The Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision

[schmidlap]

We believe in equality and human rights, you do not - you brainless clump of cells that should be denied personhood and killed by your own standard.

You believe in authoritarianism, and are hellbent upon inflicting your extremist agenda upon freedom-loving Americans who respect a woman's right to control her womb and recognize that a mindless, microscopic amalgam of cells is not a person.

Your preformation/homunculus fantasy was dispelled by medical science centuries ago, but you are still free to follow that nonsense yourself. No one is attempting to inflict medical science on you.

​

61% of Americans say abortion should be legal | Pew Research​

​

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

You believe in authoritarianism

I'm a strict libertarian, you stupid fuck, that's why I oppose aggressive violence and flagrant inequality like you do, you lying authoritarian piece of shit. Go fuck yourself.

upon freedom-loving Americans

We're all good here - you're our enemy, though.

who respect a woman's right to control her womb

What a dishonest and horrible framing of killing your own kid for personal gain.

recognize that a mindless, microscopic amalgam of cells is not a person

Others do not share your stupid, mindless bigotry, you worthless and inhuman clump of cells.

Your preformation/homunculus fantasy was dispelled by medical science centuries ago

Life begins at fertilization - that is textbook scientific, biological, embryological, medical science FACT. It is indisputable. You're pathetic.

 

[schmidlap]

I'm a strict libertarian, you stupid fuck, that's why I oppose aggressive violence and flagrant inequality like you do, you lying authoritarian piece of shit. Go fuck yourself.


We're all good here - you're our enemy, though.


What a dishonest and horrible framing of killing your own kid for personal gain.


Others do not share your stupid, mindless bigotry, you worthless and inhuman clump of cells.


Life begins at fertilization - that is textbook scientific, biological, embryological, medical science FACT. It is indisputable. You're pathetic.

Calm down and try to conduct yourself in a civil, adult manner.

Your desire that the State abrogate and arrogate personal freedom, imposing your antic notion upon everyone, is the antithesis of libertarianism.

No matter how much you rage against freedom-loving Americans, that is inescapable.

​

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Calm down and try to conduct yourself in a civil, adult manner.

Nah.

I’m done with your bullshit spam.

Just shut the fuck up.

Your desire that the State abrogate and arrogate personal freedom

I don’t have that desire. Stop lying.

Violence against others isn’t “personal freedom,” psychopath.

 

[schmidlap]

Nah.

I’m done with your bullshit spam.

Just shut the fuck up.


I don’t have that desire. Stop lying.

Violence against others isn’t “personal freedom,” psychopath.

Your authoritarian fanaticism is obviously impervious to empirical data and rational discourse.

That has been amply exposed.

Patriotic Americans will not surrender to the statism of Nicaragua, El Salvador, or Iraq, regardless of how much you push it.

In 2006, Nicaragua enacted a complete abortion ban — including in cases of rape, incest, and when the life of the woman is at risk.​

​

Under the 1973 Penal Code, induced abortion was officially recognized as a crime in El Salvador.​

​

There are 16 countries where abortion is prohibited altogether, a list that includes Egypt, Iraq, the Philippines, Laos, Senegal, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Haiti and the Dominican Republic​

​

The freedom-loving people of the United States and other advanced, democratic nations will not submit to such tyranny.

​

Poll Shows Most Americans Support Abortion Rights​

 

[schmidlap]

Nah.

I’m done with your bullshit spam.

Just shut the fuck up.


I don’t have that desire. Stop lying.

Violence against others isn’t “personal freedom,” psychopath.

Documented reality: There are 16 countries where abortion is prohibited. They include Egypt, Iraq, the Philippines, Laos, Senegal, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Haiti and the Dominican Republic

The freedom-loving people of the United States and other advanced, democratic nations will not submit to such tyranny.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Documented reality

Asshole just write some basic code and stop posting already.

AI is so much more advanced than your NPC bot rant that you spam every time you talk.

A bot would have more variety and more creative and critical thinking skills than you.

 

[schmidlap]

Asshole just write some basic code and stop posting already.

AI is so much more advanced than your NPC bot rant that you spam every time you talk.

A bot would have more variety and more creative and critical thinking skills than you.

You may be less ill-tempered if you were to immigrate to Egypt, Iraq, the Philippines, Laos, Senegal, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Haiti or the Dominican Republic where authoritarian regimes control wombs.

Advanced democracy respect freedom.

 

[Pellinore]

Don’t take Schittlap too seriously. Nobody does.

Maybe you should. If this were a court case, he would be beating the oratorical shit out of you with a bombardment of links, including from sites such as The Hill and Time.

I see a lot of simplistic name-calling, but you and Carsomyr have done nothing but name-call.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

You

If you ask Rick Astley for a copy of the movie “UP”, he cannot give you it as he can never give you up. But, by doing that, he is letting you down, and thus, is creating something known as the Astley Paradox.

 

[schmidlap]

If you ask Rick Astley for a copy of the movie “UP”, he cannot give you it as he can never give you up. But, by doing that, he is letting you down, and thus, is creating something known as the Astley Paradox.

The number of authoritarians in America who wish to crush reproductive freedom and cede control of wombs to their politicians and bureaucrats is shrinking:

Majorities of Americans in 43 states and the District of Columbia say that abortion should be legal in most or all cases, and in 13 states plus the District, more than 7 in 10 residents support legalization. The proportion of Republicans who say it should be illegal in all cases declined throughout 2022 from 18% in March to 14% in December.​

​

[New 50-State Survey: Support for Abortion Rights Rising in All States - PRRI]​

Interesting:​

Frank Pavone, a defrocked priest who was formerly a Catholic adviser to Donald Trump, is engulfed in a sex scandal that is rocking the anti-abortion movement.​

[Inside the Unholy Sex Scandal Rocking Trump’s Ex-Adviser]​

​

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

The

UwU what's this ?! ​

Rawr X3 *nuzzles* How are you? *pounces on you* you're so warm o3o *notices you have a bulge* someone's happy! *nuzzles your necky wecky* ~murr~ hehe ​

 

[BackAgain]

Maybe you should. If this were a court case, he would be beating the oratorical shit out of you with a bombardment of links, including from sites such as The Hill and Time.

I see a lot of simplistic name-calling, but you and Carsomyr have done nothing but name-call.

False. If this were a court case it would have been dismissed on motions alone.

Linking to articles doesn’t support his absurd premise anymore than you agreeing with him supports his nonsense.

You’ve got nothing. It shows. Neither does he.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Spamming irrelevant nonsense, repeatedly, does not constitute an argument.

If he continues to spam it, all he is going to get is copypasta replies. There are a lot of these. If I somehow ran out, then just entire bad fan fiction replies, up to the text limit.

 

[BackAgain]

Your little tantrum in defense of authoritarian dictate is noted. Please respect freedom-loving Americans, even if you prefer the repressive regimes of Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Iraq where the State has seized control of wombs and eliminated personal freedom.

Many Americans living in states where abortion rights are limited want more abortion rights, poll shows
In many states where GOP lawmakers have banned abortion, most residents say they support abortion rights in most or all cases,
according to a survey published Thursday by the Public Religion Research Institute, a nonpartisan research organization that
tracks views on abortion. In all, majorities of Americans in 43 states support legal abortion.

More Than Half of People in States Trump Won Support Abortion in 'Most or All Cases'

Most people in most states support legal abortio

Even Religious Americans Favor Abortion Rights Post-Dobbs​

This one is a repeat for your need it Shitlips but also an effort to try (probably in vain) to educate Pellinore

The right to life is not supposed to be a matter subject to the whims of democracy. Accordingly, voter sentiment is irrelevant.

Again, this is a very strong example of why we aren’t a “democracy.”

 

[Pellinore]

This one is a repeat for your need it Shitlips but also an effort to try (probably in vain) to educate Pellinore

The right to life is not supposed to be a matter subject to the whims of democracy. Accordingly, voter sentiment is irrelevant.

Again, this is a very strong example of why we aren’t a “democracy.”

Yeah, I saw. You're approaching it, though, from your definition of a fetus is "life." Your point of view as to what constitutes "life" is your own, of course, and you are entirely allowed to have it ... but the thing you overlook is that other people are allowed to define it in their own way as well. It's not as if we can measure life molecules in parts per million, or whatever; it is a moral, ethical, and often theological issue with no universal scientific answer.

Some religions and ideologies believe that life happens the moment the two cells become a zygote, others believe not until the moment of birth, and yet others believe all points in between. We could, as a society, decide on one definite point and run from there, but instead our society is set up to allow all religions and other ideologies to exist together. That's what makes our country great in the first place.

So it's not our government's job to decide which answer is "correct," and when life definitively begins or ends. Our government's job instead to allow each person to make their own decisions, as it is with any other medical choices, or with how we raise our children, or what we choose to keep private, or maintain our dignity, or any of those. It's also their job to prevent others from infringing on our rights to do those things.

The Roe v. Wade ruling did this. It acknowledged that it was not the government's job to define human "life," but to allow each person to define it according to their own conscience. In order to protect each person's ability to make that choice, it prohibited State and local governments from passing their own anti-abortion laws. That's how our government works.

Dobbs was a mistake, the result of a blatantly partisan court establishing a moral, ethical, and theological position in order to take away a major Constitutional right. That's a first; the Court has never done that before, and it sets us on a dangerous path. I'll let your imagination fill in the blanks of how cataclysmic that can be to our system when applied to other rights, and how bad it can be for you, specifically, when the Court decides that people like you are suddenly not allowed a right you've had for your entire life.

Go on, pick a right. A big one. Now imagine not having it.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Yeah, I saw. You're approaching it, though, from your definition of a fetus is "life."

There is a definition, not “your definition.”

Life begins at fertilization. There is no question about this. No dispute to be had. You either know basic textbook scientific facts, or you fail to know them.

No, other people are absolutely not entitled to their own reality and their own facts - the suggestion is insane and stupid.

Some religions and ideologies believe that life happens the moment the two cells become a zygote, others

Others are objectively wrong and can be dismissed outright.

So it's not our government's job to decide which answer is "correct,"

It is their job to set the legal standards for personhood, and they could do so in a way that does not discriminate against some human beings so they can be killed without murder charges.

Our government's job instead to allow each person to make their own decisions, as it is with any other medical choices

Killing someone else is not “your choice” and it sure as shit isn’t medicine or healthcare.

The Roe v. Wade ruling did this.

Roe was bullshit.

Dobbs was a mistake

The 10th Amendment still exists, so you are wrong.

take away a major Constitutional right

Lie. There was no such right. There never could be. Try learning how to read English, and you might have been able to read a plain English document like the Constitution.

 

[BackAgain]

Yeah, I saw. You're approaching it, though, from your definition of a fetus is "life." Your point of view as to what constitutes "life" is your own, of course, and you are entirely allowed to have it ... but the thing you overlook is that other people are allowed to define it in their own way as well. It's not as if we can measure life molecules in parts per million, or whatever; it is a moral, ethical, and often theological issue with no universal scientific answer.

Some religions and ideologies believe that life happens the moment the two cells become a zygote, others believe not until the moment of birth, and yet others believe all points in between. We could, as a society, decide on one definite point and run from there, but instead our society is set up to allow all religions and other ideologies to exist together. That's what makes our country great in the first place.

So it's not our government's job to decide which answer is "correct," and when life definitively begins or ends. Our government's job instead to allow each person to make their own decisions, as it is with any other medical choices, or with how we raise our children, or what we choose to keep private, or maintain our dignity, or any of those. It's also their job to prevent others from infringing on our rights to do those things.

The Roe v. Wade ruling did this. It acknowledged that it was not the government's job to define human "life," but to allow each person to define it according to their own conscience. In order to protect each person's ability to make that choice, it prohibited State and local governments from passing their own anti-abortion laws. That's how our government works.

Dobbs was a mistake, the result of a blatantly partisan court establishing a moral, ethical, and theological position in order to take away a major Constitutional right. That's a first; the Court has never done that before, and it sets us on a dangerous path. I'll let your imagination fill in the blanks of how cataclysmic that can be to our system when applied to other rights, and how bad it can be for you, specifically, when the Court decides that people like you are suddenly not allowed a right you've had for your entire life.

Go on, pick a right. A big one. Now imagine not having it.

A zygote, a fetus and an embryo are all instances of life.

Try to follow along. Roe v. Wade was wrong. To a large extent, although an improvement of Roe v. Wade, Dobbs is also wrong. Why? Because Dobbs leaves a determination of the right to life up to individual states. This undermines the right to life — guaranteed under the Constitution — to a mere democratic option.

Abortion was never a real right. Just as I have no right to go kill some asshole who ripped me off by cheating at a poker table (for example), so too you have no claim that any woman has a “right” to terminate the life of the preborn human being inside her.

Your idiotic question is therefore based on an ignorant and erroneous assumption. I don’t agree to the taking away of any of our rights. But an empty claim that something “is” a right has nothing to do with your “question.”

 

[Pellinore]

There is a definition, not “your definition.”

Life begins at fertilization. There is no question about this. No dispute to be had. You either know basic textbook scientific facts, or you fail to know them.

Okay, let's run with that. Let's say you are correct, and the law must consider human life to begin at the very first spark of fertilization.

Let's look at a woman who has been pregnant for an hour, when her body flushes the fertilized zygote out before it has embedded, which happens every day. Does she have to report this to the authorities, who could then prosecute her for negligent homicide? After all, it was a human life, equal to her own under the law, and she failed to care for it.

But that was a bit much, so let's instead look at a woman who is a week or a month or several months further along. She checks into the hospital with pains and she is on the verge of miscarrying, through no fault of her own. Since the law considers her embryo a human life equal to her own, the doctors and nurses are required to save the embryo (how is beyond me). If they don't ... prosecution, again?

For most people, the answer to both will be "Of course not," but frankly even if you think they should arrest the mother in both cases, you have to admit that other rational, thinking people will have differing opinions, formed by their own morals, ethics, and theology. What's more, this is just asking questions of two aspects of this very wide issue; I haven't even brought up the rape and incest instances, or whether the life or health of the mother is in danger, or the presence and type of fetal abnormalities, and a whole bunch more.

You can be absolute and go with the first-spark all you want. I'm not here to tell you that your view is wrong. I am here to tell you that the government has about 250 million other views to consider, though, and it must consider all of them.

 

[BackAgain]

Okay, let's run with that. Let's say you are correct, and the law must consider human life to begin at the very first spark of fertilization.

Let's look at a woman who has been pregnant for an hour, when her body flushes the fertilized zygote out before it has embedded, which happens every day. Does she have to report this to the authorities, who could then prosecute her for negligent homicide? After all, it was a human life, equal to her own under the law, and she failed to care for it.

But that was a bit much, so let's instead look at a woman who is a week or a month or several months further along. She checks into the hospital with pains and she is on the verge of miscarrying, through no fault of her own. Since the law considers her embryo a human life equal to her own, the doctors and nurses are required to save the embryo (how is beyond me). If they don't ... prosecution, again?

For most people, the answer to both will be "Of course not," but frankly even if you think they should arrest the mother in both cases, you have to admit that other rational, thinking people will have differing opinions, formed by their own morals, ethics, and theology. What's more, this is just asking questions of two aspects of this very wide issue; I haven't even brought up the rape and incest instances, or whether the life or health of the mother is in danger, or the presence and type of fetal abnormalities, and a whole bunch more.

You can be absolute and go with the first-spark all you want. I'm not here to tell you that your view is wrong. I am here to tell you that the government has about 250 million other views to consider, though, and it must consider all of them.

You’re an idiot. A natural biological process involves no human causation. No crime. And even if there existed any theoretical way to say she was criminally negligent (and there isn’t) of course she wouldn’t be required to alert the cops. Have you ever HEARD of the 5th Amendment?