Tag Archives: liberal logic

The liberal logic of Gov. “Coonman” Northam

Last night I decided to checkout Coonman’s Twitter timeline to see what he was saying about gun rights in Virginia.

Instead I was given an opportunity to see some of his liberal logic on display regarding abortion and children.

He retweeted his wife’s tweet (from 1/2019): “For the next four years @RalphNortham and I look forward to working to make a difference in the lives of children. To me that is what #TheWayAhead is all about. Let’s start at the beginning with our greatest treasure. Our children.

Following that, Coonman retweeted Senator Saslaw’s tweet: “As my friend, @RalphNortham, would say. There’s no excuse that a group of legislators, most of whom are men, should be telling women what they can and cannot do with their bodies. In response to a retweet of this: NARAL Pro-Choice VA @NARALVirginia: “.@SenatorLocke and @JennMcClellanVA bills to repeal some TRAP restrictions were rolled together by the Education & Health Committee and will now be voted on as one. @SenatorLocke: “Women know what they’re doing.” #REPEALAct

I guess the only children we should treasure are the ones women deem are #TheWayAhead.

Liberal logic: It’s not designed to make sense.

See also “VA anti-gun rights Gov. Northam (D) declares state of emergency

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Womyn tells people how they can best protect their family: get a life insurance policy and not a gun

I thought progressives were all about choice? Oh wait, that only applies to killing babies.

Mommy Gabrielle Blair knows what’s best for you…

Some woman on Twitter named Gabrielle Blair tweeted some personal opinions about how you should protect your family. She describes herself as mother of 6 and a best-selling NYT author. Here ‘ya go:

There are far better ways to protect your family than a gun. Get a life insurance policy. I know you truly believe that you’ll need to defend your family at gunpoint. You need to let that go.

Statistically it’s just not going to happen. I know it’s boring, but if you want to protect your family, things like seatbelts, fire alarms, and life insurance are your best bet.

The reality is, you’re probably going to die of heart disease or diabetes, or just old age and natural causes. I know it’s not as cool-sounding as an armed-standoff, but it’s still true.

If the topic of protecting your family comes up, a gun extremist will immediately imagine an armed intruder who has come to murder. That’s not going to happen. It’s rare enough that it’s not something people need to worry about or make decisions based on.

If the topic of protecting your family comes up among people who actually interact and care for children each day, they think of things like using car seats, preventing hormones and dangerous chemicals in food, child-proofing the cleaning supplies, and schoolyard bullying.

Hundreds and hundreds of you have explained to me that a life insurance policy won’t protect against an armed intruder. I never said it would. The thing you don’t understand: There isn’t going to be an armed intruder. That’s just your paranoia.

A gun in the home is FAR more likely to kill or maim a household member than it is to protect them. Enjoy your daydreams about armed stand-offs. But that’s all they are. Daydreams.”

FYI Gabrielle, everyone has different life experiences and is entitled to protect their own family AS THEY SEE FIT (provided it’s legal).

Several years ago I had a minor, prohibited possessor living down the street from me – one who liked to commit armed robberies yet couldn’t be thrown in jail because of his age. Said punk broke into my next-door neighbor’s home – WITH A GUN – and my neighbor had to shoot him to protect himself. Unfortunately he missed the kid.

The good news is the punk continued with his hobby after he turned 18 and is now in prison for some time.

While my boyfriend was on duty one night, two hooded “youths” came knocking on my door. I turned on/off lights to indicate someone was home and grabbed my revolver. I eventually saw them walk away and get into a van across the street and take off. I don’t believe they were going door-to-door selling Girl Scout cookies.

Before I moved to Oklahoma, I had someone on FOTM threaten my life. The threat was very credible and I filed a complaint with the local Sheriff and the feds. I lived alone at the time and was very concerned for my safety.

This womyn couldn’t be more wrong about believing that we girls who like firearms for protection are dreaming of a standoff. I don’t believe she actually knows a woman who owns firearms.

I could have a conversation with her and explain about my firearm training and why I believe it’s an equalizer for me, the extended periods of time I may be alone, and the criminal elements that live in my neighborhood.

But that would involve her actually listening to MY opinions and trusting that I know what’s best for ME.

Plus I don’t think get I’d get too far in a conversation with a womyn who believes that unplanned pregnancies are always men’s fault because condoms are more readily available than the pill.

You cannot win a debate up against “liberal logic.”

Update: In typical progressive fashion, this womyn muted her thread. Shocker, not.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

The solution to Baltimore’s milestone homicides? Sue gun manufacturers!

No one is responsible for their personal actions except for the law-abiding people demorats want to control: Gun manufacturers and firearm owners.

Demorats NEVER, NEVER let facts get in the way of reaching their utopian goals.

According to the Baltimore Sun’s report on November 14, the demorat-run city (which hasn’t had a republican mayor since 1967) has hit 300 homicides for the fifth year in a row.

Baltimore Police Commissioner Michael Harrison said that to address the “culture of violence” in Baltimore, there must be programs offering young men a path away from a life of crime.

Apparently former mayor Catherine Pugh’s “Squeegee Boys” program wasn’t the correct pathway.

So what is the progressive politicians’ solution to the out-of-control gun violence in their city? Lawsuits against gun manufacturers.

WBAL TV reports that the city of Baltimore is seriously considering following the lead of Sandy Hook families and suing gun manufacturers. From their report:

“City Solicitor Andre Davis said that escalating violence is why he will legally go after gun manufacturers to hold them responsible if Sandy Hook families succeed in their cases, he said.

Andre Davis and former Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh

“That decision by the court of appeals a couple of weeks ago was a breakthrough because congress has created immunity for these gun manufacturers that, up until now, has been impenetrable and this recent decision is the first small crack in the wall and we will continue to monitor it,” Davis said.”

Read the WBAL story here.

The “crack in the wall” is Baltimore’s leadership, gang violence and prosecution of violent criminals, which republican governor Larry Hogan wants to address.

But that, of course, is deemed racist by progressives.

Enjoy your record homicide rates, Baltimore!

Suing gun manufacturers for the actions of your criminal citizens will have absolute ZERO effect on murder rates and gun violence. You CANNOT legislate and sue enough people to ensure that CRIMINALS will obey gun control laws. THEY DON’T CARE about your laws.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Steven Crowder’s latest edition: President Trump is not a racist, change my mind

It’s amazing how people fall hook, line and sinker for the media narrative.

And it’s amazing how they jump from point A to point B then point C without any correlation between their positions. That’s liberal logic for ‘ya.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Doctor says “Jewish values” drive her to perform abortions that are necessary for women to “create the families they want”

I am not familiar with Judaism and their stance on abortion. Yet in my research, I understand that abortion in Judaism is permitted only if there is a direct threat to the life of the mother by carrying the fetus to term or through the act of childbirth.

There is a pro-choice Jewish woman doctor in DC that the Washington Post (reposted on the SF Gate when I read it) wrote a glowing story about. Her name is Sara Imershein and she performs first-trimester abortions and ritual circumcisions. The article from SF Gate describes her reasons for her work as such: She believes both practices achieve the same goal: allowing women to create the families they want. Given that, she said, her Jewish faith compels her to offer the two services to Washington-area residents.”

Apparently, having the family you don’t want to create can bring suffering to women: “She cited the Jewish concept of “mitzvot,” which means “commandments.” For her, she said: “It means I am commanded, if I have the skills as a physician, to use them to alleviate suffering. Not to use my skills would be wrong.”

The article does acknowledge that Halakhah mandates that abortion is necessary if the woman’s life is in danger.

More from the article: But Jews vary on what constitutes a sufficient threat. By performing abortions for all women who meet the clinic’s standards, Imershein, who is Reform, is taking a “very permissive” position that some more conservative Jews may see as immoral, said Elli Fischer, an Orthodox rabbi and halakhah historian.”

More about Imershein’s work:

“She does not advertise, operating by word of mouth, and she does not “make much,” she said. Of course, Imershein’s advocacy – appearing at Planned Parenthood rallies in a white doctor’s coat, for example – is free.

MiMi Levine, Imershein’s 32-year-old daughter, sees her mother’s work the same way it was explained to her at age 5, when Imershein told her that “it gives women freedom.”

“I have always been super proud of her,” Levine said. “I think she’s a hero.”

Apparently Jews have a different belief than Christian’s as to when life actually begins:

When she performs an abortion, Imershein believes she is not ending a human life. Jewish law – as laid out in the Torah, the Talmud and the “responsa,” rabbinic wisdom gathered across centuries – teaches that human life starts at birth rather than conception, according to Fischer. The fetus “attains the status of a fully human life” when its head emerges, Fischer said.

Eisenberg said some rabbis have understood this to mean the fetus is more akin to a kind of property than a person. Because of that, they say abortion is not murder, defined as the ending of a human life. Some faith leaders believe it still counts as killing, given that it ends a form of life, Fischer said, but halakhah insists there can be extenuating circumstances in which killing is permissible.”

The article concludes with the following:

“When a woman comes to the Falls Church clinic asking for an abortion, Imershein does not second-guess her reasoning. Same goes for when a mother asks her to officiate a brit milah (circumcision) – a less controversial procedure, though a small but growing number of Jews are questioning the tradition’s merits.

“I ultimately give all rights to the mother,” Imershein said. “With brit milahs, they’re having the family they want, and if I’m doing the abortions, I’m just fulfilling the wish of women to have the lives they want.”

Read the whole story on SF Gate here.

As is typical of libtards, there’s some mental gymnastics in this doctor’s reasoning to justify her position on abortion. First she says she does it to allow women to “create the families they want.”

The doctor also states she performs abortions to “alleviate suffering.”

She then states she performs abortions when the woman’s life is in danger.

Then her daughter says she performs abortions to “give women freedom.”

Yet apparently the doctor doesn’t ask WHY a woman wants/needs an abortion. How can she verify that she is performing the procedure within the parameters of her Jewish values?

One look at this doctor’s Twitter timeline and you’ll see she’s all about “reproductive rights” and protecting civil and human rights of “all people.”

It’s obvious to me that the good doctor is performing abortions as Margaret Sanger would prefer: On demand.

One thing I’ve come to understand about liberal logic: It’s not designed to make sense.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Kamala Harris: “You gotta play by the rules but we can’t treat people like criminals”

Remember, liberal logic isn’t designed to make sense.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

TV reality star had two abortions to “end her family’s cycle of poverty”

From Daily Mail: Married at First Sight star Jamie Otis has opened up about having two abortions, stressing that while no one wants to have one, it is a ‘necessary option’ for women.

The 32-year-old nurse joined a number of celebrities in sharing her abortion story after Alabama passed a bill last week imposing a near-total ban on the procedure, including those for victims of rape or incest.

‘I just cannot continue to sit in silence while women’s fundamental human rights are being taken away. I am speaking up for HER,’ the reality star wrote on Instagram.

‘I had an abortion. Twice. Is it something I’m proud of? Heck no! No one *wants* an abortion,’ continued. ‘It has left the most painful hole in my heart. But do I think women should be stripped of their right to choose? Absolutely not.’

Jamie, who has a one-year-old daughter named Henley with her husband Doug Hehner, said she kept quiet about her abortions after receiving backlash when she first wrote about her experience in her book, Wifey 101.

In an essay for People, she explained that she grew up in extreme poverty with a drug-addicted mother who couldn’t provide for her five children.

Jamie said her mom ‘dropped out of high school’ and had a string of abusive boyfriends. She had no idea who her father was and her mother couldn’t afford to take care of her and her siblings. She would wake up without electricity or food half of the time.

‘We lived in a trailer that had leaky ceilings with doors that wouldn’t shut all the way and windows that were duct-taped,’ she recalled. ‘But the hardest part was that my mom was gone. She left us for weeks at a time and we were just teenagers and kids fending for ourselves.’

When she was 18, Jamie got pregnant by the first guy she had ever had sex with. She actually found out she was pregnant when she went to a clinic to get birth control.

The nurse told her abortion was an option, but she initially brushed it off because in her family ‘you don’t have abortions under any circumstances.’

However, she knew that her boyfriend wouldn’t be a good father, and she didn’t want to drop out of school and have a baby with an abusive man like her mother and older sister did. She didn’t want to be stuck in the same cycle of poverty.

‘I chose to have an abortion. I wouldn’t have been able to provide this child the kind of life he or she deserved,’ she wrote. ‘And I wanted to finish college and provide for my siblings and give us a better life. I didn’t see how that would be possible while also taking care of a baby.’

Jamie said she had a second abortion when she got pregnant in nursing school. ‘I don’t even want to admit that it happened twice, but here I am sharing my story so other women can feel that they aren’t alone,’ she explained.

‘My abortions were a secret I kept to myself for nearly my whole life. I hated myself for a very long time for it, and I know the stones people will throw at me: Why didn’t I use birth control better? Why wasn’t I more careful? But the thing is, it happened to me and continues to happen to couples.

‘You can throw stones at me if you want, but I just think of a young woman who has no one to turn to. I wish someone had said to me back then that I’m not evil. I felt like a terrible, selfish human being and sometimes I still do.’

The mother-of-one said she often reminds herself that she wouldn’t have her daughter Henley if she had ‘two children with two men who were not fit to be fathers.’

Read the whole story here.

Read the story here that People Magazine is promoting about 24 celebrities who had abortions and wanted to share their stories to “end the stigma.”

Here’s some reasons why these celebrities had abortions:

I was worried about my career responsibilities and afraid that I could not exist as both a career woman and mother.”

“I had an abortion. I just simply wasn’t in a place, financially or emotionally to take that on.

“My mental health couldn’t handle being pregnant again & I made the best decision for ME & ultimately my family.”

“When I was younger I had an abortion. It was the smartest decision I could’ve made, not only for myself & my boyfriend at the time. Having a baby at that time would have only perpetuated the cycle of poverty, chaos and dysfunction I was born into.

“I had an abortion when I was young, and it was the best decision I have ever made. Both for me, and for the baby I didn’t want, and wasn’t ready for, emotionally, psychologically and financially.”

‘I didn’t have anything to offer a child.”

It would have been absolute career death for me to have done that … it would have been unthinkable to have a child.” (From Joan Collins, who got pregnant with Warren Beatty.)

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0