Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (15301)	4/18/2012 12:19:53 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

<<The Republician's are trying to outlaw contraception in many places Nonsense.>> Then why are women so upset? Partially because of ideology. Conservative women are more upset at Obama, but women are on the average more liberal then men. Men lean more conservative, why are they so upset at the Democrats? To the extent women are upset at Republicans (and you greatly exaggerate that extent), it's partially because the most ignorant of them believe the Democrats lies, that Republicans are trying to outlaw contraception. Of course ignorant men can believe that too. Hopefully there isn't enough ignorance out there for the Democrats' lies to broadly succeed. And many aren't very upset, or are upset at the Democrats, or are upset at both parties (this is quite common), or are vaguely upset without a specific target. I treated your question seriously, and gave it a serious answer, even though it really didn't devise one, since it make an implied argument that's irrelevant. Women being upset, even if they where overwhelmingly very upset, and almost all of them upset at Republicans (which isn't true), wouldn't imply or suggest that Republicans where trying to ban contraception. Your implied argument is a non-sequitur. For a big liberty guy, you sure don't mind telling women what they can and cannot do with their bodies. Nope. I'm not telling them what to do with their bodies at all. I oppose outlawing contraception. Not federally funding it isn't telling anyone what to do with anything, its allowing for more freedom not less. As for abortion, I haven't expressed anything about it here. Once a position is mentioned it tends to become the focus of conversation, and I'm not looking to make this message area, or even this conversation, all abortion all the time. But the pro-life position isn't telling women what they can do with their bodies, its telling them one thing they can't do to someone else's body. Women WANT it federally funded. Liberal women (and not all of them, but I'd guess most) want it funded, not women in general. And they will fight like hell for it and are tired of men telling them how to live. Not paying for your choices isn't telling you how to live. Federal funding is closer to telling people how to live than not having federal funding. Its having the government make the choices rather than having individuals make the choice. Its not a men vs. women thing. Its a conservative and libertarian vs. liberal Liberal men generally want it funded by the feds as well. Conservative and libertarian women generally don't want federal funding. Women feel they need it to get fair pay! What they agreed to is fair. It should be between them and their employers. The government buts in. It shouldn't but if it is going to do so, it should be in a predictable way that can't be reversed decades down the line. Companies past expenses for payroll should not be retroactively changed a generation later. If your going to force some conception of fair pay (and there are almost as many ideas about what is fair as there are people to have the ideas), then do it for future pay, not for pay from a long time ago. Why were Republicans even pushing for it to begin with? Different people have different specific reasons, you would have to ask them. But in general the hope was that when women saw the child inside of them, that some of them would choose not to have an abortion. Its a type of informed consent requirement, but more invasive then most, so it had terrible political optics. They didn't realize it involved probing? My understanding is the law didn't directly require probing. It required ultrasound images of the unborn child. But that in order to get ultrasound images very early in the pregnancy, probing would often be required. Those supporting it where not ob-gyns, and even if they had their own pregnancy ultrasounds, or their wives had ones of their kids, they wouldn't have been that early so they wouldn't have had the experience themselves. I imagine many that opposed the idea also didn't initially know the details. But once that information came out it got distributed wildly. Now everyone (almost everyone involved in the issue on either side) knows.

To: koan who wrote (15301)	4/18/2012 12:20:19 PM
From: sm1th	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

Women WANT it federally funded. There are a lot of things that I want, but I don't expect the govt to tax other people to pay for them.

To: koan who wrote (15301)	4/23/2012 9:24:38 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 85487

Hill Poll: Romney leads in respect on working women issue By Ramsey Cox - 04/23/12 05:30 AM ET More voters think Mitt Romney and the Republican Party respect women who work outside the home than think President Obama and the Democrats respect women who stay at home, according to the latest The Hill Poll. Forty-nine percent of likely voters said the presumptive GOP presidential nominee respects women who have independent careers, while 27 percent said he doesn’t and 24 percent weren’t sure. When asked if President Obama respects women who stay at home rather than pursue a career, 37 percent of likely voters said he doesn’t and 35 percent said he does. Twenty-nine percent were unsure.Both candidates are trying to court the female vote, which could determine the winner of the presidential election in November. Women outnumber men in the United States and they also vote at a higher rate. On the issue of which candidate better understands women’s issues, Obama has a slight advantage over Romney with all voters, 42 percent to 40 percent, but that was a statistical tie given the poll’s 3-point margin of error. When it came to just women voters, 46 percent said Romney better understands their issues while 41 percent said Obama is better. There was also a statistical tie when it came to which political party is better for women, with 42 percent of all voters saying Republicans and 41 percent Democrats... thehill.com Message 28100642