Spin Forum Dumping Bin

[Dtwncbad]

People need to stay mentally organized on this Roe vs. Wade subject.

Gavin Newsome says Supreme Court Justices cannot be trusted to protect reproductive rights.  No shit Gavin.  They should never be attempting to “protect reproductive rights.”   They are only supposed to interpret the Constitution and let us know what is Constitutional and what is not Constitutional based only on what is actually in the document.

This decision is just doing their job.  It is then up to the people of the US to deal with the reality of it.

If abortion rights were really the overwhelming consensus that the left always screams it is, then it would be easy for Congress to officially amend the Constitution to explicitly include abortion rights.

The fact is the subject is very controversial with no national consensus.

So an amendment is likely not realistic.  That means the subject is left to the individual states to deal with individually.

That’s the reality of it.  Wouldn’t it be nice if people just grew up and accepted reality?

Edited May 4, 2022 by Dtwncbad

[Blarg]

20 minutes ago, cals said:

I'm not talking to you until you apologize for insinuating I'm a rapist. 

Simple misunderstanding, Cals.

[Lou]

28 minutes ago, Make Angels Great Again said:

 

I'm proud to say that I've become probably 15% more retarded in the last 6 years due to the politics forum.

And I have you to thank for that.

I'll take the OVER

[Kotchman]

29 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

Just quoting you, since you quoted cals, allowing me to see his last post.  Cals, if you're referring to me with the "one man quest" thing, I'll just say that I was not the first/only person to reach out.  There had apparently been a few others before I said anything.  Make of that what you will.

I get your point but emojis hurt too. You trolled me 3-4 times and I’m still recovering emotionally. Not to mention, the negative points totally killed my shot at poster of the week. The first things  I posted were simply pro life arguments that seemed to offend you. They certainly weren’t insulting 

[Amazing Larry]

[Taylor]

57 minutes ago, Tank said:

all of the people who are losing their mud over this don't seem to understand that it will now become a state issue. several states will keep abortion and some will limit it or do away with it, but it's not going away.

i've seen multiple pictures of protestors with coat hangars and talking about the handmaid's tale, like we're going back into the 1200s over this. it's just silly.

You have to understand that there are plenty of people who see this as a fundamental human right, not something that should be left to the states to decide. 

[mtangelsfan]

2 hours ago, Taylor said:

Yeah, I really don't understand the personal attack stuff, and I'm glad Chuck called it out in his reaffirming of the rules.

Calling dudes "gay" or "woman" is a 5th grade insult. It's not even clever. I'm leaning toward ignoring cals for a while just so he can talk to himself for 50% of his posts (I've already ignored his other account).

Or fat?  Or retarded?  

[Taylor]

1 minute ago, mtangelsfan said:

Or fat?  Or retarded?  

Those are just as bad IMO.

[mtangelsfan]

11 minutes ago, Taylor said:

You have to understand that there are plenty of people who see this as a fundamental human right, not something that should be left to the states to decide. 

Do you?

[Make Angels Great Again]

11 minutes ago, Taylor said:

You have to understand that there are plenty of people who see this as a fundamental human right, not something that should be left to the states to decide. 

 

There are also plenty of people that view it as an evil act. You're never gonna get a consensus on it.

Which is why it shouldn't be one or the other from the top down. I don't know why this is considered so unreasonable by the left.

[Taylor]

6 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

Do you?

Yes.

[Taylor]

4 minutes ago, Make Angels Great Again said:

There are also plenty of people that view it as an evil act. You're never gonna get a consensus on it.

Which is why it shouldn't be one or the other from the top down. I don't know why this is considered so unreasonable by the left.

Both sides are unreasonable and there needs to be a compromise. Most European countries allow abortions through 16 weeks (or past that date when there's a danger to the mother or child). I think that's an excellent compromise and would support it today.

But you have one side saying that a 2-celled embryo has the same rights as my 8-month-old daughter. And you have another side that won't even discuss restrictions.

[mtangelsfan]

2 minutes ago, Taylor said:

Yes.

wow, you've come a long way.

[Tank]

9 hours ago, Taylor said:

You have to understand that there are plenty of people who see this as a fundamental human right, not something that should be left to the states to decide. 

i would never see it in those terms. i don't understand those who do.

i see it as a moral decision as well as a medical decision (based on health and well-being factors). for those who see it as a method of birth control, i think they're way on the wrong side of things.

 

Edited May 5, 2022 by Tank

[Dtwncbad]

22 minutes ago, Taylor said:

You have to understand that there are plenty of people who see this as a fundamental human right, not something that should be left to the states to decide. 

Great.  So do the actual work to amend the Constitution so that there is no ambiguity.

[Tank]

10 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

Do you?

 

4 minutes ago, Taylor said:

Yes.

this is one of those times where your position socially puzzles me, in light of the fact you used to be a youth pastor/church worker.

[Kotchman]

1 minute ago, Tank said:

 

this is one of those times where your position socially puzzles me, in light of the fact you used to be a youth pastor/church worker.

My son has attended two Bible colleges. It’s really sad how far Christians bend these days. Services and teachings sound more like Maddow than Billy Graham these days

[Make Angels Great Again]

17 minutes ago, Taylor said:

Both sides are unreasonable and there needs to be a compromise. Most European countries allow abortions through 16 weeks (or past that date when there's a danger to the mother or child). I think that's an excellent compromise and would support it today.

But you have one side saying that a 2-celled embryo has the same rights as my 8-month-old daughter. And you have another side that won't even discuss restrictions.

 

There is a compromise. It's left to individual states to decide if they want to regulate it or outlaw it. It's not banned across the nation.

[Taylor]

4 minutes ago, Tank said:

this is one of those times where your position socially puzzles me, in light of the fact you used to be a youth pastor/church worker.

I've done a lot of soul searching in this area. It would be hard to lay out in a message board post, but I'll just say that I don't believe Christians need to be pro-life to be faithful the gospel.

Abortion is tragic and I think we should do everything to ensure it very rarely needs to happen. Outright banning it doesn't solve a host of other issues that result in mothers seeing abortion as the best option.

[Taylor]

Just now, Make Angels Great Again said:

There is a compromise. It's left to individual states to decide how they want to regulate it or outlaw it. It's not banned across the nation.

This isn't a compromise, dude. Not everyone has the luxury of moving or traveling out of state. And some states are even trying to ban that very thing (women going out of state/ordering pills from out of state to have an abortion).

[Dtwncbad]

6 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Great.  So do the actual work to amend the Constitution so that there is no ambiguity.

Taylor you gave me the “you are telling me there is a chance” emoji.

No.  I am trying to get you to accept reality. You said “plenty of people” view it as a basic human right.

In terms of what is Constitutionally protected, we don’t give that level of protection to things that “plenty” of people want.

“Plenty” isn’t nearly enough.  There just isn’t enough support for it to realistically hope for an amendment.

So they best a clear-thinking adult can hope for on this subject is for it to be left to the States. . . Unless you literally hope for a Supreme Court that makes decisions based in polls, popularity, personal opinions, or politics rather than sticking to their actual job.  And that would be pure chaos.

The Supreme Court clarifies things for us so we know what do do next, or at least what you might realistically try to do next.  They have no obligation to prevent problems or solve problems, so the anger towards them is just juvenile.

Its gonna be a States issue. And we know many,many, many States will react individually legislatively to be over-the-top pro-abortion states.

 

 

 

[Taylor]

2 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Taylor you gave me the “you are telling me there is a chance” emoji.

No.  I am trying to get you to accept reality. You said “plenty of people” view it as a basic human right.

In terms of what is Constitutionally protected, we don’t give that level of protection to things that “plenty” of people want.

“Plenty” isn’t nearly enough.  There just isn’t enough support for it to realistically hope for an amendment.

So they best a clear-thinking adult can hope for on this subject is for it to be left to the States. . . Unless you literally hope for a Supreme Court that makes decisions based in polls, popularity, personal opinions, or politics rather than sticking to their actual job.  And that would be pure chaos.

The Supreme Court clarifies things for us so we know what do do next, or at least what you might realistically try to do next.  They have no obligation to prevent problems or solve problems, so the anger towards them is just juvenile.

Its gonna be a States issue. And we know many,many, many States will react individually legislatively to be over-the-top pro-abortion states.

I love how you wrote this up based on an emoji reaction I gave you.

[Make Angels Great Again]

1 minute ago, Taylor said:

This isn't a compromise, dude. Not everyone has the luxury of moving or traveling out of state. And some states are even trying to ban that very thing (women going out of state/ordering pills from out of state to have an abortion).

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that point then. Both sides of the issue have such polarizing opinions on the morality of it. This is the best compromise I think everyone is gonna get.

[RallyMo]

1 hour ago, Make Angels Great Again said:

 

I'm proud to say that I've become probably 15% more retarded in the last 6 years due to the politics forum.

And I have you to thank for that.

 

[Amazing Larry]

45 minutes ago, Taylor said:

You have to understand that there are plenty of people who see this as a fundamental human right, not something that should be left to the states to decide. 

Everything is "a fundamental human right" with you people.