Republicans won’t be satisfied with overturning Roe

[whutTHEYsay]

This is fun.

when you get done playing with your tally whacker, try giving me an honest and serious answer:

If I am not a person; Melania Trump cannot be a person.

Using your logic and reasoning and basic white medieval Christianity bigotry and hate we are either both “persons“ or we are not both “persons“.

Which is it now?

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Nowhere is it recognized as a person until birth; including in the Dobbs decision.

.






Except for places like this.......

MSN

www.msn.com

And this......

Husband of missing pregnant woman Mischa Johnson charged with 2 murders

Murder charges have been filed against the husband of missing pregnant woman Mischa Johnson, according to the U.S. Army.

news.yahoo.com

And this......,.

Suspect will face 2 counts of murder for the killing of pregnant woman in Minneapolis

The two people charged for a pregnant woman's death in Minneapolis will face an additional murder charge for the death of the baby, police announced on Tuesday.

www.fox9.com

And this....

Suspect that killed a pregnant woman charged with double homicide, new details emerge

As the manhunt for Lawrence Franklin Jr. is still underway, he has been charged with two counts of murder, for Amiah Prather and her unborn child, Honesti.

www.tmj4.com

And this.....

Husband arrested after double homicide of pregnant Prattville woman, unborn child

The baby was delivered Monday but did not survive.

www.montgomeryadvertiser.com

Lie harder, little one.









.

 

[ding]

Nowhere is it recognized as a person until birth; including in the Dobbs decision.

“For our part, we do not question the motives of either those who have supported and those who have opposed laws restricting abortion,” Sam Alito..​

Alito sneaked a church law into Dobbs in order to rewrite a medieval era Church law to make it look like English Common Law.

Alito sneakily cited an old law that imposed punishment for the killing of a fetus and inappropriately attributed it to English Common Law. The law was Leges Henrici Primi 222–223 (L. Downer ed. 1972) (imposing penalty for any abortion and treating a woman who aborted a "quick" child "as if she were a murderess").

It actually reads "If she does this [intentionally destroys her embryo] after it is quick [animate], she shall do penance for seven years as if she were a murderess."​

​

However sAlito carefully clipped out the words "she shall do penance for seven years" from the quotation, between "quick" and "as.”​

​

The word penance ding beagle9 CarsomyrPlusSix makes it church law which is not supposed to be considered civil law.

​

​

Are you still obsessing over the SCOTUS ruling? It's over.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

“For our part, we do not question the motives of either those who have supported and those who have opposed laws restricting abortion,” Sam Alito..

Are you still obsessing over the SCOTUS ruling? It's over.

Actually, I appreciate that Catholic fascist Supreme Court Justice sAlito confirmed that’s zygotes embryos and fetuses are not “persons” that the state has an interest in protecting a right to life.

Neutrality means nothing.

 

[hadit]

I don’t find the male at fault.


There is no crime when it’s consensual sex. So no one is at fault.

I just wonder why you’re such a nosy SOB..

Consensual sex specially random consensual sex out of the family structure does not entitle the male to seize control of the woman’s uterus and other reproductive organs just because a sperm breaks through the lining of an egg.

Who do you think these male assholes are?

Supreme beings?

By the same token, why should the female be able to strip the male of his reproductive rights with no legal recourse?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

By the same token, why should the female be able to strip the male of his reproductive rights with no legal recourse?

No female who wishes not to become a mother is able to strip any male of his reproductive rights.

Every male is free to find a woman that will have sex with him and be willing to give birth to his child.

 

[hadit]

No female who wishes not to become a mother is able to strip any male of his reproductive rights.

Every male is free to find a woman that will have sex with him and be willing to give birth to his child.

Oh, she absolutely can. Once she is pregnant, she can legally force fatherhood on the man or deny it to him, and there is nothing he can legally do about it.

This is a reality.

 

[fncceo]

That's the goal though. No abortion. No birth control. No gay marriage. No interracial marriage.

That might be your goal …

… interracial marriage is AWESOME!

 

[ding]

“For our part, we do not question the motives of either those who have supported and those who have opposed laws restricting abortion,” Sam Alito..




Actually, I appreciate that Catholic fascist Supreme Court Justice sAlito confirmed that’s zygotes embryos and fetuses are not “persons” that the state has an interest in protecting a right to life.

Neutrality means nothing.

I'm sure you do appreciate that. You probably use it to assuage your guilt. Of course it doesn't change reality.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Once she is pregnant, she can legally force fatherhood on the man or deny it to him, and there is nothing he can legally do about it.

Did she rape the dumb magamale?

1. Where is a reproductive right taken away from the stupid magamale who has sexual intercourse without settling the question that she will give birth if conception occurs?
2. Where is a reproductive right taken away from the stupid magamale when the woman who does not want to have a child ends up getting pregnant?
3. In the event of paragraph Two; and the woman refuses to give birth to the child, why is the ignorant magamale’s reproductive rights taken away because she will not give him progeny? Assuming he was not raped.
4. In the event of paragraph Two; and the woman decides to give birth to the child, why is the ignorant magamale’s reproductive rights taken away because he has to pay child support. Assuming he was not raped.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

I'm sure you do appreciate that. You probably use it to assuage your guilt. Of course it doesn't change reality.

I have no guilt Saint Ding. Your Catholic perversion and self delusions regarding imaginary sins doesn’t affect my rational theism at all. The sanctity of life begins at birth. Sorry. All civilization building leading to great things beneficial to our age were built under one of the great religions that generally believed that the sanctity of life begins at birth. Christianity followed suit to Judaism.

So I don’t know what reality you’re talking about that doesn’t change. You speak generalities when you’re so intellectually stuck. I know that much about you from what you write.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

That might be your goal …

… interracial marriage is AWESOME!

View attachment 1043928

.

It sure is! I was in an interracial marriage for 33years, until my hubby passed in 2020.


.

 

[hadit]

Did she rape the dumb magamale?

1. Where is a reproductive right taken away from the stupid magamale who has sexual intercourse without settling the question that she will give birth if conception occurs?

Because at that point she can force him to become a father or deny him fatherhood if she changes her mind or just doesn't want the same thing he does, and there is nothing he can legally do about it.

1. Where is a reproductive right taken away from the stupid magamale when the woman who does not want to have a child ends up getting pregnant?

Because at that point she can force him to become a father or deny him fatherhood if she changes her mind or just doesn't want the same thing he does, and there is nothing he can legally do about it.

1. In the event of paragraph Two; and the woman refuses to give birth to the child, why is the ignorant magamale’s reproductive rights taken away because she will not give him progeny? Assuming he was not raped.

Because at that point she can force him to become a father or deny him fatherhood if she changes her mind or just doesn't want the same thing he does, and there is nothing he can legally do about it.

1. In the event of paragraph Two; and the woman decides to give birth to the child, why is the ignorant magamale’s reproductive rights taken away because he has to pay child support. Assuming he was not raped.

Because she has total control over whether his child is born and he has to pay support for 18 years. If he wants the child and she decides she doesn't, she can kill the child and deny him fatherhood. If he doesn't want to be a father and she wants to have the baby, she can force him to pay support for 18 years and there's nothing he can legally do about it. She strips him of his reproductive freedom.

She can lie to him to get him to have sex with her, she can simply change her mind about giving birth, she can do all of that and there is nothing he can legally do about it. She strips him of his reproductive freedom.

 

[MarathonMike]

why have I lost the argument?

This is my view, very precisely and eloquently stated;

iii. NotfooledbyW i. inserts info on Melania Trump:“It is imperative to guarantee that women have autonomy in deciding their preference of having children, based on their own convictions, free from any intervention or pressure from the government,”. “Why should anyone other than the woman herself have the power to determine what she does with her own body? A woman’s fundamental right of individual liberty, to her own life, grants her the authority to terminate her pregnancy if she wishes.". nfbw 241003 Vdtwsa00001

Do you have an argument against it?

You lost the argument because I stated exactly why the entire abortion narrative is a sham and you failed to refute a single fact that I presented. That's the problem with you Leftists, you don't even know when and why you lost.

 

[ding]

I have no guilt Saint Ding. Your Catholic perversion and self delusions regarding imaginary sins doesn’t affect my rational theism at all. The sanctity of life begins at birth. Sorry. All civilization building leading to great things beneficial to our age were built under one of the great religions that generally believed that the sanctity of life begins at birth. Christianity followed suit to Judaism.

So I don’t know what reality you’re talking about that doesn’t change. You speak generalities when you’re so intellectually stuck. I know that much about you from what you write.

That's nice but my point still stands. SCOTUS has ruled. It's over. Seems like you are the one who is stuck.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

if she changes her mind

NotfooledbyW said: No female who wishes not to become a mother is able to strip any male of his reproductive rights. Every male is free to find a woman that will have sex with him and be willing to give birth to his child.

NotfooledbyW said: Where is a reproductive right taken away from the stupid magamale when the woman who does not want to have a child ends up getting pregnant

Add to that; And charges her mind afterwards. - which is to decide to keep it when the hormones kick in.

When those hormones kick in a few months after having sex, this woman is going to probably want to have a relationship with the child’s father. Now if the guy is a total worthless piece of shit and she does not want to have anything to do with him. That’s a matter for another day.

But. Still, the guys reproductive rights have not been taken away unless She is the last woman on earth he could ever ever ever have sex with,

That is not under her control is it?

but if the government can force full-term gestation on a woman against her will and she dies, she has lost more than a reproductive right. She has lost her life.

She loses her life because white Republican medieval Christian males want to control their bodies.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

That's nice but my point still stands. SCOTUS has ruled.

Your point is a fruitless joke.

I have never written or believed that CATHOLIC SCOTUS has not ruled.

So you are a liar.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

. It's over.

What is over?

 

[ding]

Your point is a fruitless joke.

I have never written or believed that CATHOLIC SCOTUS has not ruled.

So you are a liar.

No. Fruitless is what you are doing, dum dum.

 

[ding]

What is over?

Roe v Wade

It's gone. Done. Kaput. Over.