Not News: Texas Lawmakers Hate Women (Trigger Warning, Rape)

[marshmallowcreampie]

blackheartgirl2

No i still think that a women should hear her unborn babies heart beat (if they have one), and see that baby before they decide to get an abortion maybe it will make them rethink and if it doesn't oh well they tried.

If they can get the same result from an abdominal ultrasound then yes i think that should be used instead but it really isn't up to me. If it was every women that gets pregnant would want to have her baby and would take good care of the child, but we know thats not going to happen.

But alas, a lot of women aren't in the position to care for potential kids even if they want to. You're trying to finish college, you don't have the time and likely don't have the money to give a kid a good life. You're in a low-paying job and can barely care for yourself, again, an issue of money. Don't know about other women, but I would never have a kid unless I can provide said kid with the best life I could. Live in a decent neighborhood with a good school, make plenty of money, good food and clothes and shelter, be able to save up for a college fund, all that jazz. I'm in my freshman year of college and still rely on my parents to help me with my rent (I only recently found a job) so if I had a kid I'd have to drop out of school, find a job that pays more, and likely have to move back in with my parents, becoming a burden on them as well.

[Vizal]

Harley Jade Linnea

Vizal

Harley Jade Linnea

Vizal

The Living Force

Vizal

No, that is a false analogy. They aren't MacGyver'ing the thing to the end of their p***s and inserting it.

What they want is an elective procedure. They don't need it, but merely want it. It's just as necessary as cosmetic surgery. If they want it, they must to go through a process they do not want to go through, but are willing for the sake of the outcome.
It's not as if they say aloud, "I want an abortion", and suddenly some detective handcuffs them and brings them to the doctor and says, "She wants an abortion, she's having this procedure even if she doesn't want it." That's simply not how it works.

If I want my wisdom teeth taken out, they have to drug me up and insert a lot of unpleasant tools into my mouth. Do I want that? Heck no. However, I know the outcome is what I want, not the process to get me there. Am I willing to put up with it? Of course. Is it rape? Apparently, you think it is.

Many jurisdictions consider non-consensual penetration with an object rape.

It is an elective procedure. So is getting my antibiotic meds. That doesn't mean I have to swallow c**k. The fact that it's elective does not justify an unnecessary preliminary procedure, especially one meant to be as traumatizing as possible so as to deter women from getting the procedure entirely.

Do you not understand the part where invasive vaginal ultrasounds are unnecessary? Entirely unnecessary. Why would they do it, then? To keep women from aborting.

- That's just it, though. They are consenting despite it being an unwanted procedure.

By your reasoning the ONLY rape that is actually rape is when its a stranger attacking you in an alley. IF they drug you and ******** you without your explicit consent, its not rape. If they coerce you, its not rape. People like you make me sick.

How in the world did you create that understanding?.

Gee, lets see 'Oh, if you are coerced into doing an action then it's CLEARLY consent' by your reasoning.

So by that if you asre drugged, aka a form of coercion, then you're not raped. If they coerce you into having sex despite an unwillingness to actually have it, its NOT rape. That is what you are saying. The majority of rapes are committed by someone CLOSE to the victim. Very few are violent, meaning the rape is through coercion or drugs. So according to your ******** up, misogynistic logic, the ONLY kind of rape that exists is when its a violent act committed by a stranger. AND it has to be done with a p***s and only a p***s for it to count as rape.

Again, you're not using logic here. This might put things into perspective.
I don't actually want to respond to or read bullshit, but I have to respond to the bullshit in order to help people make sense of things. I find the possible outcome worth while. I am thus consenting to Gaia TOS as well as this discussion each time I read more bullshit. If I didn't, you might not realize that you're applying logical fallacies.

I'm not even trying to insult you, nor am I being rude. I'm speaking of things as how they are, and it doesn't just apply to you. I'm not even saying you're stupid, but you sure are not thinking this situation out, proving a little bit of ignorance when you're applying logic (or lack there of). Please, you really need to re-read my posts and then your responses. You're not using logic. Try and think about how you might be wrong, even if you aren't.

[Vixianna]

Keltoi Samurai

shoeless joe

Keltoi Samurai

Vixianna

Keltoi Samurai

selective reading IS kicking in, but primarily on your part. it seems you think I'm arguing for these procedures, whereas all I've argued is that these procedures are not rape. just because they are not rape doesn't automatically make them OK.
and you call me a retard.

I'm arguing that not only is it medically unnecessary, that BECAUSE it is so, and because of the situation at hand, it makes it rape by proxy of an inanimate object through use of emotional coercion. And I'd argue the same about the prostate exams for vasectomies. (this aint just about women to me, its' the same ******** logical concept)

and what about the situation at hand makes it rape? the fact that it involves no-no parts? why were you silent about unnecessary prostate exams before? were you unaware of unnecessary invasive procedures prior to this issue coming up?
also, would you suggest that I was a rape survivor, since my step-sister went through a testicle-kicking "feminist" phase ( the word feminist is in quotes because it started when she took to listening to the Spice Girls, and somehow came to the conclusion that feminism advocated that all men were evil, and should be kicked in the stones for humor purposes )?
I mean, it was a series of unprovoked assaults on my genitals that had me afraid to leave my bedroom for a year, but somehow it seems to me that to call that rape would be to cheapen the concept.

Sounds like sexual assault dude.

so, all those self-defense classes that teach people to go for the nuts are institutionalised sexual assault against men?
Krav Maga would basically be the Hebrew word for rape, then, wouldn't it?
or is rape ok when it's in self-defense?

Except it wasn't in self-defense. You said yourself it was unprovoked. Stop trying to change the context. Quit moving the goal post to support your unsubstantiated opinion. If you don't want to think that your sister sexually assaulted you, then that's ok, but to try and say someone kicking some dude in the nuts without being in physical danger isn't sexually assault is ridiculous and silencing.

[Vizal]

The Willow Of Darkness

Vizal

GunsmithKitten

blackheartgirl2

Harley Jade Linnea

blackheartgirl2

Then what is the harm in reminding them?

So you would be fine with being violated by an inanimate object? Rapists would love to meet you, toots.

They are choosing to have it done. If they don't want it done they can go to another state, or not get an abortion. They are not being any more violated than any other medical procedure, which is what it is.

So if the law states that I have to consent to oral sex with an EMT before that EMT can administer first aid or trauma care, you'd be fine with it, since I can simply go out of state to have my wounds stitched or my heart restarted?

A number of you are not using logical correlations and analogies.
You're comparing a medical procedure that is elective and unnecessary to begin with (abortion less than a 1% life saving procedure), along with the prerequisite being just as unnecessary for abortion to occur to an emergency procedure that prevents actual illness and death.

There is no comparison with your logic. There is no equivalent that you've presented. Stop defending with examples that don't work.

They are taking that elective abortion, in the case of a given women sleeting to get one, is necessary.

That is irrelevant to the discussion, however. I understand they find it necessary, and I disagree wit that stance, but it's not the argument being made here, really. The point is that the procedure is not rape. It may be unnecessary, but it's not rape.

[Harley Jade Linnea]

Vizal

Harley Jade Linnea

Vizal

Steam Punk Adept

Riviera de la Mancha

Even sexual assault is kind of much to me. If that's sexual assault, then I guess the docs charged with doing exams on women and men who were raped are guilty of sexual assault too? Come now.

Just call it for what it is- its an unnecessarily invasive procedure whose sole function is emotional appeal.

You mean like when Pro-Lifers call abortion murder and refer to a fetus as a baby?

The Pro-Lifers have been using this tactic for years (to some effect), so why shouldn't we tug on those heartstrings when we get a chance?

You mean how when Pro-choicers refuse to allow it to be called murder even though application depends on location?

Show me the legal definition of murder where it does not state 'malice aforethought'. Betcha can't.

Vizal

Whatever, then it's just killing.

And? Your point? We kill millions of living organisms every single day. Every time you wash your hands you kill things. Is washing your hands vile to you now?

Please stop. I need you to really think about what you're saying. I'll first respond, then I'll give you some definitions about logic, reasoning, thinking, understanding, and so on.

Definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought. Murder is not solely retained by that single definition..

'


Back your s**t up or shut the ******** up. I'm not talking about Webster's laymen's definition I am talking about the legal definition of murder. I can tell you that in the entirety of the US the legal definition states 'The unlawful killing of a person by another especially with malice aforethought.' Now, since you're claiming that the legal definition varies I want you to prove it damn it.

[Vixianna]

Harley Jade Linnea

Keltoi Samurai

The Living Force

Keltoi Samurai

The Living Force

I'm pretty much positive you didn't read the whole post.
If I say you have to have an unnecessary, invasive procedure, before the procedure you want, it would be. It's about as bad as saying I have to suck you off before you'll give me my prescription for antibiotics.

ok, so prostate exams, endoscopy and rape kits are now rape. got it

They are if they're required before having an unrelated procedure.
Vasectomy, sir? Well, before we do that, we'll need you to drop your pants, bend over this table, and prepare for a fist in your a**.

umm . . . a prostate exam already occurs before a vasectomy in many hospitals.

Sauce?

Keltoi Samurai

also, rectal colonoscopes are completely unnecessary in the modern age, now that we have cameras that can be swallowed in pill form,

Sauce?

Keltoi Samurai

further, rape kits. those are invasive. why not argue about the woman being raped to prosecute her rapists?

Guess what? A woman can REFUSE to have a rape kit performed and *gasp* its not done. They can tell the victim that the kit will help them to collect evidence to catch their rapist, if the rape is done with a p***s and no condom is used, but the victim can deny the kit. It cannot be forced upon them and they are not requiring you to have it done to say, go to the doctor for antibiotics for an infection.

OR to even have the rape investigation proceed. That's a more apt analogy. In order to have the abortion done you HAVE to have this ultra sound. But in order for the rape investigation to proceed, to my knowledge, you don't have to have a rape kit done.

[blackheartgirl2]

marshmallowcreampie

blackheartgirl2

No i still think that a women should hear her unborn babies heart beat (if they have one), and see that baby before they decide to get an abortion maybe it will make them rethink and if it doesn't oh well they tried.

If they can get the same result from an abdominal ultrasound then yes i think that should be used instead but it really isn't up to me. If it was every women that gets pregnant would want to have her baby and would take good care of the child, but we know thats not going to happen.

But alas, a lot of women aren't in the position to care for potential kids even if they want to. You're trying to finish college, you don't have the time and likely don't have the money to give a kid a good life. You're in a low-paying job and can barely care for yourself, again, an issue of money. Don't know about other women, but I would never have a kid unless I can provide said kid with the best life I could. Live in a decent neighborhood with a good school, make plenty of money, good food and clothes and shelter, be able to save up for a college fund, all that jazz. I'm in my freshman year of college and still rely on my parents to help me with my rent (I only recently found a job) so if I had a kid I'd have to drop out of school, find a job that pays more, and likely have to move back in with my parents, becoming a burden on them as well.

I am the child of that kind of women. But my mom was 17 didn't have a job, no education (dropped out of high school when she got pregnant). I don't think my dad had very much money either. I was raised by the random guys she was dating and my grandma, lived off the state and child support from my dad. That is not a good life but i was raised good and in most cases i'm a good child. Should i not have been given the chance to live? or my sisters? I don't think so.

[marshmallowcreampie]

blackheartgirl2

I am the child of that kind of women. But my mom was 17 didn't have a job, no education (dropped out of high school when she got pregnant). I don't think my dad had very much money either. I was raised by the random guys she was dating and my grandma, lived off the state and child support from my dad. That is not a good life but i was raised good and in most cases i'm a good child. Should i not have been given the chance to live? or my sisters? I don't think so.

What matters is that your mother made the choice. Some women are okay with raising a kid in such situations, but it's not something I'd personally do.

[Harley Jade Linnea]

blackheartgirl2

Harley Jade Linnea

blackheartgirl2

marshmallowcreampie

blackheartgirl2

Then what is the harm in reminding them?

Because it wastes time and money, not to mention a transvaginal ultrasound is a humiliating and invasive procedure. The lawmakers are going "Well, we can't make abortion illegal, but we can do out best to punish and humiliate any woman who wants one!". emotion_awesome And again, there's no ned to "remind" them. THEY KNOW. Women are not that stupid. They know what an abortion is, they know what they're doing. They know they're killing a fetus and they know a fetus, if given time, can grow into a baby. The procedure is medically unnecessary and it's a waste of time.

If they didn't want to waste time and money they shouldn't have gotten pregnant in the first place,

Tell me where the on/off switch exists in the uterus because I've never seen one.

Oh, I get it, you're a 'slut-shamer'. You want to punish women for having a uterus and daring to be comfortable with their sexuality because sex is a crime exclusive to women and punishable by forced 9 month occupation of their bodies.

No i am not, i don't care about what the mothers do,

If you think that violating a woman in order to coerce her into remaining pregnant against her will is fine and dandy then yes, you are.

blackheartgirl2

i care about the unborn babies.

Exactly., You care about a non-thinking, non-feeling clump of cells. Who gives a flying ******** about the actual living, breathing women you think should be violated and coerced.

blackheartgirl2

It doesn't matter to me how the moms got pregnant, i don't really care if they had been safe or on birth control. i care about the life growing in them. I think that life should be as protected same as the mothers as long as it is not going to hurt the mother emotionally or physically.

See above. People like you disgust me.

[Vixianna]

blackheartgirl2

The Living Force

blackheartgirl2

The Living Force

blackheartgirl2

Then i guess i wouldn't have it done. though that is nothing like this situation.

Replace the variables with x's and y's, and the formula is the same.

Right because what you said is a medical procedure? I don't think so.

If a probing is unnecessary, it might as well be a d***o for all intents and purposes.

Yes but its not. And it is a medical procedure. And obviously they think it is necessary

And why the hell should politicians, who aren't trained medical professionals and who have ignored testimony FROM trained medical professionals against this, get to decide what is and ISN'T medically necessary?

[Vizal]

Harley Jade Linnea

Vizal

Harley Jade Linnea

Vizal

Steam Punk Adept

You mean like when Pro-Lifers call abortion murder and refer to a fetus as a baby?

The Pro-Lifers have been using this tactic for years (to some effect), so why shouldn't we tug on those heartstrings when we get a chance?

You mean how when Pro-choicers refuse to allow it to be called murder even though application depends on location?

Show me the legal definition of murder where it does not state 'malice aforethought'. Betcha can't.

Vizal

Whatever, then it's just killing.

And? Your point? We kill millions of living organisms every single day. Every time you wash your hands you kill things. Is washing your hands vile to you now?

Please stop. I need you to really think about what you're saying. I'll first respond, then I'll give you some definitions about logic, reasoning, thinking, understanding, and so on.

Definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought. Murder is not solely retained by that single definition..

'


Back your s**t up or shut the ******** up. I'm not talking about Webster's laymen's definition I am talking about the legal definition of murder. I can tell you that in the entirety of the US the legal definition states 'The unlawful killing of a person by another especially with malice aforethought.' Now, since you're claiming that the legal definition varies I want you to prove it damn it.

Back it up? Seriously? It's called logic, reason, sensible thinking, etc.

You're not even comprehending your own cut and paste. Note that it says "especially". This means (again) that it is not solely retained by that single definition or circumstance. Again, you failed to think things through, and I doubt this will be the last. Look, take a 15 minute break or something and come back to the discussion. Again, I'm completely serious. If you gain some of your sense, I'll continue being reasonable with you. However, if you post like this one more time, I'm afraid I'll just have to end our debate.

[Firebird Trans Am GTA_87]

blackheartgirl2

marshmallowcreampie

blackheartgirl2

No i still think that a women should hear her unborn babies heart beat (if they have one), and see that baby before they decide to get an abortion maybe it will make them rethink and if it doesn't oh well they tried.

If they can get the same result from an abdominal ultrasound then yes i think that should be used instead but it really isn't up to me. If it was every women that gets pregnant would want to have her baby and would take good care of the child, but we know thats not going to happen.

But alas, a lot of women aren't in the position to care for potential kids even if they want to. You're trying to finish college, you don't have the time and likely don't have the money to give a kid a good life. You're in a low-paying job and can barely care for yourself, again, an issue of money. Don't know about other women, but I would never have a kid unless I can provide said kid with the best life I could. Live in a decent neighborhood with a good school, make plenty of money, good food and clothes and shelter, be able to save up for a college fund, all that jazz. I'm in my freshman year of college and still rely on my parents to help me with my rent (I only recently found a job) so if I had a kid I'd have to drop out of school, find a job that pays more, and likely have to move back in with my parents, becoming a burden on them as well.

I am the child of that kind of women. But my mom was 17 didn't have a job, no education (dropped out of high school when she got pregnant). I don't think my dad had very much money either. I was raised by the random guys she was dating and my grandma, lived off the state and child support from my dad. That is not a good life but i was raised good and in most cases i'm a good child. Should i not have been given the chance to live? or my sisters? I don't think so.

Muslims don't deserve to live; especially when they're a traitor to the white race. WHITE POWA! (Don't worry, I'm dating an Iranian and am merely having fun. I understand where you're coming from. I used to hold very similar beliefs.)

[Firebird Trans Am GTA_87]

Vizal

Harley Jade Linnea

Vizal

Harley Jade Linnea

Vizal

You mean how when Pro-choicers refuse to allow it to be called murder even though application depends on location?

Show me the legal definition of murder where it does not state 'malice aforethought'. Betcha can't.

Vizal

Whatever, then it's just killing.

And? Your point? We kill millions of living organisms every single day. Every time you wash your hands you kill things. Is washing your hands vile to you now?

Please stop. I need you to really think about what you're saying. I'll first respond, then I'll give you some definitions about logic, reasoning, thinking, understanding, and so on.

Definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought. Murder is not solely retained by that single definition..

'


Back your s**t up or shut the ******** up. I'm not talking about Webster's laymen's definition I am talking about the legal definition of murder. I can tell you that in the entirety of the US the legal definition states 'The unlawful killing of a person by another especially with malice aforethought.' Now, since you're claiming that the legal definition varies I want you to prove it damn it.

Back it up? Seriously? It's called logic, reason, sensible thinking, etc.

You're not even comprehending your own cut and paste. Note that it says "especially". This means (again) that it is not solely retained by that single definition or circumstance. Again, you failed to think things through, and I doubt this will be the last. Look, take a 15 minute break or something and come back to the discussion. Again, I'm completely serious. If you gain some of your sense, I'll continue being reasonable with you. However, if you post like this one more time, I'm afraid I'll just have to end our debate.

In ED, it's against ToS to not provide sources.

[Harley Jade Linnea]

blackheartgirl2

Harley Jade Linnea

blackheartgirl2

marshmallowcreampie

blackheartgirl2

It is not rape if she is agreeing to it. and i read the article and i agree with it. If a women wants an abortion she should know everything about the baby that she is killing. Plus if she really doesn't want that ultrasound then couldn't she just go to another state?

Going to another state isn't an easy option for everyone. Especially with Texas, Texas is HUGE. Depending on where you live, it could take several hours to get out of state. On top of that, the ultrasound doesn't provide women with information they don't already know. The law exists solely to guilt women out of having an abortion by getting them to look at a sonogram, or make them go through a humiliating and unnecessary medical procedure. The laws don't really work anyway, it doesn't cause women to change their minds. Know why? KNOW WHY? Because they KNOW what they're doing when they walk into that abortion clinic. They know there is a fetus inside of them and they know what the abortion is going to do to it.

Then what is the harm in reminding them?

So you would be fine with being violated by an inanimate object? Rapists would love to meet you, toots.

They are choosing to have it done.

******** they are. They are being coerced to be violated by a law. Since you think its a-okay and fine to be violated rapists would LOVE to get you alone.

blackheartgirl2

If they don't want it done they can go to another state,

What are you twelve and living in la la land where all states ate ten minutes wide and everyone has millions of dollars in the bank? Here in the real world that's not always an option.

blackheartgirl2

or not get an abortion.

That's a disgusting thing to say. "You are too poor to drive eighteen hours one way to have an unwanted thing removed from your body? Then tough s**t, be violated for 9 months!

blackheartgirl2

They are not being any more violated than any other medical procedure, which is what it is.

When you are COERCED to have an unnecessary 'procedure' in order to have a completely IRRELEVANT procedure done then yes it is a violation.

That's like saying 'If you want a mammogram you have to let me stick this probe up your a** and ******** you with it first' even though an a**l probing has nothing to do with a mammogram isn't a violation of your body. *rolls eyes*

[Vizal]

Vixianna

blackheartgirl2

The Living Force

blackheartgirl2

The Living Force

blackheartgirl2

Then i guess i wouldn't have it done. though that is nothing like this situation.

Replace the variables with x's and y's, and the formula is the same.

Right because what you said is a medical procedure? I don't think so.

If a probing is unnecessary, it might as well be a d***o for all intents and purposes.

Yes but its not. And it is a medical procedure. And obviously they think it is necessary

And why the hell should politicians, who aren't trained medical professionals and who have ignored testimony FROM trained medical professionals against this, get to decide what is and ISN'T medically necessary?

Isn't it obvious? They don't get paid full retirement and benefits for life only after serving 2 years just because they sit on their asses ... sort of ...
You're insulting hard working politicians who truly care about the human condition and whom are selfless to their own greed and desires. Shame on you.