The GOP War on Women - The Megathread
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:46:21 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  The GOP War on Women - The Megathread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7
Author Topic: The GOP War on Women - The Megathread  (Read 25694 times)
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: March 20, 2012, 07:49:32 PM »

Hi all.
I've been lurking here for months, but after seeing some of the responses in this thread, I just had to respond.

First of all, welcome to the forum Smiley

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I would label you a person who murdered your child; the term "monster" is your word. In general, I do not view the criminal justice system as a means of using punishment under the premise that by such punishment we can achieve justice. The point of having a criminal justice system is to protect others from having crimes committed against them by 1)locking up those who have committed crimes previously, and 2) creating a deterent. To use the system as a means of simply inflicting punishment is no longer justice but revenge. For this reason I oppose using the death penalty as a criminal sentence. In an ideal world (aside from the part about you killing your child because that obviously would not happen at all in an ideal world) you would be sentenced until you are no longer dangerous and can once more be a productive member of society or at least some number of years long enough such that others would not do the same simply because there are no consequences.

I believe the exact same when it comes to abortion.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I am aware of the magnitude of the situation.

Comparisons to Hitler and to the Holocaust are rarely a good idea to make even if they are true. The primary reason why I would never make such a comparison is that these types of comparisons are purely rhetorically anyways (What actual difference does it make who's worse?) and they tend to offend more people than they convince. There are much more effective ways at conveying the magnitude of the problem than comparing it to the Holocaust.

In general, I make some degree of effort not to compare the moral worth of any two people. I can't claim to know what God will say to me when I die and go before him, but I'm pretty sure he won't say "well TJ, you deserve to burn in hell for all eternity but you were at least better than that Son of Will guy, so I'm going to let you off". This does not mean I should not question the morality of any act, lack of action, etc., but I do think these sorts of comparisions between people are not particularly meaningful.

FWIW, I do think that the US Presidents you mention are somewhat different than Hitler becuase the abortions that took place while they ran the country were not specifically ordered by their governments. Theirs is a sin of failing to stop someone else from doing something bad rather than actually orchestrating it. That is a very important moral difference.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Thank you.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

What part in particular do you find delusional? The underlying point that life begins at fertilization or something else that follows? I can see how people might disagree with that point, but where does that become delusional? Or is it something else?
Logged
greenforest32
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,625


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: March 20, 2012, 07:55:54 PM »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,733
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: March 20, 2012, 10:20:23 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which almost nobody does. This is why even most pro-choice advocates are fine with third-trimester abortions being illegal, and why the are illegal.

Which is even more arbitrary than calling birth the start of personhood because the cut-off between the second and third trimesters is when the Supreme Court arbitrarily decided to make it.[/quote]

No, birth is more arbitrary because it takes no other additional things, such as brain development, into account. Being arbitrary is about taking things on whim and preference rather than on fact an reason. The more things you take facts and information into account, the less arbitrary it is.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Intellectual capacity is what we should base our determinations on? Does this mean it's much less serious to kill and adult than an infant? They have a greater intellectual capacity.[/quote]

Intellectual capacity is certainly one of the factors. (notice those others I listed) We treat other lifeforms differently based on these same things. For instance most modern nations outlaw animal abuse, even though we're willing to kill some animals for food. Yet we don't afford plants that protection, even though they are also alive. Why do you think that is?

And no, of course it isn't less serious. The idea is that once a being reaches a certain level it becomes wrong to kill it. If there were a sapient race with just half of the brain power of humans, any civilized person in this day and age would say it would be wrong to kill them.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

What constitutes a mortal sin depends on your particular brand of Christianity. For instance one of the requirements in the Roman Catholic version is that you have to have full knowledge and understanding that what you are doing is a sin - I don't think most women who get abortions feel this way.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I agree, but you've demonstrated no facts that show that a fetus in all stages of development is a person.


Science cannot answer questions of personhood because of the concept of a "person" is not a scientific concept.

What science can do is give us information which we can use to assess whether something is a person or not based on what our concept of a person is. We can look at the traits of things we consider to be persons, narrow down those traits to the ones we consider essential, and then make the comparisons against the subject we want to determine the personhood status of.
Logged
Son of Will
Newbie
*
Posts: 7


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: March 21, 2012, 08:39:16 AM »
« Edited: March 21, 2012, 09:22:35 AM by Son of Will »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Thanks!

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I apologize for putting my words in your mouth,and I generally agree with your thoughts on the justice system. However, my original point (which I didn't get across as clearly as I would have liked) remains. My point is that if you say abortion is equal to murder, then the consequences for both actions have to be the same. That is the whole basis of our justice system, that the same crimes have the same sentence.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I agree that invoking Godwin's Law rarely produces meaningful conversation, but I thought that in this specific case (talking about vast numbers of murders), it was a valid comparison. What else might you compare it to? I'm not trying to talk about who's worse, because you're right that it doesn't really matter anyway. I'm just trying to illustrate the magnitude of the crimes you claim are being committed in this country, and since you seem to understand, I see no further need to bring up that man or his crimes again in this conversation.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I would hope God WOULD make some distinction between crimes. Perhaps, though, that is another conversation at another date.

I'm not sure I see the moral difference. Choosing not to stop a murder when you are safely capable of doing so leaves you just as responsible for the death as the guy who pulled the trigger.


Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

You're welcome!


Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I doubt that we'll ever be able to determine where life begins in a way that satisfies all people.

Perhaps delusional was a bad term, but the point I'm trying to make is this. You claim that abortion is murder and that you understand that the number of such murders would be on a nearly unprecdented scale in human history. However, I believe that your actions show you think otherwise. You do not wish abortion to be punished like murder (at least in the near-term), and you show no wish to stop it other than to provide more and more restrictions on it, until anybody would be to embarrased to get one.

I believe you argued earlier in the thread that holding an armed insurrection against the government would be futile, and it may be. But if you truly believed that your government was sanctioning the murder of MILLIONS of innocent people, wouldn't that be almost necessary, morally speaking, to start one anyway? Murder is one of the ultimate crimes in this world, and in the next. Something like that would need to be stopped now, by any means available, rather than at some indeterminate point in future.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: March 21, 2012, 09:01:42 AM »

The Republican party just has this bizzare rapist mindset that just gets worse by the year. Its like that Yale battle song to them. "No means Yes and Yes means Fuck". Am I right?
Logged
Joe Republic
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,042
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: March 22, 2012, 02:05:58 AM »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.
[/quote]
Logged
Joe Republic
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,042
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #56 on: April 18, 2012, 12:29:10 AM »

Fox News has detected at least a dozen liberal Wars on Culture, but a conservative War on Women?  *pfft*

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-april-16-2012/the-battle-for-the-war-on-women
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #57 on: April 18, 2012, 12:40:32 AM »

Fox News has detected at least a dozen liberal Wars on Culture, but a conservative War on Women?  *pfft*

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-april-16-2012/the-battle-for-the-war-on-women

Women don't play a large role in the Fox News Culture unless they are pretty.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #58 on: April 18, 2012, 10:15:44 AM »

The Republican party just has this bizzare rapist mindset that just gets worse by the year. Its like that Yale battle song to them. "No means Yes and Yes means Fuck". Am I right?

What? That was some douches' drunken chant, not the goddam fight song.
Logged
Joe Republic
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,042
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #59 on: April 19, 2012, 05:01:20 PM »

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-april-17-2012/the-great-buffett-caper

Remember, $47,000,000,000 in extra revenue from millionaires is a barely significant sum of money.  But, $300,000,000 in spending for breast cancer screenings and birth control is waaaaay too much money.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #60 on: April 19, 2012, 11:44:07 PM »

When they commission a memorial for the cause on the Mall in 40 years, what will it look like?
Logged
LastVoter
seatown
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,322
Thailand


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #61 on: April 20, 2012, 01:10:08 AM »

I support making women see ultrasounds to try and guilt them out of having abortions.

So you support cases like the one I posted where a woman who had to have an abortion or give birth to a child who would require constant expensive medical care and have a miserable life? And are you willing to have the state pay for this constant medical care since you're forcing the issue?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

So you support treating teenage girls as the property of their parents, and forcing those girls to give birth and likely have to drop out of high school?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

So you support making a fetus even more developed before it gets terminated?

All of these are pretty obvious positions resulting from a fetus being a human life since they increase the chances the woman will not have an abortion. First you attack me for not really believing that abortion is murder and now you are asking about whether or not I support these things?! Isn’t it completely obvious that murder outweighs any of these complaints by such a ridiculous margin that it’s pointless to even ask them?

And yes (since this is the only one worth addressing) I would support having the state pay for healthcare for severely disabled people if their parents cannot afford it.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

So you support destroying programs that actually prevent abortions and allow low-income women to have healthy children, even though none of the funding you are taking away actually goes to abortions?

Planned Parenthood is not the only healthcare provider in existence. Less money for them means more money for other health clinics. If there were some remote local area where Planned Parenthood was the only local provider of other care then I would be fine granting them an exemption. But in most places the opposite is true, for example, there are five clinics in my hometown that offer mammograms but zero abortion clinics.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I was speaking of the fact that you think this...



...is somehow a person, even though there's no evidence for that.[/quote]

A human embryo is alive and contains the full capability of progressing into a full grown adult. The embryo is not a part of the mother’s body— they have different DNA than the mother. The only coherent definition of when life begins that can be found is at fertilization because all others are arbitrary. If you say that life begins at birth, then the fetus just about to be born is not a person until it comes out, even though it’s structure before and after that point are essentially identical. The same can be said of any other arbitrary point along fetal development, such as viability or when a heart rate is detected, etc. The only logical place to assign the beginning of a life to is to fertilization (or perhaps implantation but that doesn’t make as much sense since the zygote is still around before then). If you try to trace a person’s existence backward, the place where the existence begins is at fertilization. Before then, the individual person is an egg and a sperm, clearly neither component is a person (and only has half the DNA). As far as truly proving it’s a person, you can’t prove anyone is a person. I can’t prove you are a person and you can’t prove I am.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I do not believe aborted babies go to hell. But taking the position that it’s okay to kill anyone who would go to heaven isn’t acceptable. Murder is not okay, regardless of whether or not the person who is killed is in a better place. That person has the right to go through life. This applies to persons in society at large beyond abortion. If we take this as a purely religious argument then the soul of the baby is not the only one we should be concerned about. What about the mother?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

So exactly how are these steps going to change the problems you mentioned earlier with incarcerating women en masse? Abortions are going to still happen in large numbers, just as it always has.

These steps would make abortion much harder to get, therefore drastically reducing the number that occur. You have admitted yourself that some girls would be forced not to have abortions here:
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Would requiring parental consent stop girls from having an abortion or not? You can’t have it both ways.

If you make abortions illegal, fewer doctors will perform them, if nothing else because they must be done in secret (and of course some people will not perform them out of fear of breaking the law), it would reduce the supply of abortions and make them more difficult to get.

[/quote]
By your logic, we should just let cancer progress to it's natural outcome - death of the host.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #62 on: April 20, 2012, 10:10:42 AM »

I support making women see ultrasounds to try and guilt them out of having abortions.

So you support cases like the one I posted where a woman who had to have an abortion or give birth to a child who would require constant expensive medical care and have a miserable life? And are you willing to have the state pay for this constant medical care since you're forcing the issue?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

So you support treating teenage girls as the property of their parents, and forcing those girls to give birth and likely have to drop out of high school?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

So you support making a fetus even more developed before it gets terminated?

All of these are pretty obvious positions resulting from a fetus being a human life since they increase the chances the woman will not have an abortion. First you attack me for not really believing that abortion is murder and now you are asking about whether or not I support these things?! Isn’t it completely obvious that murder outweighs any of these complaints by such a ridiculous margin that it’s pointless to even ask them?

And yes (since this is the only one worth addressing) I would support having the state pay for healthcare for severely disabled people if their parents cannot afford it.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

So you support destroying programs that actually prevent abortions and allow low-income women to have healthy children, even though none of the funding you are taking away actually goes to abortions?

Planned Parenthood is not the only healthcare provider in existence. Less money for them means more money for other health clinics. If there were some remote local area where Planned Parenthood was the only local provider of other care then I would be fine granting them an exemption. But in most places the opposite is true, for example, there are five clinics in my hometown that offer mammograms but zero abortion clinics.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I was speaking of the fact that you think this...



...is somehow a person, even though there's no evidence for that.

A human embryo is alive and contains the full capability of progressing into a full grown adult. The embryo is not a part of the mother’s body— they have different DNA than the mother. The only coherent definition of when life begins that can be found is at fertilization because all others are arbitrary. If you say that life begins at birth, then the fetus just about to be born is not a person until it comes out, even though it’s structure before and after that point are essentially identical. The same can be said of any other arbitrary point along fetal development, such as viability or when a heart rate is detected, etc. The only logical place to assign the beginning of a life to is to fertilization (or perhaps implantation but that doesn’t make as much sense since the zygote is still around before then). If you try to trace a person’s existence backward, the place where the existence begins is at fertilization. Before then, the individual person is an egg and a sperm, clearly neither component is a person (and only has half the DNA). As far as truly proving it’s a person, you can’t prove anyone is a person. I can’t prove you are a person and you can’t prove I am.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I do not believe aborted babies go to hell. But taking the position that it’s okay to kill anyone who would go to heaven isn’t acceptable. Murder is not okay, regardless of whether or not the person who is killed is in a better place. That person has the right to go through life. This applies to persons in society at large beyond abortion. If we take this as a purely religious argument then the soul of the baby is not the only one we should be concerned about. What about the mother?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

So exactly how are these steps going to change the problems you mentioned earlier with incarcerating women en masse? Abortions are going to still happen in large numbers, just as it always has.

These steps would make abortion much harder to get, therefore drastically reducing the number that occur. You have admitted yourself that some girls would be forced not to have abortions here:
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Would requiring parental consent stop girls from having an abortion or not? You can’t have it both ways.

If you make abortions illegal, fewer doctors will perform them, if nothing else because they must be done in secret (and of course some people will not perform them out of fear of breaking the law), it would reduce the supply of abortions and make them more difficult to get.

[/quote]
By your logic, we should just let cancer progress to it's natural outcome - death of the host.
[/quote]

I guess that statement was a little too vague. Obviously cancer is not a separate person since it comes from a mutation rather than reproduction.
Logged
courts
Ghost_white
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,466
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #63 on: April 20, 2012, 10:26:56 AM »

Fox News has detected at least a dozen liberal Wars on Culture, but a conservative War on Women?  *pfft*

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-april-16-2012/the-battle-for-the-war-on-women

Women don't play a large role in the Fox News Culture unless they are pretty.
Uh, have you seen some of these anchors...?
Logged
LastVoter
seatown
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,322
Thailand


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #64 on: April 20, 2012, 02:07:33 PM »


I guess that statement was a little too vague. Obviously cancer is not a separate person since it comes from a mutation rather than reproduction.
Don't get caught up in the rhetoric Wink , or we might have some candidates for submission to The Atlas Deluge of Absurdity, Ignorance, and Bad Posts thread.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #65 on: April 20, 2012, 02:22:01 PM »


I guess that statement was a little too vague. Obviously cancer is not a separate person since it comes from a mutation rather than reproduction.
Don't get caught up in the rhetoric Wink , or we might have some candidates for submission to The Atlas Deluge of Absurdity, Ignorance, and Bad Posts thread.

I have a bit of bad habit of returning whatever style and tone the other person has when arguing. There wasn't a whole lot of subtlety from anyone in this thread right from the start.
Logged
Chancellor Tanterterg
Mr. X
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,201
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #66 on: April 21, 2012, 10:18:52 PM »

This entire thread wants to make me run very hard head first against a brick wall...
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #67 on: April 23, 2012, 11:41:33 AM »

Interestingly, there's a gay faction in the GOP Army.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/mitt-romney-aide-history-snarky-comments-women-politics-zaps-hundreds-tweets-online-profile-article-1.1065790
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #68 on: April 26, 2012, 01:24:35 PM »

After attacking Sandra Fluke as a slut, it was inevitable that the next slur would be that she's a lesbian.

https://twitter.com/#!/MonicaCrowley/status/195558620920954880
Logged
greenforest32
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,625


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #69 on: May 05, 2012, 09:40:24 PM »

lol Kansas

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,232
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #70 on: May 05, 2012, 10:31:53 PM »

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

lol Kansas
lol Sam Brownback
lol
Logged
Fuzzybigfoot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,211
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #71 on: May 05, 2012, 10:32:13 PM »

We should just define sperm cells as children and get it over with.  Tongue
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #72 on: May 05, 2012, 10:37:18 PM »

lol Kansas

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

It amazes me that in many states, Republicans are openly endorsing the notion of allowing doctors to lie to their female patients about medical information. That one little tidbit of the bill is almost more repulsive than anything else about this bill.

What kind of political party legislates in favor of allowing (and in some cases, just plain forcing) Doctors to lie and withhold medical information? Why is that not completely outrageous to every person ever?

How far Republicans have been willing to take anti-abortion measures in the states has really exposed what sick levels they're willing to drop to as long as it might, theoretically, prevent an abortion. Dildo rape, borderline-brainwashing, guilting, and just outright lying. The ends justify the means. It would be lol-worthy were it not so terrifying and under-reported.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #73 on: May 05, 2012, 10:43:17 PM »

lol Kansas

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

It amazes me that in many states, Republicans are openly endorsing the notion of allowing doctors to lie to their female patients about medical information. That one little tidbit of the bill is almost more repulsive than anything else about this bill.

What kind of political party legislates in favor of allowing (and in some cases, just plain forcing) Doctors to lie and withhold medical information? Why is that not completely outrageous to every person ever?

How far Republicans have been willing to take anti-abortion measures in the states has really exposed what sick levels they're willing to drop to as long as it might, theoretically, prevent an abortion. Dildo rape, borderline-brainwashing, guilting, and just outright lying. The ends justify the means. It would be lol-worthy were it not so terrifying and under-reported.

You mean that Republicans not only lie themselves but allow others to lie too? Amazing.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #74 on: May 05, 2012, 10:57:57 PM »

You mean that Republicans not only lie themselves but allow others to lie too? Amazing.

Obviously on some level it's not surprising, but it's one of those things that I wish people would just stop and seriously think about for a moment. It's so completely crazy that not stopping everything and having a serious discussion about that specific part of these bills feels like it's being overlooked.

Moreover though, it just feels like a teaching moment in how Republicans do policy. In Indiana, a Democratic senator proposed an amendment to the bill that required doctors to read a ridiculous script to women seeking an abortion, an amendment that would require all information in the script to be "medically and scientifically accurate." The amendment was rejected.

I wish people would stop and consider things like that. A political party in this country will reject amendments to their ideological goals that require such pesky things as medical and scientific accuracy. It is one thing to accuse the other side of being wrong, of trying to lie, of being dishonest about their goals and methods to those goals. That's always existed and is to be expected. It's a very different thing for that to be an open admission from the accused.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.07 seconds with 12 queries.