Roe v. Wade will be overturned soon, and then abortion will be outlawed in most states...

[Jarlaxle]

Despite Hitler being a dictator, they had laws, ya moron. There was no specific law to kill Jews. Hitler merely ordered it and Nazis complied.

Some of whom were executed following the war

HITLER. WAS. THE. LAW. YOU. *******. IDIOT.

Dictators don't need legislation to enact their policies, that's why they are dictators. I swear you have the IQ of a ******* potato.

He was not the law, you moron. He had the ability, thanks to the Enabling Act, to pass laws. And yes, Germany had laws. Just not the one you're idiotically claiming.

Were the Gestapo and the SS actually reigned in by any law?

Their oversight was Hitler and they were carrying out his orders, so for years, they got away with violating the law. That ended when the war ended and the ones who were caught, met their fate in Nuremberg.

Nuremberg was based on international law, not german law. At the time german law didn't exist.

Nuremburg was a kangaroo court.

 

[Jarlaxle]

What else do "Pro Lifers" believe???


A:

1. that stars are the same size as fig leaves
2. that "soon" means more than 1800 years from now
3. that Jews are Chosen, the Pro Lifers are not, so Pro Lifers are "sub" to Jews, who largely support abortion
4. that if we off enough Muslims in the Middle East for whatever lies/reasons, FRAUD JESUS will float down from the clouds
5. during the Crusades, Christians died, Jews survived, and Christians cheered that, even though FRAUD JESUS did not end up floating down from the clouds, because apparently 1000 years was "TOO SOON"

Are you on some sort of drugs?

 

[Jarlaxle]

Yes.

my bad. so how are you pro abortion? forced genocide? cause only that could some one be pro abortion.

If you cannot support yourself and a child, cash payouts should be offered for abortion and/or sterilization.

so you wanna roll back the hyde amendment. interesting...would you want to force an abortion if a female didn't want one & has sveral children on the state's dime?

No, but any sort of assistance should be contingent on a tubal ligation.

sounds a little big brotherish. how'z about snip snip for the daddies?

Sure...if they can be identified.

 

[satrebil]

don't believe in abortion?

then don't have one.

Don't believe in slavery? Don't own one.

This is how stupid you sound.

slavery/human trafficking is against the law. abortion isn't. would you imprison a female if she seeks or has had one?

As has already been stated - the LAW is not a moral compass. It was once legal to own slaves - that didn't make it ******* right now did it?

answer the question.

would you imprison a female if she seeks or has had one?

Retroactively? No.
Going forward? Absolutely.

 

[satrebil]

Here's a good article about why abortion isn't murder.

I didn't say it was murder now did I? I said "state sanctioned homicide". Learn the difference.

do you CONsider a medically unnecessary state mandated vaginal ultrasound probe b4 termination a state sanctioned rape?

Nope. Don't like it? Don't get an abortion. You lemmings wanted government involved in "health care", you got it.

Oh... it hasn't gone the way you planned? Tough shit. Deal with it.

so you're saying that rape isn't against the law when the gov'ment does it. seems like you wouldn't mind a little gov'ment slavery in there too.

get ready for your coveted taxes to go up bigley then too.

I'm saying you reap what you sew.

We conservatives warned you tards over and over again about inviting the government into your "health care" decisions and you labeled us crazy conspiracy theorists. And now here you are with egg on your face. Again. This is YOUR doing, so don't come whining to us about it. I don't give a flying ****, you got what you asked for.

 

[Jarlaxle]

don't believe in abortion?

then don't have one.

Don't believe in slavery? Don't own one.

This is how stupid you sound.

slavery/human trafficking is against the law. abortion isn't. would you imprison a female if she seeks or has had one?

As has already been stated - the LAW is not a moral compass. It was once legal to own slaves - that didn't make it ******* right now did it?

answer the question.

would you imprison a female if she seeks or has had one?

Retroactively? No.
Going forward? Absolutely.

So...would you demand that every miscarriage be investigated as a homicide, then?

 

[satrebil]

Don't believe in slavery? Don't own one.

This is how stupid you sound.

slavery/human trafficking is against the law. abortion isn't. would you imprison a female if she seeks or has had one?

As has already been stated - the LAW is not a moral compass. It was once legal to own slaves - that didn't make it ******* right now did it?

answer the question.

would you imprison a female if she seeks or has had one?

Retroactively? No.
Going forward? Absolutely.

So...would you demand that every miscarriage be investigated as a homicide, then?

Of course not. It's pretty easy to distinguish the difference between a naturally occurring miscarriage and a child that's been torn to pieces by 3rd party instruments.

 

[GreenAndBlue]

The Emerson polling shows this massive gender voting difference and along with abortion will soon be made illegal same will be with he unwise voter will be stopped from voting

/////


There is a sharp divide between males and females in their approval of the President’s approval. Among men, Trump has a 57% approval and 38% disapproval rating whereas among women Trump’s approval flips; he has a 38% approval and 57% majority disapproval.


///

 

[Jarlaxle]

slavery/human trafficking is against the law. abortion isn't. would you imprison a female if she seeks or has had one?

As has already been stated - the LAW is not a moral compass. It was once legal to own slaves - that didn't make it ******* right now did it?

answer the question.

would you imprison a female if she seeks or has had one?

Retroactively? No.
Going forward? Absolutely.

So...would you demand that every miscarriage be investigated as a homicide, then?

Of course not. It's pretty easy to distinguish the difference between a naturally occurring miscarriage and a child that's been torn to pieces by 3rd party instruments.

You DO realize that a woman can self-abort if she is determined to do so...right?

And that pills that will cause an abortion are widely available...right?

 

[dblack]

Don't believe in slavery? Don't own one.

This is how stupid you sound.

slavery/human trafficking is against the law. abortion isn't. would you imprison a female if she seeks or has had one?

As has already been stated - the LAW is not a moral compass. It was once legal to own slaves - that didn't make it ******* right now did it?

answer the question.

would you imprison a female if she seeks or has had one?

Retroactively? No.
Going forward? Absolutely.

So...would you demand that every miscarriage be investigated as a homicide, then?

The only way to consistently enforce an abortion ban will be to set up regular state monitoring of all wombs.

 

[dblack]

Here's a good article about why abortion isn't murder.

I didn't say it was murder now did I? I said "state sanctioned homicide". Learn the difference.

do you CONsider a medically unnecessary state mandated vaginal ultrasound probe b4 termination a state sanctioned rape?

Nope. Don't like it? Don't get an abortion. You lemmings wanted government involved in "health care", you got it.

Oh... it hasn't gone the way you planned? Tough shit. Deal with it.

so you're saying that rape isn't against the law when the gov'ment does it. seems like you wouldn't mind a little gov'ment slavery in there too.

get ready for your coveted taxes to go up bigley then too.

I'm saying you reap what you sew.

We conservatives warned you tards over and over again about inviting the government into your "health care" decisions and you labeled us crazy conspiracy theorists. And now here you are with egg on your face. Again. This is YOUR doing, so don't come whining to us about it. I don't give a flying ****, you got what you asked for.

Yep. This is the way it works. Liberals expand government, and conservatives show is why it's a bad idea.

 

[playtime]

don't believe in abortion?

then don't have one.

Don't believe in slavery? Don't own one.

This is how stupid you sound.

slavery/human trafficking is against the law. abortion isn't. would you imprison a female if she seeks or has had one?

As has already been stated - the LAW is not a moral compass. It was once legal to own slaves - that didn't make it ******* right now did it?

answer the question.

would you imprison a female if she seeks or has had one?

Retroactively? No.
Going forward? Absolutely.

what a good little gestapo you would make.

 

[playtime]

Here's a good article about why abortion isn't murder.

I didn't say it was murder now did I? I said "state sanctioned homicide". Learn the difference.

do you CONsider a medically unnecessary state mandated vaginal ultrasound probe b4 termination a state sanctioned rape?

Nope. Don't like it? Don't get an abortion. You lemmings wanted government involved in "health care", you got it.

Oh... it hasn't gone the way you planned? Tough shit. Deal with it.

so you're saying that rape isn't against the law when the gov'ment does it. seems like you wouldn't mind a little gov'ment slavery in there too.

get ready for your coveted taxes to go up bigley then too.

I'm saying you reap what you sew.

We conservatives warned you tards over and over again about inviting the government into your "health care" decisions and you labeled us crazy conspiracy theorists. And now here you are with egg on your face. Again. This is YOUR doing, so don't come whining to us about it. I don't give a flying ****, you got what you asked for.

it's so cute you think you are a conservative.

 

[JoeB131]

So...would you demand that every miscarriage be investigated as a homicide, then?

Of course not. It's pretty easy to distinguish the difference between a naturally occurring miscarriage and a child that's been torn to pieces by 3rd party instruments.

How would you determine that without an investigation? You see the problem here. All you know before you start is the woman was pregnant and now she isn't. To determine which one "naturally occurred", you'd have to find the fetus and examine it. THAT'S AN INVESTIGATION!!!

 

[playtime]

 

[dblack]

How would you determine that without an investigation? You see the problem here. All you know before you start is the woman was pregnant and now she isn't. To determine which one "naturally occurred", you'd have to find the fetus and examine it. THAT'S AN INVESTIGATION!!!

But how would they even know she was pregnant in the first place? To achieve the pro-lifers' goal, we'd need government to monitor the womb status of all fertile women - or require doctors to report it. More big government intrusion. But, you know, it's different when they do it. Because they have reasons!

 

[JoeB131]

But how would they even know she was pregnant in the first place? To achieve the pro-lifers' goal, we'd need government to monitor the womb status of all fertile women - or require doctors to report it. More big government intrusion. But, you know, it's different when they do it. Because they have reasons!

Both sides are sincere in their positions... I go more with what's practical.

Practically, you can't ban abortion. Countries that have tried have failed.

Banning guns. That's achievable. Whether or not you should or not is up for debate.

Everything is a cost benefits analysis.

 

[pknopp]

But how would they even know she was pregnant in the first place? To achieve the pro-lifers' goal, we'd need government to monitor the womb status of all fertile women - or require doctors to report it. More big government intrusion. But, you know, it's different when they do it. Because they have reasons!

Both sides are sincere in their positions... I go more with what's practical.

Practically, you can't ban abortion. Countries that have tried have failed.

Banning guns. That's achievable. Whether or not you should or not is up for debate.

Everything is a cost benefits analysis.

There is no way to ban guns in this country. First of all, law enforcement would never enforce it.

 

[JoeB131]

There is no way to ban guns in this country. First of all, law enforcement would never enforce it.

Sure there is. To start with, you hold gun manufacturers accountable for the carnage they cause. Then they will be for all sorts of sensible gun laws and permits.

Once you've made guns by permit only, then you start drawing down the number of permits.

Law enforcement would be THRILLED to not be worried that every idiot they pull over for a busted tail light might be packing.

 

[pknopp]

There is no way to ban guns in this country. First of all, law enforcement would never enforce it.

Sure there is. To start with, you hold gun manufacturers accountable for the carnage they cause. Then they will be for all sorts of sensible gun laws and permits.

Once you've made guns by permit only, then you start drawing down the number of permits.

Law enforcement would be THRILLED to not be worried that every idiot they pull over for a busted tail light might be packing.

Just like how we are never going to ban abortion we aren't going to ban guns.