Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
When a woman exercises her right to privacy concerning making a decision whether to have a child or not, and that decision conflicts with conservative religious and social dogma, as authoritarians most on the right will seek to use the power and authority of the state to violate a womens right to privacy and compel her to conform to their subjective religious and social dogma and bear a child against her will.
OR, some people actually value human life. This can be hard for liberals to understand after they have been conditioned to reject the notion of right and wrong.
When you wingnuts stop trying to yank food out of the mouths of poor children, then I'll take you seriously about how much you value "human life".
you dishonest sack of shit?
Not at all.OR, some people actually value human life. This can be hard for liberals to understand after they have been conditioned to reject the notion of right and wrong.
When you wingnuts stop trying to yank food out of the mouths of poor children, then I'll take you seriously about how much you value "human life".
So, when conservatives embrace, wholly and uncritically, all liberal policies and points of view, only then would you deign to ease off such dishonest and offensive hyperbole as that above? I have a better idea...
...how about...
I'd be happy to enterain any good faith alternatives to food stamps that don't involve starving children.
A con got a wish from a genie, and said that he hated flying and wanted a bridge from L.A. to Hawaii so he could drive there. The genie said it was ridiculous because it was over two thousand miles, and told the con to ask for something different. The con asked for the ability to understand women. The genie replied, "You want that bridge to be two or four lanes?"
Just to clarify, you are stating that the war on women in the US is not occurring because women are mistreated in the Middle East. Yes?
No, what you call a "war" is nothing more than propaganda. It is political hyperbole. Drummed up hysteria. You can't possibly believe that there is a war being waged against women here in America, can you? Since when do we stage public beatings and stonings of women in the streets as a matter of punishment or twisted justice? Hmm? Do you see anyone doing such a thing here? No. Because you would be arrested and put away for a long, long time if you did.
So, what "war" are we talking about exactly? The real one in the Middle East, against those poor women.
So your argument, again, seems to be that a woman should be happy being forced to have a baby she doesn't want because, gosh darn it, at least we aren't taking you out in the street and stoning you.
Do you really think this is an intellectually honest argument?
Sorry, guy, there is a misogynistic streak in the GOP. The very thought of women controlling their sexuality frightens you for some reason.
Lovely. Imagine this very same woman being castrated as a child, married off to an elderly man to perhaps be sodomized, beaten, stoned, or worse, killed for exercising her own rights. Imagine, that if she wanted to have a baby, these men would beat her until she miscarried. Yes, there are other choices rather than abortion, Joe. You'd prefer murder to a choice, and that's good to know. Par for the course for you.
So, understand one thing, Joe. You're comparing a political party to these people. Is this what you want to go with?
Sorry, you saying so doesn't make it so.
Just to clarify, you are stating that the war on women in the US is not occurring because women are mistreated in the Middle East. Yes?
I'm pretty sure he's saying that if you think life in America constitutes a "war on women", you're spoiled, insane, and stupid.
I'd be happy to enterain any good faith alternatives to food stamps that don't involve starving children.
If you can't bring yourself to communicate without asinine hyperbole then just STFU and go back to your fantasies about communist revolutions and attacking business managers with baseball bats (neither of which a pussy like you would ever do, of course).
I'd be happy to enterain any good faith alternatives to food stamps that don't involve starving children.
If you can't bring yourself to communicate without asinine hyperbole then just STFU and go back to your fantasies about communist revolutions and attacking business managers with baseball bats (neither of which a pussy like you would ever do, of course).
But there you are pissing yourself over the notion I might.
Just to clarify, you are stating that the war on women in the US is not occurring because women are mistreated in the Middle East. Yes?
I'm pretty sure he's saying that if you think life in America constitutes a "war on women", you're spoiled, insane, and stupid.
Ya, but, he has no idea what he's going on about.
I'm pretty sure he's saying that if you think life in America constitutes a "war on women", you're spoiled, insane, and stupid.
Ya, but, he has no idea what he's going on about.
Based on what? Your feewings that American women are abused and mistreated? Whatever.
I'm pretty sure he's saying that if you think life in America constitutes a "war on women", you're spoiled, insane, and stupid.
Ya, but, he has no idea what he's going on about.
Based on what? Your feewings that American women are abused and mistreated? Whatever.
Grandma said:Hi, you have received -453 reputation points from Grandma.
Reputation was given for this post.
Comment:
You don't know what you\'re talking about. Best to stay quiet.
Regards,
Grandma
Note: This is an automated message.
Ya, but, he has no idea what he's going on about.
Based on what? Your feewings that American women are abused and mistreated? Whatever.
Nope. Based on the legislation via the states. It's ok. He could not wrap his brain around it either. His argument seemed to be quite emotional and so is yours.
Based on what? Your feewings that American women are abused and mistreated? Whatever.
Nope. Based on the legislation via the states. It's ok. He could not wrap his brain around it either. His argument seemed to be quite emotional and so is yours.
Ad hominem does not an argument make. If all you can do is sit there and insult my intelligence, then by default you are conceding defeat to my point. See, I wasn't referring to "legislation in the states" which as far as I can tell, do not involve banning women in America from getting jobs, an education, driving or otherwise depriving them of "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness." Nor have I ever seen a state passing legislation that requires all the men to sodomize them at an early age, or mutilate their genitals. Your argument is preposterous.
I'm beginning to think you can't wrap your brain around the fact that women here in the states are far better off, that they aren't being mistreated by conservatives, and don't fall in line with your definition of "abused" or "mistreated." There is no war on women in America. Deal with it.
