Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Why do you loons cheer legislation that allows murdering the most innocent of all? Freaking ghouls
Why do fools like you reject free contraception to all fertile females, and oppose age appropriate sexual education as part of a comprehensive health care curriculum? Are you stupid or brainwashed?
Why do fools like you constantly demand that others pay for things you decide you want?
Only fools oppose both contraception and abortion. I'm not one of those, you are. It is oxy - moronic of you to piss and moan, and be penny wise and pound foolish - but that defines you and other's like you
Only fools think they know anything and everything better than everyone else. Worse yet are the fools that think giving something to someone that someone else was forced to pay for is a solution to anything. Worse even than that are the fools who think killing a child is a solution to anything.
Only fools and authoritarians oppose age appropriate sex education, abortion in all cases and means to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, i.e. methods of contraception and means to prevent SDT's.
Stupid people believe "just say no" is an effective method of preventing pregnancy and disease, and you seem to fit the mold of a mentally retarded and fully brainwashed person.
If that's what the Legislature and the People want then so be it.The states have rights.Yeah, a free and open society where women are chattel and forced to undergo trans-vaginal ultrasounds One where if the majority decided that gays should be stoned to death, that'd be just peachyRedfish wants to live in a moral dictatorship that tells everyone else that they must live by his dictums.
Bullshit. I want a free and open society where all viewpoints are given equal time and the majority opinion is the one that is adopted by the society.
Who the fuck do you think you are that you can dictate what the entire society must believe? You sound like a fricken muslim.
You are the one thinking you can dictate what the entire society must believe. All we want is freedom to choose. You are the one trying to force some rigid orthodoxy upon prospective parents.Redfish wants to live in a moral dictatorship that tells everyone else that they must live by his dictums.
Bullshit. I want a free and open society where all viewpoints are given equal time and the majority opinion is the one that is adopted by the society.
Who the fuck do you think you are that you can dictate what the entire society must believe? You sound like a fricken muslim.
If they want to treat their women as chattel and they can get away with it having the women voters vote on it too, then sure !!
Abortion should be a choice of the state legislature not Wash DC.
10th Amendment.
Foolish. So the poor are out of luck and the well off can buy contraceptives, and when necessary hop on a flight to an enlightened state.
Damn, you people are dumb!
Negro contraception is not important enough to sacrifice true freedom for -- although a lot of Yankees did die to set them free back in 1861-1865.
Why do fools like you reject free contraception to all fertile females, and oppose age appropriate sexual education as part of a comprehensive health care curriculum? Are you stupid or brainwashed?
Why do fools like you constantly demand that others pay for things you decide you want?
Only fools oppose both contraception and abortion. I'm not one of those, you are. It is oxy - moronic of you to piss and moan, and be penny wise and pound foolish - but that defines you and other's like you
Only fools think they know anything and everything better than everyone else. Worse yet are the fools that think giving something to someone that someone else was forced to pay for is a solution to anything. Worse even than that are the fools who think killing a child is a solution to anything.
Only fools and authoritarians oppose age appropriate sex education, abortion in all cases and means to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, i.e. methods of contraception and means to prevent SDT's.
Stupid people believe "just say no" is an effective method of preventing pregnancy and disease, and you seem to fit the mold of a mentally retarded and fully brainwashed person.
No one is making the arguments you're implying the other side is making, nor the ones you're making yourself...
I take it your perfectly fine with abortion right up to the point of delivery? At least you'd be the most consistent person on the left making this argument.
If that's what the Legislature and the People want then so be it.The states have rights.Yeah, a free and open society where women are chattel and forced to undergo trans-vaginal ultrasounds One where if the majority decided that gays should be stoned to death, that'd be just peachyBullshit. I want a free and open society where all viewpoints are given equal time and the majority opinion is the one that is adopted by the society.
Who the fuck do you think you are that you can dictate what the entire society must believe? You sound like a fricken muslim.
You are the one thinking you can dictate what the entire society must believe. All we want is freedom to choose. You are the one trying to force some rigid orthodoxy upon prospective parents.Bullshit. I want a free and open society where all viewpoints are given equal time and the majority opinion is the one that is adopted by the society.
Who the fuck do you think you are that you can dictate what the entire society must believe? You sound like a fricken muslim.
If they want to treat their women as chattel and they can get away with it having the women voters vote on it too, then sure !!
Abortion should be a choice of the state legislature not Wash DC.
10th Amendment.
Foolish. So the poor are out of luck and the well off can buy contraceptives, and when necessary hop on a flight to an enlightened state.
Damn, you people are dumb!
Negro contraception is not important enough to sacrifice true freedom for -- although a lot of Yankees did die to set them free back in 1861-1865.
No--You're ignorant of he law. The U.S. Supreme court is there to protect the Individuals rights--while their is a 10th amendment called States Rights--States do not have the right to interfere into Individuals rights, and the U.S. Supreme court has made that VERY CLEAR in their decisions.
While we have a lot of IDIOT Republican governors that will sign off on sonogram requirements etc. they are always overturned by a Federal District court judge.
Example: Mike Pence who wasted Indiana's taxpayer dollars signing an abortion bill into law, which put the taxpayers of that state at risk for class action law suits, then they paid out money to defend his bill in court and it was immediately slapped down by a Federal District Court one year later. Here we have Mike Pence putting the taxpayers of his state at risk, over his "personal" religious beliefs. A governor's primary responsibilty is to be a good steward of taxpayer dollars and refuse to sign these kind of bills that put his constituents AT RISK.
Pence signs new abortion restrictions into law with a prayer
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/us/federal-judge-blocks-indiana-abortion-law.html?_r=0
One woman Republican Governor in Oklahoma refused to sign off on an state abortion bill because she understood the risk.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/21/us/oklahoma-governor-mary-fallin-vetoes-abortion-bill.html
In fact a Bush 1 appointee, a Federal District Court judge in Texas was interviewed--and stated he is tired of all these abortion bills that he is having to constantly overrule. When he was asked why do you suppose you get so many of them--he stated: Because most Republican state legilators are men, and they really have no business meddling into women's issues.
If that's what the Legislature and the People want then so be it.The states have rights.Yeah, a free and open society where women are chattel and forced to undergo trans-vaginal ultrasounds One where if the majority decided that gays should be stoned to death, that'd be just peachy
You are the one thinking you can dictate what the entire society must believe. All we want is freedom to choose. You are the one trying to force some rigid orthodoxy upon prospective parents.
If they want to treat their women as chattel and they can get away with it having the women voters vote on it too, then sure !!
Abortion should be a choice of the state legislature not Wash DC.
10th Amendment.
Foolish. So the poor are out of luck and the well off can buy contraceptives, and when necessary hop on a flight to an enlightened state.
Damn, you people are dumb!
Negro contraception is not important enough to sacrifice true freedom for -- although a lot of Yankees did die to set them free back in 1861-1865.
No--You're ignorant of he law. The U.S. Supreme court is there to protect the Individuals rights--while their is a 10th amendment called States Rights--States do not have the right to interfere into Individuals rights, and the U.S. Supreme court has made that VERY CLEAR in their decisions.
While we have a lot of IDIOT Republican governors that will sign off on sonogram requirements etc. they are always overturned by a Federal District court judge.
Example: Mike Pence who wasted Indiana's taxpayer dollars signing an abortion bill into law, which put the taxpayers of that state at risk for class action law suits, then they paid out money to defend his bill in court and it was immediately slapped down by a Federal District Court one year later. Here we have Mike Pence putting the taxpayers of his state at risk, over his "personal" religious beliefs. A governor's primary responsibilty is to be a good steward of taxpayer dollars and refuse to sign these kind of bills that put his constituents AT RISK.
Pence signs new abortion restrictions into law with a prayer
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/us/federal-judge-blocks-indiana-abortion-law.html?_r=0
One woman Republican Governor in Oklahoma refused to sign off on an state abortion bill because she understood the risk.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/21/us/oklahoma-governor-mary-fallin-vetoes-abortion-bill.html
In fact a Bush 1 appointee, a Federal District Court judge in Texas was interviewed--and stated he is tired of all these abortion bills that he is having to constantly overrule. When he was asked why do you suppose you get so many of them--he stated: Because most Republican state legilators are men, and they really have no business meddling into women's issues.
That's incorrect, according the constitution, the supreme courts function is to interpret the constitution in respect to incoming legislation. Which they have failed to do many times.
We're talking about the same SCOTUS who passed DOMA, then ruled for states rights over DOMA, then 2 years later contradicted their decisions saying states have no say in the matter.
You cannot claim one right to take away another's right. I can claim the second amendment to take away someone else's life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, freedom of speech, their own 2nd, privacy, 5th, 6th, 7th.
Why do you loons cheer legislation that allows murdering the most innocent of all? Freaking ghouls
Why do fools like you reject free contraception to all fertile females, and oppose age appropriate sexual education as part of a comprehensive health care curriculum? Are you stupid or brainwashed?
Why do fools like you constantly demand that others pay for things you decide you want?
Only fools oppose both contraception and abortion. I'm not one of those, you are. It is oxy - moronic of you to piss and moan, and be penny wise and pound foolish - but that defines you and other's like you
Only fools think they know anything and everything better than everyone else. Worse yet are the fools that think giving something to someone that someone else was forced to pay for is a solution to anything. Worse even than that are the fools who think killing a child is a solution to anything.
Only fools and authoritarians oppose age appropriate sex education, abortion in all cases and means to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, i.e. methods of contraception and means to prevent SDT's.
Stupid people believe "just say no" is an effective method of preventing pregnancy and disease, and you seem to fit the mold of a mentally retarded and fully brainwashed person.
Why do fools like you reject free contraception to all fertile females, and oppose age appropriate sexual education as part of a comprehensive health care curriculum? Are you stupid or brainwashed?
Why do fools like you constantly demand that others pay for things you decide you want?
Only fools oppose both contraception and abortion. I'm not one of those, you are. It is oxy - moronic of you to piss and moan, and be penny wise and pound foolish - but that defines you and other's like you
Only fools think they know anything and everything better than everyone else. Worse yet are the fools that think giving something to someone that someone else was forced to pay for is a solution to anything. Worse even than that are the fools who think killing a child is a solution to anything.
Only fools and authoritarians oppose age appropriate sex education, abortion in all cases and means to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, i.e. methods of contraception and means to prevent SDT's.
Stupid people believe "just say no" is an effective method of preventing pregnancy and disease, and you seem to fit the mold of a mentally retarded and fully brainwashed person.
Is it hard for you? I mean believing you're God and all? You seem to be such a pleasant little boy. We all realize that it can only be YOUR way and that YOU are the smartest little boy on the Board. Only fools think it's "authoritarian" to believe that one is responsible for his own progeny now run along and play with the other "good little Progressives".
We'll see ... .If that's what the Legislature and the People want then so be it.The states have rights.
If they want to treat their women as chattel and they can get away with it having the women voters vote on it too, then sure !!
Abortion should be a choice of the state legislature not Wash DC.
10th Amendment.
Foolish. So the poor are out of luck and the well off can buy contraceptives, and when necessary hop on a flight to an enlightened state.
Damn, you people are dumb!
Negro contraception is not important enough to sacrifice true freedom for -- although a lot of Yankees did die to set them free back in 1861-1865.
No--You're ignorant of he law. The U.S. Supreme court is there to protect the Individuals rights--while their is a 10th amendment called States Rights--States do not have the right to interfere into Individuals rights, and the U.S. Supreme court has made that VERY CLEAR in their decisions.
While we have a lot of IDIOT Republican governors that will sign off on sonogram requirements etc. they are always overturned by a Federal District court judge.
Example: Mike Pence who wasted Indiana's taxpayer dollars signing an abortion bill into law, which put the taxpayers of that state at risk for class action law suits, then they paid out money to defend his bill in court and it was immediately slapped down by a Federal District Court one year later. Here we have Mike Pence putting the taxpayers of his state at risk, over his "personal" religious beliefs. A governor's primary responsibilty is to be a good steward of taxpayer dollars and refuse to sign these kind of bills that put his constituents AT RISK.
Pence signs new abortion restrictions into law with a prayer
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/us/federal-judge-blocks-indiana-abortion-law.html?_r=0
One woman Republican Governor in Oklahoma refused to sign off on an state abortion bill because she understood the risk.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/21/us/oklahoma-governor-mary-fallin-vetoes-abortion-bill.html
In fact a Bush 1 appointee, a Federal District Court judge in Texas was interviewed--and stated he is tired of all these abortion bills that he is having to constantly overrule. When he was asked why do you suppose you get so many of them--he stated: Because most Republican state legilators are men, and they really have no business meddling into women's issues.
That's incorrect, according the constitution, the supreme courts function is to interpret the constitution in respect to incoming legislation. Which they have failed to do many times.
We're talking about the same SCOTUS who passed DOMA, then ruled for states rights over DOMA, then 2 years later contradicted their decisions saying states have no say in the matter.
You cannot claim one right to take away another's right. I can claim the second amendment to take away someone else's life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, freedom of speech, their own 2nd, privacy, 5th, 6th, 7th.
Roe V Wade is here to stay--You just heard it from Neil Gorsuch--it is PRECEDENT. It is also known as "A woman's RIGHT to choose."
States DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to oppress or interfere into Individual rights that are guaranteed by the U.S. Supreme court.
No sh!t Dick Tracy you certainly are not God.Why do fools like you constantly demand that others pay for things you decide you want?
Only fools oppose both contraception and abortion. I'm not one of those, you are. It is oxy - moronic of you to piss and moan, and be penny wise and pound foolish - but that defines you and other's like you
Only fools think they know anything and everything better than everyone else. Worse yet are the fools that think giving something to someone that someone else was forced to pay for is a solution to anything. Worse even than that are the fools who think killing a child is a solution to anything.
Only fools and authoritarians oppose age appropriate sex education, abortion in all cases and means to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, i.e. methods of contraception and means to prevent SDT's.
Stupid people believe "just say no" is an effective method of preventing pregnancy and disease, and you seem to fit the mold of a mentally retarded and fully brainwashed person.
Is it hard for you? I mean believing you're God and all? You seem to be such a pleasant little boy. We all realize that it can only be YOUR way and that YOU are the smartest little boy on the Board. Only fools think it's "authoritarian" to believe that one is responsible for his own progeny now run along and play with the other "good little Progressives".
No I am not GOD--but neither are YOU. You cannot legislate your personal version of moratility onto others. The U.S. Supreme Court is there to make sure you NEVER do.
Why do fools like you reject free contraception to all fertile females, and oppose age appropriate sexual education as part of a comprehensive health care curriculum? Are you stupid or brainwashed?
Why do fools like you constantly demand that others pay for things you decide you want?
Only fools oppose both contraception and abortion. I'm not one of those, you are. It is oxy - moronic of you to piss and moan, and be penny wise and pound foolish - but that defines you and other's like you
Only fools think they know anything and everything better than everyone else. Worse yet are the fools that think giving something to someone that someone else was forced to pay for is a solution to anything. Worse even than that are the fools who think killing a child is a solution to anything.
Only fools and authoritarians oppose age appropriate sex education, abortion in all cases and means to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, i.e. methods of contraception and means to prevent SDT's.
Stupid people believe "just say no" is an effective method of preventing pregnancy and disease, and you seem to fit the mold of a mentally retarded and fully brainwashed person.
No one is making the arguments you're implying the other side is making, nor the ones you're making yourself...
I take it your perfectly fine with abortion right up to the point of delivery? At least you'd be the most consistent person on the left making this argument.
Why do fools like you constantly demand that others pay for things you decide you want?
Only fools oppose both contraception and abortion. I'm not one of those, you are. It is oxy - moronic of you to piss and moan, and be penny wise and pound foolish - but that defines you and other's like you
Only fools think they know anything and everything better than everyone else. Worse yet are the fools that think giving something to someone that someone else was forced to pay for is a solution to anything. Worse even than that are the fools who think killing a child is a solution to anything.
Only fools and authoritarians oppose age appropriate sex education, abortion in all cases and means to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, i.e. methods of contraception and means to prevent SDT's.
Stupid people believe "just say no" is an effective method of preventing pregnancy and disease, and you seem to fit the mold of a mentally retarded and fully brainwashed person.
Is it hard for you? I mean believing you're God and all? You seem to be such a pleasant little boy. We all realize that it can only be YOUR way and that YOU are the smartest little boy on the Board. Only fools think it's "authoritarian" to believe that one is responsible for his own progeny now run along and play with the other "good little Progressives".
No I am not GOD--but neither are YOU. You cannot legislate your personal version of moratility onto others. The U.S. Supreme Court is there to make sure you NEVER do.
Well they forced us to buy car insurance, how's that working out. want to repeal it?I don't think so. There are two ways to look at Roberts's Obamacare vote. 1. It's a tax. Congress has the power to levy any tax it wants with very little restriction beyond only Jews or something. But to rule Obamacare was legal was going to bring the wrath of the right. Roberts is the chief, so he got the short straw.
Except the entire argument by the Obama Administration defending the ACA was that it was NOT a tax.
OR 2. He was just not going to have the SC drawn into a partisan politcal fight.
Agreed. He took the coward's way out, plain and simple, and set a very dangerous precedent down the road. Once it's been decided that the federal government can force you to buy a product where does that authority end?
Sak does not understand freedom and liberty, and Doc1 does not understand underwriting free contraception and age appropriate sexual education is a cost benefit in our society.
A fetus has no inherent right re: the Constitution. Such rights must come in legislation that does not conflict with inherent constitutional rights. Thus mother over fetus.
It does have inherent rights, as stated in our courts. Again homicide of a pregnant mother no matter the stage of pregnancy is a double homicide.... A fetus also has rights wether wanted or unwanted, depending on differing age state to state. This is inconsistency
And I do understand rights and freedoms, these cannot be granted positively to selective people by the government, they can only be taken away from the government, in a way that's stated government can make no law concerning such and such. You cannot claim that free contraception is a right, just as much as someone could claim a free car or house is a right. The government cannot grant offer positive rights to people since our rights do not come from the government, they come from the people imposed onto the government. Allowing certain people affording extra things to certain other people is not an equal right, nor does it make it a freedom.
Actual freedom disappears when you grant rights to one person over another, in any form. That takes away that persons freedom
If that's what the Legislature and the People want then so be it.The states have rights.
If they want to treat their women as chattel and they can get away with it having the women voters vote on it too, then sure !!
Abortion should be a choice of the state legislature not Wash DC.
10th Amendment.
Foolish. So the poor are out of luck and the well off can buy contraceptives, and when necessary hop on a flight to an enlightened state.
Damn, you people are dumb!
Negro contraception is not important enough to sacrifice true freedom for -- although a lot of Yankees did die to set them free back in 1861-1865.
No--You're ignorant of he law. The U.S. Supreme court is there to protect the Individuals rights--while their is a 10th amendment called States Rights--States do not have the right to interfere into Individuals rights, and the U.S. Supreme court has made that VERY CLEAR in their decisions.
While we have a lot of IDIOT Republican governors that will sign off on sonogram requirements etc. they are always overturned by a Federal District court judge.
Example: Mike Pence who wasted Indiana's taxpayer dollars signing an abortion bill into law, which put the taxpayers of that state at risk for class action law suits, then they paid out money to defend his bill in court and it was immediately slapped down by a Federal District Court one year later. Here we have Mike Pence putting the taxpayers of his state at risk, over his "personal" religious beliefs. A governor's primary responsibilty is to be a good steward of taxpayer dollars and refuse to sign these kind of bills that put his constituents AT RISK.
Pence signs new abortion restrictions into law with a prayer
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/us/federal-judge-blocks-indiana-abortion-law.html?_r=0
One woman Republican Governor in Oklahoma refused to sign off on an state abortion bill because she understood the risk.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/21/us/oklahoma-governor-mary-fallin-vetoes-abortion-bill.html
In fact a Bush 1 appointee, a Federal District Court judge in Texas was interviewed--and stated he is tired of all these abortion bills that he is having to constantly overrule. When he was asked why do you suppose you get so many of them--he stated: Because most Republican state legilators are men, and they really have no business meddling into women's issues.
That's incorrect, according the constitution, the supreme courts function is to interpret the constitution in respect to incoming legislation. Which they have failed to do many times.
We're talking about the same SCOTUS who passed DOMA, then ruled for states rights over DOMA, then 2 years later contradicted their decisions saying states have no say in the matter.
You cannot claim one right to take away another's right. I can claim the second amendment to take away someone else's life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, freedom of speech, their own 2nd, privacy, 5th, 6th, 7th.
Roe V Wade is here to stay--You just heard it from Neil Gorsuch--it is PRECEDENT. It is also known as "A woman's RIGHT to choose."
States DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to oppress or interfere into Individual rights that are guaranteed by the U.S. Supreme court.
Well they forced us to buy car insurance, how's that working out. want to repeal it?I don't think so. There are two ways to look at Roberts's Obamacare vote. 1. It's a tax. Congress has the power to levy any tax it wants with very little restriction beyond only Jews or something. But to rule Obamacare was legal was going to bring the wrath of the right. Roberts is the chief, so he got the short straw.
Except the entire argument by the Obama Administration defending the ACA was that it was NOT a tax.
OR 2. He was just not going to have the SC drawn into a partisan politcal fight.
Agreed. He took the coward's way out, plain and simple, and set a very dangerous precedent down the road. Once it's been decided that the federal government can force you to buy a product where does that authority end?
If that's what the Legislature and the People want then so be it.Foolish. So the poor are out of luck and the well off can buy contraceptives, and when necessary hop on a flight to an enlightened state.
Damn, you people are dumb!
Negro contraception is not important enough to sacrifice true freedom for -- although a lot of Yankees did die to set them free back in 1861-1865.
No--You're ignorant of he law. The U.S. Supreme court is there to protect the Individuals rights--while their is a 10th amendment called States Rights--States do not have the right to interfere into Individuals rights, and the U.S. Supreme court has made that VERY CLEAR in their decisions.
While we have a lot of IDIOT Republican governors that will sign off on sonogram requirements etc. they are always overturned by a Federal District court judge.
Example: Mike Pence who wasted Indiana's taxpayer dollars signing an abortion bill into law, which put the taxpayers of that state at risk for class action law suits, then they paid out money to defend his bill in court and it was immediately slapped down by a Federal District Court one year later. Here we have Mike Pence putting the taxpayers of his state at risk, over his "personal" religious beliefs. A governor's primary responsibilty is to be a good steward of taxpayer dollars and refuse to sign these kind of bills that put his constituents AT RISK.
Pence signs new abortion restrictions into law with a prayer
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/us/federal-judge-blocks-indiana-abortion-law.html?_r=0
One woman Republican Governor in Oklahoma refused to sign off on an state abortion bill because she understood the risk.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/21/us/oklahoma-governor-mary-fallin-vetoes-abortion-bill.html
In fact a Bush 1 appointee, a Federal District Court judge in Texas was interviewed--and stated he is tired of all these abortion bills that he is having to constantly overrule. When he was asked why do you suppose you get so many of them--he stated: Because most Republican state legilators are men, and they really have no business meddling into women's issues.
That's incorrect, according the constitution, the supreme courts function is to interpret the constitution in respect to incoming legislation. Which they have failed to do many times.
We're talking about the same SCOTUS who passed DOMA, then ruled for states rights over DOMA, then 2 years later contradicted their decisions saying states have no say in the matter.
You cannot claim one right to take away another's right. I can claim the second amendment to take away someone else's life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, freedom of speech, their own 2nd, privacy, 5th, 6th, 7th.
Roe V Wade is here to stay--You just heard it from Neil Gorsuch--it is PRECEDENT. It is also known as "A woman's RIGHT to choose."
States DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to oppress or interfere into Individual rights that are guaranteed by the U.S. Supreme court.
You are not using the term precedent correctly especially in the context of a confirmation hearing, which you also do not understand.
Also zero rights come from the Supreme Court. Rights come from the people in the form of the constitution, for which the Supreme Court misinterprets all the time. Dred Scott, 3/5, against women's right to vote, internment camps, kilo, are just some of the MANY misinterpretations, the Supreme Court is guilty of in the name political preferences.
Sak does not understand freedom and liberty, and Doc1 does not understand underwriting free contraception and age appropriate sexual education is a cost benefit in our society.
A fetus has no inherent right re: the Constitution. Such rights must come in legislation that does not conflict with inherent constitutional rights. Thus mother over fetus.
It does have inherent rights, as stated in our courts. Again homicide of a pregnant mother no matter the stage of pregnancy is a double homicide.... A fetus also has rights wether wanted or unwanted, depending on differing age state to state. This is inconsistency
And I do understand rights and freedoms, these cannot be granted positively to selective people by the government, they can only be taken away from the government, in a way that's stated government can make no law concerning such and such. You cannot claim that free contraception is a right, just as much as someone could claim a free car or house is a right. The government cannot grant offer positive rights to people since our rights do not come from the government, they come from the people imposed onto the government. Allowing certain people affording extra things to certain other people is not an equal right, nor does it make it a freedom.
Actual freedom disappears when you grant rights to one person over another, in any form. That takes away that persons freedom
Those courts are following state legislation, not conferring rights that do not otherwise exist independently.
The mother's pre-existent, constitutional rights to privacy supersede those of any rights by state legislatures given to the fetus.
Sak does not understand freedom and liberty, and Doc1 does not understand underwriting free contraception and age appropriate sexual education is a cost benefit in our society.
A fetus has no inherent right re: the Constitution. Such rights must come in legislation that does not conflict with inherent constitutional rights. Thus mother over fetus.
It does have inherent rights, as stated in our courts. Again homicide of a pregnant mother no matter the stage of pregnancy is a double homicide.... A fetus also has rights wether wanted or unwanted, depending on differing age state to state. This is inconsistency
And I do understand rights and freedoms, these cannot be granted positively to selective people by the government, they can only be taken away from the government, in a way that's stated government can make no law concerning such and such. You cannot claim that free contraception is a right, just as much as someone could claim a free car or house is a right. The government cannot grant offer positive rights to people since our rights do not come from the government, they come from the people imposed onto the government. Allowing certain people affording extra things to certain other people is not an equal right, nor does it make it a freedom.
Actual freedom disappears when you grant rights to one person over another, in any form. That takes away that persons freedom
Those courts are following state legislation, not conferring rights that do not otherwise exist independently.
The mother's pre-existent, constitutional rights to privacy supersede those of any rights by state legislatures given to the fetus.
No they don't, those "rights" of privacy are still limited to protect life. And each state has their own constitution pertaining to their jurisdiction (their state), all of them have to adhere to the BOR (supreme law of the land), and all of them recognize life of fetus is constitutionally protected in the case of homicide. Anytime you get into one persons "rights" superseding another persons actual rights (let's be serious we're talking right to privacy, superseding right to life...which also violates the fetus right to privacy), you have now ventured into a territory where were violating the constitution/BOR, as we did with interment camps, dred Scott, 3/5s, Jim Crow, etc, etc, one groups rights over another.
You're the one wanting the government to tell you what you must do. You're the one who wants women to lose their freedom now that your ilk is in charge. You are the one wanting to live in a dictatorship.You are not judge of any of that. Our judiciary makes those decisions.When Redfish and Chuz get asked such questions, this is the look you get in return:
the central question is: is an unborn child a human being? if yes, then abortion is murder, if no, then its a medical procedure.
We disagree on that central question. Will we ever agree, probably not.
WRONG WRONG WRONG. When a civilization has an issue where there are differing opinions and beliefs, they vote. Judges do NOT decide what is moral and acceptable behavior, civilization as a whole makes those decisions.
WTF is wrong with you, why to you want to live in a dictatorship? Why do you want the government telling you what you must believe and how you must live?
Think, fool. your liberal ideology may not always hold sway. Are you willing to deal with giving up your freedoms when your guys aren't in charge?
Women do have freedom, and with freedom comes responsibility of the choices you make with your freedom. If they choose, with that freedom, to participate in the act of reproduction without using contraception, reproduction can bring about a baby. Complaining about successfully reproducing after participating in reproduction irresponsibly hardly sounds like a fight against tyranny. Especially since contraception is the easiest, cheapest, effective, safe, and accessible as it has ever been in human history.
And the argument the left cannot successfully make, is the one of is it life or not life. Since a fetus is its own human being with its own distinct 46 chromosomes, just at a different stage of life. No one ever says the caterpillar is not the same species as its cocoon or butterfly counterpart, or that it isn't life. That's just ridiculous. A fetus meets all the same requirements of defining life we all do. And according to the DOI, we are endowed with certain UNALIENABLE rights, of these LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
The only change the left is actually arguing on, is the whether the fetus is wanted or unwanted. Since no one can claim a right to privacy by violating another's. Especially since we define a Fetus as life in our courts in the event of a homicide of a pregnant mother, that becomes a double homicide.
Sak does not understand freedom and liberty, and Doc1 does not understand underwriting free contraception and age appropriate sexual education is a cost benefit in our society.
A fetus has no inherent right re: the Constitution. Such rights must come in legislation that does not conflict with inherent constitutional rights. Thus mother over fetus.
It does have inherent rights, as stated in our courts. Again homicide of a pregnant mother no matter the stage of pregnancy is a double homicide.... A fetus also has rights wether wanted or unwanted, depending on differing age state to state. This is inconsistency
And I do understand rights and freedoms, these cannot be granted positively to selective people by the government, they can only be taken away from the government, in a way that's stated government can make no law concerning such and such. You cannot claim that free contraception is a right, just as much as someone could claim a free car or house is a right. The government cannot grant offer positive rights to people since our rights do not come from the government, they come from the people imposed onto the government. Allowing certain people affording extra things to certain other people is not an equal right, nor does it make it a freedom.
Actual freedom disappears when you grant rights to one person over another, in any form. That takes away that persons freedom
Those courts are following state legislation, not conferring rights that do not otherwise exist independently.
The mother's pre-existent, constitutional rights to privacy supersede those of any rights by state legislatures given to the fetus.
No they don't, those "rights" of privacy are still limited to protect life. And each state has their own constitution pertaining to their jurisdiction (their state), all of them have to adhere to the BOR (supreme law of the land), and all of them recognize life of fetus is constitutionally protected in the case of homicide. Anytime you get into one persons "rights" superseding another persons actual rights (let's be serious we're talking right to privacy, superseding right to life...which also violates the fetus right to privacy), you have now ventured into a territory where were violating the constitution/BOR, as we did with interment camps, dred Scott, 3/5s, Jim Crow, etc, etc, one groups rights over another.
Sweet baby Jesus are you really this Stupid:--this is your personal opinion--while the word Privacy is not written in the Constitution--the U.S. Supreme court stated it does exist in 1965--and ruled against Connecticut over it. That is also PRECEDENT. People have a RIGHT to privacy. And YOU don't have the fucking right to determine what PRIVACY you're going to allow.
Griswold v. Connecticut - Wikipedia
