Oh, right, "legitimate" rape. As opposed to...she secretly liked it? Sick fucks. - Page 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by trumptman 

Aren't all the posters decrying this guy the same people who declared women should have no control over their bodies with regard to the HPV vaccine?

 

Women only have rights per them until it harms the herd. Then they are cattle to be rounded up and done with as their overlords decree.

Don't forget BR's forced sex education classes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR 

Knowledge! It burns!

So does hypocrisy and denial related to those who scream about ignorance while advocating for an authoritarian police state where they can dictate to the female "herd" what they must do with their bodies.

However the OP makes his case quite clear. Those who advocate for mandatory HPV vaccines, who believe women aren't fit to determine what they can do with their bodies, they are sick fucks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetry 

Quote:

Originally Posted by trumptman 

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR 

Knowledge! It burns!

So does hypocrisy and denial related to those who scream about ignorance while advocating for an authoritarian police state where they can dictate to the female "herd" what they must do with their bodies.

However the OP makes his case quite clear. Those who advocate for mandatory HPV vaccines, who believe women aren't fit to determine what they can do with their bodies, they are sick fucks.

You certainly make a good case for abortion to be freely available. Would you put no restrictions on what they can do with their bodies?

I've argued that whatever rights we establish, it goes both ways. We cannot declare that a woman is notified of her impending status as a parent and is given the option to terminate it because the baby might be unwanted, unaffordable or just damaging to the lifestyle and career she desires and then turn around and say to a man, you get no notification, no rights and no recourse.

So I argue for equality. If a man is notified that a former or current partner is pregnant, he ha a period of time where he can terminate his fatherhood rights and go on with his life. It should be within the period where the woman can still have an abortion and she can choose what she wants to do based in part off his decision and knowing she will have sole custody. Paternity and child support laws are ridiculous and sound like 19th century reasoning.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR 

Indeed.  Even if a fetus were to be considered a person--a person has no right to occupy your body, take your energy, and threaten your life without your consent.

 

Also, don't you love how MJ quickly changed the subject away from him advocating keeping children in the dark?  When one's worldview is threatened by the free flow of information, there's something seriously wrong with that worldview.

Certainly a fetus is more advanced than a vaccine and you would declare the right for the state to force the woman to take that vaccine without their consent.

You don't accept the free flow of information. You put on blinders and ignore information and arguments that don't match your worldview. You refuse to engage them and just repeat yourself with more strident name-calling and ever larger measures of profanity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR 

Also, don't you love how MJ quickly changed the subject away from him advocating keeping children in the dark?

I advocated keeping children in the dark? You'll have to point to the post in order to avoid looking like a fool and a liar.

Meanwhile, we know that you advocate forcing people to listen to and be educated in whatever it is you feel they need to listen to and be educated in. We all notice how you changed the subject when this truth was laid bare for you and everyone else to see.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR 

When one's worldview is threatened by the free flow of information, there's something seriously wrong with that worldview.

I think trumptman addressed your hypocrisy on this well enough here, I needn't say any more on it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmac 

In a way he does represent a large part of the GOP ( and running for a Senate seat as a Republican ) as he was talking about his anti abortion stance shared by many Republicans and Tea party types. And please if this had happened to a Democrat just try to tell me the Republicans wouldn't take the same angle. Of course though most Democrats are pro choice.

In a way?  Uh, in no way whatsoever, which is why he was denounced by everyone.  And I mean everyone.  As for Democrats, they've said things far worse.  The difference is they don't get asked to resign or drop out.  They can be openly racist, sexist, bigoted, immoral, or even directly responsible for a person's death.  Doesn't matter...because their hearts are in the right place.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by BR 

Incorrect, SDW.  On Mike Huckabee's radio show, Akin said that he meant "forcible rape" when he said "legitimate rape".  Your spin is bogus.

What incentive to I have to "spin?"  I'm simply trying to understand what he meant.  While I don't see why its necessary to use the term "legitimate," I also don't think it means he thinks a woman liked it, as you suggested in the thread title.  Since he's clarified by saying he meant "forcible," I can only assume that he was distinguishing between force and say, date rape?  I don't know.  Either way, the medical ignorance is what I am most taken aback by.  He still doesn't have any good explanation for that.  His "I read some articles that turned out to be wrong" comment was laughable.  

I don't support abortion, but of all the possible reasons to give for why it's wrong, he comes out with this...  Seems this generation of Republicans need to lay off the drugs...