HHS moves to reclassify contraception as "abortion"

[LadyTevar]

Why would you have the opinion.. Because you're a sexist, conservative reactionary? That's the common reason people have such idiotic thoughts. It's the 'Welfare Queen' lie all over again, but unfortunately, you are not Reagan talking to idiotic people. You are on SDN.

I'd be far from conservative in my beliefs towards sex. All I can say is that seeing many teenage girls in my high school end up with fatherless kids and going out of school to collect welfare a less then ideal circumstance.

So's going through the 1920 and 1930 births and using WhiteOut on the blatant "BASTARD" or "ILLEGITIMATE" on children born to unwed mothers of the time.

So's doing 20 Paternity Affidavits every day, so these unwed mothers can have their baby-daddy's name listed on the child's birth certificate, and hopefully get him to pay Child Support.

All of which, of course, is anedoctal evidence, so my work experience with the local DHHR has about as much weight as your "the girls in highschool were SLUTS!" commentary. It does make me wonder if one reason why you're bitching is because they weren't sluts for you, but that's anedoctal as well.

[Justforfun000]

The answer to your question, you infantile brat, is you don't present personal opinions, especially as fact. You don't whine about 'True to me'. You discuss logically or you don't type up responses.

But if I observed something, such as my fellow classmates becoming pregnant and leaving school to go on welfare, then it IS fact although I can't prove it to you without literally posting names and evidence of their life history which would be obviously unfair to drag people's personal lives up into public. In any case I thought the argument I was making about irresponsibility to be the main point anyway, not the examples.

Which is not, no matter what you say, evidence of being wildly irresponsible and purposefully going there. Many factors could lead to that: Lying assholes, restrictive parents, local laws about parental consent and abortion, restrictions on contraception..

Of course. But I already narrowed my argument to a very specific one. They had to be aware of contraception, have access, and still choose to deliberately engage in unprotected sex. I already said many times over I wasn't including any other women in the category. So what's wrong with that point?

[Broomstick]

The thought of a full-term pregnancy and twenty years of endless time and money spent is terrifying, and the thought of an abortion is pretty frightening too. If we get pregnant, it has to be one or the other.

What's this "we" bullshit?

Seriously, when did it start? THE WOMAN GETS PREGNANT, NOT THE MAN. That's why SHE gets to make the choice to continue or abort a pregnancy.

You ALSO forgot option #3 - give the kid up for adoption. Dumbass.

[Justforfun000]

All of which, of course, is anedoctal evidence, so my work experience with the local DHHR has about as much weight as your "the girls in highschool were SLUTS!" commentary. It does make me wonder if one reason why you're bitching is because they weren't sluts for you, but that's anedoctal as well.

No because I'm gay and never cared sexually for women one way or the other. But also, I'm really sorry I used that phrase 'loose slut'. It was completely inappropriate and not even relevant to my point. I didn't think of these girls that way, they were just not being responsible enough. We were all taught about contraception in family studies well before they got pregnant, and condoms and the pill were widely available. I just think it's sad that so many go down that road and one can't deny that it's not a financial drain on the government to support the mother and child.

[SirNitram]

The answer to your question, you infantile brat, is you don't present personal opinions, especially as fact. You don't whine about 'True to me'. You discuss logically or you don't type up responses.

But if I observed something, such as my fellow classmates becoming pregnant and leaving school to go on welfare, then it IS fact although I can't prove it to you without literally posting names and evidence of their life history which would be obviously unfair to drag people's personal lives up into public. In any case I thought the argument I was making about irresponsibility to be the main point anyway, not the examples.

And once again, we come to the fact you don't have credibility, and have irreparably damaged any you had with your 'I DIDN'T MAKE THIS ABOUT NUMBERS'. There is no reason to believe what you say. How many times must this be repeated? Posting names won't even do it.

And what is this 'main point'? The 'Principle' of the thing?

Which is not, no matter what you say, evidence of being wildly irresponsible and purposefully going there. Many factors could lead to that: Lying assholes, restrictive parents, local laws about parental consent and abortion, restrictions on contraception..

Of course. But I already narrowed my argument to a very specific one. They had to be aware of contraception, have access, and still choose to deliberately engage in unprotected sex. I already said many times over I wasn't including any other women in the category. So what's wrong with that point?

How about you not providing evidence it's a non-trivial amount? Oh, damn, there I go, expecting evidence and logic from you, just because, well, the rules specifically state when asked for evidence, you provide it or concede.

[LadyTevar]

The thought of a full-term pregnancy and twenty years of endless time and money spent is terrifying, and the thought of an abortion is pretty frightening too. If we get pregnant, it has to be one or the other.

What's this "we" bullshit?

Seriously, when did it start? THE WOMAN GETS PREGNANT, NOT THE MAN. That's why SHE gets to make the choice to continue or abort a pregnancy.

You ALSO forgot option #3 - give the kid up for adoption. Dumbass.

Umm... Broomstick? Not to ruin a good rant or anything, but Metatwaddle's a girl too.

[RedImperator]

Any abortion, including an RU-486 abortion, usually involves a lot of side effects afterwards; the common ones are bleeding, cramping, nausea and diarrhea for two to four weeks. So basically it's like a period, prolonged by a factor of three, with nausea and diarrhea.

Is someone really going to try to convince me that's easier for women than using a goddamn condom?

You sir, have obviously NEVER tried to argue a reluctant man into using a condom!

Also, asswipe, sometimes contraception fails.

Seriously - many women put up with nausea and diarrhea during their periods, too. So, instead of 5 days maybe it's 10. That might not be "fun" but it might also be preferable to nine months of pregnancy, labor and delivery, and 18 years of raising the rugrat. Seems that being a woman at all comes with "side effects", including condescending jackasses presuming to take away a woman's choice "for her own good".

What the flying fuck are you talking about? You obviously haven't been reading the thread, because Metatwaddle (a pro-choice feminist girl, by the way, who knows all about the side effects of being a woman) has been arguing something entirely different from what you seem to think she is. Justforfun is arguing (or was, before he started backpeadling) that there are a statistically significant number of women using abortion as their primary means of birth control, and Metatwaddle has been debating that notion for three pages. At no point in this thread, or, to my knowledge, in her entire life has Metatwaddle ever argued against abortion.

[Justforfun000]

How about you not providing evidence it's a non-trivial amount? Oh, damn, there I go, expecting evidence and logic from you, just because, well, the rules specifically state when asked for evidence, you provide it or concede.

Ok then I have to concede. I can't prove those kinds of personal examples without unethically posting personal information.

I honestly don't know if it's a non-trivial amount. I just made a judgement on the behavior itself. I wasn't arguing any specifics in numbers because I have no clue what the percentage would be. But I know I've seen more then one personally, so that's why I argued it.

But then we're back to my personal experiences are no good to cite. So that paints me into a corner. So I have to concede.

[Broomstick]

Umm... Broomstick? Not to ruin a good rant or anything, but Metatwaddle's a girl too.

So? How does that change my post? SHE gets pregnant, not she+he. That business of "we" - from either side of a couple - pisses me off.

[SirNitram]

How about you not providing evidence it's a non-trivial amount? Oh, damn, there I go, expecting evidence and logic from you, just because, well, the rules specifically state when asked for evidence, you provide it or concede.

Ok then I have to concede. I can't prove those kinds of personal examples without unethically posting personal information.

You're also illiterate: Proving a few cases of something != Proving it's a non-trivial amount. Gods, you're stupid.

I honestly don't know if it's a non-trivial amount. I just made a judgement on the behavior itself. I wasn't arguing any specifics in numbers because I have no clue what the percentage would be. But I know I've seen more then one personally, so that's why I argued it.

But you keep acting as if it's a problem for society that should go beyond the existing stigmas. If the objective harm is non-trivial, it deserves no more attention.

But then we're back to my personal experiences are no good to cite. So that paints me into a corner. So I have to concede.

Your own actions painted that. I suggest, before you rant again, you recignize you'll need to bring more than 'I sawed it'.

[Justforfun000]

Justforfun is arguing (or was, before he started backpeadling) that there are a statistically significant number of women using abortion as their primary means of birth control, and Metatwaddle has been debating that notion for three pages.

Is that what I said? Or should I say is that what's coming across? Jesus Murphy, no wonder I'm being jumped on. I don't believe that. I obviously went very wrong with my wording. I apologize Metatwaddle. Until I saw this phrased like that, I didn't see how I was coming across.

[Kanastrous]

Umm... Broomstick? Not to ruin a good rant or anything, but Metatwaddle's a girl too.

So? How does that change my post? SHE gets pregnant, not she+he. That business of "we" - from either side of a couple - pisses me off.

On the two occasions when there was a pregnancy scare, *I* sure felt that there was a "we" involved, if my girlfriend chose to carry the pregnancy.

Very much like the sensation of stepping into an open elevator shaft, by the way. In a literal sense.

[Justforfun000]

You're also illiterate: Proving a few cases of something != Proving it's a non-trivial amount. Gods, you're stupid.

I'm getting you now. Sorry.

[Metatwaddle]

The thought of a full-term pregnancy and twenty years of endless time and money spent is terrifying, and the thought of an abortion is pretty frightening too. If we get pregnant, it has to be one or the other.

What's this "we" bullshit?

Seriously, when did it start? THE WOMAN GETS PREGNANT, NOT THE MAN. That's why SHE gets to make the choice to continue or abort a pregnancy.

You ALSO forgot option #3 - give the kid up for adoption. Dumbass.

Uh, what? By "we" I meant "women".

You sir, have obviously NEVER tried to argue a reluctant man into using a condom!

Also, asswipe, sometimes contraception fails.

Way to read my previous posts in the thread.

Guess what? Birth control doesn't always work. The large majority of women having their second or subsequent abortion are not only on birth control, but are using a highly effective form of it.

You can shove your knee-jerk reactions and piss-poor reading comprehension up your ass, you fucktard.

[Broomstick]

Any abortion, including an RU-486 abortion, usually involves a lot of side effects afterwards; the common ones are bleeding, cramping, nausea and diarrhea for two to four weeks. So basically it's like a period, prolonged by a factor of three, with nausea and diarrhea.

Is someone really going to try to convince me that's easier for women than using a goddamn condom?

You sir, have obviously NEVER tried to argue a reluctant man into using a condom!

Also, asswipe, sometimes contraception fails.

Seriously - many women put up with nausea and diarrhea during their periods, too. So, instead of 5 days maybe it's 10. That might not be "fun" but it might also be preferable to nine months of pregnancy, labor and delivery, and 18 years of raising the rugrat. Seems that being a woman at all comes with "side effects", including condescending jackasses presuming to take away a woman's choice "for her own good".

What the flying fuck are you talking about? You obviously haven't been reading the thread, because Metatwaddle (a pro-choice feminist girl

Being a pro-choice feminist girl does not protect you from the consequences of being an ignorant dumbass. Frankly, it wasn't until after I posted that that I picked up that Metatwaddle is female but I don't see where her gender will change my opinion.

At no point in this thread, or, to my knowledge, in her entire life has Metatwaddle ever argued against abortion.

No, but she's making stupid statements. Such as "we" get pregnant. No, SHE can get pregnant, but her+mate does not get pregnant. It's not a group effort. It's great if the man involved is supportive, kind, caring, etc. but it's not required by biology.

Her stupid-ass statement that the choices were EITHER abort OR raise the kid and no other option - she's never heard of adoption? Hello? Granted, there are issues with adoption but there are issues around every part of human reproduction.

Yes, the "morning after pill" has side effects and some women might find them intolerable... but others may not and it's wrong for ANYONE, including other women to take that choice away from a woman. Regardless of whether I, personally, may ever need to make such a choice it would be wrong of me to make that on behalf of anyone else because I am not that woman nor do I have to live with the consequences of that choice.

And yes, there ARE men out there who will NOT wear a condom. I think it's stupid but then people frequently are stupid.

I refuse to give Metatwaddle a free pass just because she is also female and pro-choice. She should either argue well or learn to argue better.

[Broomstick]

Umm... Broomstick? Not to ruin a good rant or anything, but Metatwaddle's a girl too.

So? How does that change my post? SHE gets pregnant, not she+he. That business of "we" - from either side of a couple - pisses me off.

On the two occasions when there was a pregnancy scare, *I* sure felt that there was a "we" involved, if my girlfriend chose to carry the pregnancy.

Very much like the sensation of stepping into an open elevator shaft, by the way. In a literal sense.

I'm overjoyed that you give a damn, but the fact is you are not, never were, and never can be pregnant.

Because you are a civilized human being you felt great responsibility, even fear for the future, and were willing to be a true father with all the awesome scary good and bad things that entails but you were not the pregnant one. Men are able to run away from an unwanted pregnancy, women can NOT do that. It's impossible. Men shouldn't run away, but the fact it's an option makes a substantial and unavoidable difference between the man's and the woman's experience in such circumstances.

[Broomstick]

The thought of a full-term pregnancy and twenty years of endless time and money spent is terrifying, and the thought of an abortion is pretty frightening too. If we get pregnant, it has to be one or the other.

What's this "we" bullshit?

Seriously, when did it start? THE WOMAN GETS PREGNANT, NOT THE MAN. That's why SHE gets to make the choice to continue or abort a pregnancy.

You ALSO forgot option #3 - give the kid up for adoption. Dumbass.

Uh, what? By "we" I meant "women".

Make that clearer next time.

And you still missed option 3.

You can shove your knee-jerk reactions and piss-poor reading comprehension up your ass, you fucktard.

Kiss my ass, cunt.

[Metatwaddle]

Ghetto edit: Your reading comprehension is even worse than I thought. The last sentence of the post I was replying to was as follows:

I can't imagine how it must feel for the woman, but I'm sure that having one of those close calls is more than enough to scare a woman into insisting on protection from that point on.

How is it not abundantly clear that Durandal was saying what it was like for the man, and I was providing a female perspective to say "yeah, it's terrifying, and pregnancy for us [that means women! I know you can't figure it out so I thought I'd tell you] comes with medical consequences that it doesn't for men?

Her stupid-ass statement that the choices were EITHER abort OR raise the kid and no other option - she's never heard of adoption? Hello? Granted, there are issues with adoption but there are issues around every part of human reproduction.

I was imprecise in not including adoption, but that doesn't change the truth of my statement: that any pregnancy comes with physical consequences for a woman that it doesn't for a man.

Yes, the "morning after pill" has side effects and some women might find them intolerable... but others may not and it's wrong for ANYONE, including other women to take that choice away from a woman.

Are you fucking hallucinating? Where did I ever advocate taking any choices away from a woman?

Jesus fuck, I've been arguing for three pages against fucktards like justforfun who are whining that they have to pay six cents a year for the abortions of "loose sluts", and now you come in and think I'm a pro-life male!

[Metatwaddle]

Kiss my ass, cunt.

Oh, stop whining. You didn't read my previous posts in the thread, you got called on it, and now you're employing gendered slurs because you're all butthurt that you can't read. Shove it up your ass.

[Broomstick]

Her stupid-ass statement that the choices were EITHER abort OR raise the kid and no other option - she's never heard of adoption? Hello? Granted, there are issues with adoption but there are issues around every part of human reproduction.

I was imprecise in not including adoption, but that doesn't change the truth of my statement: that any pregnancy comes with physical consequences for a woman that it doesn't for a man.

Be more precise. You construct an either/or choice that turns out to have alternatives and it WILL be used against you.

Jesus fuck, I've been arguing for three pages against fucktards like justforfun who are whining that they have to pay six cents a year for the abortions of "loose sluts", and now you come in and think I'm a pro-life male!

I've been arguing for women's choice for three decades, I'm old enough to remember the time before Roe v. Wade - how about you?

Wah-wah-wah - Ru-486 has side effects. So do illegal abortions. Or having to travel hundreds or thousands of miles out of state to obtain a reasonably safe abortion.

You want to argue pro-choice do it well or shut the fuck up. I'm not disagreeing with your position, I'm disagreeing with the sloppy way in which you're presenting it.]

Kiss my ass, cunt.

Oh, stop whining. You didn't read my previous posts in the thread, you got called on it, and now you're employing gendered slurs because you're all butthurt that you can't read. Shove it up your ass.

Lick my bloody rag, shithead.

[Justforfun000]

Jesus fuck, I've been arguing for three pages against fucktards like justforfun who are whining that they have to pay six cents a year for the abortions of "loose sluts", and now you come in and think I'm a pro-life male!

That really did come across badly. I still think it's certainly not an ideal thing to become pregnant when you have the options and education to utilize birth control, but I should never have said that phrase. It gets worse every time I look at it again. I shot my mouth off too fast and too flippantly. I deeply apologize.

[Broomstick]

Would you feel better if I ripped into you, too? (I thought Metatwaddle was doing an adequate job of that)

[RedImperator]

Being a pro-choice feminist girl does not protect you from the consequences of being an ignorant dumbass. Frankly, it wasn't until after I posted that that I picked up that Metatwaddle is female but I don't see where her gender will change my opinion.

The only ignorant dumbass in this thread (now that justforfun has conceded) is you. You leaped to three or four wild-ass conclusions, all of them completely wrong, presumably because you didn't read the entire thread, and now you're trying to defend your error.

At no point in this thread, or, to my knowledge, in her entire life has Metatwaddle ever argued against abortion.

No, but she's making stupid statements. Such as "we" get pregnant. No, SHE can get pregnant, but her+mate does not get pregnant. It's not a group effort. It's great if the man involved is supportive, kind, caring, etc. but it's not required by biology.[/quote]

There is absolutely nothing in her post to suggest she was using "we" to mean "both halves of the couple". In fact, it was pretty obvious to me she was using "we" as "we women, collectively". At any rate, even if she was using "we" to refer to her and her significant other, the only problem I can see with it is that you don't like it, and to be blunt, I don't see why she or I (me being the other half of the couple) or anyone else should give a rat's crusty ass what you think about it.

Her stupid-ass statement that the choices were EITHER abort OR raise the kid and no other option - she's never heard of adoption? Hello? Granted, there are issues with adoption but there are issues around every part of human reproduction.

Hooray, a point where you're not completely wrong.

The thought of a full-term pregnancy and twenty years of endless time and money spent is terrifying, and the thought of an abortion is pretty frightening too. If we get pregnant, it has to be one or the other.

You're half-wrong instead. Metatwaddle listed a full-term pregnancy as one-half of the either/or. The only thing that's optional is raising the kid. Congratulations, you successfully nitpicked something. Next perhaps you'll point out that it's possible she could have a preemie, so it's not guaranteed she'll actually have a full term pregnancy.

Yes, the "morning after pill" has side effects and some women might find them intolerable... but others may not and it's wrong for ANYONE, including other women to take that choice away from a woman. Regardless of whether I, personally, may ever need to make such a choice it would be wrong of me to make that on behalf of anyone else because I am not that woman nor do I have to live with the consequences of that choice.

I dare you, I double dare you to find the quote where Metatwaddle says she wants to take RU-486 away from women.

And yes, there ARE men out there who will NOT wear a condom. I think it's stupid but then people frequently are stupid.

I refuse to give Metatwaddle a free pass just because she is also female and pro-choice. She should either argue well or learn to argue better.

She argued just fine. It's your reading comprehension that needs work.

[Metatwaddle]

Her stupid-ass statement that the choices were EITHER abort OR raise the kid and no other option - she's never heard of adoption? Hello? Granted, there are issues with adoption but there are issues around every part of human reproduction.

I was imprecise in not including adoption, but that doesn't change the truth of my statement: that any pregnancy comes with physical consequences for a woman that it doesn't for a man.

Be more precise. You construct an either/or choice that turns out to have alternatives and it WILL be used against you.

It's a good thing your superior arguing skills allowed you to detect that small imprecision in my post. Maybe next time it'll actually allow you to figure out which side I'm arguing.

I've been arguing for women's choice for three decades, I'm old enough to remember the time before Roe v. Wade - how about you?

What, am I supposed to bow down to your superior age and feminist street cred? I'd be more inclined to do that if you could actually, you know, read.

Wah-wah-wah - Ru-486 has side effects. So do illegal abortions. Or having to travel hundreds or thousands of miles out of state to obtain a reasonably safe abortion.

What the fuck does this have to do with what I posted? Did I ever suggest making abortion illegal? No. And you're the only one who seems to think I have.

Kiss my ass, cunt.

Oh, stop whining. You didn't read my previous posts in the thread, you got called on it, and now you're employing gendered slurs because you're all butthurt that you can't read. Shove it up your ass.

Lick my bloody rag, shithead.

Eat my shit, you stupid twat.

Hey, look! I can make meaningless statements with misogynistic language too! Wow, this is so impressive and it definitely advances the argument!

[LadyTevar]

*looks at Broomstick. Looks at MetaTwaddle*
Weren't we chewing on JustforFun a minute ago? Where'd this sudden attack on each other pop up from?