The “life bit” is the only important part of the equation.
Svetlana Voreskova

The “life bit” is the only important part of the equation. You are the one dismissing science in favour of emotion. The abortion issue is about the right to life. That is all. It is not about religion. It is not about anyone’s right to choose. It is about the right to life of a human being and the point at which a foetus becomes a human being.”

Wrong. Emotion is the least bit of that equation. Unless you count anger at a total stranger, completely not involved with a woman’s reason for doing what she is doing, dictating what that stranger demands that the woman does. Then yes, emotion is part of the equation. However, I prefer the science. While there is no absolutely clear consensus among learned people about exactly when a foetus is able to survive outside of the host — the viability factor. When are the major organs capable of sustaining life outside the host womb? 23 weeks seems to be the very edge of the limit, with a survival rate of around 20–35 percent.

So. Let’s take a fertilized egg of say, 2–4 days post fertilization, out of the host womb and set it, carefully now, in a Petri dish on a counter. Can that fertilized egg continue to survive, grow, flourish? Of course not. My miscarriage occured at an estimated 6–8 weeks. The only reason I knew that I was pregnant, because even on birth control pills my periods were wonky, was that after missing 1 and nearly 2 periods, I had an incident that required me to seek medical care due to massively heavy bleeding and other symptoms. The OB/GYN on call confirmed that a mass of tissue that was a foetus of approximately that stage had been passed while I was in the ER. All I saw was a bowl full of blood and blobs. Think I should have asked to take the bowl home, set it on the counter, and watch it grow into a child?

You and I (and many, many others) can argue this point to infinity and even further, but none will agree with each other, so let’s move on.

“If a (for example) eight week old foetus is a human being, then your constitution is very clear. You do not have the right to deny it is right to life, unless that is you can put it before a jury of its peers and convict it of a capital offence.”

And yet, we still put people to death who are innocent on a distressingly regular basis in our prison system. White supremacists regularly killed those they deemed ‘subhuman’, most of the time without a single consequence. I’m not arguing this point; the main thing is not agreeing on when life actually begins. Or, as is usual with humans, defining that as it pleases us and meets our personal reality.

“If it is not a human being; and I have no idea whether it is or not because we have not established what exactly constitutes a human being; but if it is not, then it is simply the property of the mother and therefore hers to do with as she pleases.”

Since there is no consensus as to when life truly begins, this is a moot point, because as demonstrated in the HL/Conestoga case, their faith demands they believe that life begins the moment the sperm successfully penetrates the egg.

“It is really not a complicated argument. A foetus at some point becomes a human being. That is a universally accepted fact. Nobody has the right to terminate the life of a human being, not even the mother. So the only remaining question is — at what point precisely does that foetus become a human being.

In other words what would be your cut off point and why?”

Ah, the point made, at last. For some of us, it is not complicated, not at all. If the foetus cannot survive outside the host, life is not viable and therefore, if miscarried or aborted at that time, it is a loss, a tragedy, but (and I know I’m in for it here, but I’m going there anyway) acceptable. At that point in the development of the foetus, life is not sustainable outside the womb.

“If you cannot answer tht question clearly then you are just doing political correctness, not science and you are metaphorically tearing up your own constitution in the process.”

Our Constitution has already been thrown in the trash. We’ve proven that, unfortunately. And even though my answers are clear, you will find reason they are not. Next.

“I have never worked for any company that provides free birth control. I certainly would be very surprised if a specifically Catholic company provided free birth control as part of its package. That would be a little like expecting a Jewish organisation to provide free pork sausages. A private company or organisation is under no obligation to finance anything it does not approve of.”

Since you are not familiar with our healthcare/insurance here, let’s take that from the top. MOST, not all, insurance plans cover birth control. Since an individual can choose, something like ordering from a menu, what they wish to have covered (not all plans allow this flexibility, but many do), most tick the birth control box. The HL/Conestoga ruling invoked a provision that allows closely held (family, usually) companies to circumvent any rule they do not agree with. I know many Catholic women who have left the faith due to the onerous restrictions placed upon them to be fruitful. I would definitely not expect a closely held company owned by a devoutly Catholic family or consortium to offer ANY sort of birth control services to its employees.

And, point of order — that birth control is NOT free. How it works here is thus. Every cheque my husband gets has approximately $300 taken from it to pay for our health insurance. That is about $7200/year for us. Next year, he will have Medicare at a cost of $210/month, while I will have to go open market (if it still exists at that point), and most plans for women my age are around the $600/month mark. My IUD, under our insurance (which is quite good), was $1067, of which I paid, out of pocket, $230.

As a Jew, I would not be keeping Kashrut if I allowed pork into my refrigerator, stove, oven or microwave. However. I have seasonal help from time to time, some of whom are Mexican, and they bring their lunches consisting of homemade tamales. These are almost always pork tamales. Because blowtorching my refrigerator or my microwave would not work out very well for further service out of them, should a pork tamale touch their insides, I made an effort to accommodate my guys by acquiring a small refrigerator and microwave for their use. They keep it clean, I keep my home and appliances Kashrut, everybody is happy, and no one is inconvenienced, offended or otherwise felt like they were being ‘picked on’. Why HL/Conestoga could not have taken that route, well, it was their right to do what they did, and the result was that people like myself do not patronize their stores. It’s really that simple. Of course, other than the wire wrap earrings I make for myself and friends, with supplies I purchase at the twice yearly Gem Faire or through my shop, I don’t frequent stores like that anyway.

“To equate this with some religions conspiracy to impose their beliefs is just silly. The company in question did not deny its employees anything. It simply refused to pay for something it had no obligation to pay for.”

Oy, again with the ‘silly’! There is zero question that they denied 4 different contraceptives because their faith would not allow them to morally offer it. Period.

“I am sorry to break more bad news but it is supposed to be “my body my choice” not “my body my choice but not my responsibility.” You are responsible for your reproductive system: Nobody else. You have no right to expect anyone else to pay for your choices. You want all the choice? Then you must accept all the responsibility. It is quite simple.”

I was on birth control pills when I got pregnant. My mother had 4 pregnancies while on birth control pills, one of which she carried to term. What part of birth control pills do not work for all women did you not understand? I made a responsible choice. It failed. End of story.

“You want birth control? Then find the best method for you, and pay for it yourself. It is nobody else’s concern but yours.”

IUD — $1067. Out of pocket expense-$230. That is why we have health insurance. $1067 for someone making minimum wage, raising a child (children) without support from the father, living in a rent-subsidized apartment is so far outside the realm of attainable it’s not even funny. Seems you do not understand that. I can’t seem to make you understand that, so movin’ on, once again.

“If you cannot afford birth control then the minimum wage laws should help because basic birth control is not that expensive; and there are also all sorts of independent agencies that subsidize it for those who are poor.”

Did you even read what you wrote in the paragraph above this one? I do not even know how you determined that minimum wage laws have anything at all to do with being able to afford birth control, because they do not.

As for those independent agencies — Planned Parenthood is on the verge of being defunded, thanks to the righteous right wingers just elected. Local agencies are set upon by the religious right — many of us here have been pressed into service as escorts into those clinic, to protect the women getting breast cancer screenings, birth control, Pap smears and prenatal care against those ‘Christian’ people, spewing their hate and ignorance. Once they prevail, I fully expect things to get as bad as can be imagined.

Is my country screwed up or what!

“But it is not the government’s business to regulate birth control and it is not the obligation of anybody else to pay for yours. You have the right to freedom of choice. You do not have the right to expect others to pay for your choices. It is not complicated.”

Uhhhhhh…..let’s see, in my country ‘freedom of choice’ is exactly what we women are having to once again fight to protect. No one said anything about the government regulating birth control (?), and no one but me (or, I guess technically, my husband since he is the main wage earner here) pays for my health care/insurance/birth control. Where did you even come up with that? Subsidized health care/insurance for the very poor that cannot afford it — guess it’s just better to let them die then? Because that’s where I see you going with that one.

“Protesting because the government won’t give you free stuff is just silly. Nobody owes you free stuff.”

Seriously? Once more from the top — $600/month paid out for health insurance. $1067 for IUD. $230 out of pocket expense. How many times must I type this? NO ONE GETS FREE HEALTH INSURANCE.

And please give that ‘silly’ bit a rest, what say

“You know that people survived quite well for millions of years with no birth control at all. Not having the ability to have casual sex with some random stranger every other weekend is not a life or death issue. So no: it is not a health priority and the government has no business being involved.”

Let see. Been married to the same man for 35 years. Never a fan of casual sex anyway, not even sure where that comes from. For a segment of the population that was not able to afford health insurance/health care (no matter what type), the government stepped in to insure that they could now have access. For the rest of us, Medicare/Medicaid — funded by payroll taxes WE pay.

And don’t even get me started on socialized medicine. Do you really want to go there? Pure government involvement, that.

“It would be much more sensible than teaching them — “Go ahead and make any reckless choices you want. We can just demand that the taxpayer pick up the tab.” If that doesn’t work then we can always hold protests at the fact that we are apparently “oppressed” by our own lifestyle choices.”

Hopefully, by now, you have an understanding of the fact that WE who PAY for our OWN insurance ARE the very taxpayers you speak of. We pay into Medicare/Medicaid because eventually, for my husband next year, we will partake of what WE paid into. Us taxpayers.

I’m sorry — are we really going to go down the ‘don’t protest being oppressed by your lifestyle’ path? First off, that statement makes zero sense. Secondly, I don’t know how you got there from, well, anywhere.

Americans love to protest. People protest me raising beef (all the damn time). People protest coal fired electric generating stations. People protest being treated as subhuman (back of the bus, don’t use THAT drinking fountain, you can’t be an astronaut/fireman/policeman/helicopter pilot/equal human, etc). Guess what, cupcake? In my country, I can protest whatever the hell I want, whenever the hell I want, and so long as I get a permit and don’t destroy/damage other people or property, not a damn thing anyone can do to stop me. If you don’t like it, don’t like it. Not my problem. We let the KKK show up and do their thing; being a Jew, I’m kinda not okay with that but hey, they have the right to do so. Heck, in 7th grade us kids protested because they painted the cafeteria such a gawdawful shade of green, it literally made us sick to eat in there. And you know what? It got repainted back to the school colours. How utterly trite and trivial, right?

“As for your emotive conjecture about pursuing rapists: You may be unaware that 2016 was marked by an avalanche of highly politicised rape accusations, mostly on college campuses across the USA. The overwhelming majority of them soon turned out to be completely manufactured.”

Do not presume that I am unaware of things in my own country. That is not only rude, you just took what I said as emotive (it was not) and then put words to me that I never even insinuated. My take was a valid one. Most NON sensational rape cases, the ones I assure you that you have NOT heard of, go down just as I described — a terrified victim, paraded in front of strangers and her alleged attacker, torn to bits by a defense attorney (paid to do so, not quibbling that point), being made to try and remember a horrifying event over and over again to prove that she was ‘asking for it’.

You sir show very little sense of compassion here. Please do not do so again.

“False accusations are two a penny and they do an incredible amount of damage to the accused even if he isn’t convicted. That is why we have a confrontational justice system. That is why we have a demand for the presumption of innocence and the requirement for proof beyond reasonable doubt.”

As it does happen, false accusation are hardly ‘two a penny’, not in my country. Because the accused has the ‘right’ to confront their accuser in the case of rape is an experience I would not ever want to go through. The accused has already perpetuated violence on the accuser. Who do you think holds the upper hand there? Rape is NOT a coldly clinical event, and the torrent of emotional trauma the victim undergoes is not lost on the defendant. He is a person capable of such violence already, do you think a sobbing woman cowering in front of him is going to do what? Make him confess and apologize? It will empower and embolden him.

Since you seem to think you know so much, go look up the backlog of rape kits at any major metropolitan American city. It’s sickening how low a priority such a violent crime has here. And by the way, rapes kits are proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Aw, was that maybe a bit to ‘emotional’ for ya? Tough beans, unless you’ve been there and been thru a trial yourself, you have zero need to expound on it.

“Nobody thinks that the system is perfect by any means, but what do you suggest? A return to medieval witch-hunts? We should not examine the evidence and ruthlessly test every accusation for validity?”

Even if I did have one, you’d find fault. But, sadly, I do not. I do advocate that a rapist, proven as such, should be emasculated at the very least (and I’d prefer it done painfully, without sedatives, and a dull, rusty blade, but that’s just the liberal in me I guess). There is a reason that rapists and child molesters are segregated from the general prison population. Even society’s dregs look down upon them and exact revenge when given the opportunity.

In America, we tend to shy away from the term ‘ruthlessly’. Sounds pretty totalitarian here.

“Is that what you are saying because if it isn’t, then what are you suggesting? I get it. You have been the victim of a sexual assault. I come from the other angle because I sat through a series of hearings while my brother was being assaulted on remand in prison, because a woman accused him of rape.”

Mentioned that because it had a minor bearing on the original conversation, otherwise, it didn’t scar me, doesn’t bother me, it just happened, and I got lucky.

Did you know that your brother was falsely accused beyond a reasonable doubt, or did he simply tell you? I do not presume to know or understand your own criminal justice system, so I will not comment on that.

I am fully aware that women do ‘cry wolf’. Got laid, regretted it, decided to go for it. Maybe the guy didn’t buy her a new car, or pony up for a fancy dinner. But a woman has to be some kind of stupid as well as spotlight seeking to want to go thru a trial like that. And, if proven that it didn’t happen, she should absolutely, without a doubt, go to prison for a very long time. I have no problem with that at all. Did she ruin a life? Possibly. Here, the man would have to register as a sex offender and there goes being able to freely choose where to live and what kind of job he can get. Even if acquitted. Does it suck? Yes, and so do some so-called humans. Nothing I can do about that.

“Even hardened cons don’t like “sex-offenders” you see. So much for “rape culture.” No evidence was presented. Her word was enough to have him held in custody. She finally came forward and confessed that she had made the entire story up to settle a score with him. He was released back into what was left of his life after his six month ordeal to find nobody would rent him an apartment and nobody would employ him.

After being convicted of attempting to pervert the course of justice, she walked away with a one year probation. How’s that for “rape culture.””

Reply above.

“So we both have out personal stories but personal anecdotes do not mean a whole lot in the greater scheme of things. The fact is that when someone accuses someone of rape then one thing is obvious; a serious crime has been committed. Either a person has been raped, or another person is perverting the course of justice in an attempt to destroy the life of an innocent man. Both of these things happen. It is the job of the courts to find out which it is in each case.”

I agree. People in my country have been put to death after being falsely accused, tried and convicted of rape, robbery and murder. It sucks, it really does. We do what we can to insure it cannot happen, but somehow, it still does happen.

“You do not serve justice by screaming “believe the victim” before it has even been established exactly who the victim is.”

Did I ever once say that? Again, do not put words to me I did not say. It’s rude and makes you look, well, ‘silly’. Sorry, couldn’t resist.

“You think marching around with a placard is a good solution to this?”

You got a better idea, let’s hear it. Remembering that this is my country, and here, I can march around with a placard to show what I stand for, because I stand for something I believe in. I have that right — at least, for now.

“I have already seen the feminist solution — to expand the definition of rape until it encompasses all kinds of consensual interaction that is not rape by any stretch of the imagination so that they can ramp up their “rape-culture” hysteria while sucking up ever more funding.”

In your country or mine? I’ve not seen such a thing. Like all ‘newsworthy’ things anymore, if they are not ‘fake’, then the media/people/social media town criers latch on to a nutty fringe group that makes good headlines and proclaims their agenda for all to hear.

In this age of ‘date rape’ drugs, alcohol and far too much TV and such that glorifies sex, it is probably too easy for bad things to happen, or for someone to do bad things to someone unaware. I once saw a horrible video (long gone) that was listed under a fake title that involved a gang rape of an obviously unconscious woman. I reported it immediately to YouTube and later wondered what happened to that woman, and did YouTube turn the video over to police?

That is not hysteria. That is real, actual concern for what is going on today.

“And in doing so they trivialise a very serious crime and make it even more difficult to get to the truth, which suits feminist organisations fine”

No, that isn’t anywhere near being true. There is no way to do such a thing that I am aware of. I’m guessing that you’d rather women just shut up and take it rather than demand to be taken seriously? Because that is how you come off with what you are saying. I don’t actually consider myself a true feminist. My very first job out of the military, I asked my male work partners, a level or two below me, what their pay was. Even for the men two levels below me, it was more than I was getting paid. I went to management, and without all that emotive, hysterical and ‘silly’ stuff, simply stated that there seemed to be a problem with my pay. Within a month, I was making the correct amount for the job I was doing. No feminist organisation involved. But it was not fair, and I brought that to the attention of the proper people, it got fixed. It does NOT work that way for most women getting paid less for the same work as men. They have need of other women and men on their side. If you want to malign them for that, think first of how that looks.

“The Washington march actually split into two marches because of various “progressivist” groups and their predictable race baiting. Even Medium has been deluged with posts by marchers denouncing other groups of marchers for everything from their skin colour to whether they were gay or whether they identified as men or cats or whatever — you must be well aware of the levels of childishness theses progressivist types can always be counted upon to descend to.”

Again with presuming things. Vox and The Federalist aren’t exactly known for being non-sensational leaning ‘news’ sources. If you get enough diverse people together, I do not care who or for what reason they are together, there will be dissent. That is the human condition in a nutshell.

However. The very VAST majority of the marchers were having a good time and got along just fine. The media and individual ‘reporters’ on social media could pick and choose what to show/represent/report on of course. Depending on where they were on the social spectrum would dictate what they chose to highlight.

I try to read as much as I can on Medium, but you might notice that there is a LOT of stuff posted even in 5 minutes. I’m a rancher, during calving season, and rarely have enough time to read everything I’d like to. I bookmark many things that I have yet had the time to get to. I’m sure, just like your post here, there are opinions I do not agree with, as well as stories that show the flip side of things like the March.

“ The usual victim Olympics of the pampered and petulant, twittering classes.”

Coming from the source, that’s awful rich. And incorrect when applied to all marchers. Over exaggeration is just exactly that.

“You must have tried very hard to miss all that.”

Nope. Next.

““Protecting our right to choose what we do with our bodies.”

You have the right to do whatever you want with your body provided you are not infringing upon the rights of another:”

Do I now? Not according to some people.

“Asking for equal pay for equal talents.”

“You have the right to equal pay for equal work, and a massive network of organisations and legal checks to ensure it is protected.”

(laughs ironically) Seriously? A man two levels below me was making more than I was, and until I spoke up, it would have remained that way?

Oh, right. I shouldn’t presume to protest that little bit of inequity. Shame on me.

“For an end to being discriminated against because of our faith, our skin, our gender in acquiring that equal pay, housing and medical care.”

“From a woman’s point of view you should be careful what you wish for there. You are already heavily prioritised over the other half of the population in terms of healthcare, housing, education and employment law. These are easily demonstrable facts. Equality with men on any of those points would be a step back for women.”

Again, in my country, this is not now nor has it been the case in the past unless we’ve gotten up and protested and sued for it. Unless you live here and experience it, you do not get to comment on it, please.

I’d LOVE to live like Bill Gates, or Warren Buffet, or any other man like those guys. Actually, I do admire those guys, but I wouldn’t want their money, so yeah, maybe not.

Perhaps you’ve avoided looking at some videos of women walking down the streets, NOT provocatively dressed, in any major city? Sure, the video was probably edited to show the worst of things that men said as the women walked by. I’m sure you have a source for the same thing happening to men walking down the street in any major city. No? Oh. So, I should be concerned that my being able to equally walk down the street in any major US city and be treated like men is a step back?

And why is it that my medical insurance costs so much more than my husband, 13 years OLDER than me? And not by a little, but by a LOT? I’d LOVE to be able to pay what he pays.

“The “dead-beat dad” problem is a common thread across Europe too. Of course it was once a very rare phenomenon; back before feminism launched it’s openly declared war against the nuclear family which has resulted in the demographic melt-down and the explosion of fatherless kids and consequent social ills we now see.”

Again, blaming feminism for men figuring out that they can simply walk away from a woman and his child and go on to father more. Bad news — this started in my country LONG before Gloria Steinem and the ERA.

I’m not sure how your history books read in your country, but women did not ‘declare war’ on the nuclear family. At least not in my country. Rising costs of living that caused women to have to enter the workforce for less pay did that all on its own.

“I don’t think two million feminists are going to fix that considering the ideology they march for caused it and indeed celebrates it.”

Then don’t think it. In the meantime, we will be out there doing, instead of sitting back all smug and pretentious, tearing it all to bits.

“Your whole society creates the people you call “dead-beat dads” by first creating fatherless boys who don’t know how to be men”

I agree in part. Boys growing up without fathers tend to the same themselves. Which is why we have things like Big Brothers and other organisations that do what they can to try and break the cycle.

“(not to mention girls who don’t know how to be women) and then by forcing men out of families through welfare and other “support” networks, which have created what many refer to as the generational poverty trap.”

No one ‘forces men out of families through welfare, where did you even come up with that?

The poverty trap is real, I will give you that point. The cause you cite is not. I grew up beyond dirt poor on a dairy farm, but we were hard workers who learned the value of such work. Most urban poor do not get that chance. Some rural poor get the chance but do not take it. I have not been poor or impoverished in many decades, so I do not presume to understand nor speak for those who are still.

“The nuclear family has been proven to provide the healthiest environment for children and for adults and the most successful model for societies as a whole. The destruction of that model was engineered by design by feminism.”

Are you quoting ‘Pravda’ there? Yes, the nuclear family will USUALLY be the best choice, unless it’s a dysfunctional nuclear family. That’s a whole different can of worms there.

Again with the satanic feminism. I’m not sure how exactly you are defining it, but to continually and falsely blame it for all of society’s ills is just getting annoying now. Having to leave the home to work for a pittance because that was the only way to make it wasn’t feminism, it was survival. My mom worked two jobs most of the years we were growing up. My dad was in the Navy, half owner of a small, struggling dairy, and when he wasn’t at sea or off the coast of Vietnam during the war, he drove a tractor, worked as a security guard and drank himself senseless at every opportunity. And we still barely existed at the poverty level. Should I blame feminism for that too? ‘Damn you feminists, I had to wear worn out socks and torn underwear to school because of you!’

“So if you have a problem with that, then take it up with your “sisters.””

Don’t join my club. No skin off my butt.

“I am not going to address your references to a few stupid individuals and their stupid comments and your attempt to equate that with some conspiracy of religious stupidity. I could give you hundreds of equally stupid comments from democrats but I would not try to claim that those people represented anything but a lunatic fringe.”

Please don’t. You already look prissy enough.

I call out stupidity when I see it. I don’t care where it shows up. I’m a registered Independent, because I dislike the Democrats and despise the Republicans. I’m not too fond of overbearing religious zealots who think they are the only ones right with their God and the rest of us better join them or go straight to hell. I’m a Jew, I get a lot of shit from those people, and the overwhelming majority of them are Christians. You sit in my seat, you get to tell me what you see. Otherwise, bugger off, because your information is flawed at best.

“Feminism: No that is a different story. That entire ideology is built on stupid. “

Yep. Stupid of us women wantin’ to be not treated like dirt, kept as a man’s property (yes, that was reality for far too long in history), not bein’ allowed to speak up when being beaten when dinner wasn’t on time and bein’ paid less for more work. How ‘silly’ are we women, eh?

Sarcasm is just one of my many services, free of charge.

“You want a denial of biology then how about “patriarchy theory” or “gender as a social construct!”

Yow, dude, you on some sort of roll or what! I don’t know nor care to know about either of those things, so yeah. Pass.

“ Reality denying stupid doesn’t come any stupider than that and they are no some lunatics on the fringe.”

‘Lunatic Fringe’ is one of my fave songs. Oh right, we aren’t talking rock and roll. Actually, by now, I’m not even sure what you are talking about any more. I suppose that was your plan all along?

Any group of people, no matter how small or large, has not only their own perspective on the world, but their own ‘lunatic fringe’. Deal with it by ignoring it until it knocks on your door, then deal with it however you wish.

“They are the core foundations of all feminist theory and advocacy.”

Hah! I was forced to read Annamarie Jagose’s awful, weird and wacky abstract for a psych class a few years ago! I’d just tell anyone still reading this far to go look it up. I am not sure when it was published, but it was several years ago.

She didn’t actually get feminism either, at least I don’t think she did, so you are in fine company.

“Along with the claim that “equality” is something either desirable or obtainable; “

Nope, we are all happy to be doormats. Don’t desire to be anything but. Easily obtainable, that.

Your statement is beyond weird. If your intent was to wear me down, I do confess to being pretty bored now. ‘Feminism is the root of every evil the world ever experienced.’ You could have saved a lot of bandwidth by just saying that.

“that it is possible for any two people to be “equal” Another breath-takingly stupid idea, and one which formed the central theme of the Washington March.”

If you don’t get it by now, you simply are too thick to ever get it. I work the same job, I want the same pay. That equals, um, equal.

“First off, I am not a big fan of someone reading something I wrote and going on the personal attack without A) being a citizen of my country; B) being educated about my country IN my country and C) knowing basically zero about my life experiences.”

“I do not need to be a citizen of your country to study your constitution, which I have done. I do not need to be a citizen of your country to study history and biology and genetics. I do not need to be a citizen of your country to have an opinion.”

No, you don’t, but it helps with the whole perspective thing. Noticed you skirted the whole personal attack thing, but okay, I get it.

“I also have a lot of expertise in education and I am familiar first hand with your university system.”

This was stated because???

“As for your “life experiences:” Your life experiences are as irrelevant to the facts as mine are and all I care about is the facts.”

Facts are important, I will never deny that (I already know you are going to meticulously point out every single instance of me doing exactly not that, but go ahead, knock yourself out). And, you would be wrong that life experiences are not relevant to facts. My life experiences make it possible for me to discern facts. If I knew that the swelling of a cow’s rear teats means that calving is to occur within the next 2–4 hours in a certain cow, then that is a fact. Without the experience with that cow and the signs of her rear teats swelling, it would only become a fact to me after it happened.

“Babbling about people having to accept your opinions as valid because they don’t understand your life experiences is just silly.”

Exactly what you have been doing for pages. Next.

“ You don’t understand mine either; but mine, like yours, are completely irrelevant to the topic.”

Nope. I don’t know how your experiences contribute to how you discern facts, then your babble. to me, is not actually facts so far as I can tell.

“Unlike you, however, I brought you facts in a non-confrontational manner.”

“You didn’t bring fact at all. You brought vague implications that you were being denied rights that you are in fact not being denied.”

Again. Fact — I had to go to management to ask that I be paid a fair wage given my position. Right to equal or greater pay denied. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Fact- Right now if I am raped and become pregnant, I can choose to terminate the pregnancy. However, that right is once again under fire.

Notice you skirted, once again, the non-confrontational thing.

“You conflated a Christian organisation not paying for birth control with them somehow trying to deny people the right to access birth control.

Ah, I wasn’t aware that HL/Conestoga walked that one back. Congrats on them for allowing their employees to once again choose the birth control that works for them, no matter that the faith of the company owners are not comfortable with that.

Oh, not what you meant then, was it? (that’s the sarcasm rearing its ugly head again)

“You claimed that there was some kind of conspiracy against rape victims because of the necessity of facilitating the requirement for proof.

I simply draw the line at having incorrect attributions thrown at me. I never did say that. My exact words, the ones I believe you are twisting, were thus:

“In general, however, defense attorneys, doing their job, will tear a victim down on the stand and try to make it look as if SHE asked for it.”

This is fact. It is the defense’s job to do this. I never, not ONCE, used the word ‘conspiracy’. You who profess to love ‘facts’ so much had better get yours straight before you accuse someone of something.

“You finally claimed that women were disadvantaged in healthcare, housing, education and employment, which is the exact opposite of what is demonstrably true.”

My words:

Protecting our right to choose what we do with out bodies. Asking for equal pay for equal talents. For an end to being discriminated against because of our faith, our skin, our gender in acquiring that equal pay, housing and medical care.”

Disadvantaged? Where did that word show up? And again — when I had to go to management to ask that I receive the pay I was clearly entitled to, was there some part of that you didn’t understand?

“You brought emotion, inexplicable outrage, empty self-righteousness and ideological sloganeering.”

Did I? Gosh, emotion is such an awful thing. I sure wish people would be colder, less caring about others, BORINGLY alike in their one dimensional way, don’t you?

If you don’t want to get mad about something, then don’t. I care. You don’t. Moving on to the next one.

Empty self-righteousness. What does that even MEAN? I’m a pretty righteous broad, or so I’ve been told by many people. Well, not YOU, but then, you strike more as a robot-type than a warm blooded human type of person.

Ideological sloganeering. Yow, I had a slogan in there somewhere? Did I miss it? Was it good? Can I put it on my barn?

“Just like the women on the Washington march.”

Yep. All of them, marching in lockstep, exactly alike. Emotion — mostly happy to be together and doing something they felt like they wanted and needed to do. No wait, you said there was infighting and sniping and such (I’m not questioning that, just pointing it out). There was a LOT of sloganeering going on, my fave was “Don’t Ignore the Elephant in the Uterus”. Now there was a gal with some kind of imagination! Oh wait, you don’t LIKE imagination. How boring your perfect, sterile world must be. Myself, I prefer my muddy, cowshit and dog hair spattered, messy, loud existence. It’s called living. I have passion for what I believe it. I will stand up for the underdog if the underdog deserves it, and stand up to idiots. It’s that emotion and passion for living that I cherish every single day with every single breath I take. Privileged people like you don’t bother me. In a way, you challenge me to go to the mat, to dive in, to gleefully splash water at you, because you hate that, and want to throw bricks back to prove your point.

Go for it, dude. I’m in my happy place. Are you?

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.