Romney Picks Paul Ryan...

[ballen0351]

No. What was being said in these hearing was that even private insurance companies should not have to pay for birth control, even if birth control itself was not the point of taking the drug. That the companies knew better that the doctors and not from any scientific reasoning, but rather religious reasons. Plug in other drugs and treatments ad this line of thought becomes quite worrying and concerning. However, since sex and the decisions women make about it can be enveloped in the arguement, it then becomes fair game for those less government types that want more government involvment in women's medical decisions.

I want less govt thats the point. I want the govt out of it. If I own a private company I should be allowed to cover what I want for what ever reason I want. YOU want the govt to get involved and force private companies to do whatever the Govt wants even if its against my wishes.

Here's a fair way to do it. If you sign up for a program that supplies birth control, and your doctor says you need it, you get it covered. If your religious convictions stand in the way of that, then you don't have to get the birth control. If a private insurance company sells its policy with paying for birthcontrol, it doesn't get to yank that coverage because of "religious" reasons. The government should definitley not be over-riding doctor's decisions in order to capitulate to the religious right.

Heres a better way, the govt can just stay out of it all together and if you and your doc decide you need it then thats between you and your doc.

 

[ballen0351]

First of all, it is shameful for politicians to nit pick on the definition of 'rape' in order to victimize the victim a second time. And I am not even going there where the esteemed gentleman declares that women can't get pregnant when raped. That is a slap in the face to top it all off.

Thats not what he said. He said the chances of pregnancy from a rape are RARE which is true. The chances of getting pregnant from a rape are rare. According to the CDC and National Sexual Violence resource centers numbers there are approx 650,000 rapes in the us each year of them 35,000 result in a pregnancy.
So we should keep abortions legal and allow people to kill millions of babys every year because of 35,000 people? So be honest and admit Abortions are just another form of Birth control and thats it. It has nothing to do with a rape but using it as birth control does not look good in the papers so we will focus on 35000 people

 

[WC_lun]

Women who are raped have the same chance to become pregnant as a woman having unprotected sex...about 5 percent. As I said earlier, I can respect the person who says no abortion no matter the circumstance because at least they are being true to what they are saying. However, lies about rape help no one and just muddy the waters.

 

[ballen0351]

Women who are raped have the same chance to become pregnant as a woman having unprotected sex...about 5 percent. As I said earlier, I can respect the person who says no abortion no matter the circumstance because at least they are being true to what they are saying. However, lies about rape help no one and just muddy the waters.

Its not a lie 35,000 pregnancies is a very low number so to say we need abortions to stay legal for 35000 people is silly, what are the other 1.2 million people using as there excuse for it?

 

[elder999]

Thats not what he said. He said the chances of pregnancy from a rape are RARE which is true. The chances of getting pregnant from a rape are rare. According to the CDC and National Sexual Violence resource centers numbers there are approx 650,000 rapes in the us each year of them 35,000 result in a pregnancy.
So we should keep abortions legal and allow people to kill millions of babys every year because of 35,000 people? So be honest and admit Abortions are just another form of Birth control and thats it. It has nothing to do with a rape but using it as birth control does not look good in the papers so we will focus on 35000 people

That'a not quite what he said. If he'd merely said that, it might have been okay. What he said was:

"From what I understand from doctors,if it's a legitimate rape the female body has ways to shut that whole thing down."


For....:lfao:.....emphasis ( ):

"From what I understand from doctors,if it's a legitimate rape the female body has ways to shut that whole thing down."

:lfao: :barf: :angry:
And look, all of those smileys are actually appropriate at the same time! :lfao:

 

[ballen0351]

That'a not quite what he said. If he'd merely said that, it might have been okay. What he said was:

"From what I understand from doctors,if it's a legitimate rape the female body has ways to shut that whole thing down."


For....:lfao:.....emphasis ( )
"From what I understand from doctors,if it's a legitimate rape the female body has ways to shut that whole thing down."

:lfao: :barf: :angry:
And look, all of those smileys are actually appropriate at the same time! :lfao:

Sorry elder you either didnt listen to what he said and your just repeating what the left media tells you or your just lying. He said "From what I understand from Doctors thats really RARE"

for Emphasis

HE SAID THATS REALLY RARE. listen to it again its about 1:25 in the clip you posted.

 

[elder999]

Sorry elder you either didnt listen to what he said and your just repeating what the left media tells you or your just lying. He said "From what I understand from Doctors thats really RARE"

for Emphasis

HE SAID THATS REALLY RARE. listen to it again its about 1:25 in the clip you posted.

Getting pregnant at all is fairly rare-I wouldn't call it "really rare." If that were all he said, it might have been okay, but he said:

"From what I understand from doctors,it's really rare,if it's a legitimate rape the female body has ways to shut that whole thing down."

Which is not only scientifically inaccurate, but brings up the entire insulting idea of "legitimate rape." Not to mention the degrading idea that if a woman is subjected to such a horrible experience and is one of the rare ones who gets pregnant, then-out of state mandated respect for human life-she must carry that pregnancy to term.

Perhaps, then, we should have a government funded program to raise "legitimate rape babies?"

 

[Steve]

I want less govt thats the point. I want the govt out of it. If I own a private company I should be allowed to cover what I want for what ever reason I want. YOU want the govt to get involved and force private companies to do whatever the Govt wants even if its against my wishes.

Consumer advocacy is a recognized and accepted role of government. If your company is in the business of providing a service, it's reasonable for government to provide regulatory oversight that protects the consumer. This is doubly so when it's a matter of health and/or safety.

Where the lines are is a subject of debate, but whether or not this is a proper role of government is not. Both sides of the aisles, with the exception of only the strictest libertarian (perhaps) agree that consumer advocacy is well within the purview of government.

 

[ballen0351]

Getting pregnant at all is fairly rare-I wouldn't call it "really rare." If that were all he said, it might have been okay, but he said:

"From what I understand from doctors,it's really rare,if it's a legitimate rape the female body has ways to shut that whole thing down."

So your just going to ignore his actual words to prove your own point? Calling something rare means it can happen. Hes not saying a rape cant lead to pregnancy he said its rare. Im sorry you choose to ignore his actual words.

Which is not only scientifically inaccurate, but brings up the entire insulting idea of "legitimate rape." Not to mention the degrading idea that if a woman is subjected to such a horrible experience and is one of the rare ones who gets pregnant, then-out of state mandated respect for human life-she must carry that pregnancy to term.

He also said it not right to punish the innocent baby because of the act of a bad man. I dont disagee with him. The baby and the woman are both victims. I agree Its not fair to have to keep the baby for nine months but you know what alot of things in life are not fair but 9 months of being uncomfortable are not worth killing a baby that did nothing.

Perhaps, then, we should have a government funded program to raise "legitimate rape babies?"

Or we can just adopt them out to a loving family. That works too.


As for the legitimate rape comment I understand what he was trying to say he just said it wrong. There is a difference in trauma both mentally and physically between a rape by a husband or boyfriend which is the most common type of rape and a stranger abduction and rape. One is not worse then the other but they are very different.

 

[elder999]

So your just going to ignore his actual words to prove your own point? Calling something rare means it can happen. Hes not saying a rape cant lead to pregnancy he said its rare. Im sorry you choose to ignore his actual words.

I didn't ignore his actual words, any more than you did.

For....:lfao:.....emphasis:

"From what I understand from doctors,it's really rare,if it's a legitimate rape the female body has ways to shut that whole thing down."



Which is, I'll admit, sort of the way the media has spun it-but unspinning it doesn't negate that what he "actually said" was unscientific, degrading, inaccurate and insulting beyond the pale-that's why he apologized, and why the Republican party pretty much tried to throw him under the bus.

He also said it not right to punish the innocent baby because of the act of a bad man. I dont disagee with him. The baby and the woman are both victims.

Don't know that it's "punishment" or an "innocent baby." In fact, it's not a baby at all.

I agree Its not fair to have to keep the baby for nine months but you know what alot of things in life are not fair but 9 months of being uncomfortable are not worth killing a baby that did nothing.

WHat a remarkably kind and enlightened viewpoint from someone who doesn't have a vagina.


I mean, you could be raped, but you'll surely never get pregnant from it.....:lfao:

Or we can just adopt them out to a loving family. That works too.

Sometimes it does. Fact is though, we shouldn't force a woman whose life has been incredibly violated and disrupted by rape to further disrupt her life with 9 months of pregnancy so the other innocent victim can be born, if that's not what she wants. I can't even see how it's worthy of discussion.

As for the legitimate rape comment I understand what he was trying to say he just said it wrong. There is a difference in trauma both mentally and physically between a rape by a husband or boyfriend which is the most common type of rape and a stranger abduction and rape. One is not worse then the other but they are very different.

Rape is rape. No is no.

Trauma is trauma. To try and differentiate between them-even the instances you point out, with their understandable differences (and how many women get raped by a husband or boyfriend and don't report it?) is, again, beyond the pale-he said that there should be no exception for rape or incest, and he's wrong. He said the female body has a way of shutting that whole thing down, and he's wrong.

He said "legitimate rape," which implies that there's such a thing as an "illegitimate rape," and he's wrong.

 

[ballen0351]

Consumer advocacy is a recognized and accepted role of government. If your company is in the business of providing a service, it's reasonable for government to provide regulatory oversight that protects the consumer. This is doubly so when it's a matter of health and/or safety.

Where the lines are is a subject of debate, but whether or not this is a proper role of government is not. Both sides of the aisles, with the exception of only the strictest libertarian (perhaps) agree that consumer advocacy is well within the purview of government.

Well place me in the libertarian group. I dont think the Fed Govt has the right to tell a company you must cover this or that. If I own a company I should be allowed to choose whatever products I want to sell. As long as the product is not illegal I should have a choice to sell it or not. I see it no different then If I choose to sell only pepsi or only coke products. The Govt should not be able to force my company to sell both because its not fair to the pepsi people that I only sell coke.

 

[Steve]

He also said it not right to punish the innocent baby because of the act of a bad man. I dont disagee with him. The baby and the woman are both victims. I agree Its not fair to have to keep the baby for nine months but you know what alot of things in life are not fair but 9 months of being uncomfortable are not worth killing a baby that did nothing.

Whether or not it's a "baby" is a point of debate, as well. There are some who believe that "life" starts at conception, while others believe that it begins when the fetus is viable outside the womb, and others believe that life begins at birth.

Or we can just adopt them out to a loving family. That works too.

For those who choose to go this route, more power to them, but where you see children going into loving families, I see more babies in an overworked, underfunded State foster system, which is statistically far more likely. Which also, for what it's worth, means bigger government, because these agencies would need more funding to manage the additional children being surrendered to the State.

Hey, I have an idea... let's privatize the adoption process and legalize the sale of babies! That would solve all of our problems.

 

[ballen0351]

I didn't ignore his actual words, any more than you did.

For....:lfao:.....emphasis:

"From what I understand from doctors,it's really rare,if it's a legitimate rape the female body has ways to shut that whole thing down."

Well if your going to ignore his actual comments theres no point in going further in the conversation. I hear exactly what he said who are you to tell him what he "ment" hes the one that said it.

Which is, I'll admit, sort of the way the media has spun it-but unspinning it doesn't negate that what he "actually said"

What he actually said was it was rare. end of story thats his own words he didnt try to add it later or say I ment to say its rare he actually said it the words came out of his mouth.

unscientific, degrading, inaccurate and insulting beyond the pale-that's why he apologized, and why the Republican party pretty much tried to throw him under the bus.

He apologized because hes being attacked by people that refuse to actually listen to what he really said. He was thrown under the bus because the republican party is spineless they have been for years.

Don't know that it's "punishment" or an "innocent baby." In fact, it's not a baby at all.

Ill remember that next time a woman has a miscarage and is crying her eyes out. Dont worry it wants a babay anyway. Ill have to find some happy fetus shower cards too my wifes friend is having a baby shower or opps a Fetus shower. If it helps you except what you support then so be it but Ill call them what they are Babies.

WHat a remarkably kind and enlightened viewpoint from someone who doesn't have a vagina.

I would say lets ask the baby but you want them all killed so we cant

I mean, you could be raped, but you'll surely never get pregnant from it.....:lfao:

true good job you learned something in 6th grade

Sometimes it does. Fact is though, we shouldn't force a woman whose life has been incredibly violated and disrupted by rape to further disrupt her life with 9 months of pregnancy so the other innocent victim can be born, if that's not what she wants. I can't even see how it's worthy of discussion.

Again we could try and ask the baby what it wants but you want it killed so

Rape is rape. No is no.

true never said it wasnt

Trauma is trauma.

nope. Ive delt with both types many times I can tell you the concerns and worries are totally different between a stranger rape and a known attacker

To try and differentiate between them-even the instances you point out, with their understandable differences (and how many women get raped by a husband or boyfriend and don't report it?) is, again,

Way more go unreported then are reported I believe last rape class I went to said 75 to 80% are never reported if attacker is a boyfriend and well over 90% if the attacker is married to the victim.

-he said that there should be no exception for rape or incest, and he's wrong.

He and many others agree with him. Ill even concede to allowing the 35000 have an abortion what about the other 1.2 million that get them every year whats there excuse?

He said the female body has a way of shutting that whole thing down, and he's wrong.

Not totally when the body goes into shock it shuts down many functions. It sounds more like he just was not educated on what he was talking about.
He said "legitimate rape," which implies that there's such a thing as an "illegitimate rape," and he's wrong.[/QUOTE]

 

[ballen0351]

Whether or not it's a "baby" is a point of debate, as well. There are some who believe that "life" starts at conception, while others believe that it begins when the fetus is viable outside the womb, and others believe that life begins at birth. For those who choose to go this route, more power to them, but where you see children going into loving families, I see more babies in an overworked, underfunded State foster system, which is statistically far more likely. Which also, for what it's worth, means bigger government, because these agencies would need more funding to manage the additional children being surrendered to the State.

Hey, I have an idea... let's privatize the adoption process and legalize the sale of babies! That would solve all of our problems.

yeah that extra 35000 a year will really put a burden on the system

 

[Steve]

Well place me in the libertarian group. I dont think the Fed Govt has the right to tell a company you must cover this or that. If I own a company I should be allowed to choose whatever products I want to sell. As long as the product is not illegal I should have a choice to sell it or not. I see it no different then If I choose to sell only pepsi or only coke products. The Govt should not be able to force my company to sell both because its not fair to the pepsi people that I only sell coke.

So, if I wanted to sell toys that are dangerous, you're cool with that? Buyer beware sort of thing? Government shouldn't advocate on behalf of the consumer? Do you have any inkling of what that might look like? I honestly can't believe that you would roll back the consumer advocacy roll of government. Well, you'd be right in one thing. Being able to hide loopholes and exceptions to coverage behind legalese and incomprehensible language would make it very easy to make a lot of money. But it would take us back to a time in our country when insurance salesmen were the smarmiest salesmen of them all, going door to door looking to hook people on policies that don't actually cover anything.

Would you also be in favor of rolling back employee advocacy? Child labor laws or employee health and safety laws? Let's just shitcan the entire lot of em... no more OSHA.

Fortunately for all of us, your position is only shared among the most radical, right wingers. Even the run of the mill radical right wingers we've got in politics today disagree with you on this point.

 

[Steve]

yeah that extra 35000 a year will really put a burden on the system

On an already overburdened system? It will cripple it. And it's bigger government, which I thought... weren't you against that? The philosophically consistent position for you, as someone who is against government oversight on the matter, would be to legalize the sale of children through private "brokers." It would be... kind of like adoption. Just a "for profit" version.

Sure, it's illegal now and reprehensible to most reasonable people. But if you're a hardline libertarian, with the exception of using the rule of law to FORCE women to carry and deliver an unwanted baby, child auctions might be the way to go.

Hey, and if I act early, maybe I can buy a workforce and, since they're "my children" I wouldn't have to pay them at all (because the government would be out of the employee advocacy business, too!)! I'd name my first employee... er child... Jack Dawkins, and my second one Oliver.

 

[WC_lun]

He believes a woman's body fights pregnancy in case of rape. That is what he said. That is BS, and he's using it for cover of no abortion for rapes. If you believe abortion is murder, fine. It should be murder in all cases. However, to use the "legitimate rape" thing to bolster his arguement so more people will agree with his abortion stance is a lie and insulting as hell to anyone who has or knows anyone that has been raped.

Akin also has stated his desire to get rid of student loans because they are "a socialist cancer." He also has stated his opposition to student lunch programs and would fight to remove them if elected.

Those hearing you have been going on about to keep government out if health care, was actually government sticking its' nose into private insurance and healthcare. The insurance company agreed to provide birth control for those that paid for the insurance. Then the insurance company decided they weren't going to cover what was already agreed upon because the college didn't want its' female students using birth control. Something they had already paid for and agreed to.

 

[ballen0351]

So, if I wanted to sell toys that are dangerous, you're cool with that? Buyer beware sort of thing? Government shouldn't advocate on behalf of the consumer? Do you have any inkling of what that might look like? I honestly can't believe that you would roll back the consumer advocacy roll of government. Well, you'd be right in one thing. Being able to hide loopholes and exceptions to coverage behind legalese and incomprehensible language would make it very easy to make a lot of money. But it would take us back to a time in our country when insurance salesmen were the smarmiest salesmen of them all, going door to door looking to hook people on policies that don't actually cover anything.

Would you also be in favor of rolling back employee advocacy? Child labor laws or employee health and safety laws? Let's just shitcan the entire lot of em... no more OSHA.

Fortunately for all of us, your position is only shared among the most radical, right wingers. Even the run of the mill radical right wingers we've got in politics today disagree with you on this point.

Yes How did we ever survive as a nation with out OSHA where would I be with out my lime green traffic safety vest. All hail to the great and powerful Govt. I dont know how the founding fathers lived long enough to even write the Constitution with out the great and powerful US Federal Govt.

None of that is what I said however I said the Govt should not force a company to sell a service if it does not want to.

 

[ballen0351]

On an already overburdened system? It will cripple it. And it's bigger government, which I thought... weren't you against that? The philosophically consistent position for you, as someone who is against government oversight on the matter, would be to legalize the sale of children through private "brokers." It would be... kind of like adoption. Just a "for profit" version.

Ill take a little bit larger Govt if it ment not killing innocent babies that did nothing wrong

As for the rest of that nonsence its about as good an argument as we need to keep abortion legal because of rape and you ignore the 1.2 million abortions a year that are NOT rape related.

 

[ballen0351]

He believes a woman's body fights pregnancy in case of rape. That is what he said. That is BS, and he's using it for cover of no abortion for rapes. If you believe abortion is murder, fine. It should be murder in all cases.

It is murder in all cases

However, to use the "legitimate rape" thing to bolster his arguement so more people will agree with his abortion stance is a lie and insulting as hell to anyone who has or knows anyone that has been raped.

Well since I know alot about rape and have actually caught rapists and put them in jail, have interviewed victims, held there hands, Let them cry on my shoulder, I do know a thing or too about it. I know what he said. Can you tell me what an unlegitimate rape is?

Akin also has stated his desire to get rid of student loans because they are "a socialist cancer."

Hes not against student loans hes against the Govt providing the loans:
“I don’t think the government should be in the student loan business,” Akin said. “Go back to where we were a couple years ago and let the private lenders do the student loans.”

He also has stated his opposition to student lunch programs and would fight to remove them if elected.

Wrong again but ok keep listening to Maddow and not doing any research for yourself what he actually said was the Fed Govt should not be provding student lunch programs it should be the states choice to buy what they want from where they want.

Those hearing you have been going on about to keep government out if health care, was actually government sticking its' nose into private insurance and healthcare. The insurance company agreed to provide birth control for those that paid for the insurance. Then the insurance company decided they weren't going to cover what was already agreed upon because the college didn't want its' female students using birth control. Something they had already paid for and agreed to.

AND? its a private company they have that choice to change coverage if they want my health insurance changes what it covers every year it happens.