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: 201
view profile
History
The War on WomenPage 9 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)



Next... Another point you’re missing is states’ rights to create laws of that state and not have the federal government dictate what they can and cannot do.


It's offial. Aries has now entered into Matchland.


This shouldn't take much of your time...

http://www.uscourts.gov/EducationalResources/FederalCourtBasics/
CourtStructure/UnderstandingFederalAndStateCourts.aspx


The U.S. Constitution created a governmental structure for the United States known as federalism. Federalism refers to a sharing of powers between the national government and the state governments. The Constitution gives certain powers to the federal government and reserves the rest for the states. Therefore, while the Constitution states that the federal government is supreme with regard to those powers expressly or implicitly delegated to it, the states remain supreme in matters reserved to them. This supremacy of each government in its own sphere is known as separate sovereignty, meaning each government is sovereign in its own right

...
For example, since the Constitution gives Congress sole authority to make uniform laws concerning bankruptcies, a state court would lack jurisdiction in this matter. Likewise, since the Constitution does not give the federal government authority in most matters concerning the regulation of the family, a federal court would lack jurisdiction in a divorce case. This is why there are two separate court systems in America.


Hopefully the source of the link has some level of legitamacy with you... although I understand it has little value to you. We should all just, like, OMG, do, like, uh, like do the right thing ya know....
 Balsamica
Joined: 2/24/2012
Msg: 202
The War on Women
Posted: 3/20/2012 3:24:01 PM
Hey, Mylawn67?

"""He can't campaign on any accomplishments as the economy is still firmly in the red, gas prices are more than doubled after he stopped US drilling. Gas was $1.84 a gallon when he took office it is now more than double that."""

July 7, 2008—Crude oil prices settled-in at a new record of $147 per barrel. The U.S. average price for regular gasoline climbs to an all-time high of $4.11/gallon

"Unemployment is rampant and the current numbers do not reflect the true state of jobs in the US as many are underemployed or have just given up looking for work."

Unemployment after the worst recession since the Great Depression was just under 9% in December, 08. and has been declining steadily since 2010 to about that rate now. The crash came under a Republican administration and took a while to recover from: Obama didn't create it, he inherited a sinking ship.

The welfare rolls have grown over 40% since he came into office.

TANF has been block-granted at the same rate as 1996, it has not changed.

""Yeah if I had messed up as bad as him I would want to fabricate something to take the eyes of the voter off my record as well.""

YOU are the fabricator.
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 203
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 3/20/2012 3:46:48 PM

It's offial. Aries has now entered into Matchland.


Some of us realize that the Constitution is the firewall between us and tyranny, which makes it more important for all of us to respect it than a lot of people seem to realize. Those who don't like the Tenth Amendment can try to repeal it, but until that time, they don't get to ignore it.

The discussion of federalism Aries cited is basic fact--nothing at all controversial about it. Federalism is one of the protections against government abuse of power designed into the Constitution. There's a reason we call ours a federal government, and not a national one. One more fact about jurisdiction. The Constitution establishes only the Supreme Court. Congress had to create all the other federal courts--the twelve Courts of Appeals, the district courts, the courts of claims and bankruptcy, etc.

That means Congress could also, at least in theory, pass legislation to dissolve any or all of those courts. It can certainly limit their power by removing their jurisdiction over certain issues, and sometimes it has. Congress has even removed the Supreme Court's jurisdiction over a case that was already before the Court--it had even heard arguments in it.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 204
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 3/20/2012 4:21:06 PM
^^^ The ACLU has long been the most consistent, and active champion of defending the Constitution, even to the point of defending the most vile of free speech offenders. Yet they are considered "leftists" by the far right. The far right on the other hand was silent during the egregious violations of the Constitution during the Bush II error, beginning when he was assigned the presidency by the 5, over the popular vote.

This debate as well is premised on cafeteria Constitutionalism, and selective morality.

We all claim morality, but the far right has a much larger menu of morality to choose from in defending denying women and minorities certain rights. We still think we can win each other over with arguments, facts and figures, but the stark reality remains, that our brains function differently, we all think we are right, and it turns into a peeing contest where everyone gets wet and trickled upon.

I found this piece worth a read, worth pondering, and worth considering as we go through these exchanges of ideas.
http://www.alternet.org/story/154607/how_the_right-wing_brain_works_and_what_that_means_for_progressives?page=entire
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 205
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 3/20/2012 6:00:27 PM

The far right on the other hand was silent during the egregious violations of the Constitution during the Bush II error, beginning when he was assigned the presidency by the 5, over the popular vote.


I don't know what you mean by the "far right," but I don't know of any egregious violations of the Constitution during Mr. Bush's terms. And the popular vote doesn't decide U.S. presidential elections--the electoral vote does that.

As someone who's studied Bush v. Gore pretty carefully and who followed part of the oral arguments in it, I agree with the majority. Justice Rehnquist had it exactly right, but then there was no one sharper on the Court. The Florida Supreme Court was trying to rig a national election and didn't succeed. The Chief Justice of that court wrote a very critical dissent from its decision on recounts, and I think that carried a lot of weight with the majority of the Supreme Court of the U.S.

I don't agree with the overheated rhetoric about the Patriot Act. Its intrusions on civil liberties are mild by historical standards. Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas, for God's sake, allowing the military to drag U.S. citizens out of their beds, throw them in a brig, and sentence them to death in military tribunals.

Woodrow Wilson, one of our two Progressive presidents, didn't think much of the Constitution. He set up a sort of secret police. They arrested 50,000 men at one fell swoop for resisting the draft--and all but a few were later released. And FDR, the liberal's liberal, ordered many thousands of Americans of Japanese ancestry interned.

I don't favor infringing any American's rights. But I will always support the right of the majority in any state to infringe those rights as much as it sees fit, within the limits of that state's constitution, the U.S. Constitution, and any applicable federal laws or treaties. You can't defend individual liberties by arbitrarily denying the right of majorities to make their moral views the rule in their states--however ridiculous anyone in some other state may consider those views. The cure is worse than the disease.
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 206
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 3/20/2012 6:21:31 PM

I still see no signs of this war on women ...
It's not expected that everyone will see "The War on Women" for what it really is.

.... want the state to pay them to have babies ...
The state will be paying for more and more babies if the Republicans outlaw contraception and abortion.

I would imagine that there are quite a few of them who think the only reason they don't get laid is because women have rights...
That's right ... we have the right to choose who we lay down with and the more we read in here in the forums, we know exactly who we will choose.

Hint ... if you are a man and you are declaring war on us (women), don't expect to get laid anytime soon!

I'll bet some of them might even spend the entire first date detailing exactly how the Constitution and SCOTUS give them the right to insist she allow them to stick whatever they want, wherever they want...
You give them too much credit. They don't have that much understanding of the Constitution and SCOTUS.

The cost for the pill is a miniscule amount compared to the alternative.
Yes ... the alternative is that we have all kinds of women having babies they probably didn't really want and then will go on Welfare because they cannot afford to take care of the babies.

Personally I'd rather give a few ladies of child-bearing age the pill than pay to raise all the children they can bear throughout their child-bearing years. Personally I'd rather pay for a few vasectomies than have those guys going out impregnating all their child-bearing partners.

It is allowing religious organizations to just not pay for it because they have a very strong moral objection.
Why can't they leave it up to their employees to decide what they "morally" want.

Maybe it would be better if they encourage those employees that follow the religious views of the employer to avoid using that part of the insurance and allow the others to make a choice for themselves.

Better yet ... why not allow those who have an objection to just opt out of that part of the insurance ... just not pay for it and allow those who want it to pay for it and use it?

Seems to me that would also be a moral thing to do?
 MondoVman
Joined: 4/26/2009
Msg: 207
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 3/20/2012 6:34:43 PM
Perhaps all Republican women should be provided the pill free of cost as an experiment.
Wonder the effect that would have on the political makeup of the population down the road?
 Balsamica
Joined: 2/24/2012
Msg: 208
The War on Women
Posted: 3/20/2012 7:05:31 PM
The evangelical voting block is a big one and a lot of these politicians are just pandering to it for votes. There is a Republican majority in the House and a lot of states, too, so the ones who take it all seriously are trying to roll back their losses from the 70's, their time has come,

Abortion is a form of infanticide, it's ugly, but it's uglier to have women induce abortions with coat hangers and the black market would flourish if it were ever outlawed .... a choice of two evils.........best to let it be available safely, IMO, as long as its early.

I think I read that Arizona now will force a woman to carry a dead fetus to term vs. an abortion? Ugly stuff..........
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 209
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 3/20/2012 7:16:12 PM

I think I read that Arizona now will force a woman to carry a dead fetus to term vs. an abortion? Ugly stuff..........
Carrying a dead fetus to term ... hmmmm. When the fetus dies ... wouldn't that be "term"?

Just a big bunch of despicable people.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 210
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 3/20/2012 7:45:26 PM
what is this urban legend day....


Carrying a dead fetus to term ... hmmmm. When the fetus dies ... wouldn't that be "term"?

Just a big bunch of despicable people.


Just because you hear something doesn't make it true. And when you repeat it people think that must be true because of the campaign of demonization which permits people to do absolutely inhuman things to their neighbors. You love the thought of it. No different than saying the Jews sucked the blood from Christian babies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel

The reference you are talking about was a Georgian Congressman who must not have had much of a background trying to tell a personal story and basically making a stupid comparison.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/03/12/442637/georgia-rep-compares-women-to-animals/?mobile=nc

Life gives us many experiences…I’ve had the experience of delivering calves, dead and alive. Delivering pigs, dead or alive. It breaks our hearts to see those animals not make it


You heard it from someplace that heard it from someplace and turned it into Arizona with trying to force women ... It is ludicrous and happily believed by glossy eyed faithful.

Question what you hear people.

I don't know what is going on but have you guys always been this way and I just never realized?????
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 211
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 3/20/2012 7:59:00 PM



I think I read that Arizona now will force a woman to carry a dead fetus to term vs. an abortion? Ugly stuff..........

Carrying a dead fetus to term ... hmmmm. When the fetus dies ... wouldn't that be "term"?

Just a big bunch of despicable people.

Just because you hear something doesn't make it true.
You love the thought of it. No different than saying the Jews sucked the blood from Christian babies.
Oh no ... OMG ... the Jews did that?

My response to Message 248 was a general response ... a statement about what a dead fetus is ... it's term.

Carrying a dead fetus for any length of time in one's living body could make one also dead. Also "term".

That's it ... nothing more. No need to read into something that is not there.
 red_fir
Joined: 11/21/2011
Msg: 212
The War on Women
Posted: 3/20/2012 8:03:16 PM
Why is it that the reps just cannot understand that preventing unwanted pregnancies is so much cheaper than the alternative?


Says who?

Very few things are more alarming to a career freeloader (politician) than a reduction of taxpayers.

Of course we're gonna dress it up as morality but the essential question to a politician is "who's gonna pay the bills"?
(Rapidly followed by a motion to exempt themselves from that burden).

And the political left is equally frantic about establishing precedents because they're rapidly gonna lose their minority status
(whats the big weakness of the Democratic party? The thing they name as their strength! Too much diversity, a whole bunch of groups who really don't like each other and don't care a rats patootie about their associates concerns all gathered under one umbrella fighting for the last dry place to stand)
and taxpaying citizens are on the brink of being THE minority.

Then who will pay for all those needless social programs let alone birth control?
Cause we damn sure ain't gonna reduce the massive benefits paid to the 1%
And military budget will grow every time its cut (or that's the historical precedent!)
And politicians will never fail to represent the people who send them to office....
and that ain't you or me or any other schmuck with a vote.

Better breed up a new batch of suckers quick!
 magicallaroundme
Joined: 3/9/2011
Msg: 213
The War on Women
Posted: 3/20/2012 8:22:16 PM
It's not expected that everyone will see "The War on Women" for what it really is.

or what it isn't.

The state will be paying for more and more babies if the Republicans outlaw contraception and abortion.

Not necessarily. Republicans only care about protecting fetuses not babies. They have no concern for its fate post birth. It is not beyond the Republicans to terminate all expenditures related to children to provide more tax relief to Exxon.

Hint ... if you are a man and you are declaring war on us (women), don't expect to get laid anytime soon!

Many iterations of the world wide pvssey embargo have been announced in the past with few or no results. If they couldn't circle the wagons closely enough to keep John Bobbit or Joey Buttafuco from having sex again then how are they going to get at Rick Santorum or Donald Trump?

Yes ... the alternative is that we have all kinds of women having babies they probably didn't really want and then will go on Welfare because they cannot afford to take care of the babies.

No problem. The Republicans are quite amenable to canceling Welfare too. Hence none of these unwanted babies go on Welfare.

Better yet ... why not allow those who have an objection to just opt out of that part of the insurance ... just not pay for it and allow those who want it to pay for it and use it?

Why go to all that bother when they can just have thugs with guns force their will and morality on anyone who would dare object? That way they can severely punish those who aren't a moral as they are with the full weight and unrestrained brutality of arrogant government functionaries. They would deserve it.
 Justatrubblemakr
Joined: 1/27/2011
Msg: 214
The War on Women
Posted: 3/20/2012 8:23:18 PM
anyone notice that the only place birth control and abortions are really heard about and practiced openly are in countries with educated semi wealthy populations? ever wonder why? pretty simple , they dont really care if poor illiterate people breed uncontrolled because they are breeding a poverty stricken uneducated bunch of children willing to work for mere food.
we are in an age now of capitalism and the goal of capitalism is cheap/free labor and a dumb uneducated workforce that will do exactly as they are told. they want people that are as disposable as your cigarrette butts so that they can have complete domination and control. after they crush organized labor and unions there will be little to no protection for workers
over 6 million babies were eradicated due to legalized /civilized murder. sure some people think its their right to erase a mistake , and whos to tell them it isnt since the only party truly that has anything to lose is to tiny and insignificant to have a viable excuse to live.
as far as those social programs ... well they will be a thing of the past when capitalism takes over completely , might makes right and capitalism only harbors the rich, it doesnt suffer the poor or unmotivated, so hopefully youll be more motivated than the other guy else youll be the one with the foot standing on your back to reach the top. democratic party, theres an oxymoron lol democratic in itself is an true joke, there has never been a true democracy in any world government


preventing unwanted pregnancies...... well that in itself really speaks volumes of the quality of the people populating the world these days.
you say it like its as normal as say preventing a parking ticket or preventing tripping over your shoelaces . pregnancy and child birth are a little more significant and important. pc and society has watered it down to a simple procedure, done quietly in a clinic , baby bits and stem cells are harvested and sent off to factories to be used for experimentation, its all very serene clean and clinical in nature . the true holocaust is yet to be seen when they start aborting the rest of us, if they can legitamize eradicating unborn and unwanted babies, whats to stop them from eradicating the elderly the pension recievers, the sick etc .
this isnt a war on women its a war on humanity
 Justcheckingfor1
Joined: 8/11/2011
Msg: 215
The War on Women
Posted: 3/21/2012 5:28:57 AM
This whole "War on Women" malarky is just a bunch of nonsense and paranoia. Now if the subject was changed to the War on Humanity or the War On Babies(or lab material as the liberal view of children) then that would be correct. There is no war on women, only political postering is going on. This whole issue is a made up drama, to gain attention for the politicians.
 Yule_liquor
Joined: 12/7/2011
Msg: 216
The War on Women
Posted: 3/21/2012 8:58:20 PM
@trubblemaker


anyone notice that the only place birth control and abortions are really heard about and practiced openly are in countries with educated semi wealthy populations? ever wonder why?


and isn't it a coincidence that much of the women in the "educated/semi-wealthy" group tend to be Caucasian women!


they dont really care if poor illiterate people breed uncontrolled because they are breeding a poverty stricken uneducated bunch of children willing to work for mere food.


Not only that; these very pple don't mind "breeding" with impunity, because it is a sure fire way of ensuring that they will remain on public assistence; (which is something that those on the far left are happy to have) as long as they remain content being "poor"


sure some people think its their right to erase a mistake , and whos to tell them it isnt since the only party truly that has anything to lose is to tiny and insignificant to have a viable excuse to live.


Yep, this is what it is when pple (those in the driver's seat) opt to define life by political constructs rather than a biological one!
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

@justchecking


There is no war on women, only political postering is going on. This whole issue is a made up drama, to gain attention for the politicians.


Agreed! The notion that there is a 'war on women' in the US based on the issues described is ludicrous! The real war on women is going on in poor & 3rd world countries in which they are being: trafficked; sexually exploited/mutilated; enslaved; etc. Just go on the Amnesty Int' site and its for all to see!
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 217
The War on Women
Posted: 3/22/2012 4:47:49 AM
While most republicans might not see that they've declared war on women it does seem that the voters think they have:

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) has drastically slipped in the polls after backing two controversial anti-abortion measures over the past several weeks: the fetal personhood bill and the mandatory ultrasound bill. But in an interview on CNN Tuesday night, he said the "War on Women" is something Democrats have invented.

"This 'war on women' argument is very unfortunate," he told John King. "It's false, and it's been the political theater for the Democrats for the past couple of months."

He continued, "Listen, if I had Obama's record on jobs, on spending, on debt and deficit, on energy, I would want to talk about something else, too. And, John, that's really what's going on. And it's just very unfortunate that this politics of division, separating men from women, rich from the middle class, continues to be the theme of this campaign."

If recent polling is any indication, Virginia voters disagree with McDonnell on this point. A Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday shows that McDonnell's approval rating dropped a net 13 points in March to its lowest level since June 2011. The dip in support occurs in the month that McDonnell helped GOP legislators write a bill that requires women to have an ultrasound procedure at least 24 hours before having an abortion, even if the doctor deems it medically unnecessary.

The approval rating for the Virginia state legislature has also dropped from 47 percent to 38 percent since it passed the mandatory ultrasound bill in February.

"Virginia had been the only state surveyed by Quinnipiac University in which the state legislature had received a net positive job approval," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. "The fact that the legislature's approval dropped so much, while approval ratings for other statewide elected officials are basically unchanged, indicates that voter dissatisfaction is targeted."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/21/bob-mcdonnell-va-gov-war-on-women_n_1370834.html
 Bladesmith81801
Joined: 10/30/2010
Msg: 218
The War on Women
Posted: 3/22/2012 11:07:04 AM
It's difficult to look at these points and then accpet the claim theres no war against women by the GOP. I'm sure these are all unrelated, unplanned coincidences, right?

(Edited to make SFW.)

■Republicans are trying to shove foreign objects into our vaginas.

■Republicans are comparing us to f***** farm animals.

■Republicans are trying to force us to carry DEAD FETUSES in our wombs because hey—pigs and cows do it!

■Republicans want to tax us if we choose to get an abortion.

■Republicans are forcing doctors to flat-out lie to us about abortions increasing the risk of breast cancer.

■Republicans tried (and nearly succeeded) in denying us access to any preventive health care whatsoever, if it offends somebody’s twisted theological sense of morality.

■Republicans are trying to force us to watch an abortion before having one.

■Republicans are trying to force us to get permission from the man (Father? Rapist? Who cares!) before getting an abortion.

■Republicans are trying to force us to tell employers whether we’re using the pill for birth control.

■Republicans think that a baby conceived by rape is a gift from God.

■Republicans think that we gals don’t need contraception—we should just hold an aspirin between our knees.

■Republicans think that “rape” is a figment of our imagination. Is it really rape or are you just being a cranky-pants?

■Republicans think we’re sluts for wanting insurance coverage for contraception—whether for birth control or otherwise—all the while demonstrating how utterly devoid of brain activity they are by suggesting that the doctor-recommended use for birth control is “a-pill-per-screw,” and that maybe we could pay for our ovarian cyst treatment if we’d just stop drinking so many f****g soy lattes.

Gosh, that doesn't sound like unreasonably targeting women at all.

(Full posting here, NSFW language.)

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2012/03/21/cathy-mcmorris-rodgers-thinks-democrats-are-scaring-women/#more-98671
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 219
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 3/22/2012 11:18:31 AM
^^^^I dare anyone to try to match *that* for insightful, intelligent analysis. It puts even the Daily Worker (may it rest in peace) to shame.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 220
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 3/22/2012 1:25:19 PM

If recent polling is any indication, Virginia voters disagree with McDonnell on this point. A Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday shows that McDonnell's approval rating dropped a net 13 points in March to its lowest level since June 2011.


This is the point about states rights... If the people in the state see their rep is a batsh*t lunatic they have the authority to act and knock the bathi*t lunatic in his place. The scary part is you have to trust people to do it. They may not act as fast as you want and can let it get scary and if they refuse than maybe some more direct action from a higher authority is justified...

All you have done is point out the basic fact that this is how the system is designed to work and correct itself.

No need for the all mighty Federal Government to save the day and screw it up for everyone.

And again... if there is a real inappropriate influence from ALEC and it crosses multiple states that is a case a federal court probably wouldn't mind getting into even if the ACLU files it.

There is no war on women crisis. I have more of a crisis living in Los Angeles where the companies I work for are being taxed to death and reducing workforce right and left and leaving the state and facing even more punishing regulations over bs environment claims. Regulations that are harming entire communities and causing food prices to be higher. That’s a crisis. But again maybe it is only a crisis for California and the rest of the country could care less... And no I did not vote for our awful governor that only did exactly as he promised and people voted for it. Yay... My hope is the next election cycle will be really bad on incumbents here from city to national level. One can hope. It is the system that I support. May not always like its outcome but that is because I do not rule the world. No one every promised I would get my way. No one ever promissed it would be pretty. No one ever promissed it would be easy. It is a whole lot better than having a central government that dictates what is best for everyone equally.

You think the War on Women is real... Wait until you see what the war really is. It will be about the money you don't have to pay for what they won't cover. With the money you don't have there will be no alternatives and there will be no voting for a change. Maybe you can write your congressman and beg for an exception to the federal decision that your specific health problem impacts your life. Then maybe he can submit a request for the board to review your case. Maybe a few years later and miracles can happen...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204795304577220950656734864.html

Under ObamaCare, a single committee—the United States Preventative Services Task Force—is empowered to evaluate preventive health services and decide which will be covered by health-insurance plans.

The task force already rates services with letter grades of "A" through "D" (or "I," if it has "insufficient evidence" to make a rating). But under ObamaCare, services rated "A" or "B"—such as colon cancer screening for adults aged 50-75—must be covered by health plans in full, without any co-pays. Many services that get "Cs" and "Ds"—such as screening for ovarian or testicular cancer—could get nixed from coverage entirely.

That's because mandating coverage for all the "A" and "B" services will be very costly. In 2000, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the marginal cost of similar state insurance mandates was 5%-10% of total claims. Other estimates put the cost of mandates as high as 20% of premiums
 Twilightslove
Joined: 12/9/2008
Msg: 221
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 3/27/2012 12:55:54 PM
Wow Plursty,

That was quite the post for children of war and I agree that we need to stop wars for children's sakes as well as adults. However, the topic was about the current war on women which is really brewing fast. As women we really need to be aware of this current irrational behavior being used to try to control women instead of accepting women for our positive qualities that enhance life and that could change the world in good ways if we just stood up and said we are prepared.

I find it so sad that certain males think that they need to control females in order to look strong. To me, they look small, scared and weak when they promote such laws.


There is a reason Republicans have not shied away from the war on women or their right to choose their own reproductive health. They comprehend that the majority of Americans who self-identify as Christians have been brainwashed since birth to believe women are inferior and require a man to direct every aspect of their lives. The Christian bible is rife with instances of women being relegated to less-than-equal status that starts in Genesis and ends in Revelation with the beast being referred to as a whore, or harlot. Various Christian denominations use terms like “god’s assigned roles” and “our creator suited women to fulfill their responsibilities,” that are code for women are inferior. It is convenient that Republicans claim barring them from imposing their beliefs on women is tantamount to attacking religious liberty, but on some level, according to their bible, they have god-given duty to dominate women and regardless the outrage and protest from women’s groups, the domination will not stop without an electoral ass-kicking in November.

The important message for women is that the only means of bringing the war on women to an end is removing every Republican from state and federal elected office before they relegate women to slave status stuck in the home giving birth and cleaning their man’s chamber pot. The war on contraception has not abated and, in fact, has expanded despite the electoral consequences in November. Throughout the Republican presidential primary, Rick Santorum has been an outspoken critic of contraception and he was rewarded with victories in states with conservative evangelical majorities who believe, like Santorum, men are exercising their god-given right to control women and make their medical decisions for them. At an Americans For Prosperity summit, in the room next to where Santorum and Paul Ryan insisted the rule requiring insurance providers to cover contraception was an attack on religious liberty and nothing to do with contraception, a pro-life group handed out anti-contraception literature with the message that contraceptives could cause cancer and that the best choice for women was chastity. It typifies the bible’s premise that women are not capable, or allowed, to make the best choice because that is the man’s responsibility.
http://www.politicususa.com/women-republicans-pay/


Good article.
 want to travel
Joined: 7/29/2006
Msg: 222
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 3/27/2012 1:17:52 PM
look
women that want abortions will get them no matter what the law is
forcing a woman that does not want a child, to have one, well that is stupid
the world has 7 billion people, maybe the planet can sustain 9
we do not need any more unwanted children, by people who can't or don't want to be parents!!
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 223
The War on Women
Posted: 3/28/2012 11:10:52 AM
Very good article indeed TL...it rehashes some of the thoughts that some of us have on this war.


To me, they look small, scared and weak when they promote such laws.


My thoughts as well.
 Twilightslove
Joined: 12/9/2008
Msg: 224
view profile
History
The War on Women
Posted: 3/30/2012 11:31:31 AM
Jimmy Carter quit the Baptist Church over their misogyny.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jul/12/jimmy-carter-womens-rights-equality
"At its most repugnant, the belief that women must be subjugated to the wishes of men excuses slavery, violence, forced prostitution, genital mutilation and national laws that omit rape as a crime. But it also costs many millions of girls and women control over their own bodies and lives, and continues to deny them fair access to education, health, employment and influence within their own communities."
 tuloa942
Joined: 2/21/2012
Msg: 225
The War on Women
Posted: 3/30/2012 3:06:18 PM
Someone was right in saying that women who really want/need an abortion will find a way.

And that is exactly why it needs to be kept safe. I was a teen before 1973 when abortions were finally made legal. There were always stories of women going to back alley places or trying to do it themselves with clothes hangers. I can't imagine the horror and grief these women had to deal with by themselves! They couldn't tell family, the guy was usually long gone figuring it was the girl's problem, etc. The women would end up physically (and emotionally) damaged or sterile and need medical care. But, of course, it was okay to get medical treatment then, just not for the actual procedure.

We have come a long way since then, so it is very disheartening that women's rights are under fire so much now. It's actually frightening. Are those men leading this "war" feel such a loss of control over their own lives that they have the need to subjugate as many women as possible? Sad, just sad.

Thank God we still have the vote! We have to use it wisely or they will try to take that away also.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > The War on Women