Fuck the Republican Party.

[Baby Sandwich]

A new government healthcare mandate says that our family business must provide what I believe are*abortion-causing drugs*as part of our health insurance. Being Christians, we don't pay for drugs that might cause abortions. Which means that we don't cover emergency contraception, the morning-after pill or the week-after pill. We believe doing so might end a life...

This could be fixed with a high school Health class. The morning-after pill prevents ovulation (just like the regular birth control pill). It does not terminate pregnancy. But I'm sure this has been stated to these people many times over.

[chairmenmeow47]

he even calls it emergency contraception. wtf?! their weird hours are why i've never shopped there. every single time i've tried they've been closed. i also know a gay guy who's a manager there. where's the lawsuit against equal employment?

[amyzzz]

weird hours

That is why I can't eat at Chic Fil A, the damn closures on Sundays, which is usually when I want Chic Fil A. Stupid Christians.

[xuclarockerx]

This could be fixed with a high school Health class. The morning-after pill prevents ovulation (just like the regular birth control pill). It does not terminate pregnancy. But I'm sure this has been stated to these people many times over.

to be fair i don't recall my high school health class going into that level of detail for morning-after pills.

[xanman86]

[SlowMotionApocalypse]

That is why I can't eat at Chic Fil A, the damn closures on Sundays, which is usually when I want Chic Fil A. Stupid Christians.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1vYGi7Hiro

[Bud Luster]

Fuck everyone. Hobby Lobby is GOOD SHIT. I shop there all the time. I don't give a fuck if they're owned by ignorant tards or not. I also don't give a fuck if they aren't open when you want to shop there. Do you demand to know the political and religious leanings of every establishment you patronize? Better start asking. Whoa is you if you accidently shop somewhere that supports sex trafficking.

*Edit: open 9am - 8pm everyday, but closed Sundays. Soooooo weird!

[PlayaDelWes]

Whoa is you if you accidently shop somewhere that supports sex trafficking.

Like a brothel?

[chairmenmeow47]

Fuck everyone. Hobby Lobby is GOOD SHIT. I shop there all the time. I don't give a fuck if they're owned by ignorant tards or not. I also don't give a fuck if they aren't open when you want to shop there. Do you demand to know the political and religious leanings of every establishment you patronize? Better start asking. Whoa is you if you accidently shop somewhere that supports sex trafficking.

*Edit: open 9am - 8pm everyday, but closed Sundays. Soooooo weird!

"leanings" aren't the same as policies. believe whatever the fuck you want, but don't try to restrict my access to health care as a result.

[Baby Sandwich]

to be fair i don't recall my high school health class going into that level of detail for morning-after pills.

I might have mixed it up with memories of listening to Love Line during high school. Whatever.

This should be common knowledge in 2012. The morning after pill doesn't kill babies. You can still be pro life and use a morning after pill.

[amyzzz]

Shoot. I have been believing that misinformation all these years.

[Hannahrain]

"leanings" aren't the same as policies. believe whatever the fuck you want, but don't try to restrict my access to health care as a result.

I didn't realize you worked at Hobby Lobby. Model train specialist?

[TomAz]

You can still be pro life

Why I Am Pro-Life

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Published: October 27, 2012 311 Comments


HARD-LINE conservatives have gone to new extremes lately in opposing abortion. Last week, Richard Mourdock, the Tea Party-backed Republican Senate candidate in Indiana, declared during a debate that he was against abortion even in the event of rape because after much thought he “came to realize that life is that gift from God. And even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen.” That came on the heels of the Tea Party-backed Republican Representative Joe Walsh of Illinois saying after a recent debate that he opposed abortion even in cases where the life of the mother is in danger, because “with modern technology and science, you can’t find one instance” in which a woman would not survive without an abortion. “Health of the mother has become a tool for abortions anytime, for any reason,” Walsh said. That came in the wake of the Senate hopeful in Missouri, Representative Todd Akin, remarking that pregnancy as a result of “legitimate rape” is rare because “the female body has ways to try and shut that whole thing down.”

These were not slips of the tongue. These are the authentic voices of an ever-more-assertive far-right Republican base that is intent on using uncompromising positions on abortion to not only unseat more centrist Republicans — Mourdock defeated the moderate Republican Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana in the primary — but to overturn the mainstream consensus in America on this issue. That consensus says that those who choose to oppose abortion in their own lives for reasons of faith or philosophy should be respected, but those women who want to make a different personal choice over what happens with their own bodies should be respected, and have the legal protection to do so, as well.

But judging from the unscientific — borderline crazy — statements opposing abortion that we’re hearing lately, there is reason to believe that this delicate balance could be threatened if Mitt Romney and Representative Paul Ryan, and their even more extreme allies, get elected. So to those who want to protect a woman’s right to control what happens with her own body, let me offer just one piece of advice: to name something is to own it. If you can name an issue, you can own the issue. And we must stop letting Republicans name themselves “pro-life” and Democrats as “pro-choice.” It is a huge distortion.

In my world, you don’t get to call yourself “pro-life” and be against common-sense gun control — like banning public access to the kind of semiautomatic assault rifle, designed for warfare, that was used recently in a Colorado theater. You don’t get to call yourself “pro-life” and want to shut down the Environmental Protection Agency, which ensures clean air and clean water, prevents childhood asthma, preserves biodiversity and combats climate change that could disrupt every life on the planet. You don’t get to call yourself “pro-life” and oppose programs like Head Start that provide basic education, health and nutrition for the most disadvantaged children. You can call yourself a “pro-conception-to-birth, indifferent-to-life conservative.” I will never refer to someone who pickets Planned Parenthood but lobbies against common-sense gun laws as “pro-life.”

“Pro-life” can mean only one thing: “respect for the sanctity of life.” And there is no way that respect for the sanctity of life can mean we are obligated to protect every fertilized egg in a woman’s body, no matter how that egg got fertilized, but we are not obligated to protect every living person from being shot with a concealed automatic weapon. I have no respect for someone who relies on voodoo science to declare that a woman’s body can distinguish a “legitimate” rape, but then declares — when 99 percent of all climate scientists conclude that climate change poses a danger to the sanctity of all life on the planet — that global warming is just a hoax.

The term “pro-life” should be a shorthand for respect for the sanctity of life. But I will not let that label apply to people for whom sanctity for life begins at conception and ends at birth. What about the rest of life? Respect for the sanctity of life, if you believe that it begins at conception, cannot end at birth. That radical narrowing of our concern for the sanctity of life is leading to terrible distortions in our society.

Respect for life has to include respect for how that life is lived, enhanced and protected — not only at the moment of conception but afterward, in the course of that life. That’s why, for me, the most “pro-life” politician in America is New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. While he supports a woman’s right to choose, he has also used his position to promote a whole set of policies that enhance everyone’s quality of life — from his ban on smoking in bars and city parks to reduce cancer, to his ban on the sale in New York City of giant sugary drinks to combat obesity and diabetes, to his requirement for posting calorie counts on menus in chain restaurants, to his push to reinstate the expired federal ban on assault weapons and other forms of common-sense gun control, to his support for early childhood education, to his support for mitigating disruptive climate change.

Now that is what I call “pro-life.”

[amyzzz]

Why not just call it pro-abortion and anti-abortion? and indifferent-abortion.

[heart cooks brain]

Why not just call it pro-abortion and anti-abortion? and indifferent-abortion.

not sure if srs

[bmack86]

Because most "pro-choice" people wouldn't be labeled as necessarily pro-abortion, but rather they are for the right of an individual to choose whether to have an abortion. Just like, as Tom's article makes clear, most pro-life people aren't supportive of life in the rest of their policies (I bet in almost all instances they are death penalty advocates, which is the ultimate irony to me.)

[TomAz]

BABIES AREN'T GUILTY BRYAN

[heart cooks brain]

BABIES AREN'T GUILTY UNTIL AFTER THEY'RE BORN BRYAN

just to clarify

[IceyHotshot]

"Whoa is you"

[jackstraw94086]

[amyzzz]

Because most "pro-choice" people wouldn't be labeled as necessarily pro-abortion, but rather they are for the right of an individual to choose whether to have an abortion. Just like, as Tom's article makes clear, most pro-life people aren't supportive of life in the rest of their policies (I bet in almost all instances they are death penalty advocates, which is the ultimate irony to me.)

I know, but it'd be easier. Maybe just pro-abortion-choice.

[bmack86]

How about Pro-choice v. Anti-choice. That's what it boils down to: should a person be able to make a decision regarding their reproductive future, or should they not be able to make that choice because we as a society deem it to be immoral?

[heart cooks brain]

i mean, you can call it that, but i doubt anyone on the anti-choice side will choose to refer to themselves in that way.

[amyzzz]

All euphemisms.

[SlowMotionApocalypse]

Stephen Stills said he never thought he would see a creepier politician than Nixon.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/ne...nixon-20121029

Probably never thought Nixon would be the last liberal president either.

http://www.rockthecapital.com/06/15/...ral-president/

[TomAz]

Stephen Stills said he never thought he would see a creepier politician than Nixon.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/ne...nixon-20121029

Read his exclusive endorsement of President Obama

what, exactly, is the point of on exclusive endoresement? "Yes, I will tell you that I support Obama, but I won't tell anyone else."

[Starraven]

Interviews/photos are called exclusive in a mag to help sell mags... dummy.

[jackstraw94086]

Interviews/photos are called exclusive in a mag to help sell mags... dummy.

That's exactly the interpretation Tom is using. It still makes no sense to offer an exclusive endoresment of a candidate because there's no more meat to that story to help sell the magazine

[theresalwaysone]

BABIES AREN'T GUILTY BRYAN

Original sin......

[guedita]