why would any thinking woman vote for paul ryan?

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Free Thinker, Aug 15, 2012.

  1. Paul Ryan and Reproductive Rights
    August 15, 2012 at 12:02 pm Ed Brayton
    As journalists and pundits dig into Paul Ryan’s record in the House, it’s looking worse and worse for women’s rights. Ryan isn’t just your run of the mill Republican when it comes to reproductive rights, he’s on the ultra far right of the party. If he had his way, even the most popular forms of birth control would be illegal. Yes, you heard that right.

    Ryan is one of the sponsors of a federal personhood bill, which would declare that any fertilized ovum “shall have all the legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood.” The bill would not just ban abortions, it would ban hormonal birth control — that is, the pill — as well, because such contraception works by preventing implantation of the fertilized egg in the uterus. And there are no exceptions even for rape and incest. That idea is so extreme that it was rejected soundly even by ultra-conservative Mississippi two years ago. It’s been rejected all over the country by wide margins. It’s wildly unpopular, even among Republicans.

    But that’s just the beginning. He actually goes even further than that. Remember that terrible Virginia bill that would force any woman seeking an abortion to undergo an invasive ultrasound even if their doctor says it’s medically unnecessary? Ryan is one of the sponsors of a bill, the Ultrasound Informed Consent Act, to do that on the federal level. This, again, puts him on the furthest right wing fringe of his own party.

    Mitt Romney has tried to have it both ways on this issue. He was pro-choice — he once told a story about a family friend who died from a botched abortion to explain why he was pro-choice and said “You will never hear me waver on that” — until he decided to run for president because he knew he couldn’t win the Republican nomination without sounding stridently anti-choice. So last year he said he “absolutely” supported a personhood amendment.
    http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/2012/08/15/paul-ryan-and-reproductive-rights/
     
  2. Most women I know make decisions on feeling not thinking.
     
  3. Yannis

    Yannis

    Obama's War On Women

    <iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/M-ky5Obzk5A?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

    :(
     
  4. thinking young men should not vote for ryan either. if they thought about in they might come to this conclusion.

    holy crap if these guys win and get everything they want it means no more birth control and no abortions. that means every young guy who lays a woman just for fun could potentially be caught in a trap that could cost them for 18 years.

    i am guessing that is not something young guys in their skirt chasing years would think is a good thing.
     
  5. and republicans would fix this by cutting off their safety net?

    they arent stupid enough to buy into that.
     
  6. Yannis

    Yannis

    The Repubs would make it possible for them to get jobs, have a family and live productive lives in dignity. Unlike the dems who are just treating them like powerless nincompoops. All this stupidity with the Fluke character: women want jobs, financial security and freedom, not some so-called "gift" of free birth control that costs $9/mo!

    Repubs think of the safety net as a last resort, to be needed/used very rarely. Obama has extended it to 110+ million people who are too stupid to see that his net is a trap of poverty and misery, a safety net motel of sorts, where you go in but cannot go out despite the fact that you vote for your liberal owners every time to keep the free stuff coming.
     
  7. sure but in romneys world they would have to compete for those jobs with the chinese or indians at $3 a day and no benefits. otherwise they get outsourced.
    even then to get those jobs by voting republican they have to risk losing birth control so that they would get burdened with a dozen children.
     
  8. Yannis

    Yannis

    I don't know where you get this nonsense. Obama created no net jobs in his presidency while his jobs czar, Immelt, outsourced thousands of his company's (GE) jobs overseas... and so did GM which is owned to a great extent by Obama... not to mention Fisker sending jobs to Finlad and thousands of other examples.

    A huge reason for American industrialists wanting to move jobs overseas is cost and quality, but another one is the supermilitant labor unions that almost destroyed GM/Chrysler and many other companies. American workers have to understand that they are not the only game in town and have to compete for their jobs like everyone else.

    No one is taking birth control away, you should just have to pay a few bucks to get it, the government free stuff store should close for good. What the dems are doing, robbing the Treasury to buy votes, is immoral and deeply anti-democratic.
     
  9. can you be bothered to read the article you are commenting on?

    "Ryan is one of the sponsors of a federal personhood bill, which would declare that any fertilized ovum “shall have all the legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood.” The bill would not just ban abortions, it would ban hormonal birth control — that is, the pill — "
     

  10. Romney and Ryan want to ban condoms as well as putting black people in chains ?

    :eek:
     
    #10     Aug 15, 2012