Republicans... the gift that keeps giving

Attack me all you want, but wouldn't it be better, for all involved, including the fetus, for Tree's friends to use birth control vs. being an abortion factory ?
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #34
Attack me all you want, but wouldn't it be better, for all involved, including the fetus, for Tree's friends to use birth control vs. being an abortion factory ?

Yes it would be better. My Name is Ms Tree, let me be your tour guide to reality. The optimum out come is not always ways what happens. Contraceptives fail, accidents happen, heat of the moment happens.

As Dog pointed out above, the republicans not only do not care about that and make every effort to block anything that would prevent unwanted pregnancy such as sex ed, contraceptives, family planning. The republican idea of birth control is just say no. Like that works so well. Just ask Sarah Palin, Bristol Palin and Track Palin how saying no worked.

It boggles the mind how republicans can be against abortion and also be against everything everything that would help prevent unwanted pregnancy. That has got to be the dumbest set of positions I have ever heard. It's like being on the Titanic and not liking life boats.
 
The problem, Tree is there are two lines of thought in the Republican party on this subject and you are off base with your assumption.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #37
Attack me all you want, but wouldn't it be better, for all involved, including the fetus, for Tree's friends to use birth control vs. being an abortion factory ?

This brings up another issue. Both of the friends who had abortions were under 18 when it happened. They had their entire life ahead of them. If they had the child as a single unwed mother they would have born the brunt of the responsibility of raising the child. We all know the fathers are not held responsible for their actions by society. So not only do you end up with a child parent but you end up with one who more than likely will not complete their education and will more than likely end up on the public dole. But hey, so long as the republicans just ignore the problem and stay the course with "just say no" which has been proven to be infective, all will be good in the world.

Perhaps had birth control been available to my friends they may not have become pregnant and had an abortion. Perhaps had sex education been available my friends would not have become pregnant and had an abortion. Perhaps had their been family planning centers available (not really popular in the 'enlightened south') my friends would not have become pregnant and had an abortion.

So the question is as always, would you like to spend a few dollars now and prevent abortions from happening (I thought that was what the republicans wanted?) or would you rather spend more money later and promote abortions (I thought that is what republicans did not want?). What do republicans pick, spend more and promote abortions. What a much of immoral ignorant hypocritical dumb asses.

Just say no to republican ignorance.
 
Tell that to the party that wants to score political points attacking Planned Parenthood.

Maggie Sanger was quite the cold hearted biitch supported by DNC today.

Eugenics




Sanger's 1920 book endorsed eugenics.
As part of her efforts to promote birth control, Sanger found common cause with proponents of eugenics, believing that they both sought to "assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit."[sup][83][/sup] Sanger was a proponent of negative eugenics, which aims to improve human hereditary traits through social intervention by reducing reproduction by those considered unfit. Sanger's eugenic policies included an exclusionary immigration policy, free access to birth control methods and full family planning autonomy for the able-minded, and compulsory segregation or sterilization for the profoundly retarded.[sup][84][/sup][sup][85][/sup] In her book The Pivot of Civilization, she advocated coercion to prevent the "undeniably feeble-minded" from procreating.[sup][86][/sup] Although Sanger supported negative eugenics, she asserted that eugenics alone was not sufficient, and that birth control was essential to achieve her goals

DNC peoples choice candidate.......

Role model for todays up and coming Democrat idealists.

I think this forum could benefit from Ms Sangers Eugenic views rather quickly.
 
I have no problem with Democrats practicing population control. I also have no problem with people having access to contraception.

I'm still waiting for a good explanation on why I should have to pay for it, when a month's supply of generic birth control pills only costs $4 at Walmart.

Three weeks ago, I stood in line at the corner store, and watched a woman pay for a 44oz Coke and a bag of Hostess mini-donuts with her SNAP card, and then whip out a C note to buy a carton of cigarettes...

If they really can't afford the $4, then I'm even OK letting them use their SNAP card for birth control. Might as well let them buy something more useful than Cokes and junk food...
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #40
Silly me, I thought Clinton was a headliner on defending women against the evils of the Republicans, even though he has a long & documented history of sexual harassment claims, suits and cheating on his wife.


The irony in all this is that abortion wasn't even an issue on the Republican's platform. It was a pivot issue brought up by Democrats and the media.

The DNC knew that sexual freedom and freedom from religion were far more important to talk about than far less important issues like the economic stability of the country....

It worked. People like you obviously bought into that.

Personally, I find abortion abhorrent. That doesn't mean I want to restrict anyone's ability to obtain one. Yet in the binary world that people like you live in, if I don't support it for myself, obviously I want to take it away from someone else.

Clinton is a horn dog. What else is new. No judgements have been made against him although I think they should have been.

Seriously? Have you not read the RNC platform? Have you not seen the laws like HR 1096 from 2011? Abortion is a key issue for the RNC to the point that any appointment to the court has top pass that litmus test.

There are issues other than economic that face this nation. Everyone knew that Romney did not have a plan. Everyone knows that Obama does not have a plan. Both republicans and dems suck at spending issues because they are both beholden to business. That leaves the social issues. Believe it or not the social issues do affect people and it is important to them.

I do not like abortion either. I think it is being used as a form of birth control and I think that is disgusting. Thing is I do not think it is my right to make that decision for anyone else. Your party wants to do that (see HR 1096 and other such bills.) Your party is trying to make it all but illegal to have an abortion in this country. All the while not doing a damn thing to help prevent people from getting pregnant in the first place. In fact the RNC and the religious right wing idiots are doing everything in their power to make sure young teens in the US (still one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the world) get pregnant and have absolutely no resources at their disposal to prevent it.

That is one example of republican morality that this country definitely can do with out.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #42
** Planned Parenthood was founded by racists who wanted to reduce minority birth rates; even today, abortions are disproportionately sought out by minorites...

Who the hell cares if Sanger was a racist. So was Ford. So were a lot of people in the early 1900's. The Civil Rights Act was not passed till 1964. Segregation was the name of the game. Are you holding Fords beliefs against the company as well?

That was close to 100 years ago. Do you honestly believe that Planed Parenthood is still a racist organization?

Good grief is that a weak argument.
 
Your party wants to do that (see HR 1096 and other such bills.) Your party is trying to make it all but illegal to have an abortion in this country.

I see nothing in HR 1096 that makes it "all but illegal" to have an abortion.

What it does is say that abortion isn't an issue the Federal government can decide, nor should they have the ability to overturn individual state's decisions on the issue.

I'm pretty certain that you specifically had a problem with the Defense of Marriage Act potentially overriding a individual state's right to define marriage. Why are you opposed to something which preserves a state's right to decide who has rights and how tax dollars are used?

Does it just boil down to you support the Feds butting out on gay marriage, but want the Feds to butt in when it comes to "womens health issues"?....

Let the states decide. If you don't like how Texas does things, move to New York or California...
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #45
Then you are either ignorant or lying through your teeth.

The only problem I had with DOMA is the the fact that it was seeking to enforce and idea that is unconstitutional.

Nope, I want them top protect the rights in both cases.

Equal rights should not be up to a vote. Prop 8 is a perfect example of that. The 14th of the COTUS is pretty clear on these issues.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top