Submitted by Lawrence Rafferty, (rafflaw), Guest Blogger
I don’t think Barry Goldwater would recognize Conservatism or his Republican Party if he was alive today. Conservatism used to mean belief in safe and sound economic spending and freedom for all from governments getting too large and too restrictive on personal freedoms. Recently we have seen Republicans offer up a brand new and dangerous definition of rape in an attempt to restrict abortions and to restrict government money being used to pay for them. Now we are seeing another Republican attempt to restrict the use of contraceptives under the guise of ending the alleged use of Federal funds to pay for abortions.
A recent article outlined the legislation proposed by Rep. Mike Spence of Indiana to eliminate the entire $327 million dollar budget for Title X. Title X is a program that provides funding for women’s health and family planning costs. “The measure would eliminate all $327 million in funding for Title X, a family planning program that began 40 years ago under President Richard Nixon. And while Planned Parenthood receives millions of dollars from the program, Title X funds cannot be used for abortion services. The money is to be used for noncontroversial family planning services, mostly for low-income families.”
Rep. Spence and his fellow Republicans are trying to defund Planned Parenthood because it receives millions from Title X funds to assist women in their family planning and health matters. In order to try to end abortions without testing the strength of Roe v. Wade in the courts, the sponsors and backers of this bill don’t care if low-income women suffer by not getting the health care that they so desperately need. Many of these same legislators also backed the repeal of the Affordable Health Care act which would also assist low-income women get affordable health care.
The proposed legislation would end all monies from Title X and the effects of those funds drying up could be catastrophic for women. “The pro-abortion-rights group NARAL said the legislation would lead to more unwanted pregnancies by cutting funding for contraceptives. “The new anti-choice House leadership now wants to take away birth control and cancer screenings from millions of American women and men,” said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL. “While these politicians attack abortion coverage from every angle, they now want to deny funding for birth control, even though that’s the best way to prevent unintended pregnancy. Americans will not stand for this blatant hypocrisy.” ‘
Is it just me or do I detect a pattern here? What do these mostly male Republicans have against women? I was thinking of writing an article asking when America will have its own “Egyptian” moment, but maybe I should ask when will American Women have their “Egyptian” moment?
Source: Raw Story
Submitted by Lawrence Rafferty, (rafflaw), Guest Blogger
Blouise:
“I’ll bring you a nice cup of tea … you will gird your loins and return to the fray”
It’s been one of those days but you have just allowed me the first, genuine smile of the day!
Rae,
eating good cookies can be very detrimental to spelling and grammar skills.
Could you imagine having to live with Bubba? It would drive a person crazy.
BBB,
I am not moving the goalposts. I don’t need to because the war on women has been very easy to expose. You moved the goal posts when you tried to create a new definition of viability. Roe V. Wade is still the law of the land until the Republicans have the stones to try to pass through Congress a bill overturning it or challenging it in court. Of course, I think I said earlier that they had their chance during the Bush years when they controlled both houses and the White House and they didn’t even try. Why? Because they know most people are in favor of the womens right to choose and the Religious right wouldn’t have any reason to vote anymore for Republicans if the abortion boogey man was no longer there.
Multiple personality syndrome
———————————-
It’s Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
Even something as common as a typo Bubba blames on something other than himself. Today it was “Snicerdoodles”. At other times it’s the cat or trying to eat while typing. It is NEVER, NEVER, Bubba.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyE7SCK_OBQ&w=480&h=390]
You flatter yourself, BBB.
If you do that too much, you might start growing hair on your palms.
Stamford Liberal
1, February 14, 2011 at 4:56 pm
BBB:
I’m wounded. I will now go cry in the corner.
================================================
I’ll bring you a nice cup of tea … you will gird your loins and return to the fray ❗
“I don’t give a shit what you think, B.”
Oh, but you do. You just like to think that by saying you don’t some people will believe you. How’s that working for you?
“You lost that right, Tautology, er, BBB.”
Lashing out?
More insults. Please. The solo practitioners need more to laugh at.
Multiple personality syndrome … I love it 😆
I don’t give a shit what you think, B.
You lost that right, Tautology, er, BBB.
Did I say I had a problem with the sliding scale of Roe v. Wade? No. Because I don’t as a matter of legality. Roe defined viable as “potentially able to live outside the mother’s womb, albeit with artificial aid”. The key part of that is “OUTSIDE THE MOTHER’S WOMB”, half-wit. Until then? A fetus is not a human any more than you are.
So instead of sticking premises into my statements that aren’t there? I think you can figure out where to stick them. You should be able to. It’s the same place you store your head.
Bubba reminds me of a used car salesman. What was his name? Worthington? Yep. Worthington.
When you need…
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiQ_4J9o3rs&w=480&h=390]
BIL,
What’s the matter? Legal precedent and accepted definitions too much for you? Wasn’t it the Supreme Court in Roe who declared that a viable fetus had rights?
You want to see potential human life? Take a look at a sperm and an ovum. Shortly after that; it’s human and it’s alive.
Please don’t hold back with the insults. They are indicative of the acceptance of defeat. That’s the reason you always resort to ad hominem attacks.
rafflaw:
“The Republicans and Tootie and BBB really want to protect their fetuses, but if they get sick after they are born, let someone else take care of them.”
Exactly. Champions of the unborn, kick the already born to the curb. Then they piss and moan when these kids eventually become wards of the state.
BBB:
I’m wounded. I will now go cry in the corner.
Blouise,
Could be.
“Your insistence”
Pardon the sloppy homonym.
I blame the excellent Snicerdoodles I got for Valentine’s Day.
BBB,
When I can go out to lunch with a fetus or buy a car from them?
Then we can talk about them being human and alive.
Until then?
A fetus is a growth until it is born or able to live outside the womb. It has been that way in the animal kingdom since the evolution of placental mammals. You’re insistence that they are humans with rights until they are able to live without the support of the mother’s body is simply wishful thinking.
Here’s a hint:
potential \pə-ˈten(t)-shəl\, adj.,
1: existing in possibility : capable of development into actuality
actual \ˈak-ch(ə-w)əl, -sh(ə-w)əl; -chü-əl, -shü-\, adj.,
1: existing in act and not merely potentially
Now get a clue, Wish Boy.
Hey Buddha … look who’s come calling … 👿
rafflaw,
“The Republicans and Tootie and BBB really want to protect their fetuses, but if they get sick after they are born, let someone else take care of them.”
Why move the goal posts, rafflaw? If you had a valid argument, I doubt you would feel the need.
BBB has Bubba backed into a corner. What will Bubba do?
I know.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACpNVD5GMUw&w=480&h=390]