“THE BABY IS THE WOMAN’S PROPERTY IN MUCH THE WAY THAT YOUR LIVER IS YOUR PROPERTY”
|| By MANDE WILKES || Boy, do I hate it when I’m compelled to adopt a Democratic position. It just breaks my cold conservative heart, you know? On social issues like abortion and gay marriage, though, I find that actually the left’s position is often more aligned with conservative principles.
Weird.
Anyway, such is the case with abortion, a topic that has lately dominated headlines. A pro-life group has released undercover videos appearing to show abortionists negotiating the sale of fetal tissue. Worse, the people depicted in the video are employees of Planned Parenthood — the women’s-health conglomerate which receives half a billion dollars annually in federal support.
Right off the bat I’ll admit that the videos are unpleasant to watch. The content is by turns gruesome and sterile — dry medical talk on the subject of terminating babies in such a way as to preserve “intact” organ tissue.
And that’s where the controversy begins. What happens to the fetal tissue, after it’s removed from the patient’s body? Some patients elect to donate the tissue to medical research. In those instances Planned Parenthood is permitted by law to recoup costs associated with the donation, but cannot profit from the transaction.
The organization contends that that’s the extent of its financial involvement in the process. But the videos — possibly edited, certainly voided of context — do make it appear as if babies are being sliced up and sold like deli meat.
And so it is that the abortion debate has been reignited with a vengeance. Republicans argue about the sanctity of life, and Democrats think it’s an issue of privacy.
Wrong and wrong — virtually everyone gets it dead wrong on this subject.
Framing it as a property-rights issue brings clarity. Attached to a pregnant woman’s body is her gestating baby. It’s a fixture. It’s part of her body, just like her liver or her lungs. To lay claim to a part of a person’s body, then, is to disregard the concept of property rights.
Unfortunately, it’s not an uncommon theme in this country. The government shows less and less respect for that which people own. Property taxes keep climbing even as zoning laws keep restricting use of that very property — and those are just two examples. Frankly it scares me the extent to which our property rights continue to erode. What scares me more, though, is how little attention this issue gets from the media or from voters.
That’s why I’m doubly disappointed in the reaction to the undercover videos. Here we have a unique opportunity to identify and correct a growing threat to our freedom, and yet we’re stuck repeating the same dueling choruses of “life” versus “choice.”
This is where that cold, conservative heart comes in handy. It’s necessary here to separate our beliefs from our emotions and our actions from our reactions. No, it’s not pretty to listen to executives discuss the details of abortion procedures. It’s especially ugly when the videos make it sound, to the naïve ear, like those same executives are negotiating for profit on the backs (literally) of dead babies.
But try and consider it from the perspective of the patient herself — the woman to whom the fetus is attached in the same way that her fingernail is attached to her nail bed. The baby is the woman’s property in much the way that your liver is your property. That which is within us is our own, and if we wish to donate it for research purposes then that’s our prerogative. What happens after that choice is made might make us squirm, and that’s OK. If we don’t like abortions, we don’t have to have one.
Am I getting too touchy-feely about this? I fear I’m veering into what may start to sound all “our bodies, ourselves.” To be clear, the position I’m staking is not born (ha!) of some misguided feminist mantra, nor is it born of a rightwing obsession with religiosity. No, this position is both more sane and less radical than either the Democratic or the Republican stance.
In America, nothing is more sacred than the concept of private property. Indeed, the country itself was founded in rebellion of a government which didn’t respect ownership rights. As a culture it’s time we clarify our definition of “property” to encompass that most basic property right — ownership of our own bodies.
If you think this sounds like a bridge too far, consider that the Supreme Court has long considered a job as someone’s property. That’s why government workers rarely lose their jobs. It might constitute a “taking” of the worker’s property. If we recognize a mere job as deserving of protection, then surely we should extend that same deference to our bodies.
Mande Wilkes is a wife, mother, businesswoman, author, etc. residing on the South Carolina coast with her family. Email her at m@mandewilkes.com. This column – reprinted with permission – originally appeared in The (Myrtle Beach, S.C.) Sun News.
118 comments
I have never been a particularly religious person and have been known to violate a couple of moral concepts during my lifetime. But, buying off on this logic is “a bridge too far.”
Excuse me, I now have to go and dump some of my property in the sewer system.
Hold on, it takes a brain a long time to flush. So planned parenthood says,
Mande is merely hewing close to the Ayn Rand line on this. Rand was totally pro-abortion.
She also hated religion and denounced Ronald Reagan, yet Republicans still adore her.
Actually, every baby in the womb has a unique DNA unto itself.
Sounds to me like Mande is a supporter of 3rd tri-mester abortions. Hell the way she talks she’s in favor of abortion in the 9th month.
Yes.Mande is the poster child for what Mother Teresa once said…’if a mother can kill her own child, what can be next’?
If a woman believes her child is no different that her tv or computer (property)…my guess is that she is souless and a POS as a mother.
Mother Teresa only wanted live babies because they could eventually turn into dying poor people. She loved to watch people suffer.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2287427/Was-Mother-Teresa-saintly-Researchers-spark-controversy-claiming-care-sick-dubious-handling-cash-suspicious.html
As usual, Mande provides interesting food for thought. Like her, the two “social issues” she mentioned are where I part company with conservative philosophy.
Glad to see you back, Mande!
If it’s a property rights issue because the baby is “attached” to you, then why can’t you deliver it, kill it before cutting the umbilical cord, then donate those sweet, sweet organs to science for a small “handling” fee?
Please don’t give those folks any ideas…..
Jackie, frantically on the phone to 911 after waking up from a wet dream: “I just abandoned hundreds, perhaps thousands of my children in a hostile, unsurvivable climate where they will all surely die! WHAT KIND OF MONSTER AM I???? Please send the police so that justice may be done to me. I confess to all of it.
*Sees tray full of parts for sale
*Immediately thinks about semen
Mande dining on fetus: “it’s a property rights issue.”
sort of like this >>>>
A fishing trawler goes down, leaving only one survivor. Eventually, he washes ashore on a remote island inhabited by cannibals. They capture him and tie him to a stake, where they proceed to nick him with their spears and drink his blood. This goes on for two weeks. The guy can’t take it any longer and asks to see the chief. When the cannibal leader arrives, the guy says, “Look, chief … either let me go or kill me. I’m tired
of being stuck for the drinks.”
This is a very gruesome article for a Sunday evening!
“To be clear, the position I’m staking is not born (ha!) of some misguided feminist mantra, nor is it born of a rightwing obsession with religiosity.”
So what? Congratulations on showing how “practical” you are by not veering to one extreme or another. The truth, however, is white you may not align with radical feminists generally, this is exactly what they would argue. “Property rights”, “control over our own bodies”, “medical privacy”, etc are just covers for unfettered abortion. If you are going to argue for these things then logic will not allow you to take a softer position. You gloss over that, as well as the fact that a creation of a market for the baby parts only incentivizes encouragement of more abortions and discourages reproductive responsibility. I just don’t even understand the need to write any of what you did. Surely you can do a better job at anticipating obvious objections to what you’re going to write.
Mande buying fresh farmed fetus parts at the farmers market: “it’s a property rights issue.”
While I would dispute that property rights comes before the right to life whether you use religion or our country’s founding principles, I’m going to argue my point solely on the issue of property rights.
First, is the obvious. The mother and child have separate DNA that distinguishes one from the other. But it is not enough to deny the mother ownership. After all if a person has a transplanted organ, it is not their DNA, yet no one would dispute that the organ is the donee’s property.
A fetus is defined as “an unborn human baby more than eight weeks after conception.”
By that definition we clearly understand that we are now concidering two individuals if not more with a multiple pregnancy. The 13th ammendment outlawing slavery prohibited the ownership of another individual and the 14th ammendment guarantees due process in taking away of some else’s rights.
Property can also be owned by more than one individual. In cases in which property is jointly owned, one owner can not damage or destroy the interest of the other owner. “Theoretically, all joint owners have an equal right to possess and use the entire property, regardless of their fractional share of the whole title. http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/rights-and-duties-of-joint-owners-of-real-property.html
So we have two individuals sharing the same property. A fetus develops finger nails at 12 weeks. If those finger nails are the mother’s property then the mother’s own fingernails are the fetus’s property as well.
While a minor can not purchase property, they can own it in various ways such as an estate or inheritance. In those situations the government has the right and obligation to protect the minor’s rights and interest in the property. Until it is possible to safely separate the common interest of the mother and child in a way that protects that property then each the mother and the child can be restricted from damaging the other’s property rights.
While I would dispute that property rights comes before the right to life whether you use religion or our country’s founding principles.
——–
In 2010, the law protected a Houston taco-truck owner who shot a man for stealing a tip jar containing $20.12. Also in Houston, a store clerk recently killed a man for shoplifting a twelve-pack of beer, and in 2008 a man from Laredo was acquitted for killing a 13-year-old boy who broke into his trailer looking for snacks and soda.
Texas law also justifies killing to protect others’ property. In 2007, a man told 14 times by a 911 operator to remain inside during a robbery gunned down two thieves fleeing from his neighbor’s house. (“There’s no property worth shooting somebody over, OK?” the operator said on the call. The shooter’s response: “The law has been changed….Here it goes, buddy! You hear the shotgun clickin’ and I’m goin’!”) He was acquitted the next year.
Thursday, June 11, 2015
BAYTOWN, TX (KTRK) –A burglary suspect was shot and killed by a homeowner in Baytown on Tuesday, according to police.
Baytown Police say David Hernandez, 24, was fatally shot by an unidentified homeowner in the 1700 block of N. 5th Street.
The homeowner is not charged.
JUNE 16, 2015
SAN ANTONIO — The Bexar County Medical Examiner’s Office identified a man Thursday who was killed by a homeowner after an alleged burglary gone bad on the Southeast Side Tuesday.
Davis Phillips, 36, died from a gunshot wound to the back and was found dead inside a vehicle at an apartment complex in the 2800 block of Lasses Boulevard.
His death occurred after he allegedly tried to steal something from a home after jumping over a fence at 3 p.m. on the corner of Pecan Valley Drive and Pollydale Avenue, said SAPD Sgt. Tina Jones.
As Phillips was heading back over the fence, the homeowner ran outside and shot at the suspect, police said.
Phillips and another person inside a brown Ford Crown Victoria drove away from the scene.
A Colorado woman accused of cutting the unborn baby (that died as a result) from an expectant mother’s womb will not face murder charges in the gruesome attack that revived the highly charged debate over when a fetus can legally be considered a human being.
___________________________________
Should have been charged with theft or destruction of property.
will not face murder charges
——
Apparently you don’t want to defend your “dispute that property rights comes before the right to life whether you use religion or our country’s founding principles.”
Do you really think murder defined as termination of a pregnancy would be a less embarrassing discussion?
Well, you know not all property crimes are the same. I think the tip jar with $20.12, a twelve-pack of beer, or snacks andsoda are each much more serious crimes than steeling a fetus. I mean, how money is the mother of a fetus out for anyway?
Mande walking through rows of slaves circa 1851: “well, if you look at it from the slave owners position then it makes perfect sense that they’re entitled to sell their slaves for body parts.”
Jackie walking across the parking lot from the sperm bank to his car: “OMG! What have I done?!?!?!? I sold thousands of my children into slavery to some strangers!!!!”
Corruption in Columbia bringing cup of semen to organ tissue purchaser:
“Here’s some more hearts, kidneys, and eyeballs for you to cure cancer with.”
Jackie getting out of the shower: ‘I just jerked off , and killed a million babies,but no one will ever know.’
It’s like a daily ritual genocide.
9″ bringing cup of semen to tissue purchaser:
“Here’s another batch of organs for you to perform research on.”
So does the baby have a right to its…er…pivate property…it’s liver, spleen, brain, bone marrow, spinal cord, etc?
You took the words right out of my mouth, handsoff. To compare a baby to a fingernail or an organ is just disgusting and shows a complete disregard for life itself. A fetus is not “like” anything….it’s a human being. Slave owners also used the “property” argument some years ago and eventually (rightfully) lost for the same reason your argument doesn’t hold weight: private property doesn’t include the “ownership” of a human being. Just because that human being relies on you for its own life, doesn’t give you the right to end it any more than it gives you the right to kill a two year old child for just pissing you off on a random bad day. Also, you’re wrong, Ms. Wilkes, there is something more sacred in America than the “concept of private property.” It’s called “life” and the right to it.
A fetus doesn’t HAVE that ‘property’.
When does it and who determines that?
Probably you,when you say so. Ain’t no point in arguing w/people like you about this,and since we’re both men , we don’t know shit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVeR7VLLQc8
(thinks humanity is determined by the subjective belief of a woman)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBLNYuKLYD0
Mande walking through rows of holocaust victims circa 1941: “well, if you take the nazi position that Jews aren’t people, then it makes sense that they should sell the gold from their teeth for profit.”
Awaiting Taylor’s rebuttal with baited breath.
Mande trying to sell her child on Craigslist: “it’s MY baby and you’re telling me I can’t sell him? The steady erosion of property rights in America continues.”
Mande after arrest for prostitution: ” I own MY body and I can’t sell it??”
You bring up one of the great injustices of our legal system. Wgy is it a crime to sell something you can give away? That is a more open and honest transaction than what the law sees many women doing every day, but calling it other things just to “stay legal”. Whether sharing their “favors” for a raise or promotion, of maybe for that envied political “appointment”, it happens every day.
Corruption in Columbia picking through tray of baby parts for sale:
“The real tragedy here is that this fetus wasn’t able to sell its body for sex.”
Jackie walking back to his car after spending the evening with a prostitute: “NO!!!! Please tell me I didn’t just leave thousands of my potential children in some whore’s (pick one or more) hoo-ha/esophagus/anus/dirty condom/etc.
Mande trying to sell kidney on Craigslist: “you mean to tell me I can’t even sell MY kidney? I thought this was America where people owned themselves.”
Mande denied trying to sell self into slavery: ” I own myself, why can’t I sell myself?”
Attached to a
pregnant woman’sgestating baby’s body is her/hisgestating babymother. It’s a fixture. It’s part ofherthe baby’s body,You even slip up and call “it” like liver, or lungs a baby. Everyone understands the difference.
You are Republican property. Live it. Love it. You’re just a woman.
“To lay claim to a part of a person’s body, then, is to disregard the concept of property rights.”
Like a baby’s liver, kidneys and eyes?
“Frankly it scares me the extent to which our property rights continue to erode.”
It’s been happening ever since they took away our slaves, now it’s babies. When will it end?
Communication Breakdown, It’s always the same,
I’m having a nervous breakdown, Drive me insane!
But try and consider it from the perspective of the patient herself — the baby
womanto whom thefetuswoman is attached“OK. If we don’t like abortions, we don’t have to have one.”
What if the baby doesn’t want to be one and the cut up and sold afterwards.
You’re just like crosstown traffic
So hard to get through to you
Crosstown traffic
I don’t need to run over you
Crosstown traffic
All you do is slow me down
And I’m tryin’ to get on the other side of town
I’m not the only soul who’s accused of hit and run
Tire tracks all across your back
I can, I can see you had your fun
But, darlin’ can’t you see my signals turn from green to red
And with you I can see a traffic jam straight up ahead
You’re just like crosstown traffic
So hard to get through to you
Crosstown traffic
I don’t need to run over you
Crosstown traffic
All you do is slow me down
And I got better things on the other side of town
“Supreme Court has long considered a job as someone’s property.”
The courts have not found any such right. Government jobs are protect by civil service law and union agreements.
Jobs may also be protected by state statues and employment contracts.
But then you might have graduated from the CSOL. Did you pass the Bar?
Good point, I overlooked that while reading the article. To think that your job and your unborn child is chattel and you can do with each as you see fit, is ridiculous and illegal.
A man… he works from dawn to dusk…
A woman.. she don’t ever stop…
A woman… she works in the hot sun… in the shadow of a man…
I hear my train a comin’…
Comin’ to take me away…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EX5phFmbrU8
His father works some days for fourteen hours
And you can bet he barely makes a dollar
His mother goes to scrub the floor for many
And you’d best believe she hardly gets a penny
Living just enough, just enough for the city…yeah
His sister’s black but she is sho ’nuff pretty
Her skirt is short but Lord her legs are sturdy
To walk to school she’s got to get up early
Her clothes are old but never are they dirty
Living just enough, just enough for the city…um hum
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfbvm52G8fE
When you believe in things you don’t understand,
Then you suffer,
Superstition ain’t the way, yeh, yeh.
Very superstitious, nothin’ more to say,
Very superstitious, the devil’s on his way,
Thirteen month old baby, broke the lookin’ glass,
Seven years of bad luck, good things in your past.
When you believe in things that you don’t understand,
Then you suffer,
Superstition ain’t the way, no, no, no.
Read more: Stevie Wonder – Superstition Lyrics | MetroLyrics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CFuCYNx-1g
Twenty-eight years have come and gone.
And she’s seen a lot of tears
Of the ones who come in.
They really seem to need her there.
It’s a sacrifice working day to day.
For little money just tips for pay.
But it’s worth it all just to hear them say that they care.
She works hard for the money.
So hard for it, honey.
She works hard for the money.
So you better treat her right.
Already knows she’s seen her bad times.
Already knows these are the good times.
She’ll never sell out, she never will, not for a dollar bill.
She works hard
She works hard for the money.
So hard for it, honey.
She works hard for the money.
So you better treat her right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MX7MbG6MiQs
I have a hard time building a life philosophy on the rantings of a heroin addict.
What would posess you to consider such insanity?
Oh, come on, come on, come on, come on
Didn’t I make you feel like you were the only man? Yeah
An’ didn’t I give you nearly everything that a woman possibly can?
Honey, you know I did
And, and each time I tell myself that I, well I think I’ve had enough
But I’m gonna, gonna show you baby, that a woman can be tough
I’ll say come on, come on, come on, come on and take it
Take another little piece of my heart now, baby
Oh, oh, break it
Break another little bit of my heart now, darling, yeah
Oh, oh, have a
Have another little piece of my heart now, baby
Well you know you got it, child, if it makes you feel good
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SL0oRcD7t0
Upvote.Saw her in 1969.
http://georgiamusic.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/69-ATLANTA.jpg
This whole debate seems to be rather anti-capitalist to me.
Let’s cut food stamps
Let’s get rid of welfare
Let’s get rid of condoms
Let’s get rid of sex education
And force women to term, even if it kills them.
Because we love them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bld_-7gzJ-o
You are disgusting and have no value in society.A hateful divider that mocks Christ,Life and anything that is moral in our society today.
Other than that you are ok in my book.
There is a great ladder of religious cruelty, with many rounds; but three of these are the most important. Once on a time men sacrificed human beings to their God, and perhaps just those they loved the best—to this category belong the firstling sacrifices of all primitive religions.
But the feral Republican – to Whom, and of what still remained to be sacrificed? The poor.
Was it not necessary in the end for Republicans to prove their faith by sacrificing everything comforting, holy, healing, all hope, all faith in hidden harmonies, in future blessedness and justice, but of those who had nothing?
Was it not necessary for Republicans, out of cruelty, to worship stone, stupidity, gravity, fate, nothingness? To sacrifice God for political emptiness – total nothingness— The Donald? The paradoxical mystery of the ultimate cruelty has been reserved for the rising generation; for they must be corrupted as well.
Even more mindless gibberish.
Yes, your post is again mindless gibberish! Good on you for being honest!
“The Times of India, reporting on the controversial essay, wrote that the
authors asserted Mother Teresa saw beauty in the downtrodden’s
suffering and was far more willing to pray for them than provide
practical medical care.”
That’s what Jesus would do.
Euwe max whispering to tray of baby parts for sale: “well, at least I would’ve allowed you to get free lunch at school.”
Confused, she offered the mass of cells on the toilet seat a piece of toast.
Euwe max staring at tray of baby parts for sale:
“Cells sure are big these days.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aclS1pGHp8o
Jackie to a wad of jizz on his toilet seat as he puts down the Hustler magazine: “Oh no!!!! I’ll never get to give you your bottles, change your diapers, take you to school!!!! WHAT HAVE I DONE!!! ??? !!!
Corruption in Columbia staring at tray of baby parts:
“Lol, this is what I shoot into my wife every night.”
Euwe max whispering to holocauast victim being loaded onto train: “I’ve got my fellow nazis to give the people back in your village that we consider humans increased welfare benefits. Thought you’d like to know.”
*shoves onto train, slams door shut
*shoves onto train, slams door shut
———-
(frantically, she hunted through her menstrual fluids for something to bury)
(Thinks tissue companies are buying menstrual fluid for organ research.)
Is it a tissue issue?
Mindless Gibberish
I agree, your post absolutely is.
Maximum population growth, minimum support. Hurray for starving children!
This is what the Republican party actually believes.
and in other news:
Burning of Christian churches in Israel justified, far-Right Jewish leader says
Head of Lehava, known for violent campaign against Jew-Arab assimilation, risks arrest with public defence of setting fire to Holy Land churches
Let’s just step back and recall what we learned from Monty Python’s Meaning of Life – – – – – – “Every sperm is precious, every sperm is great, when a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irrate.”
“Every sperm is precious, every sperm is great….. when a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irrate.”
“Framing it as a property-rights issue brings clarity. Attached to a pregnant woman’s body is her gestating baby. It’s a fixture. It’s part of her body, just like her liver or her lungs.”
Wrong and wrong — Mande gets it dead wrong on this subject.
Every sperm is precisous, every sperm is great…… when a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irrate.
“Hey Baby, let’s buy a house. We need another 5% down. Get undressed and I’ll pull back the covers.”
PROPERTY RIGHTS? Really.
This is the dumbest thing I have ever read.
Yea….Mande employed the typical truncated 1-liner regarding property rights. “If you think this sounds like a bridge too far, consider that the Supreme Court has long considered a job as someone’s property.”
What Mande failed to do was give you the actual court’s position. The deprivation of a job only raises a due process issue when one has a “legitimate expectation of continued employment.” State law governs the creation of a property right. Thus, a worker with a contract for continued employment does have a property right and must be afforded certain rights (Eldridge).
I remember when abortions were illegal.I took a girlfriend to a motel to have one.Once the ‘doctor’ left , I had to take her to ER;she was bleeding to death…I’m pro choice.
(outed as old)
you got that right.I’m old enough to know better,but still young enough to do it…;)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgbDVkYOyHM
What if the fetus is pregnant and has a fetus of its own?
The videos, “possibly edited”… Why can’t anyone tell if they were edited or not? Just another lame excuse in lieu of a substantive argument.
Why does this idiot get platform to write things – or get asked to run for office? What a heartless bitch.
The Democrats own you. They always have. The media tells you ehat to think, and you do what you’re told, like a faithful little leming.
And like so many FITSNews comrades, you don’t even know it.
Please hush GrandTango, the adults are talking.
First time ever for you, I bet. (:
This argument is missing some important elements. First off, in many of these cases where fetal tissue is transferred, a few things have happened prior to the transfer. First, a woman, or a couple, have made the agonizing choice to abort a pregnancy. Maybe that choice was actually already made, that a miscarriage is in process, or there is a fetal abnormality. They are then given the option to donate that tissue for research. Let’s say it’s a pending miscarriage, that the fetus has ceased to be a viable birth. The parents, including the mother, are given the option to donate this tissue for research that may help others in the future if causes and treatments can be found. Let’s say it’s an abnormality – an even tougher choice. But the same rule applies, making that tissue available for research to avoid abnormalities in the future. So at this point, a couple, a mother, a family, have already faced a very difficult decision. Their choice to make that tissue available for research is a very private decision. Now along come somebody with an iPhone – video taping the transaction that takes place outside of their choice. But the decision, as difficult as it is, was made by the parents. And yet somehow, people now want to take that choice away from the family, because they want to dictate to the family what they should and shouldn’t do.
“…virtually everyone gets it dead wrong on this subject…Framing it as a property-rights issue brings clarity…”
Wow, just wow. Could you possibly get this any “wronger”?
Selling livers saves lives.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aclS1pGHp8o
Hitler convinced people like you, and the rest of the Democrat Party, that the Jewish people were his property, too.
The ignorant are incapable of learning, aren’t you?
Then if a baby is a woman’s “property”, we shouldn’t saddle men with having to pay for someone else’s property, right????
Mande, your gorgeous and intelligent, but not very good at research. I’ll give you a shot at making up on the whole research thing. Every video released has also been put online… No edits. The full context is there.. Now go, watch and rethink your conclusion. Adios Chika
you’re*
It’s not a woman’s place to be critical, we are the teachers, and you are the teachee.
Allow us to erect the edifice upon which you are educated… your best interest is served by adoring our imperfections, cheer leading rather than cock blocking.
Within the Republican, really “deep down,” (measured in nanometers) there is, of course, something unteachable, some granite of spiritual sputum – of predetermined decision and answer to a predetermined selected questions… any question falling close enough is thus translated into the question that “should have been posed,” so that the “best answer” can be selected.
Whenever a cardinal problem is at stake, there speaks an unchangeable “this is our political imperative.” About a woman’s choice, for example, Republicans cannot think apart, but only continue the answer that has been already given to them. he answer has already seen in their mind’s eye, its common destination – even before they have considered it… based on the impetus received “in the beginning” from Faux news, at the water cooler, or the local AM hate radio station.
Where the self-aware sees information and reflection as steps to self-knowledge, to his ultimate relationship to his fellows, the Republican sees only signposts on the road to Stupid assuring him he has been faithful to what is, in essence, his external self, his dictated morality, his “faith” – what shall ultimately become his internal, spiritual sputum.
When female voices are heard analyzing—holy Aristophanes!—Republican men are frightened! For women then threaten with medical explicitness what woman wants from man, first and last! Is it not in the worst taste, a forbidden trespass of “fashion” when woman sets about becoming scientific in that way?
For enlightenment is the sole property of the Republican political pundit, whose morality is unimpeachable – as the mount Olympus of unattainable insight – of the Mormon Romney, or the trans-Jesus, the Donald.
For whatever women write about “woman,” Republicans, in the end, reserve a healthy suspicion as to whether woman really wants enlightenment… about herself, about life, about her ultimate purpose in relation to “man.” Whether, innately, woman can possess the will to be enlightened.
The Republican may well assert: “Woman does not want truth” – what is truth, after all, to woman? From “the beginning,” a weak derivative of man, nothing has been more alien, repugnant, and hostile, they assert, to the spirit of a woman, than truth — her great art since the garden has been the lie, and her greatest concern is mere appearance, and beauty.
For the Republican woman, is it not true that on the whole “woman” has so far been despised most by the Republican woman herself? Has she not despised the independence of feminism – as Phyllis Schlafly- despised the very notion of equality of power with men – in the workplace, in church, in war?
Republicans wish that woman should not go on compromising herself through enlightenment – just as it was Republican’s thoughtfulness and consideration for woman that found expression in the church decree: mutter taceat in ecclesia!
..and the Republican woman has no greater friend than in the counsel: mutter taceat de mulierel
The Republican man must in his inner heart (so to speak) conceive of woman as possession, as vaginal property that can be locked, and all matter going in, and coming out is personally monitored by them. Something predestined for service and achieving her greatest perfection in the sexual manifestation of that.
For if woman should unlearn her fear of man, she surrenders her most womanly instincts… of service, of nurturing, of submission. More precisely, when the Republican in man is no longer desired and cultivated – woman then aspires to the antagonism of man’s sexual appetite and becomes “woman as cold, calculating bitch.”
As she thus takes possession of new rights, Republicans see her aspiration to become “master,” a trans-gender, a man with purchased breasts and clinically defined erogenous zones, rather than being excited simply by being desired by a Republican male. This, to a Republican – the ownership of her sexuality, and of her internal processes – is retrogressing.
Woman, who may today escape ownership by a single male, must be prevented from being totally unowned. Her sexual ownership must be secured symbolically by the male-centered “state,” preserving for the Republican, the comforting and “traditional” ownership of the woman and her sexual desires and ability to satisfy man’s sexual needs, as “property.”
As if Nikki Haley hasn’t emasculated every.male, Republican or Democrat, that has attacked her. And yet, Republicans, men and women, enthusiastically vote for her.
The facts just never seem to fit your naratives.
The Republican women you describe seem more like Hillary.
Phyllis Schlafly, mAnn Coulter, Megyn Kelly, Gretta Van Sustren, Pamela Geller,Cathie Adams, Ann Barnhardt, Brigitte Gabriel, Cathy Hinners,Laura Ingraham,Claire Lopez, Jeanine Pirro, Sandy Rios, Debbie Schlussel, Dianna West, Michelle Malkin
All powerful strong women.
I don’t know all of them. Have any run for office, been nominated by the Republican party or elected? The voters don’t choose pundits.
Republicans.
Fox News anchor and host of The Kelly File, Megyn Kelly, has revealed her political affiliation while discussing the 2016 presidential candidates. According to NewsMax: In a lengthy sit-down interview for this week’s Variety cover story,Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly revealed that she doesn’t belong to either party.
She can always fall back on her killer bees.
On her On the Record show of November 17, 2004, Van Susteren interviewed Hillary about her husband. Mrs. Clinton said that “I think I know a great leader when I see one. And so does America. In 1992 and 1996, Americans chose a president who left our country in better shape than when he took office.”
euwe, why the war on women?
I’d say because Republicans are scum, but that would be redundant.