Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Regressive:
A nation dictating for two years to women the choice of injecting a vaccine into their bodies, essentially robbing them of their bodily autonomy.
Guess who? The US. Every western nation (or 'advanced' nation).
So, how do you address this double standard?
Nothing even remotely sane to add, mouth breather?You’re the hysterical one who’s throwing a tantrum here faggot. Poor triggered asshole. Killing of children isn’t right and you’re whining about it. Now tell your boyfriend you need comforting.
Mischaracterization. No surprise there.Which was advised by groups like the National Abortion Federation.
Why then, does the behavior of Democrats belie the position taken in that platform? Because none of them believe in the safety, legality, or rarity of abortion.
House Democrats Pass Extreme, Un-American Abortion Bill
The fact is, the measures in the Democrats' abortion-on-demand legislation are extreme, even for Americans who identify as "pro-choice."www.newsweek.com
dianeravitch.net
I get it. But call me naive for wanting a truthful answer for once.They address this double standard the way they address all of their double standards: "I want it, and you're bad for not giving it to me!! Wanting it makes it right!!!"
Deflection. Attacking the source, not the behavior being addressed by the source.Mischaracterization. No surprise there.
The New Republic: “Newsweek” Has Turned into “A Zombie Magazine”
Alex Shephard writes in the latest issue of The New Republic that something odd has happened to Newsweek. It has become an outlet for rightwing advocacy. The Newsweek story has been covered by many…
Alex Shephard writes in the latest issue of The New Republic that something odd has happened to Newsweek. It has become an outlet for rightwing advocacy. The Newsweek story has been covered by many media outlets over the past several years, but I had not seen those stories and had no idea about what happened to this once iconic magazine.
For half a century, Newsweek was owned by the Washington Post and was a well-respected voice in American journalism. In 2010, the Post sold Newsweekto 91-year-old businessman Sidney Harman; Harman bought it for $1 and assumption of its liabilities. Ownership turned over a few more times, from Harman to Barry Diller. Diller regretted his purchase and sold Newsweek in 2014 to a group called International Business Times Media. IBTM changed its name to Newsweek Media Group. Its owners were tied to a small Christian college (Olivet University) led by a charismatic Korean pastor, David Jang. Jang also was founder of a cult called “The Community,” according to this report in Mother Jones.
In 2018, the offices of Newsweek were raided by federal agents investigating a money-laundering operation between the publication, the cult, and the college.
But since you're attacking my link for being from a right-wing advocacy site, I will note that Mother Jones is the leftist equivalent.Alex Shephard writes in the latest issue of The New Republic that something odd has happened to Newsweek. It has become an outlet for rightwing advocacy.
Second paragraph of the bill:Deflection. Attacking the source, not the behavior being addressed by the source.
So, where's your point?
Notice how I didn't attack that image of yours from Mother Jones earlier. So the least you can do is provide me with the same dignity.
Or admit you have no cogent point.
It's not that simple, physical life begins at conception. Personhood begins at birth. So are you trying to protect all life, or all people. I go with the latter, women need to be protected from atrocitious abortion laws.
If abortion is murder as you say, there have to be victims. Please name the victims. People have names.
Second paragraph of the bill:
(2) Since 1973, the Supreme Court repeatedly has recognized the constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy before fetal viability, and to terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability where it is necessary, in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care professional, for the preservation of the life or health of the person who is pregnant.
Why do you believe a woman's right to make that choice that difficult choice is any of your f****** business you are the f****** hypocrite don't you understand that.
When all this s*** started the supreme Court should have said abortion is a medical procedure and a Private matter and it's none of our business. Ending all abortion laws before they started would have been the right thing to do.
What part of "CHOICE" don't you get?That is in stark contrast to the Democratic platform of "Abortion on Demand." No longer do they want it "safe, legal, and rare."
You don't want women to have the CHOICE to con-trol their own bodies.The flaw of your argument:
It isn't the rarity, it's the legality.
They've been long ago abandoned it when they went crazy.This is a victory for democracy. Now the voters in the individual states get to decide if they want abortions inside their borders. The Constitution gives the Federal govt no authority over medical matters. Under the 10th amendment, that means that power rests with the states and with the people. I am shocked that the Democrats in Congress took an oath to defend the Const and now they have abandoned it.
Vasectomies can be temporary.Men shouldn't be allowed to abort babies either.
Abortion exists for a reason. People seem to have very little control over their sexual natures thus the Creator entity put many controls in place to try to control the population. We are still over populating the Earth, the last thing we need is any more people on this Earth adding to the problem. If a god existing I believe it does, it would not want us to destroy this world as we are doing.
Exactly.Nothing even remotely sane to add, mouth breather?
Just drivel?
Nothing new here.
It was probably meant to test the waters. 70% of Americans still believe a woman's right to choose is the way to go. A minority only 28% believe the opposite. Doing away with roe versus Wade would create tremendous social injustice.
So it's the magical trip through the birth canal that grants personhood?
