Damo wrote:According to the Huffington post, women all over the world, including Imploding Charlie, are offended by Trump's proposal of 6 weeks maternity leave for women.
Apparently this means he thinks women should be the ones to stay at home looking after the baby while the man continues to be the bread winner
What did he say about this?Imploding Turtle wrote:even in cases of rape and incest
It's the GOP platform of which he is the leader. It's why he/they are going after Planned Parenthood. It's why Republican states are going after abortion clinics in states in which they hold the legislature.taio wrote:What did he say about this?
That's why he didn't answer your questiontaio wrote:He's explicitly said his view that rape amongst other circumstances would be an exception
I hold no weight in what Trump says when he promises to protect individual rights. The man has proven himself to be a liar on so many occassions that i have no doubt that he would lie just to protect his women's vote share.taio wrote:He's explicitly said his view that rape amongst other circumstances would be an exception
I've not really been following the whole Trump thing in the media, I get my current affairs news from this forum mainly.Imploding Turtle wrote:Lets pretend that 6 weeks maternity leave is the most outrageous of the GOP's policies, and not something like banning abortion for women even in cases of rape and incest. It's definitely the maternity leave they're most upset about.
quoted for posterity.Damo wrote:And now he's furiously checking the internet for a fake news website, with some completely made up quotes to counter your argument
So you completely made up the bit about rape and incest?Imploding Turtle wrote:I hold no weight in what Trump says when he promises to protect individual rights. The man has proven himself to be a liar on so many occassions that i have no doubt that he would lie just to protect his women's vote share.
I've already addressed my mistake, but like the child that you are you were too busy shitposting and providing nothing to the conversation to have noticed.Damo wrote:So you completely made up the bit about rape and incest?
Your a really odd individual charlie
taio wrote:As I was typing me first post I just thought that's a big pile of steaming horseshite
You made up a complete, weird lie and backtracked when someone pulled you about it is what you meant?Imploding Turtle wrote:I've already addressed my mistake, but like the child that you are you were too busy shitposting and providing nothing to the conversation to have noticed.
Imploding Turtle wrote:Then it's a good job you were talking to someone who values facts and was prepared to go and factcheck his own claim when pressed.
RIGHT on the button.ClaretMoffitt wrote:My thoughts exactly.
Truth is though, special interest groups using identity politics like this aren't actually out for a genuine authentic progressive cause, mearly to further their own left wing agendas.
Otherwise there would be global women's protests over Saudi Arabia, for example in its treatment of women.
Yes, that's the reason.Lancasterclaret wrote:I'm seriously hoping that the only reason people are arguing against IT on this is that they don't like him.
I was actually wrong to admit a mistake since as it turns out i was right.taio wrote:I thought it was best to check given how regularly you pull people up on here if they are factually incorrect. As expected it was baseless nonsense. You believed you were correct which is stupid.
GOP wrote:The Constitution’s guarantee that no one can
“be deprived of life, liberty or property” deliberately
echoes the Declaration of Independence’s
proclamation that “all” are “endowed by their
Creator” with the inalienable right to life.
Accordingly, we assert the sanctity of human life
and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental
right to life which cannot be infringed. We support
a human life amendment to the Constitution and
legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth
Amendment’s protections apply to children before
birth.
In fairness, the pro-life lobby, especially in the southern States (which essentially guides the GOP on birth rights policy) is in favour of banning abortion even in the cases of rape.Damo wrote:So you completely made up the bit about rape and incest?
Your a really odd individual charlie
Damo wrote:Yes, that's the reason.
Normally I don't mind it when people start making up nonsense about someone they dislike, but I'm glad he got pulled up about it, being as it's Charlie
Did you even read the link you posted?Imploding Turtle wrote:I was actually wrong to admit a mistake since as it turns out i was right.
Trump promised to change the GOP party platform on abortion. Here he is on video being interviewed and specifically being asked about changing the Republican platform to include exceptions for rape, incest, and for the life of the mother. He says he will "absolutely" do that.
That was in April. At the GOP convention they passed a platform without these exceptions and it remains the position of the GOP that:
So yes, it is the official position of the Republican party that there should be no exceptions on abortion.
Feel free to use CTRL+F to search the platform and prove me wrong, but nowhere does it use the words "rape" or "incest", nor does it use the word "except" or "exception" to explain that such a ban would have these exceptions.
https://prod-cdn-static.gop.com/static/ ... atform.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The first one? Yes. The second one? Not all of it, just the relevent parts.Damo wrote:Did you even read the link you posted?
As long as she made dinner when she got back.NRC wrote:Result for me today..... Mrs decided to go protesting at the NC Capitol building. Left me to watch soccer. She's just arrived back, managed to not get arrested, and I'm just finishing off watching City/Spurs - my 3rd game today. Real result!
Trump's own words, and the GOP's actual platform. I guess these are fake news now?Damo wrote:And now he's furiously checking the internet for a fake news website, with some completely made up quotes to counter your argument
Even i would support banning sex-selection abortions.taio wrote:From the link you posted:
"We support state and federal efforts against the cruelest forms of abortion, especially dismemberment abortion procedures, in which unborn babies are literally torn apart limb from limb.
We call on Congress to ban sex-selection abortions and abortions based on disabilities — discrimination in its most lethal form."
No, i said it was the GOP's position. I later said i don't believe a word Trump says when it comes to protecting individual rights.taio wrote:I'm not understanding you point because you said Trump supported a ban on abortion by rape victims which is most certainly incorrect. Now you're bundling around trying to find ways of making you look like you were right all along which is quite funny
Lets pretend that 6 weeks maternity leave is the most outrageous of the GOP's policies, and not something like banning abortion for women even in cases of rape and incest. It's definitely the maternity leave they're most upset about.
The only person who looks an imbecile, as usual, is you. You are lying over and over in the most bizarre ways, you are bare faced trying to convince people that this women's match is a protest against political theology.Imploding Turtle wrote:He's being a moron. He knows the reason it's a women's and not a generic protest is because Trump's government will be specifically targetting women's rights and access to healthcare on religious grounds. He's just trying to deflect from his own massive hypocrisy in dismissing this fight against the imposition of political theology by Christians, while criticising Muslims in another thread for their imposition of political theology, not about Trump.
Try not to get sucked in by his imbecilic utterings. He's angry that he's been caught being a hypocrite so he's lashing out.
ClaretMoffitt wrote:The only person who looks an imbecile, as usual, is you. You are lying over and over in the most bizarre ways, you are bare faced trying to convince people that this women's match is a protest against political theology.
On a thread about racism of one of our players , which I was fully, 100% denouncing, you took it upon yourself to imply that I am a hypocrite because of my views on religion? Then used this unbelievable strange comparison of the women's march to back up your statement.
I used to think you were a decent poster, with strong and principled views on here, but over time you have shown yourself to be a petulant child who will say absolutely anything.
Imploding Turtle wrote:I was actually wrong to admit a mistake since as it turns out i was right.
So yes, it is the official position of the Republican party that there should be no exceptions on abortion.
Feel free to use CTRL+F to search the platform and prove me wrong, but nowhere does it use the words "rape" or "incest", nor does it use the word "except" or "exception" to explain that such a ban would have these exceptions.
bobinho wrote:It doesn't matter how many tree hugging lesbians go to pointless rallies and light candles, "The Donald" got the most votes and is The Man. Why do all the liberal lefty **** bags not recognise a democratic result if it's not the one they wanted?
Show me where he got the most votes as there seems to be no evidence of that.bobinho wrote:It doesn't matter how many tree hugging lesbians go to pointless rallies and light candles, "The Donald" got the most votes and is The Man. Why do all the liberal lefty **** bags not recognise a democratic result if it's not the one they wanted?
Oh, and NRC, it's football. And did you get your dinner made??? After all, that is what these women should be doing instead of behaving like spoilt children.
And for you über sensitive types, my tongue is firmly in my cheek. Although don't let that stop you being outraged.
To be fair, the electoral college.Spijed wrote:Show me where he got the most votes.
Imploding Turtle wrote:To be fair, the electoral college.
Oh, so you think that there would have been this massive women's March if jeb Bush would have won, do you? No you don't, you know there wouldn't have been. This was an anti-trump protest in the main due to his comments about grabbing women by their private regions. Nothing what so ever to do with opposing Christian oppression on women.Imploding Turtle wrote:Why do you think it was a women's march on Washington? I never once said it was only about political theology, i said the reason it's a specifically women's march was in large part because the Republicans pose a threat to women's rights in a way that they don't pose a threat to men's rights, and that the reason for this is because they want to impose their religious beliefs on everyone. That isn't bizarre, it's patently bloody obvious.
And yes, i called you a hypocrite because you criticised Muslims for imposing political theology on women in one thread while in another thread (this one) dismissing a women's march that was, in part, a protest against Christians imposing political theology. The hypocrisy is pretty clear.
ClaretMoffitt wrote:Oh, so you think that there would have been this massive women's March if jeb Bush would have won, do you? No you don't, you know there wouldn't have been. This was an anti-trump protest in the main due to his comments about grabbing women by their private regions. Nothing what so ever to do with opposing Christian oppression on women.
One of those images on the webpage i linked to showed a large sign by a Code Pink protester. One of code pink's "issues" is Saudi Arabia.ClaretMoffitt wrote:
You also well know that my rant was not about Islam originally, but about the march itself. Stating that there are causes worldwide of abuse and systematic oppression of women that get no attention what so ever from these groups simply because they don't fit their political agenda.
So you imply Trump supports abortion, when someone had been raped or through the result of incest.Imploding Turtle wrote:Trump's own words, and the GOP's actual platform. I guess these are fake news now?
I didn't mean to make a fool of you by admitting to a mistake that i later realise i hadn't made, and not proving myself right in the first place until after you had celebrated my mistake like a child, but it's certainly a happy accident.
Damo wrote:And now he's furiously checking the internet for a fake news website, with some completely made up quotes to counter your argument
Damo wrote:So you imply Trump supports abortion, when someone had been raped or through the result of incest.
Then post a link of him categorically stating that's not his view.
You mean the Republican party? Which is what I was talking about in the first place?Now your claiming to have flukes across some evidence that your right because someone else has these views?
Lmao