User

LOL, come on indeed. Are you comparing the kind of warfare and eradication employed in Yugoslavia to Settlement disputes in Israel? At this pace, maybe in 10,000 years the West Bank will be "cleansed." *eye roll*

No one has bribed Thomas. What an outrageous accusation with no proof.

Of course it had to do with the quality of Roe. The Court had to reinvent tests for the lower courts to apply continually. Roe V Wade was never an absolute right to abortion anytime, anywhere, for any reason. So... again, it was poorly written, even by whatever absurdity you want to exist. Again, I am not interested in your religious bigotry and the issue of abortion is not so clearly divided. It actually spans a lot of demographics for those who are and are not Pro-Life/Pro-Choice. But I guess you feel better getting your little jabs at religion in...

What legal reasoning to you think will support such a law being found to be Constitutional? It's just more fear-mongering.

What am I ignoring? Be specific.

So, you believe she shot a puppy but then conveniently think she lied about the circumstances.

You continue with this false dilemma that we must choose porn or your SNM bondage classes for kids in K-12. You claim to be so concerned with porn, but you ignored my questions: Do you support legislation pushed by Republicans in various right leaning states to regulate online porn more to require age verification to help prevent kids from accessing it? Any other measures? Again, you are pushing YOUR values regarding what is a healthy sexual relationship and dismissing mine as prudish. My point here is that neither of us should be pushing our values regarding what is or is not a healthy sexual relationship onto children outside of basics like consent, safety, and consequences. You are the one being obtuse and quite frankly, disgustingly rude, with your mocking me about blow jobs while in the next sentence acting like you don't want to teach them about how to engage in (recreate) porn activities while you then flip back to a girl worrying about why her anus hurts because they did not use lube. Someone like you needs to be kept as far away from a classroom full of kids as possible. You have no business determining standards for what constitutes healthy sexual relationships or showing them how to do it. Then you wonder why folks think folks that are pushing crap like the PRIDE flag in the classroom have sexual deviant tendencies or there is some kind of sexual thing to it... that Venn diagram is starting to look an awful lot like a circle for your views on putting this smut into classrooms and your support for the PRIDE flag... No, I can't decide how people feel, but I can certainly point out objective facts. A biological male, who feels like a woman, pretends to look like one, act like one, is not actually one. That doesn't make me intolerant, it makes me a sane rational human being and your conflating that with intolerance is EXACTLY why the PRIDE flag has no place in the classroom, it is you shoving your political ideology onto kids. The PRIDE flag is just as much about superiority here to you, you have already admitted as much, as you assert that what it stands for must be accepted or those who do not are the intolerant ones! I already showed you what the Pro-Life flag stands for and you just fabricate things to oppose it. Nothing about it was superiority related. Where did the link I provided you say: "The pro-life (anti-choice) flag says that women should not have the right to choose whether to carry a fetus within them." It did not. You are just making this up. Which again, is exactly my point. You are here pushing your political views and trying to justify them and then dismissing mine. OR we just don't push our politics onto the kids... the classroom is not a soapbox for teachers or staff.

Trump, rightly, was still playing by the unwritten code of conduct. Once you are President, you don't continue to use your position to target your rival for prison. Biden was too old or too inept to disagree with his handlers on Trump. He would rather tear the country apart with this mess to "get Trump" and appease his radical base. Trump knows better now.

That is not the definition of ethnic cleansing. Name-calling doesn't make your arguments any better. I do know what apartheid is. In this case, it is just a left-wing, mindless talking point parroted by people who typically have no ability actually to articulate anything to support it.

It is likely even more nefarious. Jack Smith timed his indictments to where they essentially secured the nomination for Trump to win the primary, and now they are crying and fighting to try to fast-track it through before the election... to meddle there, too. Hoping it will keep Trump distracted and unable to campaign (Election Interference) and drown out the issues because the news cycle will be 24/7 Trump trial instead of Biden sucks. (More Election Interference). And they got a shot at locking Trump up, but at worst, they still had the Election Interference. Now it looks like they won't get the trial before the Election and the Democrats are just going bananas over it, including Jack Smith.

This is a bit duplicitous. Roe V Wade was an awful ruling, instead of dealing with that, you want to argue that because it was awful for so long, then we shouldn't change it. Again, Roe V Wade is what caused 50 years of political strife and issues. It was a never ending battle to try to push state laws that constantly had to be retested in the Courts with specious legal reasoning and tests created and fabricated by the Courts. The Supreme Court made this a way of our life for 50 years by forcing Roe V Wade on everyone. Now, it is best left to the States. Even your take on the Federalist Society is disingenuous at best. Judicial restraint is returning to a world before Roe V Wade because it was the Supreme Court THEN that inserted itself into the case. Righting that wrong is a return to more judicial restraint.

OK... here are all the cases beyond Dredd Scott: https://constitution.congress.gov/resources/decisions-overruled/

No, you never provided any evidence of that. You mentioned settlements. That is not ethnic cleansing. The simple fact is that the West Bank is under Israeli Control because they lost a war and were conquered. Israel has handed over much control to the Palestinian Authority. How exactly is this apartheid?

The entire argument is going to be subjective here regarding ones stance on putting the PRIDE flag into a classroom or not... that is my point. Leave the politics out of the classroom. Stop pushing your agenda onto kids. I have little interest in writing a research paper here on all schools in the country and how many introduced pride flags, when they did so... I will leave it at my anecdotal experience in answering the question as to why this is more recent... because it is more recent that the LGBTQ stuff has been going crazy. You go back 10 years ago and we did not spend over half the year celebrating days, weeks, months out of the year for Transgender awareness day, Gay Pride Month, my dogs cousins brothers owner coming out of the closet day.... to include we must have teachers in the classroom dressed in rainbows like they came off the street with PRIDE flags all over their classrooms. That was not a norm 10 years ago like it is today.

I missed that. My apologies.

Well great! I am glad we could finally agree that it is constitutional to overturn Roe v Wade. So, now you are a big Dredd Scott supporter? Stare Decisis is a solid rule of thumb, not an absolute. Roe V Wade was one of the most overarching and egregious rulings in the Supreme Court's history. It went on to define generations of angst, hate, and discontent with the ruling, as well as numerous other rulings that had to be fixed as it was continually challenged in Court.

The pushing of all things PRIDE into the classroom is recent... BECAUSE it is a political message meant to push that view (all of what the PRIDE flag encompasses) onto children. There is a reason why you see this in more left wing places and liberal run/controled schools. It is entirely political.

No, you did not just say real. You mocked me by saying I would leave them to a porn star as if I did not support anything at all. What you did was dishonest. *Some kids fall prey to online porn. Do you support legislation pushed by Republicans in various right leaning states to regulate online porn more to require age verification to help prevent kids from accessing it? Any other measures? Your position here is that they are going to see this in porn... so we should teach them how to do it in the classroom too? No, that is in fact asinine. You are not giving them an alternative, you are simply endorsing it and pushing your own warped values onto them. You can have blow job training sessions with your own kid, maybe even teach them about how to shit on people and how to properly fit their bondage or use a sex swing. Don't want to miss out on any of the sexual fetishes out there! Leave your sick twisted depravity out of the classroom. And yes, you are here trying to brow-beat with the Pride flag, you are the one proving that is exactly your intent with your intolerant of the intolerant rhetoric and notions that having an honest, scientific, and factual position about men being men and women being women... Hey, the Pro-Life flag and Christian flags do no harm to anyone either. Round and round we go... maybe we should keep your political crap out of the classroom.

How do you track what you can afford in a gift society? In a money society... we have money. Money is simply a token to represent the value someone has created through their work and creations.

Ah yes. The left-wing: We must eradicate all pit bull breeds and ban them all; none can be trusted. Also: OMG, I can't believe someone shot their violent, aggressive dog! We could have moved heaven and Earth to ensure it lived with someone else instead!

Where did I lie? I am the one who provided the actual reasoning from the book, which the person who created this thread did not provide and did not include as the reason why she shot her dod. I am the one who brought more honesty and facts to this discussion.

Well, no, you did not say that at all. You made no mention of states. No, the Constitution explicitly protects certain inalienable rights, including the state's right to make laws. There is nothing in the Constitution that explicitly protects abortion.

It was not then... when? Roe V Wade did not exist at the writing of the Constitution or for another 180+ years after. The Court is not guilty of cherry-picking. Since Roe V Wade, they have had to constantly delve into it since then because it was such an awful ruling. Besides, we are straying from the point anyhow... you and I can relitigate Dobbs v Jackson for the rest of our lives. Folks on the Pro-Life side have been pointing out how awful Roe V Wade was for 50 years. So, I wish you the best of luck (not really) My point here was to simply say that your notion that it is not Constitutional to overturn Roe V Wade is just silly nonsense.

Where do you get any "fetal supremacy" notion from? This is just a strawman argument. The Dobbs v Jackson ruling created no such thing. It pushed the abortion decision back to the states to be regulated. States like California and other left-wing run states are free (and doing so now) to open up abortion rights to their hearts content.

The Majority Opinion was about 70 pages long, not including the appendixes. The purpose of citing Sir Matthew Hale took up less than a sentence to only illustrate the common law nature of abortion laws. Instead of dealing with that fact, you make this pathetic play at discrediting a source... when that was never even the point of citing that particular source. And as I already pointed out, Roe V Wade was not an established precedent for the 180+ years before...