Liberals Will Have A Stroke

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You are correct that it's useless to talk facts to some indoctrinated fool who believes a bunch of cells, smaller by far than your little fingernail, is actually a baby human.

Don't like abortion?
Don't have one.

Meanwhile, myob.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It has the potential to become a sentient being no other part of the body does,

And as a fact of Constitutional law it is not a 'person' entitled to Constitutional protections until such time as it is born.

Then how can a person be charged for killing it during the course of a crime?

Because the crime is against the pregnant woman, not the embryo/fetus, which is devoid of Constitutional rights.

No one may take from a woman her fundamental right to decide whether to have a child or not – not the state in the context of civil law and substantive due process, or an individual in the context of criminal law and procedural due process.

Moreover, all such statues have provisions excluding medical professionals who perform lawful abortions.

Wrong, the person can be charged with th death of the child. Two charges, one for the mother and one for the child, double homicide

In some states, however, an unborn child can be considered a "person" for purposes of a state's vehicular homicide law. For example, some state laws covering negligent homicide and first- and second-degree murder (different types of offenses for the killing of another person) specifically include the death of an unborn child who is "in the womb at any stage of its development."

No, this is wrong.

 

[jknowgood]

Kinda like Obama lighting up the white house like a rainbow flag? You supported?

I know nothing about that.

Like this?View attachment 66179

Yep. President Obama believes in equality and that pisses off traitors like you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But, but his beliefs on government property.

So you'd object to a rainbow decal on a sheriff's car?

Would you object to in God we trust being lit up on the white house?

 

[my2¢]

My choice would have been the state's motto, Sic semper tyrannis (or in English, Thus always to tyrants). Simply because (1) more in line with my philosophy that state trumps federal and (2) seems a more appropriate use.

Let's take this opportunity to observe that the 2¢ piece was first U.S. coin to carry the motto In God We Trust back in 1864.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I know nothing about that.

Like this?View attachment 66179

Yep. President Obama believes in equality and that pisses off traitors like you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But, but his beliefs on government property.

So you'd object to a rainbow decal on a sheriff's car?

Would you object to in God we trust being lit up on the white house?

Is the whitehouse the President's private residence?

 

[Hossfly]

One more 1st Amendment issue to cause Liberals to go berserk.


The sheriff for York-Poquoson counties in Virginia has added America’s national motto, “In God We Trust,” to his patrol cars, offering an extensive legal defense for his actions.

Sheriff J.D. “Danny” Diggs posed for a photo on the York County’s Facebook page showing the new decal on a sheriff’s vehicle.

In the post, Diggs says his goal is not to offend anyone, but rather to honor God. He said posting the motto on patrol cars “does not injure or threaten anyone.”


Sheriff Adds 4 Words to His Patrol Cars – Liberals Outraged – American Spotlight

In God We Trust,”

And which god(s) is the goober referring too?

The only God of Abraham. What did you think?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Wrong.

The states have no authority to 'decide' who will or will not have his civil rights; one does not 'forfeit' his civil rights merely as a consequence of his state of residence; and one's civil rights are not determined by 'majority rule.'

The states are subject to the Constitution, its case law, the rule of law, and the decisions of Federal courts, where those decisions are binding on the states and local jurisdictions.

If you don't believe unborn children have rights then

You won't find any personhood rights for the unborn in the Constitution either, which means such rights cannot be invoked.
As far as the Constitution is concerned, taken as you wish it to be taken,

a woman having an abortion is no different than a woman having her appendix removed.

This argument is useless when a person equates a baby to a unused organ. If we used your analogy then evolution should have wiped the human race out before we real even began.

You are correct that it's useless to talk facts to some indoctrinated fool who believes a bunch of cells, smaller by far than your little fingernail, is actually a baby human.

Don't like abortion?
Don't have one.

Meanwhile, myob.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It has the potential to become a sentient being no other part of the body does,

And as a fact of Constitutional law it is not a 'person' entitled to Constitutional protections until such time as it is born.

Then how can a person be charged for killing it during the course of a crime?

Because choice is the pregnant woman's choice.

 

[NYcarbineer]

One more 1st Amendment issue to cause Liberals to go berserk.


The sheriff for York-Poquoson counties in Virginia has added America’s national motto, “In God We Trust,” to his patrol cars, offering an extensive legal defense for his actions.

Sheriff J.D. “Danny” Diggs posed for a photo on the York County’s Facebook page showing the new decal on a sheriff’s vehicle.

In the post, Diggs says his goal is not to offend anyone, but rather to honor God. He said posting the motto on patrol cars “does not injure or threaten anyone.”


Sheriff Adds 4 Words to His Patrol Cars – Liberals Outraged – American Spotlight

In God We Trust,”

And which god(s) is the goober referring too?

The only God of Abraham. What did you think?

Not true. In his own words, he says, or pretends, that it refers to anyone's god.

 

[Hossfly]

It's political theism. He has no business putting his personal belief decals on government owned vehicles.

Cough cough ...it's on our money.

So? You want a Christian Taliban in America? This is a step in that direction.

Hardly. Seeing the word "God" on a police car isn't going to have any real consequence on your life, I promise.

It will give them the vapors

A implicit admission that the real goal here was to antagonize.

Good! I like to antagonize Liberal Progressive pukes with all my heart and soul.

 

[Hossfly]

Ironically, I'll bet this sheriff is a bit extra suspicious when he pulls over a car and the driver's name is Jesus.

Jesus better hope his papers are correct.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Cough cough ...it's on our money.

So? You want a Christian Taliban in America? This is a step in that direction.

Hardly. Seeing the word "God" on a police car isn't going to have any real consequence on your life, I promise.

It will give them the vapors

A implicit admission that the real goal here was to antagonize.

Good! I like to antagonize Liberal Progressive pukes with all my heart and soul.

Well then maybe in your next life you'll come back as a mosquito and live the dream.

 

[Hossfly]

I respect all believes. My opinion however is that Bernie sanders is the best candidate. I even wrote a song about it! Check it out!

Bernie Sanders sucks hog snot.

 

[Hossfly]

One more 1st Amendment issue to cause Liberals to go berserk.


The sheriff for York-Poquoson counties in Virginia has added America’s national motto, “In God We Trust,” to his patrol cars, offering an extensive legal defense for his actions.

Sheriff J.D. “Danny” Diggs posed for a photo on the York County’s Facebook page showing the new decal on a sheriff’s vehicle.

In the post, Diggs says his goal is not to offend anyone, but rather to honor God. He said posting the motto on patrol cars “does not injure or threaten anyone.”


Sheriff Adds 4 Words to His Patrol Cars – Liberals Outraged – American Spotlight

Just the American Taliban at work, using tax dollars to promote religion.

When you really have no sound argument equate something like words on a police vehicle to a group that has committed real crimes against humanity. Its a pathetic ploy.

The question should be does this violate the separation of church and state to the people of that community. If so then they will be heard in the next election for Sheriff. If it doesn't bother the community then its nobody else's freaking business

So no one should criticize something that's legal? Tell that to the anti-abortion nuts.

Abortion does not fall under the US Constitution if anything it takes away the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, Unless there's a rape, incest or the mothers life is in danger abortion should be illegal.

The right to an abortion is protected by the Constitution.

No way. It's protected by the Alzheimers Club at SCOTUS.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Just the American Taliban at work, using tax dollars to promote religion.

When you really have no sound argument equate something like words on a police vehicle to a group that has committed real crimes against humanity. Its a pathetic ploy.

The question should be does this violate the separation of church and state to the people of that community. If so then they will be heard in the next election for Sheriff. If it doesn't bother the community then its nobody else's freaking business

So no one should criticize something that's legal? Tell that to the anti-abortion nuts.

Abortion does not fall under the US Constitution if anything it takes away the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, Unless there's a rape, incest or the mothers life is in danger abortion should be illegal.

The right to an abortion is protected by the Constitution.

No way. It's protected by the Alzheimers Club at SCOTUS.

You're wrong. SCOTUS has the CONSTITUTIONAL power to make case law that is the law of the land.

Go read a book or something.

 

[Hossfly]

Right because you will not find it all.

You won't find any personhood rights for the unborn in the Constitution either, which means such rights cannot be invoked.
As far as the Constitution is concerned, taken as you wish it to be taken,

a woman having an abortion is no different than a woman having her appendix removed.

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness Regardless If its not in the Constitution then its for the states to decide.

Wrong.

The states have no authority to 'decide' who will or will not have his civil rights; one does not 'forfeit' his civil rights merely as a consequence of his state of residence; and one's civil rights are not determined by 'majority rule.'

The states are subject to the Constitution, its case law, the rule of law, and the decisions of Federal courts, where those decisions are binding on the states and local jurisdictions.

If you don't believe unborn children have rights then

Please point out the words that say abortion is legal.

LOL

Google is your friend. Use it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Right because you will not find it all.

You won't find any personhood rights for the unborn in the Constitution either, which means such rights cannot be invoked.
As far as the Constitution is concerned, taken as you wish it to be taken,

a woman having an abortion is no different than a woman having her appendix removed.

This argument is useless when a person equates a baby to a unused organ. If we used your analogy then evolution should have wiped the human race out before we real even began.

It's not an 'argument'. It's the Constitution taken at face value. You cannot find personhood rights for zygotes, embryos, and fetuses in the Constitution.

Then the fetus should be ground up and used for fertilizer if it's not a human person. Lot's of farmers in the world use human waste for fertilizer. A ripe fetus would help the taters grow faster and bigger.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I know nothing about that.

Like this?View attachment 66179

Yep. President Obama believes in equality and that pisses off traitors like you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But, but his beliefs on government property.

So you'd object to a rainbow decal on a sheriff's car?

Would you object to in God we trust being lit up on the white house?

Of course but even you should be able to figure out that it would be for the same reason.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hossfly]

When you really have no sound argument equate something like words on a police vehicle to a group that has committed real crimes against humanity. Its a pathetic ploy.

The question should be does this violate the separation of church and state to the people of that community. If so then they will be heard in the next election for Sheriff. If it doesn't bother the community then its nobody else's freaking business

So no one should criticize something that's legal? Tell that to the anti-abortion nuts.

Abortion does not fall under the US Constitution if anything it takes away the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, Unless there's a rape, incest or the mothers life is in danger abortion should be illegal.

The right to an abortion is protected by the Constitution.

No way. It's protected by the Alzheimers Club at SCOTUS.

You're wrong. SCOTUS has the CONSTITUTIONAL power to make case law that is the law of the land.

Go read a book or something.

Not so, Punkin. Congress makes laws. Scotus interprets them. In this instance, Scotus made the law and it's not legal.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Just the American Taliban at work, using tax dollars to promote religion.

When you really have no sound argument equate something like words on a police vehicle to a group that has committed real crimes against humanity. Its a pathetic ploy.

The question should be does this violate the separation of church and state to the people of that community. If so then they will be heard in the next election for Sheriff. If it doesn't bother the community then its nobody else's freaking business

So no one should criticize something that's legal? Tell that to the anti-abortion nuts.

Abortion does not fall under the US Constitution if anything it takes away the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, Unless there's a rape, incest or the mothers life is in danger abortion should be illegal.

The right to an abortion is protected by the Constitution.

No way. It's protected by the Alzheimers Club at SCOTUS.

How is it that you RWNJ traitors don't know that we have three branches of govt? And they never know what scotus does exactly what they were designed to do. Whine all you want. You're not getting a Pooting govt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Luddly Neddite]

So no one should criticize something that's legal? Tell that to the anti-abortion nuts.

Abortion does not fall under the US Constitution if anything it takes away the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, Unless there's a rape, incest or the mothers life is in danger abortion should be illegal.

The right to an abortion is protected by the Constitution.

No way. It's protected by the Alzheimers Club at SCOTUS.

You're wrong. SCOTUS has the CONSTITUTIONAL power to make case law that is the law of the land.

Go read a book or something.

Not so, Punkin. Congress makes laws. Scotus interprets them. In this instance, Scotus made the law and it's not legal.

That's what you get for dropping out of junior high.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hossfly]

When you really have no sound argument equate something like words on a police vehicle to a group that has committed real crimes against humanity. Its a pathetic ploy.

The question should be does this violate the separation of church and state to the people of that community. If so then they will be heard in the next election for Sheriff. If it doesn't bother the community then its nobody else's freaking business

So no one should criticize something that's legal? Tell that to the anti-abortion nuts.

Abortion does not fall under the US Constitution if anything it takes away the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, Unless there's a rape, incest or the mothers life is in danger abortion should be illegal.

The right to an abortion is protected by the Constitution.

No way. It's protected by the Alzheimers Club at SCOTUS.

You're wrong. SCOTUS has the CONSTITUTIONAL power to make case law that is the law of the land.

Go read a book or something.

Not so, Punkin. Congress makes laws. Scotus interprets them. In this instance, Scotus made the law and it's not legal.

When you really have no sound argument equate something like words on a police vehicle to a group that has committed real crimes against humanity. Its a pathetic ploy.

The question should be does this violate the separation of church and state to the people of that community. If so then they will be heard in the next election for Sheriff. If it doesn't bother the community then its nobody else's freaking business

So no one should criticize something that's legal? Tell that to the anti-abortion nuts.

Abortion does not fall under the US Constitution if anything it takes away the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, Unless there's a rape, incest or the mothers life is in danger abortion should be illegal.

The right to an abortion is protected by the Constitution.

No way. It's protected by the Alzheimers Club at SCOTUS.

How is it that you RWNJ traitors don't know that we have three branches of govt? And they never know what scotus does exactly what they were designed to do. Whine all you want. You're not getting a Pooting govt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I studied Government in college while you slept in class.

 

[boedicca]

I have a question.

If Liberals have a stroke, how can we possibly tell?