Enjoy Delphi Forums ad free!Click here.
CURRENT EVENTS -  How We Create Immorality (17487 views) Notify me whenever anyone posts in this discussion.Subscribe
 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconSep-30 7:57 AM 
To: WALTER784 DelphiPlus Member Icon  (937 of 1030) 
 588.937 in reply to 588.926 

September 30, 2021

         "forbids banning abortions on the basis of a baby’s race, sex, or disability,"

          They left out "eye color." They could call this the "legalized eugenics bill."

House Democrats vote to codify Roe v. Wade, legalize abortion on demand

The bill forbids states from subjecting abortion to ultrasound requirements, mandatory waiting periods, informed-consent requirements, and other health and safety rules.

Driven by fears that the Supreme Court may be on the verge of overturning the landmark pro-abortion ruling Roe v. Wade, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 218-211 Friday to pass legislation that would enshrine abortion on demand in federal law. 

In December, the nation’s highest court will begin hearing oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which concerns Mississippi’s HB 1510 law banning abortions from being committed past 15 weeks for any reason other than physical medical emergencies or severe fetal abnormalities. Abortion defenders argue it violates the judicially-created “right” to pre-viability abortions; pro-lifers hope the case will finally lead to the reversal of Roe.

In May, House Democrats reintroduced the so-called Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA), purportedly to prepare for such a future, though it would go much further than granting the tenets of Roe statutory legitimacy.

The legislation, which has been repeatedly introduced over the past several years without being acted upon, establishes a federal statutory right to perform and obtain abortions, including after fetal viability (under the broad cover of “health”), and specifically forbids states from subjecting abortion to ultrasound requirements, mandatory waiting periods, informed-consent requirements, and other health and safety regulations, such as admitting privileges.

The WHPA also protects so-called “webcam” abortions (i.e., dispensing abortion pills without an in-person doctor’s visit), forbids banning abortions on the basis of a baby’s race, sex, or disability, and forbids banning particular techniques such as dilation and evacuation (D&E) procedures, better known as “dismemberment” abortions because they entail literally ripping unborn babies apart in the womb, then removing them from the uterus limb by limb.

~~~~~~~~~~

That means that, for now, the future of abortion law remains in the Supreme Court’s hands. Many pro-lifers see the upcoming Mississippi case as the greatest test yet of the current justices, a majority of whom were appointed by Republican presidents yet have still disappointed pro-lifers and conservatives on various occasions. 

Only Justice Clarence Thomas is explicitly on the record as anti-Roe, and only he and Justice Samuel Alito have established consistently conservative records over a significant period of time. 

 
 Reply   Options 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconSep-30 8:06 AM 
To: All  (938 of 1030) 
 588.938 in reply to 588.937 

September 30, 2021

         "A leading medical journal..."   

         Not anymore. See next two posts to demonstrate what the Lancet has become.

Fury as leading medical journal describes women as 'bodies with vaginas'

Now the Lancet CANCELS women: Fury as leading medical journal runs 'dehumanising' and 'sexist' front-page describing females as 'bodies with vaginas' to placate trans lobby

A leading medical journal has come under fire for describing women as 'bodies with vaginas' on the front page of its latest edition. The Lancet was accused of sexism and dehumanising women after it editors used the term, which was written in an article titled 'Periods on Display', on the journal's front cover in an attempt to be inclusive to trans people.

THE VAGINA MUSEUM, I WENT DOWN...TO SEE IT — A-Broad In London
   The article, which was published on September 1, examines an exhibition exploring the taboos and history of periods at the Vagina Museum in London and sees the writer use the word 'women' but also use the term 'bodies with vaginas'. 
 

The quote, which was then used on the journal's front page, read: 'Historically, the anatomy and physiology of bodies with vaginas have been neglected.' 

However the move to display the quote on the journal's front cover has been met with criticism, with some academics calling it 'insulting and abusive' and a 'misguided pursuit of woke points'. 

Meanwhile others said they had cancelled their subscriptions with the peer-reviewed medical journal - which was founded in 1823. 

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconSep-30 8:10 AM 
To: All  (939 of 1030) 
 588.939 in reply to 588.938 

From Recent History - July 25, 2021

       "The Vagina Museum doesn't want women to have to be reminded of the fact that they are women."

https://thepostmillennial.com/vagina-museum-womens-health

Vagina Museum seeks to erase women's health from public discourse

The Vagina Museum would have women's health again regulated to the dustbin of the undiscussable.

THE VAGINA MUSEUM, I WENT DOWN...TO SEE IT — A-Broad In London

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Vagina Museum, which is likely targeted to women, tells women that the use of the word "woman" is not acceptable, because some people who are female but believe they are men, will find the language upsetting. The Vagina Museum doesn't want women to have to be reminded of the fact that they are women.

To that end, they write that women should use much less specific terms to describe their bodies, women's health, and women-specific products.

"Instead of 'sanitary products', say 'menstrual products';" "Instead of 'feminine hygiene products', say 'period products';" "Instead of 'becoming a woman', say 'starting puberty'."

"Instead of 'women's health', say 'reproductive health' or 'gynaecological health' (whatever you prefer);" "Instead of 'women and girls', say 'people who menstruate' or 'people who have periods'."

What would prompt the Vagina Museum to instruct women to rewrite the language they use about their own bodies and experiences? Is there something wrong with the concept of the "feminine"? Is there something abhorrent about "becoming a woman"?

The Museum says that they want to remove shame from womanhood, but instead, in creating language that obfuscates femaleness and female bodies, they are adding shame. They are also creating confusion.

It has been decades of hard-fought activism by women to get the concept and practice women's health to the public square. Yet the Vagina Museum wants to rephrase that to say "reproductive health" or "gynecological health" as opposed to "women's health." The Vagina Museum believes that the only sort of health differences between men and women are in the realm of reproduction, but this is entirely false.

Women's health concerns differ from those of men in many, significant ways. Cardiovascular health is one key area where male bodies and women's bodies differ. The signs of a male heart attack or stroke are different from women's. Cancer concerns and risks are different, as is the area of bone health. These are just a few differences that, if women opted instead for the term "reproductive health" would be entirely missed.

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconSep-30 8:12 AM 
To: All  (940 of 1030) 
 588.940 in reply to 588.939 

From The Archives - June 7, 2020

       "The Lancet medical journal pulled the study after three of its authors retracted it, citing concerns about the quality and veracity of data in it."

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/06/exclusive-lancet-study-hydroxychloroquine-complete-fraud-authors-linked-pharmaceutical-industry-people-died-lies/

The Lancet Study on Hydroxychloroquine Was a COMPLETE FRAUD – The Authors are Linked to the Pharmaceutical Industry and People Died Because of Their Lies!

The Lancet Medical Journal apologized this week and pulled the controversial hydroxychloroquine study.

The study released by Lancet titled — “Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis” —  was retracted after it was found to be a complete fraud.

Reuters reported:

An influential study that found hydroxychloroquine increased the risk of death in COVID-19 patients has been withdrawn a week after it led to major trials being halted, adding to confusion about a malaria drug championed by U.S. President Donald Trump.

The Lancet medical journal pulled the study after three of its authors retracted it, citing concerns about the quality and veracity of data in it. The World Health Organization (WHO) will resume its hydroxychloroquine trials after pausing them in the wake of the study. Dozens of other trials have resumed or are in process.

The three authors said Surgisphere, the company that provided the data, would not transfer the dataset for an independent review and they “can no longer vouch for the veracity of the primary data sources.”

The co-authors of this study are all linked to the pharmaceutical industry.

Mandeep Mehra, Frank Ruschitzka, Amit Patel and Sapan Desai

This incident is worse than was reported by the liberal media.

The purpose of the Lancet study was to create uncertainty and skepticism on the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat the coronavirus.

The HCQ was showing tremendous success in studies around the world.  And it was promoted by President Trump.  HCQ is a cheap drug that has been around for decades.

So this Lancet Study’s entire purpose was to lie about the drug’s abilities in order to promote more expensive pharmaceutical alternatives.  And, of course, they authors also knew they would embarass President Trump in the process.

What makes this so sinister is the fact that hundreds or thousands of individuals may have been saved from HCQ’s use but died from coronavirus instead.  

 

 
From: WALTER784 DelphiPlus Member IconSep-30 8:46 AM 
To: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member Icon  (941 of 1030) 
 588.941 in reply to 588.937 

WEBELIAHU said...

They left out "eye color."

Then sue them for $30 Billion for being so biased. (* SMIRK *)

FWIW

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconOct-1 5:48 AM 
To: WALTER784 DelphiPlus Member Icon  (942 of 1030) 
 588.942 in reply to 588.941 

October 1, 2021

        "Left-wing activists have largely erased the term "women" from their political vocabulary in recent years out of fear of offending biological women who identify as men."

        Liberals should be OUTRAGED. Imagine a woman that identifies as a man. She is therefore a MAN, right, and everybody knows men cannot become pregnant. It is therefore SILLY to give these MEN abortion protections. LIBERALS - YOU NEED TO PROTEST!

Democratic Abortion Bill Protects ‘Transgender Men’

Bill would legalize abortion on demand nationwide

Women march across the US to fight for equal rights - ABC News

A Democratic bill legalizing abortion on demand nationwide includes provisions for "every person capable of becoming pregnant," including "transgender men."...The bill notes that "transgender men, non-binary individuals, those who identify with a different gender … are unjustly harmed by restrictions on abortion services."

 

 
From: WALTER784 DelphiPlus Member IconOct-1 7:56 AM 
To: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member Icon  (943 of 1030) 
 588.943 in reply to 588.942 

WEBELIAHU said...

"Left-wing activists have largely erased the term "women" from their political vocabulary in recent years out of fear of offending biological women who identify as men."

        Liberals should be OUTRAGED. Imagine a woman that identifies as a man. She is therefore a MAN, right, and everybody knows men cannot become pregnant. It is therefore SILLY to give these MEN abortion protections. LIBERALS - YOU NEED TO PROTEST!

We should have never let women's liberation movements start in the 1960's... then none of this would have happened. </sarcasm off> (* ROFLMAO *)

I wonder what the real women have to say for this and why aren't they pushing against such blasphemy???

Edited to add: [But as women have been liberated... they should stand up and flat out say "we are offended" against this onslaught against their species!!!]

FWIW

  • Edited October 1, 2021 7:57 am  by  WALTER784
 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconOct-1 5:08 PM 
To: WALTER784 DelphiPlus Member Icon  (944 of 1030) 
 588.944 in reply to 588.943 

Woke IQ Test - Which One Is Different?

      Should self-identifying trans women be on all-women shortlists? Our writers  discuss | Shaista Aziz, Susanna Rustin, Shon Faye and Sonia Sodha | The  Guardian

 

 
From: WALTER784 DelphiPlus Member IconOct-2 1:06 AM 
To: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member Icon  (945 of 1030) 
 588.945 in reply to 588.944 

The guy claiming he's a woman!

FWIW

 

 
From: WALTER784 DelphiPlus Member IconOct-2 5:16 AM 
To: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member Icon  (946 of 1030) 
 588.946 in reply to 588.2 

Getting used to perversion?!?!?! Hmmmm... thanks but no thanks for me.

But the Dutch don't think so. They have nude pools and spas but I've never been to one and don't want to go to one. I believe they do have days where clothing is required for those not into getting in the nude in front of others.

Personally, I think your private parts should remain private... especially in the eyes of strangers.

The best nude spa in Amsterdam? Spa Zuiver Reviewed - Citizen Femme (citizen-femme.com)

FWIW

  • Edited October 2, 2021 5:17 am  by  WALTER784
 

Navigate this discussion: 1-6 7-16 17-26 ... 917-926 927-936 937-946 947-956 957-966 ... 1007-1016 1017-1026 1027-1030
Adjust text size:

Welcome, guest! Get more out of Delphi Forums by logging in.

New to Delphi Forums? You can log in with your Facebook, Twitter, or Google account or use the New Member Login option and log in with any email address.

Home | Help | Forums | Chat | Blogs | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
© Delphi Forums LLC All rights reserved.