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.
No, idiot. There is no case where threatening the kids and family of a government person is justified. You're so fucking stupid sometimes it just amazes me... but only when you're typing.. but always when you're typing.If the point being disagreed with is significant enough, then nothing is more important.
Threatening people and families most certainly could be warranted over the right issues.
So that is not a valid argument.
Are you seriously suggesting that harm should come to the Court if they overthrow Roe? I hope you see the FBI at your door soon. And I'm pretty sure that calling for illegal behavior or violence is against the site rules.Not if the issue is of vital important to individuals.
Then the rights and even survival of any members of government that are infringing, could be forfeit.
If the SCOTUS were to try to overturn Roe vs Wade, then the SCOTUS would not likely survive a week, and that would be warranted.
The SCOTUS has to learn that THEY are not the actual source of government authority in a democratic republic.
The people are instead.
And when the SCOTUS does serious harm, they should not survive it.
No woman is being forced to be an unwilling breeding machine. Over 99% very willingly spread their legs. You're full of shit.They weren't busting anything up, they weren't burning anything. They were just letting Serena Joy they don't like being turned into unwilling breeding machines.
So let me get this straight... it's okay for Serena Joy and her comrades to pass invasive laws that allow the state to get involved in the most intimate decisions a woman needs to make, but dammit, don't interrupt my dinner while I'm fucking you over.
That was Trump's thought, too. Only Nancy Pelosi objected to the military being there. Of course, had Nancy done it your and Trump's way, probably no one would have been arrested because it would have stayed peaceful and legal. But, with the army there, the first one that broke a window or door and came through it should have gotten a bullet in the head. The second one would never have come in. Which is why they didn't shoot the first; they needed a full-scale riot in the building to support their anti-Trump agenda.My thoughts exactly on the J6 Insurrection
No woman is being forced to be an unwilling breeding machine. Over 99% very willingly spread their legs. You're full of shit.
War Zone? Are you fuckin' daft?
LOL.....The closest clinic known to me (since moved) usually had a old man and his wife picketing out front.....Well shuffling was more like it, and in all kinds of weather.
I'm pro-choice (with guardrails) but I would stop at the Micky Ds across the way and get them a sausage biscuit and a cup of coffee every now and again because I flat-out admired their dogged perseverance. Nice folks too.
BINGO. Now you finally admit the underlying reason for the defense of abortion. Abortion is about sex without consequence. (In)Humanity is killing 60 million babies so that people can have sex without consequence. Men like you, especially men who are so against a relationship, defend a woman's access to abortion so men like you can have sex with women without consequence.Women should be able to spread their legs and not worry about being stuck with an obligation for 18 years they didn't want.
Absolutely.It depends on what is being protested.
It the controversy is significant enough, then murdering all members of government can be warranted.
What is warranted in this particular case is not up to me to dictate.
But clearly if it were something like gassing Jews, then uprising against the government would be totally warranted.
Fully disagree.No, idiot. There is no case where threatening the kids and family of a government person is justified. You're so fucking stupid sometimes it just amazes me... but only when you're typing.. but always when you're typing.
No. A particular law is "almost never" sufficient for a popular uprising or a rebellion.Are you seriously suggesting that harm should come to the Court if they overthrow Roe? I hope you see the FBI at your door soon. And I'm pretty sure that calling for illegal behavior or violence is against the site rules.
Cut the crap.Are you seriously suggesting that harm should come to the Court if they overthrow Roe? I hope you see the FBI at your door soon. And I'm pretty sure that calling for illegal behavior or violence is against the site rules.
BINGO. Now you finally admit the underlying reason for the defense of abortion. Abortion is about sex without consequence. (In)Humanity is killing 60 million babies so that people can have sex without consequence. Men like you, especially men who are so against a relationship, defend a woman's access to abortion so men like you can have sex with women without consequence.
Never had an issue with a woman I was involved with needing an abortion. ANd the one time I had an acquaintence who needed one, she was dead set on getting it.
Libtards. ^^^Women should be able to have sex without consequences, IF THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. It's a free fucking country.
No. A particular law is "almost never" sufficient for a popular uprising or a rebellion.
Usually there's a long list of grievances.
Like in our Declaration of Independence.
You do realize the colonists jumped out from behind trees and slit redcoat throats, yes?
Tarred and feathered King George's tax collectors, then poured scalding tea down their throats so they couldn't talk for a month.
Rigby5 stated that if Roe is overturned then the Justices should be attacked. You're agreeing with him?Cut the crap.
No one's "calling for" anything.
In fact we're doing our UTMOST not to have to go there.
But Stalinism will not be tolerated.
It will be taken out
So, 'not my problem'?
Libtards. ^^^
No, Joe. It's not a free country. It's a very EXPENSIVE fucking country.
And there is no such thing as doing ANYTHING without consequences.
For amplification, please Google on "personal responsibility".
Men like you, especially men who are so against a relationship, defend a woman's access to abortion so men like you can have sex with women without consequence.
There's a very good reason why, at almost six decades of age, he's never found a woman that would marry him. And you can taste the sour grapes when he repeats his excuses for being an incel at this age.
No, Joe. It's not a free country. It's a very EXPENSIVE fucking country.
And there is no such thing as doing ANYTHING without consequences.
For amplification, please Google on "personal responsibility".
Because they are "mostly peaceful protesters".
Pro-choice protesters descend on Coney Barrett's home with blood and doll props
Members of Rise Up 4 Abortion Rights protested outside of Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett's home in Virginia demanding "abortion on demand and without apology."www.foxnews.com
Where is the DOJ, US AG?
Why aren't laws being enforced against liberal intimidators / law breakers?
Corrupt, lawless 3rd World Nation status justice on display
