Jewish couple was rejected as foster parents because of their religion. The future Project 2025

a reply to: wAnchorofCarp

So as we see as familiar and friendly he is with the Heritage group and the people from his administration and who are involved in it and he plans on putting back into WH admin positions, he tells you he "has no idea who is behind it"?

🤣🤣 and you just believe because he posted it on Truth Social.

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: quintessentone

Are you one of them?

Here is one of them.

4 reasons why Christians should refuse to support Donald Trump's candidacy

Finally, he can’t win. Trump always had a way of enflaming opposition. In 2016, few thought he could win and so some of the Trump-deranged sat out the election. They didn’t make that mistake in 2020, so even when he increased his votes, so many turned out against him and he lost. They’ll turn out against him again in 2024. The January 6, 2021 rampage turned even more moderates, who otherwise might be won by him, permanently against him. The result of his maniacal strategy is an increase in the ranks of the Never Trumpers. These last mid-term elections proved that. Conservative candidates who were not tied to Trump generally did well. Those joined at the hip to him, went down. So, nominating Trump in 2024 in hopes of furthering Christian values is as delusional as Trump’s plan to return the electoral votes to the senders.

Trump ends as a tragedy because he could have achieved so much more. Now, as we look to the future, we need to look for candidates who will learn from his successes but have looked beyond Trump.

www.christianpost.com...

Trump will not further true Christian faith only extremist Christian nationalist agendae is the message above.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: wAnchorofCarp

So as we see as familiar and friendly he is with the Heritage group and the people from his administration and who are involved in it and he plans on putting back into WH admin positions, he tells you he "has no idea who is behind it"?

🤣🤣 and you just believe because he posted it on Truth Social.

didn't he post his ideas on his web site? I thought he did. Hell, I may have even linked it a few posts ago. So let's see, we have his agenda, his words saying he isn't on board with project 2025, and ....yep, that's it. So other than the strong wishes of the left, what facts point to Trump pulling a fast one on the planet, and hiding his plans to go all radical, totally opposite of what he did in his last term?

and for the bonus question, does everyone who offered input on the idea of project 2025, fully endorse every idea put forward? I am genuinely curious on that, as the only time I hear anything about it is when a rabid leftie is trying to puke up the MSM talking points about it.

a reply to: network dude

Trump lies and gaslights to get votes. Remember building a wall and getting Mexico to pay for it? That worked like a charm didn't it?

a reply to: Dandandat3

Well their particular case is about a state law not anything federal.

Also I am confused on why they just couldn't use another adoption agency??? Just find one that isn't Christian, problem solved right? I dont see how this is a problem whatsoever. Now if they banned all non Christian adoption agencies that would be a problem. But there are non religious and non Christian adoption agencies they could use.

It's like the gay wedding cake thing. Just find a different bakery you are not the main character hehe just find a different bakery that will make the cake for you why do you think you can force people to do things they don't want to???

originally posted by: quintessentone
Don't be fooled.

“We proudly stand for families and Life,” states the new platform’s brief section on abortion. “We believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty without Due Process, and that the States are, therefore, free to pass Laws protecting those Rights.” (The odd capitalization reflects, as has been reported, that Trump personally edited the document.) In other words, the platform maintains that embryos are people with constitutional rights and must be protected under the law. This idea is the core of a radical anti-abortion movement that seeks to bestow “personhood” rights on fertilized eggs.

www.msn.com...

I am a fertilized egg. At what point did I become a person? When is a human not a person?

A fertilized egg with canine DNA is a what? A frog? A cat? No. It is a dog. A fertilized egg with human DNA is a human. And the argument people are trying to make is that there is a point in which a human crosses a threshold of nonperson to person, but no one can agree on when that is, exactly. Probably because it’s an inane, moot, non-answerable question, because a human is a person and a person is human and DNA code determines whether a person is human or not and that happens at fertilization.

The problem is not that this is true. The problem is the inconvenience this creates when we must carry out the implications of this truth along its full trajectory.

originally posted by: Lapidoth

originally posted by: quintessentone
Don't be fooled.

“We proudly stand for families and Life,” states the new platform’s brief section on abortion. “We believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty without Due Process, and that the States are, therefore, free to pass Laws protecting those Rights.” (The odd capitalization reflects, as has been reported, that Trump personally edited the document.) In other words, the platform maintains that embryos are people with constitutional rights and must be protected under the law. This idea is the core of a radical anti-abortion movement that seeks to bestow “personhood” rights on fertilized eggs.

www.msn.com...

I am a fertilized egg. At what point did I become a person? When is a human not a person?

A fertilized egg with canine DNA is a what? A frog? A cat? No. It is a dog. A fertilized egg with human DNA is a human. And the argument people are trying to make is that there is a point in which a human crosses a threshold of nonperson to person, but no one can agree on when that is, exactly. Probably because it’s an inane, moot, non-answerable question, because a human is a person and a person is human and DNA code determines whether a person is human or not and that happens at fertilization.

The problem is not that this is true. The problem is the inconvenience this creates when we must carry out the implications of this truth along its full trajectory.

Why is the only way to deal with this issue is to take away a woman's right to make decisions about her body?

originally posted by: quintessentone
Trump lies and gaslights to get votes.

And so do the Democrats.
"Biden is competent and sharp as a tack" ... we heard that for years.
It was a lie they were all in on .. gaslighting.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
Trump lies and gaslights to get votes.

And so do the Democrats.
"Biden is competent and sharp as a tack" ... we heard that for years.
It was a lie they were all in on .. gaslighting.

I am sure they are gaslighting too about policies, but they aren't going to take away women's constitutional rights and make the government the new Christian nationalist government. Tariffs is a whole other dismal policy that they both seem to always go to.

The only gas lighter here is you.

Trump didn’t take away women’s rights the Supreme Court made a ruling, which impacted states ability to govern themselves as it relates to women’s rights within those states. Anyone who wants to have an unborn baby ripped out them because they can’t manage themselves or their lives in a productive way can still have that done,100%. Heck even mentally retarded men are asking for abortions. All the people who want their rape babies shredded can also do that too….because Trump didn’t do any of the things you said he did.

He tried to build the wall but was stone walled pun intended by legislation and the blocked funding, and the fact that some Americans are simply to retarded to tell the difference from a legal law abiding immigrant and a illegal invader.

Why do you care about Christian’s? I doubt you have a sliver of faith in your whole body.
a reply to: quintessentone

originally posted by: Athetos
The only gas lighter here is you.

Trump didn’t take away women’s rights the Supreme Court made a ruling, which impacted states ability to govern themselves as it relates to women’s rights.

He tried to build the wall but was stone walled pun intended by legislation and the blocked funding, and the fact that some Americans are simply to retarded to tell the difference from a legal law abiding immigrant and a illegal invader.

Why do you care about Christian’s? I doubt you have a sliver of faith in your whole body.
a reply to: quintessentone

Trump appointed three pro-life Christian justices, who then got rid of Roe v. Wade. Trump then is saying that states (other people) get to decide for women what they can or can't do with their bodies. That is the reality.

originally posted by: quintessentone
but they aren't going to take away women's constitutional rights

- Abortion isn't in the Constitution. Nowhere does the Constitution promise the right to certain medical procedures.

- SCOTUS gave the people of each state the right to decide the laws of that state, instead of the federal government deciding. States rights ... people's rights to govern themselves.

and make the government the new Christian nationalist government..

Left wing talking point boogyman. Can't happen.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
but they aren't going to take away women's constitutional rights

- Abortion isn't in the Constitution. Nowhere does the Constitution promise the right to certain medical procedures.

- SCOTUS gave the people of each state the right to decide the laws of that state, instead of the federal government deciding. States rights ... people's rights to govern themselves.

and make the government the new Christian nationalist government..

Left wing talking point boogyman. Can't happen.

It is not left wing it is for all women's constitutional rights to do with their bodies as they will and for nobody else to intervene, especially government or other people who don't give a damn about them.

You are all making a big mistake with supporting this issue, don't # with women's rights.

originally posted by: quintessentone
it is for all women's constitutional rights to do with their bodies as they will .

Again ... there are no medical procedures listed in the Constitution and therefore abortion is not a 'Constitutional right'.

And the American people elected Trump so by your own logic they got what they wanted correct?

American people——->Trump———>appointed justices.

So by your logic you blame Trump for appointing the justice. Why not the American people for electing Trump?

Unless….your logic is flawed and it was the combined Supreme Court’s decision and they based that off of their understanding and interpretation of the constitution which is the foundation from which ALL laws of your country must be built on. This is the way I lean.

Not what ever spoon fed msm drivel your trying to serve.




a reply to: quintessentone

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: quintessentone
it is for all women's constitutional rights to do with their bodies as they will .

Again ... there are no medical procedures listed in the Constitution and therefore abortion is not a 'Constitutional right'.

Yes, by not allowing women to have dominion over their bodies they become slaves. I believe the 14th Amendment would then apply.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: wAnchorofCarp

Except:

video here

Now do Democrat policy and socialism.

Think you’ll find even more examples that line up.

Trump has nothing to do with this 2025 BS.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: Dandandat3

Sorry to burst your bubble but project 2025, is just that propositions on how to run the country during the Republican take over, is up to the president if he wants to endorsed or now, take what he can and discard the rest.

Soo far Trump has not shown any leaning to any parts of it.

But what can I say, project 2025 is all the democrats have to campaign against Trump, they have been grooming kamala the nice littler girl to seat, eat, talk and smile when she is told soo, project 2025 is their base now.

Uninformed nonsense.

There are a 140 Trump admin people who are now inside the Heritage Foundation and have helped write Project 2025. A 140 different people who worked inside the Trump admin, some in the highest level positions.

Here is what Trump himself said of the Heritage Foundation, and a video of it, and a transcript:

“They’re going to lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do and what your movement will do when the American people give us a colossal mandate to save America,” Trump said of the Heritage Foundation.

JD Vance, Trump's VP pick, just aligned himself with the HF leadership and wrote the foreword to the new book Kevin Roberts is releasing. Kevin Roberts is the leader of the HF and Project 2025.

If you're trying to distance yourself from some unpopular ideology, you don't turn around and write in their books,give them support and tell everyone they are your blueprint. Only a fool would believe those words over their own eyes and ears.

a reply to: Dandandat3

They are denying adoptions if parents don't agree to the trans agenda.

Trump isn't even president, Biden is, and you're blaming this on Trump?

OMFG!

lol

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Lapidoth

originally posted by: quintessentone
Don't be fooled.

“We proudly stand for families and Life,” states the new platform’s brief section on abortion. “We believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty without Due Process, and that the States are, therefore, free to pass Laws protecting those Rights.” (The odd capitalization reflects, as has been reported, that Trump personally edited the document.) In other words, the platform maintains that embryos are people with constitutional rights and must be protected under the law. This idea is the core of a radical anti-abortion movement that seeks to bestow “personhood” rights on fertilized eggs.

www.msn.com...

I am a fertilized egg. At what point did I become a person? When is a human not a person?

A fertilized egg with canine DNA is a what? A frog? A cat? No. It is a dog. A fertilized egg with human DNA is a human. And the argument people are trying to make is that there is a point in which a human crosses a threshold of nonperson to person, but no one can agree on when that is, exactly. Probably because it’s an inane, moot, non-answerable question, because a human is a person and a person is human and DNA code determines whether a person is human or not and that happens at fertilization.

The problem is not that this is true. The problem is the inconvenience this creates when we must carry out the implications of this truth along its full trajectory.

Why is the only way to deal with this issue is to take away a woman's right to make decisions about her body?

Roe vs Wade was overturned while Biden was President. 😀