The bus to the Women's March

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

www.cnn.com...

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

www.cnn.com...

Yeah!

I'm saying!

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: UKTruth

If it helps, some of the women in my life find both Trump and Madonna disgusting.

It helps in as much as you seem even more human now. Less the Trump-bot

So, some women in your life are disgusted by Trump?

I have to assume that the fine work you do here day in and day out is for the ones that aren't

We all know on which side our bread is buttered - right UK?

:-)

The most important of all does not find Trump disgusting. More amusing.
You may be surprised to know I don't like Trump. I think he is an arsehole. I just don't take that much into consideration when discussing politics.

a reply to: UKTruth

The most important of all does not find Trump disgusting.

I feel so very vindicated

More amusing. You may be surprised to know I don't like Trump. I think he is an arsehole. I just don't take that much into consideration when discussing politics.

Extreme Devil's Advocate Sports? I get that. I can even respect that - up to a point

Not so much a game to me. Real lives on the line and all. Arsehole is just the tip of the iceberg

I had you figured for one of those: OMG! Western Civilization is falling! types

:-)

Am I wrong?

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: UKTruth

The most important of all does not find Trump disgusting.

I feel so very vindicated

More amusing. You may be surprised to know I don't like Trump. I think he is an arsehole. I just don't take that much into consideration when discussing politics.

Extreme Devil's Advocate Sports? I get that. I can even respect that - up to a point

Not so much a game to me. Real lives on the line and all. Arsehole is just the tip of the iceberg

I had you figured for one of those: OMG! Western Civilization is falling! types

:-)

Am I wrong?

More pragmatic than that and a little less dramatic.

The politics and culture in the West has swung too far one way and needs course correction. This happens.
I am also anti-media. They are propagandists and bought and paid for.

I am more of a centrist. A non republican and non democrat seems right, regardless of personality.

a reply to: Byrd

Kudos to you for walking the walk. Lot of Keyboard Kommandoes with Action Avatars around here that that won't leave the basement for their convictions.

And as an aside, I'm sure you are grateful to all of those who straightened you out on any misconceptions that you might have had regarding both your intelligence and your patriotism.

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: Teikiatsu

Now if you are talking about the separate human body that may be growing in your womb some day, that's where I think the government has the right to regulate the procedure to responsibly defend the innocent and unborn while balancing it with women's health.

My body - not yours. Not the governments

Government has a compelling interest in defending the unborn child. The child's body is not your body.

If you decide to treat women like a holding area - you've denied them their human rights.

Considering that humans are heterosexually reproductive species, this is nothing about rights. It's called 'biology.'

If you plan to force women to carry babies according to your religious beliefs - not their own beliefs?

We all know what that is

Odd that I have not mentioned religion at all.

No different from chattel - no different from slavery

Don't like it, don't have sex. It's not the child's fault if you are not prepared to deal with natural biological consequences of engaging in a behavior designed to produce children. Sex evolved in humans for procreation, not jollies. Equal treatment means being told the facts without sugar coating them.

Fact: Women's reproductive systems are designed to get them pregnant and make babies.

No amount of protesting with vagina hats is going to change that reality.

a reply to: UKTruth

The politics and culture in the West has swung too far one way and needs course correction. This happens.

Needs a course correction?

These things do happen - organically

Force of will course corrections - not as useful

As a not so dramatic centrist ( ; ) ) you might want to consider that you are over correcting for the wrong winds

It's important. Even here. Even at ATS

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Teikiatsu

so then....
you hate women, am I reading that correctly?

No. You read incorrectly.

Or just the ones who don't 'behave' the way you, Sir, in your so-called Christian mindset, think they should?

You read a lot of hate into things. What way and mindset, Ma'am, is that?

It is defensiveness. I do that when jackboots are around. Just to check if I'm saying the right things.

Ad hominem. So old and boring.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: Teikiatsu

Madonna has built her career on being outrageous. It's her brand. That's show-biz. Trying to build a case to disparage the Women's Protest March on anything Madonna has done there, in the past or future, is nonsense.

She built her brand partially on acting like a promiscuous diva. Remember offering blow jobs to people voting for Clinton last year? She brought that brand with her to DC. *shrug*

And she's still here.

And still a powerful voice for women.

How many male or female have her status?

I really don't care, I'm not into fleeting pop icon status. What matters to me is that she's apparently got enough celebrity that fringe elements consider her a good spokeswoman for blowing up the White House. Kudos! That's been going viral.

originally posted by: UKTruth
It's not even taken until Monday for some of his changes - Trump's new immigration orders are being enforced today.

The Executive branch of the govt. enforces the laws of the land.
That you think Trump can't change the way the country is run without asking Congress to implement new law is baffling.

The fact he is already doing it should be a clue.

Remember: it was okay when BO did it.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

Sex evolved in humans for procreation, not jollies. Equal treatment means being told the facts without sugar coating them.

You believe in equal treatment now? Or - did you just tell us all that you believe you understand the facts?

Evolution is about natural selection. Nature doesn't judge. But, you do

Humans do have sex - for jollies, and a bunch of other reasons. Our humanity doesn't exist to please anyone - or court their approval. Yours included

Fact: Women's reproductive systems are designed to get them pregnant and make babies.

These boots were made for walking. Fish gotta swim - birds gotta fly. Your fingers were designed - for what? Prayer? Picking your nose? Making macaroni art?

You can lead a horses ass to water - but you cannot make him think

You have no right to our bodies. How we choose to use our bodies or what grows in our bodies - not up to you.

You can't force women to have babies because of your personal beliefs

Don't like it, don't have sex.

I'll do as I please without your permission

Odd that I have not mentioned religion at all.

It is odd - especially since your argument only works if you make this about God. Without God - it's just you throwing your weight around and fantasizing that we care what you think

Even with God - you only have a set of personal beliefs that don't legally have anything to do with me

a reply to: Teikiatsu

Government has a compelling interest in defending the unborn child.

The government has NO compelling interest in defending a fertilized egg, embryo or pre-viable fetus from its mother/host.

The child's body is not your body.

A woman's egg doesn't stop being part of her body because of a chemical reaction., AKA fertilization. A woman's developing embryo doesn't stop being part of her body when in implants in her uterus. A fetus doesn't stop being part of a woman's body until it is born, or otherwise expelled.

Considering that humans are heterosexually reproductive species, this is nothing about rights. It's called 'biology.'

So? So is the flu. Is giving birth a woman's duty to biology?

It's not the child's fault if you are not prepared to deal with natural biological consequences of engaging in a behavior designed to produce children.

It's biology's fault. But, we have ways of overcoming the obstacles of biology and nature.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

Ad hominem. So old and boring.

What?
What are you talking about? You asked me what my problem was. I told you. That is IN NO WAY an 'ad hominem' attack. It is a reply.

You asked what my problem is. It is defensiveness.

So I said:
I am feeling defensive. And acting like I feel like I have to defend myself.

But you are going to reject my answer....????
projection much?

Do you see anything in my post about feeling defensive that threatens you?






see how you are? *rubs face*


Please please do some serious soul-searching. Please match your behavior to your 'religious' creed. Please come back when you have a coherent excuse for being so combative and rejecting and judgmental.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

Let's treat this separately:

Government has a compelling interest in defending the unborn child. The child's body is not your body.

The child's body?

Is it a possession then?

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Government has a compelling interest in defending the unborn child. The child's body is not your body.

and the women's body does not belong to the fetus, does it?
and of course, some seem to think that they should be voice of the unborn... to tell the women what she can and can't do with the body that the fetus happened to be developing in for nine months or so. and, have managed to get some laws written up to control what the women does while the fetus is inside...
don't drink, don't do drugs, and for heaven's sake don't fall down a flight of stairs or you might end up arrested by a bunch of fools that think you threw yourself down them to cause a miscarriage! throw her in the hospital and force a c-section on her.. who cares if the doctor says she's likely to die. it's all good, because well, that little life inside of the women is sacred!!

the tiny sperm meets the tiny egg and the two become one and makes their way to the uterus to embed into it and starts the development process that will turn the tiny little one celled organism into a little baby girl.. and from the moment of that little girl's birth it seems that her "sacredness" diminishes in the eye of society to the point when she is pregnant and can't even lay claim to her own physical body!

It's a separate entity. Period.

a reply to: dawnstar

the tiny sperm meets the tiny egg and the two become one and makes their way to the uterus to embed into it and starts the development process that will turn the tiny little one celled organism into a little baby girl.. and from the moment of that little girl's birth it seems that her "sacredness" diminishes in the eye of society to the point when she is pregnant and can't even lay claim to her own physical body!

If the pregnancy threatens the mother's life? Who comes first? If she miscarries - God's will? Not nature's will of course, because nature has no will. But, then - nature designed us to have babies - and that is what women are for...it's just biology

Does the power of biology compel me?

What they're talking about is not the value of embryos - or even children, but the ownership of women's bodies. Ownership of a woman's rights

No matter what our philosophical, spiritual and/or religious differences - nobody should have the right to tell someone they have no right to their own body

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: UKTruth

The politics and culture in the West has swung too far one way and needs course correction. This happens.

Needs a course correction?

These things do happen - organically

Force of will course corrections - not as useful

As a not so dramatic centrist ( ; ) ) you might want to consider that you are over correcting for the wrong winds

It's important. Even here. Even at ATS

No, I am clear on the particular gust taking the world towards the rocks, and it is not Donald Trump.
My only fear is that he is trying to turn the ship 180 degrees in a short space of time. We may sink.

a reply to: UKTruth

You don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows

Wish we were seeing the same things