Yzermandius19 Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Goddess said: They are talking about it. Do you realize how terrifying this is for women? The religious extremists are exceptionally vocal right now. If you think some states are not going to ban abortions outright with no exceptions, your'e being misled by the extremists. Instead of distancing yourself from them, you're supporting them. there is only 8% who oppose abortions in all circumstances and even among the most conservative Republicans only 17% oppose abortions in all circumstances it is not popular, even in the reddest states banning contraception is even less popular than that you're too paranoid Edited June 28, 2022 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristides Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 11 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: take it up with the 14th amendment no one is banning birth control https://nypost.com/2022/06/24/court-should-reconsider-gay-marriage-birth-control-clarence-thomas/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goddess Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said: you're too paranoid No, I'm not. Not when the Justices publicly said Roe vs. Wade would NOT be revisited and it turned out they lied about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 1 minute ago, Aristides said: https://nypost.com/2022/06/24/court-should-reconsider-gay-marriage-birth-control-clarence-thomas/ they should Obergefell is a garbage ruling too and Thomas doesn't want to ban either gay marriage or contraception Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goddess Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 2 minutes ago, Aristides said: https://nypost.com/2022/06/24/court-should-reconsider-gay-marriage-birth-control-clarence-thomas/ Pretty rich coming from a man whose own inter-racial marriage had to be fought for in the supreme court. I bet he won't be revisiting that ruling. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 Just now, Goddess said: No, I'm not. Not when the Justices publicly said Roe vs. Wade would NOT be revisited and it turned out they lied about that. not a reason for paranoia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 1 minute ago, Goddess said: Pretty rich coming from a man whose own inter-racial marriage had to be fought for in the supreme court. I bet he won't be revisiting that ruling. revisiting those rulings doesn't mean he's for banning anything same with Roe v Wade they are simply issues that shouldn't be federalized Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goddess Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said: not a reason for paranoia How do you know they're not lying now about birth control and gay marriage? What other rights are they planning to take away from women? Do you know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristides Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 3 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: they should Obergefell is a garbage ruling too and Thomas doesn't want to ban either gay marriage or contraception Then why does he want to re visit both? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) Just now, Aristides said: Then why does he want to re visit both? states rights same as with Roe v Wade kicking the issue back to the states is not banning anything Edited June 28, 2022 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristides Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 Just now, Yzermandius19 said: revisiting those rulings doesn't mean he's for banning anything same with Roe v Wade they are simply issues that shouldn't be federalized https://abc7chicago.com/which-states-ban-abortion-banning-is-illegal-trigger-laws/11992746/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristides Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 Just now, Yzermandius19 said: states rights same as with Roe v Wade Bullshit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Aristides said: Bullshit. he wrote down his reasoning in extreme detail I trust that more than the shitty mind reading skills of a hostile witness Edited June 28, 2022 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Goddess said: How do you know they're not lying now about birth control and gay marriage? What other rights are they planning to take away from women? Do you know? the only rights being taken away are states rights and that is being remedied rights are being restored by the SCOTUS, not taken away Edited June 28, 2022 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristides Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 5 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: not a reason for paranoia More bullshit. SCJ's who say one thing in public and do the opposite on the bench. Plenty of reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 1 minute ago, Aristides said: More bullshit. SCJ's who say one thing in public and do the opposite on the bench. Plenty of reason. they never said they wouldn't overturn it they said it was an important precedent and didn't comment on how they would rule on future cases Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristides Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) Quote ustice Brett Kavanaugh added in his concurrence, “Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.” Kavanaugh wrote: “I emphasize what the Court today states: Overruling Roe does not mean the overruling of those precedents, and does not threaten or cast doubt on those precedents.” He said the same thing about RvW during his confirmation hearing. Who would believe anything this guy says. Quote “And one of the important things to keep in mind about Roe v. Wade is that it has been reaffirmed many times over the past 45 years, as you know, and most prominently, most importantly, reaffirmed in Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992, Edited June 28, 2022 by Aristides Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 31 minutes ago, Aristides said: He said the same thing about RvW during his confirmation hearing. Who would believe anything this guy says. no mention that he wouldn't overturn Roe get better reading comprehension Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goddess Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 Sabrina Maddeaux: Yes, overturning Roe v. Wade affects Canadian women (msn.com) Quote It’s certain or likely that 26 states will ban or nearly ban abortion in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision. This will immediately make it much more dangerous for Canadian women who are pregnant or even just of childbearing age to visit more than half of America — and perhaps all of it. Already, in Texas –– now home to many top tech companies and employers –– care for miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies is under threat. All women of childbearing age also have to worry about potential criminal charges if they suffer a miscarriage while in a U.S. state that bans abortion. Miscarriage is fairly common in the first trimester, and often occurs before women even know they’re pregnant. Even before Roe v. Wade fell, U.S. prosecutors were successfully prosecuting women for miscarriages. Women are going to die needlessly. Quote Just days ago, a pregnant U.S. woman visiting Malta fought to survive after her placenta detached, which resulted in massive blood loss and made her pregnancy unviable. But because the baby’s heart was still beating, under Malta’s strict abortion laws, she could not get the care needed to potentially save her life. Luckily, she was medically evacuated to Spain in time. This is not a unique situation. In 2017, another tourist in Malta was airlifted to France under similar circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristides Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 2 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: no mention that he wouldn't overturn Roe get better reading comprehension No problem with reading comprehension, you have a definite problem recognizing integrity, or rather lack of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 1 minute ago, Aristides said: No problem with reading comprehension, you have a definite problem recognizing integrity, or rather lack of it. he never said he wouldn't overturn it you are just pretending he did because you are grasping at straws Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristides Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 Just now, Yzermandius19 said: he never said he wouldn't overturn it you are just pretending he did because you are grasping at straws I'm not the one grasping at straws. He danced around it like Nureyev, being anything but honest. You really like shysters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Aristides said: I'm not the one grasping at straws. He danced around it like Nureyev, being anything but honest. You really like shysters. SCOTUS judges aren't allowed to discuss potential future cases they all dance around it Edited June 28, 2022 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristides Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 8 minutes ago, Goddess said: Sabrina Maddeaux: Yes, overturning Roe v. Wade affects Canadian women (msn.com) Women are going to die needlessly. Canadian women better take pregnancy tests before entering the US and make sure they steer clear of red states if they are positive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted June 28, 2022 Report Share Posted June 28, 2022 (edited) 3 hours ago, Aristides said: As Chelsea Handler said last night. She says stupid things every night, so be warned. Quote Universal health care is pro life She's conflating two separate topics, and saying something completely stupid, so she's just wrong. "Pro-life" is a well-known term which means that you're in favour of protecting the lives of the unborn once they've reached a certain stage of their gestation period. Being in favour of health care doesn't mean that you wouldn't stab a baby in the head ten minutes before it's born. Therefor it's not "pro-life", as we've come to understand that term. She's being duplicitous and you're her stooge. Quote Restricting guns is pro life Sort of, but not in the way that Dems would restrict guns. Dems aren't against criminals possessing guns at all, and those are the guns that take almost all of the lives lost every single year. The lives that would be saved by the Dems' version of gun control are a drop in the bucket. Quote Fighting climate change is pro life It works for Saudi Arabia, because the people who fight for climate change aren't fighting against Saudi oil, they're fighting for Saudi Oil, and against North American oil production. Sebastien Vettel is a perfect example - he has a Saudi Oil co. as a sponsor and he rages against Alberta oil. Sebastien Vettel isn't pro-life, he's a bought and paid for mouthpiece. The people who fly in private jets and then pontificate about climate change aren't pro-life, they're liars & hypocrites and you're their stooge. Quote Listening to doctors during a pandemic is pro life Which doctors? Did you know that in the US & Canada doctors can receive consideration from drug companies for prescriptions which they dole out and they don't have to disclose it to you? For example, they can be receiving nice vacations to Caribbean Islands so that they can attend conferences about the benefits of Lipitor every year, as long as they give out enough prescriptions, and they can prescribe Lipitor to you without telling you about your contribution to their vacays. So do you really need Lipitor, or is it just beneficial to your doctor if you take it? You don't actually know, you just take it. Like an 18-yr-old taking a Pflacebo. FYI not all doctors are in favour of the Pflacebo, they're just censured if they're skeptical about it. Quote Not forcing women to give birth like livestock is pro life That's not a real thing. It's like if I said "Pinning kids down and torturing them until they accept the vax is pro-choice". No one does that to kids. It's just a straw man argument. Quote Republicans are against all of them Republicans are against stupid bullshit, so of course they're at odds with you & Chelsea. Quote Saying Republicans are pro life is like saying OJ Simpson is pro wife. Republicans are pro-sense. It makes sense to allow abortions up to a certain period of gestation. Republicans are in favour of that, as they should be. Republicans are against allowing abortions past a certain period of gestation. That makes sense. At both ends of each spectrum there are idiots. People who would force teens to have babies which are the product of rape are stupid and they should be disregarded. People who think that a woman should have the right to kill a perfectly healthy baby, at full term, the moment before birth are idiots, and they should be disregarded. The Republicans are at a healthy part of the bell curve, where common sense and human rights intersect. You can treat a healthy fetus like a tumour up until 15 weeks or some such. Then you need a very good reason to treat it like a tumour. Mainstream Dems are creating laws which say that the unborn have no human rights at any time during a pregnancy and that's sickening. A 9.5 month-old fetus isn't like a tumour in any way. They have dreams. They choose to drink more amniotic fluid if their mom eats something yummy, or less if their mom smokes or drinks alcohol. They're not tumours. They're humans inside of a womb. Chelsea Handler doesn't understand that. Chelsea Handler is a living abortion. Edited June 28, 2022 by WestCanMan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.