Hey Liberals: Churches are PRIVATE Property

SweetSue92

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2018
Messages
40,749
Reaction score
38,031
Points
3,615
Location
USA
Imagine storming into a church DURING A CHURCH SERVICE that demanding that the worshippers listen to you vent your spleen. Even further, imagine that YOU think you have the right to storm in and vent because of "free speech".

The dopes in Minneapolis are about to find out, I have a feeling.

 
1768823744542.webp
 
Imagine storming into a church DURING A CHURCH SERVICE that demanding that the worshippers listen to you vent your spleen. Even further, imagine that YOU think you have the right to storm in and vent because of "free speech".

The dopes in Minneapolis are about to find out, I have a feeling.

Um, so, if ICE storms into a church looking for immigrants, you'll be all up against that?
 
Imagine storming into a church DURING A CHURCH SERVICE that demanding that the worshippers listen to you vent your spleen. Even further, imagine that YOU think you have the right to storm in and vent because of "free speech".

The dopes in Minneapolis are about to find out, I have a feeling.

But there were only three in the congregation and later it was realised that two had died and been ignored for the previous two days .
 
Yes. Not ALL of us put our politics over our religion--or worse, have made politics are entire religion

Okay, we'll see. I'll make sure to tag you when there's a story about ICE raiding a church.

Incidentally, Politics isn't my "religion". I've criticized the Democrats quite a bit when I think they are wrong. The only difference is that the Democrats are merely incompetent; the Republicans are straight-up evil.
 
Okay, we'll see. I'll make sure to tag you when there's a story about ICE raiding a church.

Incidentally, Politics isn't my "religion". I've criticized the Democrats quite a bit when I think they are wrong. The only difference is that the Democrats are merely incompetent; the Republicans are straight-up evil.
supporting slaughter 50 million innocent children in the womb is the epitome of evil ..
 
Um, so, if ICE storms into a church looking for immigrants, you'll be all up against that?
ICE has federal officers with search warrants and probable-cause to look for illegals and arrest people for harboring fugitives.

Commie assholes have no authority or right to break into private property just cuz they suspect somebody might support the federal government.
 
Fetuses aren't people, and there were just as many abortions happening before Roe as after Roe.
Exactly. Getting rid of Roe changed nothing. You still have the right to murder the unborn.
When are you libroids going to issue a retraction and an apology?
 
ICE has federal officers with search warrants and probable-cause to look for illegals and arrest people for harboring fugitives.

Commie assholes have no authority or right to break into private property just cuz they suspect somebody might support the federal government.

ICE is storming schools and churches without warrants; that's the problem there.
 
Cowardice and misplaced belief the problem would just go away?

Plessey was upheld for about as long, and was just as bad.

I would probably agree that the Justices hoped that Roe would be no more controversial than Griswold was. They failed to account for how the Evangelical Crazies would glom onto Abortion after Segregation stopped being a popular issue with their congregations. (Before Roe, the Evangelicals saw abortion as a "Catholic" thing, and the Catholics considered abortion somewhere long the lines of "using contraception" and "Eating meat on Friday during Lent" kind of sin.)

No, guy, Roe isn't as "Bad" as Plessey. Roe was pragmatic because by 1973, most OB/GYNs were ignoring abortion laws and performing abortions in their offices.

The reality of the pre-Roe abortion laws are they were rarely enforced, as opposed to segregation, which was actively enforced. (That's what made what Rosa Parks did so radical).

Abortion providers were only prosecuted if they got sloppy and injured or killed the woman. Women were almost never arrested for having abortions.

The only thing worse than a dumb law is trying to enforce a dumb law. (As we are seeing now with immigration.)
 
I would probably agree that the Justices hoped that Roe would be no more controversial than Griswold was. They failed to account for how the Evangelical Crazies would glom onto Abortion after Segregation stopped being a popular issue with their congregations. (Before Roe, the Evangelicals saw abortion as a "Catholic" thing, and the Catholics considered abortion somewhere long the lines of "using contraception" and "Eating meat on Friday during Lent" kind of sin.)

No, guy, Roe isn't as "Bad" as Plessey. Roe was pragmatic because by 1973, most OB/GYNs were ignoring abortion laws and performing abortions in their offices.

The reality of the pre-Roe abortion laws are they were rarely enforced, as opposed to segregation, which was actively enforced. (That's what made what Rosa Parks did so radical).

Abortion providers were only prosecuted if they got sloppy and injured or killed the woman. Women were almost never arrested for having abortions.

The only thing worse than a dumb law is trying to enforce a dumb law. (As we are seeing now with immigration.)

No, they failed to admit that a fetus is a unique and separate life, something you can deny all you want but doesn't change anything.

Roe was jiggery pokery, as Scalia once said about Obergfell.
 
No, they failed to admit that a fetus is a unique and separate life, something you can deny all you want but doesn't change anything.

If a fetus isn't viable, it isn't a separate life.

And as a practical matter, if a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, she'll find a way to not be pregnant.

Unless you are willing to start putting women in jail for having abortions, this is a meaningless discussion.

Roe was jiggery pokery, as Scalia once said about Obergfell.

Actually, Scalia also said that once Sodomy laws were struck down, (Lawrence v. Texas) there was no legal basis to keep gay marriage illegal.

And as it turned out, there really wasn't.
 
15th post
If a fetus isn't viable, it isn't a separate life.

And as a practical matter, if a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, she'll find a way to not be pregnant.

Unless you are willing to start putting women in jail for having abortions, this is a meaningless discussion.



Actually, Scalia also said that once Sodomy laws were struck down, (Lawrence v. Texas) there was no legal basis to keep gay marriage illegal.

And as it turned out, there really wasn't.

It is a separate life regardless. Different DNA than the mother.

I support birth control abortions up to 10-12 weeks, so go find another point.

He was saying that with sarcasm.
 
It is a separate life regardless. Different DNA than the mother.

I support birth control abortions up to 10-12 weeks, so go find another point.

He was saying that with sarcasm.

Wait, hold on, guy, if you think fetuses are separate lives, then how can you support abortion up to the 12th week?

What changes between week 12 and week 13?

No, Scalia said that in his dissent to Lawrence.
 
Wait, hold on, guy, if you think fetuses are separate lives, then how can you support abortion up to the 12th week?

What changes between week 12 and week 13?

No, Scalia said that in his dissent to Lawrence.

Because I believe in compromise and drawing lines.

It's the balance between individual liberty and government responsibility.
 
Back
Top Bottom