• 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 the Founding Fatthers are rolling over in their graves due to Alito’s Dobbs decision

NatMorton said:
Prior to 1920 you weren't guaranteed a right to vote. Precedence does not make right.

I'm not saying your definition is a bad one. I am saying states have a right to choose a different definition, and some have begun to do just that.
Click to expand...

Yes they do...we've concurred with that...right up until the protection of those rights violates the federal rights of women. Your posts look so foolish when you refuse to acknowledge this, are you hoping the uninitiated wont realize it?

Even a state judge acknowledged that in ND this week. He was very clear and used federal rights in his decision...and over turned that state's attempt.

☮️ 🇺🇸 ☮️
 
NatMorton said:
Prior to 1920 you weren't guaranteed a right to vote. Precedence does not make right.

I'm not saying your definition is a bad one. I am saying states have a right to choose a different definition, and some have begun to do just that.
Click to expand...
The right to vote was related to citizenship, not personhood. If you're not recognizing rights to life, liberty, and property to persons, who are already born, you certainly shouldn't be recognizing them for non-persons.
 
choiceone said:
The right to vote was related to citizenship, not personhood. If you're not recognizing rights to life, liberty, and property to persons, who are already born, you certainly shouldn't be recognizing them for non-persons.
Click to expand...
Again, and where state laws are concerned, that is only your opinion. It carries no legal weight whatsoever.
 
NatMorton said:
Again, and where state laws are concerned, that is only your opinion. It carries no legal weight whatsoever.
Click to expand...
Can't help but think you're an unreconstructed pre-Civil War Southerner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom