• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Believe EVERYTHING on the right-wing agenda is going to happen; it's not fear-mongering.

Why is that worse than wanting it decided at the federal level? If you lose at the federal level, then women have to leave the country to get an abortion.

Do you think whether or not someone should be allowed to own a gun be left up to the states?

If not, why is owning a gun something that needs to protected at the Federal level, but not ownership of a woman’s body by herself?
 
You realize that Anti-Choice states are already pushing for laws that would criminalize a woman getting an abortion regardless of where she has it, right?

The Texas law you are probably referring to does not criminalize women who leave Texas to another state for an abortion.
 
Lol, really? Isn't this the same court that once ruled that black people are the legitimate property of white people?

Should we trust the free market?

Furthermore, don't people like you believe government in general exists to protect people's rights?

In a democracy, YES. Because there are no protected rights outside of government, because there's no society.

I wouldn't worry about this ruling too much. In states which outlaw abortion, the market will provide pregnant women with options.

Such as what? Specifically.
 
Lol, really? Isn't this the same court that once ruled that black people are the legitimate property of white people?

Furthermore, don't people like you believe government in general exists to protect people's rights?



I wouldn't worry about this ruling too much. In states which outlaw abortion, the market will provide pregnant women with options.

Translation: “Abortions will only be available for wealthy and privileged. If you are poor, have fun with your clothes hanger and then prison if you survive.”
 
Do you think whether or not someone should be allowed to own a gun be left up to the states?

No, but it's still better than having it decided at the federal level.

If not, why is owning a gun something that needs to protected at the Federal level, but not ownership of a woman’s body by herself?

In case you haven't noticed, there is an entire federal agency that does nothing but violate gun rights.
 
The Texas law you are probably referring to does not criminalize women who leave Texas to another state for an abortion.

The Oklahoma Law DOES. And there’s Bills sitting in various stages of committee across the Anti-Choice states to do the same.
 
No, but it's still better than having it decided at the federal level.



In case you haven't noticed, there is an entire federal agency that does nothing but violate gun rights.

So you would support the elimination of the 2nd Amendment and for states to decide if you can legally own a gun?
 
Remember, these laws have been designed to TRIGGER a response from the Supreme Court. Do you think these laws will not get even more extreme when Roe is struck down?
 
Such as what? Specifically.

I don't know, that's the beauty of it. Maybe a black market in abortion pills:


Or maybe some sort of transportation app that helps women get to another state.

If there is a demand, the market will provide.
 
So you would support the elimination of the 2nd Amendment and for states to decide if you can legally own a gun?

No, I support any and all restrictions on government power at every level.
 
I don't know, that's the beauty of it. Maybe a black market in abortion pills:


Or maybe some sort of transportation app that helps women get to another state.

If there is a demand, the market will provide.

And when criminal justice is based on how much you can pay, the poor women who go with those options, will end up in prison.
 
No, I support any and all restrictions on government power at every level.

So then you would support restricting states from violating abortion rights? How do you do that without Federal action?
 
The Oklahoma Law DOES. And there’s Bills sitting in various stages of committee across the Anti-Choice states to do the same.

Do you mean this law:

 
So then you would support restricting states from violating abortion rights? How do you do that without Federal action?

I don't know how to stop f-ing government from violating people's rights, that's one reason why I'm an ancap.
 
Do you mean this law:


Correction: Missouri, not Oklahoma

 
And when criminal justice is based on how much you can pay, the poor women who go with those options, will end up in prison.

That's exactly what we have now. Everyone reading this knows that government-run courts are extremely biased towards the wealthy.
 
I don't know how to stop f-ing government from violating people's rights, that's one reason why I'm an ancap.

You would prefer rights be violated by corporations and the rich instead instead.
 
That's exactly what we have now. Everyone reading this knows that government-run courts are extremely biased towards the wealthy.

Yeah, and we need to stop that by going after the privilege of the wealthy aggressively.

What we don’t need is to create a system in which literally everything in society is based on the market and how much one can pay, thereby making the rich the equivalent of medieval monarchs.
 
No private company has ever shaken me down for protection money like government does.

Because the government bans them from doing so. You think the uberwealthy are just going to become altruistic and leave you alone when there is no check to their power?
 
I don't know how to stop f-ing government from violating people's rights, that's one reason why I'm an ancap.

Why are you taking advantage of the benefits of civilized society if you're an ancap? Shouldn't you be spraying your mouth with silver paint while riding into a desert hellscape?

shiny-and-chrome-nux-spray-gif.gif
 
Because the government bans them from doing so.

Yes, like all monopolists, the government hates competition.

irs protection racket.jpg


You think the uberwealthy are just going to become altruistic and leave you alone when there is no check to their power?

Wait, is it your view that the government is protecting me from Elon Musk?
 
Why are you taking advantage of the benefits of civilized society if you're an ancap?

Government is predicated on force and violence. Civilized society exists in spite of the state, not because of it.
 
Back
Top Bottom