Jump to content

Democrats waging "war on women"?


colourwheel

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

They are trying to make it difficult/expensive to get an abortion. Its an end-run short of an outright ban.

Religious belief is not the only reason that people oppose abortion. There are plenty of non-religious arguments that can be made against it. Even if the motivation for such a law is purely religious in origin it does not invalidate that position. Declaring a person's political belief to be invalid because that belief is rooted in a religious belief is an example of religious intolerance.

Edited by TRoaches
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Religious intolerance is unacceptable, but, the religious being intolerant of my views is ok. Check. Got it.

 

Trying to shove your religious views down my throat by passing legislation is intolerable as well. Abortion was only one example. I'll leave it at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard though it may be it is one of the few hard and fast rules on the debates section. Don't get into religious discussions. Period.~Lisnpuppy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trying to shove your...views down my throat by passing legislation is intolerable as well. Abortion was only one example. I'll leave it at that.

Advocating a position that you are opposed to is not the same as shoving that viewpoint down your throat. You are free to ignore it or actively act in opposition to it, but if your efforts fail and that position is codified as a law it is not accurate to say that it was "shoved" on you. You are making the same mistake that people who oppose the ACA make when they cry about it being "shoved" on them. If legislation is proposed that you are opposed to the only viable civil actions that are avialable to you are telling your representatives how you feel about it and subesquently voting them out of office if they ignore you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Trying to shove your...views down my throat by passing legislation is intolerable as well. Abortion was only one example. I'll leave it at that.

 

Advocating a position that you are opposed to is not the same as shoving that viewpoint down your throat. You are free to ignore it or actively act in opposition to it, but if your efforts fail and that position is codified as a law it is not accurate to say that it was "shoved" on you. You are making the same mistake that people who oppose the ACA make when they cry about it being "shoved" on them. If legislation is proposed that you are opposed to the only viable civil actions that are avialable to you are telling your representatives how you feel about it and subesquently voting them out of office if they ignore you.

 

I think the point can be made that passing laws to address a problem with our healthcare system is one thing, there is an actual practicality to reform a system that is degrading over time. Passing laws forcing a women to have a totally unnecessary trans-vaginal probing when a woman wishes to seek to have abortion has no logical or practical purpose or address any type of existing problem other than to restrict a woman from having a constitutionally protected medical procedure.

 

If the Republican party is wanting to start to pass laws to restrict abortion( which is a constitutionally protected right) They might as well start passing laws like castrating a males penis after they have impregnated a woman so many times in their life (at least this would address over population in our nation). Because Tran-Vaginal probing laws are just as meaningless as passing a law that doesn't address the well being of anyone or anything other than satisfying ones personal belief.

Edited by colourwheel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...