Supreme Court Draft Decision Would Strike Down Roe v. Wade

originally posted by: marg6043
The males of the species gets soo, offended when women dares to make fun of their private parts, I guess of tis an offence on the ego and a problem with the species males are defective.

If I'm not mistaken you were the one immediately set off by this

Again if you want castration of males simply because they are single then w that law should be removal of the uterus the first abortion a woman gets

THATS apples and oranges

a reply to: JAGStorm

The outlook dictated by your personal experience takes "painting with a broad brush" to another level of extreme...

a reply to: SideEyeEverything

Worst banning interstate traveling for abortions, more restrictions targeting only the genetical female of the species

We have been punished for everything that goes wrong in the male world, this days, now we are no to be call "females" and our uterus are the property of the government.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

You know I am having a blast with all the males here, feeling soo offended by the females' wanting rights to their own uterus, vaginas and body.

My point? we still live in a very male dominated society after all, but hey while many now hates religions this started with religious believes.

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: JAGStorm

The outlook dictated by your personal experience takes "painting with a broad brush" to another level of extreme...

My personal experience is one of tens of thousands. You think i'm unique in it, sadly not. As a man you wouldn't understand because you probably don't hear about it.

Yes, women use abortion as birth control............ok what is the alternative? Having a baby they don't want, nobody wants?
Oh, let's hear about abstinance or birth control, well historically those haven't elimanted all non wanted pregnancies either.

What about rape/incest, how anyone with any decency can say you should still have it is as evil as evil comes.

Domestic violence, we all know how rampant it is. Do you think any woman wants to bring a child into that environment?

Like I said, this is about so much more.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: LSU2018

That's not the source. You wanna stop it at the source then the woman has to say no,

Yea because we know every woman that has ever said NO has never gotten pregnant.

I'm not talking about rape. That's an entirely different scenario and circumstance. I'm referring to two consenting adults, that makes up 95% or more of pregnancies.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: SideEyeEverything

Worst banning interstate traveling for abortions, more restrictions targeting only the genetical female of the species

We have been punished for everything that goes wrong in the male world, this days, now we are no to be call "females" and our uterus are the property of the government.

I love how youre going to the extreme of everything and overlooking the ability for the gov to even DO this , and skipping right over personal responsibility

I guess PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY is just a bridge too far for you isnt it? Screw all the birth control methods we have out there, screw obstaining until your married if thats your cup of tea, naaa

LET ME KILL THIS BABY ITS MY BODY!

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: marg6043
The males of the species gets soo, offended when women dares to make fun of their private parts, I guess of tis an offence on the ego and a problem with the species males are defective.

If I'm not mistaken you were the one immediately set off by this

Again if you want castration of males simply because they are single then w that law should be removal of the uterus the first abortion a woman gets

THATS apples and oranges

She's been thoroughly brainwashed by the Left. Which is especially funny because she probably thinks she's immune to their indoctrination.

And based on her statements, she harbors an underlying bigoted hate of men just because they're men, like a good little 3rd wave liberal feminist.

It's not like you can have a logical discussion with her.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Actually it absolutely is retruend to states right

Actually, show me. Please site from the draft where it absolutely hands women's reproductive rights exclusively to the states. Show me where the draft opinion bars the federal government through Congress from banning abortion or codifying Roe V Wade.

a reply to: LSU2018

I'm referring to two consenting adults, that makes up 95% or more of pregnancies

You think about this, with two consenting adults, why do you think so many women have abortions.
Ponder that.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

You know I am having a blast with all the males here, feeling soo offended by the females' wanting rights to their own uterus, vaginas and body.

My point? we still live in a very male dominated society after all, but hey while many now hates religions this started with religious believes.

I know this isnt to me but were not offended!!!! Were amused at your blatant apples and oranges comparison and that you refuse to answer ANY of the options fired back at you, to be honest your acting like a raging leftist right now, ignoring common sense, ignoring options and flipping out completely with emotion.

originally posted by: SideEyeEverything
Misogyny bad.
Misandry good.

Again, GMAFB.

And I'm a woman, FWIW.

You sound just like my wife, lol. She rolls her eyes at feminazi BS all the time, too.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Actually it absolutely is retruend to states right

Actually, show me. Please site from the draft where it absolutely hands women's reproductive rights exclusively to the states. Show me where the draft opinion bars the federal government through Congress from banning abortion or codifying Roe V Wade.

Literally if they overturn this that's exactly what happens..

A high-school understanding of government would give you the knowledge of this......not trying to be a dick it's just a fact

I'm not going to spoon feed you....that's why you believe half the wrong think you already do

Try doing some of your own research I'm on vacation on a beach right now 🤷‍♂️

originally posted by: JAGStorm
You think about this, with two consenting adults, why do you think so many women have abortions.

Substitute birth control ... that's tantamount to murder?

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

You know I am having a blast with all the males here, feeling soo offended by the females' wanting rights to their own uterus, vaginas and body.

My point? we still live in a very male dominated society after all, but hey while many now hates religions this started with religious believes.

This is not about religion, religion is just the most convenient and effortless argument to discredit women's health. This is about the state profiteering from children born in underprivileged or high risk homes, because "population replacement" numbers are going down and that's problematic.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

To be honest, the private citizen mechanism is brilliant and I don't think so for the reasons you think off hand.

To start, taking nearly all enforcement of laws from the hands of government directly to the people would result in only serious, tangible violations of law being prosecuted. No more "administrative" offenses, no more fines to fund fat cats in cities/county commissions.

The laws targeting abortion are idiotic. To an extreme.

And yet, the government exempts itself and its agents from the law and yet thinks it should enforce the law? Citizens wronged have no recourse and its agents/officers have no fear of personal consequences should they make a mistake (other than killing someone, pretty much)

This is how the country was for a long time

a reply to: optimisticcontrarian



the anti abortion movement is soo full of crap, yep they used to be popular the last time abortion was an issue in the supreme court.

Soo how many unwanted children you are going to allow in your home. BTW is thousand of children coming across the border that will need homes because they are unaccompanied.

The irony, is all about fetuses forget the children.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Then you'd think the left would want to help the right neuter government as much as possible.

As in, we should put our own issues aside and work together to achieve a country we both want. One where neither of us can shove our views down the other's throat

What do you say?

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: DBCowboy
And already it has begun.

(and so it begins. . . )


The de-humanization of the unborn human.

Because if you don't think of them as living, growing, humans, then you can do whatever you want to them.

Explain to me why impregnation is considered a human right and abortion isn't. By law, any consenting adult of any background with any qualification or lack thereof is granted the ability to reproduce but not the ability to terminate gestation. If I didn't know better, I'd say this isn't about enforcing family values but making sure the population stays at peak numbers regardless of how many children are removed and rehoused by the state. If abortion is unethical and borderline sinful because human rights, it reasonably follows that parenthood must be licensed and regulated by the state to ensure the maximum welfare of children nationwide...because human rights. Unless that kind of thing stops being relevant the moment they are born?

Laws are put in place to follow. It's up to the people whether or not they want to follow them. Everyone knows that if you break the law, there are consequences to pay.

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: DBCowboy
And already it has begun.

(and so it begins. . . )


The de-humanization of the unborn human.

Because if you don't think of them as living, growing, humans, then you can do whatever you want to them.

Explain to me why impregnation is considered a human right and abortion isn't. By law, any consenting adult of any background with any qualification or lack thereof is granted the ability to reproduce but not the ability to terminate gestation. If I didn't know better, I'd say this isn't about enforcing family values but making sure the population stays at peak numbers regardless of how many children are removed and rehoused by the state. If abortion is unethical and borderline sinful because human rights, it reasonably follows that parenthood must be licensed and regulated by the state to ensure the maximum welfare of children nationwide...because human rights. Unless that kind of thing stops being relevant the moment they are born?

Laws are put in place to follow. It's up to the people whether or not they want to follow them. Everyone knows that if you break the law, there are consequences to pay.

It's almost like you either didn't read my remarks or didn't really think about your response.