Trump is currently addressing the March against Women's Reproductive Rights

[Harpy Eagle]

So the right of an individual to own a gun isn't a constitutional right, it's just a mere interpretation made by unelected judges?

The right to bear arms is stated specifically in the Constitution. Please find me the part of the constitution where killing a human being is listed as a right.

Find me science that says an unborn fetus is a human being.

No, it isn't. The proper term would be "They say that the Constitution says otherwise"

For the Constitution to say it the document would have to be amended and the words "Abortion is a right" or something similar would have to be added.

So the right of an individual to own a gun isn't a constitutional right, it's just a mere interpretation made by unelected judges?

The right to bear arms is stated specifically in the Constitution. Please find me the part of the constitution where killing a human being is listed as a right.

Since the Constitution affords NO rights of personhood, citizenship, or any such other relevant condition to fetuses,
the right to terminate a fetus has nothing to do with killing humans as far as the law of the land is concerned.

it says nothing about having the right to terminate one either, and is thus left up to the State legislatures.

No it gives persons the right of privacy. The states ought not be allowed to interfere in a woman's right to the private act of abortion because there is no constitutional protection of what is being aborted.

what is being aborted is a human, what else could it possibly be? Do you think the thing being aborted is a frog?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No, it isn't. The proper term would be "They say that the Constitution says otherwise"

For the Constitution to say it the document would have to be amended and the words "Abortion is a right" or something similar would have to be added.

So the right of an individual to own a gun isn't a constitutional right, it's just a mere interpretation made by unelected judges?

The right to bear arms is stated specifically in the Constitution. Please find me the part of the constitution where killing a human being is listed as a right.

Find me science that says an unborn fetus is a human being.

What else can it be? Is it a chicken? or is is a penguin? or is is frog? NOPE the only possible answer is that the results of two humans mating is that they created another human.

Science tells us that each kind begets its own.

When i eat my fresh chicken eggs in the morning for breakfast, am i eating eggs or chickens?
Look, i understand the emotion in this, but calling them human beings isnt correct. They dont even meet the requirements for a living organism, much less a human.

you are eating a chicken egg.

Please explain to me how a fetus does not meet the requirements for a living organism.

When does the magic happen that transforms the non-human into a human? Are you a big Harry Potter fan?

 

[martybegan]

So the right of an individual to own a gun isn't a constitutional right, it's just a mere interpretation made by unelected judges?

The right to bear arms is stated specifically in the Constitution. Please find me the part of the constitution where killing a human being is listed as a right.

Find me science that says an unborn fetus is a human being.

No, it isn't. The proper term would be "They say that the Constitution says otherwise"

For the Constitution to say it the document would have to be amended and the words "Abortion is a right" or something similar would have to be added.

So the right of an individual to own a gun isn't a constitutional right, it's just a mere interpretation made by unelected judges?

The right to bear arms is stated specifically in the Constitution. Please find me the part of the constitution where killing a human being is listed as a right.

Since the Constitution affords NO rights of personhood, citizenship, or any such other relevant condition to fetuses,
the right to terminate a fetus has nothing to do with killing humans as far as the law of the land is concerned.

it says nothing about having the right to terminate one either, and is thus left up to the State legislatures.

No it gives persons the right of privacy. The states ought not be allowed to interfere in a woman's right to the private act of abortion because there is no constitutional protection of what is being aborted.

Where does the constitution say we have a right to "privacy"?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Supreme Court and its decisions are part of the Constitution you idiot.

No they are not. they are merely interpretations of the Constitution. To be part of the document you have to use the amendment process.

A Supreme Court decision is every bit part of the Constitution. They are binding and the supreme law of the land.

Wrong, as usual.

Gee, what an argument.

OK, I'll dumb it down for you, SC rulings can be overturned by the courts, constitutional amendments cannot. A ruling does not become part of the constitution.

The Supreme Court decides what the Constitution means. Certainly the meaning of the Constitution is part of what the Constitution is. How can it not be?

 

[martybegan]

Judicial review doesn't mean their decisions become part of the Constitution. Only the Amendment process can add or subtract things from the document.

And Judicial review doesn't mean making shit up as you go along, which is what was done with Scott, Plessey, Roe, and Obergfell.

Interpretation is what it is.

You want to eliminate the Supreme Court? How would that work?

Where did I ever say that? What I want is a Court that is a strict constructionist and follows it's Constitutional mandate.

So why are ranting about 'unelected judges' in a prejorative manner?

Because the current incarnations of the Court have decided they get to legislate, not interpret.

Legislating from the bench is a meaningless catch phrase.

No its the crux of the problem.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The right to bear arms is stated specifically in the Constitution. Please find me the part of the constitution where killing a human being is listed as a right.

Find me science that says an unborn fetus is a human being.

So the right of an individual to own a gun isn't a constitutional right, it's just a mere interpretation made by unelected judges?

The right to bear arms is stated specifically in the Constitution. Please find me the part of the constitution where killing a human being is listed as a right.

Since the Constitution affords NO rights of personhood, citizenship, or any such other relevant condition to fetuses,
the right to terminate a fetus has nothing to do with killing humans as far as the law of the land is concerned.

it says nothing about having the right to terminate one either, and is thus left up to the State legislatures.

No it gives persons the right of privacy. The states ought not be allowed to interfere in a woman's right to the private act of abortion because there is no constitutional protection of what is being aborted.

Where does the constitution say we have a right to "privacy"?

lol, a libertarian wants to convince me I have no privacy rights. lol too funny.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Republicans are marching for life. Meanwhile they still haven't secured CHIP funding.

They care about about a child until they are born.

Not this tired and worn out shit again

Well, it is an accurate statement.

I'm not a republican but we have three adopted children....sit down

How does that change the facts about republicans?

It's a worn out talking point. Here's a thought maybe the left should stop running their pie holes and step up and start adopting? Instead they want the government to take care of them. Put your goddamn money where your mouths are...better yet learn some damn responsibility

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Find me science that says an unborn fetus is a human being.

The right to bear arms is stated specifically in the Constitution. Please find me the part of the constitution where killing a human being is listed as a right.

Since the Constitution affords NO rights of personhood, citizenship, or any such other relevant condition to fetuses,
the right to terminate a fetus has nothing to do with killing humans as far as the law of the land is concerned.

it says nothing about having the right to terminate one either, and is thus left up to the State legislatures.

No it gives persons the right of privacy. The states ought not be allowed to interfere in a woman's right to the private act of abortion because there is no constitutional protection of what is being aborted.

Where does the constitution say we have a right to "privacy"?

lol, a libertarian wants to convince me I have no privacy rights. lol too funny.

Privacy does not include ending the life of another human.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Interpretation is what it is.

You want to eliminate the Supreme Court? How would that work?

Where did I ever say that? What I want is a Court that is a strict constructionist and follows it's Constitutional mandate.

So why are ranting about 'unelected judges' in a prejorative manner?

Because the current incarnations of the Court have decided they get to legislate, not interpret.

Legislating from the bench is a meaningless catch phrase.

No its the crux of the problem.

SCOTUS decisions are called 'case LAW". It's all legislating from the bench.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Republicans are marching for life. Meanwhile they still haven't secured CHIP funding.

They care about about a child until they are born.

Not this tired and worn out shit again

Well, it is an accurate statement.

I'm not a republican but we have three adopted children....sit down

How does that change the facts about republicans?

It's a worn out talking point. Here's a thought maybe the left should stop running their pie holes and step up and start adopting? Instead they want the government to take care of them. Put your goddamn money where your mouths are...better yet learn some damn responsibility

I agree the left is just as bad as the right in this area. Why are you whining to me about it?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Republicans are marching for life. Meanwhile they still haven't secured CHIP funding.

They care about about a child until they are born.

Not this tired and worn out shit again

Well, it is an accurate statement.

I'm not a republican but we have three adopted children....sit down

How does that change the facts about republicans?

It's a worn out talking point. Here's a thought maybe the left should stop running their pie holes and step up and start adopting? Instead they want the government to take care of them. Put your goddamn money where your mouths are...better yet learn some damn responsibility

You want us to adopt fetuses?

 

[g5000]

Donald Trump: "I'm Very Pro Choice," Partial Birth Abortion is OK

^^^^ People are allowed to change their mind and opinion on any issue, abortion is one, someone might be Pro Choice and then think about that and decide it's wrong and then become Pro Life, The Donald like everyone else is allowed to change his mind on issues.

No, Trump just says what the rubes want to hear.

When he was questioned about his alleged pro life beliefs, it was obvious from his responses he had never had a pro-life thought in his head in his entire life.

He gave the responses a liberal would give who thinks they know how pro-life people would answer, and he totally fucked it up.


Trump is still pro-choice, and always has been.

Before:

I'm very pro-choice. Right up to the ninth month of pregnancy. I have New York values.

After:

Those bitches who abort should go to prison.


Is handed a note:

Things are unclear.


Is handed another note:

D. The woman is a victim. Final answer.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

No they are not. they are merely interpretations of the Constitution. To be part of the document you have to use the amendment process.

A Supreme Court decision is every bit part of the Constitution. They are binding and the supreme law of the land.

Wrong, as usual.

Gee, what an argument.

OK, I'll dumb it down for you, SC rulings can be overturned by the courts, constitutional amendments cannot. A ruling does not become part of the constitution.

The Supreme Court decides what the Constitution means. Certainly the meaning of the Constitution is part of what the Constitution is. How can it not be?

Supreme court rulings can be overturned... they do not become part of the constitution. Geeze, civics 101.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Not this tired and worn out shit again

Well, it is an accurate statement.

I'm not a republican but we have three adopted children....sit down

How does that change the facts about republicans?

It's a worn out talking point. Here's a thought maybe the left should stop running their pie holes and step up and start adopting? Instead they want the government to take care of them. Put your goddamn money where your mouths are...better yet learn some damn responsibility

I agree the left is just as bad as the right in this area. Why are you whining to me about it?

Look fool, you think yourself clever, I think you're a loon.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Since the Constitution affords NO rights of personhood, citizenship, or any such other relevant condition to fetuses,
the right to terminate a fetus has nothing to do with killing humans as far as the law of the land is concerned.

it says nothing about having the right to terminate one either, and is thus left up to the State legislatures.

No it gives persons the right of privacy. The states ought not be allowed to interfere in a woman's right to the private act of abortion because there is no constitutional protection of what is being aborted.

Where does the constitution say we have a right to "privacy"?

lol, a libertarian wants to convince me I have no privacy rights. lol too funny.

Privacy does not include ending the life of another human.

I just explained to you the constitution's position on the personhood rights of fetuses.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Well, it is an accurate statement.

I'm not a republican but we have three adopted children....sit down

How does that change the facts about republicans?

It's a worn out talking point. Here's a thought maybe the left should stop running their pie holes and step up and start adopting? Instead they want the government to take care of them. Put your goddamn money where your mouths are...better yet learn some damn responsibility

I agree the left is just as bad as the right in this area. Why are you whining to me about it?

Look fool, you think yourself clever, I think you're a loon.

Fuck you are touchy one. I agree with you on abortion and you still bitch at me. Take a chill pill

 

[NYcarbineer]

A Supreme Court decision is every bit part of the Constitution. They are binding and the supreme law of the land.

Wrong, as usual.

Gee, what an argument.

OK, I'll dumb it down for you, SC rulings can be overturned by the courts, constitutional amendments cannot. A ruling does not become part of the constitution.

The Supreme Court decides what the Constitution means. Certainly the meaning of the Constitution is part of what the Constitution is. How can it not be?

Supreme court rulings can be overturned... they do not become part of the constitution. Geeze, civics 101.

They're part of the Constitution UNTIL overturned.

You think then that the SCOTUS ruling that owning guns was in fact an individual right is not part of the Constitution?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

it says nothing about having the right to terminate one either, and is thus left up to the State legislatures.

No it gives persons the right of privacy. The states ought not be allowed to interfere in a woman's right to the private act of abortion because there is no constitutional protection of what is being aborted.

Where does the constitution say we have a right to "privacy"?

lol, a libertarian wants to convince me I have no privacy rights. lol too funny.

Privacy does not include ending the life of another human.

I just explained to you the constitution's position on the personhood rights of fetuses.

Please quote the part of the constitution that defines personhood, highlighting the part about fetuses.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I'm not a republican but we have three adopted children....sit down

How does that change the facts about republicans?

It's a worn out talking point. Here's a thought maybe the left should stop running their pie holes and step up and start adopting? Instead they want the government to take care of them. Put your goddamn money where your mouths are...better yet learn some damn responsibility

I agree the left is just as bad as the right in this area. Why are you whining to me about it?

Look fool, you think yourself clever, I think you're a loon.

Fuck you are touchy one. I agree with you on abortion and you still bitch at me. Take a chill pill

Unfortunately for you I don''t take direction from you. Now scram, boy

 

[Avatar4321]

End the life of a human baby is not a reproductive right.

A reproductive right would be the right not to get pregnant


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

The Constitution says otherwise.

I invite you to read the constitution at some point because you’ve been misinformed