collapse

* Recent Posts

Big East 23-24 NCAA and NIT Results by bilsu
[Today at 06:22:26 AM]


NCstate fan scouts Marquette by brewcity77
[Today at 06:05:33 AM]


Katz has MU in Final Four by Uncle Rico
[Today at 05:59:46 AM]


10 years after “Done Deal” … It’s Happening! by willie warrior
[Today at 05:53:49 AM]


UNLEASH THE POWER OF SCOOP!!! by Jay Bee
[Today at 05:13:02 AM]


Three Years Ago Today... by Newsdreams
[March 27, 2024, 11:34:10 PM]


Kam Jones 1st Round Mock - The Ringer by PGsHeroes32
[March 27, 2024, 10:40:15 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!


Author Topic: Protecting the Constitution  (Read 26234 times)

ChitownSpaceForRent

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6315
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #75 on: June 24, 2022, 03:43:50 PM »
Celebrating all the babies’ lives that will be saved. This was never in the constitution. If you can find abortion in there, let me know. It’s about time people start being held accountable for their sexual decisions. If you don’t like it, move to another state I suppose. Or another country.

*Fetus

What about women who were raped? Should they have to carry that out to full term. Technically that’s a viable pregnancy.

Ectopic pregnancy? Technically speaking it’s viable, the fetus can still grow. Who cares about the woman that will die carrying it to full term though, right?

And before you say, “oh that’ll never happen” bullcrap. Some states will absolutely use those technicalities and say those count as viable pregnancies.

Merit Matters

  • Walk-On
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #76 on: June 24, 2022, 03:46:53 PM »
How perfectly cruel of you.
I’ve never killed a baby so I’ll take that side every time. What I am concerned about is abortions that may have to take place as a result of health of the mother, rape or incest. Outside of that, you make a sexual decision, you live with it. Period. Or, move. My body my choice except for vaccines. All lives matter except for unborn ones. Etc., etc.
All Lives Matter

Uncle Rico

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9585
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #77 on: June 24, 2022, 03:49:01 PM »
*Fetus

What about women who were raped? Should they have to carry that out to full term. Technically that’s a viable pregnancy.

Ectopic pregnancy? Technically speaking it’s viable, the fetus can still grow. Who cares about the woman that will die carrying it to full term though, right?

And before you say, “oh that’ll never happen” bullcrap. Some states will absolutely use those technicalities and say those count as viable pregnancies.

Don’t argue with racist dirtbags
“This is bar none atrocious.  Mitchell cannot shoot either.  What a pile of dung”

Merit Matters

  • Walk-On
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #78 on: June 24, 2022, 03:50:58 PM »
Don’t argue with racist dirtbags
When you have nothing to say, scream racism. Works every time. The ultimate Trump card and sign of a fundamentally flawed argument.
All Lives Matter

Hards Alumni

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6583
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #79 on: June 24, 2022, 03:51:46 PM »
I’ve never killed a baby so I’ll take that side every time. What I am concerned about is abortions that may have to take place as a result of health of the mother, rape or incest. Outside of that, you make a sexual decision, you live with it. Period. Or, move. My body my choice except for vaccines. All lives matter except for unborn ones. Etc., etc.

They're not babies you doofus.  No one is killing babies, and if they are, it's murder.  A clump of cells that can't live on it's own isn't a baby.

Again, take your puritanical Fundemental Christian Extremism and move to a country that was founded upon it.  This one certainly wasn't.

Uncle Rico

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9585
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #80 on: June 24, 2022, 03:53:21 PM »
When you have nothing to say, scream racism. Works every time. The ultimate Trump card and sign of a fundamentally flawed argument.

Your posting history is a clear indication of your racism. 
“This is bar none atrocious.  Mitchell cannot shoot either.  What a pile of dung”

Merit Matters

  • Walk-On
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #81 on: June 24, 2022, 03:53:54 PM »
They're not babies you doofus.  No one is killing babies, and if they are, it's murder.  A clump of cells that can't live on it's own isn't a baby.

Again, take your puritanical Fundemental Christian Extremism and move to a country that was founded upon it.  This one certainly wasn't.
I respect your opinion. I’ll stay in this country because I love the red white and blue.
All Lives Matter

Merit Matters

  • Walk-On
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #82 on: June 24, 2022, 03:54:17 PM »
Your posting history is a clear indication of your racism.
I respect your opinion.
All Lives Matter

NCMUFan

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2522
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #83 on: June 24, 2022, 04:01:43 PM »
They're not babies you doofus.  No one is killing babies, and if they are, it's murder.  A clump of cells that can't live on it's own isn't a baby.

Again, take your puritanical Fundemental Christian Extremism and move to a country that was founded upon it.  This one certainly wasn't.
A born baby can't live on its own also.  It also needs its mother or others for its existence.

Hards Alumni

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6583
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #84 on: June 24, 2022, 04:04:59 PM »
A born baby can't live on its own also.  It also needs its mother or others for its existence.

Just needs anyone to take care of it.   ;)

wadesworld

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 17383
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #85 on: June 24, 2022, 04:09:21 PM »
I’ve never killed a baby so I’ll take that side every time. What I am concerned about is abortions that may have to take place as a result of health of the mother, rape or incest. Outside of that, you make a sexual decision, you live with it. Period. Or, move. My body my choice except for vaccines. All lives matter except for unborn ones. Etc., etc.

You’ve never killed an intruder yet you love to tell everyone how manly you are and how you’d blow a person’s head off to protect your family all the time.
Rocket Trigger Warning (wild that saying this would trigger anyone, but it's the world we live in): Black Lives Matter

Merit Matters

  • Walk-On
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #86 on: June 24, 2022, 04:12:11 PM »
You’ve never killed an intruder yet you love to tell everyone how manly you are and how you’d blow a person’s head off to protect your family all the time.
I stand by that. My family is happy and protected to the best of my ability. That is my duty as a man, a husband and a father.
All Lives Matter

Dickthedribbler

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 589
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #87 on: June 24, 2022, 04:15:28 PM »
When you have nothing to say, scream racism. Works every time. The ultimate Trump card and sign of a fundamentally flawed argument.

+100

lawdog77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2432
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #88 on: June 24, 2022, 04:15:38 PM »
How about we compromise. If you get an abortion (except for the cases of incest, rape, danger to mother), you get sterilized as well

TAMU, Knower of Ball

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22055
  • Meat Eater certified
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #89 on: June 24, 2022, 04:17:52 PM »
“The unborn” are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don’t need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don’t bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus, but actually dislike people who breathe. Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.”

― Methodist Pastor David Barnhart
TAMU

I do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.


NCMUFan

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2522
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #90 on: June 24, 2022, 04:19:20 PM »
That is a nice little quote we have seen before.  Again, who says people aren't also being concerned and helping those other groups.

lawdog77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2432
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #91 on: June 24, 2022, 04:20:45 PM »
“The unborn” are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don’t need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don’t bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus, but actually dislike people who breathe. Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.”

― Methodist Pastor David Barnhart
1. It doesn't have to be either/or
2. Pastor Barnhart is a man of religion, so his opinions are automatically thrown out by many here

Hards Alumni

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6583
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #92 on: June 24, 2022, 04:22:39 PM »
1. It doesn't have to be either/or
2. Pastor Barnhart is a man of religion, so his opinions are automatically thrown out by many here

??????????????

Uncle Rico

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9585
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #93 on: June 24, 2022, 04:22:50 PM »
+100

When a guy posts racist drivel, that makes him a racist
“This is bar none atrocious.  Mitchell cannot shoot either.  What a pile of dung”

TAMU, Knower of Ball

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22055
  • Meat Eater certified
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #94 on: June 24, 2022, 04:26:03 PM »
That is a nice little quote we have seen before.  Again, who says people aren't also being concerned and helping those other groups.

Who says? Well most pro-abortion politicians for one.

1. It doesn't have to be either/or
2. Pastor Barnhart is a man of religion, so his opinions are automatically thrown out by many here

It doesn't have to be. Yet so many who who fight for the unborn seem very happy to fight against certain populations of born people despite claiming to be Christian.

As a disclaimer I am both Christian and believe life starts at conception. I just recognize that my belief shouldn't be forced onto others.
TAMU

I do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.


Dickthedribbler

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 589
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #95 on: June 24, 2022, 04:28:18 PM »
When a guy posts racist drivel, that makes him a racist

I have seen neither racism nor drivel from Mr. Merit on this site

Goose

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 10442
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #96 on: June 24, 2022, 04:29:34 PM »
All I know is that from the day I heard my wife and I were expecting a child I had unconditional love for that child. Imo, there is nothing more wonderful than seeing a Mom see her new child the first time. It brings tears to my eyes every time I see a picture of Mom and their child. That 100% sums up my feeling on the topic.
 

Pakuni

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9875
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #97 on: June 24, 2022, 04:32:16 PM »
Your love affair with the "Stare Decisis" is misplaced. SD is not law and it is not codified anywhere. It is a doctrine or guide that has evolved over centuries to provide clarity and consistency to prior rulings on the same issue. While SD has a virtual binding effect on lower courts and on intermediate appellate courts, it is not absolute when it comes to the US Supreme Court. The US SC can re-visit its own prior decisions anytime it has the proper case before it.

In 1896 the US SC in Plessy v. Ferguson held that " separate but equal" was permitted and did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution ( public accomodations----separate railroad cars for Blacks and Whites). The adherence to "Stare Decisis" caused that to be the law for 58 years and resulted in mandated separate schools; separate restrooms; separate hotels; etc. For segregationists and other Democrats, Plessy was the gift that kept on giving.

Until 1954 when the US SC realized the grave error they had made, and in Brown v Board of Education, held that separate schools were inherently UNEQUAL, thereby implicitly overrulind Plessy. This opened the door for school and other integration. Stare Decisis be damned.

So under your position, SD should prevent today's court from overruling Roe, and the 1954 Court should have been prevented from overruling Plessy because of SD. Or in other words, keep aborting and keep Blacks in separate train cars. Unless you're a rank hypocrite, today's SC decision overturning Roe is completely reconcilable with Brown.

And Stare Decisis has little, if nothing, to do with it.

Ah, the false equivalency to Plessy again raises its ugly head.
A few problems with this argument.

The first a is that Plessy - unlike Roe - was never explicitly overturned by the court. We didn't have one group of justices arrive on the scene decades later and say "You know, I don't like that ruling. Let's flip it." Now, Brown did have the effect of weakening it in schools specifically, but unlike Dobbs, Brown wasn't written solely to reverse a prior court's decision.

Second, unlike Brown and most other instances in with a latter court decision had the effect of weakening or changing a prior court ruling, Dobbs wasn't written to protect or extend a Constitutional right. It was written to eliminate one. I may be wrong here, but I'm not aware of any other instances in which a court threw out a prior court's decision with the express purpose of taking away a right.

And third, while Brown reflected the vast change in American law, culture and society when it came to race since Plessy and was reflective of popular sentiment, Dobbs is the opposite. The American public overwhelmingly supports abortion rights, and certainly moreso than 50 years ago. Unlike Brown, this court is cutting against the grain. 

So, sorry, but your attempt to equate the two is a failure.


« Last Edit: June 24, 2022, 04:36:00 PM by Pakuni »

Merit Matters

  • Walk-On
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #98 on: June 24, 2022, 04:33:23 PM »
All I know is that from the day I heard my wife and I were expecting a child I had unconditional love for that child. Imo, there is nothing more wonderful than seeing a Mom see her new child the first time. It brings tears to my eyes every time I see a picture of Mom and their child. That 100% sums up my feeling on the topic.
Thanks for sharing, Brother Goose.
All Lives Matter

Jockey

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2016
  • “We want to get rid of the ballots"
Re: Protecting the Constitution
« Reply #99 on: June 24, 2022, 04:33:30 PM »
Up next, gay rights. Some Americans are monsters.

Or as Texas put in their platform, Abnormal.

 

feedback