Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Myth of Female Oppression
http://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html ^

Posted on 03/03/2012 7:05:40 PM PST by Borges

All of us have been taught how women have supposedly been oppressed throughout human existence, and that this was pervasive, systematic, and endorsed by ordinary men who presumably had it much better than women. In reality, this narrative is entirely fabricated. The average man was forced to risk death on the battlefield, at sea, or in mines, while most women stayed indoors tending to children and household duties. Male life expectancy was always significantly lower than that of females, and still is.

Warfare has been a near constant feature of human society before the modern era, and whenever two tribes or kingdoms went to war with each other, the losing side saw many of its fighting-age men exterminated, while the women were assimilated into the invading society. Now, becoming a concubine or a housekeeper is an unfortunate fate, but not nearly as bad as being slaughtered in battle as the men were. To anyone who disagrees, would you like for the men and women to trade outcomes?

Most of this narrative stems from 'feminists' comparing the plight of average women to the topmost men (the monarch and other aristocrats), rather than to the average man. This practice is known as apex fallacy, and whether accidental or deliberate, entirely misrepresents reality. To approximate the conditions of the average woman to the average man (the key word being 'average') in the Western world of a century ago, simply observe the lives of the poorest peasants in poor countries today. Both men and women have to perform tedious work, have insufficient food and clothing, and limited opportunities for upliftment.

As far as selective anecdotes like voting rights go, in the vast majority of cases, men could not vote either. In fact, if one compares every nation state from every century, virtually all of them extended exactly the same voting rights (or lack thereof) to men and women. Even today, out of 200 sovereign states, there are exactly zero that have a different class of voting rights to men and women. Any claim that women were being denied rights than men were given in even 0.1% of historical instances, falls flat.

This is not to deny that genuine atrocities like genital mutilation have been perpetrated against women; they have and still are. But men also experienced atrocities of comparable horror at the same time, which is simply not mentioned. In fact, when a man is genitally mutilated by a woman, other women actually find this humorous, and are proud to say so publicly.

It is already wrong when a contemporary group seeks reparations from an injustice that occurred over a century ago to people who are no longer alive. It is even worse when this oppression itself is a fabrication. The narrative of female oppression by men should be rejected and refuted as the highly selective and historically false narrative that it is. In fact, this myth is evidence not of historical oppression, but of the vastly different propensity to complain between the two genders.


TOPICS: History; Reference; Science
KEYWORDS: sourcetitlenoturl
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

1 posted on 03/03/2012 7:05:45 PM PST by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Borges

Christianity essentially elevated the female—and put them on a pedestal. Our culture gave women the control over the selection of a husband—unlike any culture in the history of the world.

Western Civilization with the adoption of Christianity gave us concepts like Common Law and dignity and worth of every individual including women and the weak and sick and children. Chivalry and Romance come from Christianity.

The war is on the male—to destroy the patriarchy—because that will collapse the culture—men are always needed to protect and fight for rights. They are attacking males with both the homosexual movement and the feminist movement—and both destroy male children’s development and demonize male behavior.

They particularly (Marxists) are attacking individualism and risk—working on “group think”. They are destroying all Virtue—because without Virtue, men do not control their passions and you get chaos in society.

Homosexuality reduces all males to sexual objects for other men, which will collapse all ethics in male organizations—destroys trust.

The oppressed are the males-—and they are silenced—if they speak out like Rush or Brietbart, the MSM will destroy (or kill) them. They have to follow the communist mantra.


2 posted on 03/03/2012 7:20:56 PM PST by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Borges

Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals:

The organizer’s first job is to create the issues or problems, and organizations must be based on many issues. The organizer must first rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression. He must search out controversy and issues, rather than avoid them, for unless there is controversy people are not concerned enough to act. . . . An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent.


3 posted on 03/03/2012 7:21:35 PM PST by expat1000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Borges

I would disagree with this author and say that there is oppression of women today - Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan being two of the worst examples.


4 posted on 03/03/2012 7:24:20 PM PST by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Borges
Women can oppress guys easily.

What's that song again...."She said don't hand me no lines, and keep your hands to yourself!"

5 posted on 03/03/2012 7:24:27 PM PST by Darren McCarty (Time for brokered convention)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Borges

Well, not QUITE. Until the early 20th century, dying in childbirth was a real and regular risk. One also has to keep in mind what happened to those women without protection from “marauding” male armies.


6 posted on 03/03/2012 7:25:51 PM PST by Amberdawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Borges
In the war of the sexes, do we men really want to adopt the female tactic of bitching and moaning about how tough men have it?

If that becomes the preferred approach to female claims of oppression, then the war is lost.

Personally, I think the best way to deal with women who complain they're oppressed is to laugh at them.

7 posted on 03/03/2012 7:27:36 PM PST by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amberdawn

Dying in childbirth wasn’t due to being ‘oppressed’ but a biological circumstance that was eventually alleviated by medical advances.


8 posted on 03/03/2012 7:29:03 PM PST by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender

I laugh at them. Then I tell them: “I have it worse than you do — but you don’t hear me bitching and moaning about it!”


9 posted on 03/03/2012 7:30:30 PM PST by ClearCase_guy ("And the public gets what the public wants" -- The Jam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

For many women, there is nothing that stings worse than being laughed at.


10 posted on 03/03/2012 7:34:12 PM PST by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: tbw2

Islam doesn’t consider females to be human so it’s a moot point.


11 posted on 03/03/2012 7:39:17 PM PST by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Borges

This is BS. Women didn’t have the right to vote in the US until a century and a half after men did, and with the dangers of childbirth female life expectancy was less than men’s for much of history.


12 posted on 03/03/2012 7:43:32 PM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

You present a false dichotomy between patriarchy and men being needed. Giving women equal rights does not destroy boys.


13 posted on 03/03/2012 7:45:33 PM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Borges
this myth is evidence not of historical oppression, but of the vastly different propensity to complain between the two genders

Ouch!

14 posted on 03/03/2012 7:49:58 PM PST by stormhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker
Historical distortion
Furthermore, anyone who looks at divorce laws and claims women are oppressed is either a liar or a fool.
15 posted on 03/03/2012 7:53:54 PM PST by stormhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie
Interesting article and much food for thought for Western Civilization.
16 posted on 03/03/2012 8:21:26 PM PST by Art in Idaho (Conservatism is the only hope for Western Civilization.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Borges

...by medical advances made by men.


17 posted on 03/03/2012 8:37:27 PM PST by achilles2000 ("I'll agree to save the whales as long as we can deport the liberals")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Borges

“Most of this narrative stems from ‘feminists’ comparing the plight of average women to the topmost men (the monarch and other aristocrats), rather than to the average man.”

Yes, and to make the fallacy a bit less obvious, they’ve invented the notion of “the patriarchy” to give impressionable people the idea that all men held some privileged status in society simply because of their sex. In reality, men throughout history have shown little to no regard for each other based on sex alone. Class and caste have always been much more determinative factors for status in society, and those cross the sex divide. An upper class woman had more rights and privileges than a lower class man, and they still do in most places, so where is this “patriarchy”?


18 posted on 03/03/2012 9:14:08 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amberdawn

“Until the early 20th century, dying in childbirth was a real and regular risk.”

Which is men’s fault how exactly? A natural pitfall of life isn’t “oppression”.

“One also has to keep in mind what happened to those women without protection from “marauding” male armies.”

Yes, but this wasn’t something done to women by their own society, but by the enemies of both the men and women of their society. Their men were out there fighting and dying to prevent that from happening to the women. Maybe if they had known that, instead of gratitude for their sacrifice, the fairer sex would try to blame them for it later on, they wouldn’t have bothered.


19 posted on 03/03/2012 9:19:53 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: tbw2
Many, many societies also oppress the men as well. They also have the nasty habit of killing them. Look at Iran and Iraq in the eighties. An entire generation of both countries men where slaughtered in a useless, unwinable war.
20 posted on 03/03/2012 9:20:06 PM PST by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender

Refuting a false argument isn’t “bitching and moaning”.

Ridicule is a great tool against liars, but it usually isn’t the best way to convince people sitting on the fence that you are correct and the liars are wrong. To do that, you usually have to address the false arguments being made.


21 posted on 03/03/2012 9:23:11 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Borges

I am so SICK of the ‘woe is me’ single working mom crap. White males have been getting beat, kicked, robbed, laid-off, fired, sued, denied, rejected, and spit on since passage of the Civil Rights Act and everyone knows it.


22 posted on 03/03/2012 9:26:29 PM PST by FedsRStealingOurCountryFromUs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker

“Women didn’t have the right to vote in the US until a century and a half after men did”

Well, you’re focusing on the US, which had some of the most progressive voting rights in the world. Still, even here not ALL men had the right to vote that early. In the beginning most men did not have the right to vote, only white male property owners, who were a minority. Also, in most cases non-Christians could not vote either, and there were also requirements to pay poll taxes, or literacy tests. It wasn’t until 1870 that all men in the US achieved legal voting rights.

Still, for non-whites just having the “right” didn’t translate to actually being able to vote everywhere, until 1965 with the Voting Rights Act. White women, on the other hand, had freer voting rights starting in 1920. So, even in the US, some women were voting decades before some men were. It’s not as cut-and-dry a scenario as some like to paint.


23 posted on 03/03/2012 9:32:17 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker

Voting does not give one power-—look at Russia and Chicago.

Oppression of women is relative-—Western Civilization has given women—esp. in colonial America a tremendous amount of power and rights. Look at the lives of Abigail Adams and most women of their time who selected their own husbands and had much power over men’s votes and thoughts and property. Total control of the education of the children, etc. The power of that is control of the future. Look at what Tocqueville said about the women in America.

To compare American women to men is stupid-—they are not the same and not equal in many ways. The Egalitarianism which tries to take away the humanity of both men and women and say they are interchangeable and should have the exact same ROLES in life and the family are extremely destructive—especially to the emotional development of children.

It is human NATURE that woman IS THE WEAKER SEX—that is why they have been “oppressed” by every single culture that ever existed. The weak always were oppressed whether women or MEN.

BTW, it is Christianity which gave dignity and worth to women-—IDEOLOGY-—which determines if a person has dignity and worth and “oppressed” women in the US were given much more respect in the early 20th century than after the 60’s-—where now women are routinely portrayed as meat and sluts and no one even bats an eye. They aren’t even able to care for their babies at home now with taxes and divorce rates and single parenting becoming the norm.

Women have stated in all women magazines how miserable they are-—and this is AFTER they got the vote. They write about how to be a sex slave in bed-——they are slaves to the lust of men (and women) and NOT oppressed anymore, huh-—when STD’s and abortions are the norm and they mutilate their bodies to get men’s attention for more than 10 minutes and fill their bodies with birth control pills-—toxins causing cancers, etc.

What is important in life was God—and with Him there was great happiness and fulfillment and love of children and family which gave women great happiness-—always did—even without the now worthless vote.

Giving the vote to women was stupid-—it got us Zero. I know way too many stupid women who never read anything but romance novels and would vote for Zero any time. They are useful idiots when it comes to voting for whatever the headlines in the newspapers want them to do. Men have always been much more responsible voters—especially if they were land owners. People should have to take a test to have the right to vote.


24 posted on 03/03/2012 9:39:46 PM PST by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Borges

No, really? Is war not due in part to higher levels of aggression in men?


25 posted on 03/03/2012 10:19:00 PM PST by Amberdawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Borges

If woman were the equal of man, then how could man ever oppress woman?


26 posted on 03/03/2012 10:21:49 PM PST by Age of Reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Stop being so defensive, I didn’t say it was men’s fault, but this author presents male life expectancy as SO much lower than womens when it’s due to many factors besides war. Such as; males propensity to be more violent/aggressive, to take risks, and to work at dangerous jobs.


27 posted on 03/03/2012 10:26:25 PM PST by Amberdawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

Susie, government gives it’s citizens nothing that they can’t nullify, so you may as well argue that giving voting rights to men was just as fruitless.


28 posted on 03/03/2012 10:29:50 PM PST by Amberdawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Amberdawn
Stop being so defensive

I didn't read anything "defensive" into that reply.

Maybe your'e just being passive-aggressive, lol.

29 posted on 03/03/2012 10:31:43 PM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: stormhill

Just walk into a department store and look around. Tell me who controls the money.


30 posted on 03/03/2012 11:08:47 PM PST by Dawggie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Amberdawn

Well, the vote did work for many years in America-—it is since media and the schools were taken over by Marxists and the Truth is constantly hidden or twisted. We have to have Freedom of Press for the vote to matter—otherwise, we are like a Banana Republic. Too many “voices” get killed suddenly. We have no Freedom of the Press-—as Rush even has to apologize for saying more polite statements than Maher who never is required to apologize or loses advertisers. Rush apologizes for stating the Truth.

We are also no longer a Nation of Laws-—we are post Constitutional—which is what Mark Levin stated. Voting is rigged. We have judges who decide the “vote” or to nullify the vote of the people or they make up arbitrary laws or let arbitrary laws stand as Constitutional.....a complete JOKE.


31 posted on 03/03/2012 11:09:03 PM PST by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Amberdawn

War is due to property and envy—but, men ALWAYS had to protect their women and raise their children or they would die. Without fighting, there would never have been the property rights that were enshrined in American Law by brilliant white men.

All people will fight for life-—it is just women were weak and having babies so they were useless in war. Without men, the women and children were dead—they wouldn’t have survived. It was stressful for men to have to make sure their family had food and shelter and were protected since caveman days. Women oppression is just different difficulties than man’s difficulties-—life is hardship—life oppresses all—even kings. This idea that women are the only group oppressed is silly (and Marxist—divide and conquer).


32 posted on 03/03/2012 11:23:48 PM PST by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

I see why you chose your screen name.


33 posted on 03/04/2012 12:30:41 AM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

I agree that we all face difficult problems, Susie. There is an old saying that “without one’s women (and offspring), you are no longer a people”.


34 posted on 03/04/2012 12:35:40 AM PST by Amberdawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

You’re being ridiculous. Only men had the right to vote in the US for 150 years, and blacks had the right to vote three generations before women did.

No, suffrage wasn’t absolutely universal for men immediately and yes, there was some practical denial of blacks’ right to vote in the South up until the ‘60s, but that doesn’t obscure the basic facts.

Rush’s stupid comment has sent misogynist FReepers into a tizzy of idiocy.


35 posted on 03/04/2012 12:36:17 AM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

True enough.


36 posted on 03/04/2012 12:37:27 AM PST by Amberdawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

For one thing, civilians have also borne the brunt of wars effects. While being in combat is terrible, civilians face the depredations of enemy troops, rape, pillaging, starvation, expulsion and exposure. Militaries long ago figured out that they needed to provide good conditions for their troops in order to be effective. The military will provide food, medical care, transportation, etc., that civilians may not receive at all, or only after the fighting man’s needs are seen to.


37 posted on 03/04/2012 1:12:13 AM PST by Amberdawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie
Our culture gave women the control over the selection of a husband—unlike any culture in the history of the world.

I'm not sure it's accurate to say no other culture in the history of the world allowed this, but it is certainly very rare historically.

On a recent FR discussion, someone claimed that various male traits had evolved as part of the evolutionary process as men competed for female sexual attention. I tried to point out that until quite recently even in our society the choice of which men a woman had sex with was not up to her. Just could not get through to the other posters that our present freedom for women to decide who with and whether they will have sex is extremely unusual.

38 posted on 03/04/2012 4:55:43 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Amberdawn

Righto.

In most wars thru history the civilian deaths vastly exceeded the military dead.

In fact, one could develop a quantitative analysis of various wars by determining the ratio of military vs. civilian deaths. The US has been quite lucky in this regard. All three of the wars fought on US soil would come in extraordinarily low on this scale.


39 posted on 03/04/2012 5:04:26 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Borges

Bill Shakespeare said it better. As usual.

“Thy husband is thy lord, thy life, thy keeper,
Thy head, thy sovereign; one that cares for thee,
And for thy maintenance commits his body
To painful labour both by sea and land,
To watch the night in storms, the day in cold,
Whilst thou liest warm at home, secure and safe;
And craves no other tribute at thy hands
But love, fair looks and true obedience;
Too little payment for so great a debt.”


40 posted on 03/04/2012 5:05:57 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amberdawn

“No, really? Is war not due in part to higher levels of aggression in men?”

So, Elizabeth I, Indira Ghandi, and Golda Meir were men? Women leaders engage in war too.


41 posted on 03/04/2012 6:40:42 AM PST by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Borges; All

Everyone should just read The Myth of Male Power by Warren Farrell. Farrell, by the way, is a male feminist (try not to laugh!) and once served on the board of N.O.W. The book is DEVASTATING to feminist myths. The book’s info about false reports of rape was shocking to me.


42 posted on 03/04/2012 6:44:48 AM PST by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

I found it interesting that you summed up in a few words what was never touched upon in the avalanche of sociological concepts and links produced here. These results are political as well as sociological. Well done.


43 posted on 03/04/2012 7:59:22 AM PST by Luke21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Amberdawn

Sorry if I got too defensive. I’m just sick and tired of the “blame game” that goes on in our society, ya know?

I think the point though, is not that men’s lives were so much harder than womens, but just to show that the flawed arguments of the feminists can be turned around and used to paint the exact opposite picture. The argument may still be flawed, no matter which perspective you argue from, but it doesn’t even work consistently in favor of the feminists.


44 posted on 03/04/2012 8:33:18 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker

“No, suffrage wasn’t absolutely universal for men ...”

Yes, that’s my whole point. Suffrage wasn’t denied only on the basic of sex, which is the simplistic argument that feminists like to paint. I’m not tryng to “obscure basic facts” by pointing out the complexity of the situation, the feminists are trying to do that by reducing a complicated history to a single sentence.

When you look at the actual history, it paints a different picture than “men oppressed women”. The truth is more like “some men oppressed women and other men, and at times, they oppressed women more than some men, and at other times, they oppressed some men more than some women.”

“Rush’s stupid comment has sent misogynist FReepers into a tizzy of idiocy.”

Why are you engaging in the typical feminist (and liberal) shaming tactic of calling others hateful names because they disagree with your position? Do you think that is a valid method of argument?


45 posted on 03/04/2012 9:08:47 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Amberdawn

Well, that’s a whole different argument since there were both civillian men and civillian women, though of course they suffered in different ways if the military failed to protect them. Still, women getting raped, or forced into servitude during wars, isn’t a result of men being sexist bastards, it’s a result of humans being evil. The same men that were out raping the enemy’s women were trying to stop the enemy from raping their women. It was a tactic of war, based on practicality getting the better of everyones’ morality.


46 posted on 03/04/2012 9:20:13 AM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

I agree wholeheartedly that men are s*** on constantly by the media and academia and that has to stop. I only took issue with one strand of the author’s article and certainly don’t hold men responsible for deaths in childbirth.


47 posted on 03/04/2012 9:22:18 AM PST by Amberdawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

I agree wholeheartedly that men are s*** on constantly by the media and academia and that has to stop. I only took issue with one strand of the author’s article and certainly don’t hold men responsible for deaths in childbirth.


48 posted on 03/04/2012 9:22:29 AM PST by Amberdawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

I have no doubt that male civilians suffer terribly as well. I’m only saying that for female civilians, having one’s male family members killed off or missing, and then potentially being raped or forced into concubinage by the enemy seems like a fate worse than death to me. If ever I faced that circumstance, I think I’d rather die fighting.


49 posted on 03/04/2012 9:33:22 AM PST by Amberdawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Luke21

I find that in studying philosophy and psychology, that there are many lies posited in the school systems——BK Eakman outlines them in her Cloning of the American Mind as does John Taylor Gatto and Allan Bloom in Closing of the American Mind.

This is all to destroy Natural Law Theory and concept of God and Objective Truth. It is a movement that picked up its power with Nietzsche and Marx and the postmodernists who emigrated to the Universities in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and took over public school curricula.

The basic truths and the idea of Virtue is being intentionally destroyed so that the Marxists can redesign Right and Wrong without God and Objective Truth. (CS Lewis wrote about this in England in the 30’s—same thing).

With lies as foundational learning-—children have no trouble with illogical concepts such as the bizarre idea of “homosexual” marriage and the word “Slut” is good and “sodomy is good”. 50 years ago this would have beeen unbelievable-—because we believed in Objective Truth (God) and in Natural Law Theory which is Common Sense. The irrationality of the leftists leaves any arbitrary thing a “Right” including forced abortion.


50 posted on 03/04/2012 2:56:49 PM PST by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson