Should the next Republican president use his executive PEN to outlaw abortions?

[Jantje_Smit]

In the current way the law reads, she can get an abortion. That means if she has kids she can't afford, it's due to a choice she made NOT to have an abortion.

You make it out, as of NOW, she was required to have the kids she can't afford. She isn't. That means because SHE made the choice, SHE gets the cost. If she can't, tough shit. Her kids that she made a choice to have under the CURRENT situation isn't anyone else's responsibility.

Oh, my mistake, I thought you wanted to outlaw abortion.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So you are saying that Obama could overturn Citizen's United through Executive Action?

If you are saying he cannot- well then Obama would agree- since he is openly against the Citizen's United Ruling- but has issued no executive order to counter it.

Almost like he understands- unlike you- that a President cannot use an executive order to ignore a Supreme Court ruling.

Is a Supreme Court ruling more powerful than a federal law?

Obama has used his pen to go against federal immigration laws. The DOJ has sued states for trying to follow those laws when they should be going after the sanctuary cities.

If Obama has broken federal immigration laws- why haven't Republicans impeached him for breaking the law?

Why indeed..
For the same reason dems didnt do shit when Reagan allowed amnesty.
You partisans out there amaze me with your inability to see whats going on.
But hey,as long as your guy wins it doesnt matter right?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Obama set the standard for creating law with the executive pen & phone after all.

What say you?

So you are saying that Obama could overturn Citizen's United through Executive Action?

If you are saying he cannot- well then Obama would agree- since he is openly against the Citizen's United Ruling- but has issued no executive order to counter it.

Almost like he understands- unlike you- that a President cannot use an executive order to ignore a Supreme Court ruling.

When it comes to what Obama understands, he should look to what he said 22 times about not having the authority to do what he did with immigration. He was openly against doing what he did based on HIS claims he didn't have the authority to do it. Then he did it.

I'm sure you have some excuse as to why it was OK despite Obama understanding 22 times he couldn't do it.

You can bet your buns there's gonna be payback. Not only with executive actions being issued and some of Obama's overturned but there will be "get even time" in Congress as well. That said, we must first elect a Republican President.

As long as it isnt an RINO yeah.

 

[rightwinger]

Of course you do. You pay your taxes and get to vote for your representative to decide how it is spent

Is this a great country or what?

That you don't recognize her individual choice is on a much different level is yet another example of the failed educational system in this country.

You are a member of a society. As a society, we are much stronger than you are as an individual. We contribute to society and decide as a group what we will spend our money on. Some of those things you may like and some you may not like

So are those who constantly get handed someone else's money. When are they going to contribute anything to society. Aren't they a member of it, too?

WE don't contribute to society. Some of us contribute and others leech off our hard work.

We help those who need help.

We are the wealthiest country on earth. We are not Calcutta where the poor are begging in the street for scraps. We are fully capable of taking care of those who need it.

No WE don't. SOME of us do and the rest leech off those of us who do.

You're free to help anyone you deem worthy of your money. You're not free to deem MY money does it. If a woman has the sole choice with her body, something you support, I have the sole choice with MY money.

Guess what?

You lose

We as a society have decided that we will take care of our poorest citizens. We also take care of our wealthiest citizens

Guess who makes out better?

 

[Freewill]

No, law is made by the legislative branch not the executive branch or as the Democrats have done for the last 7 the judicial branch.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Do you support me having the choice with MY money when it comes to not supporting her kids? That's the problem with people like you. You expect the woman to have the sole choice with her body yet when she can't afford the results, it's OK for her to demand others fund something they were told to butt out of when it was happening. I don't care if she has 20 kids as long as I don't have to support a damn one of them for a choice she made.

You really don't get it, do you?

If a pregnant women wants an abortion (maybe because she feels she isn't in a position to support kids) you want to deny her that choice but at the same time you refuse to pay to support those kids that you force her to have.

And somehow you don't see anything wrong with that way of reasoning.....

Personally I dont care if a women gets an abortion as long as it's early in the pregnancy.
Nor do I have a problem with BC or the morning after pill.
I do however have a problem when I'm asked to pay for the children she doesnt abort......all six of em.

 

[rightwinger]

Obama set the standard for creating law with the executive pen & phone after all.

What say you?

So you are saying that Obama could overturn Citizen's United through Executive Action?

If you are saying he cannot- well then Obama would agree- since he is openly against the Citizen's United Ruling- but has issued no executive order to counter it.

Almost like he understands- unlike you- that a President cannot use an executive order to ignore a Supreme Court ruling.

When it comes to what Obama understands, he should look to what he said 22 times about not having the authority to do what he did with immigration. He was openly against doing what he did based on HIS claims he didn't have the authority to do it. Then he did it.

I'm sure you have some excuse as to why it was OK despite Obama understanding 22 times he couldn't do it.

You can bet your buns there's gonna be payback. Not only with executive actions being issued and some of Obama's overturned but there will be "get even time" in Congress as well. That said, we must first elect a Republican President.

As long as it isnt an RINO yeah.

I love it when Republicans fight among themselves

A RINO is your only chance to elect a President. Electiong a conservative from Jesusland is not going to happen

 

[rightwinger]

No, law is made by the legislative branch not the executive branch or as the Democrats have done for the last 7 the judicial branch.

Our Supreme Court is led by conservatives. Has been for 15 years

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Obama set the standard for creating law with the executive pen & phone after all.

What say you?

So you are saying that Obama could overturn Citizen's United through Executive Action?

If you are saying he cannot- well then Obama would agree- since he is openly against the Citizen's United Ruling- but has issued no executive order to counter it.

Almost like he understands- unlike you- that a President cannot use an executive order to ignore a Supreme Court ruling.

When it comes to what Obama understands, he should look to what he said 22 times about not having the authority to do what he did with immigration. He was openly against doing what he did based on HIS claims he didn't have the authority to do it. Then he did it.

I'm sure you have some excuse as to why it was OK despite Obama understanding 22 times he couldn't do it.

You can bet your buns there's gonna be payback. Not only with executive actions being issued and some of Obama's overturned but there will be "get even time" in Congress as well. That said, we must first elect a Republican President.

As long as it isnt an RINO yeah.

I love it when Republicans fight among themselves

A RINO is your only chance to elect a President. Electiong a conservative from Jesusland is not going to happen

I dont go to church.
And we arent fighting among ourselves,all you have to do is look at the poll numbers.

 

[Freewill]

No, law is made by the legislative branch not the executive branch or as the Democrats have done for the last 7 the judicial branch.

Our Supreme Court is led by conservatives. Has been for 15 years

Yeppers, the Obamacare rulings that made law certainly are in line with conservatives.

Not to mention the making of law with gay marriage, again a conservative ideal, not.

But I am sure you are good with both as you are with Corporations being people.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Why would the liberal media film whatever it is you are talking about?

If you want to play the game of "if", how about:

If Republicans cared about children the way they cared about a fetus, we could cut crime in half.

If those who chose to do what it took to produce kids then had them would support their own, we'd increase personal responsibility in that area by 100%

Your ignorance regarding the reasons why women have abortions is painfully obvious. If they can't afford to support and raise those kids then the responsible thing to do is to have an abortion. Too bad your emoting prevents you from being able to think for yourself.

The responsible thing is to accept the results of the previous choice that produced the result.

You don't get to make that decision for anyone else.

Bizarre cognitive dissonance of those those who claim to support individual rights but at the same time want to deny women their individual rights.

Do I have the individual right to tell that mother who chose to have kids she couldn't support no when it comes to providing for her kids?

You show a bizarre cognitive dissonance when you claim a woman has a right to make a choice then think it's OK for her to expect someone else to fund the results of something she said was no one else's business. If I don't get to make the decision for her, she doesn't get to expect someone else to fund hers when she can't. I'll give her the choice as long as I get the same one with MY money.

Thank you for that weird display of your cognitive dissonance. Now everyone here can see just how confused your emoting actually is on this OP topic.

Have a nice day.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Great societies don't force one person to fund the results of someone else's choices.

So we don't have to pay for Bush43's illegal warmongering choice?

 

[Freewill]

Great societies don't force one person to fund the results of someone else's choices.

So we don't have to pay for Bush43's illegal warmongering choice?

What illegal warmongering? You mean the war that Mrs. Clinton endorsed with her vote? If that was illegal then that is just another reason that the democrats should not back Mrs. Clinton.

 

[rightwinger]

No, law is made by the legislative branch not the executive branch or as the Democrats have done for the last 7 the judicial branch.

Our Supreme Court is led by conservatives. Has been for 15 years

Yeppers, the Obamacare rulings that made law certainly are in line with conservatives.

Not to mention the making of law with gay marriage, again a conservative ideal, not.

But I am sure you are good with both as you are with Corporations being people.

The problem with today's radical conservatives is even a conservative court will buy into your dogma. No, the courts will not support your insertion of religion into government. They will not ban abortion. Five of nine judges and Chief Justice were selected by conservatives

 

[rightwinger]

Great societies don't force one person to fund the results of someone else's choices.

So we don't have to pay for Bush43's illegal warmongering choice?

What illegal warmongering? You mean the war that Mrs. Clinton endorsed with her vote? If that was illegal then that is just another reason that the democrats should not back Mrs. Clinton.

The choice to invade was Bush's and Bush's alone

Like he liked to say....he was the decider

 

[Arizona Willie]

So the question is " should the next Republican President use an Executive Order to outlaw abortion ".

I'm surprised you're willing to wait until 2948.

 

[Conservative65]

Great societies don't force one person to fund the results of someone else's choices.

So we don't have to pay for Bush43's illegal warmongering choice?

What illegal warmongering? You mean the war that Mrs. Clinton endorsed with her vote? If that was illegal then that is just another reason that the democrats should not back Mrs. Clinton.

The choice to invade was Bush's and Bush's alone

Like he liked to say....he was the decider

So the C-I-C using something the Constitution explicitly delegates his authority to do is illegal?

 

[Conservative65]

No, law is made by the legislative branch not the executive branch or as the Democrats have done for the last 7 the judicial branch.

Our Supreme Court is led by conservatives. Has been for 15 years

Yeppers, the Obamacare rulings that made law certainly are in line with conservatives.

Not to mention the making of law with gay marriage, again a conservative ideal, not.

But I am sure you are good with both as you are with Corporations being people.

The problem with today's radical conservatives is even a conservative court will buy into your dogma. No, the courts will not support your insertion of religion into government. They will not ban abortion. Five of nine judges and Chief Justice were selected by conservatives

You have a strange idea of what conservative means. It's a good attempt at an excuse.

 

[Conservative65]

Great societies don't force one person to fund the results of someone else's choices.

So we don't have to pay for Bush43's illegal warmongering choice?

What's illegal about the C-I-C using authority granted to him by the Constitution and from a vote by members of Congress?

 

[Conservative65]

If those who chose to do what it took to produce kids then had them would support their own, we'd increase personal responsibility in that area by 100%

Your ignorance regarding the reasons why women have abortions is painfully obvious. If they can't afford to support and raise those kids then the responsible thing to do is to have an abortion. Too bad your emoting prevents you from being able to think for yourself.

The responsible thing is to accept the results of the previous choice that produced the result.

You don't get to make that decision for anyone else.

Bizarre cognitive dissonance of those those who claim to support individual rights but at the same time want to deny women their individual rights.

Do I have the individual right to tell that mother who chose to have kids she couldn't support no when it comes to providing for her kids?

You show a bizarre cognitive dissonance when you claim a woman has a right to make a choice then think it's OK for her to expect someone else to fund the results of something she said was no one else's business. If I don't get to make the decision for her, she doesn't get to expect someone else to fund hers when she can't. I'll give her the choice as long as I get the same one with MY money.

Thank you for that weird display of your cognitive dissonance. Now everyone here can see just how confused your emoting actually is on this OP topic.

Have a nice day.

I have a fine display of personal responsibility. Yours, on the other hand, involves thinking it's responsible to expect someone else to pay for a choice you made.