By making them dependent on the government Democrats are helping facilitate women independence ^_^
So the democrats hurt women by supporting the welfare and making them dependent yet there not the ones waging the war on women
By making them dependent on the government Democrats are helping facilitate women independence ^_^
You mean making abortion harder.
You mean not paying for them. By your logic the Democrats having an anti-lexus stance because they won't buy me one :hmm:
You mean refusing to pander to the feminist lie that money grubbing corporations that will outsource to china to save 10 cents will pay men more to do the same work.
And yet 44% of women and a majority of married women voted Republican.
I cant believe that those women supporters think this is independence
Abortions are not made "harder" by unnecessary procedures, it only adds discomfort for women by meddling politicians who are pushing an agenda.
Nope, that isn't what happened with contraception.
Nope, has nothing to do with mythical "feminists" that only exist in your mind.
Clearly, you have not understood the underlying problem of the Republican party.If the Republicans had been willing to compromise 5% on their no-tax obsession after their 2010 thwacking of the Democrats and never mentioned the word rape they quite likely would have won in 2012.
Your statement is not accurate. Obama won 45% of white male voters. Democrats don't have a male problem, it's white males who are seen as having an Obama problem.EDIT: And while Romney won 44% of female voters and Obama won 45% of male voters you do not hear any talk about the Democrats having a male problem. I wonder why?
By agenda you mean they want to outlaw killing of fetuses (which then consider to be babies)
EDIT: It adds discomfort to women who want abortions. Although democrats seem to have a problem distinguishing between that subset of women and women in general
Show where Republicans have actually outlawed contraception
That is exactly what the "pay-gap" myth is about. People who think women should be exactly like men.
1. Politicians forcing unnecessary procedures= insane.
2. Strawman.
3. We know, you hate women. What does that have to do with mythical "feminists"? There is no such movement anymore and hasn't been for decades.
1. Politicians forcing unnecessary procedures= insane.
2. Strawman.
3. We know, you hate women. What does that have to do with mythical "feminists"? There is no such movement anymore and hasn't been for decades.
Your statement is not accurate. Obama won 45% of white male voters. Democrats don't have a male problem, it's white males who are seen as having an Obama problem.
That was extensively discussed during the 2008 primaries when many thought that Hilary Clinton would be a better nominee than Obama. The truth of course was that she wasn't much more popular with that particular demographic.
Hey, this is P&N! We don't let things like facts obstruct our arguments!Isn't that exactly what I said?
Yep, it was.
To adapt their message and broaden their tent means they'll have to do a one-eighty on current positions regarding reproductive rights, LGBT rights, immigration policy, and economic policy. The growing demographics in this country disagree with the GOP on all those issues. When the Republicans get curb-stomped in 2016, there is going to be some very high-level discussions on the party platform going forward.
1.) I am sure Republicans would say supporting women committing murder is insane
2.) So you concede that the Republicans attacking contraception thing is a lie.
3.) Who do you think keeps harping about the 77% myth?
1. You didn't even try.
2. That isn't even close.
3. Demons in your head?
The most important thing is issue 1. All you did was double down. This is why the republicans will continue to lose women. Justify and rationalize all you want, but you be losing!
Does Rick Santorum count as a Republican?2.) I am still waiting for your evidence of Republicans attacking contraception. This was your claim.
Last year Santorum told the Christian blog Caffeinated Thoughts that as president he would warn the nation about "the dangers of contraception" and the permissive culture it encourages. "Many of Christian faith have said, 'Well, that's OK. Contraception is OK,'" he said. "It's not OK. It's a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. ... If it's not for purposes of procreation, then you diminish this very special bond between men and women."
Santorum: Says he wouldn't try to take away the pill or condoms
2.) I am still waiting for your evidence of Republicans attacking contraception. This was your claim.
3.) The Barack Obama website. Although I can see why that might be confused with demons
Sigh. Ok, number 1 disappeared.
2. The first sign of the new assault came last October, when Mississippi activists and congressional Republicans pushed legislation on the state and federal level, respectively, that would have treated zygotesa.k.a. fertilized human eggsas legal "persons." If the definition of legal personhood is changed so that it begins when sperm meets an egg, hormonal birth control or barrier devices that prevent zygotes from implanting in the uterine wall could become illegal, making using an IUD tantamount to murder. Yet some 40 percent of House Republicans and a quarter of their allies in the Senate back bills that would do just that.
That's not all. Earlier this year, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a rising conservative star who's considered a possible pick for the 2012 GOP vice-presidential nomination, introduced a bill that could cut off birth control access for millions of women by allowing even non-religious employers to refuse birth control coverage as long as they cite a religious reason. In other words, if your boss doesn't want to cover birth control in the company health plan because he says it would offend his religious beliefs, he wouldn't have toeven if his Cialis was still covered. Rubio's bill could also allow states to refuse to provide birth control through Medicaid, which provides family planning services to millions of poor women.
These are people who have never, ever approved of birth control, and they saw an opportunity to take it one step further.
The Republican presidential candidates also have come out against birth control. Mitt Romney has slammed President Barack Obama for requiring most employers to offer insurance that provides birth control at no cost to women who want it, even though Romney himself maintained a similar rule as governor of Massachusetts.
Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who won the non-binding Missouri primary as well as the Minnesota and Colorado caucuses on Tuesday, has also slammed Obama's decision. But he's also gone farther than that, suggesting that any form of birth control is immoral. "Many of the Christian faith have said, well, that's okay, contraception is okay," Santorum, a devout Catholic, said in October. "It's not okay. It's a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be." As Salon's Irin Carmon has documented, Santorum thinks Griswold v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court decision that said states can not deny married couples access to contraception, should be overturned.
Even previously uncontroversial ideas about contraception are now being questioned. As I explained in this story about Obama's birth-control policy, most of the administration's recently-issued rule requiring companies to provide birth control to their employees has been widely accepted federal law for a decade. Requiring employers to provide birth control if they provide other preventative services was so uncontroversial that most employerseven Catholic universities like DePaul, in Chicagosimply changed their policies and offered birth control to avoid being sued. The percentage of employers offering birth control coverage tripled in a decade. The national controversy only erupted after Obama issued the new rule in January.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/republican-war-birth-control-contraception
3. You made up your own definition of a feminist.Interesting. So every time I heard liberals complain that viagra was covered but BC wasnt they were lying out their ass?
Again, feel free to keep doubling down on failed policies. You will continue to be at a disadvantage with women and blame them for it at the same time. I really prefer you keep with your insane opinions. It is killing the republican party.
So like I said Republicans do not think the government should be in the business of paying for people's BC. Thank you for sourcing this.
So Republicans are against BC being treated as a special privileged class of drug. How radical! ^_^
And overturning it changes nothing if states don't outlaw it. No evidence has been provided that they would.
Fun fact. 1% more men voted Obama than women voted Romney. Why haven't we heard about the Democrats man problem?
And I didnt make up my own definition of a feminist. Anyone who believes there is a serious problem with women being paid less for the same work should be consigned with the same people who believe 9/11 was an inside job.
Fun fact. 1% more men voted Obama than women voted Romney. Why haven't we heard about the Democrats man problem?
And I didnt make up my own definition of a feminist. Anyone who believes there is a serious problem with women being paid less for the same work should be consigned with the same people who believe 9/11 was an inside job.
The circle jerk wars of strawmen have begun!
And we have yet another circle jerk thread about how the Republican party is in shambles and is hanging on by a thread.