I figured out why republicans are against birth control and abortion

[nehalem256]

If you really didn't understand my point, then I have a hard time believing you are actually a software engineer.

Who cares? That's really irrelevant to the point under contention, which is whether or not the Republican Party has made a deliberate effort to target women with legislation that violates their rights.

It has. You've admitted it.

They are not targeting women. They are targeting a subset of women. A subset of women that they consider murderers. If a man commits murder and is put in jail is that a "War on Men"?

If you oppose abortion then you are saying she shouldn't HAVE a "reproductive choice". So your position makes absolutely no sense (unless you're just a plain old misogynist, which is starting to seem entirely possible.)

Republicans dont believe either men or women should have a reproductive choice, or more accurately that the choice is made when they decide to have sex together. Republicans treat men and women as equals.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

They are not targeting women. They are targeting a subset of women.

Again, you can play semantic games if you want. Women are the ones who get abortions, women are the ones who mostly use Planned Parenthood.

They are targeting women. There is no "myth" about this.

Republicans dont believe either men or women should have a reproductive choice, or more accurately that the choice is made when they decide to have sex together. Republicans treat men and women as equals.

Then why did you say "Women are allowed to extort men for money if the get pregnant from casual sex"?

If they are equals, then that means they must share the cost equally.

And since you're such a big believer in equality, I suggest that while the woman is giving birth, you have the hospital staff give you a catheter with a garden hose.

 

[woolfe9999]

I don't think the socially conservative position is based on the sort of calculation the OP has suggested. If it was really a calculated and utilitarian motive, then it would be outweighed by the fact that the poor and minorities see higher birth rates where abortion is banned, and this in turn likely results in more democrat voters in the long run. The better explanations are those given by several people already: moral objections based on religion, and misogyny.

I give the OP marks for intellectual creativity but this is a flight of fancy, not reality.

 

[piasabird]

Women are extortionists. That is a new one. Actually it is true. I think it is OK for a woman to ask money from a man to help pay for the baby, because It would not happen without the man and the woman. But they should not expect men to pay for everything. Women should bare half of the responsibility. However, the state should not be able to compel men to pay a dime. This is one area the government needs to get out of.

Maybe if women were not summarily awarded support by the state, then they would be less likely to sleep around in hopes of a free ride.

 

[nehalem256]

Again, you can play semantic games if you want. Women are the ones who get abortions, women are the ones who mostly use Planned Parenthood.

They are targeting women. There is no "myth" about this.

They are targeting women WHO GET ABORTIONS.

Then why did you say "Women are allowed to extort men for money if the get pregnant from casual sex"?

If they are equals, then that means they must share the cost equally.

And since you're such a big believer in equality, I suggest that while the woman is giving birth, you have the hospital staff give you a catheter with a garden hose.

Only if they are given equal rights. Since men are given no rights they should have no forced responsibility.

Really though it should be expected that a pregnancy resulting from casual sex should result in an abortion. It would be reasonable to expect the man to pay for half of the abortion.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

They are targeting women WHO GET ABORTIONS.

Your qualification doesn't change the fact that they are targeting women.

It's not even entirely true anyway. They are not just targeting women who get abortions. They are targeting women who use reproductive health clinics, and a heck of a lot of them go there for reasons other than abortions.

Glad you now understand that the GOP's war on women is not a myth.

Only if they are given equal rights. Since men are given no rights they should have no forced responsibility.

This is pure bullshit, of course.

Really though it should be expected that a pregnancy resulting from casual sex should result in an abortion. It would be reasonable to expect the man to pay for half of the abortion.

If people like you had their way, abortion would be made illegal. You said so yourself.

You cannot (reasonably) both call for abortion to be made illegal and also for men to not have to pay to raise unwanted children.

What you want is to be able to have casual sex, force the woman to give birth to an unwanted child, and then not have to pay for its upbringing. It's pretty obvious what that makes you (hint: it's not someone who cares about "equality").

 

[nehalem256]

Your qualification doesn't change the fact that they are targeting women.

It's not even entirely true anyway. They are not just targeting women who get abortions. They are targeting women who use reproductive health clinics, and a heck of a lot of them go there for reasons other than abortions.

Glad you now understand that the GOP's war on women is not a myth.

Its a pretty important qualification. And besides where are the special government funded mens clincis? No government funded clinics for men or women would seem to be treating them as equals. Saying that treating men and women equally is a war on women is pretty screwed up.

This is pure bullshit, of course.

I am sorry that you feel men having equal rights is pure bullshit. Especially since based on your username you appear to be a man :hmm:

If people like you had their way, abortion would be made illegal. You said so yourself.

You cannot (reasonably) both call for abortion to be made illegal and also for men to not have to pay to raise unwanted children.

What you want is to be able to have casual sex, force the woman to give birth to an unwanted child, and then not have to pay for its upbringing. It's pretty obvious what that makes you (hint: it's not someone who cares about "equality").

Perhaps you should read what I said, and in fact you previously quoted.

I dont think abortion should be illegal.

I am opposed to the idea of casual sex. If people insist on having though and a pregnancy results then the woman should get an abortion.

 

[Moonbeam]

nehalem256: I know the rules. I am saying that they are unequal. The funny thing is that Republicans use the exact same argument you are making for why women shouldn't be able to have an abortion.

M: The rules don't give a shit what you think. You are whining about reality again. This inequality is only a fiction you have created. And, yes, Republicans make the same absurd should argument that you do, that reality gives a shit what they think. The law gives you a choice not to have sex and women to have or not have a child within legal limits. Should be this should be that doesn't mean shit. The law governs these issues.

n: In short Republicans think that having sex is consent to being a parent for men and women.

M: A stopped clock is right twice a day. Republicans are one for two.

n: Democrats think that having sex means only men are consenting to being a parent.

M: No, both the man and the women consent to being parents if they have sex. The one who is the carrier, however, whatever sex she might be, gets to decide if she wants to continue being a parent. That's the law. There is only inequality because only one sex, whichever it is, is the carrier. Your own 50 50 conception decided that. Man up, you drew a y. You had an equal chance to be a woman. You got to be a man, now be one. Quit your fucking crying about unequal or cut your nuts off and join the Opera if you want to continue your shrill crying.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Saying that treating men and women equally is a war on women is pretty screwed up.

If the opposition was based solely on not wanting to fund any clinics, then that would be one thing. When the opposition is based specifically on trying to deny women's legal rights, it's another.

I am sorry that you feel men having equal rights is pure bullshit. Especially since based on your username you appear to be a man :hmm:

I am a man, and the claim that "men have no rights" is what is bullshit.

Perhaps you should read what I said, and in fact you previously quoted.

I misread that. I apologize. Given that, your position is indeed more logically consistent.

I am opposed to the idea of casual sex. If people insist on having though and a pregnancy results then the woman should get an abortion.

And if she doesn't want one?

 

[nehalem256]

If the opposition was based solely on not wanting to fund any clinics, then that would be one thing. When the opposition is based specifically on trying to deny women's legal rights, it's another.

Well by that logic anyone who opposed fugitive slaves laws was in the wrong as well, since they just wanted to oppose the legal right of southerners to own slaves

I am a man, and the claim that "men have no rights" is what is bullshit.

Men have no reproductive rights.

I misread that. I apologize. Given that, your position is indeed more logically consistent.

Thank you.

And if she doesn't want one?

Well, first that would make her an idiot. And second then she should be fully responsible for that choice.

 

[nehalem256]

n: Democrats think that having sex means only men are consenting to being a parent.

M: No, both the man and the women consent to being parents if they have sex. The one who is the carrier, however, whatever sex she might be, gets to decide if she wants to continue being a parent. That's the law.

Why do you keep saying "That's the law". I know what the law is. The law is enforcing inequality.

There is only inequality because only one sex, whichever it is, is the carrier. Your own 50 50 conception decided that. Man up, you drew a y. You had an equal chance to be a woman. You got to be a man, now be one. Quit your fucking crying about unequal or cut your nuts off and join the Opera if you want to continue your shrill crying.

You know statements like that make it seem like you believe men are superior to women and therefore it is acceptable to enforce unequal obligations :hmm:

 

[Moonbeam]

Why do you keep saying "That's the law". I know what the law is. The law is enforcing inequality.

Rubbish. The law forbids unequal application of the law. You simply have to go to a lawyer and present your case. If you are right you will win. Of course, because you are totally wrong, you won't win.

You know statements like that make it seem like you believe men are superior to women and therefore it is acceptable to enforce unequal obligations :hmm:

Gender discrimination is against the law. I believe in the law so I can't believe that men are superior to women no matter what you think you hear and it is also illegal to enforce unequal obligations so I also can't be recommending that.

Try to see that the law doesn't give a shit about your deviant thinking, that you are simply whistling into the wind. You got a burr up your ass. You demonstrate well know psychological lunatic features that put you beyond the pale.

So how much are you paying in child support?

 

[nehalem256]

Rubbish. The law forbids unequal application of the law. You simply have to go to a lawyer and present your case. If you are right you will win. Of course, because you are totally wrong, you won't win.

Gender discrimination is against the law. I believe in the law so I can't believe that men are superior to women no matter what you think you hear and it is also illegal to enforce unequal obligations so I also can't be recommending that.

I believe fornication is as well...

How does believing in the law mean you dont believe that men are superior to women. Especially when you keep saying that men should man up and pay for women's reproductive choices.

Try to see that the law doesn't give a shit about your deviant thinking, that you are simply whistling into the wind. You got a burr up your ass. You demonstrate well know psychological lunatic features that put you beyond the pale.

So how much are you paying in child support?

I pay no child support as I have no children.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Well by that logic anyone who opposed fugitive slaves laws was in the wrong as well, since they just wanted to oppose the legal right of southerners to own slaves

Can't make any sense out of that.

Men have no reproductive rights.

Same. What specifically are you talking about?

Well, first that would make her an idiot. And second then she should be fully responsible for that choice.

Not sure I really agree with this, but it's at least somewhat intellectually consistent.

 

[nehalem256]

Can't make any sense out of that.

You said it was wrong to deny women legal rights aka abortion. White southerners had the right to own slaves prior to the civil war. Opposition to fugitive slave laws would therefore be denying them their legal rights to own slaves.

Same. What specifically are you talking about?

All reproductive rights are held by women. She can choose to abort the child. She can choose to have the child and force him to pay child support. She can have the child and abandon it under safe-haven laws without is knowledge or consent. She can choose to have the child and never inform the father.

Any "right" the father has exist solely at the pleasure of the mother.

 

[Moonbeam]

nehalem256: How does believing in the law mean you dont believe that men are superior to women.

M: Why do you ask a question I already answered? I believe in the law. The law says no sexual discrimination is allowed. I can't therefore believe what I don't believe. I do not believe men are superior to women. That is what you feel.

n: Especially when you keep saying that men should man up and pay for women's reproductive choices.

M: Exactly, stop feeling inferior to women because they are only equal to you and stop whining about how men are getting fucked. If you have sex and get a woman pregnant everything that happens from there happens by law. Man up and obey the law. Men know what it is going in, pun intended. Stop squealing like a baby if the consequences turn out to be unpleasant. As soon as you dump your sperm your choice in what happens ends. Your contribution in making the child ends right there and the labor, pun intended, of bringing or not bringing the child to fruition is all on the mother. You contribute no skin to the child after fertilization but the woman does. That is why at this point it is solely up to her. The law is going to hold you responsible to the child if it is born, as it should. It's your genes and they carry a legal tax. Men understand this. Simpering masses of irresponsible male protoplasm do not.

 

[nehalem256]

nehalem256: How does believing in the law mean you dont believe that men are superior to women.

M: Why do you ask a question I already answered? I believe in the law. The law says no sexual discrimination is allowed. I can't therefore believe what I don't believe. I do not believe men are superior to women. That is what you feel.

n: Especially when you keep saying that men should man up and pay for women's reproductive choices.

M: Exactly, stop feeling inferior to women because they are only equal to you and stop whining about how men are getting fucked. If you have sex and get a woman pregnant everything that happens from there happens by law. Man up and obey the law. Men know what it is going in, pun intended. Stop squealing like a baby if the consequences turn out to be unpleasant. As soon as you dump your sperm your choice in what happens ends. Your contribution in making the child ends right there and the labor, pun intended, of bringing or not bringing the child to fruition is all on the mother. You contribute no skin to the child after fertilization but the woman does. That is why at this point it is solely up to her. The law is going to hold you responsible to the child if it is born, as it should. It's your genes and they carry a legal tax. Men understand this. Simpering masses of irresponsible male protoplasm do not.

Why would I feel inferior to someone who demands that I subsidize their health insurance and throws a hissy fit if I stop funding their special health clinics? Clearly you dont know what the word inferior and equal mean.

The law should only hold men responsible if they are actually granted rights. Is there any requirement a woman notify a man that he has child.. no. In fact a woman can abandon a man's child to the state without his notification or consent. Is there any punishment for women who falsely name a man as the father of a child, a crime at least on par with rape?... no there is not.

A man has no reproductive rights, only reproductive responsibilities. And you find this to be equality?

A man does not allow a woman to have power over him. And if we are to continue along that line of thinking... a woman does not kill her own children, irresponsible female protoplasm does , haha, which I guess would mean anti-abortion laws are not anti-woman at all :biggrin:

 

[Budarow2]

I was watching a documentary about the Black Death plague that wiped out half of Europe in the 14th century. One of the items of interest was how this affected the economy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequences_of_the_Black_Death#Social_and_economic_effects


See how that works? Having a labor shortage drives wages up. Republicans hate this idea because they are the ruling class. The 100% proven way to keep wages low as hell is to keep the population super high. How does one do that? Make abortions illegal, make certain types of birth control illegal, get churches to actively discourage birth control, tell people condoms don't work, etc.

That's a pretty good theory, but there's a much simpler explanation. The repub leaders/strategists don't care 1 way or the other about abortions, just like they don't care about gun control, gay rights or embryonic stem cell studies. They simply use these "hot button" topics to get voters with extreme viewpoints (i.e., anti-whatever) to turn out in large numbers to "vote for them." During election years, repubs always get "propositions" regarding gay marriage, etc. on the ballots in key battle ground states just to turn out the anti-whatever crowd. If they had even more $$$, they get those issues on ballets of all states.

 

[LunarRay]

Nehalam256,

First and off topic, would you mind telling me the brand of battery you use that enables you to 'energizer bunny' this topic? I'd love to know! Are they expensive?


My Legal opinion regarding 'Roe' is that the strongest argument for it is not Privacy or any other position the Justices held but, rather, the Equality that you keep harping on.... EQUALITY!
How can I who never filed a brief on the topic (I'm not an attorney) argue what is clearly unEqual as you say...

Ok... Change your batteries....

Equality is found squarely in the concept of both Man and Women follow equally their Life Course!!!! Do you see that.... Boy is boy and Girl is girl and they Equally ought to be able to be Boy or Girl... That is the Equality that Roe should have been centered on.... to the extent it was not.... Kennedy saw Privacy and I see it from the other window... Equality is, in this case, nothing more or less than enjoying each sex's LIFE COURSE....

Don't say you 'know the law' without also presenting logical legal argument against my point.

Don't forget the brand of battery... and if it is a strong as it appears to be, do you think it might also be used to create the first Cross Country electric vehicle without recharge?

 

[Moonbeam]

That's a pretty good theory, but there's a much simpler explanation. The repub leaders/strategists don't care 1 way or the other about abortions, just like they don't care about gun control, gay rights or embryonic stem cell studies. They simply use these "hot button" topics to get voters with extreme viewpoints (i.e., anti-whatever) to turn out in large numbers to "vote for them." During election years, repubs always get "propositions" regarding gay marriage, etc. on the ballots in key battle ground states just to turn out the anti-whatever crowd. If they had even more $$$, they get those issues on ballets of all states.

Which is what makes them the worst of human scum. They will take a bath is shit to get a vote.There's not a racist pig or psychopath homophobic they won't pander to for a vote.

 

[nehalem256]

Nehalam256,

First and off topic, would you mind telling me the brand of battery you use that enables you to 'energizer bunny' this topic? I'd love to know! Are they expensive?

Its called Justice.

Equality is found squarely in the concept of both Man and Women follow equally their Life Course!!!! Do you see that.... Boy is boy and Girl is girl and they Equally ought to be able to be Boy or Girl... That is the Equality that Roe should have been centered on.... to the extent it was not.... Kennedy saw Privacy and I see it from the other window... Equality is, in this case, nothing more or less than enjoying each sex's LIFE COURSE....

Don't say you 'know the law' without also presenting logical legal argument against my point.

Can you explain what the bolded means in plain English.

 

[cybrsage]

You said it was wrong to deny women legal rights aka abortion. White southerners had the right to own slaves prior to the civil war. Opposition to fugitive slave laws would therefore be denying them their legal rights to own slaves.

I believe the Dredd Scott case said this same thing.

 

[Budarow2]

Which is what makes them the worst of human scum. They will take a bath is shit to get a vote.There's not a racist pig or psychopath homophobic they won't pander to for a vote.

Here's a prediction for you. I think within 2 years, the repubs "allow" the dems to pass strict firearm control laws (the political mix of dems/repubs won't matter in the least bit either).

 

[LunarRay]

Its called Justice.



Can you explain what the bolded means in plain English.

"Man and Women follow equally their Life Course!!!!"

Are there too many notes? That is in plain English.

I'll try to elaborate but I have before said basically the same thing only adding 'life course' this effort in an attempt to direct your thinking to the fundamental issue of being because that is what this is all about.

I think you'd agree that there are two kinds of people... sexes if you will. Each has a life course that they are uniquely designed to follow. Boys can't be girls [except in beauty pageants and only after some serious alterations that still don't completely enable a change in life course] and likewise Girls follow theirs not as boys but as girls.

Equality then is providing for both to equally follow that course. You want to parse that difference to find inequality. That can't be done because the life course of either sex by virtue of its life course follows a different path. To follow their separate or different path equally is what the Term Equality means in this case.

This above condition is much much different than looking at say... two males wishing to follow their genetically produced brain/mind. One male wants to shoot guns all day and the other wishes to knit... You can loosely see that their life course is dissimilar in that regard but may be quite similar otherwise... a Boy is not only possessed with a different functioning mind than a Girl but also their genetic differences structurally produce a far greater difference across the board... ergo, their life course are different to the extent of those differences that by chance occur.

Now, in the case of our two boys they should equally be able to enjoy their pleasure or Right of shooting or knitting... The great chasm between the sexes by definition produces far greater differences in the enjoyment of their pleasures or Rights and they should also enjoy them Equally. Hence, Each Sex Equally follows their Life Course... it is different but it is Equal.

EDIT: I could add the obvious. Abortion decisions by the court recognize whether they articulate it or not that the Life Course of a Woman forces consideration in the Context of Privacy. The Privacy bit flows from the recognition of Equality of Life Course...
Or in baby speak.... IF men had babies then their Life Course would be similar to woman and the discussion would be moot.

 

[Ausm]

I was watching a documentary about the Black Death plague that wiped out half of Europe in the 14th century. One of the items of interest was how this affected the economy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequences_of_the_Black_Death#Social_and_economic_effects


See how that works? Having a labor shortage drives wages up. Republicans hate this idea because they are the ruling class. The 100% proven way to keep wages low as hell is to keep the population super high. How does one do that? Make abortions illegal, make certain types of birth control illegal, get churches to actively discourage birth control, tell people condoms don't work, etc.

That sounds like most of the Republicans I know..the other ones are just fucking clueless.

Have a nice day Rightists!