Anti-abortion activists indicted for undercover videos smearing Planned Parenthood

[Dhara]

I'm sure some of you guys would like to see pregnant women imprisoned and forced to give birth rather than respect her right to privacy..

 

[Dhara]

It's been done before. See Magdalene Laundries.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I provided reports proving Insurance companies, using tax dollars, paid for abortions that were outside the Hyde Amendment restrictions. I can't help you refuse to accept that.

Instead you do Alynski proud by attempting to point fingers at Reagan and Bush than actually look at how the government fleeces tax payers. The worst example of this is NOT abortions but the nearly $1 trillion dollar Obama failed Stinulus bill that contained iver 7,000 pieces if self/party-serving DNC-ONLY oueces of pork that took money out of Middle Class tax payers to go towards, anong other thibgs, Alcoholic Chinese prostitutes and gay Argentinians.

You prove you are as concerned with our politicians' charged responsibility of being good stewards of OUR money as the politicians who are violating that trust. You are more interested in making sure the opposing political party is blamed.

You have proven you care nothing about personal accountability, whether it is someone who wants anyone else to pay for their abortion, someone who wants to pay for yet another illegitimate child, or a pokitician who uses tax dollars to study gay Argentinians.

Try to convince someone else otherwise of your BS - it doesn't float here.

I provided reports proving Insurance companies, using tax dollars, paid for abortions that were outside the Hyde Amendment restrictions. I can't help you refuse to accept that.

No you didn't. There is no private insurer that receives federal funds to sponsor abortions.
You are truly deluded.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

GAO:
'...though Planned Parenthood—the organization performing 40% of America’s (reported) abortions every year—claims federal funding does not directly fund abortion, it’s not feasible nor believable that a group performing hundreds of thousands of abortions annually could prevent cross contamination.'

If you actually think PP divides their different sources of money into separate accounts and ensures that each abortion paid for is only paid for from the account marked 'NOT Tax Dollars' you're an idiot.

It's called accounting fool.
Do you suppose federal money should be orange so it won't be confused with the
" bad" money spent on abortion?

It's called three card Monty that only fools suckers like you. All the money goes into the same pot. There's no way to distinguish a dollar intended for abortions from one that is not.

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

But there is, fool.
How does any entity organize and report their financial transactions for a given year?

Like I said, maybe federal money should be orange so simple minded fucks like you could follow along with the conversation.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

The people who support imprisoning people because of their political activities know they are wrong. They just don't want to admit it.

 

[Votto]

Have they prosecuted the veterans for being put on secret government lists to die because they were to expensive to treat as well?

 

[Dhara]

I'm reminded of Atwood's novel, A Handmaid's Tale.

in Atwood’s future, the religious/military/economic groups among us have gradually turned the United States into the Republic of Gilead. You might say that the Moral Majority has finally lived up to its name. Powerful people are so white, religious, and universal that they are assumed to be everyone except the workers they command.

However, the big problem is that women’s ability to bear children has been diminished by radiation and other modern excesses. That’s why acceptable young women are tested for viable ovaries, and compelled to become breeders for men of the ruling class.

Since sex outside of marriage is forbidden by extreme religiosity—as is divorce, sex between two women or two men, and any form of sexual expression that can’t end in conception—the wife must become part of this process by literally holding down the young woman while she has monthly intercourse with the husband. Among the wife’s rewards is that there is yet another category of women who do all the housework of the ruling class.

To make sure that this female hierarchy remains happy or at least compliant, all females are forbidden to be literate—which is why signs for, say, shopping, are made up of pictures instead of words. If there are female rebels, they are sent to work in dangerous colonies, or underground clubs as prostitutes for ruling class men; illegal but tolerated. Up and down this female hierarchy, women also police each other in order to survive.
The Handmaid’s Tale: A Warning About Patriarchy and Power | Feed Your Need To Read

This is the type of world fetal fanatics want to create.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

How is that enforceable without punishing women more than men?
To be fair both partners responsible for the pregnancy should be considered:
what if the man raped the woman? Are we going to criminalize the woman while the man goes free?
Try writing laws that hold men equally responsible as women for sex that leads to unwanted pregnancy in the first place.
Otherwise, arguing after the fact, is going to affect women more than men and the laws are going to be biased.

how about the laws stay out of the private sex lives of men and women and not make any laws respecting "equal responsibility" for having sex.

but it is true that the misogynist wingnuts love "punishing the harlots".

How about people start taking responsibility for their own actions?

And interesting position on laws staying out of the bedroom, considering the left want to force everyone to pay for things inside personal sex lives.

People do take responsibility for their actions. Some choose an abortion as the most responsible choice they can make. I don't expect you to understand that. You're too busy judging other people's lives and wanting to insert your will into their bodies.

Choosing an Boston isn't being reponsible, especially when you don't pay for it. Keeping your legs shut is being responsible.

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

Getting a vasectomy works great too.

Mine works great! They should be free for all.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

how about the laws stay out of the private sex lives of men and women and not make any laws respecting "equal responsibility" for having sex.

but it is true that the misogynist wingnuts love "punishing the harlots".

How about people start taking responsibility for their own actions?

And interesting position on laws staying out of the bedroom, considering the left want to force everyone to pay for things inside personal sex lives.

People do take responsibility for their actions. Some choose an abortion as the most responsible choice they can make. I don't expect you to understand that. You're too busy judging other people's lives and wanting to insert your will into their bodies.

Choosing an Boston isn't being reponsible, especially when you don't pay for it. Keeping your legs shut is being responsible.

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

Getting a vasectomy works great too.

How does the failure of some slut to keep her legs shut obligate me to get a vasectomy?

How does the failure of some slut to keep her legs shut obligate me to get a vasectomy?

Tells us all we need to know about your view of women.

 

[emilynghiem]

First a side note:
To bripat9643 to you this may seem obvious and stupid, but it's not people's fault we don't see things the same way -- because our beliefs shape our perceptions where our language can fail us, even where it seems obvious.
Our religious and political beliefs and biases can be so deep, we can't conceive of the other person's views as real.

For example, there are atheists who do not relate to things going on in the world in terms of a "personal God" to the point that's not even a valid choice to them, but something made up, foreign and false. Likewise, theists who see things in terms of God's eyes can't imagine how atheists can't see this, and think they are lying or otherwise lacking.

One way I could it explain is by comparison: bripat9643 if you or others you know consider abortion to be murder, that it is wrongful period to terminate life of a helpless baby with no control and no way to express consent or dissent or even to ASK for defense, in the mind of such a prolife believer, "abortion is not even a choice" just like murder is not a free choice. It is "hypothetically" but in real practice, no, it is not an option. So in THAT mindset, a 'ban on abortion' does NOT take away any choices that someone ought to have anyway. If a person thinks THAT way, it is hard for them to understand why a prochoice person would complain their freedom of choice is violated "if abortion, murder, and other forms of unnatural termination against the will of the individual" are NOT viable choices to begin with!

Well to many people, insurance and federal govt are natural ways they would seek to cover health care anyway; so what choice is being taken away to require this that "everyone needs anyway". To them other choices are not viable, this is the best way assuming "everyone is going to run to govt to cover emergency costs", so why not require ways to pay for it that people have to use anyway?

bripat9643 if you can understand how abortion is NOT a choice, so bans are "not taking away any choices" That is close to how some people's minds might not be able to see that fining people for not buying insurance isn't taking away any choices, because "people need to buy insurance or pay for health care anyway."

In such situations, I don't see how that is the fault of either prochoice or prolife people whose minds frame things differently: one sees it as free choices sacrificed to govt control, and the other sees no choices lost.

After arguing in circles with people here, I came to the conclusion they can't help not thinking the way we do; just like how atheists and theists can't help that their brains don't see things the same way, to the point the other way is FOREIGN to them.

how do health care mandates penalize choice?

I pay for a lot of things I don't approve of. that's something the right needs to get over

Hi jillian Hutch Starskey C_Clayton_Jones and others who don't see the mandates
as penalizing free choice

I think this is very important to address, and I thank you for being honest that you do not see it the same way as people do who feel govt overreached and has violated Constitutional protections, limits and individual liberty.

BEFORE the ACA mandates were passed and enforced, citizens had the freedom to buy insurance or pay for health care ourselves, without being penalized or regulated *BY FEDERAL GOVT* in terms of HOW to pay for this.

(NOTE: To you, if you are not of the Constitutional belief of putting rights of States and people before handing jurisdiction to FEDERAL GOVT, you may not understand what a violation this is to people who DO put the liberty of citizens first, and require a whole other process BEFORE handing FEDERAL GOVT any authority assumed by default to belong to the people or States.)

Examples: we could pay the whole bill ourselves, ask help of friends or charity, invest money into charity programs to help other people -- all these are free choices in a free market. where people have freedom to give to the charities or programs of our choice.

With ACA mandates, these restrict citizens to either
(a) pay for private insurance that meets federal regulations
(b) pay for the insurance under the federal exchanges under those requirements
(c) meet or file for exemptions under hardship or religious exemptions that are also regulated
and approved by govt
(d) pay under "state alternatives" that have to be preapproved by federal govt
(e) or pay fines that don't go to the programs of citizens' free choice but to the federal govt system

So federal govt is regulating, restricting and mandating limited choices
of what citizens ARE REQUIRED to pay for, including fines for noncompliance.

We no longer have freedom to pay for or provide health care in any other ways, such as paying the cost
ourselves WHICH IS NOT A CRIME, or
such as building sustainable medical school programs that provide low cost health care to the public.

When people 'LOSE LIBERTIES' ie govt deprives citizens of liberties,
the general standard is

(a) either the person is convicted of a criminal or civil violation through DUE PROCESS to penalize the PARTICULAR PERSON (not collectively punishing all citizens as a class)
so that the loss of liberty is a PENALTY for that criminal or civil violation.

In this case, the citizens have NOT committed any violations yet, nor undergone any due process to PROVE such, before we are made subject to rules restricting our freedom/liberty/choice and/or forced to pay a fine.

This is punishing citizens collectively by losing liberty, including freedom to pay in more cost effective ways, instead of going after the actual people running up costs and not paying for them.

NOTE: Just because YOU don't feel you lost any choice in the matter, doesn't mean others have not.

(b) or the govt must show a COMPELLING interest and show the LEAST RESTRICTIVE means of achieving that goal

so if the goal is making sure people pay for their share, then why not come out and say that instead of dictating HOW to pay which is NOT the "least restrictive way"

There are other ways to pay and provide for health care, such as setting up medical training programs where residents and interns earn their education by providing public health services to the general population.

Forcing INSURANCE as the only way, or a limited number of exemptions that not all people qualify for,
is NOT the least restrictive way. What is wrong with paying for one's own costs without insurance and/or paying for health care for others through charities or other medical programs? What makes insurance the only option?

A law could have been passed barring citizens from imposing their health care costs on other taxpayers against their consent, but WITHOUT dictating HOW this is to be done. Or a law requiring States to set up health care programs for their populations so that costs are contained and not imposed on federal govt.

And leave it to the people or the States to work out HOW instead of trying
to regulate those decisions and processes on the FEDERAL LEVEL.

Lastly a point that seems lost to people who "don't think this way"
The Constitutionalists who believe that rights and freedoms by default belong to the people by NATURE,
and it isn't govt that GRANTS these, but it is by Constitutional laws we limit and check govt from taking
liberty AWAY, believe that the Federal Govt has NO authority except what is EXPRESSLY specified in the Constitution or added by AMENDMENTS. This way, the people and States RESERVE rights and freedoms not specifically granted to federal govt; and VOTE on any changes that give more authority to the federal govt.

So the issue of HEALTH CARE CHOICES AND FINANCES
is NOT agreed upon, NOT written specifically in the Constitution as giving authorization to federal govt,
but through the political process, the necessary step of VOTING ON AMENDMENT WAS BYPASSED.

So again, the PEOPLE were DEPRIVED of the right, freedom and choice to VOTE
on whether or not to EXPAND the authority of federal govt into private health care decisions and
how to pay for that which is PRIVATE.

Now I understand, that to the liberal mindset of people who are NOT Constitutionalist,
the belief is that "government can pass ANY law through Congress and through Courts if it is contested"
WHETHER OR NOT it is contested by other citizens as being Unconstitutional and requiring an Amendment.

So this is ANOTHER area of "political beliefs" where the two sides are clashing
and cannot see each other's viewpoint as valid. Because of the conflict, the
situation has been "handed over" to the whim of votes in Congress and Courts
instead of addressing the FUNDAMENTAL issue of conflicts in POLITICAL BELIEFS.

That issue has not been addressed or resolved, but just left to the "flip of a coin"
which side would get more votes in Congress or Courts.

To the Constitutionalist it is NOT an option, NOT up to a vote by majority rule in Congress/Courts,
to lose liberties and freedom of choice in PERSONAL health care and financial decisions;
but that any such expansion of federal powers requires States to ratify an Amendment
and thus give taxpayers a VOICE and CHOICE in the matter -- instead of taxation without representation.

From discussing this with JakeStarkey and C_Clayton_Jones
it became more and more clear that the political beliefs bias the thinking on both sides so much
that we cannot even see the other beliefs are even valid but seem to be an excuse to skirt or bypass laws.
JakeStarkey expressed concern over and over that I sound like I am trying to go outside the whole system.

So bripat9643 and jillian it is BECAUSE we cannot even see how each other's views are valid beliefs,
it is even more important we don't take these biases for granted, but make sure the democratic, legal and judicial processes RECOGNIZE these differences in belief and perception, and protect both sides that risk exclusion coercion or imposition by the other, even without knowing or intending it, due to these deep rooted biases in our beliefs.

 

[Dhara]

how about the laws stay out of the private sex lives of men and women and not make any laws respecting "equal responsibility" for having sex.

but it is true that the misogynist wingnuts love "punishing the harlots".

How about people start taking responsibility for their own actions?

And interesting position on laws staying out of the bedroom, considering the left want to force everyone to pay for things inside personal sex lives.

People do take responsibility for their actions. Some choose an abortion as the most responsible choice they can make. I don't expect you to understand that. You're too busy judging other people's lives and wanting to insert your will into their bodies.

Choosing an Boston isn't being reponsible, especially when you don't pay for it. Keeping your legs shut is being responsible.

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

Oh ya. It's ALWAYS up to the woman. Why don't you guys tell the men to keep it zipped?

Nature made it up to the women.

Way to not take any personal responsibility!

 

[Dhara]

How about people start taking responsibility for their own actions?

And interesting position on laws staying out of the bedroom, considering the left want to force everyone to pay for things inside personal sex lives.

People do take responsibility for their actions. Some choose an abortion as the most responsible choice they can make. I don't expect you to understand that. You're too busy judging other people's lives and wanting to insert your will into their bodies.

Choosing an Boston isn't being reponsible, especially when you don't pay for it. Keeping your legs shut is being responsible.

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

Getting a vasectomy works great too.

How does the failure of some slut to keep her legs shut obligate me to get a vasectomy?

How does the failure of some slut to keep her legs shut obligate me to get a vasectomy?

Tells us all we need to know about your view of women.

Sure does. Misogynistic.

 

[easyt65]

Conservative men think its solely the woman's job to prevent pregnancy.

Liberals love TRYING to speak for others... and absolutely SUCK at it. lol

 

[Dhara]

Conservative men think its solely the woman's job to prevent pregnancy.

Liberals love TRYING to speak for others... and absolutely SUCK at it. lol

Your words speak for themselves. I don't have to make up a thing.

 

[easyt65]

Personal responsibility / accountability applies to both man and women as well as to both - much to Liberals' disdain and attempts to shirk it - Conservatives AND Liberals.

 

[Dhara]

Personal responsibility / accountability applies to both man and women as well as to both - much to Liberals' disdain and attempts to shirk it - Conservatives AND Liberals.

Says the guy who wants to take the responsibility for the decision away from women.

 

[Faun]

this topic really show who the people are that doesn't care about human or life itself. though they will blow smoke up your butts of HOW they care so much more for people. it's shameful

this is like the fifth thread on this. you would think they would care about the aborted little babies being butchered. remember how they nuts when it being done to monkeys? well you see how low our society has went downhill all thanks to abortion on demand

No one is stopping you from adopting and implanting an unwanted fetus.

you are twisted

Spits the conservative who wanted to rally up 30 million "patriots" to storm the White House and forcibly remove Obama with pitch forks and torches.

 

[easyt65]

Personal responsibility / accountability applies to both man and women as well as to both - much to Liberals' disdain and attempts to shirk it - Conservatives AND Liberals.

Says the guy who wants to take the responsibility for the decision away from women.

YOU LIE...which is no surprise to anyone. As I have continually said, women should have the right to kill as many babies as they want, but they should have to pay for their own elective surgery. I would like liberals to do something they try to avoid like the plaque - take personal responsibility for their choices and actions!

(It's not MY 'Red Line'...It's THE WORLD'S Red Line'....good grief, what a POS 'blame-shifter'.)

 

[Dhara]

Women who conceive through rape and choose to keep their children often face stigma and disgrace. They must constantly struggle to engage with these children without blaming them for the trauma that produced them.

Whether, what, and when to tell the children about the circumstances of their conception are loaded questions: it is awful to know that one was conceived in brutality, but it is also awful to have been ignorant of one's origins and find out through happenstance.

These children may belong to an identity group without knowing it; they may struggle all their lives with their mothers' ambivalence about them without having a clue about its cause.
Rape

 

[jillian]

How about people start taking responsibility for their own actions?

And interesting position on laws staying out of the bedroom, considering the left want to force everyone to pay for things inside personal sex lives.

People do take responsibility for their actions. Some choose an abortion as the most responsible choice they can make. I don't expect you to understand that. You're too busy judging other people's lives and wanting to insert your will into their bodies.

Choosing an Boston isn't being reponsible, especially when you don't pay for it. Keeping your legs shut is being responsible.

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

Getting a vasectomy works great too.

How does the failure of some slut to keep her legs shut obligate me to get a vasectomy?

How does the failure of some slut to keep her legs shut obligate me to get a vasectomy?

Tells us all we need to know about your view of women.

Yup