PhoebeElaine
PhoebeElaine
PhoebeElaine

I realize that you don't agree with their views on birth control but there is only one definition of a scientific and medical fact and we cannot accept people redefining it to suit their own beliefs. Regardless of whatever personal value someone places on a fertilized egg, they cannot change the definition of abortion

Some of the issues that get overlooked with Hobby Lobby is that their entire claim is based on a false premise: IUDs do not in fact cause abortions and neither does the morning after pill. Furthermore, if the owners of Hobby Lobby are so morally outraged by abortion, then why do they important billions of dollars

'I didn't say helping women would do more harm then good I said encouraging pre-martial sex would do more harm then good'

The Bible says that it's a sin to eat shellfish, wear clothing made from two different fibers, cut your hair, and come into contact with a woman while she's on her period.

'most feminists want women to be free of social pressures that men do not face without having to take on the pressures that men face.'

1. fact:

Holly shit - it's really important for you to have the last word, isn't it? Why else would you keep deleting my posts even after I acknowledged that we should end the conversation when I posted this:

"Parents invest in their sons' educations because they hope to be supported by them when they are elderly and boys/men have more freedom and economic opportunities and that is why parents choose them instead of their daughters."

But you refuse to see that beyond the complexities of poverty (which believe me, I acknowledge are there), that there is also inherent sexism involved in controlling women's bodies and freedom. You've repeatedly dodged the fact that these practices take place in middle class families (and I've also pointed out that

No, you're the one who needs help. It's faith you're talking about, not facts. If you really are the one who is being factual here then you would have had no trouble poking holes in my arguments by actually addressing them. But you can't do that so instead you imply that I'm crazy. I will however agree that there's no

I can tell you that in my own family, I have relatives who were married at 14, 15, and 16 (and I come from a Christian background and a relatively liberal one compared to the girl in the article so it's not necessarily a religious or poverty thing but rather it's cultural). And they were all from middle class

You know what, I'm sorry but you are clearly trying to justify women's oppression here. You've told everyone else to have compassion and understanding but do you have any for the girls? So far you've offered absolutely no solutions whatsoever and told the rest of us to back off in our criticism. You don't need to tell

Then why did you come in here and state that abstinence education wasn't exclusive of sex ed if you are against teaching comprehensive sex ed in the first place? You should have made your feelings clear instead of acting as though you were being objective.

I am well aware that pregnancy can result from sexual intercourse and that it is even more of a risk in cultures where there is limited access to birth control and lack of sex education. But that doesn't answer the question regarding honor killings even when sexual activity did not result in a pregnancy out of

I'm delusional? Why? Because I understand that something which occurs in nature was not 'designed' for something which was socially constructed? Do you also think that eating was 'designed' for the tradition of gathering for a family dinner?

Okay, so I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt and thought that perhaps you didn't delete my response to you and it was maybe an issue with Kinja. I've responded to you 4 times now and it's quite clear that you are in fact deleting my comments.

And your definition of 'fact' is simply not what you think it means because whether you want to admit it or not, sex was not 'designed' for marriage. Sex predates the concept of marriage. More specifically, sex is a natural activity while marriage is a social construct.

And your definition of 'fact' is simply not what you think it means because whether you want to admit it or not, sex was not 'designed' for marriage. Sex predates the concept of marriage. More specifically, sex is a natural activity while marriage is a social construct.

Oh wow thank you so much! Yeah I've seen so many right-wing pundits all of a sudden transform into champions of women's rights when it comes to discussing Middle Eastern and African women but it's so obviously an attempt to scare people against migrants/refugees and most foreign countries in general.

Oh, I absolutely agree. This is just an excuse to deny women their rights and in the process they get to perpetuate homophobia. It's illogical and completely disgusting.