War on Women
#41
(05-01-2012, 09:02 AM)cletus1 Wrote:
(05-01-2012, 08:47 AM)broadzilla Wrote: The original post is about women demanding FREE on demand abortions and birth control. Kind of like pay per view TV?

Seriously, if women end up getting free surgical procedures and free medication...then you would have to do that for everyone for everything. Socialized medicine here we come! Finally, a way to actually get it done...hoo-rah! Wink

Yes the OP was about free birth control and abortion, but the conversation was moved a bit by Tornado who blamed the Democrats and then OL that pushed the conversation into religion where it does actually belong.

I'll make quick work of the "free" issue than we can continue. I support Medicare for all so that is almost free.

Do you think your employer should be able to dictate your health care needs relative to birth control?

No clete, I am not pushing it to religion. The whole war on women over free birth control and abortions versus paying for them is a non starter when Obama sends over 1 billion in "aid" to a terrorist organization that we all know likes to fuck their donkeys and kill their women.

How do you think the women getting executed in the photo would feel if all she had to do was worry about if she had to pay for or get free birth control pills?

You leftists politicizing who pays for birth control is about sad as the lady getting her brains blown out through her forehead. By the way, if you look 45 degrees down in front of her head, that's her brains spraying all over.

Reply
#42
(05-01-2012, 08:32 AM)Simon Peter Wrote:
(05-01-2012, 08:22 AM)cletus1 Wrote: Back to the war on women.

I found these views pretty center of the road. Access to contraception started this controversy. This was never a left right issue until just recently. Lets hope some conservative women that use BC weigh in.

Anyway, here are some excerpts from some articles I read. Wow, calmer more intelligent discussions are possible; just looky here:

“I am completely shocked that contraception is being made to seem as if it’s a controversial issue,” said the Rev. Debra W. Haffner, president of the Religious Institute, a Connecticut-based group that examines the intersection of theology and human sexuality. “The fact is, 99 percent of heterosexual, sexually active adults use contraception. More than nine in 10 American adults support the availability of contraception.”

Haffner noted that support for this issue used to be bipartisan. As a member of the House of Representatives during the 1970s, future president George H.W. Bush championed family planning initiatives, and President Ronald W. Reagan signed them into law during the 1980s.

Why the change now?

“I think what is going on now has virtually nothing to do with contraception,” Haffner, a Unitarian Universalist minister, told Church & State. “It has to do with both the Catholic bishops and the extreme evangelical right looking for new wedge issues to continue to try to impose their beliefs about sexuality on the general public.

http://www.au.org/church-state/may-2012-...traception
Access to BC and abortion is fine. The below photo is from the protest referred to in the OP and it is why I commented how I did.

[Image: free-abortion-e1335821427834.jpg]

These dipshit leftist bitches should try this shit in Afghanistan after Obama hands it back to the Taliban.
Reply
#43
I though this was suppose to be a covert war, which one of you guys spilled the beans.
Reply
#44
(05-01-2012, 07:19 PM)orygunluvr Wrote:
(05-01-2012, 08:32 AM)Simon Peter Wrote:
(05-01-2012, 08:22 AM)cletus1 Wrote: Back to the war on women.

I found these views pretty center of the road. Access to contraception started this controversy. This was never a left right issue until just recently. Lets hope some conservative women that use BC weigh in.

Anyway, here are some excerpts from some articles I read. Wow, calmer more intelligent discussions are possible; just looky here:

“I am completely shocked that contraception is being made to seem as if it’s a controversial issue,” said the Rev. Debra W. Haffner, president of the Religious Institute, a Connecticut-based group that examines the intersection of theology and human sexuality. “The fact is, 99 percent of heterosexual, sexually active adults use contraception. More than nine in 10 American adults support the availability of contraception.”

Haffner noted that support for this issue used to be bipartisan. As a member of the House of Representatives during the 1970s, future president George H.W. Bush championed family planning initiatives, and President Ronald W. Reagan signed them into law during the 1980s.

Why the change now?

“I think what is going on now has virtually nothing to do with contraception,” Haffner, a Unitarian Universalist minister, told Church & State. “It has to do with both the Catholic bishops and the extreme evangelical right looking for new wedge issues to continue to try to impose their beliefs about sexuality on the general public.

http://www.au.org/church-state/may-2012-...traception
Access to BC and abortion is fine. The below photo is from the protest referred to in the OP and it is why I commented how I did.

[Image: free-abortion-e1335821427834.jpg]

These dipshit leftist bitches should try this shit in Afghanistan after Obama hands it back to the Taliban.

So, you approve of the Taliban's treatment of women.Blink

Reply
#45
Save a fetus. Kill the mothers!
Reply
#46
(05-01-2012, 07:48 PM)Tiamat Wrote: Save a fetus. Kill the mothers!
Can we feed them to Bermuda Pythons ?

Reply
#47
Why? The Taliban is so much more effective.
Reply
#48
(05-01-2012, 07:48 PM)Tiamat Wrote: Save a fetus. Kill the mothers!

Kill the mother?
You mean the mother's freedom not the mother herself.
Reply
#49
(05-01-2012, 08:05 PM)chuck white Wrote:
(05-01-2012, 07:48 PM)Tiamat Wrote: Save a fetus. Kill the mothers!

Kill the mother?
You mean the mother's freedom not the mother herself.

I mean OL's post.
Reply
#50
(05-01-2012, 07:58 PM)Tiamat Wrote: Why? The Taliban is so much more effective.
I'm not interested in fighting any wars to simply liberate another nations women form their abusive men. I'm not interested in fighting a war that I cant finish and what I mean by that is total annihilation of the enemy.

Reply
#51
(05-01-2012, 07:47 PM)Tiamat Wrote:
(05-01-2012, 07:19 PM)orygunluvr Wrote:
(05-01-2012, 08:32 AM)Simon Peter Wrote:
(05-01-2012, 08:22 AM)cletus1 Wrote: Back to the war on women.

I found these views pretty center of the road. Access to contraception started this controversy. This was never a left right issue until just recently. Lets hope some conservative women that use BC weigh in.

Anyway, here are some excerpts from some articles I read. Wow, calmer more intelligent discussions are possible; just looky here:

“I am completely shocked that contraception is being made to seem as if it’s a controversial issue,” said the Rev. Debra W. Haffner, president of the Religious Institute, a Connecticut-based group that examines the intersection of theology and human sexuality. “The fact is, 99 percent of heterosexual, sexually active adults use contraception. More than nine in 10 American adults support the availability of contraception.”

Haffner noted that support for this issue used to be bipartisan. As a member of the House of Representatives during the 1970s, future president George H.W. Bush championed family planning initiatives, and President Ronald W. Reagan signed them into law during the 1980s.

Why the change now?

“I think what is going on now has virtually nothing to do with contraception,” Haffner, a Unitarian Universalist minister, told Church & State. “It has to do with both the Catholic bishops and the extreme evangelical right looking for new wedge issues to continue to try to impose their beliefs about sexuality on the general public.

http://www.au.org/church-state/may-2012-...traception
Access to BC and abortion is fine. The below photo is from the protest referred to in the OP and it is why I commented how I did.

[Image: free-abortion-e1335821427834.jpg]

These dipshit leftist bitches should try this shit in Afghanistan after Obama hands it back to the Taliban.

So, you approve of the Taliban's treatment of women.Blink

No, while these leftists idiots run around crying for free birth control their dear leader wants to put back in power a group of men that would execute each and every one of these idiots in a public square without the blink of an eye. Gives the leftists "War on women" a little perspective, no?
Reply
#52
Those darn leftists are responsible for everything. I wonder why more people consider their causes vote-worthy than yours? Laughing
Reply
#53
They want free sammies too.

[Image: 057.jpg]
Reply
#54
(04-30-2012, 12:17 PM)tornado Wrote: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-..._blog.html?
It’s Democrats who are putting focus on birth control
By Melinda Henneberger

The beauty of the current birth-control conversation for Democrats is that they not only have public opinion on their side but have cannily managed to make contraception a front-burner election-year campaign issue -- by complaining that Republicans are making it front-burner election-year campaign issue.

The answer, in other words, to the many who are wondering why the Republicans would want to ride such a losing pony is: They don’t.... read more at the link.
Conservative women are disgusted that year after year "abortion" takes center stage as the primary "women's issue".
Why not have t-shirts printed stated that you are "INCONTINENT", something to be very proud of.
Reply
#55
http://www.theweepingeagle.com/2012/05/o...leged.html

Quote:Obama Launches Campaign with Alleged Wife-Abuser Sherrod Brown

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) has put himself at the center of the Democrats’ latest meme: the war on women. Brown recently launched his “Women For Sherrod Brown” subgroup; in doing so, he stated, “There’s a war on women’s rights in Ohio and across the country by some who don’t want women to be in charge of their own health care decisions. I remain committed to ensuring that the voices of Ohio’s women are always heard in the United States Senate.” One of the chief points of Brown’s political agenda has been the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.



And tomorrow, President Obama is slated to use Brown to launch his formal re-election campaign in Columbus, Ohio.
But perhaps Brown isn’t the best person to lead off the Obama campaign – particularly not if the “war on women” is to remain one of Obama’s key campaign themes. Divorce records from Brown’s first marriage, obtained by Breitbart News, show that during the contentious proceedings, his wife accused him of “extreme cruelty” and “harassment”; she said she was “in fear for the safety … of myself and our children,” and accused Sherrod of “physical violence.” In fact, she said, Brown had “struck and bullied me on several different occasions.” The allegations apparently first became fodder for campaigning during Brown’s race for Congress in 1992.
Reply
#56
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/324000-w...force-hits

Quote:324,000 Women Dropped Out of Labor Force in Last Two Months--As Number of Women Not in Labor Force Hits Historic High

CNSNews.com) - 324,000 women dropped out of the nation’s civilian labor force in March and April as the number of women not in the labor force hit an all-time historical high of 53,321,000, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The civilian labor force consists of all people in the United States 16 years or older who are not in the military, a prison, or another institution such as a nursing home or mental hospital and who either have a job or are unemployed but have actively sought work in the previous four weeks and are currently available to work.

The civilian labor force is a subset of what BLS calls the civilian noninstitutional population, which includes all people in the country 16 or older who are not in the military, a prison, or another institution such as a nursing home or mental hospital.

This year (in both January and April), only 57.6 percent of the women in the civilian noninstitutional population were in the labor force. That is the lowest rate of labor force participation by American women since April 1993, according to historical data maintained by BLS.

The rate of female participation in the civilian workforce peaked twelve years ago--in April 2000--when hit 60.3 percent.

In February, according to BLS’s seasonally adjusted data, 52,833,000 American women were not in the labor force. In March that climbed to 53,090,000—a one-month increase of 257,000. In April, it climbed again to the historical high of 53,321,000—a one-month increase of 231,000 from March and a two-month increase of 488,000 from February.

n February, there was an historical high of 72,706,000 women in the labor force. But in March, that dropped to 72,529,000—a decline of 177,000. And in April, it dropped to 72,382,000—a decline of another 147,000.

Thus, in March and April, according to the BLS data, a total of 324,000 American women dropped out of the civilian labor force.

The number of women added to those not in the labor force in March and April (488,000) exceeds the number of women who dropped out of the labor force during those two months (324,000) because women who newly turned 16, or left the military, or were released from prison or another institution during those two months and then did not seek a job were added to the ranks of those not in the labor force.

BLS says that for a one-month change in the number of women in the labor force to be statistically significant it has to be greater than about 260,000. For a three-month change to be statistically significant it has to be greater than 400,000. Thus, the two-month increase of 488,000 in the number of women not in the labor force is a statistically significant trend, but the two-month increase of 324,000 women who dropped out of the labor force is not. However, if at least 76,000 additional women drop out of the labor force in May the trend will become statistically significant.

Moreover, BLS says the decline of female participation in the workforce over the past year has been statistically significant—dropping from 58.3 percent in April 2011 to 57.6 percent this April.

For both males and females combined, the rate of participation in the labor force dropped to 63.6 percent in April—the lowest rate since December 1981.

Recently, however, women have been leaving the labor force in larger numbers than men.

From February to March, the number of men in the labor force actually increased by 14,000—rising from 82,165,000 to 82,179,000, according to BLS. From March to April, it dropped back down to 81,983,000—a one-month decline of 196,000.

CNSNews.com is not funded by the government like NPR. CNSNews.com is not funded by the government like PBS
.
Reply
#57
[Image: 1415mpe.gif]
Reply
#58
Why do we have a page 4 that says this thread does not exist?
Reply
#59
Reply
#60
Must have missed something. Laughing
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)