and when it comes to childbirth, most of the responsibility to the pregnancy rests on the mother - the woman.
And what do you call it when there are women who are against the idea of abortion, people who would full well be effected by the law? Are they "going to war" against themselves?
My point wasn't to get people to oppose abortion(partly because I support abortion) but to not post a strawman and claim that all people who are against abortion being legal are misogynist, especially when some of these supports to make abortion illegal are women.
. I agree with you to a certain degree - There is a 'war on women'. The Republicans are doing it all of the time, let me give an example: "Herman Cain says A, B and C are good. Herman Cain is black. A,B and C are racist against black people, But because Herman Cain is black he can't be racist against his own people" -Wrong. He is being paid to go on the front of the stage and speak out for the views of certain people. "A woman says A,B and C are good. A woman is, well, a woman. A,B, and C are misogynistic and sexist against women, But because a woman is, well, a woman, she can't be misogynistic and sexist" -Wrong. She is being paid to go on the front of the stage and speak out for the views of certain people. I agree that there are some women who think that way but I truly believe that allowing government such rights to enter your privacy is as insane as blacks allowing and supporting their local states to pass segregation laws.
It is not. You can repeat your arguments without evidence all you want, that won't magically make them come true. And the fact that you are refusing to even acknowledge my point shows you aren't prepared to have a meaningful discussion of this topic, you're just trying to defend people who want to force their unprovable views on others from any and all criticism. We're done here. Have a nice day.
It is not. You can repeat your arguments without evidence all you want, that won't magically make them come true.
The evidence is you claiming that concern for a fetus is formed from some mistrust or dislike of women. Its not! Caring about a fetus and not wanting it to be aborted, even if the future mother does, is not a hatred of women.
Helmholtz Watson: The evidence is you claiming that concern for a fetus is formed from some mistrust or dislike of women.
And now you're lying about what I've said. Very poor form on your part.
No, your saying that if people are against allowing a women to choose to have an abortion, then it is a form of misogyny, nonsense. To quote you, "That's what makes it misogynistic- the assumption that women are incapable of deciding for themselves what is the proper way to deal with the fetus they are carrying". Like I said, I don't agree with them, but I'm not going to start putting up strawmen and accuse them of hating women when I have heard them tell me they feel this way because they think that the fetus has a right to live.
Helmholtz Watson: Like I said, I don't agree with them, but I'm not going to start putting up strawmen and accuse them of hating women when I have heard them tell me they feel this way because they think that the fetus has a right to live.
But you want abortion to be made illegal, suggesting that you do not trust women to make that decision themselves, so you're going to make it for them. I'm supposed to believe that shows a lot of respect for women? That is the point he's getting at. You're either lying about his argument or you just don't understand. Which one is it?
Helmholtz Watson: Like I said, I don't agree with them, but I'm not going to start putting up strawmen and accuse them of hating women when I have heard them tell me they feel this way because they think that the fetus has a right to live.
But you want abortion to be made illegal, suggesting that you do not trust women to make that decision themselves, so you're going to make it for them. I'm supposed to believe that shows a lot of respect for women? That is the point he's getting at. You're either lying about his argument or you just don't understand. Which one is it?
First off, I'm pro-abortion. Second off, the "suggestion" is wrong. It doesn't have to do with trust, it has to do with being concerned about the fetus.
Helmholtz Watson: First off, I'm pro-abortion. Second off, the "suggestion" is wrong. It doesn't have to do with trust, it has to do with being concerned about the fetus.
Yeah, so the lifers say. Yet they make it clear that they don't trust women to make the decisions themselves. Why not? Can you answer that?
Helmholtz Watson: Not the ones I speak to, it isn't that they don't trust women, its that they are concerned about the fetus.
To the degree where they think that they, and they alone, have the correct answer and thus it must be made law.
I see no reason why a person should not vote on a bill because they believe they are right, but we're getting off topic. Having concern about a fetus doesn't equate to having a sexist hatred towards women.
Helmholtz Watson: I see no reason why a person should not vote on a bill because they believe they are right, but we're getting off topic. Having concern about a fetus doesn't equate to having a sexist hatred towards women.
If you think that a fetus is more of a person than an already-living adult, and that women can't be trusted to make their own healthcare decisions, I daresay that there might be some underlying problems there.
Helmholtz Watson: I see no reason why a person should not vote on a bill because they believe they are right, but we're getting off topic. Having concern about a fetus doesn't equate to having a sexist hatred towards women.
If you think that a fetus is more of a person than an already-living adult, and that women can't be trusted to make their own healthcare decisions, ....
lol, ok. Good thing that they don't. Nobody ever said that a fetus was more of a person than a adult, just that the fetus also has a right to life. That's it. Disagree and point out how that could be interpreted as meaning that even if the fetus is the result of incests or rape, it should live(a point that I brought up when I talked to them), but your current method of "proving them wrong" is nonsense.
Helmholtz Watson: Having concern about a fetus doesn't equate to having a sexist hatred towards women.
But forcing a woman to alter her lifestyle, become increasingly physically and mentally debilitated on an upwards curve, and put her job on the line for the better part of a year against her will isn't exactly being kind and understanding to women, either. I think to hold such a position, you have to have a pretty high threshold for how much pain and misery, both physical and emotional, you're willing to put other fully alive and fully aware human being through.
And yes, I know you're pro-choice. I'm just trying to point out the inherent lack of altruism in the "concern for the fetus" stance. When you're talking about the difference between aborting a life before it is fully formed or self-aware, and forcing a woman to go through a very painful and very preventable experience for nine months, nobody can really claim the moral high ground. The debate isn't which is more morally just. The debate is do we give full human rights to an embryo, or do we give full human rights to the fully-formed and fully-aware human being. Because you cannot treat both like full humans if those are the only options.
I would put a link on words, but I do not know how to do that. A spokesman for Nan Hayworth called for people to hurl acid at women senators in the democratic party.
So what do you think? Personally, I am amazed it isn't already a common sentiment in the GOP.
Well I think that he should have already been fired, and if there are hate laws in the state he is in he should be investigated for inciting violence under those laws (or whatever similar laws might apply to this case). It's simply unacceptable.
I also think your comments are hateful and unacceptable. Just because someone supports the republican part does not mean they hate women and love violence against women.
I would put a link on words, but I do not know how to do that. A spokesman for Nan Hayworth called for people to hurl acid at women senators in the democratic party.
So what do you think? Personally, I am amazed it isn't already a common sentiment in the GOP.
Well I think that he should have already been fired, and if there are hate laws in the state he is in he should be investigated for inciting violence under those laws (or whatever similar laws might apply to this case). It's simply unacceptable.
I also think your comments are hateful and unacceptable. Just because someone supports the republican part does not mean they hate women and love violence against women.
Have you SEEN the comments made by the American GOP?
Here are just some common excerpts I found:
- America is a "Christian" nation.
- Minority babies are "not good" because they support Democrats who give them food stamps.
- Being gay is a choice and they commit suicide, not because of us taunting them, but by their own gayness.
- Liberals are supported by illegal immigrants.
Do you seriously not consider these hateful? These common talking points that are thrown around?
Also: America has NO hate speech laws. For good reason. Because hate laws in America would only serve to pacify any progressive movement, as it would be considered offensive.
But forcing a woman to alter her lifestyle, become increasingly physically and mentally debilitated on an upwards curve, and put her job on the line for the better part of a year against her will isn't exactly being kind and understanding to women, either. I think to hold such a position, you have to have a pretty high threshold for how much pain and misery, both physical and emotional, you're willing to put other fully alive and fully aware human being through.
I don't mind disagreeing with them, what I have an issue with is falsifying their motivation for being pro-life and flat out telling them that they "must" hate/mistrust women in order to be pro-life. That to me is complete bullshit and a strawman.
Lilani: And yes, I know you're pro-choice. I'm just trying to point out the inherent lack of altruism in the "concern for the fetus" stance. When you're talking about the difference between aborting a life before it is fully formed or self-aware, and forcing a woman to go through a very painful and very preventable experience for nine months, nobody can really claim the moral high ground. The debate isn't which is more morally just. The debate is do we give full human rights to an embryo, or do we give full human rights to the fully-formed and fully-aware human being. Because you cannot treat both like full humans if those are the only options.
Again I don't mind debating the pros and cons of the issue, what I have a problem with is setting up a strawman and refusing to consider that a person can be pro-life without being a person who has a irrational hatred/mistrust of women.
I would put a link on words, but I do not know how to do that. A spokesman for Nan Hayworth called for people to hurl acid at women senators in the democratic party.
So what do you think? Personally, I am amazed it isn't already a common sentiment in the GOP.
Well I think that he should have already been fired, and if there are hate laws in the state he is in he should be investigated for inciting violence under those laws (or whatever similar laws might apply to this case). It's simply unacceptable.
I also think your comments are hateful and unacceptable. Just because someone supports the republican part does not mean they hate women and love violence against women.
Have you SEEN the comments made by the American GOP?
Here are just some common excerpts I found:
- America is a "Christian" nation.
- Minority babies are "not good" because they support Democrats who give them food stamps.
- Being gay is a choice and they commit suicide, not because of us taunting them, but by their own gayness.
- Liberals are supported by illegal immigrants.
Do you seriously not consider these hateful? These common talking points that are thrown around?
Also: America has NO hate speech laws. For good reason. Because hate laws in America would only serve to pacify any progressive movement, as it would be considered offensive.
Now show me where every single Republican in politics agrees with that or has said that. Go on, I'll wait. I mean the burden of proof is on you to back up such a wild generalization.
Well I think that he should have already been fired, and if there are hate laws in the state he is in he should be investigated for inciting violence under those laws (or whatever similar laws might apply to this case). It's simply unacceptable.
I also think your comments are hateful and unacceptable. Just because someone supports the republican part does not mean they hate women and love violence against women.
Have you SEEN the comments made by the American GOP?
Here are just some common excerpts I found:
- America is a "Christian" nation.
- Minority babies are "not good" because they support Democrats who give them food stamps.
- Being gay is a choice and they commit suicide, not because of us taunting them, but by their own gayness.
- Liberals are supported by illegal immigrants.
Do you seriously not consider these hateful? These common talking points that are thrown around?
Also: America has NO hate speech laws. For good reason. Because hate laws in America would only serve to pacify any progressive movement, as it would be considered offensive.
Now show me where every single Republican in politics agrees with that or has said that. Go on, I'll wait. I mean the burden of proof is on you to back up such a wild generalization.
Liberals being supported by illegal immigrants also falls under the minority babies.
You don't need every republican to say it, you just need enough republicans to. Especially if those same republicans run for president. Most of the GOP's ideals come from the Christian Right, which is not a good thing.
Hell, there are entire books dedicated to how the Christian right became the core of the GOP. One of the better known books is called "evangelicals at the ballot box."
In fact, its common knowledge now. You won't even need to read a book to know that. The Christian Right is perhaps the biggest influence the GOP has. In fact, there is talk the Christian right is diversifying and including other religions turning into the religious right. That's why the republicans tend to be religiously charged.
I am done. But I'm not about to let you lie about my position when you get in your last word. If you can't tell the different between what you reported as my positions in this post I'm directly replying to, and what you reported as my postion in the one before that I objected to, then it only shows you aren't willing to look at this issue honestly. You are so eager to protect anti-choice conservatives from any and all criticism that you either don't understand or refuse to honestly acknowledge my position.
You don't need every republican to say it, you just need enough republicans to.
You do need to prove that every Republican supports such ideas if you are going to make comments about the entire GOP.
Ultratwinkie: Especially if those same republicans run for president. Most of the GOP's ideals come from the Christian Right, which is not a good thing.
Being a presidential candidate doesn't make you "more" of a Republican than other Republicans, nor does it mean you speak for all Republicans. Case in point, Ron Paul is a republican and was a Republican presidential candidate, but it's laughable to say that he represents the views of all Republicans.
Katatori-kun: You are so eager to protect anti-choice conservatives from any and all criticism that you either don't understand or refuse to honestly acknowledge my position.
Wrong, I think their argument falls apart when rape or incest is the cause the of the fetus. I also support abortion, as if I haven't said that enough. I'm not trying to say you can't criticize them, just that you shouldn't make up strawman in order to do so.
Now in your post, you accuse them of being misogynist because you think that they can't trust women. I'm telling you as clearly as I can, that is incorrect. There may be some people that do feel that way, but the people I'm referring to(the ones that protest at my college), made it very clear that the reason why they are against having abortion being legal is because they are concerned about the fetus. You can go on and on about how they "must" mistrust women all you want, but it will never be anything more than a strawman. Perhaps you have met pro-lifers that are like that, in which case they would be misogynist, however the people at my school never cited a mistrust for women being the cause of their beliefs.
You don't need every republican to say it, you just need enough republicans to.
You do need to prove that every Republican supports such ideas if you are going to make comments about the entire GOP.
Ultratwinkie: Especially if those same republicans run for president. Most of the GOP's ideals come from the Christian Right, which is not a good thing.
Being a presidential candidate doesn't make you "more" of a Republican than other Republicans, nor does it mean you speak for all Republicans. Case in point, Ron Paul is a republican and was a Republican presidential candidate, but it's laughable to say that he represents the views of all Republicans.
Oh, I get how this works. Nothing bad any one Republican says can possibly be used to condemn any other Republicans, because they are completely individual human beings with souls. Democrats, on the other hand, are just fragments of the Great Librul Hivemind, so when some Democrat says anything stupid all Democrats everywhere must preface every statement they make with a ritual abjuration or be assumed to agree with the stoopid one.
Helmholtz Watson: I'm not trying to say you can't criticize them, just that you shouldn't make up strawman in order to do so.
You're either intentionally ignoring the subtlety of my position or outright lying about it in order to create a false accusation of a straw-man argument to protect them from my criticism.
Now in your post, you accuse them of being misogynist because you think that they can't trust women.
While I may have used the word "trust" in one of my posts (I can't be bothered to go back and read through them this late at night), no, that's not an honest restatement of my position.
And I suspect for as many times as I've had to repeat my position for you that you already know that.
Nope, when Republicans do that, it's just as big of a generalization . Generalization are still generalizations regardless of the political persuasion of the person spouting them.
You're either intentionally ignoring the subtlety of my position or outright lying about it in order to create a false accusation of a straw-man argument to protect them from my criticism.
I understand what you are saying, I'm just telling you that your wrong. Again, while I don't doubt that there are people who think like the way that you have described, the people at my college are not those people. They have specifically stated that their main concern is that the fetus has a right to life. Now that stance right there? Criticize it, criticize it all you want. I know I did[1].
[1] My criticism was that, what if in order for the baby to be born, the mother must die?
I would put a link on words, but I do not know how to do that. A spokesman for Nan Hayworth called for people to hurl acid at women senators in the democratic party.
So what do you think? Personally, I am amazed it isn't already a common sentiment in the GOP.
Well I think that he should have already been fired, and if there are hate laws in the state he is in he should be investigated for inciting violence under those laws (or whatever similar laws might apply to this case). It's simply unacceptable.
I also think your comments are hateful and unacceptable. Just because someone supports the republican part does not mean they hate women and love violence against women.
Have you SEEN the comments made by the American GOP?
Am I misunderstanding what GOP means? Doesn't GOP=Rep Party? If so, and if 1/3+ of your population are members of that party, then your statements are very hateful and unacceptable since you are branding millions based on the quotes you will give from a handful.
Here are just some common excerpts I found:
- America is a "Christian" nation.
But it is. Oh not constitutionally, but functionally it is. I'm not saying that's right that it is, but it seems to be the reality of your country from what I see as an outsider, and from what both religious, and even more so, anti-religious, people on this forum say all the time.
- Minority babies are "not good" because they support Democrats who give them food stamps.
Well that sounds pretty bad. That guy/girl sounds like a bigot all right. I wonder though what the context was and if your paraphrasing does the original quote justice.
- Being gay is a choice and they commit suicide, not because of us taunting them, but by their own gayness.
Unless you are bi, I agree, that's clearly an incorrect statement about choice. As for the suicide, its a half truth. Being taunted alone is not enough reason for someone to kill themselves, there is always more to the story (although I doubt "gayness" is the other part). BTW, what makes you think all, or even most, republican supporters agree with that statement?
- Liberals are supported by illegal immigrants.
Well they are. In the current US political landscape Dems are more likely than Repubs to support methods to legalize illegal immigrants. Human self interest therefore dictates that more of their votes (if they vote) will go to Democrats.
Do you seriously not consider these hateful? These common talking points that are thrown around?
A couple of them are, a couple are just things you don't agree with.
Also: America has NO hate speech laws. For good reason. Because hate laws in America would only serve to pacify any progressive movement, as it would be considered offensive.
That's a shame. I had thought some laws might exist, even though I knew you were overboard on freedom of speach. In Canada we wouldn't, for example, tolerate a hate group like the Westbro Bapist idiots heckling at a funeral.
Well I think that he should have already been fired, and if there are hate laws in the state he is in he should be investigated for inciting violence under those laws (or whatever similar laws might apply to this case). It's simply unacceptable.
I also think your comments are hateful and unacceptable. Just because someone supports the republican part does not mean they hate women and love violence against women.
Have you SEEN the comments made by the American GOP?
Am I misunderstanding what GOP means? Doesn't GOP=Rep Party? If so, and if 1/3+ of your population are members of that party, then your statements are very hateful and unacceptable since you are branding millions based on the quotes you will give from a handful.
Here are just some common excerpts I found:
- America is a "Christian" nation.
But it is. Oh not constitutionally, but functionally it is. I'm not saying that's right that it is, but it seems to be the reality of your country from what I see as an outsider, and from what both religious, and even more so, anti-religious, people on this forum say all the time.
- Minority babies are "not good" because they support Democrats who give them food stamps.
Well that sounds pretty bad. That guy/girl sounds like a bigot all right. I wonder though what the context was and if your paraphrasing does the original quote justice.
- Being gay is a choice and they commit suicide, not because of us taunting them, but by their own gayness.
Unless you are bi, I agree, that's clearly an incorrect statement about choice. As for the suicide, its a half truth. Being taunted alone is not enough reason for someone to kill themselves, there is always more to the story (although I doubt "gayness" is the other part). BTW, what makes you think all, or even most, republican supporters agree with that statement?
- Liberals are supported by illegal immigrants.
Well they are. In the current US political landscape Dems are more likely than Repubs to support methods to legalize illegal immigrants. Human self interest therefore dictates that more of their votes (if they vote) will go to Democrats.
Do you seriously not consider these hateful? These common talking points that are thrown around?
A couple of them are, a couple are just things you don't agree with.
Also: America has NO hate speech laws. For good reason. Because hate laws in America would only serve to pacify any progressive movement, as it would be considered offensive.
That's a shame. I had thought some laws might exist, even though I knew you were overboard on freedom of speach. In Canada we wouldn't, for example, tolerate a hate group like the Westbro Bapist idiots heckling at a funeral.
1. When they say America is a "christian nation" they actually mean it was FOUNDED by Christian who wanted to "serve God." They also say non-christians are not American. Yes, this also means Jews are not American. That is a myth that only exists because preachers lied to their congregations enough times.
Historians have debunked this multiple times. It was founded by Deistic principles. Back when America was first founded, Deism was a sub-category of Atheism. Atheism was a rejection of the big three. Anything that wasn't in the big three was an Atheist. So in truth, America was founded by what was then-called Atheism. It wasn't until recently did Atheism "break up" and these two terms meant totally different things.
2. The minority babies part comes from a republican group saying America is in trouble because more Minority babies are being born than white babies. If you want, I can get the speech for you.
3. Because it a common talking point among the anti-gay groups, which are many. They claim its an unnatural lifestyle. You can find claims like this in the Christian Right. The most glaring example is the district Michael Bachmann used to lead. She left a mini-bachmann (a person who believes the same as Bachmann) and as a result gays were killing themselves en mass. Her district was the closest you can get to a theocracy without breaking the law.
So instead of recognizing bullying as a problem, they said gays kill themselves because their "unnatural lifestyle led them to it." Pick any one of the anti gay groups and you'll find claims like these.
4. When they say they are supported by illegal immigrants. They mean all their supporters would be living off food stamps and are illegal immigrants. Its this attitude that led to widespread racism against Hispanics in red states.
Well they are. In the current US political landscape Dems are more likely than Repubs to support methods to legalize illegal immigrants. Human self interest therefore dictates that more of their votes (if they vote) will go to Democrats.
hidden for 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
1. When they say America is a "christian nation" they actually mean it was FOUNDED by Christian who wanted to "serve God."
2. The minority babies part comes from a republican group saying America is in trouble because more Minority babies are being born than white babies. If you want, I can get the speech for you.
3. Because it a common talking point among the anti-gay groups, which are many.
4. When they say they are supported by illegal immigrants. They mean all their supporters would be living off food stamps and are illegal immigrants. Its this attitude that led to widespread racism against Hispanics in red states.
Ah, I see. Clearly American politics is nuttier than I thought as I "missed the code words". Thanks for the clarification.
Even so... do you really think everyone who supports the Republicans thinks that extremist way? With roughly half of the votes going to them each election I find it hard to believe that half (or even a quarter) of Americans are closed minded and ill informed specimines from Victorian times.
If America is really that messed up, I can see why you have been falling apart lately.
Well they are. In the current US political landscape Dems are more likely than Repubs to support methods to legalize illegal immigrants. Human self interest therefore dictates that more of their votes (if they vote) will go to Democrats.
Ah, how quickly they forget George W. Bush....
You are correct. I should have said are PERCEIVED as more likely.
Well they are. In the current US political landscape Dems are more likely than Repubs to support methods to legalize illegal immigrants. Human self interest therefore dictates that more of their votes (if they vote) will go to Democrats.
Ah, how quickly they forget George W. Bush....
An ultimate irony, as George W. Bush did more to outreach to minorities than any Republican president prior and in the years that follow the GOP pretty much looks like the party that would elect George Wallace over George Bush.
hidden for 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
1. When they say America is a "christian nation" they actually mean it was FOUNDED by Christian who wanted to "serve God."
2. The minority babies part comes from a republican group saying America is in trouble because more Minority babies are being born than white babies. If you want, I can get the speech for you.
3. Because it a common talking point among the anti-gay groups, which are many.
4. When they say they are supported by illegal immigrants. They mean all their supporters would be living off food stamps and are illegal immigrants. Its this attitude that led to widespread racism against Hispanics in red states.
Ah, I see. Clearly American politics is nuttier than I thought as I "missed the code words". Thanks for the clarification.
Even so... do you really think everyone who supports the Republicans thinks that extremist way? With roughly half of the votes going to them each election I find it hard to believe that half (or even a quarter) of Americans are closed minded and ill informed specimines from Victorian times.
If America is really that messed up, I can see why you have been falling apart lately.
The republican party is essentially "dying."
Its getting more unpopular as time goes on, and moderates are beginning to flee the party. Pretty soon, the only people left in the GOP would be the extremists.
The GOP relies on tradition and religious authority, and those traditions are becoming less and less relevant to the newer generations. Newer generations are sliding into pseudo-Deism. In fact, its becoming an anathema to modern America. They don't want to follow traditions that date back to the time (circa 1950) when women were property and being gay was an actual crime that sent you to prison.
The GOP would either have to reinvent itself to be in line with the modern generations, or lose any political power they have.
1. When they say America is a "christian nation" they actually mean it was FOUNDED by Christian who wanted to "serve God."
2. The minority babies part comes from a republican group saying America is in trouble because more Minority babies are being born than white babies. If you want, I can get the speech for you.
3. Because it a common talking point among the anti-gay groups, which are many.
4. When they say they are supported by illegal immigrants. They mean all their supporters would be living off food stamps and are illegal immigrants. Its this attitude that led to widespread racism against Hispanics in red states.
Ah, I see. Clearly American politics is nuttier than I thought as I "missed the code words". Thanks for the clarification.
Even so... do you really think everyone who supports the Republicans thinks that extremist way? With roughly half of the votes going to them each election I find it hard to believe that half (or even a quarter) of Americans are closed minded and ill informed specimines from Victorian times.
If America is really that messed up, I can see why you have been falling apart lately.
The republican party is essentially "dying."
Its getting more unpopular as time goes on, and moderates are beginning to flee the party. Pretty soon, the only people left in the GOP would be the extremists.
The GOP relies on tradition and religious authority, and those traditions are becoming less and less relevant to the newer generations. Newer generations are sliding into pseudo-Deism. In fact, its becoming an anathema to modern America. They don't want to follow traditions that date back to the time (circa 1950) when women were property and being gay was an actual crime that sent you to prison.
The GOP would either have to reinvent itself to be in line with the modern generations, or lose any political power they have.
You say that, but they also keep winning elections.
Ah, I see. Clearly American politics is nuttier than I thought as I "missed the code words". Thanks for the clarification.
Even so... do you really think everyone who supports the Republicans thinks that extremist way? With roughly half of the votes going to them each election I find it hard to believe that half (or even a quarter) of Americans are closed minded and ill informed specimines from Victorian times.
If America is really that messed up, I can see why you have been falling apart lately.
The republican party is essentially "dying."
Its getting more unpopular as time goes on, and moderates are beginning to flee the party. Pretty soon, the only people left in the GOP would be the extremists.
The GOP relies on tradition and religious authority, and those traditions are becoming less and less relevant to the newer generations. Newer generations are sliding into pseudo-Deism. In fact, its becoming an anathema to modern America. They don't want to follow traditions that date back to the time (circa 1950) when women were property and being gay was an actual crime that sent you to prison.
The GOP would either have to reinvent itself to be in line with the modern generations, or lose any political power they have.
You say that, but they also keep winning elections.
Which elections? Wisconsin? Especially since there has been misinformation on it.
People like Santorum winning in the south? Its to be expected. Hardly a victory because the south puts religion over everything.
.
I agree with you to a certain degree - There is a 'war on women'.
The Republicans are doing it all of the time, let me give an example:
"Herman Cain says A, B and C are good. Herman Cain is black. A,B and C are racist against black people, But because Herman Cain is black he can't be racist against his own people"
-Wrong. He is being paid to go on the front of the stage and speak out for the views of certain people.
"A woman says A,B and C are good. A woman is, well, a woman. A,B, and C are misogynistic and sexist against women, But because a woman is, well, a woman, she can't be misogynistic and sexist"
-Wrong. She is being paid to go on the front of the stage and speak out for the views of certain people.
I agree that there are some women who think that way but I truly believe that allowing government such rights to enter your privacy is as insane as blacks allowing and supporting their local states to pass segregation laws.