…"Reproductive Rights" EVERYWHERE…

Here's how it works..

Option 1
Keep your legs together

If Option 1 isn't always your thing,

Option 2… contraceptives prior to sex…

Option 3… If Option 2 fails somehow…
Morning after pill…

Option 4… Adoption

That looks like a lot of options for a responsible woman…

They are being told they dont have rights or they are being taken away, logic does not play into it.

We must save their rights and end the suffrage

Women are being told they will lose reproductive rights by women who are childless with unproductive wombs, of which Kamala is one.
What they heck do they know?
Vance was correct about miserable, childless cat ladies.

Why does the man who contributed 50% of this equation have no say in this?

Repealing roe v wade before this election was a massive political blunder

whytho987654 said:

---

Repealing roe v wade before this election was a massive political blunder

---

If saving the lives of unborn children was a political blunder sign me up for more of them.

Quote:

---

Repealing roe v wade before this election was a massive political blunder

---

Oh, really? But if it saves one life...

rocky the dog said:

---

Quote:

---

Repealing roe v wade before this election was a massive political blunder

---

Oh, really? But if it saves one life...

---

And if it leads to having the leftists in power? Could have waited until after this election

whytho987654 said:

---

Repealing roe v wade before this election was a massive political blunder

---

Weird that this has to be broken to you: No matter when this happened, it would have been prior to an election.

rocky the dog said:

---

---

Pro-aborts do love their euphemisms. I think they went with "reproductive rights" because "the final solution to the unwanted pregnancy problem" would have been too obvious.

whytho987654 said:

---

Repealing roe v wade was a massive political blunder

---

Fify

aTmAg said:

---

whytho987654 said:

---

Repealing roe v wade before this election was a massive political blunder

---

Weird that this has to be broken to you: No matter when this happened, it would have been prior to an election.

---

Yeah, Dobbs was decide a whole two years and four months before the presidential election.

Kashchei said:

---

whytho987654 said:

---

Repealing roe v wade before this election was a massive political blunder

---

If saving the lives of unborn children was a political blunder sign me up for more of them.

---

The end result could still be the death of unborn children....win the battle but lose the war. yay

"My body my choice" only applies to killing a defenseless baby. If you have that mindset about say, an experimental vaccine, get ready to be fired from your job and ostracized.

It's all bull*****

Dems had full control during Obama first term and could have made into law these " reproductive rights" if they felt important enough, but they didn't.

Sure they'll argue this was "settled" via Roe v Wade, but it was never law. Do your ****ing job if you want it to actually be a law; otherwise, shut the **** up and stop gaslighting.

whytho987654 said:

---

Repealing roe v wade before this election was a massive political blunder

---

There is politics and there is righteousness. I choose what is righteous, damn the politics.

Dems don't want to "fix" anything…

They want to keep it as a festering wound to keep getting votes…

Pretty smart strategy…

NPH- said:

---

Why does the man who contributed 50% of this equation have no say in this?

---

Because, you are not holding the fetus in your body.

Should your wife have the legal right to force you to have a vasectomy?

I am 100% pro-life, but I really hate this argument. It really is very tone deaf.

Argue about financial accountability of the baby after birth if you want. That is at least intellectually honest. The double standard there is not really defensible from a logical point of view. But your argument ignores the very important fact that the fetus is living inside a woman for 9 months, and it has an impact on her body.

We have the most relaxed abortion laws in civilized worlds, maybe these women can move there and find out?

NPH- said:

---

Why does the man who contributed 50% of this equation have no say in this?

---

dave Chappell had a great take on this years ago….went something to the tune of, "if women get 100% of the say on keeping the baby or not then men should get 100% of the say of whether we want to support you (financially) or not."

ATM9000 said:

---

whytho987654 said:

---

Repealing roe v wade was a massive political blunder

---

Fify

---

Ruth Bader Ginsburg disagrees with you.
Even RBG thought Roe v. Wade went too far. We should learn from her incremental approach.
quote from the article

• The reason was Ginsburg's criticism of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 SCOTUS decision that effectively made abortion legal in all 50 states. Ginsburg thought the ruling was correct, but too sweeping.
• Ginsburg argued that the court had been right to strike down the Texas anti-abortion law challenged by the plaintiff, "Jane Roe," but Ginsburg said that the justices erred in their "breathtaking" decision to render virtually every abortion restriction in the country illegal.

It was inevitable that Roe vs Wade would be overturned. The Supreme Court erred in its sweeping decision.

NPH- said:

---

Why does the man who contributed 50% of this equation have no say in this?

---

Because he isn't the person that can have life long issues after giving birth.

Question for the board because this is something I've only recently noticed:

Has the condition of being pregnant always been referred to as a "Medical Condition?" Because I'm hearing that now and haven't really noticed it before.

Agree, except for the exceptions like rape or incest rape

Tanya 93 said:

---

NPH- said:

---

Why does the man who contributed 50% of this equation have no say in this?

---

Because he isn't the person that can have life long issues after giving birth.

---

And so the man has potentially the rest of his life wondering what could have been with his child and the psychological effects of that as well. If life long issues after giving birth are a horrible problem, then wouldn't the entire female population have this argument? I'm tired of men being cast out of this argument because the woman "is the only one impacted"….

Can I have an opinion being an adopted at birth male who will forever be thankful for having a birth mother who was courageous for having me?

whytho987654 said:

---

Repealing roe v wade before this election was a massive political blunder

---

Someone doesn't know how the government works...

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

whytho987654 said:

---

Repealing roe v wade before this election was a massive political blunder

---

Someone doesn't know how the government works...

---

Most of the country does not understand how the gov works and they dont care. Its all about emotion and preception.

BusterAg said:

---

NPH- said:

---

Why does the man who contributed 50% of this equation have no say in this?

---

Because, you are not holding the fetus in your body.

Should your wife have the legal right to force you to have a vasectomy?

I am 100% pro-life, but I really hate this argument. It really is very tone deaf.

Argue about financial accountability of the baby after birth if you want. That is at least intellectually honest. The double standard there is not really defensible from a logical point of view. But your argument ignores the very important fact that the fetus is living inside a woman for 9 months, and it has an impact on her body.

---

This. I am 100% Pro Life. Abortion is a horrific stain on our society.

In my experience the only men that spout this stuff are the bitter ones that hate women because a woman had done something to them that they didn't like and generally feels the need to try to control a woman.

Men who are happy with women in their life don't go around spewing about how they should have 50% of control of things in order to stop a woman from doing something.

Men in successful relationships look for ways to elevate the women in their life (whom elevate theirs as well), and don't think in terms like that because it isn't necessary.

CrackerJackAg said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

NPH- said:

---

Why does the man who contributed 50% of this equation have no say in this?

---

Because, you are not holding the fetus in your body.

Should your wife have the legal right to force you to have a vasectomy?

I am 100% pro-life, but I really hate this argument. It really is very tone deaf.

Argue about financial accountability of the baby after birth if you want. That is at least intellectually honest. The double standard there is not really defensible from a logical point of view. But your argument ignores the very important fact that the fetus is living inside a woman for 9 months, and it has an impact on her body.

---

This. I am 100% Pro Life. Abortion is a horrific stain on our society.

In my experience the only men that spout this stuff are the bitter ones that hate women because a woman had done something to them that they didn't like and generally feels the need to try to control a woman.

Men who are happy with women in their life don't go around spewing about how they should have 50% of control of things in order to stop a woman from doing something.

Men in successful relationships look for ways to elevate the women in their life (whom elevate theirs as well), and don't think in terms like that because it isn't necessary.

---

Hey take your self gratifying comments and shove it where the sun does't shine, you have no idea about my relationship with women just because of one comment. Men absolutely have a part of this equation and saying they don't only serves to further divide and stroke your own ego.

I am fully aware of the impact that this has on a woman's body, but to say that's the only part of the equation is ignorant and shows you have no full understanding of the things at play. It's nothing to do about "controlling" a woman, but saying that a man's feelings and thoughts on the situation is completely ignorant. Life begins at conception, and to give the woman the only deciding part of this decision is wrong. Both people contributed to this life, it's my opinion that both people should have a say in the decision (or murder) of the child.

NPH- said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

NPH- said:

---

Why does the man who contributed 50% of this equation have no say in this?

---

Because, you are not holding the fetus in your body.

Should your wife have the legal right to force you to have a vasectomy?

I am 100% pro-life, but I really hate this argument. It really is very tone deaf.

Argue about financial accountability of the baby after birth if you want. That is at least intellectually honest. The double standard there is not really defensible from a logical point of view. But your argument ignores the very important fact that the fetus is living inside a woman for 9 months, and it has an impact on her body.

---

This. I am 100% Pro Life. Abortion is a horrific stain on our society.

In my experience the only men that spout this stuff are the bitter ones that hate women because a woman had done something to them that they didn't like and generally feels the need to try to control a woman.

Men who are happy with women in their life don't go around spewing about how they should have 50% of control of things in order to stop a woman from doing something.

Men in successful relationships look for ways to elevate the women in their life (whom elevate theirs as well), and don't think in terms like that because it isn't necessary.

---

Hey take your self gratifying comments and shove it where the sun does't shine, you have no idea about my relationship with women just because of one comment. Men absolutely have a part of this equation and saying they don't only serves to further divide and stroke your own ego.

I am fully aware of the impact that this has on a woman's body, but to say that's the only part of the equation is ignorant and shows you have no full understanding of the things at play. It's nothing to do about "controlling" a woman, but saying that a man's feelings and thoughts on the situation is completely ignorant. Life begins at conception, and to give the woman the only deciding part of this decision is wrong. Both people contributed to this life, it's my opinion that both people should have a say in the decision (or murder) of the child.

---

And I will add, I fully recognize the burden that this has on a woman's body before, during and after the pregnancy, but that's the price of admission for that game that they played and whether that life was intentional (or not) on the players in this equation is not the child's fault, and the child should not be the one that pays that ultimate sacrifice. But I am saying this is purely not a woman's sole choice if we are being honest. What if the man is 100% committed to the decision to child, is willing to do whatever he can to support or help in the burden in whatever way he can of the pregnancy, and even decides to take the child after birth? What if that life was full of potential, full of opportunity, because that man stepped up and did what he had to do? What if that child eventually grew up to develop a cure for cancer, or some other major contribution to the human race? Or it could be cut short because the woman was the decider and worried more about what it did to her body. It's completely ignorant and selfish.

ktownag08 said:

---

It's all bull*****

Dems had full control during Obama first term and could have made into law these " reproductive rights" if they felt important enough, but they didn't.

Sure they'll argue this was "settled" via Roe v Wade, but it was never law. Do your ****ing job if you want it to actually be a law; otherwise, shut the **** up and stop gaslighting.

---

Yeah… it's almost like both the Dems AND the Reps are really just the Fed and neither give a **** about anything other than maintaining the status quo and the rest is just theater meant to keep the sheep occupied.

NPH- said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

NPH- said:

---

Why does the man who contributed 50% of this equation have no say in this?

---

Because he isn't the person that can have life long issues after giving birth.

---

And so the man has potentially the rest of his life wondering what could have been with his child and the psychological effects of that as well. If life long issues after giving birth are a horrible problem, then wouldn't the entire female population have this argument? I'm tired of men being cast out of this argument because the woman "is the only one impacted"….

---

Then don't have sex.

Isn't that the argument aimed at women?