No one can listen to the braying of hoplophobes for more than, oh, seven minutes without the same old hoary indictment of firearms owners being rolled out: they only own guns to compensate for their small penises. Or to demonstrate how large their penises are. Well, one of those. How they account for the growing number of women who own heaters isn’t really clear, but that’s not really why we’re here today. At least one abortion rights supporter has apparently scanned the Constitutional rights advocacy landscape and is just a little jealous of the level of support gun owners get for their enumerated right to keep and bear . . .
The indispensable twitchy.com reports that Katie Heim testified recently before a Texas senate committee in opposition to a bill that would restrict abortions after 20 weeks. But instead of boring the lawmakers yet again with the usual dry, monotone delivery of carefully crafted talking points, Katie put pen to paper and composed an ode expressing her fervent wish that her vagina could enjoy the same level of popular and legislative protection as her guns do. OK, maybe not her guns. But someone’s.
If my vagina was a gun, you would stand for its rights,
You would ride on buses and fight all the fights.
If my vagina was a gun, you would treat it with care,
You wouldn’t spill all its secrets because, well, why go there.
If my vagina was a gun, you’d say what it holds is private
From cold dead hands we could pry, you surely would riot.
If my vagina was a gun, its rights would all be protected,
no matter the body count or the children affected.
If my vagina was a gun, I could bypass security,
concealed carry laws would ensure I’d have impunity.
If my vagina was a gun, I wouldn’t have to beg you,
I could hunt this great land and do all the things men do.
But my vagina is not a gun, it is a mightier thing,
With a voice that rings true making lawmakers’ ears ring.
Vaginas are not delicate, they are muscular and magic,
So stop messing with mine, with legislation that’s tragic.
My vagina’s here to demand from the source,
Listen to the voices of thousands or feel their full force.
We’re not sure the Austin-based, uh, poet really understands Texas gun laws. Bypass security? If only. And maybe she’s missed all those 30.06 and 51% signs posted around town. Be that as it may, based on our own unscientific survey, we’re sure the vast majority of gun owners respect vaginas – others’ and/or their own – at least as much as they do their guns. Some even more. You?
Amazing how fervently she fights for her vagina, but not the human life growing in her womb.
Is she fighting for her right to have a vagina, or an abortion?
Sounds like her right to have a vagina, which isn’t in question.
If Jennifer Bendery’s vagina were a gun, I wouldn’t want to confiscate it, but I just might vote to ban it.
Wait a sec, if that’s an unborn female in her womb, she also has a vagina. So does that vagina get no respect?
I’d also like to point out that the vagina isn’t where a fetus gestates, but whatever.
Paradox alert! Pose that question in a Starbucks and watch hipsters heads start popping.
If I’m that fetus, I’m gesticulating at that poem. And you know which one. Gesticulation, I mean.
I SERIOUSLY could have gone without a poem about someone’s vagina today. If she had enumerated all the dirty nicknames for it, I would have read more than six lines. It could have been longer (the poem!) and I would have read it.
I’m outta here.
I was thinking the same thing. She should have said uterus instead of vagina.
maybe she is fighting one issue at a time?
It sounds like she’s fighting for rhymes.
It’s a mass of unthinking cells. Should we Ban Jerking off because sperm is “alive”
my thoughts exactly. People are throwing out the arguement ‘life begins at conception’ but hello!!! sperms are alive and so is the egg.
No they are not. There are a few scientific definitions for life that I have read, all revolve aroundAbsorbing nutrients from surroundings, extracting chemical energy, and excreting waste. So far add I know, this process only starts at conception, which a biologist would call fertilization.
All of which is irrelevant because the inside of a person’s skin is outside anyone else’s jurisdiction.
Rich it is unfortunate you resort to excuses slimmer than those used by other peace and life loving leftist obama supporters for the continued killing of pregnant women and their children across the planet. Your arguments basically state you supported the official government mandated sterilization of “undesirables” that occurred in this country in your lifetime. Which I hope you realize puts you in the tenuous position of being both a leftist and a white supremacist. Strange I know but not even halfway to the highest order of hypocrisy displayed by many other leftists.
My take has always been that I hate adults, women or men, almost universally, as most of them have done something amoral to another human being. An innocent who has yet to do anything but quietly exhibit all the scientifically accepted signs of life has done nothing to draw my ire and nothing in my mind to deserve the kind of painful death they hardly even came up with in unit 731. You talk about it being her decision, yet you fail to acknowledge a decision was already made when the act was undertaken. If you want to talk science, then sex is for reproduction (and homosexual sex is for the reduction of reproduction).
I’m sure you can agree that a main problem with American youth today is the failure to take responsibility for ones actions. Most of the people getting abortions are basically seeking a cop out for a bad decision, which leads to further irresponsibility as adults. The “I do what I want” mentality is strong with you, I just wish it didn’t include an absolute belief that the most innocent type of life is not even life at all, flying in the face of all logic and science.
And for the record, I am a dyed in the wool misotheist. I have no religious argument here, only basic life science from as early as fourth grade in response to hypocritical misuse of science.
I’m sorry, but the inside of another person’s body is outside your jurisdiction. Compelling a woman to gestate and birth an unwanted fetus is nothing but chattel slavery.
your referring to yourself? If no than please expand on your stream of thought
Thought is not an accepted basic scientific indicator of life. Nor is half the genetic material of a human alive. Once a living being begins to process nourishment it is alive. This happens at the moment of conception in all mammalian species. God? What’s that? Science here. Stop using me improperly.
Yeah, and if my gun was a vagina I wouldn’t need a woman.
Oh, please dont go there…
+1
I hope it wouldn’t be *too* big bore…
Or: if my gun were a vagina, it would only shoot ping pong balls.
Did she get a background check before taking possession of her vagina? Or did she acquire it through the genetic loophole?
Did she pay the $200 tax stamp for a full-auto vagina?
That only applies to the Duggar family.
Wow. Nice!
I thought it was the genetic loophole.
badum-tish!
Many women are single issue voters with abortion, so if the GOP would drop that issue and move on we would have a lot more support. That being said, the GOP is a pretty crappy conservative party. Unfortunately tossing a vote to the others only helps the democrats.
My wife is a single issue voter on abortion, but not the way you’re thinking of. Most of my friends are the same.
I am referring to women who vote for the democratic party.
If the GOP adopted the Democratic platform on abortion it would cease to exist as 90% of it’s base would instantly abandon it.
It was maybe 90% twenty years ago, not so much today. In case you haven’t noted, folks under 30 are overwhelmingly pro-abortion whether they are otherwise conservative or not.
Nobody’s “pro-abortion.” We’re pro-choice. But the theocrats seem to believe that women are chattel property who can be summarily condemned to a full-term pregnancy, childbirth, and almost 20 years’ hard labor taking care of the unwanted child at her own expense.
You say, “she should have known better.” Yeah, like the 14-year old girl should have “known better” than to have let herself get raped by her crack-whore mother’s drunken boyfriend.
Theocrats disgust me.
No Rich. Some folks believe a fetus is a human being. It has nothing to do with women being chattel. Is it really so hard to accept that some folks disagree on that particular point?
By insisting that the only reason anyone is against abortion is some complex for controlling women you are lying to yourself.
Surely on an intellectual level you can accept that some folks really and truly believe a fetus is living human. You can believe that they are wrong, but please stop denying they are attempting to protect the rights of an individual, even if you feel you have a superior understanding of the issue than they do.
” Some folks believe a fetus is a human being. It has nothing to do with women being chattel.”
It has _everything_ to do with whether a woman is the owner of her body and its contents, or if she is someone else’s chattel property because somehow the embryo is a full-on human.
I’m sorry, but the only people who have rights are ones whom you can actually see.
Actually abortion is preferable to incarnating the kind of spirit that would override its own mother’s Free Will.
Rich I guess that means we can keep killing brown children with impunity in the name of democratic freedom, because we… can’t see them? I’m all for herbal freedom but you need to lay off the pipe for just a day or so man.
How about the Constitution?
“AMENDMENT XIV
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.
Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” [emphasis mine]
So, no matter which way you cut it, you’re wrong.
OOOOH, I get it now. I was reading this in line at wendy’s, must have clicked a link from another story. No wonder I was so confused wondering what this had to do with “vagina carry.”
No argument here.
Id hate to have a negligent discharge around this woman.
What a splendid idea! Let’s consider Abortions the same way guns are treated.That way,the SCOTUS will continually dodge Abortion related circuit splits.We can also make abortions may issue ,so every sheriff in the land can decide which woman does and doesn’t get the ability to have an abortion.Don’t forget to show “Good Cause”! BTW,don’t have sex without a permit in New York State,so please provide 3 references to indicate you’re of good character to lawfully use your vag.
Beware what you wish for.You just might get exactly what you want.
+1
I suspect her vagina occasionally produces an unexpected discharge, just like a gun.
Eww
Quite frankly I don’t think it’s my place to judge what resides in other peoples pants, bedroom, kitchen…vagina or otherwise. Here is an idea, you keep whatever you carry in your pants and why to yourself, I’ll do the same with why and what I carry in mine.
+1 Exactly my thoughts.
I am pro vagina and pro gun.
I’d say I’m ‘pro-your right to decide what you want to do with your body and what guns you want to buy’ cuz if you respect both then I got nothing to worry about.
++
Since I believe the division on abortion comes down to (what I consider to be) a deeply philosophical question about what it means to be human, which I don’t believe is going to be settled anytime soon, I’ll just agree with the generalized ideal of individual self-determination.
I always went the opposite route, asking the simplest questions. 1 – “What is life?” and 2 – “Is it wrong to kill a living human who has not committed a heinous or life threatening act?”
Usually folks can’t get past the first one
+1000
For me, any reflection on the subject inevitably comes down to this: it’s a HUMAN LIFE. Stuff your silly arguments – if it lives, it will not turn into an elephant. It will not turn into a hyena. It will NOT turn into a fish, a horse or a raccoon. It will grow and develop exactly like a HUMAN BEING does. Because IT IS ONE.
And, even though the next logical step asserts that taking this life is homicide, tell ya what I’m not gonna do: I am not going to stand in your way. You have to ride your own karma, sister. It’s yours, and no one else’s, and you WILL NOT avoid it in the long run. No one does.
I will willingly advise you of what I know to be the truth about the matter, and that the results of your action cannot be avoided with words.
And I will not stand in your way, having so informed you. It’s yours, now.
By your argument, sperm is also “human life”, and as such, ejaculation outside of the vagina is a killing spree.
Incorrect, int19h, if you had passed 8th grade bio you would know this.
I’m sorry but one pregnant woman is not two people. Or maybe they think that the embryo is a person and the woman is merely its incubator.
According to God, in Genesis 2:7, “Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.” the beginning of Life is Breath.
And according to 8th grade biology, at conception, a living sperm encounters a living ovum, they merge, and become one zygote. So one life is actually snuffed out.
If a woman’s body and everything inside of it aren’t her own property, then exactly whose property is she?
You’re free to have whatever religious beliefs you want; you’re free to exhort, preach, guilt, shame, whatever you want to induce obedience in your flock, but if government power doesn’t stop at our skin, then we might as well all don our swastika armbands and march the goose-step.
Rich, you could use a return to 5th grade reading comp. My response was to Int’s claim that Onanism is tantamount to murder. Which it is not, as a sperm cell, or a human egg, merely contains half the genetic material required to form a human being, and thus is not actually human.
And no, a pregnant woman is not two people. She is only one person, with another slowly forming inside her. If you cannot provide a scientifically viable cutoff point where some change initiates “human life” then no human is technically alive even after birth and can be killed with abandon.
No religion here. I abhor religion as one of the leading causes of death in human history. If I had a Delorean I would push Moses down the mountain, scalp Mohammed, and break Mary’s donkey’s knees before they made it out safe. But it is fun to rub scientific hypocrisy in folks’ faces. If a human embryo is not a living human being then a human isn’t technically alive by the leftist definition until it has a full time job and can fully support its own life, making the killing of any child or even deadbeat adult offspring by a parent simply a late term abortion. You want to claim science as the arbiter of all reason but selectively disregard scientific definitions in reality.
You talk about government power “ending at our skin” which can only mean laws against murder are wrong. You are either saying murder is wrong, or you are saying it is right. No gray area to be had here.
All that mumbo-jumbo and appeal to emotion is irrelevant.
Unless she tells you so, there is no legal way to even determine that a woman is pregnant.
Yes, a “late-term” abortion is a horrible thing to contemplate, especially for the woman who would otherwise be forced at gunpoint to carry an unwanted fetus to full-term, undergo childbirth with all its concomitant risks, and provide for its upkeep for the next 18 years at her own expense.
She’s stuck between a rock and a hard place.
And how many so-called “late-term abortions” do you have documented evidence to have ever even taken place? That’s the same extremist tactics used by the grabbers. I’d think that by the time a woman has let it progress that far, she has probably made the decision to continue to carry it.
She “should have known better?” How can she, when the same people who oppose freedom of choice will fight tooth and nail to keep any kind of sexual education out of the schools?
And according to God, in Genesis 2:7, “Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.”
So the Beginning of Life is Breath.
But the (possibly most important) point is, it’s not your call! If government power doesn’t stop at our skin, then we might as well all don our swastika armbands and march the goose-step.
“If a human embryo is not a living human being then a human isn’t technically alive by the leftist definition until it has a full time job and can fully support its own life”
How you’re just spluttering.
A fetus isn’t a human being. A newborn baby is.
When they find a dead newborn in a dumpster, they examine its lungs. If it hasn’t breathed, it was a stillbirth. If it has, it’s homicide.
“You talk about government power “ending at our skin” which can only mean laws against murder are wrong.”
That’s just idiocy.
Rich you again miss the point of scientific fact that copulation is an act biologically suited to one of two things, procreation, or in the case of homosexuality lack of procreation to manage the population. The decision is not made after copulation, the copulation is the decision. You don’t want to reap weeds? Don’t sow them. And not being able to legally determine pregnancy is absolutely irrelevant. Murder of a living human being that does not present a clear and present danger to you is wrong and illegal. Unless you can provide a scientific, logical definition of when a child becomes alive your argument falls through the floor. The argument that it is not alive until it is self sufficient flies in the face of a society full of deadbeat freeloading twenty somethings. Making excuses to dehumanize the victim is the basis of the mentality of every bad ideology of the last two centuries, and caused most of the wars.
And please stop talking about the Bible. Having the leftist be the one using the Bible argument and the constitutionalist be the one using a scientific argument is giving me a migraine. If you like the thing so much go start killing brown kids yourself, for great justice!
I am a visual guy. without pictures, I am at a loss to comment on whether or not I would defend her vagina. just saying.
Trust me, Dirk. You don’t want to see this chick’s junk.
What’s the difference between an airport and this woman’s junk?
Most airports have a landing strip.
Unless she’s splayed out with a speculum in her, you can’t even see a vagina. What you can see is a vulva.
I hope that the Texas senate enjoyed seeing her snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
I’m not sure that snatch has seen jaws of any kind.
You ever have one of those moments when you just slowly close your eyes and shake your head, with a rueful smile?
I just had one.
Yup. Now I can’t stop laughing
She may think she’s a poet,
But the truth, we know it.
I love my state, by the way. Go Texas! YEEHAW!
Works for me. Not a terrible comparison really, is it? I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen one advertised as “pristine condition” only to realize it’s never been cleaned in years…
Best post yet but I’m only 2/3 of the way down. People in my office are going to wonder why I’m laughing so hard.
Next free gun contest should be funniest reply to one of these.
Punt Gun? Blunderbuss? Atomic Annie? Big Bertha?
Nah. Saturday Night Special. 😉
The “bypass security” bit is an erroneous reference to the Texas State Capital building. CHL holders go through a separate security line, which tends to be much shorter and faster, much to the chagrin of the gun-less. However it is still a security line.
Nobody cares about her vagina. The fact that she has fallen for the lie that a baby and a vagina are the same thing and that wanting to save one necessitates violating another means she’s not good at logic. Or grammar… a good poet would use the subjunctive….
“If my vagina [were] a gun…”
Good call. Unless, in Jennifer Bendery’s specific case, that unused, bag of flesh was, in fact, a ‘gun’ in a previous life.
Let’s change the subject of this poem to say penis instead of vagina and then we will see what side you are on.
You seem to have fallen for the lie that an embryo and a baby are the same thing. There is a point at which they are, and when that point is can be debated, but though some legislators would claim otherwise a fertilized egg =! a baby.
So there is a moment in which the fetus has the option to become a hammer? Or an expensive sneaker? Or is that option left only to twins?
Well, are we talking about embryos, fetuses, or fertilized eggs? 60-70% of fertilized eggs never implant in the uterus, and are therefore flushed out by the body. If an egg is fertilized for in-vitro fertilization, and remains forever frozen in a test tube, is that murder?
Don’t get me wrong — the debate here is about a texas bill restricting abortions after 20 weeks. Though still arbitrary, there is a better case to be made for a 20 week old fetus to be a human life. 5 weeks? 10 weeks? Not so much.
Yeah right.
I can just hear the thousands of women a day who do a home pregnancy test and find out they are pregnant and excitedly tell their husbands “We’re having an egg!!!”
Hey Jennifer,
Show up to a 2a rally with some friends, some NOW posters, and some signs advocating how CCW and armed self defense stops violence against women and watch the Libertarian dudes line up at your next pro choice rally.
Just sayin’. Sometimes you gotta give a little to get a little.
Now THAT is some sound advice.
Or she could just hide one (you know, a gun) right in there (I don’t make up this stuff)
http://www.guns.com/2013/07/09/oklahoma-woman-sentenced-to-25-years-for-concealing-revolver-in-her-vagina/
There is not enough brain bleach on the planet to get that out of my head.
Do you suppose DeSantis makes a holster for that application? 😉
Pocket carry?
devil’s pocket carry
Try a pint of Wild Turkey. The 101 proof.
I take it “vagina” is in the constitution under, “what they really meant to say”
These females are so gross and classless. I’m sick of them acting as if all they are is one big vagina! What is the matter with these females? They cannot be called women because they’re not mature enough (chanting “Hail Satan” and reading poems lauding their V’s into congressional records ) and they’re certainly not Ladies. Ewwww.
Would you feel this way if this was your daughter, wife or mother speaking up for her rights?
Let’s be accurate….. you mean the RIGHT to tear the neck off a fetus.
Please explain your logic or morality where the worth of a baby can be WORTHLESS TRASH or INFINITELY VALUABLE at the whims of another?
what?
“But my vagina is not a gun, it is a mightier thing,
With a voice that rings true making lawmakers’ ears ring.”
Bendery’s missive conjures up disturbing images that will be difficult to shake. Her vagina must be a very scary thing.
That’s not a ‘voice.’ Those are the famous ‘vaginal farts.’ The reason guys don’t stand up for her vagina has nothing to do with with her vagina. It’s about her face and haircut. Of course nothing goes up.
As for the vaginal farts, I once read: ” Some doors were never meant to be opened by man.”
Just don’t go there. Turn on a baseball game. Mow the lawn. Anything.
“If my vagina was a gun, its rights would all be protected,
no matter the body count or the children affected.”
Sorry to break it to you, lady… but the body count and children affected from abortion massively outpaces that from gun violence.
+40,000,000
Planned Parenthood alone takes out 22 times as many “vaginas” as there are non-vagina persons murdered every year.
Except there is evidence that abortions reduce gun violence. See the subject ‘The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime’.
I reject the argument that it is okay to murder innocent people now because there is a possibility that they might eventually commit a violent crime.
True, aborted children rarely shoot people, and are rarely shot themselves.
So does hacking people to death with machetes. What’s your point?
Are all fertilized eggs which implant “children?” If so, does a fertilized egg become a “child” due to attaching to the uterine wall, or because it was fertilized? If a fertilized egg is inherently a child, what are we to make of hormonal birth control which prevents the implantation of fertilized eggs? What of the unused fertilized eggs from in-vitro fertilization?
There exists a line, somewhere, where a fetus may be considered a child. However, there is a time before that where it is not. When that line is to be drawn may be reasonably debated; this is how we arrived at the “viability” metric.
It is not however, accurate, to consider every abortion to be equivalent to killing a child — and the assumption required to reach that conclusion (that a fertilized egg is a person) has far wider reaching implications than abortion alone.
It is a proven scientific fact that at the very instant of fertilization there exists a completely separate individual being, made up of human DNA that is totally unique from the mother and father. All those “fertilized eggs” are human beings. Refusing to call them “a child” is merely a rationalization tool for people who think that the end justifies the means.
By the way, if one is intellectually honest with the “viability” metric, then the option to kill a 3-month old is just as reasonable as killing a “fetus.” Neither one can survive on their own.
Viable =! survivable. The question is whether the fetus is likely to survive outside of the womb. Of course, this means something rather different today than it did in 1973, due to advances in medical science.
If, indeed, every fertilized egg is a human being, then hormonal birth control which prevents the implantation of a fertilized egg is murder. In-vitro fertilization, is murder.
Given that between 50 and 70% of all fertilized eggs fail to implant themselves in the uterus and begin growing… a woman’s body is a natural bona fide murderplex.
http://www.ucsfhealth.org/education/conception_how_it_works/
Yes, intentionally preventing implantation is murder. It’s a deliberate act that directly results than the loss of innocent human life.
A failure to implant absent outside interference is merely a tragic natural death.
Does birth control constitute interference? Because I suppose we’ve ridden well off the deep end as a society if tens of millions of American women are committing murder on a regular basis. But how do we draw that line? If only 30-40% of fertilized eggs implant naturally and hormonal birth control brings that number down to 1 to 2%, which ones do we count? If for in-vitro fertilization 10 eggs are fertilized, 2 are implanted and 8 remain frozen, are those 8 human beings? Is it murder not to implant them somewhere?
What if a fetus is known to be developing with no brain? Guaranteed to die minutes out of the womb? Need we force a mother to bring that pregnancy to term? Well it can’t be the woman’s choice if humanity, and thus human rights, start at fertilization.
I understand there are passionate views on both sides of this issue. I would prefer to live in a world in which there were zero abortions. But outlawing abortion won’t mean abortions will stop being performed any more than banning guns will stop them from being used in crimes. Banning abortion only ensures it will be done more irresponsibly, more unsafely, and with less regard for ethics.
I think you first need to determine your principles. Only then will you have a clear starting point and an ability to address all your hypothetical exceptions.
You’re right that banning abortions will not stop them… in the same way that laws against rape and murder do not stop rape and murder. That doesn’t mean that we should accept these things or provide safe environments for them to occur.
>> It is a proven scientific fact that at the very instant of fertilization there exists a completely separate individual being
I love how you avoided using the term “human” or “person” anywhere. Ever thought that it’s precisely the point?
Unless she tells you so, there’s no legal way to even determine if a woman is pregnant, short of a TSA-grade body cavity probe.
One pregnant woman is NOT two people!
“If my vagina was a gun, its rights would be protected,
no matter the smell or the throngs so affected.”
MUCH better.
A poem from a vagina-rights (ie pro-abortion at will) activist invoking the sanctity of children?
Now, THERE is a paradox that makes smoke come out of my ears.
I love how these womynz (did I get the politically correct misspelling right?) make abortion rights a health issue when a vast majority of abortions are conducted for SOCIAL reason (ie: wrong time, wrong guy, too many kids, not enough money).
I am not some radical pro-lifer. I recognize it as a personal choice. BUT it is a very weighty consideration that gets cheapened by the “just a clump of cells” argument (incidentally made by the same women who 10 to 20 years after making it, fight tooth and nail to bring the very same kind of lump of cells to full term so they can coddle and smother it and indoctrinate it).
She taught her vagina to talk? Didn’t William S Burroughs write about a guy……
YES. He WAS one, and it talked. Clem Snide, that’s the name!
You can follow her/him ,not sure wich , on Twatter. com.
Ssssssss. It STINGS!
I ROFL’ed…
I took the comment below off her twitter site:
“Fran Sanders @SandersFran 16h
@jbendery If your vagina was a gun it would rust from lack of use & cleaning& oiling.#dumb”
“If my vagina was a gun…”
Would probably require a high capacity magazine in order to function.
Anti-gun and anti-abortion groups actually use many of the same tactics. Unable to outlaw the evil thing completely, they make it harder to obtain, subjecting people to more invasive hoops to jump through (transvaginal ultrasound, anyone?), targeting gun stores or clinics with onerous zoning laws, etc. Both groups are always proposing new “reasonable restrictions,” when we know that most of them actually seek total prohibition.
Both political parties use these culture war issues to their advantage, knowing that they’ll get those one-issue voters. I’ve known deeply religious people who are basically anti-war, pro-welfare-state leftists who vote Republican because of abortion, and anti-government conservative/libertarian women who vote Democrat because of abortion.
I guess I don’t know any anti-gun single-issue voters, but obviously their are plenty on the pro-gun-rights side. As a lot of younger voters are becoming jaded with the two-party system (really, one corporate/national-security-state party with two wings), the political landscape will get more complicated.
Yet having an abortion, by definition, means that someone dies.
Owning a gun, doesn’t.
The only difference is that one is in the right and the other is in the wrong.
You mean, the only difference is that one you personally believe (likely due to your religious background) to be wrong, while the other one is perfectly fine with you.
If those antichoice theocrats were really “pro-life,” they’d be marching on the Capitol demanding an immediate end to all of Obama’s bloody wars, and withdrawal of all of America’s imperial occupation forces around the world.
Except that the constitution contains the 2A which guarantees my rights as a gun owner, as well as these words:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Seems to me that if you have the right to an abortion then the unborn child is stripped of all its rights, starting with its right to Life.
actually that’s from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.
Also *people* have rights, zygotes and embryos do not.
Ah, the ol’ personhood approach. It was flawed then, when applied to slaves, and it’s still flawed now.
To paraphrase Horton Hears a Who: “A human’s a person, no matter how small.”
Yes, a human is a person. Therefore, that which is not a person is not a human. A fertilized egg is not a person – it cannot think or even feel anything.
One pregnant woman is not two people.
I was speaking more of tactics than “rightness,” but I am pro choice with both guns and abortion. The vast majority of abortions happen early in pregnancy. Lots of women choose to give their babies up for adoption, and I wish more would, and I support any private or government effort to facilitate this. Is abortion the taking of a human life? Yes, it probably is, and I don’t like it. But so is a miscarriage. Should we prosecute women who miscarry because they’ve taken lousy care of their bodies? That would certainly constitute negligence. Men don’t have to worry about this stuff. Squirt your load and move on. I respect religious people who are totally anti-abortion, but I think the current standard is about right. If the baby is viable outside the mother, no abortion, barring true medical emergency. If a woman finds out she got pregnant last month, different story.
Also, I wish more “pro-life” people would give a shit about babies who have actually been born, even if those babies made the poor choice to be born in an area subject to U.S. drone strikes.
I’ll believe they care about babies when the mobs outside the clinics carry signs like “We Will Adopt!” rather than terrorizing vulnerable little girls with grisly photos of botched operations.
Guys have the gun, ladies have the holster.
That’s one way to explain it to a 5 year old.
Wow, Henry. That was awesome! Thanks.
It’s an Assault Vagina! Stand well back!
I respect the right to keep and bear vaginas! (I like the poem BTW, creative!)
So many questions though…
vagina registrations,
Federally Licensed Vagina Dealers,
Vagina locks (that would be unfortunate),
Be sure to clean and lube…oh no…
Rule #1, There is no unloaded….no that’s bad too…
Hi Cap….erg….not going there…
Like a DI AR-15, they’re designed to run w…. never mind, I’m done.
Vagina locks = chastity belts
Sir Galahad and the Chastity Belt
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think that the right to an abortion is SPECIFICALLY named in the Constitution, like, say the 2nd Amendment.
And if her V were a gun? Then she’d have the right to keep it and bear (NOT bare) it. I’d bet that if someone wanted her to have a background check, fill out a form, pay a fee and wait for her V, she’d be pretty hacked off.
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
Jkp, “… Not be construed to deny or disparage..” is not the same thing as affirming something as a right.
If you are not willing to spell out Vagina then you are not mature enough to make decisions about it.
A-rod, I don’t have a vagina for which i could make decisions (assuming I were mature enough to make them, which is debatable at best).
I definitely think she implied that. It’s a parallel line she’s drawing, so it would follow that she agrees with that sentiment.
She seems to be a bit anatomically challenged. There’s a big difference between a vagina and a living human fetus.
Just another data point in support of my doctoral thesis that really, really (REALLY!) unattractive people are compelled to force other people to discuss their genetalia.
C’MON! You’re not going to share the title of your thesis with us? We’re practically FAMILY here.
If I fail to take safety precautions and shoot someone, then I go yank the bullet out of them, shove it back into the case, can I then claim it wasn’t a bullet? Or because I failed in my responsibility should I be held responsible for my personal actions? Just a thought.
If you fail to take safety precautions and shoot someone, should that someone decline medical help because modern medicine is not natural? Shoud they shut up and deal with the wound you’ve caused or are they allowed to seek help that’s available? Just a thought.
Except, with this analogy and in most cases, the shooting was mutually agreed upon… the “wound” is the natural consequence of the voluntary activity.
Except, with this analogy and in most cases, the shooting was mutually agreed upon… the “wound” is merely the natural consequence of the voluntary activity.
And in cases where it wasn’t voluntary?
Then the rapist should be punished. The child was not the aggressor. The child is innocent. He doesn’t deserve to die for the crimes of his father.
If you don’t have one don’t tell others what to do with theirs, you have no idea. STFU
If you have one, choose for yours, then draw a line.
Two lives in one body, how many sets of rights?
It’s a tough one.
When you talk to your lawyer,
who do you want listening?
If you closes the door of your Doctors office behind you,
who do you want listening?
Most of us here know that to be arrested in Chicago because we are carrying a handgun is because of a bad law, but we would be breaking the law. Don’t pass bad laws.
If you think that it would be a better society where the SWAT can break down your Dr.’s door, I would be concerned about Big Law #4 and its privacy derivative.
If you think it’s OK, don’t bitch when they ignore Big Law #2 and #4.
Interesting view, and I recall Roe v. Wade was framed as a privacy issue. So, now that Obama care requires more and more medical information to be handed over to the government, with no clear guidelines on who will eventually be able to access the info, isn’t the main argument in Roe v. Wade now virtually meaningless? Another possible unintended consequence?
Or, in light of the court decision on Obamacare, could a state Tax all abortions at $1M per and that would be constitutional because it’s just a tax?
I’d prefer the logic to work the other way and have a right to privacy which also protects my right to not buy health “insurance.”
IF anyone here suggested it’s an easy decision, I disagree with that person. But I don’t recall anyone saying that.
So… straw man…. wouldn’t you agree?
Yup.
Hey, I support vagina rights. In fact, I’d like to go on record in support of legalizing “open carry.” ; )
If her vagina were a gun someone would actually want it.
“Vaginas are not delicate”–that’s quite a misogynistic statement.
Well… Your vagina is actually like a holster.. So if you’re lucky you will find someone to put their “gun” in it. But no one likes old, dried out, leathery holsters.
But unlike the gun, you’re not going to leave it in the holster when you’re not using it. That’s true, isn’t it?
I agree with her. She would have to take a training course, supervised of course, and pass a test before using her vagina; otherwise, possession would be a crime, and concealed carry mandatory jail time. If she was ever convicted of a felony or suspected of mental instability, she would loss her rights to a vagina.
And if, as a consequence of her use of her vagina, anybody died, she would be assumed to be guilty of murder unless she could prove self defense.
The more I think about it, the better it sounds.
“The more I think about it, the better it sounds.”
LOL. So true
Ive always found it amazing that the biggest supporters of gun control are the real baby killers.
They bitch about 25 dead school kids in Ct, but say nothing about the millions abortion willfully kills and then discardes out like yesterday’s trash.
The poet is a stupid liberal hag.
Lord I hate Democrats.
The Dem’s are the party of big govrtnment, poverty, welfare, abortion, gun control, debt, unemployment, universal medical care, and oh yea they were the party of slavery too.
I will never ince vote Democrat, wouldn’t vote Democrat even for dog catcher!
You should watch this and then come back to the discussion – http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=AvF1Q3UidWM
Watch this, A-Rod, and call me in the morning:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVMvRHl6Bas
RIP George. We miss you.
If her vagina were a gun…
…it would be classified as artillery due to the diameter.
…it would be considered a biological weapon (due to the viruses).
…it would be considered a chemical weapon (due to the repulsive smell).
…it would have killed more individuals than any other gun.
…it would be an HK because the owner values it more than anyone else does.
…it would be an AK because of the loose tolerances.
…it would be an AR because it shits so close to where it eats.
…it would be a Jennings because it’s cheap and doesn’t work 1/4 of the time.
…it would be a smooth bore because the rifling has been worn down.
…a proper gunsmith couldn’t fix it.
…gun buy-back programs would pay her to keep it.
…it would be more rusty than a buried civil war black powder rifle.
Let me make some jokes about your penis.
Well, you’re obviously not a comedian, so that must make you an expert on penises.
Logic, your logic is lacking but I am an expert on penises. Well, just mine actually. I have had one for 37 years. I do not have to be a comedian to be an expert on penises because penis jokes are so easy. Here goes….
You know who is an expert on penises? Your Mom. Ask her, she will tell you but it is pretty self evident since you are here. Better yet, ask your Dad how your mom feels about his penis. You know who else is an expert on penises? Both your Grandmothers. Think about that one for a minute.
I mean with a screen name like A-Rod that should have been evident. Mine is average so it is just ‘A Rod but’ if were a bit bigger I would call it ‘The Rod.’ Most of the time he is just Private Parts but he gets promoted to Major Wood often.
You know the ‘Vagina Monologues’ was pretty funny stand-up comedy but I always thought two male comedians should have done a male route called the ‘Penis Dialogues’.
Back to mine. Yes, after 37 years I am an expert with it. I have used it, misused it one with a girl who had braces, abused it (self abuse actually) a lot as a teenager and successfully impregnated with it on three occasions. While two of those sadly ended in miscarriages the third time was the charm.
My favorite penis joke actually more about the sperm but here goes… Two Sperm were swimming when one sperm said to the other “Hey, I’ll race you to the egg!” The other sperm says “No dumbass, we are in the stomach.” Hahahahahahaha!
Logic, come on man. Lighten up.
She would throw a hissy fit of biblical proportions if anyone proposed regulating abortions even half as stringently as guns are already.
Amazing how many men, who scream at any infringement of the RKBA are so quick to want to infringe on a woman’s reproductive freedom. As for me, I’m a man who is both Pro-RKBA, and Pro-Reproductive Freedom.
When you can get pregnant, they you can make a decision on what to do about YOUR pregnancy. No one elses’. If you can’t get pregnant then it is none of your business what a woman does with her reproductive choices. Even if you’re supporting her 100% financially, her reproductive choices are her own. Not yours.
I understand your point, and I almost agree with you. My problem is that that point of view is obviously the “you can’t tell me I can’t have an abortion” POV. Which is fine. I agree with that.
But what about the reverse? I get no say in what happens to that pregnancy, but I’m financially on the hook for it for the next 20 years just because she decides she wants to have it? Even if it was a one-night stand? Even if we used a condom (that maybe tore) AND she was on the pill and got pregnant anyway?
That is a situation patently unfair to the guy. I can’t tell her that she has to terminate the pregnancy, but if she decides to have it when it was clearly not intended, and over my strenuous objections, there should be a way for me to divest myself of legal responsibility in that case, and that is not how the law generally shakes out. I’m on the hook for the next 20 years, and my decision making ability ended at conception, but hers continues on for several months?
Absolutely, Matt. +10000.
Watch what happens, though. The ladies will have the last say. Or Aharon, one or the other.
I agree up to point. However, part of this bill is to outlaw elective abortion of VIABLE fetuses. Anyone who supports abortion on demand for such well developed fetuses is a sadist. It’s barbaric. European countries have much stricter limits on how late elective abortions can be done. Usually I don’t take their lead on things, but they do get a few issues right.
She doesn’t understand the subjunctive mood.
Mood, or tense? MY mood is getting a bit tense, right now….
The subjunctive is a mood, not a tense. A tense expresses the timing of when a verb happens, and mood expresses things like probability, whether it is an expression of fact, a command, etc. Her vagina is not actually a gun. By saying her vagina “was” a gun, she is expressing something in the past as though it were, at one time, a factual condition. Which I highly doubt.
That would be “metaphor.”
Well as of now, the courts treat abortion like it was something actually written in the bill of rights and treat the 2A as something that has to be reluctantly upheld, but as little as possible.
This is my vagina, this is my gun……..doesn’t quite have a good ring to it.
Reading these comments was the highlight of my day! Thank you, gentleman.
If my vagina were a gun it would be a Glock not a 1911. Young but experienced, requires no additional lube yet works every time. Unlike the 1911 vagina… which requires lubrication and frequently fails to please;-)
A vajayjay is, in fact, much more like a 1911: You can’t expect it to function optimally unless it is kept clean and used skillfully by a knowledgeable operator. There are some rounds it won’t handle well because of their shape. The thing is constructed favoring the “big and slow” school of inserted rounds. Most common malfunctions can be fixed with a simple “tap, rack, and bang.” The biggest complaint comes from a defective extractor. The thing really prefers to be run wet. And last of all, the best of them are tightly fitted slide-to-frame and go off with a light touch.
Ropingdown, I loved your comment. However, I just want to insert a note of reality here. I once had a girlfriend who could “go off with a light touch.” Hair-trigger light. While initially very gratifying to my ego (I knew I was good, but that made me feel awesome), in the long run it wasn’t as much fun as it sounds. You see, the explosion would be followed by a period of time during which the the entire weapon was too sensitive to touch. It made for a difficult and frustrating experience from time to time, because sometimes it would go off when you weren’t intending it to, and you’d have to go range cold just when you were getting zeroed on target.
Matt in FL: Yes, you’re absolutely right. I stretched for the sake of the 1911’s honor. Laugh.
I swear I read that as “Witness testifies in PORN form”.
My view.on abortion and my view on guns are generally the same.
Youre entitled to believe what you think is right, as long you don’t shove it down my throat when or if my opinion is different than yours.
Don’t like abortion or guns? Cool. Don’t tell me how to think or tell me what I do or dont need.
Pro abortion or pro gun? Cool. Just don’t be an a$$hole about it and act like you’re genetically superior or something.
What ever happened to live and let live??
I don’t see the connection. Is someone trying to ban vaginas or force you to register them? Are they trying to outlaw high capacity vaginas? Can some states ban you from carrying a concealed vagina? It’s disingenuous and ignorant.
The bottom line here is property rights. Unfortunately, while the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is explicitly called out in 2A, there is no corresponding protection of self-ownership, except kind of marginally in IV and XIV:
IV: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated….”
Note: it says “of the people,” not “of the people and of fetuses …”
XIV: “Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside…”
Note the operative word, BORN. Only born people have rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
A fetus isn’t a person until it’s a separate being, period. The ONLY WAY to endow a fetus with “rights” is to strip them away from its creator, the woman who is building it inside of her womb.
Yes, a fetus, while it is inside the confines of its creator’s skin, is property.
Or we could go all Biblical: check out Genesis 2:7:
“7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living ”
According to God, it’s not even a living a being until it receives the Breath Of Life.
If a woman’s body and its contents are not her own property to do with as she chooses, then exactly whose property is she?
The so-called “pro-lifers” sure don’t seem to give a whit about the rights of the born!
And the anti-choicers will cry out, “Yeah? Well, what if your Mother had aborted YOU?” To which I say, I believe that if my Mom had aborted the embryo that was to become me, that my immortal soul would have found another, WANTED fetus to possess.
We should be encouraging stupid people to kill off their genetic material. Let’s face it, aborting a baby that’s been incubating for any appreciable amount of time is just gross.
Bitch.
Some of you have a real hard time acknowledging the dark side of the abortion debate. Abortion is a necessary evil in modern society. Every single one of you who is against abortion has at least one case in which you think abortion is okay but you are too afraid to say it out loud. Examples, what if it is your unmarried teenage daughter that gets knocked up by a boy you dislike? What if it is your daughter that gets raped and gets pregnant? Should she be made to suffer an unwanted child? Moreover, should her rapist have parental rights, demand visitation rights and be forced to pay child support?
You secretly want abortion to be available because there are people in society you want to get abortions. You think white middle class women should not get abortions but poor black women and white trash trailer park denizens should have full, unquestioned availability to such service. If it came to state funded abortions being available to illegal immigrants who wanted one you would be damn sure the money was in the budget for it. Which do you want- anchor babies or abortions? Children are a responsibility but it is no right if you cannot take care of them or yourself.
You rant about the right to life of the unborn. You think God has saved the unborn lost through miscarriage but somehow God is inept at saving those lost through abortion. I’ve lost two though miscarriage and none to abortion so do not talk to me about right to life. You demand your religious point of view be the law of the land but when JFK runs for president you say hell no to a Roman Catholic in the White House. Mitt Romney is A-Okay except some of you say hell no because he is a Mormon. Some of you are still convinced President Obama is a Muslim. Dear God get over it! You say this is a Christian nation except when it is not your denomination of Christianity in power. If you want church and state to be hand in hand then move your Protestant ass to Ireland and tell me how much you like the Catholics in charge.
Some of you have a real hard time taking responsibility for your part in a pregnancy. If you are the one not willing to use a condom and then are not willing to take part in raising a child then you have no voice in a woman’s right to choose. You talk about the rights of the unborn but once they are on the outside you cut child care from the budget. You won’t let taxes go to orphanages. You are not willing to adopt. What if it is your son that knocks up a girl and for you married men with a mistress on the side you are probably going to pay for that abortion and then sweep the whole thing under the rug.
You think it is some libtard agenda in the issue of women’s rights and gay marriage. Well damn you are on a slippery slope. You already let those liberals reverse interracial marriage laws. You let those liberals win in the civil rights issues. You let those liberals win in the fight for a woman’s voting rights. You let those liberal win in nationality discrimination. Remember those ‘No Irish Need Apply’ signs. My family does. You have lost some many battles in the last 150 years to those liberal how can you stand there and think you will win in women’s rights and gay marriage?
What if Planned Parenthood did just as many testicular cancer examinations as they did breast cancer exams? What if they helped fund just as many vasectomies as they did abortions? What if they took interest in men’s health just as much they do women’s health? Are you feeling left out? Free vasectomies for men in the ghetto? Hell Yes! Free abortions for women in the ghetto? Hell N…. well, wait a minute, let me think on that. Can I tell you in private?
Again, every single one of you who is against abortion has at least one case in which you think abortion is okay but you are too afraid to say it out loud. All in all a woman’s health and her right to choose her healthcare is her business.
Congratulations, you knocked that one out of the park, for a bases loaded home run.
It’s the anti-reproductive freedom fanatics who have bombed clinics, threated abortion providers, and then actually killed them. Anti-reproductive freedom fanatics simply want to control and punish women for “fornicating” by forcing them to “bear their shame” and be nothing more than a walking incubator. And as soon as the kid is born the self-same fanatics wash their hands of the kid, and don’t give a damn if the kid starves or lives in squalor, then they get hyper-Libertarian because they don’t want “their” precious taxes being used to support some harlot and her get.
And as a white man, I really resent the fact that the most fanatic and dangerous anti-reproductive freedom crackpots, the ones who bomb clinics and murder doctors are white men.
This whole “abortion for convenience” rhetoric is just another anti-reproductive freedom smokescreen. If every abortion was because of the failure of regularly used contraceptives, people like them would still be against abortion. And since some contraceptives act as abortifacients, then if they hate the fact of abortion then they have to admit they hate contraception. Which some here admit they do.
So it all boils down to the fact that some men hate the fact they cannot control the most intimate actions of women.
I’m gonna agree with Quentin. You knocked that one out of the park. I know there are some that will whine, “Waaah, unfair generalizations,” but that’s just how it is. All of those things may not apply to everyone they’re directed towards, but I guarantee that a lot of them do.
“Again, every single one of you who is against abortion has at least one case in which you think abortion is okay but you are too afraid to say it out loud. ”
Nope. It’s never okay. No exceptions. Ever.
You are not a doctor and cannot make that judgement.
So it was okay for Savita Halappanavar to die?
My position is from the moral perspective. Being a doctor has nothing to do with it.
The end doesn’t justify the means. Murdering one person in order to save another is immoral. While it’s tragic that Savita Halappanavar died, deliberately killing her innocent and defenseless child in an attempt to save her is not morally justifiable.
Incorrect Henry. That case was the epitome of medical necessity. The poor woman had a miscarriage, and couldn’t be treated because the law said that particular miscarriage wasn’t one until both parties were dead. Good call.
Jake beat me to a response. Give her a D&C would have saved her life. D&C, while a form of abortion, is what doctors do in the case of a miscarriage. The bottom line is somebody unfit to make medical decisions took a ‘moral perspective’ and allowed a innocent woman to die.
Answer me honestly – if Savita had been your wife or daughter what would you have done?
That makes no sense. Better that they both die than save the one you can?
I think you need to so some more research. The baby was still alive, therefore not a miscarriage. The baby was in distress, but not dead. Once the baby did miscarry, it was their inability to deliver the remains that caused her to become septic.
Regardless, medical necessity does not trump morality.
A-rod, in complete and utter honesty, I would rather my wife and child both die, than for my wife and I to suffer the guilt of murdering our daughter. And, my wife would tell you the same thing. She would gladly sacrifice her own life than kill one of her children.
Henry, though I intensely disagree with you, that is a rough stance, and I can’t believe you came to it without giving it some heavy thought. As such, I can’t argue with it, because I feel it’s risen past the level of opinion to that of belief, and well… I don’t argue with people’s beliefs.
Matt,
It’s not something I take lightly. Many years of study, prayer, discussion, and discernment have formed my principles. And, I married my wife because she is just as principled as I… probably more so. All of it stems from the fundamental belief that this life is our only opportunity to gain an eternal reward. Death is not something to be feared by the righteous man.
Henry, I am going to side with Matt in FL and leave you with your level of belief. With that we can respectfully disagree but I must say and I truely believe because I have been through two miscarriages I know God takes care of the little ones.
“God takes care of the little ones.”
I absolutely agree! I have absolute faith that they are with Him. It’s the abortionists I pray for.
Henry, you need to weigh in on this one-
http://news.yahoo.com/raped-11-old-chilean-allowed-abort-amnesty-205640569.html
But IT’S NOT YOUR CALL!
The anti-choice fanatics ask me, “Well, what if your Mom had aborted you?
Well, I figure if my body had been aborted as a fetus, that my immortal soul would have found another convenient fetus to possess.
Those who are against abortions except when they are convenient are pro-abortion, not pro-life.
Convenience is the crappy excuse used by most who get them. It’s the tiny minority of medical necessity (it is exceedingly rare but can happen) or incest/rape that may or may not be warranted in getting a pass. A woman with maternal mirror syndrome and a dying baby inside her is not getting an abortion of “convenience”, you’re thinking of some idiot who was too irresponsible to use one of a million free forms of birth control, including not engaging in the act of reproduction if you *gasp* don’t want to frikkin’ reproduce.
Very few people are “pro-abortion,” even most of those of us who are pro-Freedom of Choice. It’s a horrible, tragic experience for all concerned, and we’d rather that people would teach their daughters, “Don’t let the guy stick his thing in your hole, because that causes pregnancy!” but they’re either not allowed to (“NO SEX EDUCATION IN SCHOOL!”) or they’re so wrapped up in their religious dogma that they can’t even bring themselves to be that frank and honest with their kids.
“Parental consent?” If it was safe for the girl to even talk about sex with her parents, then she very probably wouldn’t have gotten knocked up in the first place.
She should dye her hair blond then she might find a use for her vagina
“Shall not be infringed” has a new meaning for me, now.
But, my lovely young wife liked it, as I read it to her!
Thanks for that!
If the “vagina rights” that feminists fought for were “to keep and bear,” then they might have more sympathy from the people who support gun rights. Feminists never have understood the importance of the difference between guilty (deserves to die) and innocent (does not deserve to die).
Comments are closed.