7
   

The GOP's War on Women

 
 
neptuneblue
 
  4  
Reply Thu 28 Jul, 2022 06:51 am
@bulmabriefs144,
It is interesting to me that you choose a Catholic article to defend the anti-abortion stance you take. But when you choose to lie and call it the Truth, then I have to call it for what it is -- False Information with the intention of causing harm. There is absolutely no Truth to the following quote:

bulmabriefs144 wrote:
Quote:
The more hotly contested link—though one supported by numerous epidemiological studies and breast physiology—is that abortion itself can cause breast cancer. Through abortion, a woman artificially terminates her pregnancy at a time when her breast cells have been exposed to high levels of potentially cancer-initiating estrogen but before those cells have matured into cancer-resistant cells (as they ultimately do in a full-term pregnancy). According to breast surgeon Dr. Angela Lanfranchi, The same biology that accounts for 90 percent of all risk factors for breast cancer accounts for the abortion breast cancer link.


If you truly were an advocate for women, you'd source a reputable organization whose sole function is Cancer. So, here you go, from The American Cancer Society in 2014:

Quote:
The topic of abortion and breast cancer highlights many of the most challenging aspects of studies of people and how those studies do or do not translate into public health guidelines. The issue of abortion generates passionate viewpoints in many people. Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women aside from skin cancer; and breast cancer is the second leading cancer killer in women. Still, the public is not well-served by false alarms. At this time, the scientific evidence does not support the notion that abortion of any kind raises the risk of breast cancer or any other type of cancer.


https://www.cancer.org/healthy/cancer-causes/medical-treatments/abortion-and-breast-cancer-risk.html
bulmabriefs144
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 28 Jul, 2022 07:03 am
@hightor,
Leftists encourage women to mastectomy to avoid cancer they got from birth control drugs. This right here is proof enough that women are systematically being unsexed. Not only is she taking chemicals to prevent pregnancy or indeed normal sex drives, but she is now cutting out the thing that differentiates her from a male.
And of course, modern society has gone a step farther, convincing some women they are men, instead of instilling in them pride in being a butch lesbian.

I rejected trans culture after I realized that the surgery to "make me a woman" was basically starting with a castration, and wouldn't actually make me anything but an imitation. They constantly try to justify that they'll be able to make sex organs.
But so much of this new tech comes from stem cells, which they won't take just unfertilized eggs donated for that purpose, and made fertile in a lab to make a stem cell. Rather they feel the need to harvest from pregnant women or live tissue. There is a monstrous society built on death. instead of donor genes (spit is pretty high in genetic tissue btw), they typically use fetal harvesting.
And there's no incentive for them to ever work on this. They done need for women (trans or otherwise) to have babies because they don't like babies, they don't like mothers, and they don't like life.

One writer points out that many women under leftism likewise butcher their hair, even though it usually makes them markedly less attractive.
https://www.returnofkings.com/26763/girls-with-short-hair-are-damaged
And the response proves the theory (she says she cuts her hair to middle finger at men, meaning she had literally been wronged by men)
https://thesmartlocal.com/read/girls-with-short-hair-are-damaged/

Why do women want to give the middle finger to men? Because what's not being told here is how the free love culture scarred women. Until you can make a perfect condom for women, the alternatives (seriously there is a birth control drug on their arm, that sometimes gets lost inside the body) will always mean women lose out in free love. What free love really is, is men being dicks and getting a bunch of women pregnant, then not taking responsibility.

Douchbaggery masked by using words like equality. Invent a better condom, that won't tear, no matter how rough the guy is being, and that won't slip inside the body. Then maybe, maybe we can mean what we say about free love.

But more importantly, make society value moms. Because alot of them fire women who want too much maternity leave. And maternity leave is set up poorly to interfere with profit. If it sabotages the business, damned right the boss will fire pregnant women. Maternity leave needs to be restructured to actually give rights to women (the blanket solution is to keep women out of sight while they are nursing by giving them a long paid leave, but I think we need to let women go back to work whenever they want, give them as light or heavy a work load as they want, and stop restricting children from being at the workplace). Punish men who pressure women into abortions, and make pregnancies free to have.
0 Replies
 
bulmabriefs144
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 28 Jul, 2022 07:15 am
@Frank Apisa,
Dude, read the article.

You're yelling again. That means the cognitive dissonance is acting up again.
You might wanna get that checked out.

In the mean time, the article very clearly lays out how far from being a choice, most women felt pressured to have an abortion, either by the cost of pregnancy itself (which should be free), or by men looking to avoid child support. Abortion is really not a choice if your "boyfriend" acts like a sort of abusive thug. I saw this play out in a movie called Waitress. It had a Lifetime movie vibe, where all the guys were real shits, but the bottom line was that the guy was like "You can't love that baby more than me," with an implication that maybe he hoped she'd get rid of it. She had the baby though, and was like " Get him out of here. " I was like "Damned straight!" at this. The guy was a serious douche, and took her money. But most women, it seems to play out more like Girl on the Train. The guy gaslights them, bullies them, and tells them they are pro-choice and pro-women. Bullshit. Where's the choice here? This is a thug acting like an ally to women, even when thet have strong moral objections to abortion, they aren't making their choice.
bulmabriefs144
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 28 Jul, 2022 07:33 am
@neptuneblue,
No, I would not.

The American Cancer Society is a for-profit institution that routinely uses fundraisers to generate money for itself. They typically suppress any research to actually prevent cancer, instead routinely prescribing the same three treatments, all of which have a negative effect on the body. Cancer is an immune disease. Surgically removing cancerous organs makes the body less able to fight off illness. Chemotherapy typically suppress the immune system, making the body toxic and unable to fight off diseases. And radiation nukes the body. None of these are appropriate remedies. Why is there no cure for cancer? Because companies make too much money "treating" it. In fact, I read that it used to be cancer was about 1 in 20, now it's closer to 1 in 5. Ask the internet why there is no cure for cancer. And honest site will tell you that it is because people are making too much money treating it.
ACS is no better than the Komen Foundation.
https://www.bustle.com/articles/7169-pinkwashing-the-truth-behind-breast-cancer-awareness-products
Quote:
These pink soup cans, most contaminated with bisphenol-A (BPA), a suspected carcinogen with scientific links to breast cancer, helped generate over $800,000 in donations to breastcancer.org in 2006. At the same time, Campbell’s was selling millions of cans of soup, generating over $755 million in revenue across all the company’s brands.

In 2012, Campbell’s made a big announcement that they would be removing BPA from cans. In what many health bloggers called a great victory, Campbell’s managed to punt the issue until at least 2015, likely because they still don’t know how to produce close to 95% of their canned goods line without using BPA.

Quote:
In 2011, Breast Cancer Action busted the Susan G. Komen Foundation after the launch of their first signature fragrance, Promise Me. Breast Cancer Action found that the perfume contained at least two highly toxic chemicals, which likely led to the Foundation’s discontinuation of the line in 2012.

Think Before You Pink, everyone! Think real hard before you pink.

If I were a real friend to women, I would use exactly the article I used. Catholic priests typically leave women alone to go molest little boys instead. There's nothing wrong with the article.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  3  
Reply Thu 28 Jul, 2022 08:09 am
@bulmabriefs144,
bulmabriefs144 wrote:


Dude, read the article.

You're yelling again. That means the cognitive dissonance is acting up again.
You might wanna get that checked out.

In the mean time, the article very clearly lays out how far from being a choice, most women felt pressured to have an abortion, either by the cost of pregnancy itself (which should be free), or by men looking to avoid child support. Abortion is really not a choice if your "boyfriend" acts like a sort of abusive thug. I saw this play out in a movie called Waitress. It had a Lifetime movie vibe, where all the guys were real shits, but the bottom line was that the guy was like "You can't love that baby more than me," with an implication that maybe he hoped she'd get rid of it. She had the baby though, and was like " Get him out of here. " I was like "Damned straight!" at this. The guy was a serious douche, and took her money. But most women, it seems to play out more like Girl on the Train. The guy gaslights them, bullies them, and tells them they are pro-choice and pro-women. Bullshit. Where's the choice here? This is a thug acting like an ally to women, even when thet have strong moral objections to abortion, they aren't making their choice.


1) You are full of ****.

2) Citing a Catholic publication to "inform" on abortion...is like citing a Catholic publication to "inform" on whether or not there is a god.

3) I am not yelling...I am emphasizing. Although with you, it probably is not worth the trouble of hitting the Caps key. You are someone who could not even acknowledge that you were wrong when you asserted (several times) that Trump was never impeached.

4) My guess is that MOST women who choose to get an abortion are not influenced by anything other than a desire to have the abortion. If you want to consider women to be weak and subject to those kinds of pressures...you are free to do so. But that is probably because the women in your life have been very weak. Most of the women I've known are much stronger than that.

5) In case I forgot to mention it...YOU ARE FULL OF ****.
Region Philbis
 
  3  
Reply Thu 28 Jul, 2022 12:27 pm
Quote:
A teen says she was body-shamed by Rep. Matt Gaetz. .She took it as an opportunity.
Olivia Julianna, 19, has raised money for abortion funds after being singled out on Twitter.

After Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz made a speech arguing women who are worried about dwindling abortion access are too unattractive to become pregnant, a teen activist responded on Twitter. Gaetz then singled out the activist by re-posting her photo on his Twitter feed. Now she's using the attention to raise money for a cause dear to her heart — abortion funds.

Since she first tweeted on Monday night, people have donated $168,000 from more than 22,000 individual donors, Julianna said.
(msnbc)
bulmabriefs144
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 29 Jul, 2022 09:14 pm
@Frank Apisa,
1) You're welcome to manually test if that is the case. I'm pretty sure I have no **** to give.
2) What, you're not convinced by the source? I thought everyone was convinced after reading catholic links.
3) YOU ARE TOTALLY YELLING. Maybe turn it down a bit?
4) Most women think they are not influenced by anything. Most women think of men as dumb apes, and don't realize when they've just been played, because men and womenfolk are wired different. But make no mistake, there is a definite pattern when men don't want to take responsibility for sex that turns into something. I'll demonstrate.
Quote:
(Imitating Elvis) Hey, little lady. I'm gonna love you forever. Just stay by my side and I'll take care of this thing for you. Uhhhh huuhhh... (shakes hips)

The guy promises forever, and he tells her that he will solve her problems. For alot of women, this is all she needs to hear as she has been conditioned from years of hearing that safe sex is not really her responsibility, and she can have sex the same as any man.
Now I'm sorry, but you body has other plans. While the guy can flit from one to another like a bee pollinating as he wishes, your body wants you to get pregnant, and you do nothing to prevent it, you're likely to be pregnant. That you in turn wait around like a dope for 4+ months "no knowing you're pregnant," but the very next day, you should pee on a strip if you're gonna be sexually active. If not, you very much shouldn't be sexually active.

In fact, he doesn't have to say anything. He just leaves, with you desperate for money, and you'll probably "choose" to abort.
But in contract law, this is called a decision made under duress. It's similar to taking a potentially life-threatening vaccine because the media harps on how deadly the disease is going to be. You can say all you want that it is a choice, but you made it this way because you were stressed out and bullied into it.

5) See number 1.
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  3  
Reply Fri 29 Jul, 2022 09:27 pm
@Region Philbis,
Tonight the same teen, Olivia Julianna was on the 7 o'clock MSNBC show and her fund has raised close to 2 million dollars. We send a big thank you to Matt, he likes em real young, Gaetz.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2022 10:51 am
@bulmabriefs144,
Channeling your inner hawkeyeX again?
0 Replies
 
Region Philbis
 
  3  
Reply Mon 1 Aug, 2022 02:37 am

https://iili.io/S8EqEN.jpg
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  4  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2022 09:13 am
The Dobbs decision is clearing the political ground for a resolution in favor of abortion rights.

Quote:
Justice Samuel Alito, in drafting Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, said he and the other justices who joined him in ending a constitutional right to abortion had no ability to foresee what the political implications would be. Even if they could know, he added, justices have “no authority to let that knowledge influence our decision.”

Does Alito genuinely write his opinions with no concern at all of what the practical political consequences might be?

In overturning Roe v. Wade, a decision he said was “egregiously wrong,” Alito asserted that the place to decide the morality and legality of abortion is not the Supreme Court but the political process in 50 states.

So what does Alito think now, in the wake of Kansas voters resoundingly rejecting a proposal to remove protections for abortion rights from their state constitution?

These are not gotcha questions. Alito presumably would answer that what happened in Kansas on Tuesday is precisely the kind of democratic process that the Supreme Court “short-circuited,” as he wrote in Dobbs, when it established a national right to abortion by judicial edict even as the issue remained deeply unsettled in the society.

They are questions, however, that highlight how life is full of surprise and paradox, even for a Supreme Court justice who specializes in blustery self-assurance. Alito’s career as an advocate for social conservatism began long before he joined the court. His record is replete with deference to religious tradition and skepticism of loosening sexual mores on all fronts, including gay rights. His references to “abortionists” in the Dobbs opinion hardly conceal his personal disdain. There can be little doubt of how he would have cast his ballot if he were a Kansas voter.

Yet the Kansas result raises an arresting possibility: Alito’s long-term legacy may well be as the justice who facilitated a national consensus on behalf of abortion rights. Quite unintentionally, today’s hero of the “pro-life” movement could end up being a giant of the “pro-choice” movement.

Alito’s achievement was to take abortion out of the arena where it has been for a half-century — a place in which aggrieved advocates on both sides invoked a hypothetical world in which abortion is no longer legal — and move it to an emphatically real-world arena. In this new environment, all kinds of people who under ordinary circumstances would prefer not to have to think and argue about abortion must decide which side they are on.

There is good reason to be wary the old maxim of Fleet Street journalism — first simplify, then exaggerate — in some of the post-Kansas analysis. The impact of abortion politics on the mid-term elections remains murky. In most cases, voters will be choosing among candidates, not deciding a sharply framed referendum. Moreover, while Kansas is undoubtedly conservative, it is also a state with a Democratic governor and is not necessarily predictive of the dynamics in conservative states with abortion bans that took place immediately after the Supreme Court’s June ruling.

But if the Kansas result isn’t necessarily a portent of the politics of 2022 it is suggestive of the politics of 2032. Long-term, under current trends, it is easy to envisage a decisive shift that would leave a national resolution of the issue in favor of abortion rights, even in states that do not currently support that. It is hard to envisage the opposite result.

The difference lies in the gap between abstract politics and concrete politics. This is the same dynamic that makes Social Security highly popular among people who claim they disdain big government. The Kansas result, which mirrors polling showing solid majorities of people supported leaving Roe v. Wade intact, suggests that opponents of legal abortion do better when the prospect of an abortion ban is hypothetical, while abortion-rights supporters do better when the issue is tangibly real.

Values take on meaning not in the abstract but in the particular. What do you really believe when it is your adolescent child who is pregnant or has impregnated someone? Or your extramarital affair that results in a pregnancy? Or your obstetrician who calls to say she has unwelcome news from the results of a genetic test?

Thankfully, most people do not get to learn what they really believe by landing in such a situation. But lots of people — of all political persuasions — do get to learn. The Guttmacher Institute, which conducts research on abortion policy, found that about one in five pregnancies in 2020 ended in abortion. In an earlier study, from 2017, it found that about one in four women will have an abortion by age 45.

Is that number surprising? As long as abortion was a legal right, plenty of these women and their partners were likely animated by plenty of other political issues. The question now is what has changed, and Kansas suggests an answer.

Even many abortion-rights advocates acknowledge there is some truth to what Alito asserted multiple times in his opinion: That the court hindered, rather than helped, a national resolution of the abortion question. Somewhat tauntingly, the Dobbs opinion cited a 1992 speech from one of the most prominent abortion-rights supporters of all, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, that Roe “halted a political process that was moving in a reform direction and thereby, I believed, prolonged divisiveness and deferred stable settlement of the issue.”

It was as if Alito was playing a joke on Ginsberg’s memory by quoting her. It seems entirely likely that she will end up having the last laugh.


It's true, abstract ideals and concrete reality does make a big difference. I have avoided the whole abortion debate for most of my adult life for one very big reason. It is because at my core, right or wrong, I believe life begins to form at conception, the same way a flower does. On the other hand, having people tell you what you can or can't do with your own body seems wrong to me as well. Also, the way some states are going about this is getting out of hand. My daughter 18 years ago was in such a life-threatening situation, and I hate to think some law would have caused her to die. Thank God both have survived, though my granddaughter was born two months early with no adverse affects. Also, little girls barely old enough to have periods should not be made to have birth regardless of how she got pregnant.
hightor
 
  5  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2022 09:58 am
@revelette1,
Quote:
I have avoided the whole abortion debate for most of my adult life for one very big reason.

There's no necessity for a person to debate every issue and declare themselves in support or opposition. I have no problem with people who hold a religious conviction that prohibits them from terminating their pregnancy. And I respect those same people when, faced with an unplanned or unwanted pregnancy in their own family, offer their love and support to their sister, daughter, or niece and let them know they won't have to face the event alone.
Where I draw the line is trying to impose one's religious convictions on people with different beliefs.
Frank Apisa
 
  3  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2022 11:44 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:

Quote:
I have avoided the whole abortion debate for most of my adult life for one very big reason.

There's no necessity for a person to debate every issue and declare themselves in support or opposition. I have no problem with people who hold a religious conviction that prohibits them from terminating their pregnancy. And I respect those same people when, faced with an unplanned or unwanted pregnancy in their own family, offer their love and support to their sister, daughter, or niece and let them know they won't have to face the event alone.
Where I draw the line is trying to impose one's religious convictions on people with different beliefs.



Beautifully said, Hightor. I am sure Rev agrees with you on this.
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2022 12:21 pm
@hightor,
As a male, I have my opinion, but it is a woman's issue and between her and her personal Doctor - not a fat male WR knee jerker in Congress or a state legislature. The one area where my vote shouldn't count.
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  2  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2022 02:50 pm
@Frank Apisa,
true
0 Replies
 
Region Philbis
 
  3  
Reply Sat 6 Aug, 2022 04:52 am

https://iili.io/UFFgSa.jpg
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/09/2022 at 08:03:52