ bill | Florida Independent

Personhood Florida leader defends movement in op-ed | Florida Independent

Are they interested in protecting the rights of the "youngest" people? And I thought the left preached "its for the children"?? I guess that only applies if you are not murdered in the womb.

 

[logical4u]

These are more Trap laws. I would post more but there are some who will never believe a war on women exists and it is an unwritten policy of the GOP.

The GOP is waging a war on privacy rights and equal access to the law; women are but ‘collateral damage.’

Is that because elevating the rights of one group is decreasing the rights of another group? I know, that is okay in the eyes of the left, because men (the correct term for men and women in large groups) are not created equal, therefore, the perceived weakness of one group, must serve to punish another group. How soon will it be, before you are requesting the great athletes have their hamstrings cut or bones broken to make things more fair to the people that are not willing to sacrifice the hours for training their bodies to near perfection? How soon will it be before the blind are demanding other people be blinded to make things more fair.
You people do not believe in the Lord. You would take the gifts he gives to people and bury them in fields, hiding them from the world. You do not appreciate that each of us are given particular gifts to hone and use to improve society. Sad that the left wants to take us back to the class systems, where there are no choices.

 

[Wry Catcher]

These are more Trap laws. I would post more but there are some who will never believe a war on women exists and it is an unwritten policy of the GOP.

The GOP is waging a war on privacy rights and equal access to the law; women are but ‘collateral damage.’

Is that because elevating the rights of one group is decreasing the rights of another group? I know, that is okay in the eyes of the left, because men (the correct term for men and women in large groups) are not created equal, therefore, the perceived weakness of one group, must serve to punish another group. How soon will it be, before you are requesting the great athletes have their hamstrings cut or bones broken to make things more fair to the people that are not willing to sacrifice the hours for training their bodies to near perfection? How soon will it be before the blind are demanding other people be blinded to make things more fair.
You people do not believe in the Lord. You would take the gifts he gives to people and bury them in fields, hiding them from the world. You do not appreciate that each of us are given particular gifts to hone and use to improve society. Sad that the left wants to take us back to the class systems, where there are no choices.

I wonder, has Stephen King written a novel in which you were featured?

 

[logical4u]

These are more Trap laws. I would post more but there are some who will never believe a war on women exists and it is an unwritten policy of the GOP.

The GOP is waging a war on privacy rights and equal access to the law; women are but ‘collateral damage.’

I don't think so; I think women are targeted. I can't imagine a member of the GOP introducing a Jim Crow law today, some may wish they could, but to do so would result in public condemnation and a movement for recall.

Even that fool crusaderfrank wouldn't go so far as to advocate separate but equal drinking fountains and restrooms (well, he's so FU he might). As for the GOP's efforts to wage war on other citizens, DOMA and DADT are too more issues wherein their bigotry is well known.

We also know that the Dixiecrats who ran Strom Thurmand for President left the Democratic Party and joined the Republican Party after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed and was signed into law by LBJ.

This is one more distinction between the Democrats and the Republicans and one of many reason I'm a registered D and have almost always voted for the D candidate (I voted for John Anderson in 1980).

Do a little research into which party is keeping the blacks and women in the lowest parts of society (encouraging them to stay on gov't handouts) by targeting the "family". Blacks and women are encouraged not to marry and have children (that will have an increased risk of staying in poverty, being victims of abuse and molestation, and joining the prison population), but hey, they give you or people you know money, so that whole slavery thing doesn't seem that bad. You are at fun island (from Pinoccio), and when the money is gone, you will be converted to beasts of burden (asses in the story), with no one to help (you voted their power away), and no way out.

 

[logical4u]

Honestly, that's a nutty thing to post. In context, what you are saying is that a rule requiring a women to undergo a non medically necessary invasive procedure before she is able to receive a legal abortion isn't repressive. Because under your rather bizarre thinking if she were free she could choose to conspire to break the law and have an abortion possibly in a 'back alley'.

And you reserve your right to nullify the law. For example, you might choose to obey a speed limit in the afternoon, but in the early morning hours you feel no obligation to obey the law and will at your whim speed excessively.

Well ...., let's lie to her instead and explain that "scientifically" she is not murdering her unborn child, so that she (usually young and naive) will not realize that she killed an innocent life until she is much older, and will carry that "guilt" for the rest of her life. Let's not explain to her that receiving an abortion will increase her risks of certain of cancer later in life, and for clinical depression. Let's not mention that there is a risk that she will never be able to have another child if the "procedure" is not done correctly. Let's just make sure that she is available as a penis receptacle for as long as possible, don't let her be elevated to the "status" of "mother" (one of the greatest jobs there is).

Wonderful. You've convinced me, the moral decline in our culture is all the fault of women, premarital sexual relations and the billions of women who use abortion as a means of birth control.

This all began with granting women the right to vote. Had we not allowed them this privilege - denied them by the founders, BTW, and hence an unconstitutional act of a radical liberal Congress and a socialist president supporting the femanazi cabal - we would be the moral leader in a world of debauchery, our military would police the world so the world would be safe for theocracy.

Thank you for enlightening me, later today I will go to the elections office and registered to vote as a Republican. I will work hard with you and other patriots to return our nation to the 10th Century, when men were men and women were kept barefoot, pregnant and silent.

Who is doing the lying to them?

Women are intelligent, and thanks to the USA, do not need a man to protect them as in third world countries. It is the left that seeks to destroy the liberty and freedom of citizens to protect the imoral behavior of those that want abortions (how many women do not have abortions?). Encouraging imoral behavior, destroys society. It does not make for a better world. So keep voting for fraud and change, it is not for the better.

 

[logical4u]

The GOP is waging a war on privacy rights and equal access to the law; women are but ‘collateral damage.’

Is that because elevating the rights of one group is decreasing the rights of another group? I know, that is okay in the eyes of the left, because men (the correct term for men and women in large groups) are not created equal, therefore, the perceived weakness of one group, must serve to punish another group. How soon will it be, before you are requesting the great athletes have their hamstrings cut or bones broken to make things more fair to the people that are not willing to sacrifice the hours for training their bodies to near perfection? How soon will it be before the blind are demanding other people be blinded to make things more fair.
You people do not believe in the Lord. You would take the gifts he gives to people and bury them in fields, hiding them from the world. You do not appreciate that each of us are given particular gifts to hone and use to improve society. Sad that the left wants to take us back to the class systems, where there are no choices.

I wonder, has Stephen King written a novel in which you were featured?

Evil always survives with Stephen King, no interest in what he has to say.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Well ...., let's lie to her instead and explain that "scientifically" she is not murdering her unborn child, so that she (usually young and naive) will not realize that she killed an innocent life until she is much older, and will carry that "guilt" for the rest of her life. Let's not explain to her that receiving an abortion will increase her risks of certain of cancer later in life, and for clinical depression. Let's not mention that there is a risk that she will never be able to have another child if the "procedure" is not done correctly. Let's just make sure that she is available as a penis receptacle for as long as possible, don't let her be elevated to the "status" of "mother" (one of the greatest jobs there is).

Wonderful. You've convinced me, the moral decline in our culture is all the fault of women, premarital sexual relations and the billions of women who use abortion as a means of birth control.

This all began with granting women the right to vote. Had we not allowed them this privilege - denied them by the founders, BTW, and hence an unconstitutional act of a radical liberal Congress and a socialist president supporting the femanazi cabal - we would be the moral leader in a world of debauchery, our military would police the world so the world would be safe for theocracy.

Thank you for enlightening me, later today I will go to the elections office and registered to vote as a Republican. I will work hard with you and other patriots to return our nation to the 10th Century, when men were men and women were kept barefoot, pregnant and silent.

Who is doing the lying to them?

Women are intelligent, and thanks to the USA, do not need a man to protect them as in third world countries. It is the left that seeks to destroy the liberty and freedom of citizens to protect the imoral behavior of those that want abortions (how many women do not have abortions?). Encouraging imoral behavior, destroys society. It does not make for a better world. So keep voting for fraud and change, it is not for the better.

Well, this thread has been hijacked and I've been lectured on morality by an imbecile who can't spell immoral (imoral?).

 

[Wry Catcher]

Notwithstanding the fact that this thread has been hijacked and I've been lectured on morality by an imbecile who can't spell immoral (imoral?)" I will continue.

In 2011 a record number of anti-abortion laws were passed in State Legislatures. See:

2011 Already Sets Record Of Anti-Abortion Laws - COLORLINES

From the link above:

"The seemingly endless battle over women’s rights to reproductive health care has taken a substantial legal step backwards. So far this year, just 19 states have enacted a total of 162 new laws relating to reproductive health. Unsurprisingly, 49 percent of these work to restrict access to abortion services, smashing the already unsettling record of 34 legalized restrictions passed in 2005".

"conservative lawmakers have combined established and inventive strategies in an effort to reduce both access to reproductive health care and the influence of family planning programs and institutions."