Young feminists make mark in "war on ...

Young feminists make mark in "war on women"

There are 3497 comments on the CBS News story from May 16, 2012, titled Young feminists make mark in "war on women". In it, CBS News reports that:

Members of NARAL Pro-Choice America protest with Etch A Sketches outside a hotel in Washington where Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney was holding a political fundraiser March 22, 2012.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CBS News.

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#1604 Jun 26, 2012
OLD LADY wrote:
I'll make a claim,for what ever reason,children are unwanted by their mother,we had 2 presidents who were raised by folks who loved them,and wanted them. Of course, if they were aborted they wouldn't be president,they be dead.
And then what would have happened?

Would we have NOT had presidents during those years? Or would someone else have been president instead?

This idea that "they would be dead" implies that we as a society would have lost something because they didn't exist.

But that simply isn't the case. There lack of existence wouldn't have mattered AT ALL.

The world would not be running around trying to figure out why we have no president for four years because the one who should have been president during that time was never born.

We have SEVEN BILLION PEOPLE on this planet. We could lose SIX BILLION of them and still not have a problem filling jobs.

Stop trying to force women who don't want to have children to have children. They are not your slaves. You do not own their bodies.

Just mind your own business and let people do to themselves what they choose to do to themselves.

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#1605 Jun 26, 2012
OLD LADY wrote:
<quoted text>
Gerald Ford,and and Bill Clinton. To my understanding Gerald Ford's dad was a bully,who threatened his wife,so she left him. Bill Clinton's dad died in a car wreak,and was later adopted by his step dad.
Are you F'ing kidding me?

In NEITHER of these cases were these children unwanted by their MOTHERS.

They simply had fathers who either DIED by accident or were jerks.

If THIS is your best argument, you really should just give up and go home.

“OUCH”

Since: Mar 07

Russell Springs, KY

#1606 Jun 26, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
And then what would have happened?
Would we have NOT had presidents during those years? Or would someone else have been president instead?
This idea that "they would be dead" implies that we as a society would have lost something because they didn't exist.
But that simply isn't the case. There lack of existence wouldn't have mattered AT ALL.
The world would not be running around trying to figure out why we have no president for four years because the one who should have been president during that time was never born.
We have SEVEN BILLION PEOPLE on this planet. We could lose SIX BILLION of them and still not have a problem filling jobs.
Stop trying to force women who don't want to have children to have children. They are not your slaves. You do not own their bodies.
Just mind your own business and let people do to themselves what they choose to do to themselves.
Everything to you is implied. In other worlds your winging it?
When one aborts a fetus is it dead or not?

"Turns out, if you don't want a kid and end up with one, there's a much higher likelihood that you're going to do a piss poor job of raising the kid and as a result, you've bred a criminal."
Does likely and might mean the same?:)

How would you suggest we get rid of six billion people?

Why is it none of my business? It's a political issue is it not?

“OUCH”

Since: Mar 07

Russell Springs, KY

#1607 Jun 26, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you F'ing kidding me?
In NEITHER of these cases were these children unwanted by their MOTHERS.
They simply had fathers who either DIED by accident or were jerks.
If THIS is your best argument, you really should just give up and go home.
You've accuse me of being dishonest or stupid,and you rewrite what I already wrote. Care to explain why you just picked out half of what I posted? I am home,dear.
the rest of us

Saint Paul, MN

#1608 Jun 26, 2012
shovelhead72 wrote:
<quoted text> If we could only give you the 'beat down' you so richly deserve, you would no longer be able to plague us with your obstreperous opinions.
Unfortunately, that's also illegal - so we'll have to settle for....BLAH,BLAH,FART,BLAH,FAR T,BLAH......
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know you are but what am I.....in a battle of wits you're going to lose. You have a big mouth and a little brain....not a good combo. That's why you're on here farting away because in real life nobody listens.

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#1609 Jun 26, 2012
OLD LADY wrote:
Why is it none of my business? It's a political issue is it not?
Actually, it's not.

It's a medical issue that busy bodies such as yourself have turned political by deciding that, on issues that don't effect you directly, you should be able to deny others' their rights.

Just like old people and immigration and old people and gay marriage.

Funny how you love to step in and try and crush people who you don't like, but heaven forbid anyone point out that you, as a senior citizen, contribute NOTHING to society and just live off the state run welfare that WE the workers provide you.

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#1610 Jun 26, 2012
OLD LADY wrote:
<quoted text>
You've accuse me of being dishonest or stupid,and you rewrite what I already wrote. Care to explain why you just picked out half of what I posted? I am home,dear.
Because I was responding to a specific point you were making.

These posts have a 4000 character limit.

If I choose to quote an ENTIRE post by someone else in order to address one sentence in that post, then I am losing a large percentage of my characters to reprint extraneous information.

If I posted a 3900 character post and you decided to respond, could you address everything in less than 100 characters? Doubt it.

So, back on point, your "adopted" presidents were BOTH raised by their BIOLOGICAL mothers.

Do you simply not understand the term? Or were you being deliberately dishonest _again_?
Ink

Morrisville, PA

#1611 Jun 26, 2012
OLD LADY wrote:
<quoted text>
Everything to you is implied. In other worlds your winging it?
When one aborts a fetus is it dead or not?
"Turns out, if you don't want a kid and end up with one, there's a much higher likelihood that you're going to do a piss poor job of raising the kid and as a result, you've bred a criminal."
Does likely and might mean the same?:)
How would you suggest we get rid of six billion people?
Why is it none of my business? It's a political issue is it not?
I think he is say that everyone is dispensible, replaceable and disposable, so it doesn't matter who is aborted and who is born and the fewer the better. Typical secular narcistic point of view.
Ink

Morrisville, PA

#1612 Jun 26, 2012
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text> All of them. Every discussion we have had has ended with you evading my direct questions and challenges to your assertions. When that doesn't work, you leave the thread for a while.
It's all good, hon. Whatever gets you through the night:-)
I answered all of them. You on the other hand didn't even answer 'what question I avoided'.
Ink

Morrisville, PA

#1613 Jun 26, 2012
Morgana 9 wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? You have been whining about maintaining "sex lives" at tax payers expense.
I will ask you again. Why then cover prenatal care or child birth the ultimate result of a sex life? Why are you only concerned about BC?
Because that actually would be health care although I do believe that if you have to depend on the government to sustain you and your children their should be some guidelines for a limit of irresponsible behavior you can charge to the people who make a living and pay taxes.

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#1614 Jun 26, 2012
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I think he is say that everyone is dispensible, replaceable and disposable, so it doesn't matter who is aborted and who is born and the fewer the better. Typical secular narcistic point of view.
As opposed to "everyone is special"?

If you HONESTLY believed that everyone is special, then how can you justify owning a computer when people are starving to death in Africa? How can you live with yourself not giving up every spare penny you can collect to save the lives of those children?

Remember any single child in Africa is EXACTLY as important as you are. Therefore if there are TWO or MORE hungry children it's better that you feed them than eat any food yourself.

So, you tell me, when you look around your trailer. How much stuff there could be sold to send money to Africa?

Now, stop being a hypocrite.

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#1615 Jun 26, 2012
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Because that actually would be health care although I do believe that if you have to depend on the government to sustain you and your children their should be some guidelines for a limit of irresponsible behavior you can charge to the people who make a living and pay taxes.
So, people like Old Lady should have her life dictated to her because she lives entirely off the hard work of people who are paying taxes.

In fact, a HUGE portion of the population (including MUCH of the state of Florida) lives partially or ENTIRELY on social security.

Frankly, I don't think they should be allowed to vote, but I'll get behind your plan of letting me decide which of them gets what treatments for health care.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#1616 Jun 26, 2012
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I answered all of them. You on the other hand didn't even answer 'what question I avoided'.
~sigh~ I'll record it for you. On what premise do you oppose government health programs programs paying for BC, when you don't them paying for prenatal care, which is also treatment for something which is not a disease? Please give a direct answer, if you can.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#1617 Jun 26, 2012
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
Because that actually would be health care although I do believe that if you have to depend on the government to sustain you and your children their should be some guidelines for a limit of irresponsible behavior you can charge to the people who make a living and pay taxes.
Contraception is healthcare. Ask anything physician. You do not get to redefine healthcare to conform to your personal opinion. Live with it.

“OUCH”

Since: Mar 07

Russell Springs, KY

#1618 Jun 26, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, it's not.
It's a medical issue that busy bodies such as yourself have turned political by deciding that, on issues that don't effect you directly, you should be able to deny others' their rights.
Just like old people and immigration and old people and gay marriage.
Funny how you love to step in and try and crush people who you don't like, but heaven forbid anyone point out that you, as a senior citizen, contribute NOTHING to society and just live off the state run welfare that WE the workers provide you.
Didn't the courts decide for us? Are you sure just one human is effected in the abortion issue?
What about gay folks and immigration? I have nothing against either of them. I've contributed to society for 45 years. I live on a modest income,and pay for my medicare every month. I work on the weekends for spending money for my grandkids,and the love of my life who is 9. Do you understand the word work? What the hell is the matter with you? You put everyone in groups and tell us all how they live,get a damn life.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#1619 Jun 26, 2012
OLD LADY wrote:
<quoted text>
Everything to you is implied. In other worlds your winging it?
When one aborts a fetus is it dead or not?
"Turns out, if you don't want a kid and end up with one, there's a much higher likelihood that you're going to do a piss poor job of raising the kid and as a result, you've bred a criminal."
Does likely and might mean the same?:)
How would you suggest we get rid of six billion people?
Why is it none of my business? It's a political issue is it not?
You are making an assumption that each of us are indespensable. Not true. For every great mind, every amazing talent, every beautiful heart, there are many to take its place. We are all winging life. Anyone who thinks that there is an ultimate plan to the universe is mistaken, imo.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#1620 Jun 26, 2012
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
I think he is say that everyone is dispensible, replaceable and disposable, so it doesn't matter who is aborted and who is born and the fewer the better. Typical secular narcistic point of view.
How is the view that we are all dispensible a narcissistic one? On the contrary, your concept that you arrive uniquely special in the eyes of some personal God that you have at your continuous dispense is a narcissistic view.

“OUCH”

Since: Mar 07

Russell Springs, KY

#1621 Jun 26, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
So, people like Old Lady should have her life dictated to her because she lives entirely off the hard work of people who are paying taxes.
In fact, a HUGE portion of the population (including MUCH of the state of Florida) lives partially or ENTIRELY on social security.
Frankly, I don't think they should be allowed to vote, but I'll get behind your plan of letting me decide which of them gets what treatments for health care.
You have officially pissed me off. Older americans paid their damn taxes for years into the system,for the same stuff your taxes are being paid for,why is that a problem for you? So what,Florida is a retirement state. Won't Mommy and Daddy put you in their will? I see why..<grin>

“OUCH”

Since: Mar 07

Russell Springs, KY

#1622 Jun 26, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Because I was responding to a specific point you were making.
These posts have a 4000 character limit.
If I choose to quote an ENTIRE post by someone else in order to address one sentence in that post, then I am losing a large percentage of my characters to reprint extraneous information.
If I posted a 3900 character post and you decided to respond, could you address everything in less than 100 characters? Doubt it.
So, back on point, your "adopted" presidents were BOTH raised by their BIOLOGICAL mothers.
Do you simply not understand the term? Or were you being deliberately dishonest _again_?
Isn't that what I wrote,shit for brains?

“OUCH”

Since: Mar 07

Russell Springs, KY

#1623 Jun 26, 2012
elise in burque wrote:
<quoted text>You are making an assumption that each of us are indespensable. Not true. For every great mind, every amazing talent, every beautiful heart, there are many to take its place. We are all winging life. Anyone who thinks that there is an ultimate plan to the universe is mistaken, imo.
Where am I making the assumption,each of us are indispensable? Of course, there are people who takes our place. I don't think any two people are the same,in mind,in talent,in heart. This is a good thing. We can keep them in our hearts and remember. As far as winging life your right. My post had nothing to do with the poster winging life,itself.
I would hope there is an ultimate plan,if not I've lost nothing,if so yippee..:)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Mitt Romney Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Axelrod: Obama faces 'titanic struggle' (Sep '11) 6 hr BARACK FART 34
News Condoleezza Rice mum on criticism of Obama on L... (Oct '12) Thu Tear down this wall 4
News Democrats aim to blast Trump for favoring wealthy (Jun '17) Thu RIP 1,196
News Gingrich: Romney will win 'over 300 electoral v... (Oct '12) May 23 Dig Gravers 46
News Santorum, Gingrich tote Etch A Sketch toys (Mar '12) May 22 Etch a Win 2012 47
News Trump knocks Romney strategist (Oct '15) May 21 A la Bama 4
News Billionaire Soros gives $1M to pro-Obama super PAC (Sep '12) May 21 A la Bama 10