Women to march against Trump.

[Hal 9000]

2 minutes ago, cybercoma said:

What a giant pile of misogynistic ethnocentric trash. You should be ashamed of yourself.

OK, All women talk about is "their body, their choice", I've suggested mandatory birth control and that also goes against "the woman's right", we know that these women can't effectively be educated.  The fact is; women want the power, but don't want the accountability.  Fair enough, but when all is said and done, it's the taxpayers who pay the bill  - so where am I wrong?

I'm not telling women what they can't do, but why does their freedom come at a cost to the rest of us?

We force people (primarily men) to wear motorcycle helmets because it's not fair for taxpayers to pay for their stupidity, there is a push to make people who smoke and drink to pay more for medical because of their lifestyle - so, why are abortions any different? 

[TimG]

7 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

why are abortions any different? 

Because unwanted children can be an even bigger drain on the budget than the cost of abortions. Especially if the mother is an addict and does not care about the damage done to the foetus. And even if smokes and booze are taxed the taxpayer picks up the tab for the medical consequences of excess so that is not really a comparison.

Edited January 26, 2017 by TimG

[Hal 9000]

1 minute ago, TimG said:

Because unwanted children can be an even bigger drain on the budget than the cost of abortions. Especially if the mother is an addict and does not care about the damage done to the foetus. And even if smokes and booze are taxed the taxpayer picks up the tab for the medical consequences of excess so that is not really a comparison.

Which brings us back to birth control.  Why can't a serious birth control program be put into place?

[TimG]

8 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Which brings us back to birth control.  Why can't a serious birth control program be put into place?

And why can't a serious program to end drunkenness be put in place? At some point you have to respect the right of people to make their own choices even if society ends up with some of the bill. The only exception I would make is if a woman chooses to carry a child to term and she shows flagrant disregard for the health of the foetus by excessive drinking or drug use then it should be possible to lock her up until the baby is born.

Edited January 26, 2017 by TimG

[WestCoastRunner]

10 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Which brings us back to birth control.  Why can't a serious birth control program be put into place?

What you mean is 'Why can't a program be put into place that controls a woman's body'.  Women are not vessels to create babies.

Edited January 26, 2017 by WestCoastRunner

[Hal 9000]

4 minutes ago, TimG said:

And why can't a serious program to end drunkenness be put in place? At some point you have to respect the right of people to make their own choices even if society ends up with some of the bill. The only exception I would made is if a woman chooses to carry a child to term and she shows flagrant disregard for the health of the foetus by excessive drinking or drug use then it should be possible to lock her up until the baby is born.

Why not?  As I said in the previous post, motorcycle helmets and for that matter seat belts are all law for one reason only - to prevent taxpayers from needless debt incurred through injury.  Wearing a helmet infringes on my freedom.

[Hal 9000]

2 minutes ago, WestCoastRunner said:

What you mean is 'Why can't a program be put into place that controls a woman's body'.  Women are not vessels to create babies.

Here is the crux, you'd rather a third world woman have the freedom to get pregnant and abort the baby, costing taxpayers money in doctor bills, abortion surgeries and recovery (not to mention the unwanted pregnancies that end up going full term) rather than give up that freedom and prevent the whole ordeal.  The cost is a baby's life, but at least the woman keeps her power.

 

 

[TimG]

4 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Why not?  As I said in the previous post, motorcycle helmets and for that matter seat belts are all law for one reason only - to prevent taxpayers from needless debt incurred through injury.  Wearing a helmet infringes on my freedom.

Driving a vehicle is a privilege - not a right. There are any number of traffic rules that one must follow that interfere with personal freedoms (it infringes on my freedom to require me to stop at a red light if I think the way is clear...). A helmet is no different.

[bush_cheney2004]

Just now, TimG said:

Driving a vehicle is a privilege - not a right. There are any number of traffic rules that one must follow that interfere with personal freedoms (it infringes on my freedom to require me to stop at a red light if I think the way is clear...). A helmet is no different.

 

Yes it is....helmet safety has no bearing on traffic rules.   Adults in many jurisdictions have defeated helmet laws because of constitutional / religious rights.

[eyeball]

58 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Abstinence education has been proven to work, especially for teens.

That's not what your cite says.

Only about a third of sixth- and seventh-graders who completed an abstinence-focused program started having sex within the next two years, researchers found.

You got your alternative facts and then you got your alternative interpretations.

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

That's not what your cite says.

 

Yes it does....and so do I.   Get your own "cites".

[eyeball]

Your cite well do just fine.

Conclusion  Theory-based abstinence-only interventions may have an important role in preventing adolescent sexual involvement.

 it doesn't say what you say no matter how may times you say it out how you feel about it. In fact the conclusion can't even be honest and say it may prevent some sexual activity.

How fast do those numbers drop after three or five more years?

[bush_cheney2004]

9 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Your cite well do just fine.

 

I know, because it supports the contention that abstinence can be effective in preventing pregnancy and STD's for teens.

You rarely offer any cites....so I feel fine.

[blueblood]

1 hour ago, WestCoastRunner said:

What you mean is 'Why can't a program be put into place that controls a woman's body'.  Women are not vessels to create babies.

But they are the last check and balance to whether a pregnancy goes through or not.

it would be far cheaper to subsidize birth control to help out with that problem, but good luck trying to get a politician to go for it.

[OftenWrong]

3 hours ago, cybercoma said:

 Everywhere that abstinence only education has been used, teen pregnancies and abortions increased.

Patently false.
Study: Abstinence program most effective at delaying sex among youths

(CNN) -- An abstinence-only education program is more effective than other initiatives at keeping sixth- and seventh-graders from having sex within a two-year period, according to a study described by some as a landmark.

"This new study is game-changing," the nonpartisan National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy said in a statement. "For the first time, there is strong evidence that an abstinence-only intervention can help very young teens delay sex and reduce their recent sexual activity as well."

 

[DogOnPorch]

3 hours ago, dialamah said:

I know nothing of Linda Sarsour, so I can hardly approve.  I know a little of you, however, so I assume the claim you are making is either completely wrong or a pretzel version of "the truth."

 

You MUST know who she is.

You approve of her march...

 

[betsy]

12 hours ago, WestCoastRunner said:

Goodness gracious. I feel you haven't been paying attention. I'm done with you Betsy on this topic. 

No.  You know I'm right.   No matter how you try to educate women - if they're under their men's thumb, your education isn't going anywhere.  That is to say, if the woman can even set foot in a class room!   It's the mindset of their society that you need to change!

Education my foot!  How many so-called educated women in Canada are still getting unwanted pregnancies.....how many so-called educated people still getting HIV?  You can't force a horse to drink the water even if you put the bowl right in front of it!  That's a fact!

 

You progressives have only managed to create generations of self-absorbed, irresponsible people!  We're now seeing the result of that!

Bye-bye.

 

[Goddess]

11 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Many women think abortion is birth control.

No. Many women do not.

[bush_cheney2004]

11 minutes ago, Goddess said:

No. Many women do not.

 

Sure they don't...they only have multiple abortions like haircuts...even before age 18:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1238612/Girls-using-abortion-birth-control.html

Edited January 26, 2017 by bush_cheney2004

[Goddess]

1500 teenagers. Likely poor and uneducated, it doesn't say the parameters.

That's your "MANY WOMEN"?

In my entire life I've never known any grown women that view abortion as a birth control method. 

In 2 years managing a doctors office, I arranged 2 abortions for our over 5000 patients. 

No. "Many" women do not view abortion as a birth control method.

 

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, Goddess said:

1500 teenagers. Likely poor and uneducated, it doesn't say the parameters.

That's your "MANY WOMEN"?

In my entire life I've never known any grown women that view abortion as a birth control method. 

In 2 years managing a doctors office, I arranged 2 abortions for our over 5000 patients. 

No. "Many" women do not view abortion as a birth control method.

 

 

The data says otherwise.   Many women view abortion as birth control.   That's why they have multiple abortions.

[dialamah]

7 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

You MUST know who she is.

You approve of her march...

 

It seems there were 4 co-chairs who organized the march on Washington and who knows how many people organized marches in other places around the world.  It may come as a shock to you, but I don't know any of them.  

 

Edited January 26, 2017 by dialamah

[DogOnPorch]

11 minutes ago, dialamah said:

It seems there were 4 co-chairs who organized the march on Washington and who knows how many people organized marches in other places around the world.  It may come as a shock to you, but I don't know any of them.  

 

 

Exactly...so if the Muslim Brotherhood has their dirty mitts in there you'd never know...or care.

 

Edited January 26, 2017 by DogOnPorch

[Goddess]

29 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

The data says otherwise.   Many women view abortion as birth control.   That's why they have multiple abortions.

I disagree with your assessment of what constitutes "many". I'm sure there are "some" women.

You know who else believes "many" Women are degenerate sluts?

The Taliban.

[bush_cheney2004]

Just now, Goddess said:

I disagree with your assessment of what constitutes "many". I'm sure there are "some" women.

You know who else believes "many" Women are degenerate sluts?

The Taliban.

 

???? So now anyone who presents a different view backed up by data is the "Taliban" ?

How many women seeking abortions as birth control...multiple abortions...is enough to qualify as "many" ?

According to the World Health Organization, there are 40 to 50 million abortions each year...about 125,000 per day.

If far less women were being murdered each year, I bet protesters would say "many women".