Quotes: South Dakota Doesn’t Think Killing Abortion Doctors is Justifiable After All

  • Share
  • Read Later

South Dakota. Getty Images.

“Clearly the bill as it’s currently written is a very bad idea.”

-DENNIS DAUGAARD, South Dakota Governor via a spokesperson, on the state bill that sought to expand the definition of justifiable homicide to include killing someone in the defense of an unborn child. (via New York Times)

10 comments
Whatanotion
Whatanotion

I want to see a woman hire only women for a construction firm.  And have a second crew of only men and pay them the same.  Then take those same people and try similar  worker injury cases with each team on the different juries.  The women will diminish the damage awards and the men will be generous.  Every time.  Plus the construction firm will be broke.

mrbomb13
mrbomb13

Additionally, it's worthwhile to comment that TIME Magazine's misleading pitch for the article in the left side-bar goes as, "Obama Aims to Close Wage Gap for Women With Executive Orders."


Yet, in the article, TIME only describes how the orders only pertain 1) to federal female employees, and 2) to specific financial data that may or may not indicate gender pay disparities.  Even with said disparities, the individuals affected (very likely females) will have to prove a persistent pattern of pay discrimination in court in order to effect a systematic change.  


Given the above, it's clear that President Obama has barely done anything to directly close the wage gap (contrary to TIME's claim).

mrbomb13
mrbomb13

I'm actually surprised that TIME Magazine did not take the President to task for not demanding that women in the public AND private sector have access to such information on potential wage disparities.


Without such a mandate, the President's executive orders on the subject are quite hollow.  It gives the (admittedly unfair) impression that he's only concerned about female government employees, and not women in general.  

jemmaphilbyaea
jemmaphilbyaea

my roomate’s mother makes $73 hourly on the internet . She has been out of work for six months but last month her pay was $17536 just working on the internet for a few hours. Read Full Report………………… http://WWW.JOBS74.COM

lordofthefly
lordofthefly

Admirable idea, but the big money for any gender is in private enterprise. The way you get to the top there is to have the education, training and network. Oh, yeah - you have to work long hours, travel - all that stuff.

notsacredh
notsacredh

Men deserve higher wages. We have penises. Women don't. 

TakingUpSpace
TakingUpSpace

Before I started reading the article, the title scared the living ___ out of me.


Because the Democrats desperately need the female vote, they're willing to do anything -- except tell you this:


In general, women not only live longer and enjoy better health than men, who die sooner and at a higher rate of the 12 leading causes of death, they also control most of consumer spending and most of the nation's wealth. Soon they will control even more.


"Over the next decade, women will control two thirds of consumer wealth in the United States and be the beneficiaries of the largest transference of wealth in our country’s history. Estimates range from $12 to $40 trillion. Many Boomer women will experience a double inheritance windfall, from both parents and husband." -http://www.she-conomy.com/facts-on-women


Sound like an oppressed group in need of yet another equal pay law?


I suspect that many if not most of women's advocates think employers are greedy profiteers who'd hire only illegal immigrants for their lower labor cost if they could get away with it. Or who'd move their business to a cheap-labor country to save money. Or replace older workers with younger ones for the same reason. So why do these same advocates think employers would NOT hire only women if, as they say, employers DO get away with paying females at a lower rate than males for the same work?


Here's one of countless examples showing that some of the most sophisticated women in the country choose to earn less while getting paid at the same rate as their male counterparts:


“In 2011, 22% of male physicians and 44% of female physicians worked less than full time, up from 7% of men and 29% of women from Cejka’s 2005 survey.” ama-assn.org/amednews/2012/03/26/bil10326.htm 


A thousand laws won't close that gap.


In fact, no law yet has closed the gender wage gap — not the 1963 Equal Pay for Equal Work Act, not Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, not the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act, not affirmative action (which has benefited mostly white women, the group most vocal about the wage gap - tinyurl.com/74cooen), not the 1991 amendments to Title VII, not the 1991 Glass Ceiling Commission created by the Civil Rights Act, not the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act, not diversity, not the countless state and local laws and regulations, not the thousands of company mentors for women, not the horde of overseers at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and not the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which is another feel-good bill that turned into another do-nothing law (political intentions disguised as good intentions do not necessarily make things better; sometimes they make things worse).... Nor will a "paycheck fairness" law work. 


That's because women's pay-equity advocates, who always insist one more law is needed, continue to overlook the effects of female AND male behavior:


Despite the 40-year-old demand for women's equal pay, millions of wives still choose to have no pay at all. In fact, according to Dr. Scott Haltzman, author of "The Secrets of Happily Married Women," stay-at-home wives, including the childless who represent an estimated 10 percent, constitute a growing niche. "In the past few years,” he says in a CNN report at tinyurl.com/6reowj, “many women who are well educated and trained for career tracks have decided instead to stay at home.” (“Census Bureau data show that 5.6 million mothers stayed home with their children in 2005, about 1.2 million more than did so a decade earlier....” at tinyurl.com/qqkaka. If indeed a higher percentage of women is staying at home, perhaps it's because feminists and the media have told women for years that female workers are paid less than men in the same jobs — so why bother working outside the home if they're going to be penalized and humiliated for being a woman, as illustrated by such titles as this: "Gender wage gap sees women spend 7 weeks working for nothing" http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/cwgbaueysnsn/rss2/.) 


As full-time mothers or homemakers, stay-at-home wives earn zero. How can they afford to do this while in many cases living in luxury? Answer: Because they're supported by their husband, an “employer” who pays them to stay at home. (Far more wives are supported by a spouse than are husbands.)


The implication of this is probably obvious to most 12-year-olds but seems incomprehensible to, or is wrongly dismissed as irrelevant by, feminists and the liberal media: If millions of wives are able to accept NO wages, millions of other wives, whose husbands' incomes vary, are more often able than husbands to:


-accept low wages

-refuse overtime and promotions

-choose jobs based on interest first, wages second — the reverse of what men tend to do (The most popular job for American women as of 2010 is still secretary/administrative assistant, which has been a top ten job for women for the last 50 years. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/11/gender-wage-gap_n_3424084.html

-take more unpaid days off

-avoid uncomfortable wage-bargaining (tinyurl.com/3a5nlay)

-work fewer hours than their male counterparts, or work less than full-time more often than their male counterparts (as in the above example regarding physicians)


Any one of these job choices lowers women's median pay relative to men's. And when a wife makes one of the choices, her husband often must take up the slack, thereby increasing HIS pay. 


Women who make these choices are generally able to do so because they are supported — or, if unmarried, anticipate being supported — by a husband who feels pressured to earn more than if he'd chosen never to marry. (Married men earn more than single men, but even many men who shun marriage, unlike their female counterparts, feel their self worth is tied to their net worth.) This is how MEN help create the wage gap: as a group they tend more than women to pass up jobs that interest them for ones that pay well. 


"The more alarming wage gap might be the one between mothers and childless women: One recent paper (http://www.npr.org/2012/02/07/146522483/the-wage-gap-between-moms-other-working-women) found that women with kids make roughly 7 to 14 percent less than women without them." So why do organized feminists and the liberal media focus only on -- and criticize -- the wage gap between men and women? http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/02/the-mommy-track-myth/283557/


More in "Does the Ledbetter Act Help Women?" at http://malemattersusa.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/will-the-ledbetter-fair-pay-act-help-women/


lordofthefly
lordofthefly

@sacredh  

Hmm, seems there are a lot of men now who don't seem to have them. They apparently believe they're measured by how much sports and porn they watch in 24 hours and how many times they use the F-word.

lordofthefly
lordofthefly

@TakingUpSpace  


A growing number of women have found is that staying at home with a bunch of rug rats is boring.

TakingUpSpace
TakingUpSpace

@lordofthefly @TakingUpSpace  


No doubt you would find it boring to stay home with what you see as rug rats. 


Reports say more women want to stay at home. I don't advocate either postion. I just consider the facts.