March for women. A message from Conservatives

[RavenSky]

You are mistaken - more mansplainbabble simply prove the points that Rhea and others are making.

You can disprove something by refuting it with indefeasible evidence Facts, Incidents, Reasons, Examples, and Statistics

None of which you have provided

 

[RavenSky]

You are mistaken - more mansplainbabble simply prove the points that Rhea and others are making.

You can disprove something by refuting it with indefeasible evidence Facts, Incidents, Reasons, Examples, and Statistics

None of which you have provided

- - - Updated - - -

Do you get paid every time you repeat this falsehood?

No I get very well paid for my job in dispute resolution. (No I'm not joking).

I'm sure you aren't. Unfortunately Scientologist dispute resolution methods do not work here.

 

[PyramidHead]

You can disprove something by refuting it with indefeasible evidence Facts, Incidents, Reasons, Examples, and Statistics

None of which you have provided

- - - Updated - - -

Do you get paid every time you repeat this falsehood?

No I get very well paid for my job in dispute resolution. (No I'm not joking).

I'm sure you aren't. Unfortunately Scientologist dispute resolution methods do not work here.

fixed

 

[TSwizzle]

If I had to guess I'd say that reversing Roe v. Wade is pretty high on the list of policies most women who marched would object to. Defunding Planned Parenthood is another. It's not hard to find these things out.

And this is supposed to get him impeached ? Good luck with that.

You disagree with their cause and you want to make fun of them because that's what you like to do to people you disagree with.

I make fun of them because they are an incoherent rabble in pink hats screaming about a pussy. Hence I don't take it seriously. If there are legitimate concerns they are well hidden.

 

[whichphilosophy]

You can disprove something by refuting it with indefeasible evidence Facts, Incidents, Reasons, Examples, and Statistics

None of which you have provided

- - - Updated - - -

Do you get paid every time you repeat this falsehood?

No I get very well paid for my job in dispute resolution. (No I'm not joking).

I'm sure you aren't. Unfortunately Scientologist dispute resolution methods do not work here.

I work in the Oil and Gas industry. I have to observe local laws and cultures such as Sharia Law, English law and UAE laws.

 

[whichphilosophy]

None of which you have provided

- - - Updated - - -

Do you get paid every time you repeat this falsehood?

No I get very well paid for my job in dispute resolution. (No I'm not joking).

I'm sure you aren't. Unfortunately Scientologist dispute resolution methods do not work here.

fixed

I answered that, where your views right or wrong are irrelevant.

 

[whichphilosophy]

LOL, still running with that bullshit. Good for you, carry on.

- - - Updated - - -

What is the problem with the way he treats women ? Specifically what policies are likely ?

You'd have to ask someone who marched. The point is that those are specific grievances, not 'nothing in particular', so you were wrong and you should change what you think so you're not wrong anymore, but you won't.

They are not specific at all. Change my mind on what ? FFS, I ask for specifics and get nothing. If you don't know just say you don't know and be done. Don't flim flam.

If I had to guess I'd say that reversing Roe v. Wade is pretty high on the list of policies most women who marched would object to. Defunding Planned Parenthood is another. It's not hard to find these things out. You disagree with their cause and you want to make fun of them because that's what you like to do to people you disagree with. I get it. But don't pretend you have zero idea what these women care about and they could all just be simultaneously taking a stroll for all you know, with their wily and secretive ways. These are basic women's rights issues that have been in the public discourse for decades and are now coming to a head, because for the first time in a while, we have a president who is more likely than the last few guys to take away things a lot of women apparently think are important.

Well, pro Life organisations were not permitted to march, that is except one Muslim organisation who of course are anti pro life. Double standards again. I personally think the current laws are sufficient and a woman has a right to choose.

- - - Updated - - -

You can disprove something by refuting it with indefeasible evidence Facts, Incidents, Reasons, Examples, and Statistics

None of which you have provided

In fairness if it is something I have provided, you don't need to apply this as the onus is on the person making the statement. As for myself I am quoting what I read.

 

[PyramidHead]

[makes fun of people whose specific position he disagrees with]

So, once again, you acknowledge that there are specific concerns about actual policies. That's all I need from you.

 

[TSwizzle]

[FUCK YOU WITH YOUR DUMB EDITS]

So, once again, you acknowledge that there are specific concerns about actual policies. That's all I need from you.

Oh FFS, I make fun of the incoherent rabble in pink hats screaming pussy. If there are legitimate concerns then bring them forth in an adult manner and discuss. The rest is just bullshit.

 

[PyramidHead]

I personally think the current laws are sufficient and a woman has a right to choose.

How nice for you! If you were a woman and the new administration wanted to take away that right, couldn't you imagine wanting to join a protest march to express your concern about that?

Is this real life?

 

[PyramidHead]

So, once again, you acknowledge that there are specific concerns about actual policies. That's all I need from you.

Oh FFS, I make fun of the incoherent rabble in pink hats screaming pussy. If there are legitimate concerns then bring them forth in an adult manner and discuss. The rest is just bullshit.

Do go on

 

[RavenSky]

whichphilosophy, can you provide any examples of people participating in the women's march and not being able to say why?

Can you provide any examples of protesters saying the agenda of the march is to remove President Trump?

I'm waiting for someone to tell me on this forum without a vague speech.

If you marched, why would you march?

You have been told. Multiple times. Be people here who did march, and by quotes and links from people not here who did march. We are not going to keep repeating ourselves over and over.

That's your job.

 

[RavenSky]

Removing Trump is a valid goal, and all the anti-Trump posters show that it was a goal of some.

I believe that is the prime agenda of the organisers but perhaps camouflaging it with civil rights issues.

You have been told. Multiple times. Be people here who did march, and by quotes and links from people not here who did march. No one has indicated that the "prime agenda" was "removing Trump". I wouldn't care if it was, but the fact remains that you have zero evidence for your claim, and we don't care what your *belief* is.

- - - Updated - - -

Is there anything specific that you would march for?

asked and answered. move on.

 

[blastula]

It's still true today. Only a denialist would disagree given the evidence.

What evidence ?

The evidence includes an admission by the perp himself, which you try to spin as "off color remarks." The evidence also include the multiple, credible and inter-consistent testimony of the multiple women he attacked. This is the same kind of evidence that shows that the Church of Scientology abuses its members, that is, the testimony of its ex-members, which is also credible and consistent with one another.

You know or should know the evidence, so why play games? Explain why you deny this evidence.

So, once again, you acknowledge that there are specific concerns about actual policies. That's all I need from you.

Oh FFS, I make fun of the incoherent rabble in pink hats screaming pussy. If there are legitimate concerns then bring them forth in an adult manner and discuss. The rest is just bullshit.

This has been done multiple times in this thread. If you don't consider their concerns legitimate, then that's your failing.

 

[blastula]

True. If part of the reason some people marched was to express the view that we should impeach Trump because of his behavior toward women, what's the problem with that whichphilosophy?

If you want to remove Trump then do it the democratic way, ballot box.

Impeach Trump for what EXACTLY ?

Impeachment is too slow, the 25th Amendment should be invoked instead.

 

[RavenSky]

None of which you have provided

- - - Updated - - -

Do you get paid every time you repeat this falsehood?

No I get very well paid for my job in dispute resolution. (No I'm not joking).

I'm sure you aren't. Unfortunately Scientologist dispute resolution methods do not work here.

I work in the Oil and Gas industry. I have to observe local laws and cultures such as Sharia Law, English law and UAE laws.

Well, sir... any comment I have to that would likely be a TOU violation, so I will leave my opinion of your "dispute resolution" abilities unspoken. Glad you are well paid for it though. Just goes to show...

 

[RavenSky]

Well, pro Life organisations were not permitted to march...

Speaking of evidence, you need to provide actual evidence of this claim. I know for a fact I was not asked my views on any topic when I joined the march in Miami.

 

[blastula]

They did bar pro life groups from official sponsorship, but they marched anyway.

 

[TSwizzle]

What evidence ?

The evidence includes an admission by the perp himself, which you try to spin as "off color remarks."

Get real, nobody but the delusional takes that shit seriously.

The evidence also include the multiple, credible and inter-consistent testimony of the multiple women he attacked.

He made a pass a few women, it's hardly an attack.

This has been done multiple times in this thread. If you don't consider their concerns legitimate, then that's your failing.

I guess I never got to hear the concerns, all I saw was a foul mouthed tirade from Madonna who grabbed her crotch a bunch of times.

In any event, I did visit their website, it was incoherent rambling about nothing in particular.

 

[RavenSky]

They did bar pro life groups from official sponsorship, but they marched anyway.

Yes, "anti-choice" groups did march - which directly contradicts WhichPhilosophy's repeated claim otherwise.

As for sponsorship, given that Planned Parenthood was the exclusive primary sponsor of the main march in DC, why is anyone shocked or complaining that some nameless anti-abortion group was allegedly declined for sponsorship?

I am a member of the USGBC, and when we hold monthly educational events, we seek sponsorships. Should we be forced to accept a sponsorship from a coal mining company in direct conflict with the solar company that is often our main sponsor?