Yzermandius19

you are imposing your beliefs on states and people in those states who want to restrict abortion women are not the only people who abortion effects just because they are the only ones who can have an abortion

I'm okay with allowing a legal exemption for rape, out of pragmatism but that doesn't change the fact that an innocent human life is being terminated the only moral exemption is if the life or long term health of the mother is significantly threatened

Woodrow Wilson is trash that doesn't mean the Austro-Hungarian Empire should be seen as a model to emulate today because of your nostalgia for an Austria-Hungary that never was

there are plenty you have no capacity to reason on your own you just defer to a book you don’t understand and use that misunderstanding as a weapon to attack those who don't agree with you

men should not stay out of it it's their child too the vast majority of women are in favor of abortion restrictions yet you want to impose your beliefs on them while pretending it's the other side who wants to do that

it's inhumane to kill it at any point just because it's not cognizant yet doesn't morally justify it the same way killing someone in a coma who will come out of it in several weeks would be inhumane the very real concerns you listed are not more important than life likewise a child being born into a rough situation is not grounds to kill it to prevent from being in that situation you don't just get to eliminate life from the equation because you empathize with pregnant women in tough circumstances or how rough the child's life may be

motte and bailey

this isn't men vs women plenty of women agree that it's up to state to decide and most of them want some restrictions placed on abortion

in what ways does he underestimate them? basically you just don't like that he's bullish on America and not the rival powers and write him off unfairly because of it doesn't fit your confirmation bias

there is zero scientific basis to the claim that it isn't a person it's a human being in the early stages of development, right from conception

that is not the consequence of not having pointless unconstitutional gun control correlation doesn't equal causation it's a people issue, not a legal one if Canada had the gun laws of a red state, Canada would not suddenly have a similar number of mass shootings and if the red states had the gun laws of Canada they wouldn't suddenly have a similar number of mass shootings to Canada that's not how it works Switzerland doesn't have much restrictions on guns and has a well armed population yet nowhere near the mass shootings in America even though they have gun laws that are much closer to the American standard than the Canadian standard many American states have similarly restrictive gun laws that Canada had yet they have more mass shootings than Canada does you attempting to link the second amendment to mass shootings is an asinine non-sequitur

I know you don't but the Constitution trumps your opinion if you don't like that, too f*cking bad you only invoke the constitution when you agree with it pretending abortion rights are in the constitution as if you care about the constitution was an obvious charade from someone arguing in bad faith about time you finally copped to it

because they are it just isn't in the constitution and it's up to the states to decide that as a result you may not care about the constitution when it gets in the way of what you want but I do I'm willing to play by the rules you're not I would oppose an activist ruling that sides with me by ignoring the constitution and reading in a right that isn't in there if they want that right added, that's what a constitutional amendment is for until an amendment is passed, one way or the other, it's a states issue and the SCOTUS should do it's job and stay out of it

show me where in the constitution it says there is a right to abortion none of that is in the constitution hence it being a states issue

the fetus is a person the whole time

no one's testimony has proven he committed a crime not even close

abortion is not a right they are supposed to protect that is a states issue if you want to change that then pass a constitutional amendment

the 2nd amendment

there it is Infidel Dog the SCOTUS should listen to the people but state governments that do thid in states that won't vote the way I want to shouldn't listen to the people democracy only applies when it achieves the result they want call them out for hypocrisy before they do it, and they still can't help themselves

when even RBG shits on Roe v Wade that's an extremely activist ruling to point where it turns off one of the most activist judges in the courts history she even said so herself

you think leadership should be decided based on sex no more men, just women and the abortion thing is controlling babies women don't have to ask me for permission, they have to ask the state

answer the question how is the side who started it less to blame than the side on the sidelines? if you can't do that why would I buy what you're selling?

I asked first explain why Russia is a changed country when it comes to military aggression in Eastern Europe before you dismiss the historical record out of hand as not applicable

when did the EU and NATO invade Ukraine? how is the side who started the war not to blame, but those who aren't even in the war are to blame? that makes no fucking sense

Russia causes refugee crisis on the regular, who knew? they've changed though, according to Nationalist how, when and why they changed, he won't say, but he's sure they have