Election 2012- Post Mortem

[brandymac27]

So, he's laying off his employees to make a point? Are you kidding me?!

Nothing people do anymore surprises me,

[War Paint]

This relates well to what you are saying... though it comes from a pretty slanted source itself I think it was well written.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...src=most_viral

---------- Post added November-10th-2012 at 05:47 AM ----------



Thing is, the Dems weren't the ones passing bills in state chambers all over the place trying to restrict women's rights the year before the election. The "war on women" was a self-inflicted wound. Now, many might agree with the proposals or laws,but that doesn't change the fact that many, many women obviously felt attacked by a real attempt to change their rights in numerous states. It wasn't just rhetoric they were responding to, but actual legal action.

Can you please elaborate on what these restrictions against women's rights were?

[Burgold]

New Mexico, Virginia, and multiple other states passed laws restricting a woman's right to choose. The ultrasound law was only one example. There were many.

[War Paint]

New Mexico, Virginia, and multiple other states passed laws restricting a woman's right to choose. The ultrasound law was only one example. There were many.

Well, that is where I disagree with you. Being pro-life and not wanting to kill babies is not waging war on women. Perhaps people need to take responsibility for their actions. If someone is unwed and knows they don't have the financial means to raise kids, they should take precautionary measures before having sex. Condoms are affordable. Walmart sells a month supply of birth control for $9.

[deejaydana]

I've been reflecting upon the election and the campaign which preceeded it and I'm really let down that both sides devoted so little time and focus upon our debt and entitlements. *sigh*

[Burgold]

Well, that is where I disagree with you. Being pro-life and not wanting to kill babies is not waging war on women. Perhaps people need to take responsibility for their actions. If someone is unwed and knows they don't have the financial means to raise kids, they should take precautionary measures before having sex. Condoms are affordable. Walmart sells a month supply of birth control for $9.

Whether you agree with me or not... And actually, whether you are right or not is irrelevant. Women, by and large, perceived this as an attack. How they voted is the proof.

[Larry]

Walmart sells a month supply of birth control for $9.

How many states passed (Or at least "tried to pass". I remember reading about such laws. I don't remember if they passed, or just got proposed.) "religious freedom" laws, declaring that when anyone attempts to buy such birth control, every employee in the store has the right to veto that sale, and cannot be punished if they do?

You remember which people it was who pitched a fit, about laws saying that health insurance has to cover birth control?

You want to try to play the "I think it's just peachy to outlaw abortion, because they should use birth control", maybe the GOP should stop trying to restrict birth control, at the same time.

[War Paint]

How many states passed (Or at least "tried to pass". I remember reading about such laws. I don't remember if they passed, or just got proposed.) "religious freedom" laws, declaring that when anyone attempts to buy such birth control, every employee in the store has the right to veto that sale, and cannot be punished if they do?

You remember which people it was who pitched a fit, about laws saying that health insurance has to cover birth control?


You want to try to play the "I think it's just peachy to outlaw abortion, because they should use birth control", maybe the GOP should stop trying to restrict birth control, at the same time.

I never heard about the veto story. If that's true, I don't agree with that at all. In regards to health insurance, health insurance should be viewed as a private product that has the choice to decide if it wants to cover specific things like birth control. Then the customer decides if they want to purchase that product or not. If not, they can shop around and find a product that does provide for things that are important to them. The government shouldn't be involved.

[Larry]

I never heard about the veto story. If that's true, I don't agree with that at all. In regards to health insurance, health insurance should be viewed as a private product that has the choice to decide if it wants to cover specific things like birth control. Then the customer decides if they want to purchase that product or not. If not, they can shop around and find a product that does provide for things that are important to them. The government shouldn't be involved.

Ah, got it.

The Republican Party didn't object to mandating coverage of birth control, because it was birth control. They objected because they object to all laws applying to corporations.

That's why they claimed that their objection was based on religion. It's because laws are against their religion. (But only certain laws.)

[skinsmarydu]

Whether you agree with me or not... And actually, whether you are right or not is irrelevant. Women, by and large, perceived this as an attack. How they voted is the proof.

How many states passed (Or at least "tried to pass". I remember reading about such laws. I don't remember if they passed, or just got proposed.) "religious freedom" laws, declaring that when anyone attempts to buy such birth control, every employee in the store has the right to veto that sale, and cannot be punished if they do?

You remember which people it was who pitched a fit, about laws saying that health insurance has to cover birth control?

You want to try to play the "I think it's just peachy to outlaw abortion, because they should use birth control", maybe the GOP should stop trying to restrict birth control, at the same time.

I love you guys more every day. Thanks.

[twa]

New Mexico, Virginia, and multiple other states passed laws restricting a woman's right to choose. The ultrasound law was only one example. There were many.

A ultrasound was already required by Planned Parenthood before a abortion

[brandymac27]

I love you guys more every day. Thanks.

I wonder.... if it was mandated that no male children could get circumcised until they turn 13 (or could NEVER get circumcised) how many men would be in an uproar about the govt making decisions for their bodies?

[Burgold]

A ultrasound was already required by Planned Parenthood before a abortion

There are different types... also, it's one thing for a private institution to demand a procedure and quite another for a state.

[SkinsHokieFan]

The Republicans lost the "war on women" debate by being stupid, in particular 2 Senate candidates.

R's need to do the following when asked about it

"I am pro life and against abortion except in the cases of rape, incest and life of mother"

Thats it. Never mention it again. Repeat that line over and over.

And when you get in office, don't even address the issue. Go on to other more important things. Don't start passing "personhood" laws.

[CrabR]

Being pro-life and not wanting to kill babies is not waging war on women. .

and no one is forcing you get to a abortion

If you are a man like myself then we have no business in this argument as it a womans body. It amazes me at the amount of laws passed by old white men intended to govern a womans body

In the end noone is for really for a abortion,but some for whatever reason need one. Bill Clinton said it best Safe,rare and legal

PS
If you are pro life how many unwanted special needs children have you adopted ?