Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > The War on Women      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 251
view profile
History
The War on WomenPage 11 of 31    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31)
grizzelda

what you didn't read was the post just after where I said

... They may choose to work, to have a family, to own a business, to work for others or a combination of all. What isn’t necessary is to have a hand out begging for everyone else to pay for that choice.


As for the children part... your behind a few years. I myself am a sole custody parent of a daughter for the past 10 years. Many men I know are sole custody parents. The laws were written gender neutral and it just took time until judges felt fit to award custody to males at all. There is nothing to fix here. It is equal. Men do and are fathers. You don't hear the outrage any more because times have changed.

As for that horrible country for women, America...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_rights

Looks like we only qualify as #8 with a few small countries and Canada ahead. I guess we should strive to be #1 again right... However, it is nowhere near the Afghanistan that people want you to believe. All you have to do is walk outside to prove that.

A very important factor is freedom beyond the right to vote... to maintain freedom is education.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_education

In the developed world, women have surpassed men at many levels of education. For example, in the United States in 2005/2006, women earned 62% of Associate's degrees, 58% of Bachelor's degrees, 60% of Master's degrees, and 50% of Doctorates


If #8 and a high rate of education isn't good enough for you... I just don't know what to say. There is always room for improvement but liberals are lying about the state of women in the country today. Women are not downtrodden, weak, or in need of men telling them how to live their lives here. That includes liberals as well as conservatives.
 red_fir
Joined: 11/21/2011
Msg: 252
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 8:21:53 AM
Do you ever notice that these threads on women's rights all wind down to a few men arguing back and forth?
It seems a remarkable non sequiter.
 part deux
Joined: 11/11/2008
Msg: 253
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 8:23:43 AM
I never said the US is horrible. I was responding to another poster's claim. This person constantly insults women in his posts.
The claim was that nowhere in the history of the world, have women had more equality or freedom than in the US today.
Can you understand the difference between someone questioning that statement, and saying the USA is horrible?
Furthermore, no one is stating that women are downtrodden and weak, this thread is about recent republican backed bills, that are really offensive to women.
If you back and support these bills, bravo, good for you, but please don't try to make your point by manipulating the posts of others.

PS, I am a woman who lives in a country with socialised healthcare, and this image that we are " begging" for handouts when we want our b/c covered is really rude. It is also false. You do realise that women pay taxes, don't you?
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 254
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 8:34:47 AM
I understand very well...

The poster of that statement never insults women. He makes statements that can be twisted out of context to infer things that were never said. Most of what he says is some level of explanation of law.

The claim about women’s equality in America is also arguably true. According to a study which I don't know anything about its validity or testing measures we ranked #8 when many factors are looked at. What his quote specifically said was "had greater freedom or truer equality" and that may very well be true if you looked at those specific attributes. Although I think it is arguable that other nations are equal or exceed these things simply because we did it.

And the part about begging for handouts... that is exactly the point of republicans. They are not. It is the liberals that make this claim. No one else is.

Women pay taxes? You want a cookie for that? Equal is equal.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 255
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 9:41:41 AM
Okay, so you do believe that women shouldn't have to undergo vaginal probe for abortions if men do not have to undergo anal probes for Viagra, right?


Get out of the business of sticking it in everyones ass for paying for it and I'm sure that probe will go away as well.

hehe edit: Ok, that was too much but I'm going to leave it there because it was funny.

Anway...

Do you agree that:
Abortion and sexual promiscuity are not the most ideal events to happen? They are not the height of enlightenment . They occur so birth control helps to handle that. Most of what you see is because it appears that the liberal agenda is promoting these things as healthy when the reality is they are not. Birth control is to help keep bad things from getting worse.

Even though you disagree
The churches promote abstinence and sex within marriage as the ideal. That is the ideal. It isn't exactly effective but it isn't wrong. It also makes birth control outside of marriage pointless. It isn't effective but it isn't wrong. The advocating for this is because it simply isn't wrong. Although it is hardly effective.

Which would you see government promote:
Abortion and promiscuity
Abstinence
Neither

Which is more responsible for health?

My extended family has two teenage mothers. Both have multiple children and are on welfare and have full medical coverage and plan on having more kids immediately and are actively trying to have more. Neither of them work, have ever worked and their mother had 3 children from 3 different fathers and has been on welfare for near 20 years. None of them worked because if they worked they would lose their benefits.

Which version is healthier for society?
 part deux
Joined: 11/11/2008
Msg: 256
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 11:07:27 AM
I was pointing out that since women contribute to the system, they have the right to have the system reflect their needs.
Nice of you to come back with 'want a cookie', I guess you don't feel I deserve the same respect I showed you in my post.
I am not misinterpreting another poster, they get deleted, but he has posted on several occasions nasty comments of how 'ugly' women who advocate for equal rights are. If you enjoy this type of schoolyard insult, well what can I say?
Just because some of your relatives have made bad choices, do you really feel that all women are just waiting to have multiple children and live on welfare?
 Aristotle_Amadopolis
Joined: 12/8/2011
Msg: 257
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 11:19:19 AM

Which would you see government promote:
Abortion and promiscuity
Abstinence
Neither

Why are there only two choices?

Why do you put abortion together with promiscuity?



Why not promote nothing, but instead educate kids on the facts and not pretend they are too stupid to understand or think that if you talk about it they will do it and the younger you start the better.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 258
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 11:58:24 AM

Why are there only two choices?


I gave 3.


Why not promote nothing, but instead educate kids on the facts and not pretend they are too stupid to understand or think that if you talk about it they will do it and the younger you start the better.


That was the third option. Neither.

That is the best option. Government out of the morality business.
 robin-hood
Joined: 12/2/2008
Msg: 259
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 1:17:41 PM
A little more common sense here. Republican introduced legislation, paid for by religious groups. In fact I would bet most republicans don't even want the task, but these religious groups support the republican ticket.

But if you look to the source of money as the congregation, you will find a make up of republicans, democrats, independents, and not registered people. In fact I would take bets they are at least 35% democrats. So the support of these bills is a group effort.

In fact I would bet those protestors in front of clinics are a makeup of democrats and republicans. I would further say they are at least 30% registered democrats. I would just love for a news reporter to ask the question at one of those protests. If my vision is not playing tricks I could also say a large number of those protestors are women.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 260
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 1:32:20 PM

I would further say they are at least 30% registered democrats.


And I would say they are 100% republicans, but then I would be claiming something which I cannot substantiate...just like you.
 robin-hood
Joined: 12/2/2008
Msg: 261
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 1:47:17 PM
Yes I can, can common sense tells me so.

Your Irish. Do you attend church ? Or your wife ?

If so are you and or your wife democrat ?

If so then thats 2.

If I remember right the Catholic Church is a big advocate against abortion & birth control.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 262
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 1:49:34 PM

Yes I can, can common sense tells me so.

Your Irish. Do you attend church ? Or your wife ?

If so are you and or your wife democrat ?

If so then thats 2.

If I remember right the Catholic Church is a big advocate against abortion & birth control.


I do not decide what my church decides to fund or contribute towards...but, your assertion was that 30% of people picketing abortion clinics are democrats...prove it.
 robin-hood
Joined: 12/2/2008
Msg: 263
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 2:00:36 PM
Because most of those picketers are religious based from most news reports. My assumption that at least 30% of the base church members are the same or somewhat less than the member statistics.

But let me ask you. If your a reasonable man then what percentage do think are democrats ?
 Balsamica
Joined: 2/24/2012
Msg: 264
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 2:06:16 PM
I never bought the idea that a fetus was just a lump of tissue and an abortion is simply a medical procedure that a woman has the ultimate choice to have at any time.

I do think that a woman should have access to early term abortion, safe and legal, but:

1. If a man wants the child and would let her walk after she delivers it, he has no choice in the matter and cannot force her; but,

2. If a man does not want the child, but she does, he has no choice: suddenly, he is the father, he caused it and is financially responsible for 21 years.

Why is the man liable when the woman has a choice? He can't force her to bear a child, but she can force him through the law to pay for it even if she were just someone he met at a bar. She has the right, he has the responsibility? That's no fair. If a man does not want a woman to bear his child and abortion is an alternative for her, no man should have to be hounded for 21 years with child support solely because the woman chose it.

3. It is a life and a unique individual. It surely is murder to destroy something with a brain and a beating heart. Women are going to abort anyway, so it is better to let them do it safely.... but not minimize it, it is what it is.

What bothers me is: 1. Women have the power of life and death and men have no say in the matter or whether she bears a child or not, men only have the liability, and 2. the act of abortion should be seen for what it is, a killing, not a lump of tissue like a tumor or a hangnail that is removed.

I am sure that women get pregnant and cannot/should not have a child ... they should have a choice, but men should, too..........and not be liable financially if she chooses to have a child or her own.
 Bladesmith81801
Joined: 10/30/2010
Msg: 265
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 2:07:30 PM
"That is the best option. Government out of the morality business."

But you're ok with the Church using the Goverment to enforce their morality? Or do you not see how your position gives the power to the church to punish anyone not adhering to their "morals"?
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 266
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 2:09:07 PM

Because most of those picketers are religious based from most news reports. My assumption that at least 30% of the base church members are the same or somewhat less than the member statistics.

But let me ask you. If your a reasonable man then what percentage do think are democrats ?


I am a reasonable man...and I have no idea what percentage are democrats...maybe you should do some research and come back to us with facts not assumptions.
 Bladesmith81801
Joined: 10/30/2010
Msg: 267
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 2:09:30 PM
Balsamica, the man has every option to slap a condom on and thus have a 99% chance of not contributing to contraception.

If he doesn't, then he's liable. But as you and I and most men know, they put up a fight at the idea of wearing one.
 tuloa942
Joined: 2/21/2012
Msg: 268
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 3:16:48 PM
"A small bomb exploded outside a Planned Parenthood clinic in Grand Chute, Wis., on Sunday night, and police are investigating to learn who planted the device."

On Palm Sunday no less. I may be wrong but I'm guessing that this "terrorist" was home grown. I also have other ideas of what the "profile" of this person may be but will keep them to myself.
 robin-hood
Joined: 12/2/2008
Msg: 269
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 4:16:27 PM
Here is at least one link of democrats for pro-life

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrats_for_Life_of_America

So Irish you hold nothing against your church or faith, nor democrats, just republicans.

Personally I don't care what a women does with her fetus.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 270
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 5:02:14 PM

"That is the best option. Government out of the morality business."

But you're ok with the Church using the Government to enforce their morality? Or do you not see how your position gives the power to the church to punish anyone not adhering to their "morals"?


I am not ok with the Church using the government to enforce anything. The position of not having the government dictate morality is because it sucks at it and everyone knows it. This however means that both sides win and both sides lose. Religious organizations do not have to participate in acceptance and that also means they can't do a damn thing about it if someone does do it.

You can always leave a church. If it is bad enough you can always leave your community. You can't just pick up and leave your country.

Abortion should be right up there with Alcohol and sugar, salt, fat, porn and everything else that someone can find a 'sin' tax. It is not something we actively stand up and applaud but you just can't do crap about it because it makes things worse if you outlaw them.

Birth control and private insurance is not an issue. The only exception permitted was for the Catholic Church and their organizations. Deal with the exception. Just close it off and do not permit anyone else to claim that exception unless they claim direct affiliation and control from the Catholic Church. If people that work for them have an issue with it... they can take it up with HR of that organization. I'm sure they have handled it in the past.

What wasn't broken doesn’t need to be fixed.
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 271
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 6:41:04 PM

That is the best option. Government out of the morality business.


I certainly agree with that as to the federal government. It's not quite so easy with state laws, because many of them enforce majority moral standards. Laws against murder, arson, burglary, rape, robbery and so on are obvious examples. Most people agree those things are morally wrong, so their states make them crimes and punish people who commit them. Crimes where there are no clear victims are trickier.

Whether the majority's moral disapproval of a thing, by itself, is enough to ban it has become debatable. For example, do legislators in a state have to show some utilitarian argument against adult incest to make it illegal? What if it were homosexual incest, or one or both heterosexual partners agreed to be sterilized? Since in either case the objection that defective offspring could result would be eliminated, would a law against incest under these conditions be arbitrary discrimination? Or should two or three centuries of consistently making incest illegal throughout the country as immoral and unacceptable be reason enough?

Here's what the Court said in Bowers v. Hardwick, its first "gay" decision in 1986:

"[The challenger claims] there must be a rational basis for the law, and that there is none in this case other than the presumed belief of a majority of the electorate in Georgia that homosexual sodomy is immoral and unacceptable. This is said to be an inadequate rationale to support the law. The law, however, is constantly based on notions of morality, and if all laws representing essentially moral choices are to be invalidated under the Due Process Clause, the courts will be very busy indeed."
 Balsamica
Joined: 2/24/2012
Msg: 272
The War on Women
Posted: 4/2/2012 6:56:49 PM
I notice with having had roomates is what happens is that people will take very good care of themselves, shower for a solid hour, etc., but common areas........a living room, kitchen, hallway.........if two people had dogs and one of them shit in the hall it wouldnt be cleaned up, ever! ...the point is, the commons, the public, shared spaces will go to seed because people have become selfish and insulated.

Given that, which is at least partially true, the commons or mores or moral standards as public things and expectations are going to go to seed if there isnt a consensus of people to enforce them............and people are so insultated now, I dont think there is a consensus, there is a vacuum....and the vacuum is filled in by advertisers, corporations........eat, drink, buy, throw away, buy some more.

If in another world a woman became pregnant and if somehow her lover and family as a community around her discussed it, took on the problem as a small community of people, no matter what decision they made it would be the right one..........and they should have a choice....... but that doesnt happen, the choice becomes a completely personal matter for the woman carrying.........and maybe it is ultimately her choice, but the smaller community gets left out.

I had a friend who went to church with a young woman who was pregnant, the church rallied around her, she couldnt abort because she was catholic but didnt want to give a child up for adoption.............so my friend and his wife adopted the child and she was good with that, knowing them............the baby grew up as their adopted son, he is 25 now, a champion skiier, married, and lucky to be alive............ even if that girl could have aborted, if she'd had options like this one had, she might not want to opt for abortion.
 trinity818
Joined: 9/1/2006
Msg: 273
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 4/3/2012 4:45:34 AM

Women belong in the home raising children, not competing for the same jobs as the men who are supposed to provide for them.




Ummm..yeah, ok. Well SOME of us weren't so fortunate as to have found our prince to "provide for us". And my mother for example, who found quite the prince, was required to stay at home and raise the children all while my father was smacking her around on a regular basis.

So take your flame bait, and stick it where the sun don't shine.
 grizzelda
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 274
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 4/3/2012 5:11:23 AM

If in another world a woman became pregnant and if somehow her lover and family as a community around her discussed it, took on the problem as a small community of people, no matter what decision they made it would be the right one..........and they should have a choice....... but that doesnt happen, the choice becomes a completely personal matter for the woman carrying.........and maybe it is ultimately her choice, but the smaller community gets left out.


Holy Shit, do you really believe this crap? WHy the hell should the community get any say what happens in this scenario? The complete arrogance of this statement is quite sickening, that the community knows what is best for the woman. Not the woman herself. These are the kinds of attitudes and ideas that will continue to foster the war of the sexes, as long as men continue to believe that they have the right to overrule the personal choices of women because they dont agree with their decisions. The sense of moral superiority is also quite sickening when you consider that these men will never have to make the choice to terminate a pregnancy, yet they are generally the most opposed to women having choices in these scenarios.

Balsamica, how eager would you be to support this sort of scenario if it was your life being controlled, that the community decided that you arent the best candidate to father children, so the community decides that you dont get to have sex because that is the only way to ensure that the community decision is being upheld. Still liking the "community" makibng decisions about your life. Wait, your a man, so this would never happen to you right? You dont need anyone making decisions for you, just women do right? Men have the inherent right to decide what will happen in their lives, but you dont want women to have that same right if you believe in any shape or form that the community should have a say in a womans pregnancy.
 shadow939
Joined: 12/1/2009
Msg: 275
The War on Women
Posted: 4/3/2012 5:23:03 AM
There is no war on women, the democratic tactics are washed up. No one said these women had to work for Catholic Oragization, except Catholic Insurance, or go to Catholic Universities, a free mind can pick whats right for them, and not want to destroy what is right for others. Like poor Miss. Sanda Flake, they made her to look like a struggling Coed, who is actually 30 years old, specificly read through Georgetowns policies before going there, and looking for a way to attack these policies, shes a plant, and was been involved with Feminist Groups for a decade. Your annointed one is pulling all tricks out, including race now, with NBC editing the 9-11 call on MR. Zimmerman, and Photoshopping his pictures taken by the authorities. All in all destroying others systems, is not equality, its tyranny!
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > The War on Women