In his bitter words...

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2011
In his bitter words...
327
Mon, 09-17-2012 - 7:32pm

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2011
Fri, 09-21-2012 - 8:48am

Incapable women?

Okay, that's not a violation here, but I'm nonetheless deeply offended.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Fri, 09-21-2012 - 8:41am
xxxs wrote:

Rights are federal.  The states are wrong to prevent or place barriers to women who want abortions.  The federal government should place abortion clinics on federal land.  Several in every state so women could control their bodies and save the taxpayer millions if not billions of dollars.  The whole idea of states is passe in the 21st century.  We have communications that span the globe in seconds.  But in the realm of rights it is the federal government that is dominant.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Rights are federal." I feel, as do many others, that since there is no federal law on abortion, and nothing in the Constitution giving the federal government the right to regulate it, it is a right of the states.

Any competent woman can control her body and whether or not she becomes pregnant without the federal government stepping in with abortion centers everywhere, despite the left's message that women are not intelligent enough or have the self control to stop themselves from acting in an affirmative manner that could result in a pregnancy.

It's sad to see these incapable women get up in front of microphones and plead for help from the government to stop them from becoming pregnant. They really should be asking for some type of therapy, not abortion or birth control.

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2011
Fri, 09-21-2012 - 8:24am

Fighting back? How about they fight back by taking away second amendment rights, would that please you?

Nose where it doesn't belong? Stay out of our bodies. GOP noses don't belong in women's uteruses.

And by the way, there are justifications for privacy in the Constitution. If these are in fact inadequate, it is damn well time we fix the wrong and pass the Equal Rights Amendment.

Avatar for xxxs
Community Leader
Registered: 01-25-2010
Fri, 09-21-2012 - 1:45am

Rights are federal.  The states are wrong to prevent or place barriers to women who want abortions.  The federal government should place abortion clinics on federal land.  Several in every state so women could control their bodies and save the taxpayer millions if not billions of dollars.  The whole idea of states is passe in the 21st century.  We have communications that span the globe in seconds.  But in the realm of rights it is the federal government that is dominant.

chaika

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-02-2009
Thu, 09-20-2012 - 11:30pm
xxxs wrote:

While Roe vs Wade still stands many states have made it very difficult for women to have a provider.  More and more times the reason is to deny the woman access to abortion.  Abortion is their right, but if there is no provider then what good is the ruling?

I think the states are just fighting back. They don't like the federal government sticking it's nose where it doesn't belong. There is simply nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government the power to make abortion legal or illegal, Thus, it is a state power.

"Resist, we much. We must, and we much. About that, be committed."

Avatar for xxxs
Community Leader
Registered: 01-25-2010
Thu, 09-20-2012 - 10:33pm

While Roe vs Wade still stands many states have made it very difficult for women to have a provider.  More and more times the reason is to deny the woman access to abortion.  Abortion is their right, but if there is no provider then what good is the ruling?

chaika

Avatar for xxxs
Community Leader
Registered: 01-25-2010
Thu, 09-20-2012 - 10:19pm

The idea of making a group of citizens the scape goat for other's citizen's fears is too reminisce of 1938 Germany. It has worked for the power mad.  People need to see have the destruction of the safety net harms them.  Many are misled emotionally that "they" will never need it.  It is an method to get some to believe on economic myths.

But from my experience talking to many who had good jobs but are homeless,lost everything and worse have their unemployment seized for child support.  Many categories of jobs no longer exist.  Those jobs are not returning.  Many who are in the lines of unemployed to underemployed have it much tougher now than even 8 years ago.  There have been some other developments that negatively impacts the disadvantaged.  Many towns have restrictions on how many roommates can live in a abode.  The need for computer and broadband access. Access to communications,transportation,cooking facilities,proper clothing and so forth.

chaika

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-15-2009
Thu, 09-20-2012 - 9:16pm
I understand your argument, but members cannot make personal comments on the board about the logic and reasoning skills of others. It is considered a personal attack and against Terms of Service. If anyone has any questions about what is and is not allowed on the board, feel free to PM me or send me an e-mail for clarification.

Thanks for your understanding.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Thu, 09-20-2012 - 7:33pm
Without getting specific about posters (not allowed) or ideology (also not allowed now), there are people who believe that THEIR tax money is being used by freeloaders who just want to coast off the hard work and perspiration of other people's honest labor. And they resent the "fact" that THEIR money isn't staying in THEIR pockets.

For my part, I believe that any society is only as strong as its weakest member. There ARE people who game the system. But we need to find the gamers and remove them, rather than condemn, out of hand, all who benefit from programs meant to provide a social safety net.

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Thu, 09-20-2012 - 7:25pm
I understand your concern about the tone. But it does matter when people fail to use facts and logic. There cannot be debate without them--only pointless argument about perceptions.

Jabberwocka

Pages