Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

[f8ta1ity54]

1 minute ago, foster said:

I guess the Republicans and Christian conservatives are OK with BIBLICAL law after all. 

FTFY.

Of course they still hate Muslims and sharia law.

But biblical law, that really pumps their nads.

[foster]

48 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

FTFY.

Of course they still hate Muslims and sharia law.

But biblical law, that really pumps their nads.

I happily stand corrected. The same people that believe the Bible has a place in your hotel room but would be appalled if there was a copy of the Koran next to it. 
 

[SackMan518]

This!

[SpikedLemonade]

1 hour ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

FTFY.

Of course they still hate Muslims and sharia law.

But biblical law, that really pumps their nads.

 

 

[Woody]

[HipKat]

2 minutes ago, Woody said:

Matt Gaetz is one of the dumbest motherfuckers in Congress. Does he think that this issue just started in 2022?

I would love to see somebody gang tackle his ass, Dave Chapelle style. That scrawny little fucker would get crippled

[Woody]

5 minutes ago, HipKat said:

Matt Gaetz is one of the dumbest motherfuckers in Congress. Does he think that this issue just started in 2022?

I would love to see somebody gang tackle his ass, Dave Chapelle style. That scrawny little fucker would get crippled

It was funny, Hip.  Relax. 

 

[Nuke]

This leak is really a brilliant move by the Democrats. It energizes their base, about an issue many are very passionate about, heading into an election cycle where so much is going wrong for them. 

[HipKat]

58 minutes ago, Nuke said:

This leak is really a brilliant move by the Democrats. It energizes their base, about an issue many are very passionate about, heading into an election cycle where so much is going wrong for them. 

The truth is though, there didn’t need to be a leak because the decision, according to justice Roberts was going to be released this summer anyway

[SackMan518]

Call me crazy but I'm not basing my voting decisions on an invented right through perversion of the Constitution just so entitled, spoiled, American women can be free from the consequences of their whoring. These prevalent examples they use to argue for abortion like rape and issues with child birth are the far outliers that probably constitute less than 2% of abortions and obviously would be medical exemptions. Exacerbating this is that men have zero input into the decision of whether or not the child will be born or destroyed but get put on the hook financially if the baby is born without the father's endorsement. Perhaps if men could opt out financially women might find stronger allies in their quest to murder children inside their own wombs.

[HipKat]

2 hours ago, SackMan518 said:

Call me crazy but I'm not basing my voting decisions on an invented right through perversion of the Constitution just so entitled, spoiled, American women can be free from the consequences of their whoring. These prevalent examples they use to argue for abortion like rape and issues with child birth are the far outliers that probably constitute less than 2% of abortions and obviously would be medical exemptions. Exacerbating this is that men have zero input into the decision of whether or not the child will be born or destroyed but get put on the hook financially if the baby is born without the father's endorsement. Perhaps if men could opt out financially women might find stronger allies in their quest to murder children inside their own wombs.

I can’t argue with any of that

[f8ta1ity54]

41 minutes ago, HipKat said:

I can’t argue with any of that

I can. 

 

3 hours ago, SackMan518 said:

Call me crazy but I'm not basing my voting decisions on an invented right through perversion of the Constitution

 

but he'll gladly vote based on his bible. 

3 hours ago, SackMan518 said:

just so entitled, spoiled, American women can be free from the consequences of their whoring.

This is called being a misogynist by assuming all women who need abortions are whores or didnt try to prevent pregnancy.

3 hours ago, SackMan518 said:

These prevalent examples they use to argue for abortion like rape and issues with child birth are the far outliers that probably constitute less than 2% of abortions and obviously would be medical exemptions.

If you are pro life, why should incest matter? who are you to judge a life even if it is from incest? sounds like a tiered system to me, not just an "all lives matter" approach, if you will.

3 hours ago, SackMan518 said:

Exacerbating this is that men have zero input into the decision of whether or not the child will be born or destroyed but get put on the hook financially if the baby is born without the father's endorsement.

So men should have control over a women's body. thats what he is saying but with extra steps. Because what does "having a say" mean? because having an opinion is one thing, but what does having a say mean exactly in this context?

3 hours ago, SackMan518 said:

Perhaps if men could opt out financially women might find stronger allies in their quest to murder children inside their own wombs.

Nice! this is what they want! They want to be able to blow their load in a female and then control her body from then on with the threat of taking away financial assistance. thats called "responsibility" i guess.

[SackMan518]

27 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

Nice! this is what they want! They want to be able to blow their load in a female and then control her body from then on with the threat of taking away financial assistance. thats called "responsibility" i guess.

The first half was right. People want carefree sex without consequences even to the point of murder to keep their pursuit of pleasure which ultimately damages them over time. As for controlling women, I have no such desire. As much as they work and make the same now as men they can shoulder their own financial obligations. If they have to choose to have a child with my seed against my endorsement is it right for the male to subsidize it? If abortion is legal then no, if abortion is illegal then yes as both parties must shoulder the cost.

These are simple concepts, I'm shocked that you don't understand them.

[f8ta1ity54]

2 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

The first half was right. People want carefree sex without consequences even to the point of murder to keep their pursuit of pleasure which ultimately damages them over time. As for controlling women, I have no such desire. As much as they work and make the same now as men they can shoulder their own financial obligations. If they have to choose to have a child with my seed against my endorsement is it right for the male to subsidize it? If abortion is legal then no, if abortion is illegal then yes as both parties must shoulder the cost.

These are simple concepts, I'm shocked that you don't understand them.

Did the male know if he blew his load in a female she could get pregnant? it sounds like you dont want the male to be responsible for the child if he doesnt want it, but you want the female to be responsible for it even if she doesnt want it. thats the logical conclusion here.

 

LoL Man i hope the christian right starts to run on that on their platform.

Vote for me and i'll outlaw sex unless it is for procreation- because JESUS SAVES!

You'll get all the votes!

[Greg]

[SackMan518]

1 minute ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

Did the male know if he blew his load in a female she could get pregnant? it sounds like you dont want the male to be responsible for the child if he doesnt want it, but you want the female to be responsible for it even if she doesnt want it. thats the logical conclusion here.

 

LoL Man i hope the christian right starts to run on that on their platform.

Vote for me and i'll outlaw sex unless it is for procreation- because JESUS SAVES!

You'll get all the votes!

You've twisted what I've said. Yes the male shouldn't be responsible if he doesn't want it. The female is responsible because she chose poorly and had many birth control options at her disposal. She knows what happens and so does the male. As for banning sex, no. That's a ridiculous concept that's a perversion of religious teachings.

[f8ta1ity54]

44 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

You've twisted what I've said. Yes the male shouldn't be responsible if he doesn't want it. The female is responsible because she chose poorly and had many birth control options at her disposal. She knows what happens and so does the male. As for banning sex, no. That's a ridiculous concept that's a perversion of religious teachings.

LOL wow.

let me get this straight.

two consenting adults have safe sex but still end up pregnant.

the male doesn't want responsibility for the child, so you believe he should be absolved of financial support- the female who also doesn't want the responsibility of raising a child, is FORCED to carry the out the pregnancy to term?

Is that correct?

 

[HipKat]

You know there’s a really good way to avoid all of this. If you don’t wanna have A pregnancy, don’t fuck. Don’t put your dick in a woman and she won’t get pregnant by you. You will be absolved of any responsibilities concerning child care. There are other ways to achieve orgasm and give and receive sexual pleasure.

[SackMan518]

16 minutes ago, HipKat said:

You know there’s a really good way to avoid all of this. If you don’t wanna have A pregnancy, don’t fuck. Don’t put your dick in a woman and she won’t get pregnant by you. You will be absolved of any responsibilities concerning child care. There are other ways to achieve orgasm and give and receive sexual pleasure.

In my case I got snipped, if some girl is claiming I knocked her up you better name that baby Houdini!

[f8ta1ity54]

42 minutes ago, HipKat said:

You know there’s a really good way to avoid all of this. If you don’t wanna have A pregnancy, don’t fuck. Don’t put your dick in a woman and she won’t get pregnant by you. You will be absolved of any responsibilities concerning child care. There are other ways to achieve orgasm and give and receive sexual pleasure.

So two consenting married adults can never have sex PIV sex again because the state will force them to carry an unwanted child to term?

Man, nothing sounds more like American freedom than that!

Plus, telling society to practice abstinence as a form of birth control has a great historical track record of being effective.

 

[RichJ]

No truer words have been spoken by an atheiest. The left and lib want us to go back to being barbarian monsters who think its ok for parents to murder the very own children they created for convenience sake. 

Its ok if you dot beleive in the Christian God . Just dont be like a wild animal who thinks its ok to eat your own child. 

Monsters. 

 

[RichJ]

58 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

So two consenting married adults can never have sex PIV sex again because the state will force them to carry an unwanted child to term?

Man, nothing sounds more like American freedom than that!

Plus, telling society to practice abstinence as a form of birth control has a great historical track record of being effective.

 

people can have sex all they want. No one is stopping them. People can smoke all they want. People can eat McDonalds all they want. But when the consequences of your decisions does not produce a favoable outcome, don't blame or punish the innocent. Its not rocket science but I'm pretty sure that will fly over you head. 

[f8ta1ity54]

20 minutes ago, RichJ said:

people can have sex all they want. No one is stopping them. People can smoke all they want. People can eat McDonalds all they want. But when the consequences of your decisions does not produce a favoable outcome, don't blame or punish the innocent. Its not rocket science but I'm pretty sure that will fly over you head. 

Question, how many fetal deaths a year is too many, and would you do anything to stop that from happening?

[Woody]

 

 

 

[SackMan518]

4 hours ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

LOL wow.

let me get this straight.

two consenting adults have safe sex but still end up pregnant.

the male doesn't want responsibility for the child, so you believe he should be absolved of financial support- the female who also doesn't want the responsibility of raising a child, is FORCED to carry the out the pregnancy to term?

Is that correct?

 

No, that is not correct. Here's the simplified version:

Abortion is Legal = Males have the ability to financially opt out

Abortion is Illegal = Males must financially support the subsequent child

Comprende?