Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


WhiteRae -> Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 9:26:14 AM)

Politico and RH Reality Check are reporting that anti-choice Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana has introduced an amendment to a spending bill that would promote contraception--for wild horses.

This comes at the same time as the anti-choice House leadership is pushing to eliminate all funding for Title X, the nation's only domestic family-planning program for humans.

Ted Miller, communications director for NARAL Pro-Choice America, said the move would be ridiculous if the stakes weren't so high:

House members fighting to preserve a horse's right to birth control would be laughable, if they weren't trying to block women from accessing contraception at the exact same time. What's next? An amendment that would allow veterinarians to refuse to provide birth control to a horse if the vet is personally opposed to contraception?

http://www.blogforchoice.com/archives/2011/02/birth-control-f.html

So women, even if raped, shouldn't be allowed to get an abortion, but we need to help stop horses from reproducing?




truckinslave -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 9:34:20 AM)

If the Burton alternative is cheaper than what we are spending on the wild horses now, great.

Why are you confusing contraception and abortion? Granted, for some women they are essentially intercahngeable, but most pro-abortionists deny that... 




WhiteRae -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 9:39:32 AM)

I'm not saying they are the same, but I am staying it is stupid to consider contraception for horses when women are fighting for the right to control their own bodies.




truckinslave -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 9:43:32 AM)

I imagine (this is a guess only) that this is a money-saving measure. I know there is a yearly wild horse roundup, we auction some off, etc etc. Don't know how that's paid for. But I'll bet we spend some comically huge amount of money on wild horses already (thanks, PETA!) or Burton wouldn't bother.

What's got you riled up over abortion/contraception?

Did you see where someone in (I think) one of the Dakotas introduced a bill decriminalizing killing abortionists?




WhiteRae -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 9:53:27 AM)

Yea I saw that too.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2011/02/15/south_dakota_abortion_killing_bill
I'm very pro-choice and, in my opinion, I find it disgusting that a group of mostly men think they have the right to tell a women what she can or cannot do to her body. Or how about people who no longer want to use the term "victim of rape" but want them to be called the "accuser" while the term victim remains for other crimes, like theft?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/04/georgia-lawmaker-redefine-rape-victims-accusers_n_818718.html




Termyn8or -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 10:01:20 AM)

But wild horses are overrunning the slums and bothering the welfare recipients !

Where is your sense of social justice ?

T^T




popeye1250 -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 10:01:50 AM)

Is this guy Burton a holy roller or something?
I don't want my tax dollars paying for any of this stuff!
I don't want congressmen or senators even talking about abortion. It's none of the govt's business one way or the other.
If holy rollers get into public office they should keep their religious opinions to themselves.
They need to be comming up with ways to spend less money not more.




truckinslave -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 10:08:55 AM)

I only had to deal with one rape case in my short career as an investigator. As a unit we put one in the ground, one in Leavenworth, and one in the hospital on his way to Leavenworth. The one in the hospital claimed a certain investigator threw him from a jeep at 45+ MPH, but the investigator and his driver swore the prisoner jumped out in an ill-considered attempt at escape. No witnesses... Awful case, for both the victim and her husband, who was beaten half to death as foreplay to the rape. Left a small scar on a certain investigator, too.

I mention that only to point out that I am sensitive to some of the issues surrounding the crime, and that I certainly do not try to minimize it in any way. The first thing that struck me about the terminology change, though, was that it could be a way to protect the victim. I have no idea, but do you think most rape victims would prefer to be called "the victim", "the rape victim", or "the accuser". It seems to me that "the accuser" is certainly more empowering.

Of course, in my family, we would more than likely be referring to the lady involved simply as "the shooter".




kalikshama -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 10:13:21 AM)

quote:

Of course, in my family, we would more than likely be referring to the lady involved simply as "the shooter".

[sm=cute.gif]




WhiteRae -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 10:15:24 AM)

To me calling the person "the accuser" makes it seem as if you are questioning and validity of what is being said. Saying "the victim" almost sounds to me like it's being taken more seriously. But if they want to call a rape victim and accuser, why not do the same for all other crimes?




truckinslave -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 10:25:17 AM)

'To me calling the person "the accuser" makes it seem as if you are questioning and validity of what is being said. '

Yes, I see that possibility too.

As far as why one and not the other, I don't know, unless perhaps it's just that LE or the courts or whomever don't see as great a possibility of further psychological injury from calling a burglary or car theft or  assault victim, "victim".

I just had another thought. Were my child molested, I think I'd rather he be called "the accuser" than "the molested child".




luckydawg -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 10:34:37 AM)

So it is agreed, we should sterilise both Horses and Poor Women against thier will....




WhiteRae -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 10:35:37 AM)

I'm 19 so I can't really think of it that way, but that is something to think about. I guess I can see either point of view that way, but if their real intention is to make it less traumatizing then, especially with all the other issues about redefining rape and everything, it would be more beneficial to apply that to all crimes as it wouldn't hurt anyone to call someone who was stolen from "the accuser" as well.




Moonhead -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 11:21:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250
If holy rollers get into public office they should keep their religious opinions to themselves.

Haven't you stated (three or four times now) that the notorious holy roller Reagan was the last President you voted for?
You know, the twat who handed the Republican party over to the Religious right in 1980 because he thought there might be a few votes in it...




truckinslave -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 2:21:57 PM)

People who cannot afford children should not have children.




rulemylife -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 3:55:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

Is this guy Burton a holy roller or something?
I don't want my tax dollars paying for any of this stuff!
I don't want congressmen or senators even talking about abortion. It's none of the govt's business one way or the other.
If holy rollers get into public office they should keep their religious opinions to themselves.
They need to be comming up with ways to spend less money not more.


Someone else you never heard of Popeye?

Pretty amazing for someone who posts so frequently on a political forum.

Dan Burton is the hypocritical dipshit who called Clinton a scumbag because he cheated on his wife.

But then it turned out Danny had fathered a child after cheating on his wife.







jlf1961 -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 5:12:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

People who cannot afford children should not have children.



And how do you propose to stop people from having children?




outhere69 -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 6:52:52 PM)

I've known plenty of fundamentalists that have children they can't afford.  Some had the wife stay at home even though she earned more and had insurance because that's what a godly family was.

It's ironic that some of the folks that would de-fund Title X are the same ones that rant about people having children they can't afford.  The same guys that had unprotected sex when they couldn't afford kids either.  It's not like they were celibate until they got good jobs.

I used Title X when I graduated from college and into a $5/hour job (in '82, in southern CA).  It was a godsend.  The same with Planned Parenthood, when I couldn't afford to pay upfront costs to a gynecologist.






hlen5 -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 7:19:45 PM)

What happened to calling the rape victim the rape survivor?

I disagree with calling them the accuser, it implies doubt in the validity of their claim.




Lucylastic -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/19/2011 7:26:04 PM)

One TRUE god given right that neanderthals are trying hard as hell to control,
neanderthals thinkhaving  money is the only way people should procreate.







Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
5.859375E-02