- Joined
- May 1, 2013
- Messages
- 119,683
- Reaction score
- 75,628
- Location
- Outside Seattle
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Independent
So is her voice. Sit down.
This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."
That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.
It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
That's not a comprehensible response.
Words.
Where did you get this claim? I dare you to name one heterosexual unmarried couple that has been denied a secular civil marriage license in the past 100 years because they were white, conservative, christian or otherwise?Yeah, but they’re NOT SUPPOSED to be activists, but interpreters. For example, I’m a heterosexual, and even I don’t have a “Constitutional right” to marriage. Whatever is NOT in the US Constitution is left up to the states. I’m even willing to admit the Patriot Act was unconstitutional.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Please tell us where these women all are who sit around pregnant for 40 weeks and then decide the day before their due dates that they want to terminate the pregnancy and have the baby be born dead.
But if we did that we would have the wonderful stretch marks and other reminders of pregnancy to show off our liberal pro-abortion choice..........
s/. obviously.
Ah yes. I forgot about the glorious stretchmarks. By 40 weeks they were really beautiful!
But.....abortion at 40 weeks! Every woman wants one. Because the joys of being pregnant.....every woman who doesn't want the baby wants to keep the morning sickness, gas, pain, stretch marks, all of that going because it was so fun!
How are you going to force people to use birth control? FWIW, I've never voted based on abortion because I've always considered it a settled issue until the recent moves for uncontrolled late term or even day before delivery abortions. As much as I oppose that, it still isn't a top issue for me when voting.
A fetus is not yet alive until it can survive outside of the uterus and do so without heroic medical intervention. That is why there is a limit on elective abortion is currently at 22-24 weeks +/- because at that point the fetus becomes viable.
You cannot kill what isn't alive, despite what you claim that the bible says. Jesus was not anti-abortion.
Your opinions on abortion only apply to you and cannot be forced on others. If you dont liker abortion then dont have one but you cannot and do not have the right to make the medical decisions for other people, who are alive and in independent people. I'll give a Fig Newton what a man think about abortion when they are in labor and 10cm dilated.
A fetus is not alive until it can survive outside the womb?:doh Really? Guess all that kicking is imaginary as well as the need to provide it nourishment. Oh, and the beating heart. That claim pretty much invalidates whatever else you're going to say.
"For, behold, the days are coming, in which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the womb that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck."--Luke 23:29
2 Kings 8:12 dash their children, and rip up their women with child.
Legally it is not a person with any rights until it is separate from the body of the mother. The fetus is a biological parasite that is wholly dependent on the mother's body for survival until that point.
Where did Jesus ever mention abortion?
You said a fetus is not alive. That is a monumentally absurd claim. Who's talking about Jesus? Did I mention Jesus anywhere?
The fetus is not alive and not yet a person. Cancer cells and viruses are just as alive, so do you want to also claim that they are people too?
What is the basis for your opposition to Roe v. Wade if it isn't based on religious belief?
Who has ever been forced to get an abortion against their will?
Thing is one of the more bizarre posts I've seen in quite awhile. Let me guess, you claim to believe in science. Well, biology is part of science. The fetus is alive. Going off and talking about cancer and viruses shows that you are lost in the weeds.
My opposition to Roe is twofold. First, the Constitution is silent on this issue, period. Therefore, it must be left to the states to regulate or not as they desire. Secondly, a nation is a reflection of what it values and if we do not value life and cannot afford some protection to the weakest among us, then we don't deserve to succeed as a nation.
Virus and cancer cells are also alive.
The fact that the Constitution is silent on the subject means that it is a right of the person and not to be banned by the state. The various states did rule on abortion on their own but the SCOTUS decided that the issue was ripe for a single national decision when they ruled in Roe (state of Texas) and used the inherent right of privacy as a reason. Abortion was known in the 1790s when the Articles of Confederation existed and the Constitution was written and there was no reason for it to be banned then so why should it be banned now. You seem, to ignore the very core concept of personal freedom is that that we have the right to act as we choose and not to ack permission because your idea turns that idea on its heads and tries to argue that we only have the rights that the government permits us. I hate fascists.
The US Constiution is also silent on computers and the Internet so you need to get off pof it because by your own idea what you are doing is unconstitutional.
Also alive? So, a fetus is alive now? You need to make up your mind. No, it's not mentioned in the Constitution because the Constitution lays out the responsibilities of the Federal government and they are limited. Anything not so mentioned is reserved to the states to decide per the 10th amendment. Also, I'm not calling for bans on all abortions. I haven't said that anywhere.
Your other claim is also specious. You have a right up to the point that the state decides it has a compelling interest to keep you from doing something. That's why robbery, assault, arson and murder are illegal. The state's job is to keep an orderly society and protect its citizens. Just because you don't consider the unborn to be human doesn't relieve the state of its respnsibilites.
This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."
That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.
It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
I'm tired of schooling you on basic concepts of civics.If you read the Constitution it allows for the AMENDMENT PROCESS. The Founding Fathers intended that. Judges are supposed to INTERPRET the law, NOT MAKE the law. An activist judge makes laws that aren’t even existing laws, or in the Constitution! A Constitutional judge says what the Constitution actually says. Geez, learn a little about the Founding Fathers and not from sources like Howard Zinn or similar!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Marshall wrote:
It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is.
— Marbury, 5 U.S. at 177
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?