True women March for Life

[Conservative65]

The reason for that contraception falls under the umbrella of a woman choosing what to do with her body. Since the choice is hers, and you believe she should be the one making such choice, you should have no problem with the responsibility for paying for it as her place

Like I said, unless I'm getting the pussy, anything related to what a woman does with it is her responsibility.

why is viagra covered then 'eh? why do i have to pay for that? how about insulin if i'm not a diabetic? it's called comprehensive care.

That you compare medical conditions with those of a choice invalidates your argument.

when a pregnant woman needs medical care for a healthy outcome at the end of gestation & b4 the ACA became law that was considered to be a pre existing condition... then yeppers... it is indeed a medical condition.

Contraception isn't for medical care. You compared viagra and insulin, both actually used for medical conditions, with contraception, something that isn't. You lose.

educate yourself:

8 Other Reasons Women Take Birth Control Pills (Besides Preventing Pregnancy)

I'm aware of those but none of them fall under the argument you posed about using it for prevention. Prevention was your argument. When you lost, you try to bring things in that weren't a part of your argument. You keep losing and don't know when to quit trying.

The reason for that contraception falls under the umbrella of a woman choosing what to do with her body. Since the choice is hers, and you believe she should be the one making such choice, you should have no problem with the responsibility for paying for it as her place

Like I said, unless I'm getting the pussy, anything related to what a woman does with it is her responsibility.

It should be over the counter....but of coarse it won't be because the republicans have hi-jacked the christian's lying telling them they are the only party with God in the center... ( excluding ones who see right through it )

Contraception is over the counter.

Sure for the guy to use...

Who do you think the woman is having sex with that could get her pregnant? If she is going to spread her legs, shouldn't she make sure he wears it or keep them closed?

What the rubber...lol.....what if a man is abusing his wife and she doesn't want children...so many scenarios

And yes, contraception is for many medical conditions

So you're comparing criminal activity to a choice? Invalid argument

Contraception may be but the argument being put forth about it being OK to mandate someone else pay for it for a woman centered around contraception only.

 

[Conservative65]

why is viagra covered then 'eh? why do i have to pay for that? how about insulin if i'm not a diabetic? it's called comprehensive care.

That you compare medical conditions with those of a choice invalidates your argument.

when a pregnant woman needs medical care for a healthy outcome at the end of gestation & b4 the ACA became law that was considered to be a pre existing condition... then yeppers... it is indeed a medical condition.

Contraception isn't for medical care. You compared viagra and insulin, both actually used for medical conditions, with contraception, something that isn't. You lose.

educate yourself:

8 Other Reasons Women Take Birth Control Pills (Besides Preventing Pregnancy)

And Cialis is to have pleasure...not a medical condition...

It was developed to help with erectile dysfunction. Are you saying that isn't a medical condition?

 

[Conservative65]

The reason for that contraception falls under the umbrella of a woman choosing what to do with her body. Since the choice is hers, and you believe she should be the one making such choice, you should have no problem with the responsibility for paying for it as her place

Like I said, unless I'm getting the pussy, anything related to what a woman does with it is her responsibility.

It should be over the counter....but of coarse it won't be because the republicans have hi-jacked the christian's lying telling them they are the only party with God in the center... ( excluding ones who see right through it )

Contraception is over the counter.

Sure for the guy to use...

Who do you think the woman is having sex with that could get her pregnant? If she is going to spread her legs, shouldn't she make sure he wears it or keep them closed?

m'k.... so a woman being raped needs to carry a condom & tell her rapist to please stop & put one on.

got it.

So you're comparing criminal activity to a choice the woman made? You just choose to keep losing.

 

[Eaglewings]

That you compare medical conditions with those of a choice invalidates your argument.

when a pregnant woman needs medical care for a healthy outcome at the end of gestation & b4 the ACA became law that was considered to be a pre existing condition... then yeppers... it is indeed a medical condition.

Contraception isn't for medical care. You compared viagra and insulin, both actually used for medical conditions, with contraception, something that isn't. You lose.

educate yourself:

8 Other Reasons Women Take Birth Control Pills (Besides Preventing Pregnancy)

And Cialis is to have pleasure...not a medical condition...

It was developed to help with erectile dysfunction. Are you saying that isn't a medical condition?

Causes are usually medical but can also be psychological. ( like when a woman can psychologically stop.herself from getting pregnant when raped..lol

These congressmen make anything and everything to their advantage when it comes to sex..


.

 

[Conservative65]

when a pregnant woman needs medical care for a healthy outcome at the end of gestation & b4 the ACA became law that was considered to be a pre existing condition... then yeppers... it is indeed a medical condition.

Contraception isn't for medical care. You compared viagra and insulin, both actually used for medical conditions, with contraception, something that isn't. You lose.

educate yourself:

8 Other Reasons Women Take Birth Control Pills (Besides Preventing Pregnancy)

And Cialis is to have pleasure...not a medical condition...

It was developed to help with erectile dysfunction. Are you saying that isn't a medical condition?

Causes are usually medical but can also be psychological. ( like when a woman can psychologically stop.herself from getting pregnant when raped..lol

These congressmen make anything and everything to their advantage when it comes to sex..


.

When you've lost, you back off your argument. That's called trying to justify a lost cause.

Again, when you compare criminal activity to a choice, you lose.

 

[Eaglewings]

Contraception isn't for medical care. You compared viagra and insulin, both actually used for medical conditions, with contraception, something that isn't. You lose.

educate yourself:

8 Other Reasons Women Take Birth Control Pills (Besides Preventing Pregnancy)

And Cialis is to have pleasure...not a medical condition...

It was developed to help with erectile dysfunction. Are you saying that isn't a medical condition?

Causes are usually medical but can also be psychological. ( like when a woman can psychologically stop.herself from getting pregnant when raped..lol

These congressmen make anything and everything to their advantage when it comes to sex..


.

When you've lost, you back off your argument. That's called trying to justify a lost cause.

Again, when you compare criminal activity to a choice, you lose.

No I stand by the fact that the old men in congress make it easy on themselves so they can go have their hooker or other woman after a full day of voting against a woman.

Now where were we? I am on another thread too...

I CONFESS

 

[Papageorgio]

<pfffft> what a bunch of hypocrites...

What part of all lives matter is difficult to understand?

when there can only be one choice, the one that is post born with a life history already established gets that choice.

& when an unwanted pregnancy is brought to term - where are the crowds of anti abortion protesters when the congressional powers that vote to slash funding for medical, housing, clothing, & education for all those 'welfare queens' pushing out their brats?

yaaaaaaa.................... like i said................. hypocrites.

See you,keep Pro choice as one issue and move pro life to several. Interesting.

you think so? wrong. there is always several layers to either side of the issue. however it does boil down to one final issue. who gets to decide what to do with their own uterus.

The decision comes down to one person, never said otherwise, if you want to take a life, it's on you. But it is alive human being, science will tell you that.

 

[Papageorgio]

There has to be something really wrong with someone advocating the murder of the most innocent of all.

Terminating one's own embryo or fetus is not murder.

According to Science it's a life.

Murder is a legal term. According to science, a dog and a worm are life.

Did I say murder? I said it is taking a life.

 

[Avatar4321]

<pfffft> what a bunch of hypocrites...

What part of all lives matter is difficult to understand?

when there can only be one choice, the one that is post born with a life history already established gets that choice.

& when an unwanted pregnancy is brought to term - where are the crowds of anti abortion protesters when the congressional powers that vote to slash funding for medical, housing, clothing, & education for all those 'welfare queens' pushing out their brats?

yaaaaaaa.................... like i said................. hypocrites.

See you,keep Pro choice as one issue and move pro life to several. Interesting.

you think so? wrong. there is always several layers to either side of the issue. however it does boil down to one final issue. who gets to decide what to do with their own uterus.

That would be mother nature

 

[Avatar4321]

What part of all lives matter is difficult to understand?

when there can only be one choice, the one that is post born with a life history already established gets that choice.

& when an unwanted pregnancy is brought to term - where are the crowds of anti abortion protesters when the congressional powers that vote to slash funding for medical, housing, clothing, & education for all those 'welfare queens' pushing out their brats?

yaaaaaaa.................... like i said................. hypocrites.

See you,keep Pro choice as one issue and move pro life to several. Interesting.

you think so? wrong. there is always several layers to either side of the issue. however it does boil down to one final issue. who gets to decide what to do with their own uterus.

Why, when those women that make a choice with their uteruses they tell the rest of us is none of our business and it results in something they can't afford, why are those that were told to butt out now suddenly expected part of something we were told was none of our business?

In the end, if the woman chooses to have kids she can't afford, it's not anyone's responsibility but hers and the one that got her pregnant. Since I'm not the one that got the pussy from her, whatever she chose to have come out of it isn't my responsibility to take care of.

uh-huh. sing it to the choir that wants to strip contraception out of mandatory coverage.

You don't see the inherent contradiction between telling someone they have no right to say what happens to your body while demanding they pay for healthcare foe your body? Or pay specifically for their abortion or birth control?

At what point does one need to take responsibility for their choices and lives? If I make a choice to father ten children why should you pay for it? And why should any other those children be killed at the convenience of me and or my wife?

 

[PK1]

There has to be something really wrong with someone advocating the murder of the most innocent of all.

Terminating one's own embryo or fetus is not murder.

According to Science it's a life.

Murder is a legal term. According to science, a dog and a worm are life.

Did I say murder? I said it is taking a life.

How come you responded to my comment:
"Terminating one's own embryo or fetus is not murder." ?

 

[Avatar4321]

A leftist thinks Christians should be meek and humble...they couldn't be more wrong

Jesus fought for the poor . The right ..... tells the poor to go to hell .

There is only one account of Jesus even coming close to fighting in the scriptures. And he wasn't flipping over the tables of the money changers on behalf of the poor.

When was the last time you read the the bible about Jesus's life?

And you're outright wrong about the right not caring about the poor. It's specifically our love for the poor that has us fighting the government keeping them down.

Jesus fought for the underdog, he was angry with the men making money off of the poor, and taking taxes..making stupid laws and acting like kings...Sound familiar?

Again, where did he fight at all? Where was he angry with men making money off the poor? (How do you make money off the poor anyway, that makes no sense). Where did he object to taking taxes? He called a tax collector to be his apostle. Who did he object to acting as a king? Certainly wasn't Caesar

Fight...meaning , like you fight for what is important to you...not the actual fight..

Luke 19:1-10New International Version (NIV)
Zacchaeus the Tax Collector
19 Jesus entered Jericho and was passing through. 2 A man was there by the name of Zacchaeus; he was a chief tax collector and was wealthy. 3 He wanted to see who Jesus was, but because he was short he could not see over the crowd. 4 So he ran ahead and climbed a sycamoretree to see him, since Jesus was coming that way.

5 When Jesus reached the spot, he looked up and said to him, “Zacchaeus, come down immediately. I must stay at your house today.” So he came down at once and welcomed him gladly.

7 All the people saw this and began to mutter, “He has gone to be the guest of a sinner.

8 But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord,“Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything,I will pay back four times the amount.”

9 Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham; For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”

Great passage but no fighting involved at all. Nor anything you said

 

[Papageorgio]

There has to be something really wrong with someone advocating the murder of the most innocent of all.

Terminating one's own embryo or fetus is not murder.

According to Science it's a life.

Murder is a legal term. According to science, a dog and a worm are life.

Did I say murder? I said it is taking a life.

How come you responded to my comment:
"Terminating one's own embryo or fetus is not murder." ?

I was responding to your nonsensical response. I never claimed aborting a child was murder.

 

[mamooth]

If she is going to spread her legs, shouldn't she make sure he wears it or keep them closed?

Obsessing over other people's sex lives is something that only sicko control freaks do.

Mind your own business, perv. A woman's body does not belong to you, your church or your precious authoritarian state. Deal with it.

 

[PK1]

Terminating one's own embryo or fetus is not murder.

According to Science it's a life.

Murder is a legal term. According to science, a dog and a worm are life.

Did I say murder? I said it is taking a life.

How come you responded to my comment:
"Terminating one's own embryo or fetus is not murder." ?

I was responding to your nonsensical response. I never claimed aborting a child was murder.

What was "nonsensical"?

 

[Conservative65]

If she is going to spread her legs, shouldn't she make sure he wears it or keep them closed?

Obsessing over other people's sex lives is something that only sicko control freaks do.

Mind your own business, perv. A woman's body does not belong to you, your church or your precious authoritarian state. Deal with it.

Cherrypicking a portion of what I said? Sign of a typical bitch. Rest assured you couldn't pay someone to obsess over yours.

If a woman is the sole chooser of what to do with her body, why don't you hold all women to the same responsibility standard when it comes to paying for the results of those choice. You're the one that supports the authoritarian government. You tell me to stay out of what a woman does with her body then thinks it's OK for that woman to get the government to force others to support children she chooses to have when she can't. Those children aren't my responsibility for one reason and one reason only. They're not mine.

 

[mamooth]

Cherrypicking a portion of what I said? Sign of a typical bitch.

When I point out that you're clearly pro-life because you're such a misogynist, you shouldn't run to confirm it like that. Clearly, you're pro-life because you hate women in general.

If a woman is the sole chooser of what to do with her body, why don't you hold all women to the same responsibility standard when it comes to paying for the results of those choice.

Those are two separate issues. After it's born, it's not in her body, therefore it's not about her body.

You're the one that supports the authoritarian government. You tell me to stay out of what a woman does with her body then thinks it's OK for that woman to get the government to force others to support children she chooses to have when she can't. Those children aren't my responsibility for one reason and one reason only. They're not mine.

You MRAs would get more support if you didn't respond to an injustice by demanding a far bigger injustice.

 

[Conservative65]

Cherrypicking a portion of what I said? Sign of a typical bitch.

When I point out that you're clearly pro-life because you're such a misogynist, you shouldn't run to confirm it like that. Clearly, you're pro-life because you hate women in general.

If a woman is the sole chooser of what to do with her body, why don't you hold all women to the same responsibility standard when it comes to paying for the results of those choice.

Those are two separate issues. After it's born, it's not in her body, therefore it's not about her body.

You're the one that supports the authoritarian government. You tell me to stay out of what a woman does with her body then thinks it's OK for that woman to get the government to force others to support children she chooses to have when she can't. Those children aren't my responsibility for one reason and one reason only. They're not mine.

You MRAs would get more support if you didn't respond to an injustice by demanding a far bigger injustice.

All I confirmed what that you have no clue.

The only injustice is when someone telling others to butt out of what they do with their body runs to the government demanding those they told to butt out be forced to fund the choice they were told was none of their business.

Again, if they aren't mine, they aren't my responsibility.

 

[Conservative65]

Cherrypicking a portion of what I said? Sign of a typical bitch.

When I point out that you're clearly pro-life because you're such a misogynist, you shouldn't run to confirm it like that. Clearly, you're pro-life because you hate women in general.

If a woman is the sole chooser of what to do with her body, why don't you hold all women to the same responsibility standard when it comes to paying for the results of those choice.

Those are two separate issues. After it's born, it's not in her body, therefore it's not about her body.

You're the one that supports the authoritarian government. You tell me to stay out of what a woman does with her body then thinks it's OK for that woman to get the government to force others to support children she chooses to have when she can't. Those children aren't my responsibility for one reason and one reason only. They're not mine.

You MRAs would get more support if you didn't respond to an injustice by demanding a far bigger injustice.

They aren't separate issues. The latter couldn't happen unless she made the choice. That's why I said the RESULTS of that choice.

Those kids aren't my responsibility because they aren't mine. Why should I give a damn about them if the one having the pussy they came out of doesn't give enough of a damn to support her own?

 

[mamooth]

They aren't separate issues. The latter couldn't happen unless she made the choice. That's why I said the RESULTS of that choice.

Don't move the goalposts. The issue is a woman controlling her own body. Your causality chain has nothing to do with that.

Those kids aren't my responsibility because they aren't mine. Why should I give a damn about them if the one having the pussy they came out of doesn't give enough of a damn to support her own?

Was that an "I hate welfare" rant, or an "I hate paying child support" rant? Not that either one has anything to do with a woman controlling her own body.