Today's the Big Day!

christiefan915 said:
It's not about the Fed vs. the states. It's about whether a government entity has the right to tell people (read: women) what they can or cannot put into their bodies to manage birth control. Something tells me you'd be screaming about the illegality if men could get pregnant. A government entity banning birth control is as totalitarian a concept as China's one child policy, or aborting female fetuses.
Click to expand...

Ever hear of dry and wet counties?

You could still purchase birth control, just not in that state legally. I bet if they banned cigarettes, smokers would still buy them somewhere.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
...but many do. I know quite a few devout Catholics who oppose birth control. They may not be a majority of American Catholics but they are hardly a small minority.
Click to expand...

I know some who oppose it in principle, too. Yet I have to wonder why we don't have the large families that were the norm in our grandparents' era. My mom's mom had 14 kids. My dad's mom had six. Do you think it's just coincidence that the average number of children in an American family is less than two?
 
Socrtease said:
I think now, democrats should donate to Santorum's campaign. What last night showed, at least in Iowa, is that 75% of the voter DIDN'T want Romney. So the object, if you want Obama re-elected, is to help a repub candidate that independents and moderate Dems will NEVER vote for. That guy is Rick Santorum. Only in an Obama wet dream does he face Santorum in a General Election. As Bachman and Perry get out there fundamentalist voters have to go somewhere, Santorum would be the biggest beneficiary of those.
Click to expand...

Bachmann has called it quits, her voters will most likely go Santorum.
 
I remember reading about a pharmacist somewhere who took all of the birth control out of his store, because it was "killing babies"...
 
Alias said:
I bet if Darla had cunnilingus done on her correctly she'd melt like an ice cube on the kitchen floor on a hot summer day.
Click to expand...

You've just reached rock-bottom as far as disgusting posts go. I shouldn't even respond because it'll just bump up but... you need to back off with that kind of shit, now.
 
Alias said:
I agree with you on this. If there is gonna be change then we want it to occur naturally without govt interference. That's what it's all about. We run the govt. Govt doesn't run us. We don't like the left shoving their culture down our throats.
Click to expand...
Occur naturally with out government intereference? How is that humany possible? If that was true slavery would be alive and well in the south, blacks would count as 2/3 a person, children could still be worked in factories and coal mines, women wouldn't be allowed to vote and the middle class would be a fraction of the size it is today, etc, etc. Change is inevitable, it and government is the primary instrument of change. It is up to us, the electorate, to determine that the change is needed and appropriate. You're position is worst impossible and at best untenable. You have a real serious problem with making a Goebelesque bogeyman out of those who do not agree with you. Why don't you try comminicating with them and learning about them and maybe you'll find out that people who don't agree with you aren't these "Leftist" bogeyman you seem to think they are.
 
Darla said:
I think it would prove interesting to watch how the MSM handles his extreme lunatic ideas about women. Allowing states to ban birth control? There is a very small, minute, minority of American women who have never used birth control. And only a handful of American women who are so backwards, stupid, and slavish as to even consider that. I cant' wait to see how the cons, especially the con women on television, will spin that. All of whom are on birth control btw.

Once word gets out, it should be hysterical.
Click to expand...

There is also his creepy factor.
 
Damocles said:
:dunno:

I didn't pay that much attention to him until now. His surprising showing in Iowa makes him somewhat relevant for a while...

I'll have to look into that. I'll need a bit more evidence than somebody just saying he is.
Click to expand...

He isn't relevant, Iowa means nothing, or do you need proof of that, too?
 
Alias said:
I've lived in Iowa and been all over it. I grew up in Minneapolis and had family in Minnesota, Iowa, and Missouri. I'm a midwesterner who has slept in corn fields and eaten catfish right off the stick over an open fire.
Click to expand...
Yea...well me too...graduated from high school in Iowa and did some grad work there at an extremely tough school. My point being is that the fine, fine folk of Iowa are predominantly rural and hardly representative of the nation as a whole.
 
Darla said:
Yes, didn't you click on my "bitch" link? :)

He stated that birth control is “It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be”

He then came out and stated he is for allowing states to ban birth control, which would of course, overturn Griswald vs CT. Griswald has always been the true target of the anti-choice movement. To be clear, individual so-called, pro-life voters, may very well not know this, nor agree with it. I am talking about the professional anti-choice movement.

Very few of the high-profile nutballs are willing to come out and go on record that Griswald is the ultimate target. I suppose that we can all thank this lunatic for doing so.
Click to expand...

He is Catholic, correct, staunch, and creepy about it, I my opinion, so of course, he is going to be against birth control.
 
Alias said:
Ever hear of dry and wet counties?

You could still purchase birth control, just not in that state legally. I bet if they banned cigarettes, smokers would still buy them somewhere.
Click to expand...

Again that's not the point, stop being obtuse. No government, state or Fed, should have the right to tell women what they can put into their bodies to manage reproduction.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Yea...well me too...graduated from high school in Iowa and did some grad work there at an extremely tough school. My point being is that the fine, fine folk of Iowa are predominantly rural and hardly representative of the nation as a whole.
Click to expand...

They're not representative of the country? What's the union representation in Iowa vs. the rest of the country? What's Iowa's economic status compared to the rest of the country? You look at how close the last three Presidential elections have been in that state and I could see someone saying Iowa isn't representative because of how close those votes were and many states weren't competitive at all.
 
Darla said:
I'm sorry Cawacko! how right you are. Here I am babbling on, why, in near hysteria (I almost had to call out for my smelling salts!) over silly women's stuff!

Worrying about outlawing birth control! When there are serious problems to talk about. Stuff that effects real people. You know, men.

Let me remove myself from all this blather! I do apologize! I am sure there are some dishes that need washing around here somewhere. I'll get busy on that and you men light your cigars and get out the brandy and figure this all out.

Would anyone like me to pour them some water while I am hanging around?

Cake? Anything?
Click to expand...
ROTFLMAO!!! Nice Burn!
 
christiefan915 said:
I know some who oppose it in principle, too. Yet I have to wonder why we don't have the large families that were the norm in our grandparents' era. My mom's mom had 14 kids. My dad's mom had six. Do you think it's just coincidence that the average number of children in an American family is less than two?
Click to expand...
Nope not at all....my point being....they are not a lunatic fringe minority.
 
Damocles said:
Ah... I see. He supports states' rights, and was asked, "What about this SCOTUS ruling?" and said that states should have the right to ban contraception and that he thought the ruling was a bad one.

Basically he thinks that the states have been stripped of rights.
I
He even said, "I wouldn't vote for a law like that, because I think it is an improper law, but think the state should be able to pass laws that aren't covered by direct constitutional rights" (paraphrasing)...
Click to expand...

No, he has stated that he is personally against birth control and believes it harms the nation. I saw him in several interviews stating that birth control is bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top