• 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!

Why did Fox News act like some hero died..Ginsburg promoted child murder

Manc Skipper said:
Roe v Wade was a seven to two vote by a five/four Republican SC. One of the dissenters was a Democrat. The Republicans own Roe v Wade.
Click to expand...

But then they cared about the constitution, now no longer so it is high time that the supreme court gets to 9 or 11 members with 4 new actual democratic constitutional scholars rather than right wing activist judges.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
The subject of abortion is debatable.

Definitions of “baby”, “fetus”, “human”, “person”, etc., are not.

If you want honest debate regarding abortion, stick to the correct definitions of those words.
Click to expand...
I will stick to the ethical and the medical definitions. Legal is bs, because, legally, slavery was OK. So much for legal.

So, when does the "fetus" become a" human baby"?

Yeah, I know, when it's born. Or, better yet, when it's no longer a fetus. I got it.
 
Peter King said:
But then they cared about the constitution, now no longer so it is high time that the supreme court gets to 9 or 11 members with 4 new actual democratic constitutional scholars rather than right wing activist judges.
Click to expand...
Bullshit. Their entire "logic" was based on "privacy". Find me that word in the US Constitution. If "privacy" is the basis for this abomination, then all states should allow assisted, on-demand, no questions asked suicide, just as they allow assisted, on-demand, no questions asked abortion. After all, it's my body, isn't it?

The Warren Court pulled that "privacy" crap from where it's dark and smells bad to deliver to the feminazis what the feminazis couldn't possibly get through the state legislatures.
 
Novichok said:
Bullshit. Their entire "logic" was based on "privacy". Find me that word in the US Constitution. If "privacy" is the basis for this abomination, then all states should allow assisted, on-demand, no questions asked suicide, just as they allow assisted, on-demand, no questions asked abortion. After all, it's my body, isn't it?

The Warren Court pulled that "privacy" crap from where it's dark and smells bad to deliver to the feminazis what the feminazis couldn't possibly get through the state legislatures.
Click to expand...

except there are other things that are not specifically mentioned in the constitution, the 9th amendment gave them that power, it is ludicrous to think the founders disagreed with the right to privacy.
 
Novichok said:
I will stick to the ethical and the medical definitions. Legal is bs, because, legally, slavery was OK. So much for legal.

So, when does the "fetus" become a" human baby"?

Yeah, I know, when it's born. Or, better yet, when it's no longer a fetus. I got it.
Click to expand...
You really don’t have the tiniest clue of what you’re talking about.

There’s no such thing as an “ethical definition”.

If you actually knew the medical definitions used in describing the pregnancy through birth process, you wouldn’t be claiming to stick with them. Hint; the AMA doesn’t recognize the unborn as babies.

And your dismissal of existing law, because slavery was, at one time, legal is stupid at it’s stupidest level. Try using that argument the next time you’re pulled over for speeding.

Unless you’re ready/able to offer a cogent response, don’t bother responding. I have no interest in debating with the deliberately ignorant.
 
So, when does a fetus become a baby?
 
Peter King said:
except there are other things that are not specifically mentioned in the constitution, the 9th amendment gave them that power, it is ludicrous to think the founders disagreed with the right to privacy.
Click to expand...
Doctors operate what is on the list of state's approved procedures, not what's in the federal Constitution.
Dancing around "suicide on demand"?
 
Novichok said:
Doctors operate what is on the list of state's approved procedures, not what's in the federal Constitution.
Dancing around "suicide on demand"?
Click to expand...

I am 100% in favor of well regulated euthanasia.
 
Novichok said:
Bullshit. Their entire "logic" was based on "privacy". Find me that word in the US Constitution. If "privacy" is the basis for this abomination, then all states should allow assisted, on-demand, no questions asked suicide, just as they allow assisted, on-demand, no questions asked abortion. After all, it's my body, isn't it?

The Warren Court pulled that "privacy" crap from where it's dark and smells bad to deliver to the feminazis what the feminazis couldn't possibly get through the state legislatures.
Click to expand...
Women who want equal opportunity and equal protection of the law are not feminizes. They are just average intelligent women. Manipulators like Rush Limbaugh make up names like that to help people put a tough sounding name to their fears and weaknesses.
 
weaver2 said:
Women who want equal opportunity and equal protection of the law are not feminizes. They are just average intelligent women. Manipulators like Rush Limbaugh make up names like that to help people put a tough sounding name to their fears and weaknesses.
Click to expand...
No, Feminazis are exactly what they are. Pushing the feminist agenda of attacking the proper traditional family, devaluing life in its most vulnerable stage, and ultimately, discriminating against white males who aren't metrosexual Leftists like themselves.
 
Bassman said:
No, Feminazis are exactly what they are. Pushing the feminist agenda of attacking the proper traditional family, devaluing life in its most vulnerable stage, and ultimately, discriminating against white males who aren't metrosexual Leftists like themselves.
Click to expand...
How dare women demand rights!!!!!
 
Bassman said:
No, Feminazis are exactly what they are. Pushing the feminist agenda of attacking the proper traditional family, devaluing life in its most vulnerable stage, and ultimately, discriminating against white males who aren't metrosexual Leftists like themselves.
Click to expand...
Your post is a therapists wet dream of male insecurities and irrational phobias.
 
Bassman said:
No, Feminazis are exactly what they are. Pushing the feminist agenda of attacking the proper traditional family, devaluing life in its most vulnerable stage, and ultimately, discriminating against white males who aren't metrosexual Leftists like themselves.
Click to expand...
Yup, just like I said gotta use names that devalue women to camouflage your fears and weaknesses. Your problem is you're not smart enough to join with intelligent women , minorities, gays, immigrants and work for a society that is fair to every one, not just white males.
 
weaver2 said:
Yup, just like I said gotta use names that devalue women to camouflage your fears and weaknesses. Your problem is you're not smart enough to join with intelligent women , minorities, gays, immigrants and work for a society that is fair to every one, not just white males.
Click to expand...
Got a newsflash for ya. Life isn't fair, nor is it meant to be.
 
Bassman said:
Got a newsflash for ya. Life isn't fair, nor is it meant to be.
Click to expand...
So from your prospective life is just one great wallow in wealth for 1% of the people and to hell with the rest? LOL. No wonder you are uncomfortable with strong women. News flash: The purpose in life is to work toward fairness. I'm not the first to say that. I believe it was spoken of about 2000 years ago. You've just forgotten that.
 
Bassman said:
Ahh yes. Ironic because Hitler, whom the pro aborts emulate, gassed Jews.
Click to expand...

Are you assuming that abolishing Roe v Wade would result in the banning of abortion nationwide? How so? Wouldn’t it revert back to the states? How many states would suddenly become “tourist destinations”?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom