Things Ryan finds irrelevant regarding abortion

[ttt]

The following words occur zero times in his position paper on abortion:
Woman
Women
Mother
Health
Doctor
Privacy
Family


On the other hand, these words do appear once or more:
Economic
Business
Capitalism
Free market
and
Government (13 times)



paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=207539

Just in case you were wondering what his priorities are.

[2vermont]

Aug 14, 2012 15:57:37 GMT -5 ttt said:

The following words occur zero times in his position paper on abortion:
Woman
Women
Mother
Health
Doctor
Privacy
Family


On the other hand, these words do appear once or more:
Economic
Business
Capitalism
Free market
and
Government (13 times)



paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=207539

Just in case you were wondering what his priorities are.

This doesn't even sound like the pro-life movement.

[emmybean]

Is this the only position we have from Ryan on abortion?

[basilosaurus]

Aug 14, 2012 16:08:51 GMT -5 emmybean said:

Is this the only position we have from Ryan on abortion?

We have his voting record.

[ttt]

Aug 14, 2012 16:08:51 GMT -5 emmybean said:

Is this the only position we have from Ryan on abortion?

I don't know but it's the one on his website. It's the only official position from him that I've seen.

[MrsAxilla]

"Despite the “pro-choice” label, liberals’ stance on this subject actually diminishes choices, lowers goals, and leads us to live with less. That includes reducing the number of human beings who can make choices."

People really think he's smart?

[ttt]

Aug 14, 2012 16:19:10 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

"Despite the “pro-choice” label, liberals’ stance on this subject actually diminishes choices, lowers goals, and leads us to live with less. That includes reducing the number of human beings who can make choices."

People really think he's smart?

More babies = more choices!

^o)

[marie427]

Aug 14, 2012 16:20:08 GMT -5 ttt said:

Aug 14, 2012 16:19:10 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

"Despite the “pro-choice” label, liberals’ stance on this subject actually diminishes choices, lowers goals, and leads us to live with less. That includes reducing the number of human beings who can make choices."

People really think he's smart?

More babies = more choices!

I'll take your ^o) and raise you ^o) ^o) ^o)

[emmybean]

Aug 14, 2012 16:16:18 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

Aug 14, 2012 16:08:51 GMT -5 emmybean said:

Is this the only position we have from Ryan on abortion?

We have his voting record.

I mean in regards to his reasoning.

This is an extremely narrow and specific POV and if it's his only reasoning then he can go fuck himself with a rusty nail, but if it's only one point in a broader position, then; meh.

[wawa]

No, there are a few others on his site.

the one posted is by far the most detailed.
there's also this.

paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=193837

And then some stuff about the contraception mandate.

[basilosaurus]

Aug 14, 2012 16:19:10 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

"Despite the “pro-choice” label, liberals’ stance on this subject actually diminishes choices, lowers goals, and leads us to live with less. That includes reducing the number of human beings who can make choices."

People really think he's smart?

I've heard him described as a genius, an intellectual.

I blame Sarah Palin.

[Deleted]

Aug 14, 2012 16:25:41 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

Aug 14, 2012 16:19:10 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

"Despite the “pro-choice” label, liberals’ stance on this subject actually diminishes choices, lowers goals, and leads us to live with less. That includes reducing the number of human beings who can make choices."

People really think he's smart?

I've heard him described as a genius, an intellectual.

I blame Sarah Palin.

Well, yeah, he is by that standard, but then so is a bag of rocks lol

[wawa]

He also identifies himself as a pro-choice catholic, and mentions in the link I posted above as considering life to begin at conception (which i guess is kind of a no-brainer) but he doesn't really get into his reasoning beyond "it's killing a baby and that's wrong." That seems pretty typical though of pro-life politicians.

side note: I'm totally grossed out by this statement (last line in the thing I linked):

Most importantly, we must ensure that the most vulnerable among us – both unborn children and mothers struggling with unplanned pregnancies – are afforded the compassion and opportunities they need to choose life.

Oh...I see. We have to give women who are pregnant the compassion and opportunities they need...but only if they use it to do what we want them to. GO FUCK YOURSELF.

gah. the abortion debate has always been something I felt strongly about...but it recently hit home when somebody very close to me learned at her 20 week scan that her child would never live to leave the hospital. So she chose to terminate rather than deal with all the awkward well wishes throughout a pregnancy, the pain and risks of labor, the recovery period (which would be extra awesome since she has no mat leave benefits at all) and everything else for...nothing. At least it was still available in this state. I can't believe people would want to take that choice away from her. I really don't get it. It fills me with rage in fact. I'm not really going to be able to be even handed about this one for a little while.

[LoveTrains]

Wawa, I agree with you. My sister had an issue come up with her very much loved and wanted son and had to terminate post 20 weeks. His condition was incompatible with life. I am thankful that she was able to make that decision and not carry him to term, but it was heart breaking for her.

Anyone that would have told her she had to carry her son to term can go fuck themselves.

[heliocentric]

How does he reconcile this:

"Freedom and the choice it implies are moral rights which Americans are granted, not from government but from the principles that have made this a great and prosperous society. These principles uphold the equal natural rights of all human beings to live, be free, and pursue happiness, insofar as the exercise of these rights does not violate the corresponding rights of others."

With this:

"So the right of “choice” of one human being cannot trump the right to “life” of another."

[ttt]

Aug 14, 2012 17:08:10 GMT -5 heliocentric said:

How does he reconcile this:

"Freedom and the choice it implies are moral rights which Americans are granted, not from government but from the principles that have made this a great and prosperous society. These principles uphold the equal natural rights of all human beings to live, be free, and pursue happiness, insofar as the exercise of these rights does not violate the corresponding rights of others."

With this:

"So the right of “choice” of one human being cannot trump the right to “life” of another."

Women aren't people.HTH.

[heyjude]

Aug 14, 2012 17:09:19 GMT -5 ttt said:

Aug 14, 2012 17:08:10 GMT -5 heliocentric said:

How does he reconcile this:

"Freedom and the choice it implies are moral rights which Americans are granted, not from government but from the principles that have made this a great and prosperous society. These principles uphold the equal natural rights of all human beings to live, be free, and pursue happiness, insofar as the exercise of these rights does not violate the corresponding rights of others."

With this:

"So the right of “choice” of one human being cannot trump the right to “life” of another."

Women aren't people.HTH.

But corporations are!

[heyjude]

It goes women<children<fetus<corporation

[teflep]

Speaking of circle jerk. Lol