Women who say they aren't voting on the single issue of abortion rights

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love that the right is saying women need to put with their husbands.... Then what possibly was the point of gaining the right to vote if I have to vote exactly how another human being does. I would be doubling his voting power and having none of my own.
But of course that's what they want women to not have a voice and willingly choose to give it away

You’re confused. It’s the left suggesting in ridiculous online screeds that republican women are too scared to vote against their husbands’ wishes. Faux concern and insulting to other women.

+1

Married for 36 years and every election voted differently than my republican DH. That ad is insulting to both women and men.

My husband was a liberal democrat until I fixed him!

[Anonymous]

Roe. Roe. Roe. This is what the majority of the people want for very good reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love that the right is saying women need to put with their husbands.... Then what possibly was the point of gaining the right to vote if I have to vote exactly how another human being does. I would be doubling his voting power and having none of my own.
But of course that's what they want women to not have a voice and willingly choose to give it away

You’re confused. It’s the left suggesting in ridiculous online screeds that republican women are too scared to vote against their husbands’ wishes. Faux concern and insulting to other women.

+1

Married for 36 years and every election voted differently than my republican DH. That ad is insulting to both women and men.

Not every woman is as lucky as you. Maybe respect that and understand, the ad was not targeting you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love that the right is saying women need to put with their husbands.... Then what possibly was the point of gaining the right to vote if I have to vote exactly how another human being does. I would be doubling his voting power and having none of my own.
But of course that's what they want women to not have a voice and willingly choose to give it away

You’re confused. It’s the left suggesting in ridiculous online screeds that republican women are too scared to vote against their husbands’ wishes. Faux concern and insulting to other women.

+1

Married for 36 years and every election voted differently than my republican DH. That ad is insulting to both women and men.

Not every woman is as lucky as you. Maybe respect that and understand, the ad was not targeting you.

If those unlucky women can’t tell their husband who they’re voting for - or their husband intimidates them that much, those woman have much bigger problems than elections and politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love that the right is saying women need to put with their husbands.... Then what possibly was the point of gaining the right to vote if I have to vote exactly how another human being does. I would be doubling his voting power and having none of my own.
But of course that's what they want women to not have a voice and willingly choose to give it away

You’re confused. It’s the left suggesting in ridiculous online screeds that republican women are too scared to vote against their husbands’ wishes. Faux concern and insulting to other women.

+1

Married for 36 years and every election voted differently than my republican DH. That ad is insulting to both women and men.

Not every woman is as lucky as you. Maybe respect that and understand, the ad was not targeting you.

If those unlucky women can’t tell their husband who they’re voting for - or their husband intimidates them that much, those woman have much bigger problems than elections and politics.

They do. The results of this election also will affect their means to deal with them.

The GOP is going after no-fault divorce, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love that the right is saying women need to put with their husbands.... Then what possibly was the point of gaining the right to vote if I have to vote exactly how another human being does. I would be doubling his voting power and having none of my own.
But of course that's what they want women to not have a voice and willingly choose to give it away

You’re confused. It’s the left suggesting in ridiculous online screeds that republican women are too scared to vote against their husbands’ wishes. Faux concern and insulting to other women.

+1

Married for 36 years and every election voted differently than my republican DH. That ad is insulting to both women and men.

Not every woman is as lucky as you. Maybe respect that and understand, the ad was not targeting you.

The ad was suitably scorned for its belittling of women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is not even just about abortion, as many here know.
For those who just have no clue: Planned Parenthood is a place to get testing, ask questions, and get services--sometimes the only /only affordable place to go--that have nothing to do with abortion.

As far as I can tell, forced birthers don’t think women should be able to access health care at any point. They want to cancel Obamacare, they hate Planned Parenthood despite it being the most accessible and affordable point of access for medical care, they think women should just go ahead and die for need of an abortion, the fact that women’s bodies are relatively unstudied and that our medical issues are still not taken seriously at all doesn’t seem to bother them.

I think forced birthers think women should just go ahead and be miserable and die young, as they think God intended.

+1

Forced birthers are hardcore misogynists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love that the right is saying women need to put with their husbands.... Then what possibly was the point of gaining the right to vote if I have to vote exactly how another human being does. I would be doubling his voting power and having none of my own.
But of course that's what they want women to not have a voice and willingly choose to give it away

You’re confused. It’s the left suggesting in ridiculous online screeds that republican women are too scared to vote against their husbands’ wishes. Faux concern and insulting to other women.

+1

Married for 36 years and every election voted differently than my republican DH. That ad is insulting to both women and men.

Not every woman is as lucky as you. Maybe respect that and understand, the ad was not targeting you.

If those unlucky women can’t tell their husband who they’re voting for - or their husband intimidates them that much, those woman have much bigger problems than elections and politics.

They do. The results of this election also will affect their means to deal with them.

The GOP is going after no-fault divorce, too.

+1

It bears repeating: a hit dog hollers. If the ad bothers you, it bothers you because of something in your own marriage, no matter what you lie and say on here. The ad was based on what thousands of canvassers have heard from women married to Republicans have said and what millions have googled. Lots of women are not in safe relationships. It wasn’t talking down to women, it wasn’t belittling or minimizing, it was recognizing women where they are and hopefully was viral enough that more women got to see it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love that the right is saying women need to put with their husbands.... Then what possibly was the point of gaining the right to vote if I have to vote exactly how another human being does. I would be doubling his voting power and having none of my own.
But of course that's what they want women to not have a voice and willingly choose to give it away

You’re confused. It’s the left suggesting in ridiculous online screeds that republican women are too scared to vote against their husbands’ wishes. Faux concern and insulting to other women.

+1

Married for 36 years and every election voted differently than my republican DH. That ad is insulting to both women and men.

Not every woman is as lucky as you. Maybe respect that and understand, the ad was not targeting you.

The ad was suitably scorned for its belittling of women.

No, the ad was scorned by forced birther misogynists because it let awful men know that the jig is up, we see what kind of husbands they are, and they clearly don’t like being called out on it.

What a surprise, forced birthers want to control women everywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Roe. Roe. Roe. This is what the majority of the people want for very good reason.

Is Kamala going to poison five judges with cyanide? How is she going to fix the Supreme Court?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Roe. Roe. Roe. This is what the majority of the people want for very good reason.

Is Kamala going to poison five judges with cyanide? How is she going to fix the Supreme Court?

It will take more then Harris to fix SCOTUS but democratic presidental appointments are a key part of the process. Harris, Harris and then beyond.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love that the right is saying women need to put with their husbands.... Then what possibly was the point of gaining the right to vote if I have to vote exactly how another human being does. I would be doubling his voting power and having none of my own.
But of course that's what they want women to not have a voice and willingly choose to give it away

You’re confused. It’s the left suggesting in ridiculous online screeds that republican women are too scared to vote against their husbands’ wishes. Faux concern and insulting to other women.

+1

Married for 36 years and every election voted differently than my republican DH. That ad is insulting to both women and men.

My husband was a liberal democrat until I fixed him!

[Anonymous]

I don’t get the need to attack an ad that is not targeting a viewers situation. It does not bother me in the least that there are signs on the inside of airport and train station bathrooms targeting information to victims of human trafficking so they can get help. I am not being human trafficked, yet I can understand that other women are and these ads are, therefore, not targeting me. They in fact have nothing to do with me.

The question remains, why are you bothered with other women, women who are possibly in difficult marriages, receiving information targeted to them. How does this talk down to you if it is not about you? What makes you so angry? Go take a walk and get some fresh air.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrats want to expand abortion to all trimesters. They are liars. Abortions used to be emergency medicine not an elective procedure and Republicans want to go back to that.

They believe in killing a 28 week old baby with a heartbeat. That’s infanticide. The fetal tissue from late term abortions was being sold on the black market according to Sarah Merritt, a whistleblower in California who Kamala Harris prosecuted

2015 Merritt, along with David Daleiden, released videos exposing Planned Parenthood’s alleged involvement in the illegal trade of aborted baby body parts. The undercover work spanned nearly three years and exposed an underground market wherein Planned Parenthood supplied baby body parts to others for profit.

In response to that undercover journalistic work, Merritt has faced civil and criminal charges

Democrats support Roe.

Sometimes, even during Roe, a medical abortion was necessary in the 3rd term because the fetus was no longer viable or the health of the mother was at risk. If either of these conditions occurred currently in states with restrictive rules, the pregnant woman would be SOL, right? Is that what you support?

Also, how many "vanity" abortions do you think took place in the third trimester in the US? How many doctors do you think are even willing to conduct such a procedure? (hint: none)

Elective abortions in the third trimester do occur PP. It’s actually a boon for doctors because the procedure is more complex that it requires inpatient hospitalization to abort a second or third trimester baby. In Washington DC, you can abort a late term baby. In maryland, you can as well.
All elective..

In 2005, Guttmacher published a paper, “Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions,” which found that 1 in 5 women having abortions after the first trimester cited any concern about fetal or personal health.

[Anonymous]

There is a concerted effort from the abortion lobby and its allies in media to convince Americans that there is no such thing as elective late term abortion. It isn’t true.

Abortion is mostly an elective procedure