This is a classic case of misrepresentation of the facts, apparently. It seems two Representatives were banned from speaking on the subject. I'm not aware of the other Rep's statements, and can only speak to what I heard this woman state.
She is twisting this situation to make herself appear to be the victim, when in fact she was rude, disrespectful and sophomoric. To accuse the Speaker of the House of being interested in her female parts was way out of line. It's not that she said the word 'vagina' it's that she inferred the Speaker of the House was interested in her's. That's uncalled for, and disrespectful and she deserves to have been censored on the issue if she can't conduct herself any better than that when trying to make her point.
The other claim she tried to make is that it was because she was Jewish. Both statements are out and out lies.
OK, I found out why Barb Byrum was also banned. It was because she was trying to pull the 'what's fair for the goose is fair for the gander' thing, which is fine if we're comparing equal situations. Byrum, a democratic Rep. was also against the bill which would have restrictions on abortions. She wanted an amendment to the bill to apply the same restrictions for vasectomies. Ridiculous! The point of the bill was protecting...
She is twisting this situation to make herself appear to be the victim, when in fact she was rude, disrespectful and sophomoric. To accuse the Speaker of the House of being interested in her female parts was way out of line. It's not that she said the word 'vagina' it's that she inferred the Speaker of the House was interested in her's. That's uncalled for, and disrespectful and she deserves to have been censored on the issue if she can't conduct herself any better than that when trying to make her point.
The other claim she tried to make is that it was because she was Jewish. Both statements are out and out lies.
OK, I found out why Barb Byrum was also banned. It was because she was trying to pull the 'what's fair for the goose is fair for the gander' thing, which is fine if we're comparing equal situations. Byrum, a democratic Rep. was also against the bill which would have restrictions on abortions. She wanted an amendment to the bill to apply the same restrictions for vasectomies. Ridiculous! The point of the bill was protecting...
This is a classic case of misrepresentation of the facts, apparently. It seems two Representatives were banned from speaking on the subject. I'm not aware of the other Rep's statements, and can only speak to what I heard this woman state.
She is twisting this situation to make herself appear to be the victim, when in fact she was rude, disrespectful and sophomoric. To accuse the Speaker of the House of being interested in her female parts was way out of line. It's not that she said the word 'vagina' it's that she inferred the Speaker of the House was interested in her's. That's uncalled for, and disrespectful and she deserves to have been censored on the issue if she can't conduct herself any better than that when trying to make her point.
The other claim she tried to make is that it was because she was Jewish. Both statements are out and out lies.
OK, I found out why Barb Byrum was also banned. It was because she was trying to pull the 'what's fair for the goose is fair for the gander' thing, which is fine if we're comparing equal situations. Byrum, a democratic Rep. was also against the bill which would have restrictions on abortions. She wanted an amendment to the bill to apply the same restrictions for vasectomies. Ridiculous! The point of the bill was protecting a fetus - a fertilized egg. It had nothing to do with sterilization surgeries, but she wanted to be certain to get back at the male population. Nifty. Doesn't matter if it's fair or equitable, just so long as the guys feel some pain as a result. Hmmm. Wonder if she was only elected to represent the females in her district?
So there you have it. These two were shut down for 1) being rude, disrespectful and throwing a backhanded accusation at the Leader of the House and 2) demanding an inappropriate and ridiculous amendment just to get back at the men.
(more)She is twisting this situation to make herself appear to be the victim, when in fact she was rude, disrespectful and sophomoric. To accuse the Speaker of the House of being interested in her female parts was way out of line. It's not that she said the word 'vagina' it's that she inferred the Speaker of the House was interested in her's. That's uncalled for, and disrespectful and she deserves to have been censored on the issue if she can't conduct herself any better than that when trying to make her point.
The other claim she tried to make is that it was because she was Jewish. Both statements are out and out lies.
OK, I found out why Barb Byrum was also banned. It was because she was trying to pull the 'what's fair for the goose is fair for the gander' thing, which is fine if we're comparing equal situations. Byrum, a democratic Rep. was also against the bill which would have restrictions on abortions. She wanted an amendment to the bill to apply the same restrictions for vasectomies. Ridiculous! The point of the bill was protecting a fetus - a fertilized egg. It had nothing to do with sterilization surgeries, but she wanted to be certain to get back at the male population. Nifty. Doesn't matter if it's fair or equitable, just so long as the guys feel some pain as a result. Hmmm. Wonder if she was only elected to represent the females in her district?
So there you have it. These two were shut down for 1) being rude, disrespectful and throwing a backhanded accusation at the Leader of the House and 2) demanding an inappropriate and ridiculous amendment just to get back at the men.
It's about time someone stops these outrageous drama queen statements, the mockery they've made on cspan is enough to make me barf!
The only thing I see these women doing is making the rest of us look like we need the government to help us becuase we are incapable. That's embarrassing!
A female Democratic state representative in Michigan said Thursday that she has been silenced by her Republican colleagues after she uttered the word “vagina” while criticizing a slate of bills that would restrict female reproductive rights.
"Michigan State Rep. Lisa Brown (D) made her comments during a Wednesday debate on proposed legislation that critics say could effectively ban abortions in the state. ”I have not asked you to adopt and adhere to my religious beliefs,” she said. “Why are you asking me to adopt yours? And finally, Mr. Speaker, I’m flattered that you’re all so interested in my vagina, but no means no.”
And he ding-bat colleague, Barb Byrum, was banned because she continued to cause a ruckus to try to amend the 20 week limitation on abortions by stating that men couldn't have a vasectomy after 20 weeks unless it was a medical emergency, blah blah blah.
Honestly, it is women like this that makes me fear that men all women by air-heads like these two.
She was banned for making a personal attack on the speaker inferring he was interested in her vagina not for just saying the word itself.
IOW: she used it in a way as to create shock, and thus was banned.
IOW: she used it in a way as to create shock, and thus was banned.
IOW: she used it in a way as to create shock, and thus was banned.
I am against abortions after 6 weeks never mind after 20 weeks and I am appalled by serial abortions used for birth control, but if a choice has to be made about saving the mother or the fetus, in cases of rape and if the fetus is found to have serious defects, that choice should belong to the parent(s).
And since it has now become legal in the U.S. for sex selection abortion with the majority of those abortions being female, no one is going to convince me that there isn't a war on FEMALES and always has been. How far have we come ... not very.
Wikipedia
United States
Sex-selective abortion is on the rise in certain Indian and Asian communities in the United States.[17][18] In May of 2012, Live Action, a pro-life group, send actors posing as pregnant women into Planned Parenthood clinics, asking a series of questions to elicit information on sex-selective abortions. These interviews were video taped and the videos were posted on the internet.[19] The United States Congress has debated legislation that would outlaw the practice.[20] The legislation ultimately failed to pass in the House of Representatives.[21]
and here:
HOME / Human Nature : Science, technology, and life.
Fetal Subtraction
Sex selection in the United States.
By William Saletan|Posted Thursday, April 3, 2008, at 7:59 AM ET
A few weeks ago, I wrote about the transformation of sex selection—the practice of making sure your next baby isn't of the "wrong" sex—into a consumer protection issue. We're getting sufficiently used to this practice that we've begun to talk and write about whether companies that promote and facilitate it are delive...
Wikipedia
United States
Sex-selective abortion is on the rise in certain Indian and Asian communities in the United States.[17][18] In May of 2012, Live Action, a pro-life group, send actors posing as pregnant women into Planned Parenthood clinics, asking a series of questions to elicit information on sex-selective abortions. These interviews were video taped and the videos were posted on the internet.[19] The United States Congress has debated legislation that would outlaw the practice.[20] The legislation ultimately failed to pass in the House of Representatives.[21]
and here:
HOME / Human Nature : Science, technology, and life.
Fetal Subtraction
Sex selection in the United States.
By William Saletan|Posted Thursday, April 3, 2008, at 7:59 AM ET
A few weeks ago, I wrote about the transformation of sex selection—the practice of making sure your next baby isn't of the "wrong" sex—into a consumer protection issue. We're getting sufficiently used to this practice that we've begun to talk and write about whether companies that promote and facilitate it are delivering on their promises, rather than about whether what they're doing is wrong.
One key point from that article was that the new transforms the old. What's old is sex selection. What's new is the combination of ease, safety, and privacy with which you can now do it. This is a fundamental dynamic between technology and culture: Technology can coax cultures one way or the other by making it easier to do what you want to do, with less difficulty and without other people knowing about it.
Now comes further evidence of this effect. Two days ago, economists Douglas Almond and Lena Edlund published an article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences examining the ratio of male to female births in "U.S.-born childrenof Chinese, Korean, and Asian Indian parents." Among whites, the boy-girl ratio was essentially constant, regardless of the number of kids in a family or how many of them were girls. In the Asian-American sample, the boy-girl ratio started out at the same norm: 1.05 to 1. But among families whose first child was a girl, the boy-girl ratio among second kids went up to 1.17 to 1. And if the first two kids were girls, the boy-girl ratio among third kids went up to 1.5 to 1. This 50 percent increase in male probability is directly contrary to the trend among whites, who tend to produce a child of the same sex as the previous child.
And the willingness for Planned Parenthood to comply with sex-selection abortions is documented here:
and here:
IOW: she used it in a way as to create shock, and thus was banned.