• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bette Midler calls on women to refuse sex to protest Texas abortion law

Yes, human, but not people. Not until they're born.
Why allow him to bully you? Who is he to decide what is human? Is his sperm human? Only if he is Roman Catholic. "Every sperm is sacred" and all that.
 
Why allow him to bully you? Who is he to decide what is human? Is his sperm human? Only if he is Roman Catholic. "Every sperm is sacred" and all that.



I don't feel bullied. I've posted little in this exchange. He was talking to you when I poked my head in to point out an obvious distinction that he is ignoring.

I do believe that the fertilized embryo is human. I don't merely believe it -- I know it. It's science. The embryo is one stage of human development. A sperm is not a stage of human development. It is something that can start that development if it meets up with an egg. But the embryo IS human.

Nevertheless, the embryo is not a _person_. Human, yes. Person no. That is a very important distinction.

The embryo does not have a right to life. Not even in Texas. Texas only gives this right to six-week fetuses and above, and does so in violation of federal law. Until the fetus reaches viability it does not have rights under federal law. And even then it hasn't achieved personhood.

The fetus doesn't count as a tax deduction. The fetus doesn't automatically have inheritance rights. It doesn't have a right to life, not until a certain stage of development, and even then only with conditions such as its right to life not outweighing the life or health of the mother. The fetus is human. But it is not a person.
 
From the article:

Actress Bette Midler called for women to refuse to have sex to protest Texas’s recently enacted abortion law and suggested that Congress should guarantee abortion rights for women.
“I suggest that all women refuse to have sex with men until they are guaranteed the right to choose by Congress,” Midler tweeted Thursday.

Source: https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-kn...ls-on-women-to-refuse-sex-amid-texas-abortion


Um, wouldn’t that make “all women” political prostitues?
🤦‍♂️ You can't withhold sex from rapists.
 
From the article:

Actress Bette Midler called for women to refuse to have sex to protest Texas’s recently enacted abortion law and suggested that Congress should guarantee abortion rights for women.
“I suggest that all women refuse to have sex with men until they are guaranteed the right to choose by Congress,” Midler tweeted Thursday.

Source: https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-kn...ls-on-women-to-refuse-sex-amid-texas-abortion


Um, wouldn’t that make “all women” political prostitues?
In support of this cause, I swear not to have sex with Bette Midler.

Just kidding - I'd do it!
 
I do believe that the fertilized embryo is human. I don't merely believe it -- I know it. It's science. The embryo is one stage of human development. A sperm is not a stage of human development. It is something that can start that development if it meets up with an egg. But the embryo IS human.

Nevertheless, the embryo is not a _person_. Human, yes. Person no. That is a very important distinction.
Some of the things that you said above were fact, were actually opinion. I would not quibble with you about what you said, but many people would.
Also: not many people might argue that a sperm was a person, but some would argue that in its ability to start a life that it is precious, as is an embryo, for it is alive.
 
Getting back to the thread topic, Bette Midler said...blah, blah, but-blah-BLAH...blah...

She's just another irrelevant has been of a "star" hoping someone notices her.
 
Getting back to the thread topic, Bette Midler said...blah, blah, but-blah-BLAH...blah...

She's just another irrelevant has been of a "star" hoping someone notices her.
Personally, I can't imagine any male wanting to have sex with her on a good day unless he was desperate.
 
Personally, I can't imagine any male wanting to have sex with her on a good day unless he was desperate.
That has no relevance to her opinion on using the withholding of sexual relations as a strategy for fighting for a cause. Women do not have to be physically attractive or sexually appealing in order to have worthwhile opinions.
 
That has no relevance to her opinion on using the withholding of sexual relations as a strategy for fighting for a cause. Women do not have to be physically attractive or sexually appealing in order to have worthwhile opinions.
Oh yes it does. That dingbat is calling for women across the country to deny their significant other sex over something they have nothing to do with. It is asininely absurd. Her opinion has no relevance.
 
That has no relevance to her opinion on using the withholding of sexual relations as a strategy for fighting for a cause. Women do not have to be physically attractive or sexually appealing in order to have worthwhile opinions.
True enough. And there is no doubt that withholding sex is a time-honored strategy that requires no other "cause" than the hope of modifying your significant other's other behaviors. Still, not employing a strategy would be nice, wouldn't it?

And as someone who recognizes that abstinence means fewer aborted babies, I say, "Listen to good old Bette!"

Never mind that for women with a healthy and happy sexual relationship with their partners, they're "cutting off their noses to spite their faces." ;)
 
True enough. And there is no doubt that withholding sex is a time-honored strategy that requires no other "cause" than the hope of modifying your significant other's other behaviors. Still, not employing a strategy would be nice, wouldn't it?

And as someone who recognizes that abstinence means fewer aborted babies, I say, "Listen to good old Bette!"

Never mind that for women with a healthy and happy sexual relationship with their partners, they're "cutting off their noses to spite their faces." ;)
Seriously?

It has a lot more to do with than just cutting off their noses to spite their faces over sex. This kind of thinking is blaming males for every female becoming pregnant in the first place creating unwanted pregnancies which is absolutely absurd. The only way one could believe such a thing is to believe these poor feeble females are a bunch of dumbasses that don't know any better in the 21st century allowing them to get pregnant out of ignorance. The truth is females enjoy active sex relations but when they become pregnant they use abortion as their birth control after they conceived. It is something they should have thought about prior to any sexual activity if they were not wanting to get pregnant.

The Texas abortion bill has been bastardized by leftists.
 
That has no relevance to her opinion on using the withholding of sexual relations as a strategy for fighting for a cause. Women do not have to be physically attractive or sexually appealing in order to have worthwhile opinions.

Oh yes it does. That dingbat is calling for women across the country to deny their significant other sex over something they have nothing to do with. It is asininely absurd. Her opinion has no relevance.

I wrote that women could have worthwhile opinions independent of their physical appearance. You replied with, "Oh yes it does" which is non-responsive then went on to conclude, after providing no argument to bolster your point of view, that "her (Bette Midler's) opinion has no relevance".

I repeat that disparaging a woman's looks is a time-honored and completely irrelevant way to attempt to nullify her arguments.

Stephen Hawking's thoughts were not judged by his physical appearance.
 
🤦‍♂️ You can't withhold sex from rapists.
Because that's relevant to the conversation.
Considering that many men in this country firmly believe it's their wife's duty to have sex with them whether their wife wants to or not and some courts have ruled it's not rape in such instances, plus the fact that neither rape nor incest are grounds for having an abortion under this TX law, I'd say it's very relevant.
 
i didn't think lack of sex would affect many Trump Republicans 40yo and older. hell, they probably weren't getting any anyway.


Bette should have called for their wives to START having sex with them again. at least then they wouldn't be so angry all the time.
 
From the article:

Actress Bette Midler called for women to refuse to have sex to protest Texas’s recently enacted abortion law and suggested that Congress should guarantee abortion rights for women.
“I suggest that all women refuse to have sex with men until they are guaranteed the right to choose by Congress,” Midler tweeted Thursday.

Source: https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-kn...ls-on-women-to-refuse-sex-amid-texas-abortion


Um, wouldn’t that make “all women” political prostitues?


Sorry. I'm as pro-choice as the next gal, but I'm not giving up sex for anybody.
 
i didn't think lack of sex would affect many Trump Republicans 40yo and older. hell, they probably weren't getting any anyway.


Bette should have called for their wives to START having sex with them again. at least then they wouldn't be so angry all the time.

Calling sexism and misogyny against a certain class of women!
 
Calling sexism and misogyny against a certain class of women!
it was actually a rude and crude joke.


you think you can still handle that stuff or are you doing the snowflake stuff now.
 
it was actually a rude and crude joke.


you think you can still handle that stuff or are you doing the snowflake stuff now.

You should have said that when you made the sexist and misogynist remarks about a certain class of women.
 
You should have said that when you made the sexist and misogynist remarks about a certain class of women.
we're literally in a thread about having all women in Texas to stop having sex with their husbands/boyfriends. you think that's actually happening?

ps: let me know what jokes don't hurt your feeling now.
 
Foul. Two minutes for trying to dismiss what your party does by blaming it solely on texas. These are your folks passing these kinds of laws and more are lined up and ready to pass their own draconian restrictions.
Like mandatory vaccines?
 
we're literally in a thread about having all women in Texas to stop having sex with their husbands/boyfriends. you think that's actually happening?

ps: let me know what jokes don't hurt your feeling now.
Trix was right. The Texas law is an abomination, but it isn't an excuse to denigrate women in a class you do not like simply because they are women.
 
As a virgin celibate, I'm terrified that women are refusing sex to protest. My entire life has now been turned upside down.

What will I do with all my newfound free time? Would I actually have to be productive and explore life outside my bedroom? Would I actually have to start seeing women as humans instead of sex objects?

What will i do with all the money that I was saving up for all those STI vaccines? What will I do with the refund money from my lifetime supply of condoms?
 
Back
Top Bottom