No you’re wrong
Just because your religion says life begins at conception (but won’t give the unborn last rites) doesn’t make a fetus be a life or have a soul.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim can prove the majority of the women in this country are wrong, OMG someone call Fox we need to give him the audience that will truly appreciate his nonsense.

you don’t respond.

yes, i can prove the issue is not about women’s rights. There are tons of laws that restrict women’s rights

If women have bodily autonomy, by what right do we force them to take vaccines, not inject themselves with heroin, require them
to get up in the middle of the night and feed their hungry babies?

calling me an idiot, doesn’t recite my point. it cannot be refuted, i’ve used it a million times, there’s no logical response.

we all agree that women can do whatever they want as long as they don’t hurt someone else. Therefore this isn’t about women’s rights. All that matters. is the question of whether or not the baby constitutes “someone else.”

If it’s nonsense, why can’t you refute it with a rebuttal?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Moving the goal posts again

I thought it was about how life is precious

Now it’s about due process

Jim what I posted is not my what I believe it’s just a contradiction in red states who hate abortion but embrace the death penalty wanting it both ways. I belive in the right to abortion and the death penalty

Iam not conflicted
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you compared abortion and the death penalty. i didn’t move the goal
post even by an inch.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

the constitution says that life cannot be denied without due process. abortion is an obvious violation. the death penalty is clearly in keeping with that.

the death penalty is explicitly constitutional. doesn’t mean it’s ethical, i believe it’s not ethical, but you cannot even argue that it’s unconstitutional.

with abortion (again) if you believe the baby is alive, then killing it without due process, is irrefutably unconstitutional.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

the constitution says that life cannot be denied without due process.

Those goal posts must be powered by V8s they move so fast

Where in the constitution is a fetus mentioned or considered an citizen
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nowhere. It's not mentioned anywhere.

Which means, like abortion, the question of the status of the baby gets decided by the states.

Game. Set. Match.

Boy, did you walk into that one and lob me a softball.

On what basis is there another stage of development that makes more sense to call it a person. Conception is the one moment when something spectacular happens, when something gets created that literally wasn’t there a second ago.

if you pick, say 15 weeks, there’s no logic to it. the baby is no different on the last day of the 14th week, than it is on the first day of the 15th week. But it’s sure different before and after the moment of conception.

I think about this exact issue a lot, and i’d be genuinely curious to hear your reasoning why you’d pick a point other than conception to call it a person.

Show me where concealed carry or open carry is in the constitution

But this same Court magically found it. And told STATEs you can’t pass a law requiring people justify why they need to carried a concealed weapon .. yep common sense gun laws


Justice Clarence Thomas, says that it is a constitutional right to carry a weapon in public for self-defense purposes.

Ya ok
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Reminder that Thomas Jefferson who helped write the Declaration of Independence also said we should rewrite the constitution every 20 years so that dead people wouldn’t rule over modern society.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

bear

verb uses

(bɛər IPA Pronunciation Guide )
Word forms: bears, bearing, bore, borne

1. TRANSITIVE VERB
If you bear something somewhere, you carry it there or take it there.
[literary]
They bore the oblong hardwood box into the kitchen and put it on the table.

2. TRANSITIVE VERB
If you bear something such as a weapon, you hold it or carry it with you.
[formal]

...the constitutional right to bear arms.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

To paraphrase what Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote”
The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees a "right of the people to keep and bear arms." However, the meaning of this clause cannot be understood apart from the purpose, the setting, and the objectives of the draftsmen. At the time of the Bill of Rights, people were apprehensive about the new national government presented to them, and this helps explain the language and purpose of the Second Amendment. It guarantees, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The need for a State militia was the predicate of the "right" guarantee, so as to protect the security of the State. Today, of course, the State militia serves a different purpose. A huge national defense establishment has assumed the role of the militia of 200 years ago. Americans have a right to defend their homes, and nothing should undermine this right; nor does anyone question that the Constitution protects the right of hunters to own and keep sporting guns for hunting anymore than anyone would challenge the right to own and keep fishing rods and other equipment for fishing. Neither does anyone question the right of citizens to keep and own an automobile. Yet there is no strong interest by the citizenry in questioning the power of the State to regulate the purchase or the transfer of such a vehicle and the right to license the vehicle and the driver with reasonable standards. It is even more desirable for the State to have reasonable regulations for the ownership and use of a firearm in an effort to stop mindless homicidal carnage.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

infringe

verb [ I/T ]

US /ɪnˈfrɪndʒ/

to act in a way that is against a law or that limits someone’s rights or freedom:
[ T ] Copying videos infringes copyright law.
[ I always + adv/prep ] The senator is opposed to any laws that infringe on a citizen’s right to free speech.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

so you’re not going to answer.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

it’s that simple.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You would think :huh:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

More twisted logic so you can own multiple guns so your right has not be infringed

SCJ overturns a100 year old law that suddenly interpreted 2022 as an infringement .. I guess no one cared about the constitution until the current bench. Lol

The right to bear arms generally refers to a person's right to possess weapons.

No mention of bringing them where ever you like . hidden or open but let’s just add that part in 2022. So much for originality view


But move the goal post again claiming not being able to carrying a concealed Is an infringement

What’s next on the 2a infringement menu..

Carrying on planes , court rooms schools going after private companies or business who don’t allow firearms in or on their grounds

So glad the 4th of July shooter rights weren’t infringed

Odd 2a supporters seem to have no concern of the rights of those killed And their Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" Or domestic Tranquility
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment

fraud on the American public.” That’s how former Chief Justice Warren Burger described the idea that the Second Amendment gives an unfettered individual right to a gun. When he spoke these words to PBS in 1990, the rock-ribbed conservative appointed by Richard Nixon was expressing the longtime consensus of historians and judges across the political spectrum.

There is not a single word about an individual’s right to a gun for self-defense or recreation in Madison’s notes from the Constitutional

Today at the NRA’s headquarters in Fairfax, Virginia, oversized letters on the facade no longer refer to “marksmanship” and “safety.” Instead, the Second Amendment is emblazoned on a wall of the building’s lobby. Visitors might not notice that the text is incomplete. It reads:

“.. the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

The first half—the part about the well regulated militia—has been edited out.

From 1888, when law review articles first were indexed, through 1959, every single one on the Second Amendment concluded it did not guarantee an individual right to a gun.


As the revisionist perspective took hold, government agencies also began to shift. In 1981, Republicans took control of the U.S. Senate for the first time in 24 years. Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch became chair of a key Judiciary Committee panel, where he commissioned a study on “The Right to Keep and Bear Arms.” In a breathless tone it announced, “What the Subcommittee on the Constitution uncovered was clear—and long lost—proof that the second amendment to our Constitution was intended as an individual right of the American citizen to keep and carry arms in a peaceful manner, for protection of himself, his family, and his freedoms.”

As the revisionist perspective took hold, government agencies also began to shift. In 1981, Republicans took control of the U.S. Senate for the first time in 24 years. Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch became chair of a key Judiciary Committee panel, where he commissioned a study on “The Right to Keep and Bear Arms.” In a breathless tone it announced, “What the Subcommittee on the Constitution uncovered was clear—and long lost—proof that the second amendment to our Constitution was intended as an individual right of the American citizen to keep and carry arms in a peaceful manner, for protection of himself, his family, and his freedoms.”

But conservatives love their revisionist views of America
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So you can only shoot them in your house???? And my logic is twisted :rolleyes:

https://mobileimages.lowes.com/produ...pg?size=pdhism


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed

We are in the midst of a cultural war - it’s not coming - it’s here.

It’s not going to look like men in blue or gray lined up on border states.

It’s going to look like…well, what’s going on.

Ultimately demographics will determine a winner - question is Can we last that long?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ok that photo was hysterical!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

demographics…and how are democrats polling with hispanics right now?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Price of gas dropped 25 cents here today
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

wow! the gop is gonna get clobbered.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A group of Pennsylvania Republicans will form a super PAC Wednesday to support Josh Shapiro, the Democratic nominee for governor.

Call them “Never Mastrianos.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

US Senate candidate Eric Greitens is back with another ad shooting and blowing things up with his “army of patriots.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yea you guys are funny

I live in mass have an LTC and not against gun ownership .

Just against nonsense like you posted people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringe

seems the far right 2a crowd has now decided , that background checks application paper work waiting periods and questions by law enforcement suddenly these what I call normal process and inconvenient for some! Are now considered as an infringement on their right to carry a gun ..

Yep inconvenience now equal infringement



They want to walk in a gun shop paying for it and walking out .. then go to the mall with their new toy on full display

to them that’s what the 2nd amendment means
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"When voters were asked about a congressional race between 'a Democratic Party candidate who is pro-choice on abortion' and 'a Republican Party candidate who is pro-life on abortion,' 47 percent chose the Democrat. Only 32 percent chose the Republican."
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Lindsey Graham will fight Georgia 2020 election subpoena, his lawyers say

Wow a another Republican trying to ignore a lawfully issues subpoena From a State

Try that as regular citizens and see what happens
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device