@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:bullshit. no implication. it's completely obvious what she was saying, and it had nothing to do with sexual advances.
Nonsense. Her implication was clear. It is silly to deny it.
MontereyJack wrote:it had to do with legislators trying to intrude themselves into other people's business by trying to pass a probably unconstitutional law, which is precisely what the far right wing has been trying to do at every opportunity since 1973. If you had been paying attention at all for the last 40 years that would be obvious, not your and the legislators' pathetic attempt to spin it differently.
I am familiar with the issue, and with the way the fanatical left characterizes it.
I must say I find that the left lacks integrity on the matter. They pretend that they are pro-choice, but they only provide choice to the woman, denying any say whatsoever to the potential father.
The views of the right are much more equitable. They would deny the choice to have an abortion, as they believe the fetus is a living human being, but they would deny that choice to men and woman equally. While equality is not what motivates their position, they are in fact the more equitable of the two camps.
MontereyJack wrote:The legislators are the extremists, not her.
No, she is very much an extremist.