Home | About | Donate

Reprieve in Texas, But Assault on Reproductive Rights Continues Nationwide


Reprieve in Texas, But Assault on Reproductive Rights Continues Nationwide

Jon Queally, staff writer

Advocates for reproductive rights welcomed the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday which put a block on a Texas law that would have shuttered nearly every abortion clinic in the state.


Big pricks looking for vaginas to patrol in the name of small gooberment.


Kisses and hugs.


I’m sorry. You present a false dilemma as your right-wing buddies have been doing now for decades. A mass of cells is not a baby or a human being. Wonder all you want. How many potential Mozart’s have been killed in America’s unending wars for oil? If you’re really “pro-life” what about all the unwanted children in foster care? Are you adopting regularly to set an example for others about the depth of your convictions? Are you standing firm against the continued slaughter of our young people in Iraq, Afghanistan and elswhere? Are you concerned about the thousands of innocent civilians murdered in the drone programs carried out in your name? I doubt it. The game you are playing is hypocracy at its finest. You and your’s seem to think the rights of a mass of cells supercedes the rights of an actual law-abiding, tax-paying citizen. The real game is power and control of women and their bodies. Planned Parenthood expended 1.5% of its resources on abortion services last year. Shut them down and you deny health services to the poor women who depend on them. Of course, rich Republican women will simply go to Europe for their abortions and can pick up the phone for a doctor’s appointment the same day they call, so this is a crusade strictly against the poor to make sure they stay poor and the richest stay the richest. If you’re not one of the 1% then you’re a sucker taking up their cause. As for your argument most abortions are simply for convenience…I take it you’ve done a study of a large representative segment of the population and have come to this conclusion based on actual evidence and extensive interviews of those who have had abortions so you are an expert par excellance.




The plantman13 cometh…and we thank you…and your exceedingly wise commentary :wink:


Ah yes…the WiseOwl is indeed wise…and fierce too :wink:


Thank you for your kind words.


Silly, silly mminlamesa…you are now dismissed ;(


You, plantman13, are entirely welcome :wink:


I’m so glad you saw fit to reply. I love a good debate, although I’m not so sure about your style. Name calling is usually a sign of a bankrupt argument as the poster has nothing better. I spread neither hate nor bile. I do not know you and could care less about your opinion. Please show where that occured. You, of course answered none of my points save one. I suggest you study up on debate. Your rebuttal must address my points otherwise they go unanswered and conceeded. I don’t have to defend a speech made in 1923. I never mentioned Margaret Sanger and find your comments on her irrelevent. Margaret Sanger is dead and no longer runs Planned Parenthood. You also ignored my question of your own great commitment to your crusade. Have you done any of the things I suggested as demonstration of your deep and abiding “pro-life” stance? Do you boycott all Chinese goods? Women are forced to endure abortions mandated by the state every day so I’m sure you closely check every item you buy to make sure you are not supporting such a program. This of course means you don’t shop at Hobby Lobby or similar stores where goods from China dominate the selections available. I wonder how much government money Lockheed takes in every day to support its drone program which kills real children? Then there’s the 58,000,000. Big numbers. The US has killed that many civilians in its wars of agression since the beginning of the 20th century. You call me a science denier without any evidence to show how that is so. Which science have I denied? The pseudo-science of certain religious leaders? The non-science of “pro-life” fanatics? It is easy for you to dismiss the three top reasons for abortions as “inconvenience” but that’s your interpretaion. You don’t know these people and the struggle of their daily lives. How wonderful if we all had the same advantages as you but many do not and crushing poverty is not just inconvenient.
Another NEA product? I’m not sure what that’s supposed to mean. I don’t subscribe to NEA publications and am not a member. Stick to the facts. I do appreciate your stats on PP’s abortion rate and govt. subsidies but again, irrelevent. The interesting core of your anger seems directed at people you don’t know and have zero understanding of their lives and trials. You seem to think women dance blithly to the clinic for their monthly abortion without a care in the world. The women I have spoken with who have had this experience report an entirely different experience and are not happy about of what happened. You have no empathy.


Good to hear you have put your efforts where your mouth is. I have not ignored or turned a blind eye to those who meet the requirements of their convictions. I did ask the other poster questions because I am curious if that is the case or not with him. I usually find those who shout the loudest do the least. I commend the work of you and your associates. I also appreciate your decision not to terminate you and your wife’s own difficult pregnancy. I, too, was in a similar situation and my daughter, who was not aborted, is now 33 and a mom herself. This is what is ment by choice. It can go either way. I may not personally approve of another citizen’s choices but I have no right to limit them as they have no right to limit mine. (Excepting, of course, where that choice is a danger to others…rape, robbery mayhem, etc.) Where we come to difference is your loose definition of what constitutes a human being. My finger nail is not a human being. My liver and heart are not human beings. They have no rights as such and I can certainly remove and/or replace them should they become a burden to my continued existence… A foetus is not a human being. It is as alive as my thumb. Its DNA is human in origin but it has not become a viable, breathing person. I have yet to meet anyone who claims to possess memories from the womb. The Constitution is actually very explicit on the subject. It defines a citizen as a “person” who has been BORN in the United States or has been naturalized. You would give greater rights to a mass of unborn, non-citizen cells than to a living, breathing, law-abiding, tax-paying citizen. Using terms like “the unborn” and “unborn children” makes implications that are not supported by evidence and serves only to inflame the ignorant. A foetus is not a child. As for the “research” of pro-life ministries, I would take that with a pound of salt. Religion usually starts with the conclusion and then proceeds to tweek the facts to show that conclusion is true. I rely on peer-reviewed publications like the journal Science, Nature, PLoS One etc. I agree there should be a better way, but there isn’t. There isn’t because certain interest groups have used the issue (on both sides) to manipulate and influence voters. Most of this is about power and control of half the population. Its about money. I have lived and worked in DC and I can tell you most politicians who appear to be champions of one side or the other could care less. They are panderers who take positions to garner votes and nothing more. If anyone were sincerely interested in solving this dilemma, they would be talking like you and me, not screeming insults and trying to demonstrate the other side to be monsters. Perhaps you and I can hash this out and come up with a better solution except then we would be in the crosshairs as well and probably just add one more source of conflict to this complicated issue…and it is VERY complicated. Twenty five words or less will not do. As Mark Twain once said, in order to build a perfect society, we must first hang all the lawyers.


So? It is still NONE of your business why a woman chooses or has to end a pregnancy.