Thanks, US women, for making sure Romney did not get elected.

[MoonWater]

I'm sure that, if elected, Romney will do a fine job, and women are in no greater danger than we're in now.

Mitt Romney isn't interested in taking away anyone's rights. He just doesn't want the government to foot the bill for someone else's lack of planning.

When asked about how to solve the problem of inequality in the workplace, Mitt Romney went on about making sure that women had as many opportunities as men.

Even if he would do a fine job, it's not just Romney we have to worry about if he gets elected.

I'm not sure why you feel that women will be in danger if Mitt Romney gets elected (which I'm thoroughly hoping will happen).

That comment was more about the actions of the republican party in general rather than Mit Romney specifically. If you need an example of what I'm talking about just look up the latest on "forcible rape"

 

[Alceste]

Somebody doesn't know what my stance is, and the oft repeated stance on abortion Mitt Romney has.

Your stance is that supreme court justices should be selected on the basis of their stance on abortion and gay marriage, and that the constitution should be amended to extend full human rights to fetuses from the moment of conception? And you're comfortable with the fact there is no mention of any exceptions in this platform?

Romney customizes his stance on abortion to suit the preference of every new audience. I'd stick with reading the platform if I were you.

 

[Harmonious]

Even if he would do a fine job, it's not just Romney we have to worry about if he gets elected.

That comment was more about the actions of the republican party in general rather than Mit Romney specifically. If you need an example of what I'm talking about just look up the latest on "forcible rape"

You know... The guy who said it apologized, and has been properly castigated for his stupidity within the Republican party. I can't think of one human being who actually agrees with that line.

Mitt Romney has said that he doesn't agree with that nonsense. Rape is rape, and rape is evil.

Are all Republicans okay with rape because one member of Congress was terminally stupid?

That's a rather interesting brush to use against all Republicans.

 

[Harmonious]

It amazes me that someone would begrudge someone else sexual pleasure on the grounds that sexual pleasure should not -- or ought not -- be that important to them. That might be good enough for some people, but what right have those people to decide for everyone else what priority to place on sex in their lives?

Really? That's what you got out of my post?

:cover:

No one is curbing anyone's sexual pleasure. But if you don't want babies to happen, and you can't afford to have them, perhaps planning not to have sex should be a consideration BEFORE the child is conceived.

If this can't be thought of before hand, WHY, in the name of all that is pink and fuzzy, should the government have to pay to abort a child that the people having sex couldn't be bothered to consider before HAVING sex?

Don't want babies? Don't have sex. Or, if you DO have sex, and you don't want babies, take preventative measures. But if they fail, don't expect the government to kill it because you couldn't be bothered to remember that sex often leads to babies.

If you STILL want to kill it, do it on your own dime. Not mine.

ETA: I wouldn't object to tax dollars helping the victim of rape or incest, or saving the life of a mother.

I don't want to help pay because you willingly had sex and don't want to deal with the consequences.

 

[sandandfoam]

I'm with Alceste

 

[Î Î¿Î»Ï Ï€Î­ÏÏ‡Ï‰Î½ Γʹ]

Nothing to celebrate about. If anything, it proves women are as stupid as men.

 

[Sunstone]

Nothing to celebrate about. If anything, it proves women are as stupid as men.

I can't think of anything you could have said that would be dimmer or more insipid. I wouldn't even call what you've done "expressing an opinion." It's more like "gutting an opinion", don't you think?

 

[Revoltingest]

Remember folks, election time is for vilifying the other party, not the other poster.
Let the great Buckaroo Banzai guide us all in these testy times.....
[youtube]ynozTOWeX1I[/youtube]
Buckaroo Banzai - Don't be mean - YouTube

 

[Storm]

When asked about how to solve the problem of inequality in the workplace, Mitt Romney went on about making sure that women had as many opportunities as men.

Until you ask whether he supports the Lily Ledbetter Act mandating equal pay for equal work. Apparently, that's a stumper.

You know... The idea is that, with the exception of rape, incest, and saving the life of a mother, any other situation should be thought of with consideration.

Condoms aren't 100% reliable, and no contraceptive option IS, except abstinence. If a woman chooses to have sex and gets pregnant, the government shouldn't have to pay for her right to say, "Gee, maybe I shouldn't have done that."

A little self-control should work wonders, and it isn't the government's responsibility to make sure a woman keeps her panties on, or to fix it if she voluntarily chooses not to and simply doesn't want to deal with the results.

Well, if you're going to insist that women "keep their panties on" in the first place, you've got to have SOMEBODY peering into their bedrooms!

Seriously, this sort of casual dismissal of deeply upsetting and personal decisions is misogynistic in the extreme, and I don't care whether you're female yourself or not.

 

[Storm]

You know... The guy who said it apologized, and has been properly castigated for his stupidity within the Republican party. I can't think of one human being who actually agrees with that line.

Mitt Romney has said that he doesn't agree with that nonsense. Rape is rape, and rape is evil.

Are all Republicans okay with rape because one member of Congress was terminally stupid?

That's a rather interesting brush to use against all Republicans.

It wasn't just one elected official who's made highly disturbing statements about rape, and Romney hasn't even dropped his endorsement of the one who said that pregnancies from rape are "what God intended to happen."

At any rate, the issue on the table isn't whether government should pay for 'elective' abortions, but whether we should keep it safe and legal at all, or go back to the days of death by coathanger.

 

[fantome profane]

You know... The guy who said it apologized, and has been properly castigated for his stupidity within the Republican party. I can't think of one human being who actually agrees with that line.

Has Paul Ryan ever actually changed his position? Romney may have flipped all over the place, but to my knowledge Ryan has not. Yes he is the second man on the ticket and must acquiesce to Romney's view du jour, but has never wavered on his personal opinion that abortion should be illegal even in the case of rape.

 

[Harmonious]

Until you ask whether he supports the Lily Ledbetter Act mandating equal pay for equal work. Apparently, that's a stumper.

I would agree to that.

Well, if you're going to insist that women "keep their panties on" in the first place, you've got to have SOMEBODY peering into their bedrooms!

Not really. It's not rocket science. If a woman is pregnant, and she willingly had sex...

If you mean that knowing that it was consensual requires looking into bedrooms, you might be right. That's not my call.

So every unborn child should be subject to a whim as to whether or not it should live?

Seriously, this sort of casual dismissal of deeply upsetting and personal decisions is misogynistic in the extreme, and I don't care whether you're female yourself or not.

I realize that it takes two to tango, and that it takes two people to make a baby.

However, I was assuming that a mother has more rights for what goes on with her body.

Yes, if a man isn't willing or able to support the baby, he shouldn't have sex. But is it wrong to assume a woman to take responsibility for her choice?

A guy should, too.

But if two adults can't control themselves...

If it's mysogenistic to believe a woman should have as much responsibility as rights for her body, you have a personal problem.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Somebody here has not read the Republican party platform on abortion.

This....as well as the record amount of anti-abortion and personhood legislation they've been trying to pass in the states....

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Somebody doesn't know what my stance is, and the oft repeated stance on abortion Mitt Romney has.

Mitt Romney has multiple positions on abortion.

 

[Alceste]

This....as well as the record amount of anti-abortion and personhood legislation they've been trying to pass in the states....

Eighty, I think it is. Any woman who thinks the republicans aren't trying to roll back their right to reproductive choice has her head in the sand. The language is so extreme in some of their proposed legislation, including their constitutional amendment, that it would ban abortion in all circumstances, as well as some forms of birth control, IVF and stem cell research. It would also prohibit the funding of any organization that included abortion in it's services. That's not funding abortions, that's funding hospitals, clinics, etc that happen to provide abortions.

 

[Storm]

I realize that it takes two to tango, and that it takes two people to make a baby.

However, I was assuming that a mother has more rights for what goes on with her body.

Yes, if a man isn't willing or able to support the baby, he shouldn't have sex. But is it wrong to assume a woman to take responsibility for her choice?

A guy should, too.

But if two adults can't control themselves...

If it's mysogenistic to believe a woman should have as much responsibility as rights for her body, you have a personal problem.

I wasn't accusing you of a double standard there. I was saying the post was misogynistic on its face, regardless of whether you're equally dismissive of men.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Has Paul Ryan ever actually changed his position? Romney may have flipped all over the place, but to my knowledge Ryan has not. Yes he is the second man on the ticket and must acquiesce to Romney's view du jour, but has never wavered on his personal opinion that abortion should be illegal even in the case of rape.

He sort of flip-flopped because he's on the Romney ticket. But he and Todd (legitimate rape) Akin sponsored a bill defining rape and I believe personhood. Todd Akin as well as a few others are on...get this....the House Science Committee. Some of them say things like this in regards to rape and others on the committee are creationist who dispute the facts of Evolution.

 

[Harmonious]

I wasn't accusing you of a double standard there. I was saying the post was misogynistic on its face, regardless of whether you're equally dismissive of men.

I'm sorry that you find it dismissive that I assume two adults have more control of their choices than rutting animals.

I believe in human dignity, and that even as humans are animals, I believe we are higher than simple animals.

 

[Alceste]

I'm sorry that you find it dismissive that I assume two adults have more control of their choices than rutting animals.

I believe in human dignity, and that even as humans are animals, I believe we are higher than simple animals.

Not really the point. The republicans don't believe in a rape exception, and Romney tried to veto access to emergency contraception for rape victims, calling it an "abortion pill". This isn't about consensual sex and it's consequences. It's about reproductive choice, full stop. All those outrageous comments about rape didn't come out of nowhere. GOP candidates were trying to explain why there are no exceptions in their ideology, their platform and some of their new anti-abortion regulation. Why are there no rape exceptions? Well because women can't get pregnant from "legitimate" rape. No incest exceptions? No problem, because incest is "rare". No exceptions for the life of the mother? Well, with modern medicine women never die from pregnancy any more. These aren't fringe opinions, they're facts being made up on the fly to rationalize the anti-choice platform of the most misogynistic political party in America since women won the right to vote.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

He sort of flip-flopped because he's on the Romney ticket. But he and Todd (legitimate rape) Akin sponsored a bill defining rape and I believe personhood. Todd Akin as well as a few others are on...get this....the House Science Committee. Some of them say things like this in regards to rape and others on the committee are creationist who dispute the facts of Evolution.

Yeah and Paul Broun (R-Ga.) is on the House Science Committee, too. Forget evolution ... he doesn't even accept embryology! And no, I'm not taking him out of context, [youtube]ZBy3MbP4WDo[/youtube]
watch for yourself.

And the man is a medical doctor! (Though he's not a scientist, as he claims in the video.) Not a good sign for women.