(06-26-2022 02:02 PM)maximus Wrote:  Bwhahahaha

https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1...Sfxiw&s=19

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

(06-26-2022 01:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 11:39 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(06-24-2022 05:20 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(06-24-2022 05:13 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(06-24-2022 05:10 PM)fsquid Wrote:  Just provide universal prenatal and maternal care and be done with it.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

Would be nice but the right does not care about that

Yeah, the side fighting to murder babies are the ones who truly care about the children.

Neither side cares about babies mate. They just care about fundraising on the issue and trust me, donations were a coming the last 2 days on either side.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

lol. You do realize the moment you "win" on an issue---that issue ceases to be a fund raising tool.

Now it will be fund raising to create legislation to standardize it. The religious right campaign calling for a federal ban and the looney left will be campaigning on federal legalization, filibuster ending, SC expansion. Politicians are going to treat the midterms as a fight for the soul of the nation.

RvW and gay marriage were about the only things that could fire the dems up for the midterms

JRsec, I get that point. Perhaps I shouldn't have quoted a portion of your post and just made a stand alone point.

Quote:Exceptions? If the mother's life is at stake, yes. Her decision with no judgment upon her. Rape? Her decision since she didn't have one at conception. Other than that let them live. Execute those who ruin life for others!

I just wanted to put it out there that there ARE more specific reasons for legitimate exceptions than the usual rape, incest, health of the mother, etc. If you had added health/genetic issues of the baby, I wouldn't have piped up. This is not an exhaustive list of all possible exceptions, obviously.

(06-26-2022 02:32 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  I get that point. Perhaps I shouldn't have quoted a portion of your post and just made a stand alone point.

Quote:Exceptions? If the mother's life is at stake, yes. Her decision with no judgment upon her. Rape? Her decision since she didn't have one at conception. Other than that let them live. Execute those who ruin life for others!

I just wanted to put it out there that there ARE more specific reasons for legitimate exceptions than the usual rape, incest, health of the mother, etc. If you had added health/genetic issues of the baby, I wouldn't have piped up. This is not an exhaustive list of all possible exceptions, obviously.

To list more than the obvious detracts from a deliberate juxtaposition of irreconcilable stances by getting it bogged down in details thereby detracting from its focus. Which you have tediously done!

If I was writing a proposal genetic disease would have been included. I was not. I was contrasting the lefts contortions to kill innocents and spare the vilest, which are prima facia irreconcilable, and which illuminate their dishonesty in both positions. I listed mother's life and rape because that is what they toss up every time it is debated. And I knew somebody would run even with that limited list and pettifog the intent and focus.

That is a plague on this forum. So, you are not alone. Many points can be made without getting bogged down in issues tangential and not germane to the focus of a poster's argument. Other's then chime in on the tangents and it provides cover and confusion for the disingenuous to runaway from their indefensible position. Without nailing them down they then deny it was their position and pick up a new line of deception.

If I could moderate the spin room as all other forums are supposed to be moderated we would close many many threads because of derailment. So it's not your fault but rather the nature of this forum.

(06-26-2022 02:02 PM)maximus Wrote:  Bwhahahaha

https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1...Sfxiw&s=19

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

Always enjoy the actual left sh*tting on liberals. The right understands power, and understood how important the court was. McConnell managed to hold up a Supreme Court seat for a year while the pansy arse Democrats couldn't come up with a single idea (despite there being options to at least make it difficult) to keep ACB from being voted on for like 3 months. The very thing they fear mongered for years on, the thing they told me I had to vote for their garbage candidates to save they wouldn't even pull out every stop to try to save when it was very obvious it had to be done. You flip those situations and McConnell pulls every tactic legal or not to ensure that vote doesn't happen.

(06-26-2022 02:27 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 02:02 PM)maximus Wrote:  Bwhahahaha

https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1...Sfxiw&s=19

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

And I hope the rest of the left begins to finally let this sink in. Blaming the group who's made it their stated mission for 50 years to overturn Roe is pretty stupid IMO. However, blaming the group who's stated they are fighting to protect and codify Roe but literally never seriously tried and just used it as a fundraising/campaign issue for generations seems like the correct placement for anger. Pelosi acting like losing Roe is the worst thing that has ever happened to this country but then she endorsed and drug the last pro life Dem Henry Cuellar across the finish line. All because their actual enemy is the people to the left of them, the only group you ever actually see the Democrats mobilize and strategize to stop. That do nothing powerless group can all of a sudden move mountains when it becomes time to stop the left flank from actually threatening their grift.

(06-26-2022 11:04 AM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 10:46 AM)BlueDragon Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 10:38 AM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(06-25-2022 01:08 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  

(06-25-2022 12:36 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  Why not link a Phd in history instead of English composition

“Linda Sue Grimes
Devotee of Paramahansa Yogananda's teachings, I compose poems, songs, essays, & veggie recipes.”

Try digging a little deeper

I guess to you Carol Swain is not qualified.

First off both parties have blood on their hands…

The same Carol Swain who spoke of values in that video but is controversial for being anti gay and Muslim? Let’s see what she might have left out:

Fact: Democrats introduced and led the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Fact: it was the bloc of conservative Southern Democrats in the Senate who filibustered and voted against the act. The same democrats that thought it was okay to beat, sic dogs onto and shoot water hoses at the people protesting/advocating for those same rights

Fact: The act passed with a Democrat majority in both houses.

The South may not be slow, but you sure are. She just laid it out to you as simple as it can get and yet you are so stiffnecked you cannot receive.

Ok Sparky. I disagreed with her and your point and explained why. Care to refute my argurmenrpt or are you only “fast” enough to insult?

Listen Blockhead the ANSWER is simple and straightforward it’s Family Values and all the rights that go along with protecting that. Southerns didn’t leave the Democratic Party it left them by allowing Leftist Regressives to take over the party and lead it in a direction that is perverted and is he’ll bent on destroying the family unit. Carry on clueless.

Wouldn’t want you leading anyone. You can’t see the forest for all those trees getting in the way. That forest is dense.

(06-26-2022 02:32 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  JRsec, I get that point. Perhaps I shouldn't have quoted a portion of your post and just made a stand alone point.

Quote:Exceptions? If the mother's life is at stake, yes. Her decision with no judgment upon her. Rape? Her decision since she didn't have one at conception. Other than that let them live. Execute those who ruin life for others!

I just wanted to put it out there that there ARE more specific reasons for legitimate exceptions than the usual rape, incest, health of the mother, etc. If you had added health/genetic issues of the baby, I wouldn't have piped up. This is not an exhaustive list of all possible exceptions, obviously.

No matter what exceptions we are talking about, its a tiny percentage point of all abortions.

We can't miss the forest for the trees.

(06-26-2022 02:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 02:32 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  I get that point. Perhaps I shouldn't have quoted a portion of your post and just made a stand alone point.

Quote:Exceptions? If the mother's life is at stake, yes. Her decision with no judgment upon her. Rape? Her decision since she didn't have one at conception. Other than that let them live. Execute those who ruin life for others!

I just wanted to put it out there that there ARE more specific reasons for legitimate exceptions than the usual rape, incest, health of the mother, etc. If you had added health/genetic issues of the baby, I wouldn't have piped up. This is not an exhaustive list of all possible exceptions, obviously.

To list more than the obvious detracts from a deliberate juxtaposition of irreconcilable stances by getting it bogged down in details thereby detracting from its focus. Which you have tediously done!

If I was writing a proposal genetic disease would have been included. I was not. I was contrasting the lefts contortions to kill innocents and spare the vilest, which are prima facia irreconcilable, and which illuminate their dishonesty in both positions. I listed mother's life and rape because that is what they toss up every time it is debated. And I knew somebody would run even with that limited list and pettifog the intent and focus.

That is a plague on this forum. So, you are not alone. Many points can be made without getting bogged down in issues tangential and not germane to the focus of a poster's argument. Other's then chime in on the tangents and it provides cover and confusion for the disingenuous to runaway from their indefensible position. Without nailing them down they then deny it was their position and pick up a new line of deception.

If I could moderate the spin room as all other forums are supposed to be moderated we would close many many threads because of derailment. So it's not your fault but rather the nature of this forum.

This

As people argue in circles over the 1-2%, 70 million innocent babies are slaughtered in a mass genocide.

But lets dig deeper and deeper for more hypotheticals for another 40-50 years instead of stopping the slaughter.

This whole thing is utterly evil and satanic.

Sounds like Democrat voters upset w/ their own party for not doing enough (anything) to codify Roe. We'll see if a lot of them stay home for mid-terms.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/w...ar-AAYPQUi
In case Turley's article hasn't been posted:

"...While a strong majority support Roe v. Wade, they also support limitations on abortion. Polls also show that 65% of Americans would make most abortions illegal in the second trimester, and 80% would make most abortions illegal in the third trimester. (The United States is one of only 12 among the world’s 198 countries that allow abortions for any reason after 20 weeks.)..."

(06-26-2022 04:08 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/w...ar-AAYPQUi
In case Turley's article hasn't been posted:

"...While a strong majority support Roe v. Wade, they also support limitations on abortion. Polls also show that 65% of Americans would make most abortions illegal in the second trimester, and 80% would make most abortions illegal in the third trimester. (The United States is one of only 12 among the world’s 198 countries that allow abortions for any reason after 20 weeks.)..."

That's not what anyone dancing over this decision supports though. It's going to be interesting what the GOP does now, because they are the dog that caught the car. If you are someone that truly believes Abortion is Murder then why on earth would you be okay with it being up to each individual state? When the GOP takes back both houses and the presidency that part of the base is likely to demand that they outlaw abortion nationwide, and sure that's not an extremely large % of the nationwide population you can't just ignore those people as GOP politicians because they are dedicated, well funded, and a powerful portion of the GOP base. So I'm curious to see what happens next.

(06-26-2022 04:32 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 04:08 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/w...ar-AAYPQUi
In case Turley's article hasn't been posted:

"...While a strong majority support Roe v. Wade, they also support limitations on abortion. Polls also show that 65% of Americans would make most abortions illegal in the second trimester, and 80% would make most abortions illegal in the third trimester. (The United States is one of only 12 among the world’s 198 countries that allow abortions for any reason after 20 weeks.)..."

That's not what anyone dancing over this decision supports though. It's going to be interesting what the GOP does now, because they are the dog that caught the car. If you are someone that truly believes Abortion is Murder then why on earth would you be okay with it being up to each individual state? When the GOP takes back both houses and the presidency that part of the base is likely to demand that they outlaw abortion nationwide, and sure that's not an extremely large % of the nationwide population you can't just ignore those people as GOP politicians because they are dedicated, well funded, and a powerful portion of the GOP base. So I'm curious to see what happens next.

Where where you when the left was deciding for the whole country that abortion was 100% legal? Where were you when the 60-70 million babies were murdered?

I just don't remember you saying these things until Roe was overturned.

You can't argue women have this right and this right but children do not even have a right to life.

Can you not see how that is the darkest and most evil contradiction of all?

How can you talk about rights when 70 million children were not even give the most basic and fundamental right of all.....the right to LIVE.

(06-26-2022 04:32 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 04:08 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/w...ar-AAYPQUi
In case Turley's article hasn't been posted:

"...While a strong majority support Roe v. Wade, they also support limitations on abortion. Polls also show that 65% of Americans would make most abortions illegal in the second trimester, and 80% would make most abortions illegal in the third trimester. (The United States is one of only 12 among the world’s 198 countries that allow abortions for any reason after 20 weeks.)..."

That's not what anyone dancing over this decision supports though. It's going to be interesting what the GOP does now, because they are the dog that caught the car. If you are someone that truly believes Abortion is Murder then why on earth would you be okay with it being up to each individual state? When the GOP takes back both houses and the presidency that part of the base is likely to demand that they outlaw abortion nationwide, and sure that's not an extremely large % of the nationwide population you can't just ignore those people as GOP politicians because they are dedicated, well funded, and a powerful portion of the GOP base. So I'm curious to see what happens next.

It is a State issue. The work must be done State to State. Only thing Federal is no Federal $$ going to any State "services" for child murder. No international payments for child murder abroad. No military child murders, stuff like that. Most of those things have always been done with a wink and a nod to date despite the regulations against them. Time to make sure that only a state pays for it/supports it if that is the case within their voters. Then work in those States with women in crisis one by one just like what helped turn the tide and continue to expose corporate Planned Murder for what it is.

And tell the truth. Right now, today, the Left is openly fundraising by outright lying to people that abortion has been suddenly outlawed everywhere. Unfortunately that is simply not true. Yes it has been allowed to be limited by the Dobbs decision, as there was NEVER a constitutional Federal "right" to murder your child willfully., But each State now has to take the issue up and see where they are and where their voters want to go. Some have already done so. In the end, about half will place either severe limits or a few an outright ban within their borders.

The issues will come from all the public and corporate posturing about paying for travel to states where child murder remains a possibility. Interstate Commerce, federal child Murder regulations, comity, reciprocation et cetera will come into play. Bottom line would seem to be: if you want the option to murder your child, move to a State that allows it BEFORE you have sex. If you become pregnant after and try to cross a State border for purposes of obtaining a child murder then you and anyone (or any company) who assists you is guilty of a Federal Crime. Corporations will have to re-think this. They're gonna have to put their "woke" back in the box where it has always belonged or it will eventually cost them bigtime, and most corporations don't like to lose big money.

Why? Because all States have reciprocation laws in order to do business. If child murder is a crime in the State where the person is traveling from, then by law others will be forced to uphold that for non-state residents, and anyone helping them will be guilty of a federal Felony, and need to be extradited back to the residential State. This can and by right s should get that ugly. Why? To expose the lie for what it is: Child Murder is child murder no matter how small. Everyone who read Dr. Seuss knows this already.

Eventually, a Great resettling of the country based primarily on ideology may well occur to the point of being able to divide. I'll take Alberta, Canada with us, as they have oil, like IC engines, are generally conservative, have two great hockey teams, and want to get away from paying for all of Canada as it is.

(06-26-2022 02:53 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 02:02 PM)maximus Wrote:  Bwhahahaha

https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1...Sfxiw&s=19

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

Always enjoy the actual left sh*tting on liberals. The right understands power, and understood how important the court was. McConnell managed to hold up a Supreme Court seat for a year while the pansy arse Democrats couldn't come up with a single idea (despite there being options to at least make it difficult) to keep ACB from being voted on for like 3 months. The very thing they fear mongered for years on, the thing they told me I had to vote for their garbage candidates to save they wouldn't even pull out every stop to try to save when it was very obvious it had to be done. You flip those situations and McConnell pulls every tactic legal or not to ensure that vote doesn't happen.

I have no idea what alternate universe you are living in, but there will NEVER be a nationwide ban on abortion. Those republicans that you think "understand power" cannot even keep their house in order to pass the most basic and moderate of bills when they have the congress and WH. We've seen that over and over and over again.

And you think they are going to suddenly get all those liberal and moderate republicans to stay in line and vote in a nationwide ban on abortion?

You are living in an alternate reality.

(06-26-2022 03:47 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 02:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 02:32 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  I get that point. Perhaps I shouldn't have quoted a portion of your post and just made a stand alone point.

Quote:Exceptions? If the mother's life is at stake, yes. Her decision with no judgment upon her. Rape? Her decision since she didn't have one at conception. Other than that let them live. Execute those who ruin life for others!

I just wanted to put it out there that there ARE more specific reasons for legitimate exceptions than the usual rape, incest, health of the mother, etc. If you had added health/genetic issues of the baby, I wouldn't have piped up. This is not an exhaustive list of all possible exceptions, obviously.

To list more than the obvious detracts from a deliberate juxtaposition of irreconcilable stances by getting it bogged down in details thereby detracting from its focus. Which you have tediously done!

If I was writing a proposal genetic disease would have been included. I was not. I was contrasting the lefts contortions to kill innocents and spare the vilest, which are prima facia irreconcilable, and which illuminate their dishonesty in both positions. I listed mother's life and rape because that is what they toss up every time it is debated. And I knew somebody would run even with that limited list and pettifog the intent and focus.

That is a plague on this forum. So, you are not alone. Many points can be made without getting bogged down in issues tangential and not germane to the focus of a poster's argument. Other's then chime in on the tangents and it provides cover and confusion for the disingenuous to runaway from their indefensible position. Without nailing them down they then deny it was their position and pick up a new line of deception.

If I could moderate the spin room as all other forums are supposed to be moderated we would close many many threads because of derailment. So it's not your fault but rather the nature of this forum.

This

As people argue in circles over the 1-2%, 70 million innocent babies are slaughtered in a mass genocide.

But lets dig deeper and deeper for more hypotheticals for another 40-50 years instead of stopping the slaughter.

This whole thing is utterly evil and satanic.

Not only that, but we are in the year of Our Lord 2022. There are ways we can save both mother and child. As for rape, well, the argument I like to use is this: The child didn't choose to be conceived either. And as you said in another thread (I think?), the gift is life. And besides, could you imagine how many future doctors, nurses, scientists, teachers, engineers, etc. we'd have if the women who had all those abortions over the nearly fifty years Roe v. Wade was "the law of the land" had carried those pregnancies to term?

JR, my suggestion is to lock this thread before the King of Tangents clocks in for a day of work/posting at 7am tomorrow…

Just my $0.02 worth

(06-26-2022 04:53 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 04:32 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 04:08 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/w...ar-AAYPQUi
In case Turley's article hasn't been posted:

"...While a strong majority support Roe v. Wade, they also support limitations on abortion. Polls also show that 65% of Americans would make most abortions illegal in the second trimester, and 80% would make most abortions illegal in the third trimester. (The United States is one of only 12 among the world’s 198 countries that allow abortions for any reason after 20 weeks.)..."

That's not what anyone dancing over this decision supports though. It's going to be interesting what the GOP does now, because they are the dog that caught the car. If you are someone that truly believes Abortion is Murder then why on earth would you be okay with it being up to each individual state? When the GOP takes back both houses and the presidency that part of the base is likely to demand that they outlaw abortion nationwide, and sure that's not an extremely large % of the nationwide population you can't just ignore those people as GOP politicians because they are dedicated, well funded, and a powerful portion of the GOP base. So I'm curious to see what happens next.

It is a State issue. The work must be done State to State. Only thing Federal is no Federal $$ going to any State "services" for child murder. No international payments for child murder abroad. No military child murders, stuff like that. Most of those things have always been done with a wink and a nod to date despite the regulations against them. Time to make sure that only a state pays for it/supports it if that is the case within their voters. Then work in those States with women in crisis one by one just like what helped turn the tide and continue to expose corporate Planned Murder for what it is.

And tell the truth. Right now, today, the Left is openly fundraising by outright lying to people that abortion has been suddenly outlawed everywhere. Unfortunately that is simply not true. Yes it has been allowed to be limited by the Dobbs decision, as there was NEVER a constitutional Federal "right" to murder your child willfully., But each State now has to take the issue up and see where they are and where their voters want to go. Some have already done so. In the end, about half will place either severe limits or a few an outright ban within their borders.

The issues will come from all the public and corporate posturing about paying for travel to states where child murder remains a possibility. Interstate Commerce, federal child Murder regulations, comity, reciprocation et cetera will come into play. Bottom line would seem to be: if you want the option to murder your child, move to a State that allows it BEFORE you have sex. If you become pregnant after and try to cross a State border for purposes of obtaining a child murder then you and anyone (or any company) who assists you is guilty of a Federal Crime. Corporations will have to re-think this. They're gonna have to put their "woke" back in the box where it has always belonged or it will eventually cost them bigtime, and most corporations don't like to lose big money.

Why? Because all States have reciprocation laws in order to do business. If child murder is a crime in the State where the person is traveling from, then by law others will be forced to uphold that for non-state residents, and anyone helping them will be guilty of a federal Felony, and need to be extradited back to the residential State. This can and by right s should get that ugly. Why? To expose the lie for what it is: Child Murder is child murder no matter how small. Everyone who read Dr. Seuss knows this already.

Eventually, a Great resettling of the country based primarily on ideology may well occur to the point of being able to divide. I'll take Alberta, Canada with us, as they have oil, like IC engines, are generally conservative, have two great hockey teams, and want to get away from paying for all of Canada as it is.

So I'm pretty certain it would take a massive law change to make abortion considered "federal child murder" and yes I am certain some states are going to make traveling to another state to get an abortion illegal and try to make it illegal to help a person do that, but those won't be federal crimes in any way unless federal laws are changed and we'll see if those state laws hold up when they are challenged (I suspect with this ideological Supreme Court they will find a justification to allow 1 state to essentially dictate law to another).