Originally Posted by Infidel Dog

Actually there is a current relevance to that small detail of the story, but it's not particularly flattering to my side, so I was being a dirty dog, and like my opposition I prefer to avoid those. Busted though, so I'll explain.

It goes like this. If you listen to the media of the right there are a desperate few who try to excuse Todd Akin's remark on "legitimate rape". Akin's official excuse is it's only the word "legitimate" in reference to rape that people are objecting to. That's obviously not true. They object to his suggestion rape can't cause pregnancy. But go with me on this, I'll show you how Roe is being used by a scattering of excusers.

So Akin wants to claim he only made a small misuse of the word "legitimate". From there the excusers jump in, and say "Yeah, like what about Roe? She made a false claim of rape".

Originally Posted by rivrrat

Umm... no details about her story were attacked. Who is fighting against anyone learning the details? There's nothing to hide. There's nothing in her story that anyone WANTS to hide. Who's fighting about revealing any truth about who she is? We just all (who are posting) already knew who she was and knew her story. /shrug

Originally Posted by Infidel Dog

On this I'll only suggest people should read the thread, and make up their own minds.

Originally Posted by Infidel Dog

Actually there is a current relevance to that small detail of the story, but it's not particularly flattering to my side, so I was being a dirty dog, and like my opposition I prefer to avoid those. Busted though, so I'll explain.
It goes like this. If you listen to the media of the right there are a desperate few who try to excuse Todd Akin's remark on "legitimate rape". Akin's official excuse is it's only the word "legitimate" in reference to rape that people are objecting to. That's obviously not true. They object to his suggestion rape can't cause pregnancy. But go with me on this, I'll show you how Roe is being used by a scattering of excusers.
So Akin wants to claim he only made a small misuse of the word "legitimate". From there the excusers jump in, and say "Yeah, like what about Roe? She made a false claim of rape".

Originally Posted by foundit66

You want to pretend all lying is equal.

Originally Posted by 1069

I'm just confused about why someone who claimed to be gay and lived in a lesbian relationship for over a decade, then claimed that Jesus cured her and she's now heterosexual, has any credibility whatsoever.
Okay, she was for reproductive choice, then against it, then for it, then against it again. She was heterosexual, then gay, then heterosexual again.
Who cares what this flaky wingnut thinks, really?
I'm sorry about her sad and unfortunate life, but really she created a lot of her own misfortune through her substance abuse.
I'm not sure why her opinion about anything should have any bearing on my reproductive rights. Or why her opinion should have any bearing on anything, as pertains to anyone else besides herself.
What qualifications does she have? Why should we listen? Why does her opinion matter?

Originally Posted by Infidel Dog

Here ya go Rivrat. I think this is one of the ones you're looking for.

Originally Posted by Infidel Dog

Me? I thought I was clear. I'd prefer to slip past the whole business of the false rape claim. She was mixed up, abused throughout her life, and desperate. I give her a pass.
My reaction to her story is more of sympathy for everything she went through, and I'm glad she's happy now - no matter how she's doing it.
If there's a thing I find villainous though, it would be the cold way the activist attorneys, Coffey and Weddington, treated her once they had her signature on a piece of paper allowing them to use her as a kind of legal Judas goat.