Roe v Wade was our generation’s Plessy v Ferguson

[Slotback Right]

11 hours ago, SeaShells21 said:

Good afternoon class;

...Just made a decision to show that we place more value over the right to own a gun then the fundamental rights of women across the country of America.

Since you come from another country, I'll give you a pass, teacher, for not understanding our constitution. The US Constitution spells out what powers are given to the federal government.

Also...

In establishing American government’s power-sharing system of federalism, the Bill of Rights' 10th Amendment holds that all rights and powers not specifically reserved to Congress by Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution or to be shared concurrently by the federal and state governments are reserved by either the states or by the people.

Gun rights are specifically the responsibility of the federal government since they are specifically mentioned in the 2nd Amendment.

There is no mention of any right to abort a pregnancy in the US Constitution, so Roe vs. Wade was wrongly decided in 1973, and Friday's decision corrected that and sent the issue back to the states to decide. The people of each state now actually have more say on the issue, since their votes determine what direction their state goes on this issue.

Class dismissed.

[RedZone]

49 minutes ago, Slotback Right said:

Since you come from another country, I'll give you a pass, teacher, for not understanding our constitution. The US Constitution spells out what powers are given to the federal government.

Also...

In establishing American government’s power-sharing system of federalism, the Bill of Rights' 10th Amendment holds that all rights and powers not specifically reserved to Congress by Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution or to be shared concurrently by the federal and state governments are reserved by either the states or by the people.

Gun rights are specifically the responsibility of the federal government since they are specifically mentioned in the 2nd Amendment.

There is no mention of any right to abort a pregnancy in the US Constitution, so Roe vs. Wade was wrongly decided in 1973, and Friday's decision corrected that and sent the issue back to the states to decide. The people of each state now actually have more say on the issue, since their votes determine what direction their state goes on this issue.

Class dismissed.

What you're really trying to say is the Constitution really fucked over women back in the day and you have no problems with it.

In 2022... .still fucking with women.

 

 

[FreeBird]

10 minutes ago, RedZone said:

What you're really trying to say is the Constitution really fucked over women back in the day and you have no problems with it.

In 2022... .still fucking with women.

 

 

U love women so much you even wear their jeans 👖 

[concha]

1 hour ago, FreeBird said:

Typical @RedZoneshit

 

 

He's a self-acknowledged racist.  Those are probably the two words most frequently shit out of the hole under his nose. 

 

[RedZone]

9 minutes ago, concha said:

 

He's a self-acknowledged racist.  Those are probably the two words most frequently shit out of the hole under his nose. 

 

White life, chuck....

That's all you need to be concerned about there, old buddy.

If I was a racist I would be on your side. No one in the history of the forums has been called a racist more times than you, chuck.

Why is that, chuck?

Slip of the tongue often?

[RedZone]

18 minutes ago, FreeBird said:

U love women so much you even wear their jeans 👖 

Of course I LOVE and RESPECT women, crackhead.

That's why I have one and you don't.

Have you ever had a woman?.... Sooner or later you're going to have to realize that your way sucks 

Maybe you just don't like women. That's cool, I guess.

 

 

 

[FreeBird]

33 minutes ago, RedZone said:

Of course I LOVE and RESPECT women, crackhead.

That's why I have one and you don't.

Have you ever had a woman?.... Sooner or later you're going to have to realize that your way sucks 

Maybe you just don't like women. That's cool, I guess.

 

 

 

Do you really have a family, cause u been on this forum for 72 hours straight 

[RedZone]

5 minutes ago, FreeBird said:

Do you really have a family, cause u been on this forum for 72 hours straight 

Yep, they will be getting up very soon.

How about yours, crackhead?

 

 

 

[FreeBird]

17 minutes ago, RedZone said:

Yep, they will be getting up very soon.

How about yours, crackhead?

 

 

 

They went to camelback water park and site seeing, I’m staying back and cleaning out a synagogue 

[Bormio]

Democrats haven’t been this angry since we took away their slaves.

(wish I could claim authorship on this one)

[RedZone]

19 minutes ago, Bormio said:

Democrats haven’t been this angry since we took away their slaves.

(wish I could claim authorship on this one)

...donald probably has a few.

The Global Slavery Index 2018 estimates that on any given day in 2016 there were 403,000 people living in conditions of modern slavery in the United States, a prevalence of 1.3 victims of modern slavery for every thousand in the country.

[Belly Bob]

On 6/25/2022 at 1:46 PM, dan in daytona said:

Hypothetical for the Christian ( or Taliban ) Right to Lifer's out there. This old man gets lucky one night and hooks up with an inebriated, farsighted young lady. While drying out a week or two later she realizes " What the hell have I done." She goes to the corner pharmacy and purchases pills to end a possible unplanned pregnancy. Question to the sanctimonious believers out there :

Is this murder or fixing a terrible mistake made under the influences of drugs or alcohol ?  The O.P. Doctor (Bormio) wouldn't answer a month ago, any God fearing out there got an opinion ?    

It's probably best to consider it murder until you come up with a plausible explanation of why it's not.

The answer depends on what it is in virtue of which a human being has rights. If you want to deny that we have rights owing to God,  then you've got to come up with a naturalistic explanation, which is notoriously difficult to do.

You could try sapience (rationality) - we have rights because we're rational. But that won't do because not all of us are. The cognitively impaired, the demented, etc are not rational. Neither are infants or toddlers. If you say that infants will become rational, you should say the same about the unborn.

You could try self-awareness. But you'd run into the same problems as above.

You could try sentience (the capacity to suffer). But that would prove too much. Cows and pigs are sentient, but they do not have the right to life.

You could try membership in the species -- all human beings have rights because all human beings are members of the species homo sapiens. But that would imply that the unborn have rights. A human fetus is a human fetus and not a dog fetus.

You could try the state. The state gives people rights. But the history of the 20th century speaks convincingly against that alternative.

Jefferson said that "all men are created equal and that they are endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights." Maybe you think that Jefferson was an idiot because he believed in God. But if you tie human rights to God, then you've got an explanation of why infants, toddlers, and the cognitively impaired all have unalienable rights, one that naturally extends to the unborn. If you try to pin rights to something else, so that infants have them but the unborn don't, you're going to run into trouble. 

[Belly Bob]

On 6/25/2022 at 5:42 PM, On2whls said:

I’m certainly not religious by any stretch.  But your question begs to what the determination of a viable fetus is.  I think arguments could be made that within the first couple of weeks, no it is not viable.  Still to avoid abortions of convenience, contraception is a pretty reliable and easy solution to avoid creating the dilemma. 
Late term abortions are a different thing altogether. 
[...]

I don't think we want to tie the right to life to viability. Here's a passage from Alito's majority opinion.

"The definition of a 'viable' fetus is one that is capable of surviving outside the womb, but why is this the point at which the State's interest becomes compelling? If, as Roe held, a State's interest in protecting prenatal life is compelling 'after viability', why isn't that interest 'equally compelling before viability'?...Roe did not say, and no explanation is apparent. This arbitrary line has not found much support among philosophers..."

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf 

 

[OldTerrapin]

What's good for the goose right?

 

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-212) is a United States law that recognizes an embryo or fetus in utero as a legal victim, if they are injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence.

 

[Belly Bob]

On 6/25/2022 at 5:42 PM, On2whls said:

If you prescribe to the idea that once the egg has been fertilized, and thereafter it is a developing life, well then, in the US alone, abortions regularly claim over a million lives a year.  Makes our brief experience with Covid look insignificant in comparison.

Given the huge number of abortions in this country, I'm surprised that people aren't more concerned about the question of whether fetuses have rights.  I would've thought that the mere fact that they might would be a strong reason in favor of a pro-life position.

You might think that the traditional Catholic view that life begins at conception has a lot going for it. After all, the natural development of a human being from zygote to adult is the development of an individual with an uninterrupted natural history. So, if the adult has the right to life, then so does the zygote -- same individual.

But science might have something to say here. A zygote might divide into two organism and then fuse back into one. Strange things happen in the early stages of human development. So, maybe the way to go is first to determine the stage at which we can identify an individual, and then say that that is the stage at which a human being has rights. 

I think there are problems with this view too, but I think it's worth considering if you're looking for an alternative to the Catholic view.

[Belly Bob]

On 6/25/2022 at 11:07 PM, dan in daytona said:

Who's being ignorant and naïve now. More people have been murdered in the last two thousand years under the banner of Jesus Christ than any other religion. Oh they don't have a monopoly, genocide is an equal opportunity terminator when pitting our god against their god. Ever hear of the Crusades ?  The Conquistadors in the new world ? Burning witches ? Convert or you savages die ? Who's been killing Jews in the name of their God for over two thousand years ? ( Allah's only been at it for 1400 yrs) Who assassinates abortion doctors ?  Hates gays ? The Taliban throw them off the roof, what similar fate has the extreme Christian right bestowed upon them ?  Fundamentalist Christians are one and the same with the Taliban. They both worship their one and only true God. Their people alone will ascent to a heavenly place. Both are inflexible and rigid. They deal in absolutes. They each follow and praise a book of fantasy written over a millennium ago. One could go on and on with the similarities. If you really can't see the correlation, it's because you're blind, a dupe. But that's obvious by what you post.            

Christians and Muslims have an impressive record of violence, but atheists have tried like hell to play catch up: Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler, etc. etc. etc.

[OldTerrapin]

To be honest am kinda split on the whole abortion issue and really don't care about it enough to get emotional or have a strong opinion either way. Actually kinda over the drama about it which has been going on my whole life it seems.  Hell I have said before I believe some sort of population control will be required in the future by necessity. 

I will say for a fact had abortion been legal in 1967 when my wild child then 15 year old mother got pregnant with me. I certainly would not exist. Some of you may say that would have been a blessing on society ..lol

 

1967 -- Abortion is classified a felony in 49 states and Washington D.C. 

 

[Belly Bob]

On 6/26/2022 at 7:38 AM, RedZone said:

What you're really trying to say is the Constitution really fucked over women back in the day and you have no problems with it.

In 2022... .still fucking with women.

Relax.

👇

On 6/25/2022 at 8:34 PM, RedZone said:

There has never been a right and wrong answer on abortion and there won't be even when you're six feet under the ground.

Babble on, dude.

 

[Belly Bob]

On 6/25/2022 at 6:26 PM, SeaShells21 said:

Good afternoon class;

Just a quick reminder that the same group of gentleman who pushed the narrative and oppose the use and concept of masks because it infringes on their freedoms as American citizens and its their choice what they do with their bodies.

Just made a decision to show that we place more value over the right to own a gun then the fundamental rights of women across the country of America.

The right a woman (or a person with a vagina) has to decide what happens in and to her body is traditionally regarded as a property right. You own your body.

But property rights aren't as basic as the right to life. No right is. I own my car. I can do what I want with it, provided that I don't violate anyone else's basic rights. I can't run you over and then defend myself by saying, "It's my car. I can do what I want with it."

We can all agree that women have the right to decide what happens in and to their bodies. But if a fetus has the right to life, then a woman's right to her body doesn't imply the right to take actions that would result in the death of a fetus. It doesn't mean that she doesn't have a right to her body. It just means that her right to her body is constrained by the fetus' right to life.

[concha]

4 minutes ago, Belly Bob said:

The right a woman (or a person with a vagina) has to decide what happens in and to her body is traditionally regarded as a property right. You own your body.

But property rights aren't as basic as the right to life. No right is. I own my car. I can do what I want with it, provided that I don't violate anyone else's basic rights. I can't run you over and then defend myself by saying, "It's my car. I can do what I want with it."

We can all agree that women have the right to decide what happens in and to their bodies. But if a fetus has the right to life, then a woman's right to her body doesn't imply the right to take actions that would result in the death of a fetus. It doesn't mean that she doesn't have a right to her body. It just means that her right to her body is constrained by the fetus' right to life.

 

When a woman has an abortion, exactly what part of her body is she killing and would a DNA analysis agree?

 

[FreeBird]

18 minutes ago, Belly Bob said:

The right a woman (or a person with a vagina) has to decide what happens in and to her body is traditionally regarded as a property right. You own your body.

But property rights aren't as basic as the right to life. No right is. I own my car. I can do what I want with it, provided that I don't violate anyone else's basic rights. I can't run you over and then defend myself by saying, "It's my car. I can do what I want with it."

We can all agree that women have the right to decide what happens in and to their bodies. But if a fetus has the right to life, then a woman's right to her body doesn't imply the right to take actions that would result in the death of a fetus. It doesn't mean that she doesn't have a right to her body. It just means that her right to her body is constrained by the fetus' right to life.

 

2 hours ago, OldTerrapin said:

To be honest am kinda split on the whole abortion issue and really don't care about it enough to get emotional or have a strong opinion either way. Actually kinda over the drama about it which has been going on my whole life it seems.  Hell I have said before I believe some sort of population control will be required in the future by necessity. 

I will say for a fact had abortion been legal in 1967 when my wild child then 15 year old mother got pregnant with me. I certainly would not exist. Some of you may say that would have been a blessing on society ..lol

 

1967 -- Abortion is classified a felony in 49 states and Washington D.C. 

 

Everyone talks about Rape and health reasons, but that’s the fringe amount of abortions, I’m totally against abortions when the ratchet chick is going to planned parenthood like it’s subway, get 7 abortions get the 8th one free

 

maybe close your legs and you wouldn’t have to worry about getting an abortion

[OldTerrapin]

5 minutes ago, FreeBird said:

 

, I’m totally against abortions when the ratchet chick is going to planned parenthood like it’s subway, get 7 abortions get the 8th one free

 

maybe close your legs and you wouldn’t have to worry about getting an abortion

but on the flip side is it better than giving birth to another strain on the welfare system that ends up being a drug slinging murderous banger that ends up either dead anyway or a strain on the prison system or give birth to another welfare check baby factory.  Either way tax payers pay for it all  

[concha]

1 minute ago, FreeBird said:

 

Everyone talks about Rape and health reasons, but that’s the fringe amount of abortions, I’m totally against abortions when the ratchet chick is going to planned parenthood like it’s subway, get 7 abortions get the 8th one free

 

maybe close your legs and you wouldn’t have to worry about getting an abortion

 

The left likes to rage and lie about the right supposedly becoming "radical".

Really?

Back in 1993, Bubba famously announced his views on abortion: safe, legal and rare.

Today's abortion activists:

 

 

[OldTerrapin]

13 minutes ago, FreeBird said:

 

Everyone talks about Rape and health reasons, but that’s the fringe amount of abortions, I’m totally against abortions when the ratchet chick is going to planned parenthood like it’s subway, get 7 abortions get the 8th one free

 

maybe close your legs and you wouldn’t have to worry about getting an abortion

Nobody wants to talk about the women who have serious mental health issues or even committed suicide after having an abortion either. A women would have to be a little sociopathic not to have guilt or mental issues of some kind after doin it.  Abortion Mills don't offer much in the way of mental health care post abort other than maybe give you some business cards of counselors or what not. 

[RedZone]

4 hours ago, Belly Bob said:

Relax.

👇

 

Both are very true, what's your point?

republicans and Democrats thinking they have to be on one side or the other of the issue is just republican and Democrat being republican and Democrat.

It's pretty old, it's pretty boring and it will continue for the next 1,000 years or until God shows back up and knocks everybody down to the ground.