8 Things Women Couldn't Do On The First Women's Equality Day In 1971 -- And 6 They Still Can't

[Dana7360]

Necessarily access an abortion.

This is among the more egregious examples of conservative authoritarianism, the right's hostility toward the privacy rights of women.


For more than 40 years, exhibiting blatant contempt for the Constitution and its case law, republican lawmakers have sought to afford the state the authority to compel a woman to have a child against her will, to completely disregard her right to individual liberty, allowing the state to interfere with the personal, private matters of free and private citizens.

That is a question of "when does life begin" not of "does a woman have a right to do with her body as she chooses"

How dishonest that you would pretend otherwise.

A simple law stating unequivocally when life begins for legal purposes would solve everything. Yet neither Democrats nor Republicans have passed such a law.

There are several problems with your statements.

It's not about when life begins. The supreme court ruled on the right to privacy. Women have the right to privately talk to their doctor and have medical procedures without the government or anyone else being involved or knowing about it. We have further enacted laws to protect people's privacy in medical situations. The HIPPA law is one of them.

If you want to follow the laws and constitution then you should not believe that you or anyone else has the right to invade a woman's privacy.

You may believe that life begins at conception. That's well and fine for you. No one should ever tell you that you have to believe otherwise.

In the same respect, I have the same right to not believe that life begins at conception.

Please tell me what life exists in an ectopic pregnancy?

Millions of people in this world don't believe as you do and we have that right to believe as we choose just like you do.

So why not be happy to live freely as you choose? Why do you have to force your beliefs on everyone else?

LOL NO ONE has a right to believe that life begins somewhere besides where the law says it does, and anyone with a functioning brain has to admit that currently the law is pretty muddled on the matter. For instance, how can a mother choose to abort a "fetus" at X months, but if someone shot and killed that mother , they would be charged with two counts of murder? I realize you are a completely dishonest, un noble person based on the way you run around disliking well written posts just because you disagree with the opinion contained within, but even you must recognize the paradox in those two laws.

I can't know the intensions of that law. I didn't write it, pass it through congress or sign it into law.

I can tell you how I see that law.

If a woman has been killed and she's pregnant, she made the choice herself to carry that pregnancy to term. Some barbarian had violated her right to choose to carry that pregnancy to term.

If a woman decides to terminate a pregnancy that's also her choice.

I personally don't see any confliction but you do. That's your right. Don't force that belief on me.

As for your saying I'm dishonest. Just clicking that I DISAGREE with what you said doesn't make me dishonest. It makes me a person who is exercising her right to free speech by saying I disagree with you.

I know you extremists hate anyone having a different opinion from yours.

Too bad. That's your problem.

Get over it. Stop whining about people who disagree with you. By the way you post you sound like you would rather take away everyone's freedom of speech, thought and expression. You would only allow people to agree with you on everything. No disagreements. No independent thought. Thank goodness our constitution prevents you from doing that.

 

[Iceweasel]

There is no war on women.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Necessarily access an abortion.

This is among the more egregious examples of conservative authoritarianism, the right's hostility toward the privacy rights of women.


For more than 40 years, exhibiting blatant contempt for the Constitution and its case law, republican lawmakers have sought to afford the state the authority to compel a woman to have a child against her will, to completely disregard her right to individual liberty, allowing the state to interfere with the personal, private matters of free and private citizens.

That is a question of "when does life begin" not of "does a woman have a right to do with her body as she chooses"

How dishonest that you would pretend otherwise.

A simple law stating unequivocally when life begins for legal purposes would solve everything. Yet neither Democrats nor Republicans have passed such a law.

There are several problems with your statements.

It's not about when life begins. The supreme court ruled on the right to privacy. Women have the right to privately talk to their doctor and have medical procedures without the government or anyone else being involved or knowing about it. We have further enacted laws to protect people's privacy in medical situations. The HIPPA law is one of them.

If you want to follow the laws and constitution then you should not believe that you or anyone else has the right to invade a woman's privacy.

You may believe that life begins at conception. That's well and fine for you. No one should ever tell you that you have to believe otherwise.

In the same respect, I have the same right to not believe that life begins at conception.

Please tell me what life exists in an ectopic pregnancy?

Millions of people in this world don't believe as you do and we have that right to believe as we choose just like you do.

So why not be happy to live freely as you choose? Why do you have to force your beliefs on everyone else?

LOL NO ONE has a right to believe that life begins somewhere besides where the law says it does, and anyone with a functioning brain has to admit that currently the law is pretty muddled on the matter. For instance, how can a mother choose to abort a "fetus" at X months, but if someone shot and killed that mother , they would be charged with two counts of murder? I realize you are a completely dishonest, un noble person based on the way you run around disliking well written posts just because you disagree with the opinion contained within, but even you must recognize the paradox in those two laws.

I can't know the intensions of that law. I didn't write it, pass it through congress or sign it into law.

I can tell you how I see that law.

If a woman has been killed and she's pregnant, she made the choice herself to carry that pregnancy to term. Some barbarian had violated her right to choose to carry that pregnancy to term.

If a woman decides to terminate a pregnancy that's also her choice.

I personally don't see any confliction but you do. That's your right. Don't force that belief on me.

As for your saying I'm dishonest. Just clicking that I DISAGREE with what you said doesn't make me dishonest. It makes me a person who is exercising her right to free speech by saying I disagree with you.

I know you extremists hate anyone having a different opinion from yours.

Too bad. That's your problem.

Get over it. Stop whining about people who disagree with you. By the way you post you sound like you would rather take away everyone's freedom of speech, thought and expression. You would only allow people to agree with you on everything. No disagreements. No independent thought. Thank goodness our constitution prevents you from doing that.

What you just wrote is the stupidest thing I've ever read.

If life begins at X months old according to law you don't get to terminate that life just because you chose to .

 

[Dana7360]

Necessarily access an abortion.

This is among the more egregious examples of conservative authoritarianism, the right's hostility toward the privacy rights of women.


For more than 40 years, exhibiting blatant contempt for the Constitution and its case law, republican lawmakers have sought to afford the state the authority to compel a woman to have a child against her will, to completely disregard her right to individual liberty, allowing the state to interfere with the personal, private matters of free and private citizens.

That is a question of "when does life begin" not of "does a woman have a right to do with her body as she chooses"

How dishonest that you would pretend otherwise.

A simple law stating unequivocally when life begins for legal purposes would solve everything. Yet neither Democrats nor Republicans have passed such a law.

There are several problems with your statements.

It's not about when life begins. The supreme court ruled on the right to privacy. Women have the right to privately talk to their doctor and have medical procedures without the government or anyone else being involved or knowing about it. We have further enacted laws to protect people's privacy in medical situations. The HIPPA law is one of them.

If you want to follow the laws and constitution then you should not believe that you or anyone else has the right to invade a woman's privacy.

You may believe that life begins at conception. That's well and fine for you. No one should ever tell you that you have to believe otherwise.

In the same respect, I have the same right to not believe that life begins at conception.

Please tell me what life exists in an ectopic pregnancy?

Millions of people in this world don't believe as you do and we have that right to believe as we choose just like you do.

So why not be happy to live freely as you choose? Why do you have to force your beliefs on everyone else?

If I have the right to believe that life begins at conception, do I not then have the right to pursue policy that protects that life? Should I instead just say, "I believe this is a life, but your privacy is obviously much more important than protecting that life, so go ahead and do anything you want to because it is 'private.'"

Is that what you are trying to say?

No it's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying that you have the freedom and right to believe and live your life as you choose. If you believe that life begins at conception then for heaven's sake you should never ever get an abortion. I personally would take you to the OB appointments and be in the hospital every minute until that new life enters this world. Then I would celebrate your new life.

However, you don't have the right to force other people to believe that and live that way.

You don't have the right to take that freedom from anyone else.

That's what I'm saying.

Freedom. It's not just for those who agree with you.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Men have it made regarding Viagra, penis pumps, and other erectile dysfunction products. However, women are constantly being denied abortion and contraception rights. Male and female insurance coverage is not EQUAL - even when it's supposed to be part of their overall compensation package. Then comes the religious lunacy to make it even more UNEQUAL.

Perhaps because Viagra, Penis Pumps, and other erectile dysfunction products are there to correct a medical problem. Abortion on Demand and contraceptives do not correct health problems.

O

That is fucking hilarious! Thank you! Extremely stupid - but hilarious!

Stupid huh? Facts are stupid?
Oh that's right. The facts that violate the covenants of the lib narrative are stupid.

Those aren't facts. That's just ignorant bullshit. I guess lack of blood flow to a dick could be considered a "medical problem" - but many women who seek abortion and contraceptives are due to real medical problems. BTW, many women take contraceptives to correct health problems. Contraceptives aren't just about preventing pregnancy.

Just a minute...You specifically stated contraception for "birth control"/ You made NO mention of other medical conditions. And yes, the pill IS covered under many insurance policies when a DOCTOR prescribes it for a MEDICAL condition.
And YES. The AMA considers ED to be a MEDICAL condition.
You have NO argument.
You should just quit while your just bruised. Keep it up and you'll end up being the proverbial "dead horse"...
You lost. Face it. You got your pink shirt wearing ass kicked here.

Where did I specifically state contraception for "birth control"?

Stated, implied..Same difference.
We are well aware of the issue.
This is been folded into the "reproductive rights" thing

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Necessarily access an abortion.

This is among the more egregious examples of conservative authoritarianism, the right's hostility toward the privacy rights of women.


For more than 40 years, exhibiting blatant contempt for the Constitution and its case law, republican lawmakers have sought to afford the state the authority to compel a woman to have a child against her will, to completely disregard her right to individual liberty, allowing the state to interfere with the personal, private matters of free and private citizens.

That is a question of "when does life begin" not of "does a woman have a right to do with her body as she chooses"

How dishonest that you would pretend otherwise.

A simple law stating unequivocally when life begins for legal purposes would solve everything. Yet neither Democrats nor Republicans have passed such a law.

There are several problems with your statements.

It's not about when life begins. The supreme court ruled on the right to privacy. Women have the right to privately talk to their doctor and have medical procedures without the government or anyone else being involved or knowing about it. We have further enacted laws to protect people's privacy in medical situations. The HIPPA law is one of them.

If you want to follow the laws and constitution then you should not believe that you or anyone else has the right to invade a woman's privacy.

You may believe that life begins at conception. That's well and fine for you. No one should ever tell you that you have to believe otherwise.

In the same respect, I have the same right to not believe that life begins at conception.

Please tell me what life exists in an ectopic pregnancy?

Millions of people in this world don't believe as you do and we have that right to believe as we choose just like you do.

So why not be happy to live freely as you choose? Why do you have to force your beliefs on everyone else?

If I have the right to believe that life begins at conception, do I not then have the right to pursue policy that protects that life? Should I instead just say, "I believe this is a life, but your privacy is obviously much more important than protecting that life, so go ahead and do anything you want to because it is 'private.'"

Is that what you are trying to say?

No it's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying that you have the freedom and right to believe and live your life as you choose. If you believe that life begins at conception then for heaven's sake you should never ever get an abortion. I personally would take you to the OB appointments and be in the hospital every minute until that new life enters this world. Then I would celebrate your new life.

However, you don't have the right to force other people to believe that and live that way.

You don't have the right to take that freedom from anyone else.

That's what I'm saying.

Freedom. It's not just for those who agree with you.

You are illiterate. For real.

I'm saying THE LAW should define when life begins, not your opinion, not mine. Using your stupid and illogical belief someone could say "hey a baby isn't really alive so if I kill one you can't try me for murder, that's my right to have my opinion"

And what's more if you weren't so stupid you would realize that having the law set the age at when life beings would BENEFIT YOU.

Let's say the law decides life begins at the beginning of the third trimester. Simple you have the the right to abort up until that point and no one can argue any different. Doesn't matter if you believe life begins at conception, only matters what the law says. Same with you can't abort after that point, because if you do you have committed murder. Doesn't matter what your opinion is.

 

[Dana7360]

And conservatives still trivialize womens rights

Absolutely! Women need to pay careful attention at the ballot box.

Yeah that "marry another woman" thing is going to alienate the type of women you're wooing to the cause here. You never get that. Millions of women democrats in the middle bloc do not approve of gay marriage. If you doubt that, check out the poll data here: Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum 83% against gay marriage forced on churches. Most middle dem women go to church or consider themselves religious. Sorry to be the first one to break the news to you.

You're talking about two separate things.

I support marriage equality. I don't support someone forcing a church to marry a couple they don't want to marry.

I don't know of any homosexual couple, and I know a lot of them, that ever wanted to get married in a church that didn't want to marry them.

Their goal is to be married. The last thing they're going to do is go to a place that refuses to marry them. They're going to go to a place that will welcome them and perform that marriage ceremony.

Most people support marriage equality now. Equating forcing churches to marry people isn't the same thing as believing everyone has the right to be married.

Millions of people get married in places other than a church. My husband and I were one of those couples. In fact, most weddings I have attended in my life weren't in churches.

So why not stick to the real subject of marriage equality? That list didn't say anything about getting married in a church.

Right, and the last thing they are going to do is go to a bakery that doesn't want to bake a cake for them huh?

If you want to talk about bakeries then find a different post because no one in that post was talking about bakeries.

If a homosexual couple had gone to a bakery that agreed to make their cake but at the last minute that cake can't be made by that bakery and there's only one other bakery in that town, yes I think that bakery should make that cake.

The situation you're referring to was that the couple went to a bakery that agreed to make their cake. At the last minute that bakery couldn't make that cake. They only had one other bakery in that town so they had no choice but to go there. I'm sure if they had a choice, they would have gone somewhere that wouldn't have given them a hard time.

But if a homosexual couple has other options they're going to take those options. They just want a cake for their wedding. Weddings are stressful enough, they don't want to add to that stress by purposely going to a bakery that won't make their cake.

You keep changing the circumstances when I post back to you because you can't refute what I posted. So you change it to avoid admitting that you can't refute it.

Why not act like a mature adult and just let my post go by since you can't refute it? Why be dishonest and change try to the conversation?

Homosexual people are no different from any other American and they should have the same rights as every other American. To believe anything different is to spit on everyone who has fought and died for every American's right to freedom and equality.

Discrimination is very unAmerican.

 

[thereisnospoon]

5 hours later I'm still waiting to hear ONE name of someone who has posted in this thread that they support violating a woman's rights.

You're looking in the wrong place.

You'll find many republican lawmakers in states such as Oklahoma, Texas, and Mississippi who support violating a woman's rights.

I don't care

Again, Lakhota made the SPECIFIC claim that people in THIS thread were advocating taking women's rights. When I asked her to name names , she turned tail and ran

Please cite the SPECIFIC claim (post #) where I made such a SPECIFIC claim.

Still waiting on that list of people who are denying "contraception rights" and "Abortion rights"

Don't you ever watch TV news, read newspapers, read magazines, listen to radio, read Internet news, attend or watch any political debates or follow any political news?

We are waiting for YOUR list of specific people who have done these things.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

And conservatives still trivialize womens rights

Absolutely! Women need to pay careful attention at the ballot box.

Yeah that "marry another woman" thing is going to alienate the type of women you're wooing to the cause here. You never get that. Millions of women democrats in the middle bloc do not approve of gay marriage. If you doubt that, check out the poll data here: Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum 83% against gay marriage forced on churches. Most middle dem women go to church or consider themselves religious. Sorry to be the first one to break the news to you.

You're talking about two separate things.

I support marriage equality. I don't support someone forcing a church to marry a couple they don't want to marry.

I don't know of any homosexual couple, and I know a lot of them, that ever wanted to get married in a church that didn't want to marry them.

Their goal is to be married. The last thing they're going to do is go to a place that refuses to marry them. They're going to go to a place that will welcome them and perform that marriage ceremony.

Most people support marriage equality now. Equating forcing churches to marry people isn't the same thing as believing everyone has the right to be married.

Millions of people get married in places other than a church. My husband and I were one of those couples. In fact, most weddings I have attended in my life weren't in churches.

So why not stick to the real subject of marriage equality? That list didn't say anything about getting married in a church.

Right, and the last thing they are going to do is go to a bakery that doesn't want to bake a cake for them huh?

If you want to talk about bakeries then find a different post because no one in that post was talking about bakeries.

If a homosexual couple had gone to a bakery that agreed to make their cake but at the last minute that cake can't be made by that bakery and there's only one other bakery in that town, yes I think that bakery should make that cake.

The situation you're referring to was that the couple went to a bakery that agreed to make their cake. At the last minute that bakery couldn't make that cake. They only had one other bakery in that town so they had no choice but to go there. I'm sure if they had a choice, they would have gone somewhere that wouldn't have given them a hard time.

But if a homosexual couple has other options they're going to take those options. They just want a cake for their wedding. Weddings are stressful enough, they don't want to add to that stress by purposely going to a bakery that won't make their cake.

You keep changing the circumstances when I post back to you because you can't refute what I posted. So you change it to avoid admitting that you can't refute it.

Why not act like a mature adult and just let my post go by since you can't refute it? Why be dishonest and change try to the conversation?

Homosexual people are no different from any other American and they should have the same rights as every other American. To believe anything different is to spit on everyone who has fought and died for every American's right to freedom and equality.

Discrimination is very unAmerican.

More lies. Of course there are gays purpossely going to bakeries that don't want to business with them.

Also, discrimination is at the very heart of America LOL how dumb to say it is unAmerican.

 

[Lakhota]

Why do Republicans hate Planned Parenthood?

Planned Parenthood Federation of America

GOP War on Women and Planned Parenthood Continues

House GOP Declares War on Planned Parenthood

 

[thereisnospoon]

The GOP war on women continues.

You continue to make this claim.
Yet you provide nothing but opinion pieces and rantings from liberal blogs and these far left feminazi sites.
No facts though. Why? Because the facts do not fit the narrative.
You people have convinced yourselves that women should all think with their "lady parts", then mindlessly vote in lockstep for democrats.
You have it so wrong.

 

[Dana7360]

Men have it made regarding Viagra, penis pumps, and other erectile dysfunction products. However, women are constantly being denied abortion and contraception rights. Male and female insurance coverage is not EQUAL - even when it's supposed to be part of their overall compensation package. Then comes the religious lunacy to make it even more UNEQUAL.

Perhaps because Viagra, Penis Pumps, and other erectile dysfunction products are there to correct a medical problem. Abortion on Demand and contraceptives do not correct health problems.

O

There isn't enough space in this reply box to list all the ways you're wrong.

No one will die of men can't have sex. It's not a health problem that a man can't live with or that will kill him. If you can't have sex, then pay for your own insurance or devices that make you able to have sex.

I would be dead today without the pill. There is a condition, endometriosis and severe ovarian cysts that I have. That's where the lining of the uterus comes out in big clumps, the woman is in severe pain and the woman bleeds for weeks. Ovarian cysts are growths on the ovaries that are extremely painful and that will kill the woman if they rupture and she doesn't get to a hospital immediately.

I nearly died once because of ruptured cysts.

The standard medication for those conditions is the pill. And not just any pill will do. There are many types and strengths of contraceptive pills out there and the one that I had to take for those conditions wasn't cheap. In fact it was over a hundred dollars a month to buy those pills.

Men won't die if they can't have sex. Some women will die or be left infertile without the pill.

As for abortion on demand, yes it can prevent a health problem including death.

My cousin's wife is a very good example of that. She was in the middle of the 3rd trimester of a very planned and wanted pregnancy. The cord got wrapped around the neck of the fetus and it basically died. In that it was probably brain dead and there was a faint heartbeat. She had a late term abortion to save her life.

If she had not had that abortion, peritonitis would have set in and killed her. Or she would have been lucky and left infertile. Their 2 children who were born years later would have never been born.

I just want to know what life there is in an ectopic pregnancy? That pregnancy is very much a health problem with only 2 possible outcomes.

1. The woman has an abortion and lives.
2. The woman dies without the abortion.

Please learn something about the pill. It's not just for contraception. Abortions save lives. No woman should die just because her pregnancy goes wrong.

My question to you is why can't you be happy with the freedom you have to live your life as you choose? Why do you need to take other people's freedom from them and force them to live as you want them to live?

And by LAW if your doctor prescribes the pill to you your insurance company MUST cover it. Do you fucking get that?

I posted the law in this thread. It's not even up for debate. So the idea that ANYONE is trying to keep you form having access to the pill is ludicrous and dishonest.

If you have insurance now. Not all women have insurance now.

When I went through that nightmare it wasn't required by law for everyone and only for medical purposes.

When I was in my early 20s I worked jobs that didn't provide health insurance and I wasn't paid enough to pay for it myself. After I was diagnosed with those conditions, no private insurance would cover me because of that preexisting condition. I went though hell just to find a doctor who would actually see me. Since I didn't have insurance and the condition I had they didn't want a malpractice suit.

I nearly died because I couldn't afford the pills and I played russian roulette with my health. Like so many did before Obamacare and so many still do in many states that didn't expand medicare or set up their own exchange.

Today there are women without insurance who can't afford the pills that will save their lives. Too many states have closed down clinics using the excuse of abortion that now many women in some states no longer have access to medication that will save their lives.

Dana7360, thank you most sincerely for your input on this thread. I wish you well.

Thank you for your very nice post.

I just wish that people would understand this isn't a one size fits all situation. No two human beings are exactly alike in every way.

I also wish people would see that while they have the right to believe what they want, so does everyone else.

I also would love to know why they think they can take other people's freedom from them. While screaming about their own freedom at the same time.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The GOP war on women continues.

More like the obama war on women.

Really? Is Obama trying to regulate female reproductive rights?

No one is doing that...
The pill is readily available, In fact it is free of charge at any Planned Parenthood clinic. and even if it must be paid for, the pill is inexpensive.
Access to abortion is the law of the land.
So the denial is where?

 

[Dana7360]

Which political party tries hardest to limit/regulate/stifle female reproductive rights by undermining Roe v. Wade? Hint: it ain't Democrats.

There is a legitimate fundamental difference that you are ignoring. Millions of women agree that abortion kills a living human being and that it is not a reproductive rights issue.

Millions more disagree! What about the financial/mental/physical health of pregnant women? Righties don't seem to give a shit about that - or after a child is born. Why is that? Righties act like a pregnant woman is just an expendable incubator.

The point remains that abortion is not universally regarded as a reproductive rights issue. You may not like what people think, but it doesn't change what they think as regards the law.

Think it all you want.

Just don't force anyone else to agree with you.

 

[thereisnospoon]

When will women have total equality with men? When Republican men can get pregnant.

You still haven't given your opinion on how the Obama administration pays women less than men. Why not?

They pay in accordance with Civil Service rules and regulations. Those rules are established by Congress and the President has no authority to bypass them

Based on the fact that male workers hired at the same time as female workers are being paid different wages kind of debunks you post.
BTW, you could have accessed the federal government payroll website as easily and anyone else.
The issue is, White House staff is NOT paid on the GS Scale.
I went through the site myself and i for instance cannot find a GS Pay and Step level for the White House press secretary's assistant..Or the wages for the White House spokesperson that represents the Pentagon. The woman that give the press briefings for the Pentagon...her position is not listed in the GS pay scale.

 

[thereisnospoon]

When will women have total equality with men? When Republican men can get pregnant.

You still haven't given your opinion on how the Obama administration pays women less than men. Why not?

They pay in accordance with Civil Service rules and regulations. Those rules are established by Congress and the President has no authority to bypass them

He must have the authority to do so , else how did he issue an EO stating that no federal contractor could be paid less than $10/Hr?

Also, there are no laws that state that Women who work in the White House must be paid less than men who do

So in EITHER case,your argument is a fail.

He does not have the authority to alter Civil Service rules. All executive branch employees are covered under Civil Service rules established by Congress

Rules that apply to contractors seeking a Government Contract can be altered by the President. If a prospective contractor does not like them, he does not have to bid

There are no rules in Civil Service saying "women must be paid less than men". But Civil Service rules relating to time in grade and the grades assigned to positions can affect women differently than men

If Republicans are outraged by male/female pay disparity in the Civil Service, they are welcome to change the rules......I doubt if they will attempt

Yeah....But the fact that these pay discrepancies exist is the issue.
And they DO exist.

 

[thereisnospoon]

When will women have total equality with men? When Republican men can get pregnant.

You still haven't given your opinion on how the Obama administration pays women less than men. Why not?

They pay in accordance with Civil Service rules and regulations. Those rules are established by Congress and the President has no authority to bypass them

He must have the authority to do so , else how did he issue an EO stating that no federal contractor could be paid less than $10/Hr?

Also, there are no laws that state that Women who work in the White House must be paid less than men who do

So in EITHER case,your argument is a fail.

He does not have the authority to alter Civil Service rules. All executive branch employees are covered under Civil Service rules established by Congress

Rules that apply to contractors seeking a Government Contract can be altered by the President. If a prospective contractor does not like them, he does not have to bid

There are no rules in Civil Service saying "women must be paid less than men". But Civil Service rules relating to time in grade and the grades assigned to positions can affect women differently than men

If Republicans are outraged by male/female pay disparity in the Civil Service, they are welcome to change the rules......I doubt if they will attempt

Explain that.Because it's BS. Unless you're saying the Obama Administration is purposely not promoting women so that they don't have to pay them as much.

Much of your pay is established by longevity. Time in grade moves you up the Civil Service payscale. Women are more likely to enter the workforce after having children or to leave for a few years while they raise children and then return. This affects their time in grade and resulting pay

Here comes the obfuscation....
Hey, Obama and his minions are the ones shooting off their mouths about gender pay gaps.

 

[hadit]

There is no war on women.

Of course there isn't. It's all just a made up political talking point designed to shut up the opposition. Create a straw man and insist the other guy defend it as you attack it. Apparently, just like with the "racist" taunt, some people fall for it.

 

[hadit]

Which political party tries hardest to limit/regulate/stifle female reproductive rights by undermining Roe v. Wade? Hint: it ain't Democrats.

There is a legitimate fundamental difference that you are ignoring. Millions of women agree that abortion kills a living human being and that it is not a reproductive rights issue.

Millions more disagree! What about the financial/mental/physical health of pregnant women? Righties don't seem to give a shit about that - or after a child is born. Why is that? Righties act like a pregnant woman is just an expendable incubator.

The point remains that abortion is not universally regarded as a reproductive rights issue. You may not like what people think, but it doesn't change what they think as regards the law.

Think it all you want.

Just don't force anyone else to agree with you.

That's what you're doing when you deny voters the right to oppose abortion mills in their neighborhoods.

 

[hadit]

Why do Republicans hate Planned Parenthood?

Planned Parenthood Federation of America

GOP War on Women and Planned Parenthood Continues

House GOP Declares War on Planned Parenthood

Probably because it was founded to decimate the minority population.