Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You already lost because I already cited it.Cite it in RvW or lose for the last time.Roe vs Wade gives anyone the right to abort a child they are carrying. Thats why its based on the clause that says "person"Roe v Wade gives a woman the right to abort her child. Thus violating that very clause you cited.How so when the equal protection clause says "person" not "woman"Right you are sir. Violating the equal protection clause cited in post #286.None.
Women are afforded rights not afforded to men. As you said, men have no reproductive rights.Nope, no violation since men can’t get pregnant.Right you are sir. Violating the equal protection clause cited in post #286.None.What are the men's equal reproductive rights.What's unequal? The one who gets pregnant has the right to terminate their own pregnancy.No wonder he has no reproduction rights. Unequal application.
But wait you said he could get pregnant?
In the first trimester, the woman has the exclusive right to pursue an abortion, not subject to any state intervention. In the second trimester, the state cannot intervene unless her health is at risk. If the fetus becomes viable, once the pregnancy has progressed into the third trimester, the state may restrict the right to an abortion but must always include an exception to any regulation that protects the health of the mother.Cite it in RvW or lose for the last time.Roe vs Wade gives anyone the right to abort a child they are carrying. Thats why its based on the clause that says "person"Roe v Wade gives a woman the right to abort her child. Thus violating that very clause you cited.How so when the equal protection clause says "person" not "woman"Right you are sir. Violating the equal protection clause cited in post #286.None.
You're done.You already lost because I already cited it.Cite it in RvW or lose for the last time.Roe vs Wade gives anyone the right to abort a child they are carrying. Thats why its based on the clause that says "person"Roe v Wade gives a woman the right to abort her child. Thus violating that very clause you cited.How so when the equal protection clause says "person" not "woman"Right you are sir. Violating the equal protection clause cited in post #286.
Women are also afforded the ability to get pregnant where men cannot. Sounds like your beef is with G-d. Take it up with Him.Women are afforded rights not afforded to men. As you said, men have no reproductive rights.Nope, no violation since men can’t get pregnant.Right you are sir. Violating the equal protection clause cited in post #286.None.What are the men's equal reproductive rights.What's unequal? The one who gets pregnant has the right to terminate their own pregnancy.
Unequal application of the law.
I know. I was done the first time I showed you that you were wrong. Now I'm just laughing at you.You're done.You already lost because I already cited it.Cite it in RvW or lose for the last time.Roe vs Wade gives anyone the right to abort a child they are carrying. Thats why its based on the clause that says "person"Roe v Wade gives a woman the right to abort her child. Thus violating that very clause you cited.How so when the equal protection clause says "person" not "woman"
That's what I've been saying. Gender based laws are similar to race based laws.In the first trimester, the woman has the exclusive right to pursue an abortion, not subject to any state intervention. In the second trimester, the state cannot intervene unless her health is at risk. If the fetus becomes viable, once the pregnancy has progressed into the third trimester, the state may restrict the right to an abortion but must always include an exception to any regulation that protects the health of the mother.Cite it in RvW or lose for the last time.Roe vs Wade gives anyone the right to abort a child they are carrying. Thats why its based on the clause that says "person"Roe v Wade gives a woman the right to abort her child. Thus violating that very clause you cited.How so when the equal protection clause says "person" not "woman"Right you are sir. Violating the equal protection clause cited in post #286.
The thing she doesnt understand is that the Roe vs Wade decision is based on the due process clause in the 14th amendment. So if men could get pregnant they would be protected as well...Women are also afforded the ability to get pregnant where men cannot. Sounds like your beef is with G-d. Take it up with Him.Women are afforded rights not afforded to men. As you said, men have no reproductive rights.Nope, no violation since men can’t get pregnant.Right you are sir. Violating the equal protection clause cited in post #286.None.What are the men's equal reproductive rights.
Unequal application of the law.
It's with the law. Women have reproductive rights that men don't.Women are also afforded the ability to get pregnant where men cannot. Sounds like your beef is with G-d. Take it up with Him.Women are afforded rights not afforded to men. As you said, men have no reproductive rights.Nope, no violation since men can’t get pregnant.Right you are sir. Violating the equal protection clause cited in post #286.None.What are the men's equal reproductive rights.
Unequal application of the law.
Who doesn’t laugh at her?I know. I was done the first time I showed you that you were wrong. Now I'm just laughing at you.You're done.You already lost because I already cited it.Cite it in RvW or lose for the last time.Roe vs Wade gives anyone the right to abort a child they are carrying. Thats why its based on the clause that says "person"Roe v Wade gives a woman the right to abort her child. Thus violating that very clause you cited.
Doesnt matter what you have been saying. You have been saying the very thing I have proved you to be wrong about.That's what I've been saying. Gender based laws are similar to race based laws.In the first trimester, the woman has the exclusive right to pursue an abortion, not subject to any state intervention. In the second trimester, the state cannot intervene unless her health is at risk. If the fetus becomes viable, once the pregnancy has progressed into the third trimester, the state may restrict the right to an abortion but must always include an exception to any regulation that protects the health of the mother.Cite it in RvW or lose for the last time.Roe vs Wade gives anyone the right to abort a child they are carrying. Thats why its based on the clause that says "person"Roe v Wade gives a woman the right to abort her child. Thus violating that very clause you cited.How so when the equal protection clause says "person" not "woman"
Both are no-no's.
Sure, when men get pregnant, they have the same right to terminate their own pregnancy. Equal protection guarantees that.It's with the law. Women have reproductive rights that men don't.Women are also afforded the ability to get pregnant where men cannot. Sounds like your beef is with G-d. Take it up with Him.Women are afforded rights not afforded to men. As you said, men have no reproductive rights.Nope, no violation since men can’t get pregnant.Right you are sir. Violating the equal protection clause cited in post #286.None.
Unequal application of the law.
It would be equally representative to give a man the right to abort his child, regardless what the woman wanted.
You cant abort something you dont have in your womb dummy.It's with the law. Women have reproductive rights that men don't.Women are also afforded the ability to get pregnant where men cannot. Sounds like your beef is with G-d. Take it up with Him.Women are afforded rights not afforded to men. As you said, men have no reproductive rights.Nope, no violation since men can’t get pregnant.Right you are sir. Violating the equal protection clause cited in post #286.None.
Unequal application of the law.
It would be equally representative to give a man the right to abort his child, regardless what the woman wanted.
Dont get frustrated. Get a better argument that isnt so easy to dismantle.OK, nothing.
You two can talk to each other.
Night.
Well, no, there are no differences between races beyond physical appearance; while there are significant differences between genders.That's what I've been saying. Gender based laws are similar to race based laws.In the first trimester, the woman has the exclusive right to pursue an abortion, not subject to any state intervention. In the second trimester, the state cannot intervene unless her health is at risk. If the fetus becomes viable, once the pregnancy has progressed into the third trimester, the state may restrict the right to an abortion but must always include an exception to any regulation that protects the health of the mother.Cite it in RvW or lose for the last time.Roe vs Wade gives anyone the right to abort a child they are carrying. Thats why its based on the clause that says "person"Roe v Wade gives a woman the right to abort her child. Thus violating that very clause you cited.How so when the equal protection clause says "person" not "woman"
Both are no-no's.
Ciao. Better luck next time.OK, nothing.
You two can talk to each other.
Night.
Is the op aware that you can`t take a tax deduction for a fetus?the op is aware a lot of states do not consider it double homicide
State Homicide Laws That Recognize Unborn Victims | National Right to Life
