Fogbow

Kendra wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 11:53 am https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/stat ... 7636883456

I’m still trying to figure out the recent media outrage about my father possibly wanting to target Mexican drug cartel manufacturing facilities in Mexico… Is that supposed to be a bad thing???

Ah yes, the proper response has been made, I can hardly improve upon it.

Jo 🌻 @JoJoFromJerz wrote: He asked if we could bomb them and then pretend it wasn’t us, you cocaine addled, nepotistic shit for brains.

Junior’s rant tonight is that Biden was being “divisive” today when he said MAGA was extremist. “They don’t care about you. They hate your guts .. and the hatred is palpable. Don’t let them get away with it!”

Say you've moved up to freebasing without saying you're freebasing.

Volkonski wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 5:09 pm

He's talking about the progressive insistence that transmen are men and transwomen are women. So, those who share this view (as I do), must admit that some men can get pregnant. So the 'when men can get pregnant' argument is a fail.

It's a fair enough point but it gets lost in the haze of Dunning-Kruger Smugness (DKS) which surrounds DJTJR.

I guess anything is better than sending Joe Biden.

We all know how quickly his dad would rush into a war zone.

AndyinPA wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 7:49 pm We all know how quickly his dad would rush into a war zone.

Of course we wouldn't send President Biden to Ukraine. He provides real value to the United States.

tfg, on the other hand, is welcome to travel to whatever hellhole will have him. It's not great loss if he never returns.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article ... BJzOokFf_c

Ivanka and Jared Can’t Escape Neighbor Drama
By Margaret Hartmann@_NYMarg

Meow.

Ben-Prime wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 1:39 pm

Volkonski wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 5:09 pm

He's talking about the progressive insistence that transmen are men and transwomen are women. So, those who share this view (as I do), must admit that some men can get pregnant. So the 'when men can get pregnant' argument is a fail.

It's a fair enough point but it gets lost in the haze of Dunning-Kruger Smugness (DKS) which surrounds DJTJR.

So the follow up to that, though, would be that any man who can get pregnant CAN comment on abortion, but if you aren't a man who can get pregnant, then you need to shut your mouth.

So, any post menopausal woman, or a woman who has had a Hysterectomy, or a woman who is simply infertile has to shut their mouth too?

Azastan wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 9:32 pm

Ben-Prime wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 1:39 pm

Volkonski wrote: ↑Sun May 08, 2022 5:09 pm

He's talking about the progressive insistence that transmen are men and transwomen are women. So, those who share this view (as I do), must admit that some men can get pregnant. So the 'when men can get pregnant' argument is a fail.

It's a fair enough point but it gets lost in the haze of Dunning-Kruger Smugness (DKS) which surrounds DJTJR.

So the follow up to that, though, would be that any man who can get pregnant CAN comment on abortion, but if you aren't a man who can get pregnant, then you need to shut your mouth.

Except for the flip side, which I'm sure someone will have pointed out by now since I went out for the night and then to bed shortly after posting this, which would disqualify certain non-childbearing women from having an opinion, either. Which is why I say it's a 'fair' point but not a definitive nor even particularly compelling one. It's the leftist version of the same argument righties use that only people who have served in the military can have an opinion on our national defense. I don't like it.

What I *do* believe is that a state or federal legislature mostly and disproportionately made up of people who cannot get pregnant are the wrong places to be litigating this, surely.

Ben-Prime wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 3:30 am

Except for the flip side, which I'm sure someone will have pointed out by now since I went out for the night and then to bed shortly after posting this, which would disqualify certain non-childbearing women from having an opinion, either. Which is why I say it's a 'fair' point but not a definitive nor even particularly compelling one. It's the leftist version of the same argument righties use that only people who have served in the military can have an opinion on our national defense. I don't like it.

What I *do* believe is that a state or federal legislature mostly and disproportionately made up of people who cannot get pregnant are the wrong places to be litigating this, surely.

Except for the fact that the proposed laws affect body autonomy in ways other than just abortion. They will affect a woman's choice to use birth control (not all birth control meds are actually for birth control. They are also prescribed for things like migraines, heavy periods, acne and reduced risk of ectopic pregnancy) or her choices with a non-viable or life threatening pregnancy, not to mention rape and incest pregnancies.

It's not just about abortion, it's about choices and control of a woman's body, and men already have that power over us as long as they are making the laws. My thoughts on the subject might change if they make fathers criminally responsible, along with the mothers, but I don't see any movement in that direction. If it was JUST about abortion, the conversation might be different.

Suranis wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 1:16 am So, any post menopausal woman, or a woman who has had a Hysterectomy, or a woman who is simply infertile has to shut their mouth too?

No, because they know what it feels like to deal with all the effects of being pregnant or not being pregnant whether joyfully or not. They know what it is to go through all the physical aches and pains of pregnancy. They know what it is like to not be able to find a comfortable way to sleep for months during the pregnancy. They know what it is to have to interrupt life plans for their career or schooling because of a pregnancy. They know what it is to care for a child who is sick, hurt, scared, sad and/or helpless for at least eighteen years. So people who have not experienced these joys and pains and fears should just shut up.

So, only mothers (or those who have conceived) have standing in the topic. Got it.

Danraft wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 9:01 am So, only mothers (or those who have conceived) have standing in the topic. Got it.

Only the person whose body it is has standing on the topic.

Clairez wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 6:19 am

Suranis wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 1:16 am So, any post menopausal woman, or a woman who has had a Hysterectomy, or a woman who is simply infertile has to shut their mouth too?

No, because they know what it feels like to deal with all the effects of being pregnant or not being pregnant whether joyfully or not. They know what it is to go through all the physical aches and pains of pregnancy. They know what it is like to not be able to find a comfortable way to sleep for months during the pregnancy. They know what it is to have to interrupt life plans for their career or schooling because of a pregnancy. They know what it is to care for a child who is sick, hurt, scared, sad and/or helpless for at least eighteen years. So people who have not experienced these joys and pains and fears should just shut up.

Not all women have been pregnant or have children. I, for one, haven't experienced any of what you just listed because my husband and I chose not to have children and I was fortunate enough that my birth-control precautions before marriage worked and I didn't have any accidental pregnancies, either. By your standard, I should "just shut up."

ETA: We're not just talking here about who can make the decision on having an abortion or not, but rather on who has the right to speak about whether abortion should be legal or not. I agree that only the person who is pregnant can make the decision about having an abortion, but I disagree that only those who have been pregnant or have had children can discuss whether abortion should be legal or not.

It seems to me that, by Junior's logic, state legislatures that are dominated by Republican men, have no voice in the question, either.

So, is he saying that male legislators should abstain from voting for/against anti-abortion legislation?

No
No
No

FFS no

You know who should be making these decisions?
In order...

the woman who is pregnant
her doctors
her family

AND NO ONE THE PHUCK ELSE

It wasn't about who is "making the decision." It was about who is allowed to discuss abortion at all. The deflecting is real.

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 5:58 am

Ben-Prime wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 3:30 am

Except for the flip side, which I'm sure someone will have pointed out by now since I went out for the night and then to bed shortly after posting this, which would disqualify certain non-childbearing women from having an opinion, either. Which is why I say it's a 'fair' point but not a definitive nor even particularly compelling one. It's the leftist version of the same argument righties use that only people who have served in the military can have an opinion on our national defense. I don't like it.

What I *do* believe is that a state or federal legislature mostly and disproportionately made up of people who cannot get pregnant are the wrong places to be litigating this, surely.

Except for the fact that the proposed laws affect body autonomy in ways other than just abortion. They will affect a woman's choice to use birth control (not all birth control meds are actually for birth control. They are also prescribed for things like migraines, heavy periods, acne and reduced risk of ectopic pregnancy) or her choices with a non-viable or life threatening pregnancy, not to mention rape and incest pregnancies.

It's not just about abortion, it's about choices and control of a woman's body, and men already have that power over us as long as they are making the laws. My thoughts on the subject might change if they make fathers criminally responsible, along with the mothers, but I don't see any movement in that direction. If it was JUST about abortion, the conversation might be different.

Just to make it clear, I meant more that if the legislatures were more balanced, this would not be as one-sided a series of slam-dunks in passing these outrageous laws on party-line votes. i.e., it's not that certain people can or can't have opinions and even voice them, but that when certain fora are so disproportionate in representation, they lose moral and intellectual credibility and even viability to be the place where these topics are made into laws. Or... am I just not making sense. I know what I'm trying to say, but I think I'm failing.

It's a religious based forced morality in a country whose foundation is militantly secular.

I personally strongly oppose abortion. I just want to find a way to make it something that doesn't happen. But its none of damn business what anyone else does with their body, with their life and the decisions they make. I dunno when to consider a fetus life, I don't want to know. I leave that to doctors and patients and families. Were I the prospective father somewhere I think I ought to be consulted sometimes but not always, mostly in a situation where the mother to be wants to hear if I'm interested in participating in the whole 18-24 year project and if that might influence her desire to sign on.

But it really pisses me off that a bunch of holier than thou rich people, who are on occasion gonna encourage someone to have an abortion in situations inconvenient for them, to force poor people to make bad decisions from poor choices.

Make no mistake, outlawing abortion doesn't stop abortion. Poor people will do life threatening things that we don't talk about in polite company and rich people always find a way, the proverbial camping trip to Canada is gonna get a lot more popular on college campuses all over real soon.