[speechlesstx]

Hello again, Steve:
Nahhhh... You're perfectly willing to throw a poor pregnant single girl under the bus and SCAR her for life...

If that were true you might have a point.

[excon]

Hello again, Steve:

If that were true you might have a point.

Look. Let's continue on with your "scarred for life" metaphor. First off, I'm sorry your daughter had to endure an abortion... But, IT didn't scar her for life. How she DEALT with it could have done that. Having a family that thinks she committed MURDER might do that. But, the surgical procedure itself doesn't scar anybody...

That's not to say it's like getting cyst removed. It's a MOMENTOUS decision... But, with family support people get past it and live a normal life. Even WITHOUT family support, women get past it.

What they AREN'T, is scarred for life.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Hello again, Steve:

Look. Let's continue on with your "scarred for life" metaphor. First off, I'm sorry your daughter had to endure an abortion... But, IT didn't scar her for life. How she DEALT with it could have done that. Having a family that thinks she committed MURDER might do that. But, the surgical procedure itself doesn't scar anybody...

You really don't get it do you?

[talaniman]

It DOES matter and is relevant to NK's argument, "One case does not a policy make."

"Roughly 50 million legal induced abortions have been performed in the United States" since 1973. He apparently thinks my daughter is the only one thrown under the bus and scarred for life.



In light of the Obamacare promises to lower our healthcare costs I think you should spare us the cost argument.



The charge is the bill was designed to help his sister profit, which is pathetically stupid. She is a partner in a surgical group, and most surgical groups are not geared toward abortion - particularly those steered to her by a bill you guys call a TRAP law.





Spare me, PP has no regard for women, children or the law.

>Deleted because poster must think I'm STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<

[speechlesstx]

>Deleted because poster must think I'm STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/curren...ia-743581.html

[excon]

Hello again, Steve:

You really don't get it do you?

Sure I do. Do YOU think you're the ONLY one who's been touched by abortion?? Listening to you rant, you'd think you're the only person in the world who's had to deal with it.

I've dealt with it. To this day, I wonder who that person would be. It's still PAINFUL. I would NOT do it today. Does it make you feel good to know that this liberal wouldn't have an abortion today? Did you think we just screwed and aborted for fun??? Listening to you, I think you do believe that. It was a DIFFICULT decision. But, I'm glad I had the RIGHT to make that decision.

There are NO winners in the abortion debate.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Hello again, Steve:
Sure I do. Do YOU think you're the ONLY one who's been touched by abortion?? Listening to you rant, you'd think you're the only person in the world who's had to deal with it.

Never said I was, in fact I've explicitly told you I know others with the same story. I've witnessed and shared in their pain and their shame - none of it induced by "Having a family that thinks she committed MURDER" as you so harshly put it.

I've dealt with it. To this day, I wonder who that person would be. It's still PAINFUL.

Then you DO get it, she may have overcome the shame but like too many others will never overcome the pain of having aborted their child.

I would NOT do it today. Does it make you feel good to know that this liberal wouldn't have an abortion today? Did you think we just screwed and aborted for fun??? Listening to you, I think you do believe that. It was a DIFFICULT decision. But, I'm glad I had the RIGHT to make that decision.

I never expected it to be an easy decision, and I have already said I don't believe the right will ever be lost. Just spare me the argument that PP is interested in protecting and serving the best interests of women or that they, and people like Wendy Davis want to make abortion "safe and rare."

There are NO winners in the abortion debate.

There can be fewer losers.

[excon]

Hello again,

People form corporations to AVOID some of the responsibilities of BEING a person. That's the ONLY reason they do it.

Having done so, is it fair to say that you really ARE a PERSON, with ALL the Constitutional rights that come with BEING a person??

Do rights come with responsibilities?? Having shed one, are you entitled to the other??

excon

[tomder55]

The ACLU is suing NSA over 1st and 4th Amendment violations . How could they do that if they weren't people who's rights had been violated ? Where is thier standing if the ACLU is not people ?

[excon]

Hello tom:

The ACLU is a law firm that represents individual PEOPLE. And, it doesn't address my argument anyway.

If you GIVE up something to GET something, should you BE entitled to HAVE all the stuff that came with what you GAVE up???

excon

[tomder55]

What other rights should they give up ? You already want to deny them speech ,religious freedom ... how about their 6th amendment right to trial ,or any of the other due process clauses ? How about search and seizure rights ,or 7th amendment right to trial by jury for lawsuits ?
The ACLU is a corporation . The law suit I'm speaking of is called 'ACLU v Clapper'. That tells me they are representing themselves .

[talaniman]

SCOTUS will hear the case of a boss, or religious corporation having the right to deny benefits for its employees because of what they believe.

In an added unexpected tidbit, Walmart will pay its employees who work on this holiday time and a half, and spring for a turkey lunch. WOW! Progress?

[talaniman]

What other rights should they give up ?

Why do workers give up their rights so bosses, and church corporations can exercise theirs?

[tomder55]

???? I already know your position ... like people ,you want corporations to be wards of the state .

[excon]

Hello again, tom:

Let's say the Supreme's agree that corporations HAVE all the religious rights that come with being a person... Would that mean a company run by Christian Scientists wouldn't have to provide health care to its employees AT ALL? Would it mean that Jehovah's Witness's don't have to cover blood transfusions??

Who's religious rights WOULD be recognized?? Could a Jewish run company FORCE its employees to be circumcised? Would my religion that sanctifies pot allow me to FORCE my employees to get high? What if the Westboro Baptist Church formed a corporation??? Could they force their employees to carry signs at funerals?? What if the Aryan Nation church formed a company.. Could they deny employment to black people?

excon

[speechlesstx]

Do you want to force Christian Scientists to buy insurance and Jehovah's Witnesses to cover blood transfusions? Is anyone wanting to force their employees to be circumcised? And I'm betting Westboro is incorporated.

[excon]

Hello again, Steve:

Do you want to force Christian Scientists to buy insurance and Jehovah's Witnesses to cover blood transfusions? Is anyone wanting to force their employees to be circumcised? And I'm betting Westboro is incorporated.

If they run a company with 50 or more employees, then the law says they DO have to cover their employees. So, YEAH, Christian Science and Jehovah lead companies DO have to obey the law.

Nobody wants to force their employees to be circumcised, because Jews like me who run companies NEVER, in a million jillion years, thought that OUR religious beliefs could be FORCED on our employees... But, if the Supreme Court tells me I have that right, I'm SURE I will. More than that, I certainly wouldn't hire gentiles. We don't believe in mixing the races. At least MY sect of Judaism believes that.

excon

[tomder55]

I will stipulate that when SCOTUS decided that a corporation is a person that they distinguished between LEGAL person and NATURAL person. You wouldn't want it any other way . Because if BP was not a legal person under the law then there would be no standing for the lawsuits they have to address. Tal wouldn't want it because their employee contracts would not be binding . If a customer slips and falls at Hobby Lobby ,you want Hobby Lobby to be sued.
You just want it all one way . They are legal persons when it comes to responsibility ,but you refuse to recognize that as a legal person/people they also have rights.

What I like about the case is that Hobby Lobby isn't suing about contraceptives . They don't want to provide insurance that covers abortion pills . The question that matters is not whether a corporation is a person, but whether people must relinquish their First Amendment rights if they own a business.

btw I am not convinced that the same court that decided Citizen's United will also say that Congress intended the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to apply to corporations. Such is my uncertaintly with the Robert's court . But they should be clear that a business owner like David Green and his family should not be compelled to leave relgious convicitions and their morals behind when they walk into their place of business.

[talaniman]

The abortion pill is in fact not an abortion, it stops fertilizing and egg. Abortions are after they are fertilized. Thus inaccurate. Are they against condoms to? Does it apply to older females with endometriosis who are treated with BC pills?

Endometriosis Symptoms, Causes, Treatment - How is endometriosis treated? - MedicineNet

Since endometriosis occurs during the reproductive years, many of the available medical treatments for endometriosis rely on interruption of the normal cyclical hormone production by the ovaries. These medications include GnRH analogs, oral contraceptive pills, and progestins.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs (GnRH analogs)

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs (GnRH analogs) have been effectively used to relieve pain and reduce the size of endometriosis implants. These drugs suppress estrogen production by the ovaries by inhibiting the secretion of regulatory hormones from the pituitary gland. As a result, menstrual periods stop, mimicking menopause. Nasal and injection forms of GnRH agonists are available.

The side effects are a result of the lack of estrogen, and include:
hot flashes,
vaginal dryness,
irregular vaginal bleeding,
mood changes,
fatigue, and
loss of bone density (osteoporosis).

Fortunately, by adding back small amounts of estrogen and progesterone in pill form (similar to treatments sometimes used for symptom relief in menopause) many of the annoying side effects due to estrogen deficiency can be avoided. "Add back therapy" is the term that refers to this modern way of administering GnRH agonists along with estrogen and progesterone in a way to keep the treatment successful, but avoid most of the unwanted side effects.

Oral contraceptive pills

Oral contraceptive pills (estrogen and progesterone in combination) are also sometimes used to treat endometriosis. The most common combination used is in the form of the oral contraceptive pill (OCP). Sometimes women who have severe menstrual pain are asked to take the OCP continuously, meaning skipping the placebo (sugar pill) portion of the cycle. Continuous use in this manner will free a woman of having any menstrual periods at all. Occasionally, weight gain, breast tenderness, nausea, and irregular bleeding are mild side effects. Oral contraceptive pills are usually well-tolerated in women with endometriosis.

Bottom line letting any untrained and uniformed person, boss, or religious corporation getting between a person, and their doctor is a death panel. Agreed?

Another reason to cut out the middle man.

[talaniman]

Maybe it is time to better define who has what rights and when the rights are limited to personal preference, and cannot be trumped by more powerful entities. That's the bottom line.