Oklahoma Passes Bill Banning ALL Abortions - No Rape Exceptions - 10 years in Prison for Performing one

Members are reminded, no off topic snark or attacks on this forum without content to topic of thread.
 
The "US" government also at one time considered "Negros" 3/5s human. Are you really going to let a bunch of elected, by the most gullible, Beurocrats shape your understanding of life itself?
Well now there's people who want to make fetuses full citizens. How crazy is that. If you start from conception that could include not only fetuses but two celled organisms. Just because they have human DNA doesn't mean they're human beings or citizens.
 
My point is there is no shortage of US parents to adopt American children, at least not at a very young age. Trying to get a 10 year old adopted, that's a different subject all together since most parents want to raise a child from an infant if they can. My cousin got her daughter when she was 4 years old.
Will that be the same when 10 times the number of adoptable children are available
 
Will that be the same when 10 times the number of adoptable children are available
Plus there will be many with severe health problems that should have been aborted. How adoptable are they, and who could afford all those medical expenses. These people do not know what they're doing they're creating problems rather than solving any real problem.
 
Ray, I just think you are being a little racist because you specifically mentioned a "white" baby.

You should see the funny looks I get from some people when I go out with my grandsons. The older one is 16 and about as white in skin color as the day is long and looks like me. The younger one is 13 and looks almost exactly like his father, with dark brown skin and bears no resemblance to anyone else in the family. Both are mixed race, with black, white and Hispanic traits, yet you would swear they were unrelated.

I think most parents would want children that most resemble them. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with adopting children of different color or ethnic background. With my cousin and her husband you can clearly see their daughter is not their own. It was never a problem for them. They love her dearly, but at first they wanted to adopt a white child because of course, they're white. Nothing wrong with that.

But you're pulling my comment off point, and that point is there are plenty of parents to adopt a baby if the mother opts not to have an abortion but doesn't want the baby for herself.
 
I think most parents would want children that most resemble them. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with adopting children of different color or ethnic background. With my cousin and her husband you can clearly see their daughter is not their own. It was never a problem for them. They love her dearly, but at first they wanted to adopt a white child because of course, they're white. Nothing wrong with that.

But you're pulling my comment off point, and that point is there are plenty of parents to adopt a baby if the mother opts not to have an abortion but doesn't want the baby for herself.
My apologies for questioning your motives!
 
Sure it does, because you are ignoring the document as well as the intentions for writing what they did, and redefining those words to meet your beliefs. The ninth amendment only says the BOR are not exclusive or to deny other rights. So where is the right to abortion?
Where is the right to anything not specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights? The Ninth Amendment makes it clear that the rights of the people don't have to be mentioned specifically in the Constitution.

Is it your claim that the Constitution doesn't require government to protect any rights outside the very few specifically cited? If you read the Federalist Papers you'll see that was the opposite of the authors' intent. They wanted to obligate government to protect - and let's not be coy here, "protect" means "stay the fuck away from" - all our rights. They wanted to turn the tables with the novel concept that people should be free to do whatever they want as long as they're not violating the rights of others. And the state should be limited to very specific powers.
 
Last edited:
Few people commit suicide with fentanyl. How can you have a username as "Relative Ethics' if you are a Jew?

I fully support anyone stupid enough to make a permanent solution to a temporary problem.
1) People die from fentanyl overdose -- I guess tens of thousands each year.

2) What's wrong with my username?

3) Suicide is a crime at least as bad as homicide.
 
Where is the right to anything not specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights? The Ninth Amendment makes it clear that the rights of the people don't have to be mentioned specifically in the Constitution.

Is it your claim that the Constitution doesn't require government to protect any rights outside the very few specifically cited? If you read the Federalist Papers you'll see that was the opposite of the authors' intent. They wanted to obligate government to protect - and let's not be coy here, "protect" means "stay the fuck away from" - all our rights. They wanted to turn the tables with the novel concept that people should be free to do whatever they want as long as they're not violating the rights of others. And the state should be limited to very specific powers.

What if you claim something as a right with which I vehemently disagree?

For example, if you believe government paid healthcare is a right, and I disagree.
 
I think most parents would want children that most resemble them. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with adopting children of different color or ethnic background. With my cousin and her husband you can clearly see their daughter is not their own. It was never a problem for them. They love her dearly, but at first they wanted to adopt a white child because of course, they're white. Nothing wrong with that.

But you're pulling my comment off point, and that point is there are plenty of parents to adopt a baby if the mother opts not to have an abortion but doesn't want the baby for herself.
They are advertising for foster parents on Nebraska TV. People are not adopted here. Most white people here are elderly. And a lot of younger people are Hispanic here and they have plenty of kids their own, so they're not adopting. I sure hope Nebraska doesn't come up with some stupid stringent abortion laws otherwise we're going to be in real trouble here.
 
What if you claim something as a right with which I vehemently disagree?
You're free to disagree all you like.
For example, if you believe government paid healthcare is a right, and I disagree.
The concept of a right to a given service, paid for by government, is contradictory. Essentially it's claiming the "right" to enslave others - to force others to work for your benefit.
 
You're free to disagree all you like.

The concept of a right to a given service, paid for by government, is contradictory. Essentially it's claiming the "right" to enslave others - to force others to work for your benefit.
Many people believe that healthcare is a right. If you don't great, but I am sure there are ideas that you believe are rights which most people would disagree.
 
Many people believe that healthcare is a right. If you don't great, but I am sure there are ideas that you believe are rights which most people would disagree.
I'm not entirely clear what your point is. Are you saying that only the rights cited specifically in the Constitution deserve protection?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top