Ask Me Help Desk - The war on women

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

OK, imagine me saying get the Blacks to change their cultural values and you'll get what you want. Or get the Mexicans to change their cultural values and you'll get what you want. Is it racist now?

The answer to that question would be, no. There is an important difference between race and culture.

Firstly, there is no Mexican race any more than there is a French race, Australian race or American race. When classifying people according to country we are generally talking about culture.

Secondly,scientists have no agreement agree as to how many races make up humanity. It is much easier to determine how many cultural groups exist in the world.

Race has to do with genetic code. Culture has to do with the learning and experience. You can learn a culture just as easily as you can unlearn the said culture.

Tut

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Now about this war on women here, try to stop dancing around and tell us who should we be worried about, those aborting women for gender preference, union leaders smashing pinatas with Nikki Haley's face on them, porno rags photoshopping and publishing vulgar images of conservative women, a president who wants a country full of Julias dependent from cradle to grave or conservatives trying to give that baby girl a chance and empowering her to be a strong, independent woman?

Hi Steve,

There is nothing to worry about because most of you examples show how particular interest groups and individuals are waging a war on women. This is very much different to saying there is a policy in place that wages war on women. Quite rightly, the OP was about policy.

In the end policy turned into legislation is all that matters.

In order to show there is a Democrat war on women you would need to show how these examples have manifested themselves into policy.

Can hitting Piñatas be translated into some sort of policy? Do leftist magazine opinions translate themselves into policy?

Over to you.

Tut

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

My beef is parents who don't know how to parent so that their kids don't get a good start before school, eat too much junk food, don't know how to write a thank-you note or even say the words, feel entitled about anything and everything, and don't know how to keep their clothes on once they turn 12. If you can fix the parents and how they parent, you're on your way to nirvana.

So you just don't want to answer the question.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

How is it racist?
Remember, I said : "Get the Asians to change their cultural values and you'll get what you want."

Exactly, and if I had said "get blacks to change their cultural values" my post would have been removed and I would have received an "infraction" for racist remarks. YOu on the other hand can get away with it.

Quote:

So, is that your plan? To change what asian people do? Since they are the ones that are causing the statistics that you don't like.

Why would it be my plan, you're the one that brought it up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Nope, that's not what the statistic says at all. You made sh!t up again.

What part of "a LifeCanada poll conducted by Environics Research and released in October 2011 showed that an astonishing 92 percent of Canadians thought that sex selection abortions should not be legal in Canada" did I make up?

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

OMG! Could you be any more racist!!!??

Islam is not a race. Duh.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TUT317

Hi Steve,

There is nothing to worry about because most of you examples show how particular interest groups and individuals are waging a war on women. This is very much different to saying there is a policy in place that wages war on women. Quite rightly, the OP was about policy.

In the end policy turned into legislation is all that matters.

In order to show there is a Democrat war on women you would need to show how these examples have manifested themselves into policy.

Can hitting Pinatas be translated into some sort of policy? Do leftist magazine opinions translate themselves into policy?

Over to you.

Tut

Exactly what policy is waging a war on women? The one that attempts to protect children, and in a large number of cases the emotional well-being of the mother who might abort her child? The one that attempts to preserve religious freedom over a non-issue of expanding access to contraception? The one that bans gender-selective abortions?

I'll take a policy that protects children and my constitutional rights over behavior that attacks and demeans women any day. The left talks a good game but their actual behavior towards women speaks far more than their political pandering.

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Islam is not a race. Duh.

I know, I was making fun of people like yourself that see racism everywhere. :-)

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Exactly what policy is waging a war on women? The one that attempts to protect children

Hello again, Steve:

When a woman has a LEGAL right to DO something, and one segment of the population is doing everything it can to STOP them, they think it's a war on women... Sounds reasonable to me.

Frankly, it's a matter of semantics.. You have your own words, and they make sense too. I mean, who's against protecting children??

But, if we can drop the language, what we have here is a fundamental conflict between a pregnant women and the child she's carrying. That's all it is. One side champion's the rights of the women, and the other side champion's the rights of the unborn..

But, that's the problem.. You cannot recognize ONE set of rights without denying the other side its rights. We tried it one way for a long time and it didn't work. We're trying it this way, and it's not working either... What? You thought I had a solution? I'd just like things to calm down, because we have to decide one way or the other.. But, didn't we DO that already??

excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

I know, I was making fun of people like yourself that see racism everywhere. :-)

There you go with your gross misrepresentations again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

When a woman has a LEGAL right to DO something, and one segment of the population is doing everything it can to STOP them, they think it's a war on women... Sounds reasonable to me.

No one is trying to outlaw abortion, contraceptives or equal pay or stop protecting women from violence. You're just making stuff up because we don't see a need for more redundant laws and expanding government further.

Quote:

Frankly, it's a matter of semantics.. You have your own words, and they make sense too. I mean, who's against protecting children??

Whose against protecting women from abuse?

Quote:

But, if we can drop the language, what we have here is a fundamental conflict between a pregnant women and the child she's carrying. That's all it is. One side champion's the rights of the women, and the other side champion's the rights of the unborn..

You forget, I've seen close up the emotional trauma after a mother aborted her child. It's not just a choice, ex, it's not as cut and dried as either side wants to make it. There are lasting effects, so sue me for leaning toward the side of life for the child and emotional peace for the mother. Quite frankly, I don't see how anyone with a conscience could be any different.

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Exactly what policy is waging a war on women? The one that attempts to protect children, and in a large number of cases the emotional well-being of the mother who might abort her child? The one that attempts to preserve religious freedom over a non-issue of expanding access to contraception? The one that bans gender-selective abortions?

I'll take a policy that protects children and my constitutional rights over behavior that attacks and demeans women any day. The left talks a good game but their actual behavior towards women speaks far more than their political pandering.

I think there are a number of issues that need addressing

In answer to your first question. I don't know what policies are being waged against women. You would need to address the original posting to answer that question.

Secondly, policy that protests the unborn is a move in the right direction from my point of view. However, this does not lessen any policy that discriminates against women. Provided there is such a policy, but again you need to address the original posting.

If there are policies that discriminate against women then posting counter examples, doesn't negate the former.

Thirdly, religious freedom and rights of individuals only serve to complicate this particular issue. The problem from my point of view is when we attempt to reduce a whole lot of issues into a single category of understanding.

Tut

Quote:

Originally Posted by TUT317

I think there are a number of issues that need addressing

In answer to your first question. I don't know what policies are being waged against women. You would need to address the original posting to answer that question.

Secondly, policy that protests the unborn is a move in the right direction from my point of view. However, this does not lessen any policy that discriminates against women. Provided there is such a policy, but again you need to address the original posting.

If there are policies that discriminate against women then posting counter examples, doesn't negate the former.

Like I said to excon, "No one is trying to outlaw abortion, contraceptives or equal pay or stop protecting women from violence. You're just making stuff up because we don't see a need for more redundant laws and expanding government further."

In other words, the OP is a cure in search of a disease.

Quote:

Thirdly, religious freedom and rights of individuals only serve to complicate this particular issue. The problem from my point of view is when we attempt to reduce a whole lot of issues into a single category of understanding.

From my point of view the problem is manufacturing a war that doesn't exist while ignoring a real constitutional war that does exist.

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Like I said to excon, "No one is trying to outlaw abortion,

Hello again, Steve:

You could have convinced me about contraceptives.. Your ban has not YET hit the table... But, abortion?? Dude! You mean you'll be HAPPY if abortion is only "curtailed"??

Uhh, no you won't. What happened to honest Steve?

excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

You coulda convinced me about contraceptives.. Your ban has not YET hit the table... But, abortion??? Dude! You mean you'll be HAPPY if abortion is only "curtailed"???

Uhh, no you won't. What happened to honest Steve??

excon

What do you mean, brother, I just was honest about abortion not being as cut and dried as either side wants to make it sound. Where was your likewise honest response?

I believe I've said it before, I hate abortion, it's a pox on our country - but I don't foresee it ever being illegal. Doesn't stop me from trying to change hearts and minds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Like I said to excon, "No one is trying to outlaw abortion, contraceptives or equal pay or stop protecting women from violence. You're just making stuff up because we don't see a need for more redundant laws and expanding government further."

In other words, the OP is a cure in search of a disease.

Yes, I would have said this is what should be addressed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlessx

while ignoring a real constitutional war that does exist

.

Sorry about splitting your sentence. But that would deserve a post on its own.

Tut

I'm not totally against abortion either when it is justified for reasons of sexual violations and threats to the mother's life. Yet I have read stories where it was the mother who decided to have her baby when doctors were telling her of the danger of it. Mothers gave birth and mother and baby were fine. Then of course at other times not, either the mother died or both mother and baby died. So risk is taken in life for many reasons. Then we have selection sex births and I guess no one wants to here this part I'm about to share, but since I believe there is a higher power, here goes, but you may need to get out of your logical thinking to embrace it... We all existed as spirits 'Before' we came into earth life through birth by receiving a physical body. It is said at the moment of conception a flash of blue light appears at that very moment. We can ask, when does a baby become viable? We seem to look at this on a physical level only and I think it is possible that the flash of blue light that is seen is perhaps the aura... the beginning of a physical existence, the body and 'god stuff' being the aura. Now, I do not know that the actual spirit appointed to the developing physical body is capable to actually enter, somehow, the developing baby at the moment of conception, but I do believe it is possible the aura, which I call 'god stuff' (maybe someone else coined this too, I just can't remember right now) is evidence of perhaps a spirit embryo of the spirit which does enter at the very moment of conception and perhaps even part of the soul is created at this time. When we choose to abort the beginning of a physical life we are also aborting the beginning of a spiritual life appointed to a physical body or more correctly a physical body appointed to an infinite spiritual body. After all it is said, (paraphrasing) “we are spiritual beings having a physical experience.” In reality to me, a war on life is not only a war against women, but a war against men and a war against mankind. Now you can go back to your limited debating, but there is a bigger picture out there.

No sir, PP does not believe in “sex selection motivated by gender bias” - although the question is what other bias could there be for sex selection? - but another clinic was happy to advise on how to do just that. Who's going to get fired this time?

And by the way, the president who opposed the Illinois Born Alive bill also opposes a ban on gender-selective abortions. Naturally.

Yep, those darn Repubs are still waging that war on women.

Why are you up in arms about PP when the problem is the mother/parents?

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Why are you up in arms about PP when the problem is the mother/parents?

Why do you defend scum like PP?

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Why do you defend scum like PP?

a) I didn't, you're making stuff up again.
b) the parents are making the decision, not PP

Do you blame McDonald's for making you fat?

Whatever, dude, not playing your games today. I'll just post again in case someone cares to comment on PP's ethics problem instead of blaming the mother.

Quote:

No sir, PP does not believe in “sex selection motivated by gender bias” - although the question is what other bias could there be for sex selection? - but another clinic was happy to advise on how to do just that. Who's going to get fired this time?

And by the way, the president who opposed the Illinois Born Alive bill also opposes a ban on gender-selective abortions. Naturally.

Yep, those darn Repubs are still waging that war on women.

Comments? Besides blaming the mother for Planned Parenthood's ethics problems?

It's right there on the screenshot: the woman (mother) is saying that she is doing sex selection, not PP.

So you believe there are no bad reasons for an abortion? You condone sex-selective abortions?

Wow, you argue like a women, evading the question and putting words in my mouth all the time. I guess if you continuously evade the question then it must have some merit.

I understand you have a serious hatred for PP, so much that it clouds everything else. Have fun with that. I do not think they are scum. I'm not filled with hatred.

FYI

question mark
n.
A punctuation symbol (?) written at the end of a sentence or phrase to indicate a direct question. Also called interrogation point.

I know, I asked one here: https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/curren...ml#post3135308

Whatever dude, feel free to argue amongst yourself.

Hello again, Steve:

I recall that you thought whacking a piñata with the face of a Republican woman is emblematic of the left's "war on women".

Then surely you'll agree that, "Let's Hurl Some Acid At Those Female Democratic Senators", would indicate a right wing ", would indicate a right wing ". No?

excon

I find that highly despicable and I'm sure you'll find that once again, the majority of conservatives will rightly hold this idiot accountable. When the left holds their misogynists and other miscreants accountable in like fashion then we can talk.

Nan Hayworth is too good a Rep to have that idiot as a spokesman. She should fire him. I'll send her an email today saying such.

Two more clinics caught, this time in Arizona where sex-selective abortions are banned.

Quote:

A third video in a series devoted to exposing how the abortion industry is willing to arrange sex-selection abortions for women who seek them shows two National Abortion Federation-affiliated clinics in Arizona agreeing to break state law and perform an illegal sex-selective abortion.

Live Action has released the third video in the series after two other videos exposed how staff at Planned Parenthood abortion centers agreed to facilitate sex-selection abortions.

The new footage shows two NAF members, Camelback Family Planning in Phoenix and the Tucson Women’s Center in Tucson, promising to ignore the law and perform a sex-selective abortion and coaching a woman to lie on official paperwork to conceal the illegal abortion.

When the woman purportedly seeking to abort her girl and try again for a boy explains this at the Camelback abortion clinic, a counselor named Barb advises, “Don’t tell us that, because we don’t want to know.” Referring to the clinic’s abortion doctor, Gabrielle Goodrick, Barb says, “You can tell her, she’s gonna tell you the same thing, just: Don’t let it be down! She’s really good about that. You’ll like that about her.”

At the Tucson clinic, the surgical assistant Francisco tells the woman, “We could lose our license,” but agrees to cover-up her sex-selective abortion. “I’ll just forget about it,” he says, “But just be sure not to mention it” to the abortion doctor–“Don’t even mention it to him.”

Sex-selective abortion is a felony in Arizona and abortion clinics may not knowingly perform a sex-selective abortion in Arizona, or solicit or accept money to do so.

Live Action president Lila Rose urges Arizona authorities to enforce the state’s sex-selection ban and informed LifeNews that her group has sent the full footage from the Arizona clinics to the state Attorney General, Tom Horne, and to local law enforcement officials.

“Sex-selective abortion is a global search-and-destroy mission against little girls that is spreading at an alarming rate,” she said. “While we wait for Congress to pass the Prenatal Non-Discrimination Act to ban sex-selective abortion in the U.S., state authorities should vigorously enforce Arizona’s law. The clinics supporting sex-selective abortion should be investigated, prosecuted, de-funded, and de-licensed immediately.”

Not only have the videos implicated Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion business, they now have show how NAF-affiliated clinics are willing to break the law and arrange sex-selection abortions as well. NAF is the professional trade group for hundreds of abortion clinics not affiliated with Planned Parenthood that operate in the U.S. and Canada. Many NAF board members are current or former Planned Parenthood officials, and Planned Parenthood representatives frequently play a prominent role at NAF annual meetings.

The first video detailed a planned Parenthood staffer at an Austin,Texas facility urging a sex-selection abortion and a second video shows staff at Planned Parenthood’s Margaret Sanger clinic in New York City helping arrange one.

Planned Parenthood has responded to the first video by essentially saying it will do abortions for any reason and adding that the staffer in the video violated unnamed policies and has since been fired from her position. A top Planned Parenthood official recently defended its decision to oppose a bill in Congress that would have banned sex-selection abortions.

If 20/20 were doing this... never mind, the lamestream media could care less about the real war on women. And no, don't tell me to blame the mother. Abortion clinics all over the country have been breaking laws for years and that demands "awareness" - a word you leftists should be able to relate to. But go ahead, keep pretending that the right is engaged in a war on women while excusing your own.

Oh and an update . Nan Hayworth forced the idiot to resign.

PP as we all know does it's founder proud. Margaret Sanger has her place in Hades with the pointy tailed minions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

Margaret Sanger has her place in Hades with the pointy tailed minions.

Right there with ex-president Bush.

Hello again:

Senate Republicans Again Block Pay Equity Bill.

Steve thinks what ONE person does against a woman is a war... I, however, think that what CONGRESS does against women is REALLY a war.

excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again:

Senate Republicans Again Block Pay Equity Bill.

Steve thinks what ONE person does against a woman is a war... I, however, think that what CONGRESS does against women is REALLY a war.

excon

Why don't you go south of the border it appears your war on drugs has become a war on women

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

why don't you go south of the border it appears your war on drugs has become a war on women

Hello clete:

Huh?

excon

Quote:

In a statement, President Obama said, “It is incredibly disappointing that in this make-or-break moment for the middle class, Senate Republicans put partisan politics ahead of American women and their families.”

In the Obama economy anyone is lucky to have a job to get a pay check . The Equal Pay Act of 1963 already forbids pay discrimination .So all Obama has to do is unleash Eric Holder's Justice Dept if there is a suspicion of pay discrimination. But he won't do that because this is not about pay discrimination at all. It should be renamed the Ambulance Chasing ,Slip and Fall Lawyer's Job Security Bill.
Instead of jerking around with these fringe issues ,why doesn't Obama tell Harry Reid to actually pass a budget ?
Now ,if in fact a women makes so much less than a man ;as an employer ,why would you hire a man when you could pay the women so much less ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again:

Senate Republicans Again Block Pay Equity Bill.

Steve thinks what ONE person does against a woman is a war... I, however, think that what CONGRESS does against women is REALLY a war.

excon

Hi Ex,

Yes, I mentioned this previously. Steve's examples show that particular individuals and some individuals within corporations have a political leaning. It also might show these individuals and organizations are waging a war of some type.

It is important to point out these examples in order to create awareness.

Nonetheless, these examples, don't address the issue at hand. We know individuals are organizations wage war much of the time, but how does this trace back to policy, legislation or proposed policy? This is what needs to be demonstrated.

I used the example of hitting the Piñata and asked the question how did this event come about as the result of policy and legislation? I think it would be difficult to look at these events and trace them back to legislation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TUT317

I used the example of hitting the Pinata and asked the question how did this event come about as the result of policy and legislation? I think it would be difficult to look at these events and trace them back to legislation.

And I believe I said something about policy means nothing if in practice you're waging a war on women. This clinic in AZ has a policy to follow state law and refuse sex-selective abortions, but in practice they do it anyway. It's the same with Democrats in Congress and the White House, they promote a policy of equality but in practice still women get the short end of the stick.

That's a huge problem I have with today's liberalism, "do as I say and not as I do" is their policy.