Michigan State Rep. Lisa Brown Banned from Speaking After Opposing Abortion Law - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Strongbad;36345972] You clearly have extensive experience in the subject. There's no chance you're just making sweeping generalizations about Republicans. None at all.[/QUOTE] He's essentially right. So long as it doesn't contend with some kind of Judeo-Christian moral belief, Republicans are generally against government dealing in it.

[QUOTE=BuffaloBill;36345354]"Land of the Free" - Unless the Republicans have their way, then it's "Land of the wealthy caucasian Christians" Fuck off already, thundercunts.[/QUOTE] why is it so hard for facepunch to stop generalizing and stereotyping?

[QUOTE=Burgervich;36345369]This entire abortion thing is stupid. The babies don't have any consciousness at that age, they have as much consciousness as a fucking tree. It's not murder if it doesn't know it exists.[/QUOTE] Please tell me when a human being gains consciousness. Actually, please tell me what consciousness actually is, since as far as I know scientists still haven't figured it out.

[QUOTE=Penultimate;36345527]So, are you saying republicans can't be idealistic or extreme? Because things like this seem pretty extreme, if not idealistic.[/QUOTE] He didn't imply that in the least. His argument does not logically create that at all, so shut up.

The Michigan Republicans are god damned retarded and evil. They're as bad as the ones in Wisconsin. Every single one of those buffoons needs to be shoved out of politics. This doesn't surprise me. This is Michigan, the constitution doesn't apply, as we learned from [url=http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/385702/may-09-2011/the-word---autocratic-for-the-people]Rick Snyder's completely abolition of local-level democracy whenever his un-elected council says so[/url]. Let's just bar the minority party from speaking out at all, who gives a fuck?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36345699]Someone in a state government was kept from [I]just speaking[/I] just once in the US. Yep, America is definitely fucked beyond repair, time to move! [editline]15th June 2012[/editline] If Abe lived today, he would have joined the Democratic Party.[/QUOTE] It's funny how in his day the Republicans were the good guys (Wanting to end slavery and shit.) and Democrats were the bad guys (Wanted to keep slavery.) and somehow the Republicans decided to trade all their smart people for the democratic's idiot people. The last half-decent republican president was probably Reagan. At least he actually got shit done. (Bringing down inflation, brought down unemployment rate, etc.) Now it's just "who's the crazier republican!?", at least Newt wants to go into a space even for silly reasons.

50% of teens are republican 50% of adults are democracts 99% of all babies are libertarians 100% of elderly people are wizards

[QUOTE=atttapi0;36345861]I think this bill is more a cry of attention from Michigan. I live here and this state is boring as shit. We need a little controversy.[/QUOTE] Wow I hate it when people like you think everyone's motivation is "to cause controversy" or "to make the other person angry" as if everybody is just a vengeful zombie with extremely simple thought processes.

Michigan must have their coat hanger sales through the roof

The fact that she was so surprised at being silenced after making an asinine, out-of-place comment like [quote]"And finally, Mr. Speaker, I'm flattered that you're all so interested in my vagina, but 'no' means 'no'." [/quote] makes me think there may be just a little more to this than the ridiculously one-sided reporting indicates. I'm going to wait to hear the other side of the story before passing judgment.

[QUOTE=catbarf;36347037]The fact that she was so surprised at being silenced after making an asinine, out-of-place comment like makes me think there may be just a little more to this than the ridiculously one-sided reporting indicates. I'm going to wait to hear the other side of the story before passing judgment.[/QUOTE] it makes me wonder why men are allowed to be the majority in a vote which regards only women anyway.

[QUOTE=LtKyle2;36345687]Abe Lincoln, look at what your party has become.[/QUOTE] And no one was surprised that one of the most autocratic presidents in American history, second only to Woodrow Wilson, would have spawned this sort of mess.

[QUOTE=Bobie;36347074]it makes me wonder why men are allowed to be the majority in a vote which regards only women anyway.[/QUOTE] I agree but I don't think that's really the issue here. It's not about having an opinion, it's about how you present it. No legislator, regardless of gender, gets to make over-the-top sensationalist statements in state legislature like 'I'm flattered that you're all so interested in my vagina' complete with reference to rape to score points on the usual hyperbolic word games, then turn around and defend the statement by playing on medical definitions as if she was dryly stating facts and some Puritan got upset that she used the word 'vagina'. That's just ridiculous.

[QUOTE=Burgervich;36345369]This entire abortion thing is stupid. The babies don't have any consciousness at that age, they have as much consciousness as a fucking tree. It's not murder if it doesn't know it exists.[/QUOTE] So, it's coo' to kill someone brain dead even if you're some futuristic situation and can cure it?

[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;36347143]So, it's coo' to kill someone brain dead even if you're some futuristic situation and can cure it?[/QUOTE] How can that even be compared to an abortion? There's no way I can think of to "cure" an unwanted child.

[QUOTE=The golden;36347178]Most of the time abortions are had because the parent(s) cannot afford to raise a child for various reasons. The cause of the pregnancy can be everything from a broken condom to a rape. So you're saying you would rather that child grow up and be forced to live a life of hardship and suffering, knowing they were an accident or a product of rape? I'm sure they would love that. As would the parents![/QUOTE] mate-o, I'm pro abortion. For the reasons you stated. I'm attacking that argument, not the point the argument is defending. Baby has no consciousness but will have it in 9 months when he is born, but it's not murder to abort the birth Man has no consciousness but will have it in 9 months when he is cured, but it's not murder to abort the cure. That's my reasoning. [editline]16th June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=JeanLuc761;36347158]How can that even be compared to an abortion? There's no way I can think of to "cure" an unwanted child.[/QUOTE] Dude, what? The "cure" in the man scenario is analogous to the birth in the baby scenario. The point where they gain their consciousness.

[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;36347246]mate-o, I'm pro abortion. For the reasons you stated. I'm attacking that argument, not the point the argument is defending. Baby has no consciousness but will have it in 9 months when he is born, but it's not murder to abort the birth Man has no consciousness but will have it in 9 months when he is cured, but it's not murder to abort the cure. That's my reasoning. [editline]16th June 2012[/editline] Dude, what? The "cure" in the man scenario is analogous to the birth in the baby scenario. The point where they gain their consciousness.[/QUOTE] what can you define as consciousness though? the ability to understand your own emotions and acknowledge yourself? because most babies dont have that until 1-2 years old, and given that everything is alive at every stage before, during and after conception its not as if life comes from nowhere during the foetal stages. how consciousness is defined is a debate within itself

[QUOTE=Bobie;36347380]what can you define as consciousness though? the ability to understand your own emotions and acknowledge yourself? because most babies dont have that until 1-2 years old, and given that everything is alive at every stage before, during and after conception its not as if life comes from nowhere during the foetal stages. how consciousness is defined is a debate within itself[/QUOTE] Agreed, but I'm going with what the guy I was answering went. Honestly, my point has nothing to do with babies or birth or consciousness. Taking things away from someone when they have it or stopping them from every getting it are equal in wrongness. (Disregarding the consequences of the world's reaction to the loss. Since we're investigating murder, the man doesn't even have that (let's disregard its family, role in society, etc, we all agree murder is evil even when no one but the victim cares)) My point is that whether someone is murdered or not doesn't actually matter. What does matter is what you deprive the person of. [editline]16th June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=The golden;36347097]If there is anyone that should be banned on speaking about abortion it's men. They have nothing to do with it and it does not affect them in ANY way.[/QUOTE] Abortion is going to reduce population growth, that's one reason men are effected. Hell, many arguments are religion-based. In the fundies' view, you're offending the most perfect form existing, I'd be pretty pissed, too.

[QUOTE=Bobie;36347380]what can you define as consciousness though? the ability to understand your own emotions and acknowledge yourself? because most babies dont have that until 1-2 years old, and given that everything is alive at every stage before, during and after conception its not as if life comes from nowhere during the foetal stages. how consciousness is defined is a debate within itself[/QUOTE] So then why not just be consistent? When is a human considered dead? When the heart stops beating? Or how about when all brain activity ceases? So then a fetus is a living, human being when the heart begins beating, or whenever brain activity begins, respectively.

[QUOTE=BuffaloBill;36345354]"Land of the Free" - Unless the Republicans have their way, then it's "Land of the wealthy caucasian Christians"[/QUOTE] Especially Clarence Thomas, Herman Cain and Richard Nixon. [editline]16th June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Bobie;36347074]it makes me wonder why men are allowed to be the majority in a vote which regards only women anyway.[/QUOTE] Because men were babies once too. [editline]16th June 2012[/editline] The best part of the abortion debate is how both sides frame the issue in completely opposite ways so nothing ever goes anywhere and it descends into shouting and hatred.

[QUOTE=Capitulazyguy;36347594]Especially Clarence Thomas, Herman Cain and Richard Nixon. [editline]16th June 2012[/editline] Because men were babies once too. [editline]16th June 2012[/editline] The best part of the abortion debate is how both sides frame the issue in completely opposite ways so nothing ever goes anywhere and it descends into shouting and hatred.[/QUOTE] There's no two sides to the abortion debate. The fact that we are even having a debate over womens reproductive rights is ridiculous.

[QUOTE=Capitulazyguy;36347594]Especially Clarence Thomas, Herman Cain and Richard Nixon. [editline]16th June 2012[/editline] Because men were babies once too. [editline]16th June 2012[/editline] The best part of the abortion debate is how both sides frame the issue in completely opposite ways so nothing ever goes anywhere and it descends into shouting and hatred.[/QUOTE] men were babies once too yes, but a man cannot force a woman to have an abortion, and a man cannot tell a woman to not have an abortion.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;36347715]There's no two sides to the abortion debate. The fact that we are even having a debate over womens reproductive rights is ridiculous.[/QUOTE] Personally I'd rather live in a world where we have to seriously debate whether or not to terminate human life rather than one where it's okayed without any opposition, even though I'm firmly pro-choice. Some things need to be thoroughly considered before we as a society accept them, and any question of ending human life qualifies. We should never be gung-ho about killing.

[QUOTE=LtKyle2;36346717]It's funny how in his day the Republicans were the good guys (Wanting to end slavery and shit.) and Democrats were the bad guys (Wanted to keep slavery.) and somehow the Republicans decided to trade all their smart people for the democratic's idiot people. The last half-decent republican president was probably Reagan. At least he actually got shit done. (Bringing down inflation, brought down unemployment rate, etc.) Now it's just "who's the crazier republican!?", at least Newt wants to go into a space even for silly reasons.[/QUOTE] The Republican Party started out as a progressive party with Lincoln. The early Republican party was extremely 'liberal' and progressive, even by today's standards, and the ranks of Republican supporters were stuffed with communists and socialists, especially German immigrants. The Republicans were still progressive for a long time- prime example is Theodore Roosevelt, who served as a Republican president before running again with the Progressive Party. FDR was the first to make the huge switch by being a Democrat who followed progressive policies, but the party lines and full switch wouldn't come until 1968 when the Democratic National Convention and all its protests and violence lead to a total redirecting of the Democratic Party to what we see today- liberal, progressive, anti-war, pro-equality, etc. Reagan was still a Republican and followed today's standard, he was hardly any different than Bush Sr. or GWB, and is considerably more Republican fundamentalist than either Romney or McCain, the only difference being that we remember Reagan not because of his social/cultural views, but his economic successes, which were only so in the short run and did not provide a long-term fix for the problems of the time.

[QUOTE=catbarf;36347797]Personally I'd rather live in a world where we have to seriously debate whether or not to terminate human life rather than one where it's okayed without any opposition, even though I'm firmly pro-choice. Some things need to be thoroughly considered before we as a society accept them, and any question of ending human life qualifies. We should never be gung-ho about killing.[/QUOTE] If you want to talk about the details of an abortion that's okay but it shouldn't even be on a national level because that's pretty confidential. I'm saying the debate surrounding even letting women abort their pregnancies outside of very extreme circumstances. It's their womb, their body. The government shouldn't be handling it. Should be between a woman and her doctor.

I wish more (US) politicians had Lisa Brown's figurative balls.

[QUOTE=The golden;36347946]It's her womb, her body, and her child. It is made of cells that are being fed by her own body. It is literally physically attached to her. If someone thinks they have the right to deny her the right to decide what to do with it then they need to fuck [B]RIGHT[/B] off.[/QUOTE] On a biological level, embryos are more akin to parasites than human life. They can't survive on their own, they can't reproduce, and the embryo will literally cannibalize the mother's body if it isn't getting enough sustenance. This romanticized view of pregnancy and childbirth has got to stop. It's horrible. The whole process is awful, from beginning to end. There is nothing intrinsically beautiful about a parasitic organism fucking with your [I]everything[/I] for nine months straight before violently tearing its way out of a hole ten sizes too small. I mean the kid is fine once it's out, but pregnancy and childbirth isn't undergone beneath a rainbow and sunshine sparkles, and it's a hell of a lot more dangerous for the mother than most people care to realize. I've seen the process. It's the worst thing I have ever seen. Ever. No woman should be forced to undergo that process if she doesn't want to.

married men don't like the idea of not being able to control every aspect of their wife's life

[QUOTE=Lankist;36348037]On a biological level, embryos are more akin to parasites than human life. They can't survive on their own, they can't reproduce, and the embryo will literally cannibalize the mother's body if it isn't getting enough sustenance. This romanticized view of pregnancy and childbirth has got to stop. It's horrible. The whole process is awful, from beginning to end. There is nothing intrinsically beautiful about a parasitic organism fucking with your [I]everything[/I] for nine months straight before violently tearing its way out of a hole ten sizes too small. I mean the kid is fine once it's out, but pregnancy and childbirth isn't undergone beneath a rainbow and sunshine sparkles, and it's a hell of a lot more dangerous for the mother than most people care to realize. I've seen the process. It's the worst thing I have ever seen. Ever. No woman should be forced to undergo that process if she doesn't want to.[/QUOTE] jesus christ

[QUOTE=The golden;36347946]It's her womb, her body, and her child. It is made of cells that are being fed by her own body. It is literally physically attached to her. If someone thinks they have the right to deny her the right to decide what to do with it then they need to fuck [B]RIGHT[/B] off.[/QUOTE] And it's a man's money, what right have you to tell him he has to give a part to the government? if someone wants to permanently be infected with some contagious disease, it's their body, yes, but that doesn't mean it doesn't effect other people. And hell, even if it doesn't, why should you be allowed to choose for yourself? You don't allow children to do so because they don't know what's best. You could extend that to a lot of people over a lot of areas.