A very odd post coming from the anti liberal @bobknight33 who spent the day arguing in support of the Texas abortion regulations designed to end choice and remove all access to abortions (and most reproductive health services) in Texas.

Ok, I'll explain it.

It's a comedic piece, not a lecture on reproductive health.

It doesn't matter if condoms are 97, 80 or 50% effective. They are being used as a stand-in for something that HAS a 97% consensus on its accuracy.

Granted, it's not a completely perfect analogy (they are comparing efficacy to consensus), but it's poetic licence. In other words.....

it's a fucking joke.

As for writing people off, everyone is entitled to make mistakes, but really at this point climate deniers are up there with creationists, homeopaths, and flat earthers. There's only so much slack we can cut them, before we move the fuck on and say "If you believe that shit, you're an idiot"

I don't really understand how you can say "If you don't want to get raped, don't dress like a slut", as if raping sluts is somehow normal or more approved of. Raping anyone is bad, whatever their profession is. Though I do agree with the similar sentiment that "If you don't want to be thought of as a slut, don't dress like a slut." Just like (borrowing from Dave Chappelle) if you don't want to be thought of as a policeman don't go wearing a police uniform.

About the equal pay, they go on about it here too, but it's frankly just bullshit. They get the statistics by running together averages of every job but neglect the fact that if you take a man and a woman who do the same job and have equal experience, they get equal per hour pay. The fact that women on average end up in lower paying jobs and/or do less hours is another issue entirely. If we "equalized" the wages like they're suggesting it'd lead to a situation where women get paid more for less work, which is even less equal.

The microaggression thing... Really? People take the words that seriously? What the fuck is wrong with people? And aren't most swear words in English actually religious in origin, rather than sexual in nature? And even then, I can't think of a single swear word that says "what women do during sex is bad and humiliating". Any suggestions?

Reproductive health... Well, the American medical system is fucked up beyond recognition anyways, so par for the course. Good luck with that.

Media representation is a pretty valid point though, but I must say you don't really see a wide variety of men either, they're largely homogenized in very similar ways to how women in media are usually portrayed. And to the sheer amount of women on TV... I'd like to think that if more women were better at it than men, then there'd be more women there. I don't want a 50/50 split just for the sake of equality, I want the best people to do the jobs whether they're men or women.

Making it such a big deal for the Two Person relationship is just a ploy to lend legitimacy to the Two Person relationship model.

The truth is, marraige has nothing to do with the survival of DNA. DNA will find a way.

These INCORPORATIONS between two people logically must be a process extended to MORE THAN TWO.

Polygamy is just as legitimate when the participants are of age, and love each other (or not) and raise each others kids (or not).

It doesnt stop with homosexual COUPLES. This farce of govt endorsing COUPLES is obvious.

This whole thing is just misdirection away from the real issues of reproductive health and the consequences of overpopulation. Gah.

So liberating 30 million Iraqs from a cruel dictator in favor of free elections is the US "interfering with another nation's sovereignty" but the reproductive health of women around the world, that's our business, and so we should fund irresponsibility overseas, just like liberals do here at home.

And the only reason Obamarx hired this reptile was crosshairs insurance.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Government has no business interfering with or paying for personal medical decisions, either at home or abroad. That isn't government's job. I support the concept of allowing abortion to be a legal medical proceedure. I'm against any medical care being supported, advertised, promoted, and conducted with taxpayer money.
Essentially, I reject Clinton's spurious assertion that without the US government spending bazillions of dollars that the entire planet devolves into a mass of human misery. It isn't the US government's job to educate the world population about 'reproductive health'. If a citizen is concerned about the issue, they can personally volunteer time and resources to the cause. Supporting that cause with tax funds is wrong.
The well of human misery and need is a bottomless pit. The government can't and shouldn't even try to get involved in these kinds of issues. Encourage citizen volunteerism. Don't create government agencies, programs, and taxpayer pits to support causes 'du jour' in perpetuity.


What's your beef with socialized medicine? Tell us *why* taxpayer-funded medical care is wrong.

Canada, Norway, Sweden, France, Britain, and a bevy of other industrialized western countries have a taxpayer-funded system - and are healthier countries to boot.

Why do you hate healthy people? Why do you fight for a sicker America? Why do you hate puppies?

Government has no business interfering with or paying for personal medical decisions, either at home or abroad. That isn't government's job. I support the concept of allowing abortion to be a legal medical proceedure. I'm against any medical care being supported, advertised, promoted, and conducted with taxpayer money.

Essentially, I reject Clinton's spurious assertion that without the US government spending bazillions of dollars that the entire planet devolves into a mass of human misery. It isn't the US government's job to educate the world population about 'reproductive health'. If a citizen is concerned about the issue, they can personally volunteer time and resources to the cause. Supporting that cause with tax funds is wrong.

The well of human misery and need is a bottomless pit. The government can't and shouldn't even try to get involved in these kinds of issues. Encourage citizen volunteerism. Don't create government agencies, programs, and taxpayer pits to support causes 'du jour' in perpetuity.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C06E3D91139F930A25756C0A962958260

The bill covers a wide range of things, making it a capital crime to attack (fatal or not fatal) any thing that is on the property of the clinic. Constitutes it as an act of domestic terrorism.

It also makes it a federal offense to blockade.

The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE or the Access Act, Pub. L. No. 103-259, 108 Stat. 694) (May 26, 1994, 18 U.S.C. § 248), passed in 1994, prohibits the use of intimidation or physical force to prevent or discourage persons from (A) gaining access to a reproductive health care facility (which most notably includes abortion clinics), or (B) exercising freedom to worship at a religious facility. The law also creates specific penalties for the destruction of, or damage to, a reproductive health care facility or place of religious worship.

What this does is effectivly makes it Illegal to come onto Clinic Property, even if it is not fenced in, this is construed as a Federal Offense.

Sit ins, blockades, or chaining of doors shall not be tolerated under the rule of law.

This bill does take away from the right of protesters to protest. All of the acts that are punishable are acts that infringe upon the safety and protection of the woman's choice.

This law also affords the same protection to places of religion.

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/law/clinic-access/

>> ^CaptainPlanet420:
You must by default be pro-abortion to be pro-choise.

You must by default be pro-sex to be pro-life.

The main issue, which Obama states rather clearly, is that the most effective ways to reduce both abortions and unwanted pregnancies is not the il/legaliziation of abortion.

Most of the hardcore pro-life crowd are also strongly anti-sex-ed, which is completely inconsistent with their claim that they want to reduce abortions. Reality-based sex-ed , and anonymously available birth-control and reproductive health services are the best way to stop unintended pregnancy, and STI's.

Stopping unwanted pregnancies stops abortions, simple as that.

Gina Solomon is a specialist in adult internal medicine, preventive medicine, and occupational and environmental medicine. She is a Senior Scientist in the Health and Environment Program of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). NRDC is a national nonprofit organization with over 550,000 members dedicated to the protection of public health and the environment.

Dr. Solomon is also an Assistant Clinical Professor of Medicine at the University of California at San Francisco where she is an attending physician at the U.C. Pediatric Environmental Health Specialty Unit. Her work has included research on asthma, diesel exhaust, breast cancer, pesticides, contaminants in breast milk, and threats to reproductive health and child development.

Dr. Solomon attended medical school at Yale and did her residency and fellowship training at Harvard.

*****

Dr. Susan Kegley is an organic chemist with expertise in pesticide toxicology, pollutant fate and transport; environmental monitoring and analytical chemistry; and experience with pesticide regulation, pesticide data sources and the pesticide toxicology and epidemiology literature.

After 14 years of teaching, research and curriculum development in academia, Dr. Kegley worked as a Senior Scientist for nine years at Pesticide Action Network North America, a non-governmental, non-profit organization that works to promote sustainable alternatives to toxic pesticides.

Dr. Kegley started Pesticide Research Institute in 2006.

*****

Tyrone Hayes is a professor in the Department of Integrative Biology, UC Berkeley. His research focuses on the role of steroid hormones in amphibian development and he conducts both laboratory and field studies in the U.S. and Africa. The two main areas of interest are metamorphosis and sex differentiation.

His work addresses problems on several levels including ecological, organismal, and molecular questions. Studies examine the effects of temperature on developmental rates, interactions between the thyroid hormones and steroids, and hormonal regulation of skin gland development.

"In a terse 7-0 decision today, the Colorado Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the state Title Board's approval of a 2008 proposed ballot measure to bestow constitutional rights on fertilized human eggs.

Seven reproductive health advocates filed a legal challenge in August 2007 arguing that the ballot measure authored by Colorado for Equal Rights and approved by the all-male state Title Board did not meet the state's single-subject issue rule and was deceptive in its purpose.

The Court disagreed with the plaintiffs and affirmed the Title Board's action for proposed Initiative 36 which reads:

Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution defining the term "person" to include any human being from the moment of fertilization as "person" is used in those provisions of the Colorado constitution relating to inalienable rights, equality of justice, and due process of law?"

http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/111507WA.shtml