Ron Paul says Rush's apology was about $

[Cancel 2016.11]

LMAO... says one of the two women proclaiming that they have won victory?

Seriously, the two of you are being quite obtuse. My comment was nothing like Rush's. YOU are the one seeing what it is you want, rather than looking at was really there. You jumped to conclusions and now are too embarrassed to back down from your comments.

Oh, it's the law of the land. There is no debate over who won.

 

[Damocles]

Yeah, you aren't sinful if you're gay, just if you have gay sex. What a joke. So, it is not therefore a sin to be a pedophile only if you have sex witha child is it a sin.

How stupid is that, to me, really stupid, same with the phrase, love the sinner, hate the sin. Who do you think you are fooling?

If Ted Bundy had never killed anybody, but really wanted to, would he still be a murderer?

I'll try to take this into the reality. If giving somebody an abortive agent (the day after pill to the Catholics) is a sin, then forcing them to give them to people is forcing them into action that they would find morally reprehensible. Hiring a dude who is gay is not a sin, and being gay is also not a sin. They have no moral objection to their being, and no control over what they do when they aren't at work.

Telling somebody they must take direct action against their religion or be punished is a violation of a first amendment right. Even if you disagree with what they see as a sin.

What type of preventative medicine specifically for homosexuals exists that would be sinful to provide? The analogy simply doesn't equate at any level. There is no medicine that they would need to provide for these people, other than abortive agents and chemical contraceptives, that would be "sinful" for them to provide.

It isn't the action of the woman that they object to, it is being forced to "sin" themselves or face government punishment of some form or another.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Yes. Mandating insurance coverage of preventative health care is not new, in fact many states have already mandated birth control coverage. The only new thing here is the right wing freaking out over basic preventative health care and deciding to make contraception an issue in the 2012 election. Let me know how that works out for you.

I hear ya. Abortion is one thing but birth control is like the 4th pillar of politics for women. Touch it and your dead.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Another very "manly" statement by SF.

Sex relieves stress for men because they don't have to worry about getting pregnant!

This of course is an excellent point of Rana's, and let's not gloss over it.

When women have to worry about getting pregnant, sex is fraught with worry and stress. It is amazing how many posts written by both Damo and Sf are written from a male supremacist point of view. Really astounding. Neither of them appear to have ever even considered these issues from a woman's point of view.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

"My comment was nothing like Rush's. YOU are the one seeing what it is you want, rather than looking at was really there. You jumped to conclusions and now are too embarrassed to back down from your comments."

I'll certainly take your word that you didn't mean it that way. But it was an incredibly stupid comparison to make.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

I say sexist stuff like he does all the time to my wife. If she saw the supportive stuff I was writting in this thread she'd be shocked.

Why? Is it to spar back and forth? Anyway, that's fine, that's your private business Mott. I am not SF's wife! Just out curiousity which do you really believe, what you say to your wife or what you said here? Are you doing this just to piss SF off Mott?!

 

[Phantasmal]

If Ted Bundy had never killed anybody, but really wanted to, would he still be a murderer?

I'll try to take this into the reality. If giving somebody an abortive agent (the day after pill to the Catholics) is a sin, then forcing them to give them to people is forcing them into action that they would find morally reprehensible. Hiring a dude who is gay is not a sin, and being gay is also not a sin. They have no moral objection to their being, and no control over what they do when they aren't at work.

Telling somebody they must take direct action against their religion or be punished is a violation of a first amendment right. Even if you disagree with what they see as a sin.

What type of preventative medicine specifically for homosexuals exists that would be sinful to provide? The analogy simply doesn't equate at any level. There is no medicine that they would need to provide for these people, other than abortive agents and chemical contraceptives, that would be "sinful" for them to provide.

It isn't the action of the woman that they object to, it is being forced to "sin" themselves or face government punishment of some form or another.

I was raised in the Church where they teach you thought is just as sinful as the act. They contradict themselves, often.

Darla has shown you wrong, but you keep repeating your incorrect thinking. No one is forcing the Church to supply birth control for women, why do you keep repeating this fallacy?

 

[Phantasmal]

If Ted Bundy had never killed anybody, but really wanted to, would he still be a murderer?

I'll try to take this into the reality. If giving somebody an abortive agent (the day after pill to the Catholics) is a sin, then forcing them to give them to people is forcing them into action that they would find morally reprehensible. Hiring a dude who is gay is not a sin, and being gay is also not a sin. They have no moral objection to their being, and no control over what they do when they aren't at work.

Telling somebody they must take direct action against their religion or be punished is a violation of a first amendment right. Even if you disagree with what they see as a sin.

What type of preventative medicine specifically for homosexuals exists that would be sinful to provide? The analogy simply doesn't equate at any level. There is no medicine that they would need to provide for these people, other than abortive agents and chemical contraceptives, that would be "sinful" for them to provide.

It isn't the action of the woman that they object to, it is being forced to "sin" themselves or face government punishment of some form or another.

What if the pill isn't prescribe to prevent pregnancy, but to prevent other medical conditions?

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

I was raised in the Church where they teach you thought is just as sinful as the act. They contradict themselves, often.

Darla has shown you wrong, but you keep repeating your incorrect thinking. No one is forcing the Church to supply birth control for women, why do you keep repeating this fallacy?

Oh no no no, you misunderstand Rana! He's not aruging that the church is being forced to supply birth control, he dropped that argument after my 103rd post to him explaining why that wasn't true. Now he's just engaging in an "intellectual exercise!" Some people call this wanking, others call it something else but I dislike scatalogical references so I will remain mum!

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

What if the pill isn't prescribe to prevent pregnancy, but to prevent other medical conditions?

Then Bravo, the vagina inspector, will get all up in there and if he is satisfied that this is the case, he will approve the prescription! Yay!

This is called, fucking with permission. You have to get that slip though Rana!

 

[Phantasmal]

Then Bravo, the vagina inspector, will get all up in there and if he is satisfied that this is the case, he will approve the prescription! Yay!

This is called, fucking with permission. You have to get that slip though Rana!

Mea culpa, my turn!

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Nope, sorry, not embarrassed at all, but you should be.

Nope, not at all. I think you two are spouting off the same hate filled mantra the Dems want to put forth. Making this about men vs. women. Which it is not. Can't help but notice you and Darla continue to avoid answering those very simple questions. Is it because it blows up the stupidity of your argument?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Projection!

Read the thread Rana, it isn't projection. It is reality. It is what Darla has done consistently on this thread.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Another very "manly" statement by SF.

Sex relieves stress for men because they don't have to worry about getting pregnant!

Sex is a stress reliever for both sexes... not just men. You are once again making a sexist statement in suggesting that only women worry about unwanted pregnancy. Both sexes have the ability to use birth control. Both have the ability to buy it whenever they want. Both have that choice. You just want to pretend that if the government doesn't force insurance policies to cover birth control that somehow birth control is not able to be used. That is pure nonsense.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I've written pages and pages of posts on this and have answered every possible question, not once, but dozens of times as you morons refuse to abide facts. It took me three days of constant posts before the last one of you finally stopped writing "they want taxpayers to pay for their birth control". I mean that alone was a big battle.

Page after page.

IN fact, your post is pure projection SF.

No Darla... again, you have not answered a single one of those questions. Yet you continue to dodge them by proclaiming you have. I have re-read this entire thread... point out the post you think answers those questions... if you can.

Not sure why I even bother, we both know you didn't, because otherwise you would have thrown the post in my face by now.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

His ego.

And the fact that he doesn't like being told his views are sexist. Too bad, cause they are.

No, it is your views that are sexist.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

This of course is an excellent point of Rana's, and let's not gloss over it.

When women have to worry about getting pregnant, sex is fraught with worry and stress. It is amazing how many posts written by both Damo and Sf are written from a male supremacist point of view. Really astounding. Neither of them appear to have ever even considered these issues from a woman's point of view.

LMAO... yet another woman proclaiming that only women worry about unwanted pregnancies. It is amazing how many posts written by both Rana and Darla are written from the female 'da menz are outs ta get me' point of view. Really astounding. Neither of them appear to have ever even considered that their views are invalid, because they would rather proclaim it as sexist and thus demean the times when actual sexist behavior takes place. Both are doing a great disservice to women spouting off this hate filled line of crap.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

"My comment was nothing like Rush's. YOU are the one seeing what it is you want, rather than looking at was really there. You jumped to conclusions and now are too embarrassed to back down from your comments."

I'll certainly take your word that you didn't mean it that way. But it was an incredibly stupid comparison to make.

The comparison was made because to you prostitution is as bad as birth control is to Catholics. It was an attempt at an equivalent dislike.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

You know, I actually have to work. I have written on this issue in depth, and again, I am very knowledgeable about it. There is no such thing as womensplain SF, and that you think there is, and that you do not understand mansplainin, really shows that just because you are good on sex assault, doesn't mean that you are not a clueless sexist. Which you have really revealed yourself to be here, much to my disappointment. But perhaps that's all to the better as well. You and damo hope to pretend win this by arguing me to sheer exhaustion. With pure stupidity.

1) Are you forced to work for anyone that provides insurance that doesn't cover birth control? Yes, many women may be. You may have heard about the recession? That there is only one job for every five people out of work? Further, this law if passed, would have allowed companies to call women in who had worked there for years, and strip them of their birth control coverage. Not only humiliating for the woman, and rife with potential abuse, but places an undue burden upon them to find new employment. This is the same exact argument Libertarians used to fight against sexual harassment laws - if you don't like it work somewhere else! Uh, NO. We dont' like it and so we will legislate against it and thus put the burden upon the actual problem; the harasser. Same idea here. We don't like it, so we passed a law mandating that insurance companies cover birth control just as they are often mandated to cover other basic, preventative health care. Women's health is not up for a vote or a religious veto. Sorry. It passed. Over 60% of Americans support it. Adjust or be cast out.

2) Are you forced to stop using birth control? No one in my socioeconomic class would be, nor would the women you are dating be forced to stop using birth control. As I've written on this very thread, it is the height of privilege and entitlement for you to come on here and make this claim that no woman would be prevented. This is false. In fact, as we know, when birth control is not fully covered by insurance companies, many women go without some months. Many of those, end up pregnant. This is why full coverage actually saves insurance companies money. Now why do these women go without? Answer: Because they are lazy whores too busy fucking to get down to the pharmacy!

BUZZzz, wrong answer Rush! It's because for many women, the cost of birth control is prohibitive. Some months they may have to choose between heat or food and birth control. So they take a chance.

3) Are you prohibited from buying birth control on your own? This is the same question as you asked above.

BUMP for the helmet head. Not only did I answer them, but you answered my answers! Fucking full on retard here, for real.

PLUS, I have addressed all of this in many other posts I have written over the past week. But you couldn't be bothered to go read them, so I took the time out of my busy day, and believe this or not, I am NOT being facetious. I was extremely busy today, but I recapped my answers to your "questions" so you would stfu and stop saying I was "running' ( A fucking blatant joke since you have no idea what you are talking about, like I'd run from you??? get serious), and even after all of that, you know continue to slander me making these claims. Now, I have to interrupt my fucking evening, and piss someone else off, because you are in here making these completely false and untrue claims about me refusing to answer anything on this issue. Which is an outright lie.

You are either retarded, or mendacious. But there are no other choices for this spectacular performance of yours.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

LMAO... yet another woman proclaiming that only women worry about unwanted pregnancies. It is amazing how many posts written by both Rana and Darla are written from the female 'da menz are outs ta get me' point of view. Really astounding. Neither of them appear to have ever even considered that their views are invalid, because they would rather proclaim it as sexist and thus demean the times when actual sexist behavior takes place. Both are doing a great disservice to women spouting off this hate filled line of crap.

Completely clueless. This explans a lot SF.