Alabama’s Draconian Abortion Ban Has Women On Twitter Ready To Fight

Again, if liberals - you for instance - want to amend the alabama law as I stated in a previous post I wont object

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Men were NEVER stigmatized for having sex outside of marriage, and/or illegitimate kids or having three wives and cheating on them...

Women were.

Baloney, that's your alternate universe.

Have you ever heard of a man being called a slut because he had lots of sex?

That has NOTHING to do with :

Men were NEVER stigmatized for having sex outside of marriage, and/or illegitimate kids or having three wives and cheating on them...

Women were.

 

Why the sarcasm?

Men should pay to support the children they father

Why would you object to thst?

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
So it was more intentional flamebait?

......but it had the appearance of antiquated sexist stupidity.....

Well , for sure antiquated sexist stupidity would NEVER offend righties … hard to be offended when one wallows in it...

 

All the outrages you list were within the new liberal culture

Except for the lie about trump calling neo naxis good people

 

I'll continue to concur with most Americans concerning the draconian legislation passed by your good ol' boys in Alabama.

Again, you can entreat with those "liberals" over whom you obsess however you choose.

 

Here's the problem. Over 50% of rapes are not reported. The reasons are many. And valid. YOU want to FORCE a woman to report a rape - and we've all seen the physical and emotional damage trying to take a rape case to trial can have on a woman. She is ridiculed in the press and social media, she is forced to undergo invasive pelvic exams, she is threatened and humiliated by those who think she "deserved" it because of the way the dressed.

Unless we are allowed to consider that EVERY abortion may be from a possible rape, then YOU are FORCING a woman to undergo all the emotional and physical trauma of the rape all over. Which makes YOU no better than the rapist.

 

Lol...trump-was an adulterer in the “good old days” you yearn for. Don’t blame liberals
He did say there were some good people on both sides meaning some of the neo-Nazis were some good people. To me they are all despicable and his trying to get out of it by saying they were only concerned with the statues as they were marching with torches and yelling Jews will not replace us shows whqt you talk about....the good old days. We all miss the good all days when they would lynch black people. Now they are so uppity. We all miss those good old days when women had no decent job opportunities.We miss the good all days when women got married and couldn’t get credit in their own names. Oh the good old days when women and blacks knew their place

 

Uh, you'd better put a "Sarcasm Alert" in that for righties...

 

You said that you thought it was a "thing of the past." So is it in fact a thing of the past?

 

How can that happen if it's not even the law? It's just a BILL! I would disagree with it if it was the law.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
I was addressing the sick twisted sexist phrase "boys will be boys".... I didn't indicate a specific person...and here's a surprise, your question is irrelevant....

UH DUH, obviously not for some:

Post # 2955:
Mac-7Well-Known Member


"""Boys will be boys""


See, that means that it s not a thing of the past but something righties want to keep clinging to so they can shove all responsibility off on women and give "boys' a free pass.





Should it be a thing of the past ? Uh , ya. (duh) It's sexist, and ignorant.

 

What's a bill?

 

Passing draconian laws that are morally abhorrent, even if all the good ol' boys voting for them assume that their bills are far too depraved to pass constitutional muster, is not a practice that Americans hope to see proliferate. Since when is "Well, we didn't really mean it!" become an excuse for voting for repugnant legislation?

 

Surely you can't be serious. You liked Natty's post which talks about bills. Why did you do that if you don't know what a bill is? It shouldn't have made sense to you.

 

Unfortunately there is no way to know when women are lying 6 months later without a police report and rape kit results

 

Fortunately, women can just tell ant-abortionists to **** themselves when it comes to having to disclose that information.

 

Correct - the stars have aligned and you have seen the light !. What can also be said is that as the process progresses - the entity obtains more and more human characteristics.

The problem many anti abort arguments is that those words interchangeably "Choose life" "Innocent life" "innocent baby, innocent child" and so on. Obviously these folks are not referring to a Cow when they say "Choose Life".

My first question to those using such a term is "Life of what" ? The life of a zygote is only a few hours. It then ceases to exist. Its DNA has been ripped in two - and then these two strips of RNA become new DNA creating two daughter cells - clones of the parent. The life of the zygote is over.

Most often when anti aborts are using the term "a life" they are referring to the life of a human .. as opposed to the descriptive adjective "human life" In order for the life of a human to exist - the human must exist. This is not the case with "human life".

There is one poster that keeps posting dictionary definitions and claiming a baby exists on this this basis. The thing about dictionary is that it is often not a literal definition. It is what the person using the term might mean when they say something.

For example - the colloquialism "With Child" means a woman who is pregnant. This does not mean a child actually exists .. it is just an old phrase for a pregnant woman.

This and other mindless arguments are often made.

 

Life is not always fair

What would you say to a man who is forced to pay child support for a baby fathered by another man?

The wife acted like a slut to use your term and cheated on him

Got pregnant and now wants him to support the baby

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/child-support_n_3672474

 

Why should we consider married couples better than couples who are not - say another form of social union - a different kind of contract signifying commitment. One is not necessarily better than the other - and the couples who are married vs ones who are not will not necessarily fare better or last longer.

Should the children be stigmatized as well ... "bastards" ?

 

Fox has used the "life is not always fair" argument as well so it is humorous and Ironic that you have used this. Similar but different to your "baby fathered by another man example" - in the case of an unintended pregnancy - the man is punished for the consequences of the unilateral decision of another with respect to an unintended pregnancy.

This is a violation of the rule of law - on two counts - and perhaps three. First - one person is not to be punished for the unilateral action of another. The man did not make the decision to carry and unintended pregnancy to term - yet he is punished by having to be responsible for the consequences of the action of another.

Second - "Equal Justice" under the law - the woman has the right to avoid the financial consequences of an unintended pregnancy - the man does not. The whole point of "equal justice" is that it is "Fair". While life may not be fair - Justice is supposed to be.

At the end of the day "life's not fair" is a non argument - but, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Since Fox uses this flawed logic to justify her position - she should then accept this logic when others use it.

I say you are both full of fallacy but, that is another story.

 

In an 'abortion-for-convenience-after-consensual-sex' free state, it wouldn't be anti-abortionists that rape victims would need to convince. It would be the police.

 

And if you looked at the case you will see that the man was NOT forced to pay the child support.
Do you even look at your own links?

 

Trump was also a liberal for most of his life

Doing what liberals do

 

When do you think a baby exists?

When do you think a child exists?