Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah just look at Austin, TX and what the republicans were doing there. We had a modern day "Mr.George goes to Washington" occur all because the republicans there wanted to rush an abortion bill through the state senate without their being any debate over it.
They even tried to change the time stamp on the website to allow a vote to go through. If that isn't part of a war on women, then I don't know what is.
The point is that someone who happens to be a Democrat harassing women isn't the same as official Republican policies that harm women. It's like a postal worker walking into a bar and shooting it up. Was it the official policy of the Postal Sevice to kill people? No.
The point is that someone who happens to be a Democrat harassing women isn't the same as official Republican policies that harm women. It's like a postal worker walking into a bar and shooting it up. Was it the official policy of the Postal Sevice to kill people? No.
Which official Republican policies specifically harm women?
Democrats love the war on women talking point. It is sound bite friendly, vague enough to be dropped just about anywhere, and to their credit, some GOP candidates did make some really boneheaded remarks in the 2012 election cycle. However, the basis of the whole war on women line is false. Dems know this. There is no war on women. The whole thing started when Catholic institutions balked at being forced to provide contraception as part of health care plans. That is their right to decide so long as freedom of religion is still protected by the Constitution. The outrage over the recent changes in Texas is pretty flimsy as well. Dems try to paint the issue as "restricting access to abortion." In actual fact the changes require that the procedures are only to be performed by licensed doctors that are on staff at local hospitals. I am not sure I would want anyone I care about having an abortion performed by someone that was not a licensed doctor.... Finally, the Dems try to spin the war on women to paint all GOP members as misogynists. They do this while Elliot Spitzer and Anthony Weiner battle for mayors office in NYC. These may not be the two poster boys I would have running for office if I were going to continue to push a war on women narrative. A punter and a Congressman that resigned in disgrace after sending lewd and unsolicited photos of himself to women, then lying about it claiming his Twitter account was hacked. Weiner continued this behavior after resigning in disgrace. Bill Clinton is back in the news now with revelations of a damning audio tape from Monica Lewinsky. Last but not least, good old Bob Fillner. The mayor San Diego. Four accusers charging him with sexual harassment, and he is still in office. As long as Dems candidates and officer holders are acting like so many hormone addled frat boys, I think making whole war on women thing stick is going to be a challenge.
Democrats love the war on women talking point. It is sound bite friendly, vague enough to be dropped just about anywhere, and to their credit, some GOP candidates did make some really boneheaded remarks in the 2012 election cycle. However, the basis of the whole war on women line is false. Dems know this. There is no war on women. The whole thing started when Catholic institutions balked at being forced to provide contraception as part of health care plans. That is their right to decide so long as freedom of religion is still protected by the Constitution. The outrage over the recent changes in Texas is pretty flimsy as well. Dems try to paint the issue as "restricting access to abortion." In actual fact the changes require that the procedures are only to be performed by licensed doctors that are on staff at local hospitals. I am not sure I would want anyone I care about having an abortion performed by someone that was not a licensed doctor.... Finally, the Dems try to spin the war on women to paint all GOP members as misogynists. They do this while Elliot Spitzer and Anthony Weiner battle for mayors office in NYC. These may not be the two poster boys I would have running for office if I were going to continue to push a war on women narrative. A punter and a Congressman that resigned in disgrace after sending lewd and unsolicited photos of himself to women, then lying about it claiming his Twitter account was hacked. Weiner continued this behavior after resigning in disgrace. Bill Clinton is back in the news now with revelations of a damning audio tape from Monica Lewinsky. Last but not least, good old Bob Fillner. The mayor San Diego. Four accusers charging him with sexual harassment, and he is still in office. As long as Dems candidates and officer holders are acting like so many hormone addled frat boys, I think making whole war on women thing stick is going to be a challenge.
Nice complete lie. The Texas law requires that abortions take place in surgical centers, and that abortion doctors have hospital ADMITTING privileges--meaning the doctor is part of the staff of that hospital. That's not the same as being licensed--every doctor has to be licensed to legally practice medicine. You know this, but you chose to completely twist the information for your own purposes. The end result of the Texas law is that most abortion facilities will be forced to close, because it will cost millions of dollars for each clinic to become a surgical center.
When dentists, dermatologists, OBGYNS, and other physicians all have to be part of a surgical center, then we'll talk, because they all do procedures in office--many of them much more invasive than an abortion. They're not in surgical centers now because it doesn't improve the quality of care--dental work, OBGYNS, etc and ABORTION PROVIDERS can operate safely in a medical office setting. If you forced every other type of medical practioner to go to a surgical center, most would shut down. Abortion providers are no different. Of course the law just targeted abortion providers to shut them down, and of course it's a war on women. Elected officials on BOTH sides (and I don't think I'd go there on R's, because I can pull out a page long list--including Herman Cain who a good chunk of you defended) do inappropriate things--they need to be removed from office or lose their elections--but when they try to pass policy that impacts all women, it's an attack on our basic rights. If that isn't a war--an organized attack on another group--I don't know what is.
The good news is that you people can spin and twist this anyway you want, but you're not fooling anyone. The only end result is that a good chunk of women think you're insulting their intelligence, and it ticks them off. When people are mad, they get out and do something about it, including VOTE and run for office. Let's see how this one backfires on you, just as voting restrictions legislation probably handed the presidential race to the Democrats in 2012.
Being anti-abortion is not the same as being anti-woman. Roe v. Wade was never in danger of being repealed when a Republican was President.
Not all Republicans are religious/social conservatives.
In fact I personally believe a woman has the right to choose. It's her body, and it's a very personal decision that government has no business sticking their nose in. I'm not the only conservative who feels this way. Shocking, I know.
Being anti-abortion is not the same as being anti-woman. Roe v. Wade was never in danger of being repealed when a Republican was President.
Not all Republicans are religious/social conservatives.
In fact I personally believe a woman has the right to choose. It's her body, and it's a very personal decision that government has no business sticking their nose in. I'm not the only conservative who feels this way. Shocking, I know.
Same here. Fiscally conservative, but socially moderate Republican. Same views on abortion, and no issue with same sex marriage.
Being anti-abortion is not the same as being anti-woman. Roe v. Wade was never in danger of being repealed when a Republican was President.
Not all Republicans are religious/social conservatives.
In fact I personally believe a woman has the right to choose. It's her body, and it's a very personal decision that government has no business sticking their nose in. I'm not the only conservative who feels this way. Shocking, I know.
Indeed it is because the only portrayal thus far is of the religious conservative.
Very good point though. Kudos.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
