The5thHorseman
Platinum Member
- Nov 22, 2022
- 12,136
- 6,577
- 918
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #221
Don't get hysterical.You transphobic bigot.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Don't get hysterical.You transphobic bigot.
Youre the one being transphobic.Don't get hysterical.
Have any opinion you want....but keep it to your damned self...Youre the one being transphobic.
But that aside. Do I get to just ignore any law passed by anyone who doesn’t have a dick and a set of balls?
Shouldnt we have have a penis and vagina Congress.? One SCOTUS for those with nuts and one without?
The idea that I can’t have an opinion on something because I dont have a certain set of genitalia is fucking stupid.
Right. So any law passed by someone with a vagina doesnt apply to me. Right? No woman can pass a law that applies to me because we dont have the same genitalia. Is that your position?Have any opinion you want....but keep it to your damned self...
Right. So any law passed by someone with a vagina doesnt apply to me. Right? No woman can pass a law that applies to me because we dont have the same genitalia. Is that your position?
Care to answer the question?Other than your superstitions, what do you bring to the debate?
You have no business in that decision.Care to answer the question?
All you're bringing to the debate is a bunch of stupid.
Again with transphobic bigotry.You have no business in that decision.
Zero.
Because you don't have a womb.
Do you understand?
You struggle with the obvious.
There are no others...Again with transphobic bigotry.
So when are we going to rewrite all the laws so we have the with womb laws and the without womb laws since whether or not you have a womb determines which laws apply to you all of a sudden.
oh so it just this one law in which you decided genitalia matters. Are there any other moronic stipulations you'd like to let us all know about now?There are no others...
Now tell me what you bring to the debate.
You are quite welcome to contribute any others.oh so it just this one law in which you decided genitalia matters. Are there any other moronic stipulations you'd like to let us all know about now?
What are you even talking about? The Dobbs decision wasn't about whether abortion should be legal or moral, you are aware of that right?You are quite welcome to contribute any others.
But please answer the question first.
Other than your superstitions, what do you bring to the debate?
Of course it was.What are you even talking about? The Dobbs decision wasn't about whether abortion should be legal or moral, you are aware of that right?
Ok. It's clear you don't actually understand the ruling, though I'm not sure why I thought you might.Of course it was.
Don't be a rube.
It's a medical procedure....not a matter of popular will.
NOW ANSWER THE QUESTION, FRAUD.
Of course.....because it was about "states' rights".Ok. It's clear you don't actually understand the ruling, though I'm not sure why I thought you might.
What does the decision say is the reasoning?Of course.....because it was about "states' rights".
Hence the references to The Quickening...
Of what relevance is The Quickening to the constitutional process issue?What does the decision say is the reasoning?
Is that the reasoning the court gave for the decision?Of what relevance is The Quickening to the constitutional process issue?