BREAKING: SCOTUS to overturn Roe?

[LeviF]

1 minute ago, BillStime said:

 

So, where in the Constitution is the word AR-15?

 

Your argument is that abortion is not in the Constitution yet neither is AR-15.

 

Keep spinning... this is fun.

 

 

 

 

Why do you keep changing the question? If you don't like the answer to the original question perhaps you should examine why that is rather than play silly games.

[BillStime]

1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

@Tiberius has declared that he will speak for all

women, especially those confused on what they think. 

 

Isn't that EXACTLY what you are doing?

 

 

 

 

 

[Tiberius]

4 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Assaulting…the capital?  Beyond the  obvious “Huh??”…
 

It seems extreme, the death part, if that’s really your take.  
 

On the other hand, some kids were vandalizing the local Friendly’s not long ago and shooting them would probably be an effective deterrent. 

 

 

So you want the cop that blasted her arrested? 

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BillStime]

1 minute ago, LeviF said:

 

Why do you keep changing the question? If you don't like the answer to the original question perhaps you should examine why that is rather than play silly games.

 

My question has not changed once.

 

41 minutes ago, BillStime said:

I couldn’t find AR-15 in the Constitution… could you?

 

You are trying real hard to distant yourself from the fact that you are intentionally being intellectually dishonest.

 

It's hilarious watching you project about who exactly is doing what here - lolz

 

[B-Man]

 

[LeviF]

Just now, BillStime said:

 

My question has not changed once.

 

 

You are trying real hard to distant yourself from the fact that you are intentionally being intellectually dishonest.

 

It's hilarious watching you project about who exactly is doing what here - lolz

 

 

And the answer to that question is still "yes."

 

But then you change the question. You add caveats and qualifiers and pretend as if I'm the unreasonable one for asking that you just not. And ignore the fact that abortions legally fall under the same category as another example you provided yourself - stop signs - while firearms explicitly do not.

 

That the answers to the initial questions are inconvenient to your backwards political "thinking," if one can truly call it that, really isn't my problem.

 

If you wish to know my more complete thoughts on how the AR-15 is found in the Constitution, we have a reasonably active gun thread in this subforum that you may ask your silly questions in. 

[All_Pro_Bills]

1 hour ago, BillStime said:

The religious right and the cult want you to believe this but VERY few people are advocating for late term abortions unless there are severe fetal abnormalities or the health of the mother is at risk.

 

Keep fringing! 

 

 

I could tell you about the wife of a co-worker that was 2 months pregnant when she was diagnosed with a brain tumor.  The doctors told her the treatments would hurt the fetus and likely lead to its death.  But to save her life they were necessary.  But she refused treatment and her condition worsened.  She carried the child and gave birth.  But by then it was too late to address the tumor and she died a few months later.  Now that's conviction to a belief and the ultimate sacrifice.  So she saved the baby.  But she also left her husband a widower and two other children motherless.  So there's a lot of sides to the story and lessons to be learned from it.  As there is to the stories of countless other women faced with specific circumstances.    

 

But I'm not sure even read my entire post.  I ended my comment with  I expect, somewhere in the middle (of the extreme polar views) is the answer and the position of most women, and dare I suggest men too.

 

So why are you arguing with me?  Because there's nothing to argue about.  I'm merely laying out the positions at both extremes.  They are what they are.  Are you unwilling to accept there can be an acceptable middle ground consensus the majority of Americans can get behind? 

Edited May 6, 2022 by All_Pro_Bills

[716er]

2 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Are you unwilling to accept there can be an acceptable middle ground consensus the majority of Americans can get behind? 

 

That middle ground is Roe. Over 70% of Americans are behind that decision.

Edited May 6, 2022 by 716er

[BillStime]

15 minutes ago, LeviF said:

 

And the answer to that question is still "yes."

 

But then you change the question. You add caveats and qualifiers and pretend as if I'm the unreasonable one for asking that you just not. And ignore the fact that abortions legally fall under the same category as another example you provided yourself - stop signs - while firearms explicitly do not.

 

That the answers to the initial questions are inconvenient to your backwards political "thinking," if one can truly call it that, really isn't my problem.

 

If you wish to know my more complete thoughts on how the AR-15 is found in the Constitution, we have a reasonably active gun thread in this subforum that you may ask your silly questions in. 

 

My question did not change - the problem is - you are struggling because you cannot find the word AR-15 in the Constitution.

 

And you won't let go...

 

lmao

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

7 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

So you want the cop that blasted her arrested? 

It was my understanding he shot her because he feared his life was in danger, and the video I’ve seen makes me think he did.  So, no, I think he was given the benefit of the doubt and should not be arrested.  I think that approach should apply outside of the Capital police but sadly it does not.  
 

If you’ve seen indication he acknowledged he shot her because she climbed on a table, or broke a chair,  then he should be prosecuted. 

I am concerned that the government has withheld hours of footage from that day, and believe the potential for a coverup is quite high.   
 

I’m also disappointed that elected officials in harms way seem to have very little tolerance for potential for violence against them, yet an inordinate amount of patience, tolerance when law abiding citizens and law enforcement officials are targeted outside Washington.  
 

 

[All_Pro_Bills]

20 minutes ago, 716er said:

 

That middle ground is Roe. Over 70% of Americans are behind that decision.

If you read the Roe v. Wade ruling and conclusions its references the due process clause of the 14th amendment as covering a women's right to abortion but also gets into specific details such as specific treatment based on the specific trimester.  Then in 1992 the court ruled again and modified the ruling by dropping the trimester approach for one of fetal viability.  Doesn't that all sound "legislativish"?  Because by the nature of our Republic form of government and the Constitutional powers of each branch the judicial does not make law.   

 

If the current court lets the previous rulings stand then fine.  But if the court rules the previous decision was judicial activism and overreach and throws it back to the Federal and State legislatures then it should be simple to get a majority of representatives to codify the conclusions. 

Edited May 6, 2022 by All_Pro_Bills

[BillStime]

The GQP Hypocrisy is endless...

 

 

[B-Man]

7 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

 

If the current court lets the previous rulings stand then fine.  But if the court rules the previous decision was judicial activism and overreach and throws it back to the Federal and State legislatures then it should be simple to get a majority of representatives to codify the conclusions. 

 

 

 

 

[Tiberius]

2 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

That's funny 

[BillStime]

1 minute ago, Tiberius said:

That's funny 

 

Seriously, these idiots cannot even see how hypocritical they are... 

[Tiberius]

10 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

Seriously, these idiots cannot even see how hypocritical they are... 

Own the libs! That's all that matters 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, BillStime said:

 

Well, Conald wanted to shoot AMERICAN protestors outside the White House... so, I wouldn't put it past the Cult.

 

So says you, but you’re an 0fer.  

[BillStime]

54 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I could tell you about the wife of a co-worker that was 2 months pregnant when she was diagnosed with a brain tumor.  The doctors told her the treatments would hurt the fetus and likely lead to its death.  But to save her life they were necessary.  But she refused treatment and her condition worsened.  She carried the child and gave birth.  But by then it was too late to address the tumor and she died a few months later.  Now that's conviction to a belief and the ultimate sacrifice.  So she saved the baby.  But she also left her husband a widower and two other children motherless.  So there's a lot of sides to the story and lessons to be learned from it.  As there is to the stories of countless other women faced with specific circumstances.    

 

But I'm not sure even read my entire post.  I ended my comment with  I expect, somewhere in the middle (of the extreme polar views) is the answer and the position of most women, and dare I suggest men too.

 

So why are you arguing with me?  Because there's nothing to argue about.  I'm merely laying out the positions at both extremes.  They are what they are.  Are you unwilling to accept there can be an acceptable middle ground consensus the majority of Americans can get behind? 

 

Sorry to hear about that gut wrenching story. 

[B-Man]