What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Texas Congressman Threatens Companies That Pay For Employees Out of State Abortion Expenses. Companies say “Go F@&$ Yourself”

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
64,290
Reaction score
19,862
Points
2,260
These asshats are NOT Anti-Abortion. They are Anti-Woman. They want exercise full and complete control over another person's body (in this case a Woman). They are NOT Pro-Life. These shit stains support Capitol Punishment and Torture, which are NOT Pro-Life.

They do not give a flying fuck through a rolling fucking donut about the baby after it is born.

Kill an innocent fetus-GOOD

Kill a convicted murder-BAD

That's the argument you are going with?
 

marvin martian

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2020
Messages
16,359
Reaction score
26,116
Points
2,288
Location
Texas Hill Country
In a filing written for an April 26 meeting, Citigroup wrote: “In response to changes in reproductive health-care laws in certain states in the U.S., beginning in 2022 we provide travel benefits to facilitate access to adequate resources.”


Citigroup is not the only company with policies designed to assist employees seeking abortions who are living in restrictive states such as Texas.

In September 2021, Salesforce told employees the company would help them and their families relocate if they had issues with reproductive health care in their states.

Lyft CEO Logan Green announced the company would pay legal fees for any drivers sued under the Texas law for helping women get abortions.


The parent company of Tinder and OkCupid, Match Group Inc., announced it too was creating a fund for its Texas employees impacted by the abortion law.

In an internal note to employees, Shar Dubey, Match Group’s CEO, wrote that the company “doesn’t usually take political stands unless it is relevant to our business ... but this particular law is so regressive to the cause of women’s rights that I felt compelled to speak publicly about my personal views.”

She added: “ immigrated to America from India over 25 years ago and I have to say, as a Texas resident, I am shocked that I now live in a state where women’s reproductive laws are more regressive than most of the world, including India.”


Hey Briscoe. These companies are going to make sure their employees can obtain abortion services, and there isn’t a damn thing you can do about it. And the Supreme Court can’t help you either.

How does feel to be the impotent little wimp that you are?

Look at you, sucking off corporations that want to stop their female employees from having kids (so they can keep working instead). Good boy...
 

Tommy Tainant

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2016
Messages
34,227
Reaction score
11,576
Points
1,410
Location
Y Cae Ras
This isn't safety standards, which FYI are FDA regulated in the US because products cross State borders, it's about "animal rights" requirements imposed by a State on things made out of State, under another State's control.

Understand our system before commenting on it, you over-age commie limey cuck.
Its pretty much the same. Animal welfare is an important issue.
Its why we dont want our beef pumped with steroids or all manner of shit that you inject into them.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
64,290
Reaction score
19,862
Points
2,260
Its pretty much the same. Animal welfare is an important issue.
Its why we dont want our beef pumped with steroids or all manner of shit that you inject into them.

No, it isn't. This was about pen size and other crap, made to make pork more expensive at the behest of PETA type morons.

Plus california imports 99% of it's pork, so basically they were trying to pretend they were the federal government in that case.

It will be smacked down by a finally correctly made up Supreme Court.
 

Tommy Tainant

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2016
Messages
34,227
Reaction score
11,576
Points
1,410
Location
Y Cae Ras
No, it isn't. This was about pen size and other crap, made to make pork more expensive at the behest of PETA type morons.

Plus california imports 99% of it's pork, so basically they were trying to pretend they were the federal government in that case.

It will be smacked down by a finally correctly made up Supreme Court.
So fuck states rights then ?
You people........................
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
64,290
Reaction score
19,862
Points
2,260
So fuck states rights then ?
You people........................

INSIDE the State? FUCK YES

One State imposing on another? FUCK NO.

I wouldn't support an abortion banning State punishing a resident for going out of State for a legal abortion and then coming back, why would I support California being able to regulate out of State pork producers?

States rights end at the State line.
 

Tommy Tainant

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2016
Messages
34,227
Reaction score
11,576
Points
1,410
Location
Y Cae Ras
INSIDE the State? FUCK YES

One State imposing on another? FUCK NO.

I wouldn't support an abortion banning State punishing a resident for going out of State for a legal abortion and then coming back, why would I support California being able to regulate out of State pork producers?

States rights end at the State line.
I dont think that they are telling any other state how to live.
They are laying down standards to suppliers that meet with their laws.
You want to take that right away from them.
Where do you get that right from ?
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
64,290
Reaction score
19,862
Points
2,260
I dont think that they are telling any other state how to live.
They are laying down standards to suppliers that meet with their laws.
You want to take that right away from them.
Where do you get that right from ?

They can do that for suppliers in their own State, for anything out of State, that's what we have federal laws to cover.

Should California only allow EV's to drive in their State?
 

Concerned American

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
17,457
Reaction score
17,984
Points
2,288
Location
In your head
Not assumptions fuck stick, fact. After the baby is born you do not give shit about making sure that baby has a roof over its head, food in its stomach, good health care and a proper education.

You support Capital Punishment, you are not "Pro-Life". You support Torture, you are NOT "Pro-Life".

You're nothing a lying sack of shit MAGA Meat Head.
You don't know the first thing about me, dickwad. Typical democrat--no facts, just bullshit assumptions. Every one of them was dead WRONG.
 

Tommy Tainant

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2016
Messages
34,227
Reaction score
11,576
Points
1,410
Location
Y Cae Ras
They can do that for suppliers in their own State, for anything out of State, that's what we have federal laws to cover.

Should California only allow EV's to drive in their State?
So you want to take away their states rights ?
The people of that state have passed laws that specify certain standards. That is their right.

You disagree with their decision so you want to take that right away from them.

That sounds like an authoritarian stance to me. Un American.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
64,290
Reaction score
19,862
Points
2,260
So you want to take away their states rights ?
The people of that state have passed laws that specify certain standards. That is their right.

You disagree with their decision so you want to take that right away from them.

That sounds like an authoritarian stance to me. Un American.

Again, they have no right to impose standards on out of State products, that's up to the feds.
 

Tommy Tainant

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2016
Messages
34,227
Reaction score
11,576
Points
1,410
Location
Y Cae Ras
Again, they have no right to impose standards on out of State products, that's up to the feds.
So not only do you want to force inferior products on California you are looking to undercut domestic producers.

Is that a GOP policy or just your craziness ?
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
64,290
Reaction score
19,862
Points
2,260
So not only do you want to force inferior products on California you are looking to undercut domestic producers.

Is that a GOP policy or just your craziness ?

No, California wants to force pork producers to follow it's laws even though they are not located in California.
 

Tommy Tainant

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2016
Messages
34,227
Reaction score
11,576
Points
1,410
Location
Y Cae Ras
No, California wants to force pork producers to follow it's laws even though they are not located in California.
Yes thats it. Customers dictate to suppliers not the other way round. They dont have to sell to Cali.
 

bodecea

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
164,642
Reaction score
31,229
Points
2,180
Location
Will.Trade.Racists.For.Refugees

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
64,290
Reaction score
19,862
Points
2,260
Yes thats it. Customers dictate to suppliers not the other way round. They dont have to sell to Cali.

Yet Cali want's their business and to impose it's will outside it's borders. What is galling is it has no Pork industry itself to speak of.

Plus since manufacturers can't have multiple process lines economically they have to upgrade everything, thus imposing California's will on other States.

Same logic applies to not letting State punish their own residents going outside said States border to get an abortion. A State's power ends at it's border.
 

Tommy Tainant

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2016
Messages
34,227
Reaction score
11,576
Points
1,410
Location
Y Cae Ras
Yet Cali want's their business and to impose it's will outside it's borders. What is galling is it has no Pork industry itself to speak of.

Plus since manufacturers can't have multiple process lines economically they have to upgrade everything, thus imposing California's will on other States.

Same logic applies to not letting State punish their own residents going outside said States border to get an abortion. A State's power ends at it's border.
Its their choice if they want to pursue that business. Nobody is forcing them to do anything.

Its risible that you highlight pork. The principle will apply to all food products.

You want to undermine the state of california and devastate its agricultural industry. Just so you can treat some pigs badly.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
64,290
Reaction score
19,862
Points
2,260
Its their choice if they want to pursue that business. Nobody is forcing them to do anything.

Its risible that you highlight pork. The principle will apply to all food products.

You want to undermine the state of california and devastate its agricultural industry. Just so you can treat some pigs badly.

California doesn't produce any pork, they import over 99% of it.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$225.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top