the hypocrisy of libs (guns and abortion)

[JoeB131]

I know that millions of women become distraught after miscarrying. A fetus has a beating heart, unique DNA, and cells that know what to become. Do the pro-choice people have a heart like the fetus does. The baby can feel pain between 12-20 weeks gestation (variations due to the fact that no one is the same). All body systems are formed by at least 12 weeks, they just need to mature. The gender of the baby is predetermined at conception, as well as all other physical and characteristics. The heart starts to beat at around 18 days after conception and around 21 days afterward, starts pumping blood throughout the underdeveloped circulatory system.

so what? It still isn't viable at that point.

Women have a choice. To rob a child of a future that can better the world or put the child up for adoption if they feel they really can't be a parent.
Adoption is always, always a better option. It not only allows the child to grow and develop in the womb and become a contributing member of society, but also provides another family with the opportunity to be parents. Win, win.

First, there aren't enough adoptive parents to handle all the unwanted babies.

Second, We can't find jobs for all the "contributing members of society" now.

 

[bodecea]

Libs want law abiding citizens to give up their guns, which are protected by the Constitution and B.O.R. Gun owners, 99% of whom are law abiding want to protect their families, their homes and their BODIES from attack/criminals/scumbags etc. Libs want to force gun owners to lose their gun rights.

Libs want women to have control over their bodies and make their own decisions. They say that no one has the right to tell them what to do. Libs say no one should force a woman to not abort.

Can you see the issue here?

I am a liberal and I don't want anyone to give up their guns. I have many guns myself.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The hypocrisy with regard to guns and abortion belongs to solely to most conservatives, where with the former the states have no right to violate the Second Amendment, and the will of the people may be ignored by the courts; whereas with the latter, states have the right to violate a woman's right to privacy and the courts have no authority to invalidate the will of the people.

Conservatives can't have it both ways: if 'states' rights' allow the states to ban abortion, then 'states' rights' must allow the states to ban firearms.

Our rights are unalienable, sucks to be you.

This makes no sense whatsoever.

You and many others on the right seek to deny women their inalienable right to privacy, claiming residents of the states are authorized to do so; but when the residents of a state seek to place restrictions on the Second Amendment right, you and many other conservatives claim residents of the states lack the authority to do so – this is inconsistent, it's hypocrisy on the part of conservatives.

In order for conservatives to be consistent on these issues, they must give equal respect to both a woman's right to privacy and the right of citizens to possess firearms.

 

[Mertex]

Libs want law abiding citizens to give up their guns, which are protected by the Constitution and B.O.R. Gun owners, 99% of whom are law abiding want to protect their families, their homes and their BODIES from attack/criminals/scumbags etc. Libs want to force gun owners to lose their gun rights.

Libs want women to have control over their bodies and make their own decisions. They say that no one has the right to tell them what to do. Libs say no one should force a woman to not abort.

Can you see the issue here?

Sure, the issue is, why do people like you insist on having the right to own guns while insisting that a woman must not have the right to an abortion?

The 2nd amendment gives us the right to own guns, it also gives us the right to life, not the right to kill the unborn. Both are Constitutional.
Killing your own offspring is not in the Constitution.

Wrong....
The Court held in this 1973 case that a woman’s Fourteenth Amendment right to privacy protected her choice to have an abortion.

 

[ninja007]

Libs want law abiding citizens to give up their guns, which are protected by the Constitution and B.O.R. Gun owners, 99% of whom are law abiding want to protect their families, their homes and their BODIES from attack/criminals/scumbags etc. Libs want to force gun owners to lose their gun rights.

Libs want women to have control over their bodies and make their own decisions. They say that no one has the right to tell them what to do. Libs say no one should force a woman to not abort.

Can you see the issue here?

Sure, the issue is, why do people like you insist on having the right to own guns while insisting that a woman must not have the right to an abortion?

The 2nd amendment gives us the right to own guns, it also gives us the right to life, not the right to kill the unborn. Both are Constitutional.
Killing your own offspring is not in the Constitution.

Fetuses are not offspring. Roe v Wade is case law giving a woman the right to an abortion. If you don't like how the Constitution works,

leave.

yes- if you don't like gun rights, leave.

 

[Disir]

You have over 100,000 needing to be adopted. Now. They aren't all clean, white newborns. That isn't the problem of the government. What gives?

So, ya. Again. Approximately 2% of the population only goes through a home study. Americans aren't all about adoption.

The stupid immoral Libtards that support abortion don't give a crap about adoption. You are arguing that maybe (and it is a maybe) if we can't find adoptive families for 100% then we should continue with killing the children on demand for the sake of convenience.

Don't you think it would be the moral thing to do to require that the parents of a child seek adoption before killing the child? If not what is wrong with you?

How about no abortion and if you can't find somebody to take the child then you have to take responsibility yourself? That way the child is not deprived of its life because of the irresponsibility of the parents.

I really have a hard time understanding the zeal of the Libtards to support the massive killing of American children. It is against the nature of us humans to kill our children.

I think it is all to simply appease the filthy Feminazi branch of the Libtard despicable special interest groups.

Grow up. The world will operate perfectly as soon as I finish taking over the universe.



It's going to take a minute. It's just taking a little bit longer than I anticipated.

In the meantime, however, there are 100,000 kids up for adoption so let's not bullshit people by lying outright that there are people breaking down the doors. They aren't and it is a piece of information that women are faced with when they are trying to decide what the right choice for them is. It is a huge factor.

You insist on lying and when that doesn't work you lash out and call them murderers and then blame feminism, the government, and liberals.

 

[Disir]

You have over 100,000 kids in foster care now that are waiting to be adopted. You better get busy with that Americans want to adopt kids thingy.

You might want to go over her alleged facts. They are far from accurate.

How many of these posters who are against freedom and the Constitution have adopted an unwanted baby?

How many posted in favor of shooting Blacks?

That's an interesting question.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Libs want law abiding citizens to give up their guns, which are protected by the Constitution and B.O.R. Gun owners, 99% of whom are law abiding want to protect their families, their homes and their BODIES from attack/criminals/scumbags etc. Libs want to force gun owners to lose their gun rights.

Libs want women to have control over their bodies and make their own decisions. They say that no one has the right to tell them what to do. Libs say no one should force a woman to not abort.

Can you see the issue here?

Sure, the issue is, why do people like you insist on having the right to own guns while insisting that a woman must not have the right to an abortion?

And what about the right of the child in the womb?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Libs want law abiding citizens to give up their guns, which are protected by the Constitution and B.O.R. Gun owners, 99% of whom are law abiding want to protect their families, their homes and their BODIES from attack/criminals/scumbags etc. Libs want to force gun owners to lose their gun rights.

Libs want women to have control over their bodies and make their own decisions. They say that no one has the right to tell them what to do. Libs say no one should force a woman to not abort.

Can you see the issue here?

Sure, the issue is, why do people like you insist on having the right to own guns while insisting that a woman must not have the right to an abortion?

And what about the right of the child in the womb?

The fetus is not a person and therefore has no rights.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Libs want law abiding citizens to give up their guns, which are protected by the Constitution and B.O.R. Gun owners, 99% of whom are law abiding want to protect their families, their homes and their BODIES from attack/criminals/scumbags etc. Libs want to force gun owners to lose their gun rights.

Libs want women to have control over their bodies and make their own decisions. They say that no one has the right to tell them what to do. Libs say no one should force a woman to not abort.

Can you see the issue here?

Sure, the issue is, why do people like you insist on having the right to own guns while insisting that a woman must not have the right to an abortion?

And what about the right of the child in the womb?

The fetus is not a person and therefore has no rights.

Correct, reflecting the wisdom of privacy rights jurisprudence.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It is comical to see the Libtard hypocrites say they want to ban all firearms "for the children" but then these shitheads justify the killing of a million American children each year for the sake of convenience.

Then they wonder why we call them Moon Bats.

Fetuses aren't children. Even women who have miscarriages in the early stages of a pregnancy do not freak out the way that they do when they lose a child.

Miscarriages end up in the medical waste bin. They don't get funerals.

I know that millions of women become distraught after miscarrying. A fetus has a beating heart, unique DNA, and cells that know what to become. Do the pro-choice people have a heart like the fetus does. The baby can feel pain between 12-20 weeks gestation (variations due to the fact that no one is the same). All body systems are formed by at least 12 weeks, they just need to mature. The gender of the baby is predetermined at conception, as well as all other physical and characteristics. The heart starts to beat at around 18 days after conception and around 21 days afterward, starts pumping blood throughout the underdeveloped circulatory system.

Women have a choice. To rob a child of a future that can better the world or put the child up for adoption if they feel they really can't be a parent.
Adoption is always, always a better option. It not only allows the child to grow and develop in the womb and become a contributing member of society, but also provides another family with the opportunity to be parents. Win, win.

What, then, is your solution to end the practice that comports with the Constitution and its case law?

Most everyone wants to bring an end to abortion that also safeguards citizens' protected liberties, where a woman is not compelled by the state to give birth against her will.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Libs want law abiding citizens to give up their guns, which are protected by the Constitution and B.O.R. Gun owners, 99% of whom are law abiding want to protect their families, their homes and their BODIES from attack/criminals/scumbags etc. Libs want to force gun owners to lose their gun rights.

Libs want women to have control over their bodies and make their own decisions. They say that no one has the right to tell them what to do. Libs say no one should force a woman to not abort.

Can you see the issue here?

Sure, the issue is, why do people like you insist on having the right to own guns while insisting that a woman must not have the right to an abortion?

And what about the right of the child in the womb?

The fetus is not a person and therefore has no rights.

Correct, reflecting the wisdom of privacy rights jurisprudence.

I see. Two more against privacy rights.

 

[Disir]

So, you have nothing but a daily drive by drop some shit stuff.

 

[JoeB131]

And what about the right of the child in the womb?

it's not a child and it doesn't have any.

 

[peach174]

You have over 100,000 needing to be adopted. Now. They aren't all clean, white newborns. That isn't the problem of the government. What gives?

So, ya. Again. Approximately 2% of the population only goes through a home study. Americans aren't all about adoption.

The stupid immoral Libtards that support abortion don't give a crap about adoption. You are arguing that maybe (and it is a maybe) if we can't find adoptive families for 100% then we should continue with killing the children on demand for the sake of convenience.

Don't you think it would be the moral thing to do to require that the parents of a child seek adoption before killing the child? If not what is wrong with you?

How about no abortion and if you can't find somebody to take the child then you have to take responsibility yourself? That way the child is not deprived of its life because of the irresponsibility of the parents.

I really have a hard time understanding the zeal of the Libtards to support the massive killing of American children. It is against the nature of us humans to kill our children.

I think it is all to simply appease the filthy Feminazi branch of the Libtard despicable special interest groups.

Grow up. The world will operate perfectly as soon as I finish taking over the universe.



It's going to take a minute. It's just taking a little bit longer than I anticipated.

In the meantime, however, there are 100,000 kids up for adoption so let's not bullshit people by lying outright that there are people breaking down the doors. They aren't and it is a piece of information that women are faced with when they are trying to decide what the right choice for them is. It is a huge factor.

You insist on lying and when that doesn't work you lash out and call them murderers and then blame feminism, the government, and liberals.

We have so many regulations on adoption from the left, who has made adoption for American children pretty much impossible to adopt here. Most are going around the world to adopt.

 

[Disir]

You have over 100,000 needing to be adopted. Now. They aren't all clean, white newborns. That isn't the problem of the government. What gives?

So, ya. Again. Approximately 2% of the population only goes through a home study. Americans aren't all about adoption.

The stupid immoral Libtards that support abortion don't give a crap about adoption. You are arguing that maybe (and it is a maybe) if we can't find adoptive families for 100% then we should continue with killing the children on demand for the sake of convenience.

Don't you think it would be the moral thing to do to require that the parents of a child seek adoption before killing the child? If not what is wrong with you?

How about no abortion and if you can't find somebody to take the child then you have to take responsibility yourself? That way the child is not deprived of its life because of the irresponsibility of the parents.

I really have a hard time understanding the zeal of the Libtards to support the massive killing of American children. It is against the nature of us humans to kill our children.

I think it is all to simply appease the filthy Feminazi branch of the Libtard despicable special interest groups.

Grow up. The world will operate perfectly as soon as I finish taking over the universe.



It's going to take a minute. It's just taking a little bit longer than I anticipated.

In the meantime, however, there are 100,000 kids up for adoption so let's not bullshit people by lying outright that there are people breaking down the doors. They aren't and it is a piece of information that women are faced with when they are trying to decide what the right choice for them is. It is a huge factor.

You insist on lying and when that doesn't work you lash out and call them murderers and then blame feminism, the government, and liberals.

We have so many regulations on adoption from the left, who has made adoption for American children pretty much impossible to adopt here. Most are going around the world to adopt.

That is a lie. Who knew passing a criminal background check and holding down a job and providing a bedroom with furniture was going to hold someone back from adopting?

 

[peach174]

You have over 100,000 needing to be adopted. Now. They aren't all clean, white newborns. That isn't the problem of the government. What gives?

So, ya. Again. Approximately 2% of the population only goes through a home study. Americans aren't all about adoption.

The stupid immoral Libtards that support abortion don't give a crap about adoption. You are arguing that maybe (and it is a maybe) if we can't find adoptive families for 100% then we should continue with killing the children on demand for the sake of convenience.

Don't you think it would be the moral thing to do to require that the parents of a child seek adoption before killing the child? If not what is wrong with you?

How about no abortion and if you can't find somebody to take the child then you have to take responsibility yourself? That way the child is not deprived of its life because of the irresponsibility of the parents.

I really have a hard time understanding the zeal of the Libtards to support the massive killing of American children. It is against the nature of us humans to kill our children.

I think it is all to simply appease the filthy Feminazi branch of the Libtard despicable special interest groups.

Grow up. The world will operate perfectly as soon as I finish taking over the universe.



It's going to take a minute. It's just taking a little bit longer than I anticipated.

In the meantime, however, there are 100,000 kids up for adoption so let's not bullshit people by lying outright that there are people breaking down the doors. They aren't and it is a piece of information that women are faced with when they are trying to decide what the right choice for them is. It is a huge factor.

You insist on lying and when that doesn't work you lash out and call them murderers and then blame feminism, the government, and liberals.

We have so many regulations on adoption from the left, who has made adoption for American children pretty much impossible to adopt here. Most are going around the world to adopt.

That is a lie. Who knew passing a criminal background check and holding down a job and providing a bedroom with furniture was going to hold someone back from adopting?

No it is not a lie.
People adopt from overseas because it is easier. In the United States, the system is set up to make it as difficult as possible to adopt a child, not by keeping a child in the family but by keeping it in the "system"
When each child needs their own room and the couple has to make a lot of money. The overly strict rules makes it almost impossible to adopt.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

And what about the right of the child in the womb?

it's not a child and it doesn't have any.

No, there is life and its occurring. Does dismissing it as a blob clear the conscience?

 

[Disir]

You have over 100,000 needing to be adopted. Now. They aren't all clean, white newborns. That isn't the problem of the government. What gives?

So, ya. Again. Approximately 2% of the population only goes through a home study. Americans aren't all about adoption.

The stupid immoral Libtards that support abortion don't give a crap about adoption. You are arguing that maybe (and it is a maybe) if we can't find adoptive families for 100% then we should continue with killing the children on demand for the sake of convenience.

Don't you think it would be the moral thing to do to require that the parents of a child seek adoption before killing the child? If not what is wrong with you?

How about no abortion and if you can't find somebody to take the child then you have to take responsibility yourself? That way the child is not deprived of its life because of the irresponsibility of the parents.

I really have a hard time understanding the zeal of the Libtards to support the massive killing of American children. It is against the nature of us humans to kill our children.

I think it is all to simply appease the filthy Feminazi branch of the Libtard despicable special interest groups.

Grow up. The world will operate perfectly as soon as I finish taking over the universe.



It's going to take a minute. It's just taking a little bit longer than I anticipated.

In the meantime, however, there are 100,000 kids up for adoption so let's not bullshit people by lying outright that there are people breaking down the doors. They aren't and it is a piece of information that women are faced with when they are trying to decide what the right choice for them is. It is a huge factor.

You insist on lying and when that doesn't work you lash out and call them murderers and then blame feminism, the government, and liberals.

We have so many regulations on adoption from the left, who has made adoption for American children pretty much impossible to adopt here. Most are going around the world to adopt.

That is a lie. Who knew passing a criminal background check and holding down a job and providing a bedroom with furniture was going to hold someone back from adopting?

No it is not a lie.
People adopt from overseas because it is easier. In the United States, the system is set up to make it as difficult as possible to adopt a child, not by keeping a child in the family but by keeping it in the "system"
When each child needs their own room and the couple has to make a lot of money. The overly strict rules makes it almost impossible to adopt.

Proof?

 

[peach174]

The stupid immoral Libtards that support abortion don't give a crap about adoption. You are arguing that maybe (and it is a maybe) if we can't find adoptive families for 100% then we should continue with killing the children on demand for the sake of convenience.

Don't you think it would be the moral thing to do to require that the parents of a child seek adoption before killing the child? If not what is wrong with you?

How about no abortion and if you can't find somebody to take the child then you have to take responsibility yourself? That way the child is not deprived of its life because of the irresponsibility of the parents.

I really have a hard time understanding the zeal of the Libtards to support the massive killing of American children. It is against the nature of us humans to kill our children.

I think it is all to simply appease the filthy Feminazi branch of the Libtard despicable special interest groups.

Grow up. The world will operate perfectly as soon as I finish taking over the universe.



It's going to take a minute. It's just taking a little bit longer than I anticipated.

In the meantime, however, there are 100,000 kids up for adoption so let's not bullshit people by lying outright that there are people breaking down the doors. They aren't and it is a piece of information that women are faced with when they are trying to decide what the right choice for them is. It is a huge factor.

You insist on lying and when that doesn't work you lash out and call them murderers and then blame feminism, the government, and liberals.

We have so many regulations on adoption from the left, who has made adoption for American children pretty much impossible to adopt here. Most are going around the world to adopt.

That is a lie. Who knew passing a criminal background check and holding down a job and providing a bedroom with furniture was going to hold someone back from adopting?

No it is not a lie.
People adopt from overseas because it is easier. In the United States, the system is set up to make it as difficult as possible to adopt a child, not by keeping a child in the family but by keeping it in the "system"
When each child needs their own room and the couple has to make a lot of money. The overly strict rules makes it almost impossible to adopt.

Proof?

Look at each individual States.
The Courts and all of things that you have to go through. It has become ridiculous.
In other countries it is much easier and the courts are not as involved or as complicated.
Child Adoption Laws Arizona