playtime
Diamond Member
- Aug 18, 2015
- 55,166
- 47,081
- 3,645
A total fabrication.
Let's see some support for that after you pry your hoof out of your mouth.
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.
A total fabrication.
Let's see some support for that after you pry your hoof out of your mouth.
Legally, morally, historically, scientifically.
1.The two views of the Constitution are, either Originalism, or “winning is all that matters.”
The former for conservatives, the latter, Democrats.
An example that might resonate with conservatives, if you sit down to a game of Chess, and agree to ‘touch-move,’ then the other player must make the move if a piece is handled in any way….no taking back a move.
To pose the example for Democrats, when involved in a tough game of Chutes and Ladders, ….no spinning twice.
2. The decision presented this week, of abortion revives America’s founding, based on federalism, where each state retains a great degree of sovereignty, see amendment 10, and reminds that the country is made up of 51 “laboratories of democracy.”
“In its main brief in the case, Mississippi condemns Roe v. Wade and the 1992 decision reaffirming it, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, as “irreconcilable with constitutional text and ‘historical meaning.’” This expresses an “originalist” viewpoint, emphasizing the Constitution must be interpreted based on its text and where necessary on its original meaning at the time it was enacted. Mississippi insists that the Constitution’s silence on abortion, combined with the lack of historical legal protections for it, means the 14th Amendment doesn’t safeguard the abortion right. This gloves-off originalism even maintains that Roe and Casey being non-originalist opinions “provides compelling grounds to overrule them.”
Mississippiâs Originalism
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health and the attack on sexual freedomprospect.org
3. This decision by the Supremes represents the simple, yet significant view, that the Constitution is important to what America is. The fact is that the only document that Americans have agreed to be governed by is the Constitution. The U.S. Constitution calls itself the "supreme law of the land." This clause is taken to mean that when state constitutions or laws passed by state legislatures or the national Congress found to conflict with the federal Constitution, they have no force, no moment, no effect.
The conflict arises due to the major political party, the Democrat Party, advancing the view that what they wish, and their minions say, supplants the actual English language written in the Constitution. Their political will is more important than the text of the document.
4. Here, the villain who advanced that view:
In July 5, 1935, in a letter to Representative Samuel B. Hill of Washington, the President manifested his contempt for the Constitution. Hill was chairman of the subcommittee studying the Guffey-Vinson bill to regulate the coal industry: the purpose of the legislation was to re-establish, for the coal industry, the NRA code system which the Supreme Court had unanimously declared unconstitutional. Roosevelt wrote: "I hope your committee will not permit doubts as to constitutionality, however reasonable, to block the legislation."
Letter to Representative Samuel B. Hill on H.R. 8479. | The American Presidency Project
www.presidency.ucsb.edu
This was the same Roosevelt who had sworn an oath on his 300 year old family Bible, to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Chesly Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p. 65.
5. “The originalism looks to the original public-meaning of the Constitution and its amendments at the time they were enacted. The meaning of the Constitution must remain the same, until it is properly changed. And it cannot be changed unilaterally by the courts, or even by courts acting in conjunction with other branches of government.”
Professor Randy Barnett, in “Originalism,” Calabrisi, p. 262.
Of course, the understanding requires ethics, morality, and integrity, rarely found in Democrats.
I understand your difficulty with words......but try to articulate what this is supposed to mean.
I double dog dare you.
I understand your difficulty with words......but try to articulate what this is supposed to mean.
I double dog dare you.
lol ...And when you can't......mull this over:
a. when does science say life begins?(when two strands of DNA join to form a new and distinct human being)
b. what does science say about the two separate bodies involved in an abortion? (It’s not ‘her body’)
c. what percent of the 63 million abortions done via Roe are for rape or incest? (if we make exception for rape and incest, will you ban abortion?)
d. at what point does the prospective mom have the ability not to have a child,
without the step of murder? (she already had her chance not to have a child)
Is ending the life of another human being murder? (or at least homicide?)
you know EXACTLY what it means. i know you're slow ... but not that slow.
are you?
<pfffft>
Countries in which abortion is completely illegal/prohibited:
Abortion is completely illegal in the following countries: Andorra, Aruba (territory), Republic of the Congo, Curaçao (territory), Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Iraq, Jamaica, Laos, Madagascar, Malta, Mauritania, Nicaragua, Palau, Philippines, San Marino, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Suriname, Tonga, and West Bank & Gaza Strip (Palestinian territories). Note: This is a list of countries in which abortion has been completely prohibited. For a more complete and detailed list of countries and their various legal stances on abortion, see the table further down the page.
Countries Where Abortion Is Illegal 2022
can you understand this?
View attachment 664262
lol ...
life with human DNA. b4 viability?
not a person.
that the last final word is the person who is already here ... fully independent, with a life history already in existence for years.
sorry but science will tell you that an acorn is not an oak tree.
THAT doesn't matter. because it's none of yer biz'nez. nor the smaller, less intrusive gov'ment.
answered above, chicklet.
it's not murder. & the 2nd part - - - still none of yer biz'nez.
you think it's homicide? m'k, i'll play just this once.
if - as you say, it's 'homicide' ... then abortion b4 viability is justified 'homicide'.
How is your interest anything but a religious view? The issue of when life begins has been hotly debated by philosophers since the beginning of time. It’s still debated in religions. So, when you say this is the only right that takes away from the state the ability to protect a life, that’s a religious view.
the form of existence that organisms like animals and plants have and that inorganic objects or organic dead bodies lack; animate existence, characterized by growth, reproduction, metabolism, and response to stimuli.
lol ...
life with human DNA. b4 viability?
not a person.
that the last final word is the person who is already here ... fully independent, with a life history already in existence for years.
sorry but science will tell you that an acorn is not an oak tree.
THAT doesn't matter. because it's none of yer biz'nez. nor the smaller, less intrusive gov'ment.
answered above, chicklet.
it's not murder. & the 2nd part - - - still none of yer biz'nez.
you think it's homicide? m'k, i'll play just this once.
if - as you say, it's 'homicide' ... then abortion b4 viability is justified 'homicide'.
b. what does science say about the two separate bodies involved in an abortion? (It’s not ‘her body’)
You didn't answer the question.
Focus like a laser: that is the basis of your lie....er, claim, about "second class citizenship"????
it's 2nd class CITIZEN.
Second-class citizen
A second-class citizen is a person who is systematically and actively discriminated against within a state or other political jurisdiction, despite their nominal status as a citizen or a legal resident there. ~ wiki
don't think it hasn't gone unnoticed that PoliticalChic has yet to address the FACT that the decision to allow females the right to their own autonomy thru the passage of ROE V WADE was a 7-2 decision by a (R) majority SC.
A Win For Originalism…And America
AND
she has failed to acknowledge that i proved how she is dead wrong when she said that no firearms were carried by donny's traitorous flying monkeys during the insurrection.
A Win For Originalism…And America
instead, she throws anything & everything she could to deflect & deny.
she is now dismissed yet again.
don't think it hasn't gone unnoticed that PoliticalChic has yet to address the FACT that the decision to allow females the right to their own autonomy thru the passage of ROE V WADE was a 7-2 decision by a (R) majority SC.
A Win For Originalism…And America
AND
she has failed to acknowledge that i proved how she is dead wrong when she said that no firearms were carried by donny's traitorous flying monkeys during the insurrection.
A Win For Originalism…And America
instead, she throws anything & everything she could to deflect & deny.
she is now dismissed yet again.
don't think it hasn't gone unnoticed that PoliticalChic has yet to address the FACT that the decision to allow females the right to their own autonomy thru the passage of ROE V WADE was a 7-2 decision by a (R) majority SC.
A Win For Originalism…And America
AND
she has failed to acknowledge that i proved how she is dead wrong when she said that no firearms were carried by donny's traitorous flying monkeys during the insurrection.
A Win For Originalism…And America
instead, she throws anything & everything she could to deflect & deny.
she is now dismissed yet again.
I just did.
Just like the looney tune I was responding to, you also CHOOSE to ignore.
Plain and simple.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
You and her ignore the first part, cling to the second part.
A full term baby is not viable. If you put it on the table and leave it, as Democrats are wont to do, it will die. New born babies require support in order to survive. Babies in the womb require support in order to survive.lol ...
life with human DNA. b4 viability?
not a person.
that the last final word is the person who is already here ... fully independent, with a life history already in existence for years.
sorry but science will tell you that an acorn is not an oak tree.
THAT doesn't matter. because it's none of yer biz'nez. nor the smaller, less intrusive gov'ment.
answered above, chicklet.
it's not murder. & the 2nd part - - - still none of yer biz'nez.
you think it's homicide? m'k, i'll play just this once.
if - as you say, it's 'homicide' ... then abortion b4 viability is justified 'homicide'.
However , the entire pro-choice movement is run and supported by imbeciles who care more about promoting and collecting money for charities , along with whining about their feelings , than actually presenting a valid argument .