It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

War on Women Is 2012 Democrat Rallying Cry

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:31 AM
link   
Regardless of the left-right false paradigm, I would suggest the growth of soft skill jobs, free medicare, reduced male employment, polarised political war on women, are all a precursor for war on the world.




posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 



I don't know if anyone knows... but 70% of all jobs lost since 2007 were occupied by men.
Women now make more money as a whole of our economy below the 1% income percentile.


Do you suppose those 2007 jobs were lost due to the need to restructure? And isn't this the same old BS we go through every 25 years or so?... with women left holding the bag until men can get their eff-ing poop in a scoop AGAIN???



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by HarmonicNights

From reading through the recent popular threads on ATS regarding "women's rights", the feminists have collectively argued that:

- If a man is lied to or swindled into a life of paying child support, that was his responsibility for believing the woman and having sexual relations with her.


Not feminists...both men and women, republicans and democrats believe that an innocent child should not suffer due to disputes and claims made by the parents.

This argument conflates child support with financial assistance for the woman.

If a man and woman engage in consensual sex and create a child, both should take responsibility for that child.


Originally posted by HarmonicNights
-However, if a woman is lied to by a man who claims to be sterile, the woman is a victim. There's also the concept of 'date rape' where a woman is said to be a victim of rape if is she gets drunk and wakes up with a stranger. However, if the man is drunk, then he simply made a bad choice.


A woman can be impregnated while unconscience. A man can not impregnate someone while unconscience.


Originally posted by HarmonicNights
-Another feminist claim is that the abortion laws are unequal because the 'biology is unequal'. However, these same feminists will scream sexism or misogyny if they are told they aren't allowed into certain military sectors because the biology between men and women is different. They then claim that difference in biology shouldn't matter.


Here you are confusing equality with sameness. No one claims that Men and womens's biology is identical only that they have equal value. Women are better in certain sports than men and vice versa. No one argues thier physical sameness only that their different attributes be equally valued.

Are you aware that statistics consistantly show that women are better marksmen than men?

There is a lot to your post and I leave the remainder alone for the time being, but strongly disagree with the broad generalizations and false logic employed.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5

Not feminists...both men and women, republicans and democrats believe that an innocent child should not suffer due to disputes and claims made by the parents.


Completely irrelevant to anything I said. I pointed out the massively contradictory and hypocritical statements made by feminists.


This argument conflates child support with financial assistance for the woman.


I made no argument regarding child support.

Unfortunately, many times "child support" and financial assistance for the woman are one in the same.


If a man and woman engage in consensual sex and create a child, both should take responsibility for that child.


If you're a feminist who claims that your child is "another part of your body" and that the father shouldn't have any concern while it's in the womb, you should not feel entitled to suddenly demand that the father have concern once they are born. That hypocritical attitude is very telling of what that particular woman's intentions are.


A woman can be impregnated while unconscience. A man can not impregnate someone while unconscience.


A woman can claim date rape if she simply made a the choice to get drunk and sleep with a stranger or aquaintence. Men can get an erection while unconscious. There have been men who impregnated a woman against his will, yet these men are the ones held responsible.


Here you are confusing equality with sameness. No one claims that Men and womens's biology is identical only that they have equal value. Women are better in certain sports than men and vice versa. No one argues thier physical sameness only that their different attributes be equally valued.


Again, not even close to being relevant to what I said. Feminists say that biology matters in one issue, yet for another, claim it should be completely disregarded.


Are you aware that statistics consistantly show that women are better marksmen than men?


What's your point?

How about providing a link to one of these studies if you're gonna make the claim.


but strongly disagree with the broad generalizations and false logic employed.


I suggest you go read through the threads in reference. THAT is where 'false logic' in masses can be found.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 12:12 AM
link   
I started a 'War on Women'' thread. You can find it on this cached page: webcache.googleusercontent.com...:l90o4KFWwyAJ:www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread687267/pg1+stratus9+war+on+women&cd=1&hl=en&ct=cl nk&gl=us&client=firefox-a&source=www.google.com

Apparently the men running this forum deemed it either irrelevant or too controversial. It was, however, chock full of truth- with fully sourced links for every statement.

So good luck with this thread. It may have a short lifespan.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 01:41 AM
link   
The GOP and Bagger groups are calling for ending a woman's right to choose, denying women the right to birth control and want to remove women from the workplace and from now on out no more distinction will be made.

This is what y'all voted in and now must tell your daughters, sisters, mothers, aunts and neices that they don't have a right to have an abortion or get birth control and if they get raped they must deal with it.

I guess the party of family values no longer applies!



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 02:59 AM
link   
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


Birth control is not a right, it's a privilege. None of the women in my family would even consider having an abortion. I would be offended if someone suggested that I would do something like that. The right to life needs to be granted to the unborn....the ones who actually are helpless. Most females I know personally would be very happy if abortion were outlawed.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 03:58 AM
link   
reply to post by HarmonicNights
 


Your awesome. Nothing else really needs to be said.


Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by LexiconRiot
 


you say corporate masters

i say government masters



Considering the government is owned by corporations, I would definitely say corporate master.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 04:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Yet somehow, we can find all sorts of money to blow up Afghans at a wedding, can't we? How much did that missile cost, you think?

Killing protections for people at home while protecting killings of people abroad; the republican manifesto.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 04:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by HarmonicNights
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


Birth control is not a right,


It absolutely is. it's the right to self-determination, basically. There is no sensible argument for why any woman should be denied the ability to regulate when and if she wants to be pregnant.


it's a privilege.


If you honestly believe this, then I have nothing but pity for you, and fear for any daughters you raise.


None of the women in my family would even consider having an abortion. I would be offended if someone suggested that I would do something like that.


That's why it's called choice. You're completely free to not have one.


The right to life needs to be granted to the unborn....the ones who actually are helpless.


No it doesn't. The woman's life has far more value. Her needs, and even her wants, carry vastly more weight with regards to what she does with herself. granting rights to the unborn very obviously imperils the rights of self-determination for the woman.

Ever wondered why, in the fairy tales there are so very many stepmothers? because it used to be that the child was considered more important than the mother; given the choice between the "father's child" or the womb that carried it, preference was always given to the child. Women were replaceable, but children were valued possessions.


Most females I know personally would be very happy if abortion were outlawed.


Then you know mostly dumb women.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 04:48 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


i agree with you on this.

their body their choice.

no agreement between the parties? don't do it and the woman has the last word.

unless the mom is a verifiable psycho, i would not try to take the child.

as to the op, ya, the dems will tell you someone wants you dead, to get votes.

"War on Women Is 2012 Democrat Rallying Cry"



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


yes, so now I go to work everyday, earn a paycheck, while my hubby goes fishing and collects a bigger unemployment check that I bring home for 40 hours of work!!!
the republicans are making war with women, the democrats are making war on humans!!!

we need a third party now, please?????



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by HarmonicNights
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


Birth control is not a right, it's a privilege. None of the women in my family would even consider having an abortion. I would be offended if someone suggested that I would do something like that. The right to life needs to be granted to the unborn....the ones who actually are helpless. Most females I know personally would be very happy if abortion were outlawed.


What if you were raped? Would you keep the kid knowing that you WERE NOT a willing participant in the act? Knowing that you were impregnated against your will! What if you went to a party and had the person who brought you slip you a substance like GHB and raped you?

What if the person who got you prego turned out to be a wife beater? Would you keep the kid and be reminded day after day of the torture and abuse you had to endure? What about if you could barely afford to take care of yourself? What would you do then?
edit on 10-6-2011 by TheImmaculateD1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:17 AM
link   
war games online www.free-games-girls.com...



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:10 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


I don't claim to speak for harmonic here, but I think she meant that free birth control pills, like what you can get at planned parent hood, are not a right. If that is what she meant, I agree 100%. Unless you are raped, it is 100% your choice on whether or not you are sexually active. If you cannot afford birth control, or your boyfriend won't wear condoms, then don't have sex. It's really as simple as that. I don't see why the taxpayer should have to pay for women to be sexually active.

However I do understand that without free birth control many of these women might end up having children they cannot support, and end up being an even bigger burden to society, so it's a loaded issue.

Just like the heroin programs in (I think) sweeden. They inject heroin addicts, and as a result crime, as well as drug related illness has significantly dropped. While it's not a right to get high, and the tax payers shouldn't have to pay for it, it works, so maybe it's not "fair" but it's what works, and I think that's more important. Refuse BC pills to women because it isn't their right to have BC pills, or pay even more money when they start popping out babies? Even though I don't like it, I think giving them free BC is the better idea, however it still isn't a right for someone to take BC, so if that privilege gets taken away, there is no reason to cry over it.

I am however bothered that you say the life of a child doesn't matter as much as the mother's. I can understand if carrying a child will be of physical harm to the mother, but you say her WANTS are more important than the LIFE of a child that she CHOSE to conceive? By being sexually active she made the choice, she knew the possibility. How heartless is that? Why stop at unborn babies? Can a mother kill her 1 year old because she doesn't want it anymore? I just can't understand that logic. How, and where do you draw the line?

Why has the women not given up her right to do as she pleases as soon as she decides to get pregnant? Like I said before, if you choose to be sexually active, you've made the choice, because you know it's a possibility. So if you choose to bring a life into this world, you have the right to end that life?

I go back to my previous question, where do you draw the line? 8-1/2 months? 1 week old? 1 month old? 1 year old? How old is too old to kill a child? You seem to think that a women has the right to kill children of a certain age, but not another? Does a woman have a right to lock her child in a closet for days without food because it's, as you say "Her needs, and even her wants, carry vastly more weight with regards to what she does with herself" She wants to hang out with her friends and is tired of dealing with her bratty kid, seeing as a child's rights mean nothing compared to the oh-so empowered modern woman's rights, why can't she just lock her kid in the closet until she is ready to deal with it again?



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
well techinically speaking the lefts policy of abortion has killed more women

than any repulblican has.

the left counts on peoples stupidity and it is an unsult to us all.


How can you possibly say that. I would think that your head would just assplode from the dumb.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia


Democrats and allied groups including Emily’s List are framing Republican moves to cut federal spending as a war on women, an effort aimed at influencing the 2012 elections.

Support from women voters helped propel Republican gains in the 2010 elections. Democrats are hoping to reverse that next year by arguing that measures including the Republican push to end traditional Medicare would disproportionately affect women, who live longer than men.

Republican efforts to repeal collective-bargaining rights for public employees also are being characterized as anti-woman. For example, 73 percent of the American Federation of Teachers’ 1.5 million members are female.

Analysts say the success of the Democratic message likely would increase the party’s chances of holding the White House and Senate, and possibly winning a House majority.

www.bloomberg.com...



Completely pathetic and disgusting, all women should not vote for these demagogues for the sole reason of pandering on their emotions, how utterly disgusting.

Dem: "Hey women, listen please understand that money grows on trees and republicans want to repeal free healthcare, because free healthcare does exist as money grows on trees"

What an insult to women's intelligence, I need to go take a shower after reading this article, I feel so yucky!

Partisanship is insufficient, now we need more gendership in politics right?



Can the democrat party ever run on anything without having to have a victim for something all the time. This is so old now that no one is going to rally around anything.

It's the economy stupid ! Remember that one. Now the tables are turned on the Democrat party. I wonder how they feel now..



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 10:36 AM
link   
Relevant post from a different thread:


Originally posted by Throwback
reply to post by SevenBeans
 


Receiving an abortion is not an entitlement. Just admit that Republicans are using the economy as an excuse to push their social agenda. This isn't creating jobs. This isn't putting a dent in the deficit. To demonstrate how this is a Republican attack on women, I'll list a couple of bills they're tossing around.

The No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act - This bill changes the language in the Hyde Amendment so that the only federally funded abortions would be in situations of "forcible rape". Incest and presumably "unforcible" rape wouldn't be covered. Rape is rape. This bill is suggesting that some forms of rape are acceptable. The forms of rape accepted by Republicans are: date rape or rape committed with a drug, underage pregnancy due to sex with a minor, and rape when the victim doesn't physically stop her attacker. Apparently saying no isn't enough for them.

Change to H.R. 358 - Introduced by Rep. Joe Pitts (R-PA), this new change will deny emergency care to a pregnant women if it will kill the fetus. This will effectively leave them to just die. I know they think that it's better for the women to die rather than to perform an emergency abortion. This makes no sense whatsoever because once the mother dies, the fetus does too!

House Bill 1171 - Another Republican bill, introduced by Rep. Phil Jensen (R-SD), that would seek to change the meaning of "justifiable homicide". This bill would change the state law so that any killing meant to prevent the harm of a fetus is "justifiable homicide". This would open the door to legal killings of doctors who perform abortions and maybe even the women who want them. In a country where abortion providers are commonly killed, this is a dangerous bill.

So you can believe your fantasy that defunding abortion saves a significant amount of money. I can see what's really going on.




posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by HarmonicNights


This argument conflates child support with financial assistance for the woman.


I made no argument regarding child support.

Unfortunately, many times "child support" and financial assistance for the woman are one in the same.



(1) You deny conflating child support with financial assistance to the woman then go ahead and state just that?

(2) As for the "i did not make an argument regarding child support" Read your own posts, it helps.


Originally posted by HarmonicNights
- If a man is lied to or swindled into a life of paying child support, that was his responsibility for believing the woman and having sexual relations with her.




Originally posted by HarmonicNights


If a man and woman engage in consensual sex and create a child, both should take responsibility for that child.


If you're a feminist who claims that your child is "another part of your body" and that the father shouldn't have any concern while it's in the womb, you should not feel entitled to suddenly demand that the father have concern once they are born. That hypocritical attitude is very telling of what that particular woman's intentions are.


The man does have rights after the first Trimester as does the government in protecting that life. You are debating when life begins not rights and seem undeucated about the laws on the books.


Originally posted by HarmonicNights



A woman can be impregnated while unconscience. A man can not impregnate someone while unconscience.


A woman can claim date rape if she simply made a the choice to get drunk and sleep with a stranger or aquaintence.
Both men and women can claim anything. So what? Do you with to deny people the right to make a claim? Is the premise that once a woman is drunk she is fair and legal game for rapists?

Whether that claim holds up in court or not is precisely what the courts are for, to determine the truth.

a rather frightening argument you are making here.


Originally posted by HarmonicNights

Men can get an erection while unconscious.


OK. But have their been men that pin women down and rape them while unconscious?????


Originally posted by HarmonicNights

There have been men who impregnated a woman against his will, yet these men are the ones held responsible.


That sounds like an interesting story....link please?


Originally posted by HarmonicNights


Here you are confusing equality with sameness. No one claims that Men and womens's biology is identical only that they have equal value. Women are better in certain sports than men and vice versa. No one argues thier physical sameness only that their different attributes be equally valued.


Again, not even close to being relevant to what I said. Feminists say that biology matters in one issue, yet for another, claim it should be completely disregarded.


Correct and true. Biology does matter is some issues, but not at all in others. Men and women are different in many ways. This seems an obvious fact of life?


Originally posted by HarmonicNights


Are you aware that statistics consistantly show that women are better marksmen than men?


What's your point?

How about providing a link to one of these studies if you're gonna make the claim.


There are literally too many links to post.

How about googling "WW2 soviets and women snipers" or "women make better snipers" or "women marksmen"

In military circles it is a well understood fact. Doesn't mean a man can't make a good sniper, just on average women are better.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


I was going to edit my other post but the 4-hour window expired.

I just wanted you to know I wasn't attacking you with my previous point, after re-reading it I could see how someone could possibly take it that way. I was just vocalizing the things that I think about in my own head when I try to figure out my position on abortion. Personally I am in favor a woman's right to choose now, as I am totally against government intrusion into people's personal lives. In addition to that, I would hope that if Abortion ever was made illegal, it would still be allowed for rape and incest victims, but that has it's own set of problems. Women could start making false accusations of rape just so they could legally have an abortion, so there are problems with that idea as well.

I was kind of playing devil's advocate, as well as trying to get other people's opinions on those specific things regarding abortion, since like I said I still have a hard time making up my mind on the subject and the input of others could possibly give me additional "information" if you will on the whole thing. Although, also like I said before, I hate government intrusion, so it's not really something that I would try to force onto other people, upon "making up" my mind.

So that being said, I really would like your opinions on those issues I brought up, but please keep in mind it wasn't meant as an attack, more of a way to get others opinions on those aspects that I wrestle with the most myself.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join