Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   Tell me again how this isn't about punishing women for having sex   (theguardian.com) divider line
    More: Murica, Supreme Court of the United States, Roe v. Wade, Abortion, legal architect of the Texas abortion ban, supreme court brief, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Antonin Scalia  
•       •       •

4190 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Sep 2021 at 2:50 PM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



140 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-09-17 12:36:51 PM  
TFA: wealthy pro-abortion" states like California and New York with the help of "taxpayer subsidies."

I'm good with my taxes  being spent to get vulnerable and targeted people -like women- out of red hell States (that get way more in federal spending than they ever put in on average) and into safer places where they have full rights.

There is no way to protect them where they are with a completely subverted judiciary and treasonous genocidal red state govt.

The wealthy pro abortion States that are saddled with keeping the lights on in these pathetic empty wastelands of hate and barbarism will on the whole provide a better quality of life and much better outcomes for women and other refugees out of red hell.
 
2021-09-17 12:51:13 PM  
Having sex with men other than themselves, rather.
 
2021-09-17 12:53:11 PM  
Hey, I've got an idea. Let's throw men in jail for getting any woman pregnant who isn't their wife. If men want to avoid jail, they can simply abstain from sex. Perfect!
 
2021-09-17 12:54:04 PM  
Sure, dude, sure. It will support abstinence the way that taking away the welfare and unemployment insurance of unemployables and the handicapped promotes "employment".

Have you ever looked on the stats for unwed mothers with unwanted children they can't provide for because they are working full time as Moms? Red State, Red State, Red State, Red State ... there are no Blue Fish in the pond. Just Number Two Fish.

Up yours you puritanical and self-righteous fugly!

We call them Fundies because they are literal and figurative fundaments.
 
2021-09-17 12:54:11 PM  
Overturning Roe v Wade will promote abstinence, says architect of Texas abortion ban

I almost want them to FAFO what overturning it will do.

They really have no idea.
 
2021-09-17 12:54:33 PM  
I mean bottoms, derrieres, left behind buttheads.
 
2021-09-17 12:56:41 PM  

brantgoose: Sure, dude, sure. It will support abstinence the way that taking away the welfare and unemployment insurance of unemployables and the handicapped promotes "employment".

Have you ever looked on the stats for unwed mothers with unwanted children they can't provide for because they are working full time as Moms? Red State, Red State, Red State, Red State ... there are no Blue Fish in the pond. Just Number Two Fish.

Up yours you puritanical and self-righteous fugly!

We call them Fundies because they are literal and figurative fundaments.


Butt Stuff is the answer I guess.
 
2021-09-17 1:06:12 PM  
It isn't punishing them for having buttsecks.

/chessmix liberace
 
2021-09-17 2:52:37 PM  

whidbey: Overturning Roe v Wade will promote abstinence, says architect of Texas abortion ban

I almost want them to FAFO what overturning it will do.

They really have no idea.


Yeah, "Just say no" always works so well.
 
2021-09-17 2:53:00 PM  
Alright ladies of Texas, you know what to do.

A total sex-strike (after all, you're just "Saying 'No'") should get everyone's attention.  It's been done in other countries and worked a treat.

Good luck!
 
2021-09-17 2:53:32 PM  

Harry Wagstaff: It isn't punishing them for having buttsecks.

/chessmix liberace


So what you're saying is that Texas should try to get around the Lawrence v. Texas the same way they got around Roe v. Wade: By letting concerned citizens to sue people who do oral or butt stuff.
 
2021-09-17 2:53:40 PM  
Back in my day, women used a Bayer aspirin and it wasn't that expensive.  The gals just put it between their knees.
 
2021-09-17 2:54:04 PM  
Federalist Society. Of-farking-course
 
2021-09-17 2:55:30 PM  
Punishing women for having sex falls exactly in line with the Regressive's views on rape. It's always the woman's fault as far as they're concerned.

Unless it happens to them. Then it's everybody else's fault.
 
2021-09-17 2:56:42 PM  
Don't be ridiculous, subby. If they wanted to punish women for having sex, they wouldn't just be banning abortions. They'd be trying to limit access to birf control or speaking out against HPV vaccines or some other crazy shiat.
 
2021-09-17 2:57:11 PM  

allears: Hey, I've got an idea. Let's throw men in jail for getting any woman pregnant who isn't their wife. If men want to avoid jail, they can simply abstain from sex. Perfect!


You got my vote.
 
2021-09-17 2:57:34 PM  
It's like the wage discussion.

"People don't want to work!", no, people don't want to work for YOU.

"Women will say no to sex", no, women will say no to sex with YOU.
 
2021-09-17 2:57:36 PM  

The Googles Do Nothing: brantgoose: Sure, dude, sure. It will support abstinence the way that taking away the welfare and unemployment insurance of unemployables and the handicapped promotes "employment".

Have you ever looked on the stats for unwed mothers with unwanted children they can't provide for because they are working full time as Moms? Red State, Red State, Red State, Red State ... there are no Blue Fish in the pond. Just Number Two Fish.

Up yours you puritanical and self-righteous fugly!

We call them Fundies because they are literal and figurative fundaments.

Butt Stuff is the answer I guess.



The Loophole by Garfunkel and Oates
Youtube j8ZF_R_j0OY
 
2021-09-17 2:57:37 PM  
Do people really think that banning abortion stops abortions from happening?
 
2021-09-17 2:57:51 PM  
That jackass is never having sex again.

/he'll probably start raping women instead
 
2021-09-17 2:58:02 PM  
Like these jackwagons actually care about the consequences people feel from the legislation. The whole point is to flex for the base. Any negative repercussions are just gravy.
 
2021-09-17 2:58:14 PM  
Women can say "no" to rape? How about young girls saying "no" to abusive fathers?
 
2021-09-17 2:58:49 PM  

allears: Hey, I've got an idea. Let's throw men in jail for getting any woman pregnant who isn't their wife. If men want to avoid jail, they can simply abstain from sex. Perfect!


You're on the right track, but don't need to put people in jail. The consequences should be civil in the form of child support (at punitive levels) and social in the form of expulsion from polite society.  With few exceptions, a man who procreates and doesn't dedicate his life going forward to the wellbeing of the child and mother should be treated as subhuman.
 
2021-09-17 2:59:41 PM  

Herbie555: Alright ladies of Texas, you know what to do.

A total sex-strike (after all, you're just "Saying 'No'") should get everyone's attention.  It's been done in other countries and worked a treat.

Good luck!


It doesn't even have to be a total sex strike.  The women could have lesbian sex.  That might even be more effective.  Have the women get their pleasure and make sure the men know they are not needed anymore.  Scissor sisters the way out of gilead.
 
2021-09-17 2:59:46 PM  

Safari Ken: Do people really think that banning abortion stops abortions from happening?


75 million people voted for Trump. So, "yes".
 
2021-09-17 3:00:40 PM  

whidbey: Overturning Roe v Wade will promote abstinence, says architect of Texas abortion ban

I almost want them to FAFO what overturning it will do.

They really have no idea.


These monsters know.

It's what they want.

For male reich wing control freaks, the fact that they don't have control over her vagina (and in fact, her ability to offer sex gives her power over them) is an unspeakable affront.
 
2021-09-17 3:00:48 PM  
You never hear about men in airport bathroom stalls getting pregnant.
 
2021-09-17 3:01:55 PM  
Do these idiots even know that married women also have abortions sometimes?
 
2021-09-17 3:02:50 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-09-17 3:02:58 PM  
Especially since Greg Abbott's gonna eliminate rape!

Christ what an asshole.
 
2021-09-17 3:02:59 PM  
With few exceptions, a man who forces his religious beliefs on the rest of society, should be treated as subhuman garbage.
 
2021-09-17 3:03:13 PM  

GrinzGrimly: allears: Hey, I've got an idea. Let's throw men in jail for getting any woman pregnant who isn't their wife. If men want to avoid jail, they can simply abstain from sex. Perfect!

You're on the right track, but don't need to put people in jail. The consequences should be civil in the form of child support (at punitive levels) and social in the form of expulsion from polite society.  With few exceptions, a man who procreates and doesn't dedicate his life going forward to the wellbeing of the child and mother should be treated as subhuman.


Fark user imageView Full Size
You're despicable.
 
2021-09-17 3:03:32 PM  

Serious Black: That jackass is never having sex again.

/he'll probably start raping women instead


"Start" implies he ever stopped.
 
2021-09-17 3:03:42 PM  

Safari Ken: Do people really think that banning abortion stops abortions from happening?


No, but they just want to feel self righteous so they still get what they want.
 
2021-09-17 3:03:48 PM  
Abstinence only education gets expanded to adults.
 
2021-09-17 3:04:35 PM  
No one can tell you that, subby -- because it's so patently obvious that that is the case. His words are right there saying exactly that.

I really want to punch that guy. He's brutal.
 
2021-09-17 3:04:41 PM  
The space genetically procreative sex occupies on the sexuality spectrum is one tiny dot of eggshell blue. The answer is "do literally anything that won't transfer genetic material", and that's a whooole lot of butt stuff
 
2021-09-17 3:04:41 PM  

GrinzGrimly: allears: Hey, I've got an idea. Let's throw men in jail for getting any woman pregnant who isn't their wife. If men want to avoid jail, they can simply abstain from sex. Perfect!

You're on the right track, but don't need to put people in jail. The consequences should be civil in the form of child support (at punitive levels) and social in the form of expulsion from polite society.  With few exceptions, a man who procreates and doesn't dedicate his life going forward to the wellbeing of the child and mother should be treated as subhuman.


I will vote for this on one condidtion.  that us men and mxn (and women and womxn) who did not have a gamet in the decision of creating the new sentient being, are not taxed at all for the offspring.  Make the manufacturers responisble.  If the manufacturers are not held repsponisible, then we all get a vote on every new application for a sentient being production.  If we all have responsibility we should have the rights to veto the manufacture of new sentient beings.
 
2021-09-17 3:05:21 PM  
It has nothing to do with punishing women for sex. At least for those women who are married, financially secure, not victims of rape, and in good physical condition. If you aren't one of them you shouldn't be having sex anyway but if you do Texas will make sure you and your baby will pay the consequences.
 
BBH
2021-09-17 3:06:11 PM  
I guess all the men now will stop once a woman says NO.

Like that happens now...
 
2021-09-17 3:07:17 PM  
This is how they think. It's the woman's problem, entirely.

Foster Friess: Aspirin Between the Legs is the Best Contraceptive

Rick Santorum's billionaire backer told an astonished Andrea Mitchell that birth control was inexpensive back in his day.
 
2021-09-17 3:07:22 PM  

GrinzGrimly: allears: Hey, I've got an idea. Let's throw men in jail for getting any woman pregnant who isn't their wife. If men want to avoid jail, they can simply abstain from sex. Perfect!

You're on the right track, but don't need to put people in jail. The consequences should be civil in the form of child support (at punitive levels) and social in the form of expulsion from polite society.  With few exceptions, a man who procreates and doesn't dedicate his life going forward to the wellbeing of the child and mother should be treated as subhuman.


Yet you still support and defend Jason miller...
 
2021-09-17 3:08:08 PM  
I had an idea the other day. What if you sued people people trying to sue people for helping obtain abortions for helping to obtaining abortions themselves? The law is written so poorly that you could absolutely do it. Also, if you had enough time and money, you could clog the courts with sued republicans.
 
2021-09-17 3:08:43 PM  

AmbassadorBooze: GrinzGrimly: allears: Hey, I've got an idea. Let's throw men in jail for getting any woman pregnant who isn't their wife. If men want to avoid jail, they can simply abstain from sex. Perfect!

You're on the right track, but don't need to put people in jail. The consequences should be civil in the form of child support (at punitive levels) and social in the form of expulsion from polite society.  With few exceptions, a man who procreates and doesn't dedicate his life going forward to the wellbeing of the child and mother should be treated as subhuman.

I will vote for this on one condidtion.  that us men and mxn (and women and womxn) who did not have a gamet in the decision of creating the new sentient being, are not taxed at all for the offspring.  Make the manufacturers responisble.  If the manufacturers are not held repsponisible, then we all get a vote on every new application for a sentient being production.  If we all have responsibility we should have the rights to veto the manufacture of new sentient beings.


This is America. When we hold manufacturers responsible lawyers make millions and the consumers get a coupon for $35 cents off their next purchase. The government then covers the cost of making sure the manufacturers stay in business.
 
2021-09-17 3:08:45 PM  

allears: Hey, I've got an idea. Let's throw men in jail for getting any woman pregnant who isn't their wife. If men want to avoid jail, they can simply abstain from sex. Perfect!


Where do I apply to get my religious exemption from this rule?
 
2021-09-17 3:09:46 PM  

cowsaregoodeating: AmbassadorBooze: GrinzGrimly: allears: Hey, I've got an idea. Let's throw men in jail for getting any woman pregnant who isn't their wife. If men want to avoid jail, they can simply abstain from sex. Perfect!

You're on the right track, but don't need to put people in jail. The consequences should be civil in the form of child support (at punitive levels) and social in the form of expulsion from polite society.  With few exceptions, a man who procreates and doesn't dedicate his life going forward to the wellbeing of the child and mother should be treated as subhuman.

I will vote for this on one condidtion.  that us men and mxn (and women and womxn) who did not have a gamet in the decision of creating the new sentient being, are not taxed at all for the offspring.  Make the manufacturers responisble.  If the manufacturers are not held repsponisible, then we all get a vote on every new application for a sentient being production.  If we all have responsibility we should have the rights to veto the manufacture of new sentient beings.

This is America. When we hold manufacturers responsible lawyers make millions and the consumers get a coupon for $35 cents off their next purchase. The government then covers the cost of making sure the manufacturers stay in business.


$35 cents? What the hell kind of currency is that? The guy who wrote this should learn to proofread.
 
2021-09-17 3:11:27 PM  
I moved from New Orleans a very blue city and a place known for its debauchery my last year of high school to Ocala Florida in 1987.

In new Orleans I drank a lot and got laid on occasion.

In Ocala i was here a week and literally got into a threeway with my neighbor and her best friend the second week I was here.

I literally slept with 8 different girls in the six months I went to school here at most of them Baptists and two demanded the butt sex.

Footloose is a true story.
 
2021-09-17 3:11:52 PM  
These are the same people who said victims of rape should be forcibly restrained for 9 months if they don't want to birth their rapist's child, then give him child support if he wants to keep it.
 
2021-09-17 3:11:59 PM  

whidbey: Overturning Roe v Wade will promote abstinence, says architect of Texas abortion ban

I almost want them to FAFO what overturning it will do.

They really have no idea.


Women will die. They may have already died because there's no provision in the law for miscarriages or other non-viable pregnancies.

I wonder how many have had to go to Oklahoma, Louisiana or New Mexico to get life-saving medical procedures.
 
2021-09-17 3:12:17 PM  

Soup4Bonnie: This is how they think. It's the woman's problem, entirely.

Foster Friess: Aspirin Between the Legs is the Best Contraceptive

Rick Santorum's billionaire backer told an astonished Andrea Mitchell that birth control was inexpensive back in his day.


You ruined my reference/joke :-(
 
Displayed 50 of 140 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.