Law proposes men be taxed for masturbation - highlights abortion issues

LOL! Strawman! YOU brought it up !

Now you can't provide links to all the times that GOP legislators have been threatened with impeachment for bringing up unconstitutional antiabortion bills

so it's a strawman?

 

Just because you are ignorant of the fact that a human sperm is human life does not negate the correlation. Killing sperm is aborting human life.

It is not my fault that "Pro Life" advocates use nonsensical terminology. "Choose Life" "killing human life or" and so on. You, yourself have used such terminology many times.

Anti aborts when speaking of the zygote do not say - "Its killing a human cell" (which would be technically correct).
They say "its killing human life".

 

That's a lie of course.

It's YOUR strawman since YOU are the one who asked me to provide links to something YOU requested that I said doesn't exist and is thus my point in the first place. I take it English is not your primary language or you have a serious reading comprehension problem. Sorry I'm done with this line of discussion, you clearly never understood my point in the first place.

 

America has a history of introducing weird legislation


The Indiana Pi Bill is the popular name for bill #246 of the 1897 sitting of the Indiana General Assembly, one of the most notorious attempts to establish mathematical truth by legislative fiat. Despite its name, the main result claimed by the bill is a method to square the circle, rather than to establish a certain value for the mathematical constant π, the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter. The bill, written by amateur mathematician Edward J. Goodwin, does imply various incorrect values of π, such as 3.2.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill

 

What about blow jobs? Should the woman be fined?

 

You know it is hard to make this **** up!!

Ohio:It's hard to top Ohio Republicans, who had a fetus testify against abortion on the floor of the legislature. Seriously. They also went further than Wisconsin in stripping collective bargaining rights from public workers, including police and firefighters. (After that bill stalled in committee, Republicans just changed the committee membership to make sure the bill passed.) They also tried to pass legislation to allow guns in bars and stadiums and to allow drug convicts to have the right to bear arms. The legislature also poured money into for-profit charter schools, regardless of whether or not they successfully educated students, including one with a less than 2 percent success rate. All of this is without any oversight.
http://www.alternet.org/story/151712/the_10_craziest_state_legislatures_in_america

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ortion-hearing-video-heartbeat-recording.html

 

No it is still the men wasting human lives

 

Oh, did you have a point?

 

Exactly, another perfect example of abusing the legislative system. That's why I said this kind of crap would be eliminated IF there was a threat of impeachment for those who refuse to abide by their Oath of Office as mandated by the federal Constitution.

 

Certainly would stop them using 9 week old foetuses as witnesses

 

For you no, not until you start to understand English.

 

Or for Supreme Court judges, it would prevent idiotic decisions such as corporations have the same constitutionally protected rights as human beings and money is free speech (Citizens United vs SEC).

 

I might agree with you if there were equality of outrage in relation to legislation. There have been some horrific legislation introduced around women and reproductive rights but nothing balancing that

And this all that we are saying - there should be a balance.

 

If that wasn’t enough, Texas also requires that abortion clinics carry out medically unnecessary transvaginal sonograms and counselling which includes information on the purported link between abortion and breast cancer, mental-health consequences and fetal pain – all of which are refuted by much of the scientific community.
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsit...states-for-abortion-rights/16700#.WMmq7HQmKhA

this is a state that requires a woman to listen to the description of the foetus even though that foetus is being aborted because it is so malformed that it will never survive

How cruel is that? That you would force a women who has already made a very painful and heart rending decision based on an ultrasound and other tests showing that the WANTED pregnancy has gone horribly wrong - that you would force her to have a transvaginal ultrasound and listen while they describe AGAIN what is wrong with the foetus

And you are objecting because someone wants to make a point?

 

OK, you have no point.....

 

So...You admit that even semen is a human life? Why the big turn-around?

 

Not only do the legislators have a constitutional mandate to abide by their Oath of Office (which means of course to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution) but the 14th Amendment requires absolute equality where possible and reason. In your example, legislators pretend they are qualified physicians and psychiatrists. Not only is it unconstitutional but they have no standing/qualification to introduce such horrendous legislation. But having said that, just because a legislator introduces an unconstitutional bill, it doesn't mean it's ok for another legislator to introduce another unconstitutional bill, even if just to make a point. And if there was a consequence to these shenanigans, we would rarely see such garbage being introduced, much less become law.

My objection is with the fact that there exists no legitimate protection or consequence against legislators who knowingly submit obviously unconstitutional legislation. And that works both ways. Unconstitutional is unconstitutional and a violation of the Oath of Office no matter the level of unconstitutionality.

 

Just agreeing with Monty Python

 

It is no more a joke than than "the sanctity of life act" which defined a single human cell as Homo sapiens.

If human life is to be sanctified - why stop at a single human cell ... why not a human sperm ?

 

Which is of course equally absurd. You will find "single human cells" in what we all flush down the toilet. Should doctors be prosecuted for murder when they excise a tumor or draw blood?

See above, a single human cell or a bunch of them does not necessarily equal a sentient human being. The Bill of Rights specifically protects the individual rights of people or persons. And every government SERVANT should know and understand what it is they are taking an Oath to preserve, protect and defend or else be deemed incompetent for the office.

 

Yes and the Congesswoman in the OP was defending, preserving and protecting women's rights from the onslaught of those who wish to take them away.

She called attention to the attacks and absurdity of the right.

 

She did no such thing, her proposed bill had nothing to do with the above. She was elected to office to serve a specific function and one that has a specific mandate. She abused her position and in the process violated her Oath by introducing an unconstitutional bill that abrogates the constitutionally protected rights of men. Two wrongs don't make a right. If she wanted to do the above, she should have introduced a bill that repeals all laws that specifically violate women's rights (and the Constitution).

By violating her Oath. She could have drawn attention to these attacks on women's rights by doing her job and introducing a bill (or bills) that do exactly that and have a real purpose.

 

Her proposal of this legislation no more ""violated her Oath by introducing an unconstitutional bill" than the Repubs who introduced a bill in Missouri that said women must get written permission from the father before they could get an abortion....where is your outrage over that....it's proposed SLAVERY which is against the law...

She was merely pointing out the ludicrous, hateful, anti-Constitutional ANTI-Woman bills of the Republicans....and did it well, she got lots of response

 

I hope previous masturbatory emissions are grandfathered in, if not I'm going to need an equity line.

 

Correct, they are equally unconstitutional and a violation of their Oaths. I've already expressed my outrage over this kind of illegal garbage that requires impeachment charges, just go back and read my posts for comprehension.

It's irrelevant how "well" she pointed out anything, what she did violates her Oath of Office by introducing unconstitutional legislation, same as those who seek to violate the individual rights of women. Again, two wrongs don't make a right. She wasn't elected to office to make points, she was elected to office to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution first and foremost, that is what her position mandates. The ones who should be making points are The People and the Free Press, who are supposed to hold these government servants accountable.