Roe v. Wade getting overturned!!

[NotfooledbyW]

Samofvt230406-#2 to: -1 ¥ Samofvt ¥ Which side are you on?

NFBW230406-#8,136 to: -8134 “Whose side are you on?”

Samofvt230406-#8,146 to: -1 “I am on the side of whatever produces the greatest amount of liberty for all. •••• In the scenario you bring up, I believe there are many involved: 1) the woman 2) the man who contributed 3) the unborn child (the fetus itself is alive) 4) the families of the woman and the man 5) God

NFBW: Are you on the side of (1) women who willfully become pregnant and freely assume the risks of giving birth or are you on the side of (2) women who have an unwanted pregnancy and have the right within the first weeks to terminate their pregnancy in a safe and economical way,.

I do not see how you are defending the liberty of of women having an unwanted pregnancy if you would support a six week abortion ban.

END2304072109

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Samofvt220426-#408 conservative people who believe in individual freedom and liberty believe less government will result in better progress.

Samofvt230406-#8,146 to:-1 “I am on the side of whatever produces the greatest amount of liberty for all.”

NFBW230407-#8,170 to: -24 “But Jewish Americans cannot practice liberty of conscience in your vision of America unless they “all move to one state and become a religious majority themselves.” •••• I like the way the rational theists set up liberty in 1790 or thereabouts.

Samofvt230407-#8,178 to: -8 “the liberty of the unborn, in my opinion, has equal weight as the woman carrying it.

NFBW: Most abortions by choice take place well before the moment when there are two or more functioning brains inside a pregnant woman’s body.

There is only one physical and functional brain inside a woman’s body prior to the 22nd week of every pregnancy. That fact makes it explicitly absurd to push your opinion on others that a brainless existence inside a womb has equal liberty as the woman carrying it.

END2304062356

 

[Samofvt]

Wearing a seat belt is NOT doing something to your own body in fact it has absolutely ZERO effect on your body and it only applies in a single instance of driving a car.

If you want to get your tonsils out do you want to have to have that voted on by people you don't know?
If you want to get a vasectomy do you want people voting on it and telling you that you can't?
If you want to have an elective surgery that you think will make your life better do you want to have to get the permission of other people?

In addition...

I will have to submit that those things you use as examples are all invasive treatments.

- tonsil-ectomy involves surgically removing an organ of the body
- vasectomy involves surgically removing the ability of an organ to function
- elective surgery involves...surgery

All of these treatments involve one person: either the person is an adult and can make their own decisions, or the person is not an adult, and their adult parents (<-PLURAL) decide.

I will remind you that the act of insemination is, for lack of a better word, invasive surgery. Most men and women coupling to produce a living embryo implicitly agree to the use of their organs for that invasive surgery. Pleasure is the incentive, often. Rape is another topic.

Should anyone be allowed to vote and decide for you that you MUST undergo these treatments? NO

Should anyone be allowed to vote and decide for you that you CAN or CAN NOT undergo these treatments? NO

Abortion involves multiple individuals (<-PLURAL), PLUS an additional person not able to express their wishes (in my belief system, life begins at conception, not at birth)

Americanism has a long history of WE THE PEOPLE intervening on behalf of those who do not have a voice. Our culture is brimming with the glory of those who sacrifice themselves for the benefit of those less fortunate. However, this must be tempered with the understanding that there are circumstances that do not fall into any describable or known category. Those circumstances must be left to decide by those closest to the situation: parents, family, and God (if the shoe fits...I will not force my beliefs in that regard on anyone, it's best found through self-discovery).

In short, your arguments about "elective surgery" falls apart if you believe life is precious. If you do not believe life is precious then why stop at pre-birth abortions? I've got quite a few on my list that I would like to abort if that's where we are headed.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

​

“strict scrutiny test.” ​

This standard provides the strongest possible protection by limiting the government’s ability to infringe on a given right:​

Samofvt230406-#8,162 to: -1 Vermonters apparently can not read plain English, like where the amendment says "unless the state finds a compelling reason to decide reproductive issues for them".

NFBW: You put something in quotes in 08162.

"unless the state finds a compelling reason to decide reproductive issues for them".​

​

I need you to provide your source because I looked up the constitutional amendment that voters in favor of legalized abortions passed last November (Article 22) in that document reads as follows;

That an individual’s right to personal reproductive autonomy is central to the liberty and dignity to determine one’s own life course and shall not be denied or infringed unless justified by a compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means.”​

​

NFBW: Do you see the last six words? “achieved by the least restrictive means.”

I believe you are on the TrumpJesus team working to deny every individual’s right to personal reproductive autonomy by the most restrictive means as in the so-called heartbeat ban at six weeks.

Please be more informed about the amazing amount of freedom and liberty that is extremely protected in your home state. I’m where Jewish people as a minority religion can live alongside Christians in peace and harmony. You can be o your way to informed if you are curious enough to read this:

This commentary is by James Lyall, executive director of the ACLU of Vermont.https://vtdigger.org/2022/10/09/james-lyall-heres-what-you-should-know-about-vermonts-reproductive-liberty-amendment/#:~:text=The%20part%20about%20“compelling%20State%20interest%20achieved%20by,in%20this%20case%2C%20the%20right%20to%20reproductive%20autonomy.​

​

We all deserve the freedom to determine the course of our own lives. That includes the right to make decisions like whether and when to become pregnant, use temporary or permanent birth control, or seek abortion care.​

​

This November, Vermont voters will have the opportunity to preserve those rights by passing Proposal 5, the Reproductive Liberty Amendment, which would add Article 22 to our constitution.​

​

Article 22 would ensure that abortion stays legal in Vermont and that patients continue to have access to necessary reproductive care, including when serious complications arise during pregnancy.​

​

You may have already received your ballot in the mail. If so, give it a look. Proposal 5 asks voters to consider whether Vermont should add Article 22 to the state constitution. It provides: “That an individual’s right to personal reproductive autonomy is central to the liberty and dignity to determine one’s own life course and shall not be denied or infringed unless justified by a compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means.”​

​

The part about “compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means” refers to a specific legal standard known as the “strict scrutiny test.” This standard provides the strongest possible protection by limiting the government’s ability to infringe on a given right: in this case, the right to reproductive autonomy.​

​

What does that mean, in practice? If Article 22 were enacted and a future Vermont Legislature tried to pass a law that restricted our reproductive autonomy — like by limiting our access to abortion or birth control, making procedures like vasectomies illegal, or requiring certain people to undergo forced sterilization — that law would almost certainly be deemed unconstitutional by the Vermont Supreme Court and stopped from going into effect.​

​

With Article 22 in place, the state Legislature would need to establish that there was an extremely important reason to enact a law that restricted our reproductive rights. Lawmakers would also need to prove that there was not any other possible way to address that state interest without infringing on our rights. Otherwise, the law would be struck down and our rights would be protected.​

​

Unfortunately, opponents of abortion rights are trying to spread false information about this amendment and the legal standard it establishes. Vermonters should not be fooled. Legislators, advocates, and legal experts carefully designed this amendment to protect our fundamental liberties from attack, and that’s exactly what Proposal 5 does — nothing more, and nothing less.​

​

End2304080157

​

 

[Samofvt]

I believe you are on the TrumpJesus team working to deny every individual’s right to personal reproductive autonomy by the most restrictive means as in the so-called heartbeat ban at six weeks.

This tells me that you have not read one word I have written. Do you get triggered much?

Now that I see you are devolving into rants about "TrumpJesus" (seriously?), I can tell you've either had too much to drink tonight or are unwilling to have a reasonable debate.

As far as your insight into my state's constitutional Article 22, that's great that you took the time to look at it. That amendment was passed because of a huge advertising campaign, paid for by Planned Parenthood, which is funded through tax dollars. You can mince the words all you want, but in the end, any *constitutional* thing of any type that says "unless justified by a compelling State interest" means that the State has full control over that issue. At the same time people were voting to put this thing in place, they voted to get rid of another constitutional article that had the word "unless" in it, because that word "unless" could be used improperly.

"Johnny can eat Sarah's apple, unless the teacher tells him not too"

"Moses will have free reign over selecting his job title, unless the employer finds good reason to have him do another job"

"You can have sex with any girl you want tonight, unless she says no"

 

[Samofvt]

​

“achieved by the least restrictive means.”​

...
Please be more informed about the amazing amount of freedom and liberty that is extremely protected ...

​

Yes. And as a good fascist, I'm sure you will agree that the best way, and least restrictive way, to prevent Johnny from eating Sarah's apple is to bind him to a chair. We shall further tie his head back and gag him with a cloth. The least restrictive implies chemical restraints, so we might as well inject him with something to keep his eyes open (if his eyes close, we would be accused of over-restriction).

Then, and only then, will we allow Johnny to watch as Sarah ravishes that apple. This is arguably the least restrictive means to prevent the undesirable event of Johnny eating Sarah's apple.

This, my friend, is the ULTIMATE FREEDOM you profess.

 

[beagle9]

Samofvt230406-#2 to: -1 ¥ Samofvt ¥ Which side are you on?

NFBW230406-#8,136 to: -8134 “Whose side are you on?”

Samofvt230406-#8,146 to: -1 “I am on the side of whatever produces the greatest amount of liberty for all. •••• In the scenario you bring up, I believe there are many involved: 1) the woman 2) the man who contributed 3) the unborn child (the fetus itself is alive) 4) the families of the woman and the man 5) God

NFBW: Are you on the side of (1) women who willfully become pregnant and freely assume the risks of giving birth or are you on the side of (2) women who have an unwanted pregnancy and have the right within the first weeks to terminate their pregnancy in a safe and economical way,.

I do not see how you are defending the liberty of of women having an unwanted pregnancy if you would support a six week abortion ban.

END2304072109

Safe and economical way of disposal eh ?? Wow, you sound like a person attempting to write a commercial for the medical septic tank industry.

Commercial would probably read like this -
Hey just bring you and your fetus on down ladies, and we'll metaphorically flush it down the old medical toilet if you ain't happy wid it, because after all it's occupying space that you need when and if you flub up once again.

So hurry on down for your next inner scrubbin where the fetus swallowing septic tank is awaiting your next disposal of your issue in a safe, efficient, and "economical way" ..

So come on down if you can't control yourself, cause we gotcha covered.

Oh wait, baby done got a little bigger than expected ? NO PROBLEMO, we got ways of dealing with that too, so if there's a wait, then we won't hesitate to help you get around that little issue you got, because the clock is a tickin and look out because that baby is now a kickin.

Pffft... Some sick bull crap I tell ya.

Why don't people just get their ridiculous selves straightened out in life ? Then all this sick shite going on would reduce to a tiny spec on the human monitoring radar screen, and that way fewer people would be endangering their soul's for doing horrendous stuff to themselves and other's in life.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

08162a Samofvt230406-#8,162 to: -1 “Apparently, you are not reading my responses: your answers do not address the issues I raise,”

“strict scrutiny test.”
This standard provides the strongest possible protection by limiting the government’s ability to infringe on a given right: posted by NFBW-#8,184

08162b Samofvt230406-#8,162 to: -1 Vermonters apparently cannot read plain English, like where the amendment says "unless the state finds a compelling reason to decide reproductive issues for them".

NFBW230407-#8,184 to: -1 “You put something in quotes in 08162. •••• "unless the state finds a compelling reason to decide reproductive issues for them". •••• I need you to provide your source because I looked up the constitutional amendment that voters in favor of legalized abortions passed last November (Article 22) that document reads as follows; •••• That an individual’s right to personal reproductive autonomy is central to the liberty and dignity to determine one’s own life course and shall not be denied or infringed unless justified by a compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means.”

NFBW: I asked 08184 for your source in 08162. Your reply does not include a source because you are the source. You made it all up. This is the second time in a few days where you can be characterized by suspiciousness as you see yourself as a victim of a fellow American who will not read the truth and compelling insights regarding reproductive rights that you so kindly put in writing here on this very public forum in writing.

NFBW: For the record the first indication of your message board paranoia was 08162a (see above)

Samofvt230408-#8,185 to: -1 This tells me that you have not read one word I have written.

NFBW: Apparently I am in good company with liberty . . . ( for humans with brains that met the live birth requirement for value of life protected status) . . . loving persons who voted in favor of Team BidenJesus platform on reproductive rights for women. You indicated in 08162b (above) you are suspicious of Vermont’s TeamBiden voters as well when you write they “apparently cannot read plain English” in the way that TeamTrump voters do.

I can guarantee you Samofvt that I have read all your recent posts several times and that is somewhat why I ask questions. I have read much of your older posts as well and will read more whether or not you wish to continue with a meaningful discussion on a broad range of interesting and intertwined topics with a rational theist on Team BidenJesus in the mold of Washington Adams Jefferson Madison and Monroe Franklin, Paine and Allen.

END2304080630

 

[Blues Man]

All those things you list above would be ridiculous to have another interfere with, but when it comes to "deplorable thing's", that end up scarring the mind, body, and soul, then yes a civilized SOCIETY wants to have some say upon those deplorable things, otherwise this is in order to limit the damages caused by anyone thinking that they can just do horrible thing's with impunity, and therefore cause terrible problems for themselves and other's when they do them.

Now there are freedom's that truly aren't freedom's at all, otherwise if allowed to just let them be... Why ? It's because if left alone without studying the ill effects of a perceived freedom, and the perceived freedom ends up destroying the mind, body, and soul if it is a specific perceived freedom that is wrongfully allowed, then that is when one may think WHY ? Why was it allowed after so much destruction has been recorded ? Some thing's there is no excuse for.

If a person makes a choice that causes problems for himself and no one else what business is it of yours?

No one has the authority to do anything to anyone else without permission because each person has ultimate sovereignty over his own body.

 

[Blues Man]

Spot on. The government is using the resources (tax dollars) of people who do not condone unrestrained abortion to promote the practice of abortion by funding "Planned Parenthood", the largest provider of abortions.

This is a big problem ethically.

If taxpayer resources are allowed to be used to fund Planned Parenthood which promotes termination of life, there can be no reasonable argument against using an equal amount of resources to fund Pregnancy Resource centers that promote life.

No government money has ever been used to pay for abortions. Planned parenthood does more than just abortions

No, Taxes Do Not Pay for Abortions Despite What Some People Believe

Do taxes pay for abortions? See how the oft-contested Hyde Amendment has limited Medicaid federal coverage of abortions for decades now.

marketrealist.com

 

[Blues Man]

In addition...

I will have to submit that those things you use as examples are all invasive treatments.

- tonsil-ectomy involves surgically removing an organ of the body
- vasectomy involves surgically removing the ability of an organ to function
- elective surgery involves...surgery

All of these treatments involve one person: either the person is an adult and can make their own decisions, or the person is not an adult, and their adult parents (<-PLURAL) decide.

I will remind you that the act of insemination is, for lack of a better word, invasive surgery. Most men and women coupling to produce a living embryo implicitly agree to the use of their organs for that invasive surgery. Pleasure is the incentive, often. Rape is another topic.

Should anyone be allowed to vote and decide for you that you MUST undergo these treatments? NO

Should anyone be allowed to vote and decide for you that you CAN or CAN NOT undergo these treatments? NO

Abortion involves multiple individuals (<-PLURAL), PLUS an additional person not able to express their wishes (in my belief system, life begins at conception, not at birth)

Americanism has a long history of WE THE PEOPLE intervening on behalf of those who do not have a voice. Our culture is brimming with the glory of those who sacrifice themselves for the benefit of those less fortunate. However, this must be tempered with the understanding that there are circumstances that do not fall into any describable or known category. Those circumstances must be left to decide by those closest to the situation: parents, family, and God (if the shoe fits...I will not force my beliefs in that regard on anyone, it's best found through self-discovery).

In short, your arguments about "elective surgery" falls apart if you believe life is precious. If you do not believe life is precious then why stop at pre-birth abortions? I've got quite a few on my list that I would like to abort if that's where we are headed.

You do know that people can have have intercourse without intending to reproduce as well.

And the whole why don't you want to kill 2 year old children argument is specious. There is a very real difference between a 2 year old child and a 2 week old embryo.

And what you still don't seem to understand is that MY, or YOUR, opinion on what another person chooses to do to their own body is 100% irrelevant.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Cplus6221212-#6,362 And the rest is just your continued hate-boner against Catholics, which continues to be irrelevant.

I do not hate Catholics. Joe Biden is Catholic. I hate anti-American ViganòCatholicisn same as we should hate Catholic Priests who raped young boys.

Any Catholic high priest living in Vatican City under the protection of my country and our NATO Allies who is currently in an amoral alliance with the butcher of Moscow

who did that is a traitor to humanity and is most deserving of hatred / / they need to create a special place in hell for deranged Bishops such as a friend to genocide against Ukrainians that Vigano is.

MESSAGE of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò States to the Founding Congress​

of the International Movement of Russophiles (MIR) Moscow, March 14, 2023​

​

… the electoral fraud of 2020 in the United States of America was also indispensable to prevent the confirmation of President Donald Trump, just as in 2013 the deep state and the deep church managed to get Pope Benedict XVI to resign and to elect a person pleasing to the New World Order, the Jesuit Jorge Mario Bergoglio. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò March 14, 2023​

​

We cannot be surprised that, after de-Christianizing the Western world, this elite considers Russia an enemy to be overthrown.​

​

Letter #74, 2023 Thurs Mar 16: Viganò - Inside The Vatican 230316^01​

​

The Russian Federation undeniably stands as the last bastion of civilization against barbarism, and gathers around it all those nations that do not intend to submit to the colonization of NATO, the United Nations, the World Health Organization, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and that heap of foundations that have as their purpose the indoctrination of the masses, the manipulation of information, the creation of “colored springs” to destabilize governments legitimately elected and sow chaos, wars and misery as instrumentum regni.​

​

Yes I hate this Mashmont Vigano Catholicism - It is like hating the Nazis in 1939.

END2304080908

 

[beagle9]

If a person makes a choice that causes problems for himself and no one else what business is it of yours?

No one has the authority to do anything to anyone else without permission because each person has ultimate sovereignty over his own body.

Himself ? Men can get abortions now ? ROTFLMBO

 

[beagle9]

Cplus6221212-#6,362 And the rest is just your continued hate-boner against Catholics, which continues to be irrelevant.

I do not hate Catholics. Joe Biden is Catholic. I hate anti-American ViganòCatholicisn same as we should hate Catholic Priests who raped young boys.

Any Catholic high priest living in Vatican City under the protection of my country and our NATO Allies who is currently in an amoral alliance with the butcher of Moscow

View attachment 774388
who did that is a traitor to humanity and is most deserving of hatred / they need to create a special place in hell for deranged Bushops such as he Vigano is.

MESSAGE of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò States to the Founding Congress​

of the International Movement of Russophiles (MIR) Moscow, March 14, 2023​

​

… the electoral fraud of 2020 in the United States of America was also indispensable to prevent the confirmation of President Donald Trump, just as in 2013 the deep state and the deep church managed to get Pope Benedict XVI to resign and to elect a person pleasing to the New World Order, the Jesuit Jorge Mario Bergoglio. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò March 14, 2023​

​

We cannot be surprised that, after de-Christianizing the Western world, this elite considers Russia an enemy to be overthrown.​

​

Letter #74, 2023 Thurs Mar 16: Viganò - Inside The Vatican 230316^01​

​

The Russian Federation undeniably stands as the last bastion of civilization against barbarism, and gathers around it all those nations that do not intend to submit to the colonization of NATO, the United Nations, the World Health Organization, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and that heap of foundations that have as their purpose the indoctrination of the masses, the manipulation of information, the creation of “colored springs” to destabilize governments legitimately elected and sow chaos, wars and misery as instrumentum regni.​

​

Yes I hate this Mashmont Vigano Catholicism - It is like hating the Nazis in 1939.

END2304080908

Nice photo shopped pic above.

 

[Blues Man]

Himself ? Men can get abortions now ? ROTFLMBO

Idiot.

The actual issue goes far beyond abortion. Why is it you people only want to vote on controlling what women do to their bodies?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Men can get abortions now ?

No. Men like Herschel Walker knock girlfriends up and pay for abortions and then tell you they love Jesus and Trump so then it’s ok

 

[beagle9]

Idiot.

The actual issue goes far beyond abortion. Why is it you people only want to vote on controlling what women do to their bodies?

What else do you want people to vote on ? Name them if you think they are something the good citizen's should be voting to stop. Voting isn't just secluded to specific issue's, and the citizen's will vote on many issue's if they are put up for a vote.

 

[beagle9]

No. Men like Herschel Walker knock girlfriends up and pay for abortions and then tell you they love Jesus and Trump so then it’s ok

And he lost, so what's your point ?

 

[Blues Man]

What else do you want people to vote on ? Name them if you think they are something the good citizen's should be voting to stop. Voting isn't just secluded to specific issue's, and the citizen's will vote on many issue's if they are put up for a vote.

Why do you want to have people vote on the issues of personal choice? And I notice you people only want to vote on what a woman does to her own body but you never seem to want to put up to a vote what men do to theirs.

Why do you want a say in the decisions another person makes over their own body?

People can vote on things that are only relevant to the entire community , country or society as a whole.

Anything have to do with an individuals own body is not up for a vote because every single person has sole sovereignty over his or her own body and everything in it.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

And he lost, so what's your point ?

NFBW: The pregnancies he made and requested be aborted over his fuck and run lifetime apparently were done in private and legal and had absolutely no effect on the success or demise of western civilization.

The damage he could have done to all civilization on earth had he won would have been disastrous for western civilization. You have your priorities reversed and you need to straighten them out.

You are a traitor to liberal enlightenment civilization albeit not too significantly because your numbers were shy of the threshold under Trump to turn America into a MAGA autocracy and your extremist authoritarian supernaturalism is in decline. The decline has been sped up by Dobbs.

END2304081027