Roe to be overturned!!!!

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

That was funny. Because we both are hilarious.

if you say so, Sigmund

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Seems like your car is running in the garage, with you inside it, with the door down, but you aren't going anywhere. Do we need to call 911?

Were you going somewhere with any of the below?

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Only persons born.

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

[bambino]

https://t.me/TheRealKimShady/56546

BAHAHAHAHA

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Seems like your car is running in the garage, with you inside it, with the door down, but you aren't going anywhere. Do we need to call 911?

Were you going somewhere with any of the below?



Only persons born.

Yes. Your comment on a fourth grade civics education. Pretty basic stuff to understand.

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Still no earthly idea where you were going with the other quote of me. Will just assume is was the carbon dioxide build up talking. But I think I understand your ludicrous rationalization with the second part and I pity you just enough (in an amusing sort of way) that I will respond. Lube up! Sit up straight! Pay attention! There is one test question at the end.

Amendment XIII - Proposed 31 January 1865, Ratified 6 December 1865
In a nutshell, Abolish slavery after the Civil war

Amendment XIV - Proposed 13 June 1866, Ratified 9 July 1868
The amendment you cited, so no need to 'splain it to you Lucy.

Margaret Sanger - Born 14 September 1879, Died 6 September 1966
Opened first "women's" clinic, aka abortion mill, in Brooklyn 16 October 1916
The Brownsville Clinic

Test question: Do you agree with those three items above are accurate?

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Seems like your car is running in the garage, with you inside it, with the door down, but you aren't going anywhere. Do we need to call 911?
Were you going somewhere with any of the below?
Only persons born.

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Yes. Your comment on a fourth grade civics education. Pretty basic stuff to understand.

I didn't make the connection between hand grenades and 4th grade civics. Color me silly. But fear ye not, the questions get tougher as we go.

[VitaMan]

Originally Posted by Salty Again

... Let me try one --- IF the Government can FORCE you to get
vaccines - threaten your job if ya don't - then why shouldn't
the Government be able to also tell you what you CAN'T do
with your body.

### Salty

Possibly because viruses are contagious and can be passed from person to person ?

You get the idea....

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Still no earthly idea where you were going with the other quote of me. Will just assume is was the carbon dioxide build up talking. But I think I understand your ludicrous rationalization with the second part and I pity you just enough (in an amusing sort of way) that I will respond. Lube up! Sit up straight! Pay attention! There is one test question at the end.

Amendment XIII - Proposed 31 January 1865, Ratified 6 December 1865
In a nutshell, Abolish slavery after the Civil war

Amendment XIV - Proposed 13 June 1866, Ratified 9 July 1868
The amendment you cited, so no need to 'splain it to you Lucy.

Margaret Sanger - Born 14 September 1879, Died 6 September 1966
Opened first "women's" clinic, aka abortion mill, in Brooklyn 16 October 1916
The Brownsville Clinic

Test question: Do you agree with those three items above are accurate?

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

I didn't make the connection between hand grenades and 4th grade civics. Color me silly. But fear ye not, the questions get tougher as we go.

I like your garage suffocation theme.

Okay, the thirteenth amendment didn't abolish slavery completely.

So the answer is no - no I do not agree that your assessments are accurate.


Thirteenth Amendment Loophole: Penal Labor and Mass Incarceration


https://westportlibrary.libguides.co...at%20exception

After the Civil War, new offenses like “malicious mischief” were vague, and could be a felony or misdemeanor depending on the supposed severity of behavior. These laws sent more Black people to prison than ever before, and by the late 19th century the country experienced its first “prison boom,” legal scholar Michelle Alexander writes in her book The New Jim Crow.

“After a brief period of progress during Reconstruction, African Americans found themselves, once again, virtually defenseless,” Alexander writes. “The criminal justice system was strategically employed to force African Americans back into a system of extreme repression and control, a tactic that would continue to prove successful for generations to come.”

States put prisoners to work through a practice called “convict-leasing,” whereby white planters and industrialists “leased” prisoners to work for them.

Return serve:

Which states failed to ratify the 13th amendment in 1865? Which state didn't abolish slavery until 1995? Or officially in 2013. It won't surprise you, of course.


Here's some help:

National Archives

[Mplay]

Great discussion. Wish I was participating.

[eccieuser9500]

WYID, I'll check back in the morning.

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

All well and good. But then, you weren't talking about slavery or the 13th amendment. Now was ya? You were slap'n the 14th amendment on the table. The practical reality of the 14th is were I was going and you know it. So, you still sticking with the 14th and abortion is ya? Your call.

Thanks for the assist on pointing out that the 13th, along with the Emancipation Proclamation didn't really, actually end slavery and slavery related practices. Though it was the law of the land. A great many things happened. One was that certain parties did not want to return to normalcy. Instead they wanted to dig in their heals and retain their war powers. (remember that point, it applies to the covid as well visa vi not wanting to relinquish 'emergency' powers previously granted)

Anyway, enter the Black Codes. Essentially a way to retain domination and subjugation of the former slaves in a very unfriendly manner. So under the Reconstruction acts the rogue states were basically placed under military rule of sorts. The cudgel to release them from that bondage was their signing on to the 14th amendment (which you offered up), which was designed to ensure that all former slaves were granted automatic US citizenship, thus ensuring they would have all of the same rights and privileges as any other citizen.

Side bar note: Many former slaves upon the issuing of Emancipation Proclamation and 13th Amendment bolted like their hair was on fire from the South to the North. Smart! In their search for work, they were willing to take a very low wage for altruistic reasons such as not starving to death and such. Apparently, the Northern unions did not like that very much, the under cutting of wages and losing jobs to "former slaves" so they implemented a thing called minimum wage with minimum qualifications - thus removing the competition that was driving down wages.

Anyway, as you surely quoted the 14th, I presume you know most of that. And as I mentioned, whether you agreed or not, Ms Margaret Sanger didn't open up her chop-shop until 1916, approx 50 years later.

Recapping: civil war --> Emancipation Proclamation --> 13th amendment --> 14th amendment --> infanticide. Obviously many years and related events along the way.

Test questions:

• Can you cite the Supreme Court case that tried the 14th Amendment regarding illegal aliens giving birth to US citizen just because they happened to make it across the border before giving birth?
• Why did you decide to quote the 14th amendment anyway?
• What the fuck does the 14th amendment have to do with abortion and the legal status of unborn children?
• How many of the 5 D's of Dodge Ball will you need to deploy to answer the fooking questions?
• Or is Mott-and-Bailey Doctrine more your thing?

Good times

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

I like your garage suffocation theme.

Okay, the thirteenth amendment didn't abolish slavery completely.

So the answer is no - no I do not agree that your assessments are accurate....

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Originally Posted by Mplay

Great discussion. Wish I was participating.

The stakes are low and the liquor is poor. Bring your own armor and tank though.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Gonna end this round with my own question:
So we are in agreement to end:
[LIST=1][*]Forced child support <-- hand grenade warning, double dawg dare ya

Your point about the states is a good one. I'd take it down to the county level, believing government closest to the people is best. If you're going to argue that abortion should be determined by popular vote, and that it's something government and not the individual should decide, then leave it to the voters of Travis County (or Dallas County or Loving County, etc.)

As to the hand grenade, be careful. It may go off in your hands. There are around 850,000 abortions annually in the United States. I'd guess most of the women who wouldn't get abortions if they were outlawed are already or would become single mothers. You as a taxpayer would end up supporting many of their children. And most of the women would be Democrats. Since they're Democrats it's more likely their children would be Democrats. Think about that, millions and millions more Democratic voters than there would be otherwise in decades to come.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

No pro lifer here. As a matter of fact, if I get a chance to vote on Roe here in Florida, I'll vote to let it stand. I don't have a pony in this race as one of the more respected member here said. Having said that, I'm a Constitutionalist and since abortion isn't mentioned in any way shape or form in the Constitution, and the likes of Justice Ginsburg and Lawrence Tribe, the ultra Lefts go to Constitutional Professor, while both supporting the right for a woman to choose, say that Roe was flawed law, and should be granted to the States as the Constitution proscribes.



I keep hearing Psaki say that 70% of Americans favor Roe as is. So if it was left to a vote, the majority of States would uphold Roe, right? But of course we all know that isn't true. Just saw a poll that says 54% of Americans, while being pro choice, do not want to see abortions over 15 weeks. The other 16% don't care. And if it isn't really a baby until it is completely out of the birth canal, why not be able to abort half way out? Or just before being wheeled in to the operating room? Why not if it isn't really a child yet? Things that fall in the category of the "restricted choices" already in play that I referred to.



Yes, I'm playing devils advocate here. I tried to address every conceivable point of view.


If we can't figure out a way to work within the Constitution and follow the Constitution, we will never get beyond problems like this. Let each state decide by a vote of the people and live with it for another 2 years when the people can change the members of their State Houses if this wish. We couldn't be in a better situation that allows us to live where we want to live! We've got 50 places to choose from and each side will end up with roughly half the states. Don't want to live under this law, move to one of the states that will give it to you.


I truly see this as the ultimate compromise. Hell, we can bad mouth all the Elitists, make them put their money where their mouth is and provide the means for any woman to travel to a state that allows abortions and we all settle the fuck down and be thankful we still have choices in this country.


And from an economic evolutionary standpoint, I like to see which side might have an economic advantage if one was to be had. "No vacations to Disney World but we can go to Disneyland!!!!

Excellent post Hedonist. My counter argument might be something like if you left it up to the citizens of Rome to decide whether to throw the Christians to the lions, the Christians would get eaten. A woman should be able to do as she chooses, in the first trimester anyway. But admittedly the pro-lifers could use that same argument, if you equate embryos with Christians.

If you are going to leave it up to the people to decide, I'd argue, as in my reply to Why_Yes_I_Do, that it should be left to counties. Admittedly, there's no constitutional basis for that.

As to your questions, yes, some Democrats as well as some Republicans seem to have problems with free speech. What should a person be able to do to her body? Sell sex, sell her organs, be the 50th wife to man, consume substances we can't discuss in this forum? I'd lean towards answering yes, she should be able to, with some restrictions, especially as to your last point, consumption of illicit substances. And I think 6 weeks is too early -- a lot of women don't know they're pregnant by then.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Questions for the pro lifers. Why do you have a problem with abortion in the first trimester? If a person believes in the right to bear arms and speak freely, if he believes in the right not to wear a mask during a pandemic, why does he believe the government should restrict a woman's right to do what she wants with her body? If you're going to say it's because she's killing her baby, why do you consider an embryo to be a child? Where do you draw the line? No condoms, like what the Catholic Church preaches? No Plan B?

draw line at heart beat. if its alive with beating heart, its human and should be accorded natural rights.