The Supreme Court Should Rule Swiftly on Trump’s Immunity Claim

[User]

5 minutes ago, robosmith said:

It's clearly the idea that we are a Christian nation; which is explicitly prohibited by the 1st amendment and something Republicons have a hard on for establishing. Duh 

Which you might know if you were an American and not so IGNORANT.

And what is meant by saying we are a Christian nation?

That can mean many things and is a very common saying among folks in regard to our country being predominately Christian. 

Thinking such and saying such and wanting such is not a violation of the 1st Amendment at all. 

[robosmith]

16 minutes ago, User said:

And what is meant by saying we are a Christian nation?

Christian nation means different things to different people. Some believe we are bound by laws detailed in the Bible. New Testament, of course, since that is post Christ.

16 minutes ago, User said:

That can mean many things and is a very common saying among folks in regard to our country being predominately Christian. 

Thinking such and saying such and wanting such is not a violation of the 1st Amendment at all. 

Depends on who you are and whether you have the POWER to implement it. If you're JoSCOTUS, ruling against the 1st Amendment, violates it.

[User]

7 hours ago, robosmith said:

Christian nation means different things to different people. Some believe we are bound by laws detailed in the Bible. New Testament, of course, since that is post Christ.

Depends on who you are and whether you have the POWER to implement it. If you're JoSCOTUS, ruling against the 1st Amendment, violates it.

Well... it doesn't matter who you are if you are outright violating the 1st Amendment. Anyone can do that or want to do that or abuse their power to do that. 

 

[West]

8 hours ago, robosmith said:

It's clearly the idea that we are a Christian nation; which is explicitly prohibited by the 1st amendment and something Republicons have a hard on for establishing. Duh 

Which you might know if you were an American and not so IGNORANT.

You intentionally misrepresent their position to justify such vile behavior. 

8 hours ago, robosmith said:

Christian nation means different things to different people. Some believe we are bound by laws detailed in the Bible. New Testament, of course, since that is post Christ.

Depends on who you are and whether you have the POWER to implement it. If you're JoSCOTUS, ruling against the 1st Amendment, violates it.

Well in Joe's definition, opposing post term abortions is considered "Christian nationalism". Basically by labeling views he disagrees with as a threat to the nation he can justify himself in his attempts at using lawfare against his political opponents and covers up his attempt at VOTER SUPPRESSION.

Edited April 27 by West

[Hodad]

On 4/27/2024 at 11:05 AM, West said:

You intentionally misrepresent their position to justify such vile behavior. 

Well in Joe's definition, opposing post term abortions is considered "Christian nationalism". Basically by labeling views he disagrees with as a threat to the nation he can justify himself in his attempts at using lawfare against his political opponents and covers up his attempt at VOTER SUPPRESSION.

You were flirting with reasonableness for a few weeks there, but now you're just saying crazy stuff again. Nobody is taking about "post-term abortion" and Biden is not involved in any voter suppression effort.

You forget your lines? Your job is to rail at Democrats for making it easier to vote.

[gatomontes99]

9 minutes ago, Hodad said:

You were flirting with reasonableness for a few weeks there, but now you're just saying crazy stuff again. Nobody is taking about "post-term abortion" and Biden is not involved in any voter suppression effort.

You forget your lines? Your job is to rail at Democrats for making it easier to vote.

Tell that to Ralph.

 

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Tell that to Ralph.

 

Gonna need you to decode that. I didn't get your chain emails.

[West]

4 hours ago, Hodad said:

You were flirting with reasonableness for a few weeks there, but now you're just saying crazy stuff again. Nobody is taking about "post-term abortion" and Biden is not involved in any voter suppression effort.

You forget your lines? Your job is to rail at Democrats for making it easier to vote.

Biden has picked a battle with evangelicals labeling them as "extremists". It's voter suppression as he's labeling mainline conservative views as a threat.

I'm not saying crazy stuff that's Biden who's going all crazy on Christians for voting their conscience 

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, West said:

Biden has picked a battle with evangelicals labeling them as "extremists". It's voter suppression as he's labeling mainline conservative views as a threat.

I'm not saying crazy stuff that's Biden who's going all crazy on Christians for voting their conscience 

A. That's false. He didn't say anything about evangelicals, unless you'd like to make the argument that all evangelicals are Christian nationalists?

B. I don't think you know what "voter suppression" means. For that to be true he would have to come up with some way to prevent or make it more difficult for them to vote. Purging view rolls, eliminating polling locations, adding new requirements, eliminating alternative voting times--you know, the Republican playbook.

Edited April 29 by Hodad

[robosmith]

5 hours ago, Hodad said:

You were flirting with reasonableness for a few weeks there, but now you're just saying crazy stuff again. Nobody is taking about "post-term abortion" and Biden is not involved in any voter suppression effort.

You forget your lines? Your job is to rail at Democrats for making it easier to vote.

You mean no one but Trump and his MAGA CULT PARROTS.

[Nationalist]

On 4/27/2024 at 2:16 AM, robosmith said:

It's clearly the idea that we are a Christian nation; which is explicitly prohibited by the 1st amendment and something Republicons have a hard on for establishing. Duh 

Which you might know if you were an American and not so IGNORANT.

Ah Ha! That's it isn't it?

You Libbies are all freaked out about Christians because they can get a hard-on, and you freaks can't.

[gatomontes99]

8 hours ago, Hodad said:

Gonna need you to decode that. I didn't get your chain emails.

Ralph Northam said that if a baby was born they would make it comfortable and discuss with the mother what to do. That was regarding their abortion bill in Virginia.

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

Ralph Northam said that if a baby was born they would make it comfortable and discuss with the mother what to do. That was regarding their abortion bill in Virginia.

Ah, so not a chain email, but rather a disinformation meme. Great. 

But Northam was only addressing what happens in cases where a baby is born with severe deformities and has a low chance of survival.

So, yes, the fate of severely deformed newborns, who naturally lack a living will, should indeed be a discussion between parents and physicians.

I wish people would do some critical thinking about random shite from the internet before sharing it like it's news. 

 

[Nationalist]

14 hours ago, Hodad said:

Your job is to rail at Democrats for making it easier to vote.

Easier for...ILLEGALS and easier to CHEAT.

There will be Republican overseers at every polling station. Every ballot cast will be scrutinized. Your election rigging is over.

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

Ah, so not a chain email, but rather a disinformation meme. Great. 

But Northam was only addressing what happens in cases where a baby is born with severe deformities and has a low chance of survival.

So, yes, the fate of severely deformed newborns, who naturally lack a living will, should indeed be a discussion between parents and physicians.

I wish people would do some critical thinking about random shite from the internet before sharing it like it's news. 

 

That's the excuse being used but...its not floating. Your desire to kill babies is disgusting.

[gatomontes99]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

Ah, so not a chain email, but rather a disinformation meme. Great. 

But Northam was only addressing what happens in cases where a baby is born with severe deformities and has a low chance of survival.

So, yes, the fate of severely deformed newborns, who naturally lack a living will, should indeed be a discussion between parents and physicians.

I wish people would do some critical thinking about random shite from the internet before sharing it like it's news. 

 

If it is comfortable and viable enough to resuscitate, it is a post birth abortion. Make all the justifications you want, but you are supporting people that are ok with killing a post birth child.

“If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” Northam says in a video from the 2019 interview being shared online. “The infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

Edited April 29 by gatomontes99

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

If it is comfortable and viable enough to resuscitate, it is a post birth abortion. Make all the justifications you want, but you are supporting people that are ok with killing a post birth child.

“If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” Northam says in a video from the 2019 interview being shared online. “The infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

 

Do you subject a hopeless patient to heroic measures to maintain a pulse? That's the same conversation--between families and physicians--that every patient deserves.

Think about a baby born without a brain or some other essential organ, for whom life is impossible outside the womb. Do you think they should do chest compressions on the thing until it's just a pile of mush? Or offer whatever palliative care they can and let it pass with grace? 

These are actual conversations that have to take place. They are difficult and heartbreaking. And here you are exploiting that fact in an effort to score some cheap political points. Have some decency. 

[gatomontes99]

37 minutes ago, Hodad said:

 

Do you subject a hopeless patient to heroic measures to maintain a pulse? That's the same conversation--between families and physicians--that every patient deserves.

Think about a baby born without a brain or some other essential organ, for whom life is impossible outside the womb. Do you think they should do chest compressions on the thing until it's just a pile of mush? Or offer whatever palliative care they can and let it pass with grace? 

These are actual conversations that have to take place. They are difficult and heartbreaking. And here you are exploiting that fact in an effort to score some cheap political points. Have some decency. 

Oh please. Don't act like this is some extreme example. He didn't give an extreme example. He was asked if the abortion should happen after birth and he said yes, that is an option.

[West]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

 

Do you subject a hopeless patient to heroic measures to maintain a pulse? That's the same conversation--between families and physicians--that every patient deserves.

Think about a baby born without a brain or some other essential organ, for whom life is impossible outside the womb. Do you think they should do chest compressions on the thing until it's just a pile of mush? Or offer whatever palliative care they can and let it pass with grace? 

These are actual conversations that have to take place. They are difficult and heartbreaking. And here you are exploiting that fact in an effort to score some cheap political points. Have some decency. 

These are all conversations worth having. I shouldn't be subjected to a CIVIL SERVANT calling me a domestic terrorist for having a different view on it nor should any American have to worry about being subjected to governments full force coming after them for participating in the discussion 

Edited April 29 by West

[West]

12 hours ago, Hodad said:

A. That's false. He didn't say anything about evangelicals, unless you'd like to make the argument that all evangelicals are Christian nationalists?

B. I don't think you know what "voter suppression" means. For that to be true he would have to come up with some way to prevent or make it more difficult for them to vote. Purging view rolls, eliminating polling locations, adding new requirements, eliminating alternative voting times--you know, the Republican playbook.

Christian nationalism is really just a smear, like "alt right" was a few years ago, for voting differently on key issues like immigration and border security. 

Take a close look at what's being said. 

[Hodad]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Easier for...ILLEGALS and easier to CHEAT.

There will be Republican overseers at every polling station. Every ballot cast will be scrutinized. Your election rigging is over.

That's the excuse being used but...its not floating. Your desire to kill babies is disgusting.

Aw, you silly, silly man. There are always monitors from both parties at polling stations. Nothing different there. 

And the only verified voter fraud to swing a federal election in the last 50 years was republicans--and they got caught because the system works just fine. 

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

Oh please. Don't act like this is some extreme example. He didn't give an extreme example. He was asked if the abortion should happen after birth and he said yes, that is an option.

I propose that you are among those easily fooled by this kind of disinformation. When you saw this claim, did you go watch or read the full quote in context? That should be the absolute first response to any crazy claim you see. 

Edited April 29 by Hodad

[Hodad]

39 minutes ago, West said:

These are all conversations worth having. I shouldn't be subjected to a CIVIL SERVANT calling me a domestic terrorist for having a different view on it nor should any American have to worry about being subjected to governments full force coming after them for participating in the discussion 

You're tilting at windmills. Nowhere has anyone been called a domestic terrorist for having a point of view on abortion, and nowhere has the government's "full force" come after people for participating in a discussion. 

Seriously, why are you even posting this nonsense? 

[gatomontes99]

6 minutes ago, Hodad said:

 

I propose that you are among those easily fooled by this kind of disinformation. When you saw this claim, did you go watch or read the full quote in context? That should be the absolute first response to any crazy claim you see. 

Here

“[Third trimester abortions are] done in cases where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that’s nonviable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” Northam, a pediatric neurosurgeon, told Washington radio station WTOP. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

There. Nothing changes. Baby is born alive and yes, it can be killed. That's what he said.

[gatomontes99]

3 minutes ago, Hodad said:

You're tilting at windmills. Nowhere has anyone been called a domestic terrorist for having a point of view on abortion, and nowhere has the government's "full force" come after people for participating in a discussion. 

Seriously, why are you even posting this nonsense? 

Well look at that. That windmill is a giant after all:

Homeland Security listed pro-life moms as ‘radicalization suspects’ docs reveal

[Hodad]

2 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Here

“[Third trimester abortions are] done in cases where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that’s nonviable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” Northam, a pediatric neurosurgeon, told Washington radio station WTOP. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

There. Nothing changes. Baby is born alive and yes, it can be killed. That's what he said.

A. So you were indeed, incorrect. He was explicitly talking about severe situations. 

B. There is a difference between letting a body die and killing a person, no?

Again, anyone without a living will must rely entirely on the judgment of doctor and families to determine when to cease heroic measures to maintain a semblance of life. This is no different. it's pure nonsense to call it a "post-term abortion"--which is a silly word salad to begin with. Remember Terry Schaivo's "post-term abortion"? 🙄

[gatomontes99]

6 minutes ago, Hodad said:

A. So you were indeed, incorrect. He was explicitly talking about severe situations. 

B. There is a difference between letting a body die and killing a person, no?

Again, anyone without a living will must rely entirely on the judgment of doctor and families to determine when to cease heroic measures to maintain a semblance of life. This is no different. it's pure nonsense to call it a "post-term abortion"--which is a silly word salad to begin with. Remember Terry Schaivo's "post-term abortion"? 🙄

No, I was absolutely correct and no that was not the set of circumstances. There was no definitive statement that it can't live. Even still, there was an implications that it would be killed.

If you shoot a man having a heart attack, is that murder or natural causes?