Obama: "Rape is Rape. It Is A Crime"

[ElphabaGalinda]

Perfection all in one sentence.

Helen and Margaret said it beautifully :clap: Unfortunately people vote against their own self interest all the time for some strange reason.

[Stickers]

ETA: I had this conversation with my father last week actually. He asked me who I would vote for if Mitt Romney had a guaranteed plan to magically fix the economy, but he was still against my right to choose. Well, I don't care. I will never vote for someone who doesn't support my right to choose what to do with my body. Ever. What good is a great economy going to do for me if I can't even maintain autonomy over my own body? What good is 5% unemployment if I have to stay home with a kid? Eff that noise. A pro-lifer will never get my vote.

This. Economic health is worthless if I don't have my rights.

And I've heard the "Obama's bad for Israel becase of Iran" from some people in real life, and I honestly just don't think there is any merit to it. Iran does not have the kind of uranium needed to make a bomb, if they did decide to go that way it would take them years to make weapons, and their facilities are routinely inspected, so we would know when/if they do that. Nonetheless, they're facing very sever sanctions, their economy is hurting and people are staving. I can't imagine anyone getting information from a non-bias source would think Israel is under any immediate threat from that situation. From my point of view, Netanyahu's warmongering for political points is a bigger threat to Israel's security then Obama's refusal to start another war in the middle east now.

[FaustianSlip]

Supporting the right of ISR to exist as a Jewish state does not mean we are obligated to follow that asshole Netanyahu to the gates of hell.

Oh my God, thank you for saying this. Exactly.

I'm a Jew. I'm happy to be a Jew, I'm proud to be a Jew, I chose to be a Jew. None of that means that I owe Israel my vote in the U.S. presidential election, or my reproductive rights, or the State Department's funding, or my gay friends' right to marry. Sorry, no. I know a fair number of Israelis, and they're good people and all, but so are the Germans and the Aussies and the French people I know. So are the Australian and British and Canadian Jews that I know. And I'm not asking myself, "But what will the Canadians think?!" when I vote for my president. I mean, what the actual fuck. We as Americans and as American Jews- particularly American, non-Orthodox Jews- give Israel a hell of a lot of support- financial, political and religious- and frankly, we don't get a whole lot back. That goes quadruple if you're female.

I might deign to give Israel a little more consideration when Israel has a police force that puts a stop to women being attacked for immodesty, a rabbinate that doesn't applaud and call names when a woman is arrested at the Kotel for praying too loudly or wearing a tallit, bus companies that would rather pull all advertising featuring women than stand up to religious extremists and a government that would, say, allow me to marry another Jew or be buried in Israel should I choose to move there. I don't say this because I think the U.S. is perfect at all, but Israel has its own problems that they might want to focus on over who we choose as president. I don't think any Israeli is voting based on what they think their American friends or acquaintances might possibly want, and I would never, ever expect them to. I also agree that there's been very little I've seen from Obama to make me think he's nearly as "anti-Israel" as certain people want to make him out to be. I've never understood that, myself.

As far as Romney not being able to overturn Roe v. Wade "right away," seriously? The next president will, in all likelihood, wind up appointing at least two Supreme Court justices. Romney has gone on record as "supporting" people like Akin and all of this bullshit rape talk, whether he "agrees" with it or not. And I don't care if he'll wait a year or two before embarking on this stuff- he's made his attitudes toward women very, very clear, and I'll never vote for someone like that. Ever.

[Gil]

Beeks, I wish that people like you would honestly tell me "I believe that Mitt Romney's financial policies are more important than your rights as a human being." I'm sick of listening to people try to sugarcoat it.

[BlueChair]

My feelings about the State of Israel and the state of my uterus aside, if I were voting on solely economic issues, I would still be voting Obama.

[Austin]

My feelings about the State of Israel and the state of my uterus aside, if I were voting on solely economic issues, I would still be voting Obama.

Even if the bit about Romney's fiscal policies was true, which is in serious doubt, fortunes rise and fall. During our 30 years of marriage, we've had times of scarcity and we've had times of plenty, but I've always had my right to self-determine and there is no price that I could ever put on that.

[Sola]

I took would like to hear more about this magical economic plan that cuts taxes AND still raises money to reduce the deficit. That would be great. If Romney has specifics, where can I find them?

Well they could have been hearing about our 'caring and sharing' UK conservative government (it's supposed to be a coalition but the lib dems are about as much use as a chocolate teapot). You see we've had a few years of cuts, cuts and more cuts, including tax cuts for the rich at the expense of tax rises for pensioners and the result of it has been the worst double dip recession in decades. Except of course the news that we got yesterday that the recession is over as we now have shown growth this year. Except (again) this year we've had the jubilee, the royal wedding and the Olympics which has led to masses of tourists, masses of retail spending and masses of temporary jobs. Next year? Well..... there's...... erm..... nothing.

Triple dip recession anyone?

Trickle down doesn't work, never has and never will.

[formergothardite]

Well they could have been hearing about our 'caring and sharing' UK conservative government (it's supposed to be a coalition but the lib dems are about as much use as a chocolate teapot). You see we've had a few years of cuts, cuts and more cuts, including tax cuts for the rich at the expense of tax rises for pensioners and the result of it has been the worst double dip recession in decades. Except of course the news that we got yesterday that the recession is over as we now have shown growth this year. Except (again) this year we've had the jubilee, the royal wedding and the Olympics which has led to masses of tourists, masses of retail spending and masses of temporary jobs. Next year? Well..... there's...... erm..... nothing.

Triple dip recession anyone?

Trickle down doesn't work, never has and never will.

This is a fact that Jericho (and now Beeks) has never been willing to explain. If trickle down hasn't ever worked, why the hell do they think it will magically start working now.

[ElphabaGalinda]

Beeks, I wish that people like you would honestly tell me "I believe that Mitt Romney's financial policies are more important than your rights as a human being." I'm sick of listening to people try to sugarcoat it.

:clap: Me too. I wish people would say it like that, because that's how it is. And you can't claim to have watched the debates or know anything about Mitt Romney if you think he doesn't want to take away my rights as a human being. That's exactly what he'll do.

[formergothardite]

:clap: Me too. I wish people would say it like that, because that's how it is. And you can't claim to have watched the debates or know anything about Mitt Romney if you think he doesn't want to take away my rights as a human being. That's exactly what he'll do.

Amen, and I wonder if Beeks will at least come back and have the decency to say this. Yeah, it makes it look like she is a shitty person, but this is what she really said and what she really did.

[ElphabaGalinda]

Oh my God, thank you for saying this. Exactly.

I'm a Jew. I'm happy to be a Jew, I'm proud to be a Jew, I chose to be a Jew. None of that means that I owe Israel my vote in the U.S. presidential election, or my reproductive rights, or the State Department's funding, or my gay friends' right to marry. Sorry, no. I know a fair number of Israelis, and they're good people and all, but so are the Germans and the Aussies and the French people I know. So are the Australian and British and Canadian Jews that I know. And I'm not asking myself, "But what will the Canadians think?!" when I vote for my president. I mean, what the actual fuck. We as Americans and as American Jews- particularly American, non-Orthodox Jews- give Israel a hell of a lot of support- financial, political and religious- and frankly, we don't get a whole lot back. That goes quadruple if you're female.

I might deign to give Israel a little more consideration when Israel has a police force that puts a stop to women being attacked for immodesty, a rabbinate that doesn't applaud and call names when a woman is arrested at the Kotel for praying too loudly or wearing a tallit, bus companies that would rather pull all advertising featuring women than stand up to religious extremists and a government that would, say, allow me to marry another Jew or be buried in Israel should I choose to move there. I don't say this because I think the U.S. is perfect at all, but Israel has its own problems that they might want to focus on over who we choose as president. I don't think any Israeli is voting based on what they think their American friends or acquaintances might possibly want, and I would never, ever expect them to. I also agree that there's been very little I've seen from Obama to make me think he's nearly as "anti-Israel" as certain people want to make him out to be. I've never understood that, myself.

As far as Romney not being able to overturn Roe v. Wade "right away," seriously? The next president will, in all likelihood, wind up appointing at least two Supreme Court justices. Romney has gone on record as "supporting" people like Akin and all of this bullshit rape talk, whether he "agrees" with it or not. And I don't care if he'll wait a year or two before embarking on this stuff- he's made his attitudes toward women very, very clear, and I'll never vote for someone like that. Ever.

Beautifully written! I hate that in certain circles if you say any tiny thing negative about Israel you are considered anti-Jew, even if you are Jewish. I'm happy and proud to be a Jew, but that has nothing to do with my rather complicated feelings about Israel, which are similar to what you've stated.

Most Canadians I know (myself included) think anyone voting for Romney is voting against their own best interests, particularly if they are a woman or not wealthy, but I don't want to generalize for the whole country...Though in Canada no one that openly anti-woman would have a chance in hell of being elected. Though who cares what we think :lol:

Even if Romney can't overturn Roe v. Wade, he can do serious damage to abortion rights, and certain states already have done that through crazy restrictions. Even if he can't overturn it (not saying he can't), the fact that he wants to is enough to make me very afraid.

[ElphabaGalinda]

Amen, and I wonder if Beeks will at least come back and have the decency to say this. Yeah, it makes it look like she is a shitty person, but this is what she really said and what she really did.

I think anyone who believes Mitt Romney's financial policies (which aren't going to work) are more important than my rights as a human being IS a shitty person, but that's just me. And that is exactly what she said, just not in those words. Guess I just like having rights too darn much.

[formergothardite]

I agree, but she didn't word it that way because when you say what Beeks really meant without the sugarcoating, well, most people don't want to admit to themselves or others that is what they really believe. I don't know if Beeks is reading this thread or if she will come back to it, but it has to be hard to accept that you believe such a horrible thing. And that you voted for someone who is okay with taking rights away from a group of people.

I can see gay marriage happening in the next four years with Obama, but with Mitt, we are just going to go backwards.

[freejoytoo]

Beautifully written! I hate that in certain circles if you say any tiny thing negative about Israel you are considered anti-Jew, even if you are Jewish. I'm happy and proud to be a Jew, but that has nothing to do with my rather complicated feelings about Israel, which are similar to what you've stated.

Most Canadians I know (myself included) think anyone voting for Romney is voting against their own best interests, particularly if they are a woman or not wealthy, but I don't want to generalize for the whole country...Though in Canada no one that openly anti-woman would have a chance in hell of being elected. Though who cares what we think :lol:

Even if Romney can't overturn Roe v. Wade, he can do serious damage to abortion rights, and certain states already have done that through crazy restrictions. Even if he can't overturn it (not saying he can't), the fact that he wants to is enough to make me very afraid.

:clap: I'm glad you guys have said this because a high number of people seem to think that a word against Israel is instant anti-Semitism. I am not anti-Semetic in the least but feel that Israel has done some appalling things.

I would never vote for anyone prolife. I'm not fisically conservative either but even if I was I still wouldn't on the basis of bodily rights.

[ElphabaGalinda]

I agree, but she didn't word it that way because when you say what Beeks really meant without the sugarcoating, well, most people don't want to admit to themselves or others that is what they really believe. I don't know if Beeks is reading this thread or if she will come back to it, but it has to be hard to accept that you believe such a horrible thing. And that you voted for someone who is okay with taking rights away from a group of people.

I can see gay marriage happening in the next four years with Obama, but with Mitt, we are just going to go backwards.

I can see it happening in the next four years under Obama too. With Mitt, I think things will go backwards so much that marriage will be the least of peoples' worries. I thought it was funny when Republicans criticized Obama for taking so long to say he was pro gay marriage when it was something Mitt would never ever say (unless he thought it was politically absolutely necessary). The fact that you get fired in some states just for being gay, for example, could start to happen everywhere (again bad for the economy!). Homosexuality was once illegal, and it was once considered a mental disorder. I don't want to go backwards in that direction, and that's the direction things will head under Mitt, even if it won't go all the way back to that.

I'd actually be worried about what Mitt would do to my rights as a gay person, as a woman, and as a non-Christian. I think anyone who is not a white Christian heterosexual cisgendered male should be worried.

I'm not the biggest fan of Stephen Harper but at least he won't try to take away my rights and refuses to reopen the gay marriage or abortion debates. I'm also hoping you get some form of universal healthcare under Obama within the next four years too, because that's one of the things I love most about my country, and you guys deserve something as basic as that too.

[FaustianSlip]

:clap: I'm glad you guys have said this because a high number of people seem to think that a word against Israel is instant anti-Semitism. I am not anti-Semetic in the least but feel that Israel has done some appalling things.

It's hard, because I have heard people say some things that, in trying to (rightfully, IMHO) condemn some of Israel's more egregious social and political behavior, have very much blurred the line of anti-Semitism or crossed it entirely. And it's difficult for me to define what that line is, because it's sort of like pornography; I know it when I see it. But no, I do not at all think that criticizing Israel is equivalent to anti-Semitism, not least because I think that the state of Israel has done and allowed some truly deplorable things. I also think that Israel has a few critical internal issues that, if they continue to be ignored, could pose a greater threat to the country's continued existence as a state for all Jews than anything going on with the Palestinians or neighboring countries. The current model is not sustainable for a variety of reasons, within and without, and sticking our collective fingers in our ears and going, "La la la, I can't hear you! Everything's fine!" is not helping anything.

I think for me, the anti-Israel/anti-Semitism thing starts to become an issue when "the Israeli government" or "right-wing elements of the Israeli population" becomes "the Jews." Because there are a hell of a lot of Israelis, and certainly diaspora Jews, who don't agree with much of anything the current Israeli government says or does. A lot of Jewish people are fed the fuck up with what's going on there, frankly, and want change as much as anyone. But then I hear comments from people who say, "Well, I know XYZ goes against everything else that I stand for, but he 'supports Israel,' so I had to vote for him!" and I'm inclined to throw my hands up in the air, because it just reinforces that idea that some people have that all Jews march lockstep behind whatever Israel says, and that if you're not out in Gaza throwing yourself in front of a bulldozer, well, you must support the Israeli government a hundred percent, when I would say most people- and most Jews- see many more shades of gray. Personally, I won't give tzedakah to Israel, because I'm not going to financially support a Jewish state that turns a blind eye to the settlement issue and, on a more selfish note, won't even really recognize me as Jewish or protect my right as a Jewish woman to worship where and how I choose. They're a sovereign state, of course, and that's entirely their prerogative, but they don't get to just do whatever the hell they want and keep my unconditional financial and political support. Zionism does not mean and has never meant mutely going along with whatever a Jewish state does, not matter how ridiculous, and pretending it's okay because hey, we're all Jews. There's a huge difference between supporting your community and enabling them in a weird, unhealthily codependent relationship.

[Beeks]

I agree, but she didn't word it that way because when you say what Beeks really meant without the sugarcoating, well, most people don't want to admit to themselves or others that is what they really believe. I don't know if Beeks is reading this thread or if she will come back to it, but it has to be hard to accept that you believe such a horrible thing. And that you voted for someone who is okay with taking rights away from a group of people.

I can see gay marriage happening in the next four years with Obama, but with Mitt, we are just going to go backwards.

Did you see the part where I said I voted for marriage equality on the same ballot I used to vote for Romney?

I don't think economics are more important than human rights. I don't see an immediate threat to anyone's human rights electing one guy over the other but I do see our country going to hell and if the economy completely collapses, then rights like marriage and abortion won't be guaranteed to anyone anyway. The country could completely fall apart. I'm pro marriage equality and I'm pro choice, but we won't be able to sustain a country that grants everyone those rights if we continue to fall to pieces.

There is no great candidate for me. Do I wish obama's economic policies worked, sure. Do I wish mitt Romney were less of a whackadoodle Mormon, sure. Unfortunately I didn't see any perfect candidate on my ballot. I'm not sticking Romney stickers on my car or going to rallies or registering republican.

Also, re: Israel, I admitted upfront it was a total bias. I don't think anyone here on FJ owes Israel anything, it's my bias and I'm owning it. It didn't play a huge role in who I voted for, but it did help tip the scales for me.

[Guest Anonymous]

Did you see the part where I said I voted for marriage equality on the same ballot I used to vote for Romney?

I don't think economics are more important than human rights. I don't see an immediate threat to anyone's human rights electing one guy over the other but I do see our country going to hell and if the economy completely collapses, then rights like marriage and abortion won't be guaranteed to anyone anyway. The country could completely fall apart. I'm pro marriage equality and I'm pro choice, but we won't be able to sustain a country that grants everyone those rights if we continue to fall to pieces.

There is no great candidate for me. Do I wish obama's economic policies worked, sure. Do I wish mitt Romney were less of a whackadoodle Mormon, sure. Unfortunately I didn't see any perfect candidate on my ballot. I'm not sticking Romney stickers on my car or going to rallies or registering republican.

Also, re: Israel, I admitted upfront it was a total bias. I don't think anyone here on FJ owes Israel anything, it's my bias and I'm owning it. It didn't play a huge role in who I voted for, but it did help tip the scales for me.

And you think that Romney's ri-donk-ulous, utterly unhelpful, economic policies will do the trick? Wow. Good luck with that.

[formergothardite]

Mitt is very clear that he doesn't support gay marriage. Obama is clear he does. If Mitt had said he didn't support interacial marriage, would you still think it was no big deal?

And can you please explain how you think trickle down economics will work this time when it never has?

[Beeks]

Mitt is very clear that he doesn't support gay marriage. Obama is clear he does. If Mitt had said he didn't support interacial marriage, would you still think it was no big deal?

And can you please explain how you think trickle down economics will work this time when it never has?

It's definitely not "no big deal" and I never said that. I said I think the bigger, more immediate deal is our collapsing economy and the fact that if the economy completely collapses, whether you have civil rights guaranteed to you on a piece of paper is not going to matter.

Supply side economics worked under Reagan, right? And really - is obama's plan working? This is the slowest recovery In modern history. Why do you think it will get any better with another 4 years?

[Guest Anonymous]

It's definitely not "no big deal" and I never said that. I said I think the bigger, more immediate deal is our collapsing economy and the fact that if the economy completely collapses, whether you have civil rights guaranteed to you on a piece of paper is not going to matter.

Supply side economics worked under Reagan, right? And really - is obama's plan working? This is the slowest recovery In modern history. Why do you think it will get any better with an other 4 years?

I'm really sorry, but can you add some eye-roll faces? It is really tricky to read sarcasm on Internet message boards. Do you honestly believe that's true?

[Mommy22alyns]

More reasons I cannot fathom any woman voting for Shitt Romney

Yes, exactly. I've been wondering the same thing myself.

[wtfrenchtoast]

Voting for marriage equality on a ballot that you also voted for Willard on wont do a damn thing if he's elected and forces his FEDERAL marriage amendment through, which is part of his platform. Just throwing that out there.

[Beeks]

Voting for marriage equality on a ballot that you also voted for Willard on wont do a damn thing if he's elected and forces his FEDERAL marriage amendment through, which is part of his platform. Just throwing that out there.

He can't force it through.

Edit: and again, this was a balancing test for me. If the country can recover economically, gay marriage will eventually be legalized.

[OkToBeTakei]

It's definitely not "no big deal" and I never said that. I said I think the bigger, more immediate deal is our collapsing economy and the fact that if the economy completely collapses, whether you have civil rights guaranteed to you on a piece of paper is not going to matter.

Supply side economics worked under Reagan, right? And really - is obama's plan working? This is the slowest recovery In modern history. Why do you think it will get any better with another 4 years?

Which is working. Can I remind you that Reagan and Bush positively pushed for affordable housing, shall we mention the 'subprime mortgage?'

The economic crisis is not only a US problem. I like to think you are intelligent enough to realise that and also realise that bringing back those who arguably caused it is in any way an answer for the world economy. Although quite obviously if it works for you, forget the rest huh?