Is abortion rights the only freedom democrats care about?

[Votto]

It's like I always have said, democrats only care about the freedom and right to end the life of the unborn.

All other freedoms, like in the Bill of Rights to own guns and assemble freely, etc., they are against.

 

[pknopp]

Nether side has any room to stand on where freedoms are concerned.

Elijah McClain didn't even have the freedom to walk home from the store.

Want to smoke pot after work? While the control is slowing slipping some, it's still there. (from both sides)

The list is long.

 

[rightnow909]

It's like I always have said, democrats only care about the freedom and right to end the life of the unborn.

All other freedoms, like in the Bill of Rights to own guns and assemble freely, etc., they are against.

good way of putting it

they kind of like the right to be sexually perverse also...

 

[Pete7469]

As long as leftist genetic garbage is flushed down a toilet or tossed to rats in the dumpster behind Planned Unparentood I have no fucks to give. Leftist DNA is a cancer.

 

[Anomalism]

Liberals do seem to often be on the side arguing for the government to mandate our lives.

 

[john doe 101]

And naturally, Fauci pushes it in spite of the studies showing its ineffectiveness and dangers.

​

Is there anything produced or approved by our government for COVID that isn't ineffective, doesn't have terrible side effects, and doesn't actually make the virus worse? The lockdowns, masks, and shots not only failed to work, but caused terrible collateral damage, failed to stop the virus, and, in fact, likely made the virus become more virulent. Now there are reports that remdesivir, which we already know doesn't work and causes renal and liver failure, might also be making the virus itself worse.​

​

Antiviral agents, whether vaccine or therapeutic, must be perfect. If they fail to fully work, they can create viral immune escape, whereby the virus learns how to mutate around them. It's sort of like the principle of shooting at the king and missing, a principle we are often concerned with regarding the overuse or misuse of antibiotics.​

​

Researchers from the Yale School of Medicine posted a preprint study in which they discovered a mutated version of SARS-CoV-2 that appears to have redeveloped in a previously infected immunocompromised woman who was treated with remdesivir. Researchers were able to sequence the genome in a way that made it clear it was related to the remdesivir use in the patient. The patient was later cured by monoclonal antibodies. "This case illustrates the importance of monitoring for remdesivir resistance and the potential benefit of combinatorial therapies in immunocompromised patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection," the study's authors wrote.​

​

...​

​

But it gets worse. On Dec. 12, 2019, less than five months before Fauci and the FDA pushed approval of remdesivir without consulting with an outside panel of experts, the New England Journal of Medicine published a study on remdesivir use in Ebola that should have gotten the drug permanently banned for any use. Over the preceding year, the researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial of four therapeutics for use against Ebola in the Democratic Republic of Congo: remdesivir and three types of monoclonal antibodies, including Regeneron. What were the results in Table 2 of the study?​

​

Of the four drugs, remdesivir had the worst outcome with a 53.1% death rate, which is higher than the death rate from the virus. In fact, both remdesivir and ZMapp (death rate of 49.7%) were deemed to be so dangerous that they were pulled from the study on Aug. 9, 2019. Incidentally, Regeneron, which had the lowest death rate, is the monoclonal antibody therapy that seems to work well for COVID. Why would Fauci first pick remdesivir over Regeneron?​

​

On April 29, Fauci announced that remdesivir would become the standard of care, and another study he cited was Gilead's own March 2020 study (eventually published in the NEJM in June) of 53 coronavirus patients in the U.S. Canada, Europe, and Japan who used remdesivir for 10 days. Sixty percent reported adverse events and 23% reported serious adverse events, the most common being "multiple-organ-dysfunction syndrome, septic shock, acute kidney injury, and hypotension." Furthermore, "Four patients (8%) discontinued remdesivir treatment prematurely: one because of worsening of preexisting renal failure, one because of multiple organ failure, and two because of elevated aminotransferases, including one patient with a maculopapular rash."​

​

This is why the NIH to this day warns about renal failure and liver toxicity from the use of this drug that is bankrupting us and killing people in the hospitals. The WHO recommends against using it. The WHO's Solidarity trial, which was conducted on 2,750 patients in 405 hospitals across 30 countries, found "little or no effect of remdesivir on mortality," even though "the proportion of lower-risk patients happened to be appreciably greater in the remdesivir group than in the placebo group."​

​

Last year, in France's Bichat-Claude Bernard University Hospital, researchers studied outcomes in the first five COVID ICU patients who were administered remdesivir. Researchers observed, "Remdesivir was interrupted before the initially planned duration in four patients, two because of alanine aminotransferase elevations (3 to 5 normal range) and two because of renal failure requiring renal replacement." Elevated alanine aminotransferase is usually an indication of liver toxicity, one of the warnings the NIH has given about the use of remdesivir.​

​

...​

Horowitz: Remdesivir is the greatest scandal of the pandemic | Blaze Media

Is there anything produced or approved by our government for COVID that isn't ineffective, doesn't have terrible side effects, and doesn't actually make the virus worse? The lockdowns, masks, and shots not only failed to work, but caused terrible collateral damage, failed to stop the virus, and...

www.theblaze.com

It's like I always have said, democrats only care about the freedom and right to end the life of the unborn.

All other freedoms, like in the Bill of Rights to own guns and assemble freely, etc., they are against.

You're a moron.

 

[john doe 101]

As long as leftist genetic garbage is flushed down a toilet or tossed to rats in the dumpster behind Planned Unparentood I have no fucks to give. Leftist DNA is a cancer.

Actually, most women that get abortions consider themselves religious, which tend to be on the right. LOL thinking those on the left are the only ones getting abortions.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Actually, most women that get abortions consider themselves religious, which tend to be on the right. LOL thinking those on the left are the only ones getting abortions.

I don't care whose side they are on. More dead worthless moron bastard spawn is a good thing. Kill those fucking useless shits.

 

[john doe 101]

I don't care whose side they are on. More dead worthless moron bastard spawn is a good thing. Kill those fucking useless shits.

Who do you want to kill? Hopefully the FBI is reading this.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Want to smoke pot after work? While the control is slowing slipping some, it's still there. (from both sides)

It's telling that those on the left see doing mind-damaging drugs, and murdering innocent children as freedoms at least as defensible as those that they oppose, which are explicitly affirmed in the Constitution.

This is the difference between good and evil, on plain display. You don't really even try to hide it, any longer.

 

[pknopp]

It's telling that those on the left see doing mind-damaging drugs, and murdering innocent children as freedoms at least as defensible as those that they oppose, which are explicitly affirmed in the Constitution.

This is the difference between good and evil, on plain display. You don't really even try to hide it, any longer.

I'm pro-life so bite me. Yours is the typical pavlovian response.

 

[Votto]

Who do you want to kill? Hopefully the FBI is reading this.

I dunno, do parents of school children post here?

 

[DGS49]

Wimmin have a fond spot in what seems to be their "heart" for the argument that Right WIngers want to control "what they do with their own bodies."

This is obvious horseshit, but logic is not held in high esteem among wimmin.

As a card-carrying member of the Great Right WIng Conspiracy, I can say categorically that neither I nor any other Right Winger cares what any woman (other than their close friends and relatives) does with her body. She can,

• decorate it with tattoos,
• deform it with piercings,
• disfigure themselves with bizarre makeup and hairstyles,
• cover it with hideous clothes,
• consort with other women, men, or domesticated animals,
• remove body parts, or
• commit suicide.

In short, they can do ANYTHING THEY WANT WITH THEIR OWN BODIES, and no Right WInger will give a shit one way or another.

BUT when they start to carry another human within that body, then the unbridled freedom can rightly be curtailed. It would be quite reasonable to prohibit pregnant women from overt actions that are intended to, or would predictably have the effect of, endangering that other little life. It is essentially the same as saying that a woman cannot intentionally harm her child, post-birth.

And why should such constraints be a problem? The ways of avoiding becoming pregnant are many and varied, and some of them are completely without cost (abstinence, don't fuck with someone that you wouldn't want to raise a child with).

Wimmins' advocates always ask, "What about rape or incest?"

Incest? How does that get into the conversation? It is entirely possible that an incestuous copulation is entirely voluntary and knowing. How does that justify killing the product of that copulation?

Rape? Gimme a break. Statistically speaking, it does not occur. When it is claimed to occur, the claim is usually bogus.

Don't kill babies, or any living thing that might be construed as a human baby. How complicated is that?

 

[Votto]

Nether side has any room to stand on where freedoms are concerned.

Elijah McClain didn't even have the freedom to walk home from the store.

Want to smoke pot after work? While the control is slowing slipping some, it's still there. (from both sides)

The list is long.

True, both parties loved the NDAA which allows government to arrest anyone without due process so long as they think they are a terrorist.

Dear Americans: This Law Makes It Possible To Arrest And Jail You Indefinitely Anytime

Terrorism may not be the worst threat to freedom that we face.

www.huffpost.com

Most probably don't even know government can arrest them as they disappear forever without a trace

As for it being Constitutional, no, it is not.

It is my understanding though that someone has to first use the NDAA before it can be contested, but if you disappear and no one knows where you went, that will never happen

It is very strange that you can allow such laws on the books to stand till they are used.

And I don't see the GOP getting too concerned over the freedom of speech being censored other than poo slinging. They never get off their rump and do anything substantive to stop this crap so I assume deep down they are OK with it.

 

[Votto]

Currently the Bill of Rights is under attack on all fronts

The First Amendment that is supposed to protect the freedom to assemble and to free speech is under attack.

Over half the country now, mostly all Leftists, think that freedom of speech should be curbed if they are offended by it.

A shocking 61% of Americans want more restrictions on free speech. Here’s why they’re dead wrong

Those who support limits on free speech don't realize that a system of free expression is essential to individual liberty.

pacificlegal.org

And Covid has shown that government can prevent anyone from assembling, anytime, anywhere, for any reason without much opposition.

We all know the Left wants to repeal the Second amendment to be able to own fire arms.

And the 5th amendment seems to be under assault as well now that Steve Bannon has been rounded up and may defy Congress by taking the 5th not to talk. I heard some Left wing cooks talking about it on the radio today saying he should not have such rights..

But really, anything that stands in way of the DNC agenda is under assault.

 

[Road Runner]

It's like I always have said, democrats only care about the freedom and right to end the life of the unborn.

All other freedoms, like in the Bill of Rights to own guns and assemble freely, etc., they are against.

No wonder these idiots voted for Biden. None of them can't make up their mind because they don't have a mind to make up.

 

[Not a Monkeys Uncle]

It's like I always have said, democrats only care about the freedom and right to end the life of the unborn.

All other freedoms, like in the Bill of Rights to own guns and assemble freely, etc., they are against.

Yep. Democrats are so vested in murdering millions of babies, it truly is evil