GOP's War on Women

reply to post by kinda kurious

As a male there is no way I can truly emote the painful decision a female must make to consider an abortion but I DO feel it IS hers to make

So do I, I just don't think a tax funded program should pay for it. I know that this leads to other issues like "back alley abortions" that some women resort to, I don't know how to resolve that issue. As a man I have no idea what it's like being pregnant etc, I have seen the after effects of it on women and honestly believe most women seriously regret it but it's their choice. I also know the Republicans added it to the bill to get the Christian Right on their side.. let them know they still recognize them since the Tea Party movement stole a lot of their thunder. For me it's not a religious belief at all, I'm not religious by any sense of the word, I've just known girls personally who have had the procedure and saw the effects like PTSD and severe depression among other things..

Honestly what really needs to happen with the subject, especially if it's funded by tax dollars.. is just educate women on the procedure, the expected outcomes, the risks and options. Don't cram the Bible down their throats but just talking them through options and so on. To me it just seems to easy, to rushed and the first choice of many.

But what do I know I'm just a guy.. I hate the abortion debate.

I don't understand why personal responsibility seems to have been forgotten in this country. You make a decision and the results of that decision have negative consequences. That is your fault and it is not the responsibility of the rest of the country to support you. If a woman elects to have sex and she becomes pregnant, then that does not make it the responsibility of the rest of the country to provide for you to have an abortion if you can't afford one. Go after the father and get him to help support the child or pay for the abortion or whatever, but there is no reason the government (and thus the taxpayers) should be providing funds for abortion.

reply to post by Stratus9


So the big question for me is, how do republicans and their tea party buddies propose to deal with abortion?

Come on now? Shall we:

A) Declare a pregnant woman's womb and body the property of the state the minute from conception?
B) Arrest woman who choose to have an abortion?
C) Both?

..and how much funding should we put into regulating a woman's body?? Anybody?

You see I'm not concerned with people who do not want their tax dollars going into abortions, but I call BS if people claim this is the only agenda behind republicans and conservatives rallying against planned parent hood and so forth.

I am astounded the idea of the two points above doesn't bother people. You talk about celled organisms having rights, but what does that involve? It involves controlling and dictating the bodies of women, now you can try to turn this around anyway you like but at the end of the day you are called for more government and more control.

Keep your dirty hands off another persons body, it doesn't concern you.

Alright I shall weigh in on some of the numerous issues raised in this thread and particularly by the OP.

Lets start with some nifty facts about the roots of feminism. First, there's Betty Friedan, who wrote the infamous "The Feminine Mystique". A Professor Daniel Horowitz says that she was a communist propagandist. Her real name was Betty Goldstein. He says she was a Stalinist Marxist at least until her mid 30's. A lover of hers worked on atomic bomb projects. She was married to a Marxist leftist. writing.upenn.edu...

Henry Makow states, "She dropped out of grad school to become a reporter for a radical left wing news service. From 1946 -1952 she was a reporter for the union newspaper of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, (UE) "the largest Communist-led institution of any kind in the United States." Henry explains how the Communist Party used women as a minority "trojan horse" to advance communist ideals. Please read his column as it would take a long time for me to reproduce it, plus it takes up space here.
www.henrymakow.com...
ok let's talk about Margaret Sanger. She founded the American Birth Control League. The name was later changed to Planned Parenthood. Here's a quote from her and I trust it will be self-explanatory. "The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."
Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race
(Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)
Notice the name "Eugenics Publ." Yes, that's right, Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood were involved in early eugenics programs, including the very racist "Negroe Project", which expressly targeted poor black women for sterilization. Hitler was so fascinated with American Progressive eugenics ideas, he decided to try it himself. After that the American Birth Control League changed its name to Planned Parenthood because it sounded less eugenicidal.

"On the extermination of blacks:
"We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population," she said, "if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon "


Here's another quote from her On the right of married couples to bear children:
Couples should be required to submit applications to have a child, she wrote in her "Plan for Peace." Birth Control Review, April 1932
"On sterilization & racial purification:
Sanger believed that, for the purpose of racial "purification," couples should be rewarded who chose sterilization. Birth Control in America, The Career of Margaret Sanger, by David Kennedy, p. 117, quoting a 1923 Sanger speech. "
Is that Totalitarian enough for you? American Progressives during this era profoundly embraced eugenics and a de-population agenda. Today, who believes in de-population using mass medication of the water supplies? Well, how about Obama's science czar John Holdren! His theories are all outlined in his book "Ecoscience". He is decidedly radical leftist. Here are some of his ideas: "Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;
• The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation's drinking water or in food;
• Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;
• People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized. "

Now, I ask you, is that not the ultimate misogynst woman hating type of man? And who does he work for?
Let's move on to number 1 in your little list. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism- the use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs..." well, ok does it have to be patriotic? or can it just be a manifestation of a personality cult idolatry like we have seen with Obama fans... how about the most obvious SLOGAN---"Yes We Can". And what exactly does that mean anyway? We can do or be what? A marxist totalitarian utopia using class and race warfare and wealth redistribution? Ok songs: who could ever forget this little bit of propaganda using innocent children www.youtube.com...
That is one of the most distasteful uses of propaganda I've ever seen. And who is that woman leading them? Straight out of communist China?
What about the official Obama logo? en.wikipedia.org...

Now, umm how about that Civilian Security Force Obama campaigned on???? Sound like Hitler youth? How about this Obama Paramility Youth Corps?

Numer 2 on your list. Disdain for the recognition of Human rights. How about abortion for starters. See margaret Sangerand Planned Parenthood for disrespect for the rights of the unborn and the disenfranchised. Also see John Holdren for a most malicious and misguided intent to force sterlization on a mass level through drinking water supplies.
Number 3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats. Ok how about Janet Napolitano and Chuck Schumers demonizing of the T Party and blaming things on the T Party respectively. How about your demonizing the GOP collectively as misogynist woman haters?
number 8" 8. Religion and Government are Intertwined" Did you know that Humanism is a religion? Humanists stated it so long ago, and it was even declared by the Supreme Court "The U.S. Supreme Court cited Secular Humanism as a religion in the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins (367 U.S. 488). Roy Torcaso, the appellant, a practicing Humanist in Maryland, had refused to declare his belief in Almighty God, as then required by State law in order for him to be commissioned as a notary public. The Court held that the requirement for such an oath "invades appellant's freedom of belief and religion." source: vftonline.org...

Ok maybe that's enough for now as it has taken me an hour to compose this.

Originally posted by HarmonicNights

The rape argument hardly holds any water.

Wow, really? Kinda sucks you go on to prove it holds water just fine then.

'Pro-choicers' act as if rape is the only scenario in which ends in abortion.

When does that happen? While pro-lifers trip over themselves to pretend rape NEVER happens, I believe all I pointed out is that it does. I am going to need to see something backing up your claim that pro-choicers claim that abortions are only for rape victims. Can you find a place I said such a thing?

That's far from the truth. Rape rarely results in pregnancy and over 90% of abortions are done out of convenience.

Yes, that is far from the truth and why it is not my argument. While you want to be dishonest and pretend women only get pregnant because they chose to have sex, I am perfectly right in pointing out that is not always true. Thank you for proving my point for me.

Originally posted by BriggsBU
I don't understand why personal responsibility seems to have been forgotten in this country.

Because it requires you to completely reframe the arguement from being about affordable healthcare for women to tax funded abortion for sluts which is fallacious in its very nature. Try this on for size. 17 year old Angela goes to PP for healthcare. Why does she need care? Ovarian cysts. She found out about them from the pain. Her single father is too poor and too drunk to care if she really even wakes up most mornings, let alone has a doctor. What you are saying is that she needs to get her crap together, get rich, become republican, and take some freaking adult responsibility for herself? I know, I know. Just because she got crappy parents why should YOU have to pay for her ovarian cysts? Well because this is America and we are supposed to be a good charitible country. This is a Christian thing right? "How you treat the least among you.." and all that crap. Yeah, here we like to take care of neglected children and poor sick people. We hope they will get better and give back. The reason for this is because if they do not get better and give back, they just move on to become a further drain on society in other ways. So there is the moral high ground that cares not if abortions actually go up, as long as God heard that they are against it and it was signed into law so he can see they really mean it. Just like the fiscal belt tightening that wants poor people to stay poor because even though that is actually a greater drain in the long run, in the short run it sounds really good to other people who have money and who cares what anyone else thinks.

reply to post by Sinnthia


How come Planned Parenthood does not tell authorities when an underage girl seeking their services was impregnated by an older man? Why are the girls parents not notified of this? Why should they get any taxpayer funding for this? lashawnbarber.com...
And did you know that Siecus (the renowned Sex ed org who writes the educational programs for the public schools) boasted on their website of getting funds from the Stimulus package? I do not want my tax dollars supporting organizations which are interested in promoting sex ed for kindergartners.

While we are on the subject of sex ed for children, the UN organization UNESCO is very involved in promoting the "sexual rights" of the child.

Advocating universal access to “reproductive rights” and contending that “sexuality education is an integral component of human rights,” UNESCO has determined age-specific guidelines for children of all ages to learn and exercise their “sexual rights.”

www.americanconservativedaily.com...

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

How come Planned Parenthood does not tell authorities when an underage girl seeking their services was impregnated by an older man? Why are the girls parents not notified of this?

Wonderful, reference horrible cases to generalize.

So what must be done with women in general who choose to have abortions?

I just got into my SIL on facebook over this.

As a southern, conservative, abortion-hating monotheist...

I am SO tired of hearing people slam Planned Parenthood! A few years ago I saw stats that said PP was performing around 14% of US abortions.

Fourteen percent! Why isn't anyone out protesting in front of private doctors' offices?

In fact, to ONLY protest outside of PP is discrimination against poor women. Argue against publicly funded abortion all you want - but PP is a very necessary service.

I personally find abortion to be a heartbreaking & appalling thing. However, it can't be legislated out of existence. It can only be EDUCATED and PREVENTED out of common practice. PP works towards that goal.

I don't see any Christian organizations helping girls prevent pregnancy or serving poor women who need gynecological care.

As another aside - when my husband worked for a state legislator in college, they were considering a bill that found the AVERAGE woman seeking abortion was in her late 30s to late 40s, already had other children, and did not want to keep her late-life surprise. Those women go quietly to their (expensive) private OB/Gyn and no one bothers them.

As a result of that study, the state in question allowed PP to build centers unimpeded.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

How come Planned Parenthood does not tell authorities when an underage girl seeking their services was impregnated by an older man?

Maybe you can tell me why they should? Should the EMTs that took me to the hospital also report the funny smoke in my home or is that not really their place? Please elaborate.

Considering that the age of consent varies from 16-18 in the US. It is actually fairly recently that most states raised the AOC to 18. This proves that the AOC in the US is both relative and malleable so I would love to see how much extra federal funding you would like to see go into this type of enforcement through a now law enforcement agency such as PP throughout the states with their varying degree of AOC.

Let me guess, you think anyone convicted of statutory rape in NY for knocking up a 16 year old is disgusting pedophile, right? But in DC, where knocking up a 16 year old is a pefectly legla relationship, I suppose the entire situation is different and you want extra tax dollor spent enforcing that rather arbitrary set of moral relativity.

Why are the girls parents not notified of this? Why should they get any taxpayer funding for this? lashawnbarber.com...

Are you seriously posting that video long after it has been torn about and summarily debunked as evidence of anything? An already debunked video from convicted criminal and proven liar James Okeefe. Just when I thought this thread was as funny as it could get.

And did you know that Siecus (the renowned Sex ed org who writes the educational programs for the public schools) boasted on their website of getting funds from the Stimulus package? I do not want my tax dollars supporting organizations which are interested in promoting sex ed for kindergartners.

Really? What kind of sex ed for kindergartners? Are they teaching girls why it is bad to wipe back to front or take bubble baths or are they showing them how to properly felate a man? Please use sources in your reply.

While we are on the subject of sex ed for children, the UN organization UNESCO is very involved in promoting the "sexual rights" of the child.

Exactly which "sexual right?" Kids do have sexual rights and should probably know them. Like little boys have the right to not have sex with their priest. I do not mind someone cluing them in.

Advocating universal access to “reproductive rights” and contending that “sexuality education is an integral component of human rights,” UNESCO has determined age-specific guidelines for children of all ages to learn and exercise their “sexual rights.”

www.americanconservativedaily.com...

I dunno, perhaps your understand of "age specific" is different than mine. When you get those examples we can figure that all out together.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

How come Planned Parenthood does not tell authorities when an underage girl seeking their services was impregnated by an older man? Why are the girls parents not notified of this?

Wonderful, reference horrible cases to generalize.

So what must be done with women in general who choose to have abortions?

Well, excuse me! It was the OP who made a ridiculous generalization about "The GOP" being misogynist abusers and haters of women. I just thought I would rectify the error in the OPs thinking, while pointing out that Planned Parenthood generally does treat underage girls impregnated by older men. It is really not so much of a generalization as it is an expose on the worst practices of Planned Parenthood. I also pointed out that Planned Parenthood started out as the American Birth Control League, and I also showed you direct quotes from its founder Margaret Sanger, a known eugenecist. Are you trying to tell me it's goals are different now? And by the way, Sanger was sponsored by the Rockefellers, who are known to be ardent de-population supporters. It is known that American Progressives supported this type of eugenics and population control and today even George Soros, known leftist billionaire also supports such programs. Bill Gates and Ted Turner too. www.lifeissues.net...
You managed to overlook the obvious, that PP encourages underage abortions and does not report cases of underage pregnancy due to impregnation by adults. Don't you think there is something wrong with that? Or is that just one of those inconsistencies of feminism, sacrifice the innocence of the child for feminist rights?
While abortion was made legal by the Supreme Court decision Roe v Wade, that does not mean taxpayer dollars should be spent on abortions.

reply to post by Schkeptick


I have never protested outside of any doctors office or Planned Parenthood or any clinic for that matter. But I do know the facts about the roots of Planned Parenthood and the eugenics movement in the early part of the century. The issue on the thread was really taxpayer dollars going to fund abortions being part of the budget deal brokered in Congress. But I have addressed a number of the items on the OPs rant list. And, as you can see I have also addressed the Marxist, communist, Progressive and radical roots of some of the earliest pioneers of feminism. The goal of the Marxists and communists is and has always been to undermine the nuclear family, and/or redefine it according to Progressive ideals. The goals of Statism(fascism,communism,whateverism) is to destroy the family unit and replace the parents as the guardians of the children with the authority of the State. Interestingly, Obama said in the Saddleback forum that one of his biggest beefs is parents abusing their children. Marxism is promoted stealthily under the guise of protecting the children from their own parents, and POTUS has been steeped in Marxism since he was a child.

I didn't have the patience to read all the usual garbage. Just enough to see the slant. Repubs or dems - its just different names for the same tyranny. As for the PP issue I dont really care if it is including birth control and cancer screening - go pay for your own - at least until the great Obamacare system kicks in ....once we have that oh so great Obamacare what do we need PP for?

People need to stop the finger pointing and take responsibility for your own life.

reply to post by Sinnthia


I do not know what circumstances were involved in your personal life regarding that, and you obviously have left out some details, and Im not sure I really want to know. But the underage thing legally constitutes rape. And here you are defending that.
The reporting thing is also a raging controversy www.lifenews.com...
Now tell me, who debunked the video, and what exactly was innaccurate about it? Oh, you mean some liberals on ATS have debunked it and said it is not real? It's CGI? Or was it one of those Soros funded things? Factcheck.org say? That one is Bill Ayers' Annenberg Foundation. Please back this one up with something more substancial than your opinion. Oh yes, and last I checked, wiping back to front is not exactly sex ed, but rather hygienic matters, but honestly I do not trust the public school system and have not for a very long time, as they have incorporated the moral relativity of secular humanism. So, you see you make a silly joke out of it and it shows the level of immaturity you have on such things.
And I got curious and checked, and here's a typical kindergarten lesson on personal hygiene which involves ---handwashing" , not what you said. www.healerwithin.org...
By the way, the handwashing lesson is a standard in Montessori classrooms.

reply to post by Sinnthia


Please do at least some preliminary research before taking a stab in the dark on issues like this.

"According to the SIECUS standards, children starting at age 5 are supposed to be taught about vaginal intercourse (p. 26), homosexual relationships (p. 29), same-sex marriage (p. 39), masturbation (pp. 51-52), unwanted pregnancies (p. 61), AIDS (p. 65), and other sexually transmitted diseases (p. 63). That's right, all this starting at age 5. If you don't believe me, read the SIECUS guidelines for yourself. One can support "age appropriate" sex education (as I do) without embracing SIECUS's intrusive effort to force five-year-olds to deal with all manner of explicit topics.

Unfortunately, SIECUS is far from a fringe organization. It is the leading "mainstream" sex education group in the United States. That's not to say it doesn't have a pretty sordid history. As I recount in detail in my book, SIECUS was founded by partisans of evolutionary biologist Alfred Kinsey, who revolutionized sexual morality by attempting to apply a reductionist Darwinian approach to human sexuality."

www.evolutionnews.org...

Appreciate this is specifically US related, but a few views from across the pond in relation to the OP's 3 points:

1. 'Totalitarianism wants people reliant on the state'....this has been the left wing (labour party) in the UK. Men have been disenfranchised, hence the Fathers4Justice crowd a few years back. We have no Mens Health Departments, but plenty of everything for women. There is a far stronger case to say the Govt. hates men.

2. 'Most women vote democrat (labour)'. This is true, the left have promoted women as victims, and it's always nice to hear that you are that and will get preferential treatment because of it.

3. 'Male sexual deviants avoid natural relationships with women...women are better at spotting and protecting children.' Mmmmm. Bit over generalisation...i am currently avoiding relationships with women. I have been unlucky in so far as i have had one cheat on me, she was having a lesbian affair, another was a a radical feminist who after the birth of our child dumped me and would afford me the privilege of paying for but not seeing him. He does now live with me, due to her abuse of him. NSPCC research has showed that the main abusers of children are women, but I don't think it is helpful to get into '4 legs good, 2 legs bad'. There are good and bad in all and life experience accounts for a lot.

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
reply to post by Stratus9

 

It is precisely about abortion, more specifically it is about government funded abortion. You can employ your demagoguery if you want to, but the fact is that Planned Parenthood performed 332,278 in 2009 alone and even more in 2010. The majority of those abortions were given to minorities. I guess Margaret Sanger's goal of eradicating the black race is in full effect, considering she invented birth control and started Planned Parenthood with that very goal in mind. Whenever you hear a Liberal talk about women's health they are most assuredly talking about abortion. I find the same old argument of how Republicans hate women, hate minorities, hate the poor, hate puppies and kittens, etc... to be laughable. (I'm not a Republican)

Can you provide the link of women being forced into planned parenthood at gunpoint. Or are you saying the black race wants to be eradicated. If the republicans want to balance budget then cut the out of control defense budget. Or we could close the loopholes that allow companies to make billions yet pay zero taxes.

Thread closed pending staff review .
Political baiting a reminder