Author Topic: Buttigieg Defends Abortion by Suggesting the Bible Says ‘Life Begins with Breath’  (Read 9224 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Maj. Bill Martin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,716
  • Gender: Male
  • I'll make Mincemeat out of 'em"
I thought we all learned how life begins in 7th grade biology?

And from what I learned, it damned sure doesn't being by one guy sticking his ***** in another guy's ***.

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
I thought we all learned how life begins in 7th grade biology?

And from what I learned, it damned sure doesn't being by one guy sticking his ***** in another guy's ***.

@Maj. Bill Martin that was before it was discovered there are 25...not two different genders...and just because you're born with a twig and berries...that doesn't mean you're male.

You're clearly still stuck on that whole archaic XX and XY chromosome thing. /sarc
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline OfTheCross

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 739
That would depend on what State you are in.  Each State has different laws regarding murder, assault, pumping gas, getting tattoos, erecting billboards, practicing law, elective surgery, etc.  This is stated explicitly in the Bill of Rights as a power reserved for the States.   Abortion and marriage are no different.  It is up to each State to determine its laws per the Constitution of the United States of America.  Either you follow the Constitution or you don't.

Abortion was already legal before the Supreme Court decision.

All that they did was make it so that the decision up the the individual.
If a well-regulated militia be the most natural defense of a free country, it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the national security.

Offline Sighlass

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,203
  • Didn't vote for McCain Dole Romney Trump !
Abortion was already legal before the Supreme Court decision.

All that they did was make it so that the decision up the the individual.

You mean they took the focus off of saving life (mother's life in danger) to allowing disregarding the precious life of the child at all.
Exodus 18:21 Furthermore, you shall select out of all the people able men who fear God, men of truth, those who hate dishonest gain; and you shall place these over them as leaders over ....

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
You mean they took the focus off of saving life (mother's life in danger) to allowing disregarding the precious life of the child at all.

Roe basically decriminalized abortion in the states where it was illegal and forced states that didn't allow abortions to have to make them available.
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Online Hoodat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,836
Roe basically decriminalized abortion in the states where it was illegal and forced states that didn't allow abortions to have to make them available.

And it was done by the same people who falsely decry government involvement in our lives.
If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power.

-Dwight Eisenhower-


"The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals ... it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government ... it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection against the government."

-Ayn Rand-

Online Hoodat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,836
Abortion was already legal before the Supreme Court decision.

Not in Georgia.  Not in Texas.


All that they did was make it so that the decision up the the individual.

Uh, no.  All they did what deny the right of the people of Georgia and Texas to choose their own abortion laws in direct violation of the Bill of Rights.
If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power.

-Dwight Eisenhower-


"The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals ... it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government ... it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection against the government."

-Ayn Rand-

Online berdie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,613
When someone kills themselves you don't charge them with murder. All deaths aren't treated the same in the eyes of the law.




Depending on where you live,  that is an incorrect statement.

Offline Jazzhead

  • Blue lives matter
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,593
  • Gender: Male


Uh, no.  All they did what deny the right of the people of Georgia and Texas to choose their own abortion laws in direct violation of the Bill of Rights.

The 10th amendment doesn't give majorities in the States the ability to deny folks their natural rights as individuals which are secured by the federal Constitution.    A woman's natural right to self-determination is secured by the Constitution just as is your natural right to protect your person and home.   Texas can't take away your individual gun right, just as Texas cannot take away (at least not before the fetus is viable) your daughter's right to choose whether and when to reproduce.     
It's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide

Offline Maj. Bill Martin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,716
  • Gender: Male
  • I'll make Mincemeat out of 'em"
The 10th amendment doesn't give majorities in the States the ability to deny folks their natural rights as individuals which are secured by the federal Constitution.    A woman's natural right to self-determination is secured by the Constitution just as is your natural right to protect your person and home.   Texas can't take away your individual gun right, just as Texas cannot take away (at least not before the fetus is viable) your daughter's right to choose whether and when to reproduce.   

Your right to protect your person and home doesn't come from the 10th Amendment.  It comes from the 4th, and the right to guns comes from the 2nd.

Absolutely nobody involved in the drafting or ratification of the 10th Amendment would have believed it created a right to abortion - even though abortion was known practice at the time.

Online Hoodat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,836
The 10th amendment doesn't give majorities in the States the ability to deny folks their natural rights as individuals which are secured by the federal Constitution.

The right to an abortion is not secured by the Constitution.  But you knew that already.


A woman's natural right to self-determination is secured by the Constitution just as is your natural right to protect your person and home.

In regards to getting pregnant, no one is denying a woman that right.  No one.  But you knew that already.

As for self-determination, the citizens of each State have the right of self-determination to mold and shape their societies through their State Legislatures.  It is explicitly stated in Amendment X of the Bill of Rights - a self-determining right you wish to deny.  Here it is again:


The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.


Texas can't take away your individual gun right  .  .  .

Gun rights are explicitly stated in Amendment II.  But you knew that already.


.  .  .  just as Texas cannot take away (at least not before the fetus is viable) your daughter's right to choose whether and when to reproduce.   

No one is choosing whether and when a woman can reproduce.  Women are empowered with control over their own bodies.  It is 100% up to each individual woman whether she will grant an access to her body that leads to pregnancy.  No one is taking that away.  No one.  But you knew that already.

Nor does viability have anything to do with this.  Either a woman has a God-given right to kill her unborn child or she does not.
If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power.

-Dwight Eisenhower-


"The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals ... it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government ... it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection against the government."

-Ayn Rand-

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Quote
Gun rights are explicitly stated in Amendment II.  But you knew that already.

@Hoodat actually if you read enough of his posts about the right to keep and bear arms...he doesn't seem to know that.

Kinda funny that to Jazz Abortion is "a right protected and guaranteed in the Constitution"

But the 2nd Amendment is "a permission granted to us only since the ruling in DC v Heller."
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline OfTheCross

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 739
Let the record show, as well, that judges in the State of Texas unanimously ruled in favor of Roe over Wade as well.

The Supreme Court was also 7 - 2.
If a well-regulated militia be the most natural defense of a free country, it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the national security.

Offline OfTheCross

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 739
@txradioguy @Hoodat

The 2nd Amendment also mentions a well-regulated Militia by the States. But that's another discussion for another thread
If a well-regulated militia be the most natural defense of a free country, it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the national security.

Online Hoodat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,836
Let the record show, as well, that judges in the State of Texas unanimously ruled in favor of Roe over Wade as well.

The Supreme Court was also 7 - 2.

None of the Roe justices were from Texas.
If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power.

-Dwight Eisenhower-


"The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals ... it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government ... it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection against the government."

-Ayn Rand-

Offline OfTheCross

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 739
None of the Roe justices were from Texas.

The ones that unanimously decided in favor of Roe were Texans.

Wade then appealed to the Supreme Court and lost there as well.
If a well-regulated militia be the most natural defense of a free country, it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the national security.

Online Hoodat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,836
The ones that unanimously decided in favor of Roe were Texans.
Wade then appealed to the Supreme Court and lost there as well.

You may want to go back and double-check that, chief.  The Texas district judges refused to issue an injunction against Wade.  It was the appeal of that refusal that made its way to the Supreme Court.
If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power.

-Dwight Eisenhower-


"The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals ... it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government ... it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection against the government."

-Ayn Rand-

Offline OfTheCross

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 739
You may want to go back and double-check that, chief.  The Texas district judges refused to issue an injunction against Wade.  It was the appeal of that refusal that made its way to the Supreme Court.

I did. Texas judges declared it unconstitutional and did not grant an injunction.


If a well-regulated militia be the most natural defense of a free country, it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the national security.

Online Hoodat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,836
But not unconstitutional enough to prevent prosecutions for violating it.
If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power.

-Dwight Eisenhower-


"The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals ... it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government ... it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection against the government."

-Ayn Rand-

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Let the record show, as well, that judges in the State of Texas unanimously ruled in favor of Roe over Wade as well.

The Supreme Court was also 7 - 2.

Let the record show that the law clerk that wrote Roe for Justice Blackmun admitted that the ruling he authored had nothing to donwoth abortion rights.
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
I did. Texas judges declared it unconstitutional and did not grant an injunction.

Texas was deep blue Democrat at the time. Your point?
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Online Hoodat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,836
Let the record show that the law clerk that wrote Roe for Justice Blackmun admitted that the ruling he authored had nothing to donwoth abortion rights.

Here's what Justice Byron White had to say about it:

With all due respect, I dissent. I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court's judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers [410 U.S. 222] and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes. The upshot is that the people and the legislatures of the 50 States are constitutionally dissentitled to weigh the relative importance of the continued existence and development of the fetus, on the one hand, against a spectrum of possible impacts on the mother, on the other hand. As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today; but, in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court.
If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power.

-Dwight Eisenhower-


"The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals ... it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government ... it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection against the government."

-Ayn Rand-

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51,331
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
Here's what Justice Byron White had to say about it:

With all due respect, I dissent. I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court's judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers [410 U.S. 222] and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes. The upshot is that the people and the legislatures of the 50 States are constitutionally dissentitled to weigh the relative importance of the continued existence and development of the fetus, on the one hand, against a spectrum of possible impacts on the mother, on the other hand. As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today; but, in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court.

I wish someone would show me the constitutional language granting the court this power of judicial review as I simply cannot find it.
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien

Online bigheadfred

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,517
  • Gender: Male
  • One day Closer
I wish someone would show me the constitutional language granting the court this power of judicial review as I simply cannot find it.

Would it make any difference?
She asked me name my foe then. I said the need within some men to fight and kill their brothers without thought of Love or God. Ken Hensley

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51,331
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien