Personhood Amendments

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by deep

what is so difficult to understand that many women do not believe in abortion, especially for you people that are supporters of the religions belief systems.

Why are you bringing up religion again? I get the impression you are only looking for a fight, especially when you say "you people" - how condescending.

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by corianderstem

The point is that all women human beings should be concerned about words and actions that are belittling, trivializing or dismissive of rape.

I don't care that he's against abortion. And I'm sure he knows that rape is abhorrent and nothing to be trivialized. But words matter, and if people would take two seconds to THINK before speaking, they could avoid coming across like a careless jerk.

This!

[MrsSpringsteen]

You people? Not surprising I guess.

What Cori said. Being against abortion isn't the point. Anyone can do that and not speak about rape and women in such ways. And not everyone does, just this small portion of fools.

Being pro life and/or religious about it isn't making them fools about the topic- they're ignorant. Of course if someone has a predisposed bias to always connect those things, c'est la vie.

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by corianderstem

The point is that all women human beings should be concerned about words and actions that are belittling, trivializing or dismissive of rape.

I don't care that he's against abortion. And I'm sure he knows that rape is abhorrent and nothing to be trivialized. But words matter, and if people would take two seconds to THINK before speaking, they could avoid coming across like a careless jerk.

More than anything, "the rape thing" betrays his discomfort with the subject. Not a good quality for a man in an authoritative position.

Also, there was nothing wrong with deep's use of "you people". Would you have preferred he said "especially those of you who..."? Because it means the exact same thing. I swear, some people just see certain phrases and assume they're supposed to get offended by them

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

Also, there was nothing wrong with deep's use of "you people". Would you have preferred he said "especially those of you who..."? Because it means the exact same thing. I swear, some people just see certain phrases and assume they're supposed to get offended by them

I was offended with deep's use of "you people" and I have a right to be. That wasn't the first time deep tried to pick a fight with me over my religious beliefs by misinterpreting my complaints over GOP candidates being insensitive to rape victims, and until the mods step in, it won't be the last.

ETA: deep's attempts to lure me into a fight are nothing more than a personal attack. I know when I am offended and I don't need someone to tell me when my feelings are invalid.

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by Pearl

I was offended with deep's use of "you people" and I have a right to be.

yes, you have a right to be mad. I know that. You guys don't need to point out your rights to a and b everytime you're challenged on something.
He still used the phrase legitimately and the reaction is a knee jerk one.

Instead of getting upset (or in addition to), you could always address the issue he brought up. If you think he's acting like a fool, prove him to be one by showing that his point is nonsense. Otherwise this place is less about debate and more about a forum to bitch and complain about things

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

yes, you have a right to be mad. I know that. You guys don't need to point out your rights to a and b everytime you're challenged on something.
He still used the phrase legitimately and the reaction is a knee jerk one.

Instead of getting upset, you could always address the issue he brought up. If you think he's acting like a fool, prove him to be one by showing that his point is nonsense

Well, deep isn't exactly known for being the nicest guy around FYM; his devil's advocate and sarcastic approach to issues is common knowledge around here. To see him try to bait me into a fight - as I see it - is like seeing his difficulty make a turn for the worse.

I told him before that I don't answer to him, and apparently that went over his head.

Otherwise this place is less about debate and more about a forum to bitch and complain about things

IMO, deep has bitched and complained about things before, through his sarcastic remarks.

If he really thinks I am being hypocritical because of my religious beliefs and how I react to GOP candidates' insensitive remarks to rape victims (because that is the case. Its not about abortion, but about the attitude towards rape victims), then he should learn to word his posts differently and stop coming across as aggressive.

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by Pearl

Well, deep isn't exactly known for being the nicest guy around FYM; his devil's advocate and sarcastic approach to issues is common knowledge around here. To see him try to bait me into a fight - as I see it - is like seeing his difficulty make a turn for the worse.

I told him before that I don't answer to him, and apparently that went over his head.

His devils advocate style fucking irritates me as well, so me defending him on this one must mean something
If his style leads people to read all his posts in a negative light, that's his problem. I can understand that. I just felt like maybe he's raising a legitimate point (or at the very least, one that could be challenged by someone) that's being overlooked because of semantics. By all means, ignore him. But if he is just trolling, complaining about it openly only gives him what he wants and contributes noise to the convo.

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

But if he is just trolling, complaining about it openly only gives him what he wants and contributes noise to the convo.

He could be just trolling. Thing is, he's been part of Interference for so long and has always behaved this way, you forget about that possibility.

[Jive Turkey]

Anyway, now I'm contributing noise
Back to your regularly scheduled abortion debate

[Pearl]

[deep]

I did almost go back and edit that 'you people' to 'some people' or just 'people'


but I thought because I was not addressing people of color, it would not be construed as 'biased' or 'bigoted'

I do think the whole conversation was about that politician's beliefs about abortion, he is 100% pro life / anti abortion, the fact the conception happened because of rape would not make him pro abortion in that instance.

I don't believe these conservative men, whom I do not agree with, are soft on rape. If anything their conservative, tough on crime stance is quite the opposite. They get caught up in these stupid remarks because of their religions convictions.



Now, there is some good news for you people (some people, people).


Donnelly Leads Mourdock by 11 Points in Indiana | RealClearPolitics

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by deep

I did almost go back and edit that 'you people' to 'some people' or just 'people'


but I thought because I was not addressing people of color, it would not be construed as 'biased' or 'bigoted'

I do think the whole conversation was about that politician's beliefs about abortion, he is 100% pro life / anti abortion, the fact the conception happened because of rape would not make him pro abortion in that instance.

I don't believe these conservative men, whom I do not agree with, are soft on rape. If anything their conservative, tough on crime stance is quite the opposite. They get caught up in these stupid remarks because of their religions convictions.




Now, there is some good news for you people (some people, people).


Donnelly Leads Mourdock by 11 Points in Indiana | RealClearPolitics

Didn't you read what Cori said, which seemed to be in response to your post? I quoted it in agreement.

If you read my comments clearly, you would see I am very upset over these candidates' statements about rape and incest. They are ignorant and insensitive, and it is disturbing that they have supporters.

This has nothing to do with abortion. It is about ignorance and lack of sensitivity.

[Moonlit_Angel]

Yeah, there are plenty of people who are pro-life but also aren't total idiots about these issues.

People who want to be in positions of power should not be so blatantly ignorant and insensitive and mind-numbingly STUPID on these issues. The GOP has a really disturbingly bizarre obsession with this topic lately and it's getting absolutely ridiculous, if it's not already at or beyond that point.

Their comments won't stop or solve anything related to the topics of pregnancies relating from incest and rape. We can ban abortion all we want and it's still going to happen because a ban hasn't actually addressed taking care of the issues themselves that lead TO abortions being possible. They need to get a fucking clue and educate themselves, and if they can't, then they need to just shut up about it already, for the love of all that is good. I'm beyond sick and tired of this insanity.

[Pearl]

This is a disturbing story. Pro-lifers tend to make abortion a black and white issue when in truth, there's a lot of gray areas:

Another phone call, this time from the office of the OBGYN performing the procedure. You must come in 24 hours in advance. "Why?" "To sign a consent form." "What consent form?" Silence. "Well, you only don't have to sign it if you were raped." I was still completely confused. "I wasn't raped. I don't understand. What are you talking about?" "You are having an optional abortion right?" "No. I am having a therapeutic D&C (dilation and curettage operation to remove the fetus and womb lining) to remove a non-viable fetus." "But the baby is alive?" "Well, according to my religious faith, that is not so." "Is there a heartbeat?" "Yes." "Then, I am sorry to say, you are having an elective abortion and you must sign an informed consent 24 hours before the operation."

Roe v. Wade gave states the right to regulate abortion. State laws can mandate that doctors describe the risks of abortion and receive the informed consent of a woman before proceeding. In Ohio, a physician must meet with the pregnant woman 24 hours before the operation to explain the procedure, give the state sponsored materials on alternatives to abortion and receive a signed form stating that the pregnant woman "consents to the particular abortion voluntarily, knowingly, intelligently, and without coercion by any person...." There are "medical necessity" exceptions to this ruling, but due to custom more than statute, the sign of a heartbeat trumps other prognoses.

While Ohio is not the only state preoccupied with the heartbeat, it seems to be one of the most committed. On March 3, 2011, two pregnant women received ultrasounds in a state committee hearing. As Charles Lewis of the National Post reported, "The lobbying effort to end abortion in the United States moved into strange new territory Wednesday as two fetuses were presented via ultrasound to a packed committee room of the Ohio state legislature." State legislatures looked on as "a technician used a probe to show images of each woman's fetus on a portable screen. A heart monitor was used to project the sound of the beating heart of each fetus, nine and 15 weeks." This display was in service of the Heartbeat Bill, a piece of legislation that would make abortion illegal once a heartbeat could be detected. The bill passed the House but not the Senate.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tamara...b_2050888.html

[Moonlit_Angel]

Hey, state legislators, I have a question for you:

What does ANY of this "ultrasound/heartbeat" legislation have to do with rebuilding our economy?

Just wondering. 'Cause I keep hearing you guys say you'll fix that, but...

[LemonMelon]

Is it really a nation worth saving if it allows women to make their own decisions?

[Pearl]

I take it you're only kidding.

[Jive Turkey]

Who decided the completely arbitrary presence of a heartbeat means anything? Why not, does it have any fingers yet? Are there any rudimentary eye spots?

[MrsSpringsteen]

It was sarcasm