An honest question.

gfm7175 said:
riginally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Really? So tell us all, toodles ... WHAT ARE YOUR SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND FACTUAL DOCUMENTATION? The reading audience awaits!
Click to expand...


Math.
Science.
Logic.
History.

That's a good starting point.
Click to expand...

Just as I thought....you're just another BS MAGA troll with an intelligence/honesty deficiency. You state outright rejection of TWO valid, documented sources of reported/researched information without discussion of content. But when pressed, you don't have the cojones to own up to where you get your information on current events.

Like the little bird in your icon, you make a lot of noise but are full of shit. Carry on.
 
gfm7175 said:
The 14th amendment has nothing to do with it. There is no power granted to Congress to legislate re: abortion. It remains a State level issue.
Click to expand...

You stubbornly keep parroting christo-fascist talking point with proud ignorance. I'll let the late Justice Blackburn explain it to you:

Writing for the majority opinion in Roe v. Wade, Justice Harry Blackmun said that the court held a woman’s right to an abortion was implicit in the right to privacy protected under the 14th Amendment. However, while the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a woman's right to choose, it also acknowledged the state's interest in protecting the "potential of human life."

To balance the competing interests, the court established a "trimester" framework for the legality of abortions:

First Trimester (up to 12 weeks): Gives a woman an absolute right to an abortion in the first three months of pregnancy.
Second Trimester (up to 28 weeks: Allows the government to regulate abortion in order to protect the mother’s health, but cannot ban it.
Third Trimester (up to 40 weeks): Because the fetus is considered "viable" — can survive on its own outside the womb (about 24 weeks of pregnancy) — states can prohibit abortion except in cases when the mother's life is at risk.

As for the 14th Amendment: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

Please give the reason audience your precise examples/opinion as to why the 14th Amendment does not apply to Roe v. Wade? We'll wait.
 
Last edited:
gfm7175 said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Again, why don't you let us know what YOU consider a valid source(s) of information? We'll wait.
Click to expand...

Logic is a valid source. Math is a valid source. Science is a valid source.
Click to expand...

Logic has to applied to INFORMATION. Information comes from NEWS SOURCES, REPORTERS, HISTORIANS, RESEARCHERS.

You try to pass your opinions off as fact and logic. You fail.

Math is math, history is history, current events are just that. Many topics dealing with society are NOT based on math. Your excuse fails. Science is an examination of phenomena, using trial and era to prove/disprove a hypothesis ... both are used to determine facts. You offer NONE of these in your attempt to pass opinion, supposition and conjecture as a substitute. You fail again.

Bottom line: you cannot provide any fact based evidence to support your claims and assertions. You are intellectually dishonest and cowardly. But like the little bird in your icon, you'll continue to make noise and drop shit. Carry on.
 
Mason Michaels said:
Would that change the fact that Trump is a convicted criminal?
Click to expand...

Why would it change the fact that you're a fucking liar? It wouldn't - I'm just highlighting your hypocrisy.

But then, if you had honor, integrity, or basic decency, you wouldn't be a fascist - a democrat.
 
Last edited:
Mason Michaels said:
So now you are claiming Ted drove off the road on purpose because he knocked her up?
Is that the Bullshit you're selling?
Click to expand...

I'm stating the long established facts.

Edward Kennedy, after hours of cocaine and alcohol use drove Mary Jo off the Chappaquiddick bridge. He left the scene for 12 hours, then called his lawyer. He never called the police or called for help.

Mary Jo was pregnant. The coroner - who was put in office by the Kennedy clan - sealed the paternity of the baby.

In the best light, Teddy is guilty of manslaughter - in the worst - first degree murder of both Mary Jo and the baby.

But you don't care - you serve your Reich. Murder by a high ranking Reich member is something you cover up - only the Reich matters.

You're the same way with Joe Biden - you don't care that he's a criminal - all that matters is that he's a democrat. You serve your party - it's the only thing that matters to you. Uber Alles democrat.
 
Guille said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Really? Because AT LEAST 35 to 47% of registered Republican voting women didn't want to see Roe vs. Wade overturned. Maybe Rasmussen will give you more favorable polling to your liking.
Click to expand...


So a minority? Good job Lassie.
Click to expand...

Check yourself Guillermo. You previously made a flat statement that alluded to NO Republicans supported Roe v. Wade.

You were wrong.

GTFU and deal with it, because the MAJORITY OF AMERICANS REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL AFFILIATION SUPPORTE Roe v. Wade. Thanks to the Orange Oaf and the Bush crime family, we got the type of SCOTUS that preferred ideology over logic and the premises of the Constitution.

That makes dumb MAGA toots like you happy....so much for your wailing against a "nanny state". Carry on.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
Originally Posted by Nordberg View Post
The republicans. Are you unaware of that?
Click to expand...


I've not seen the republicans push to have biological males compete against women, forcing them to accept that they are not as good as men............are you unaware of that?
Click to expand...

What's that got to do with the question of the ultimate nanny state allowing local gov'ts to force women to carry a pregnancy to term regardless or rape or fatal circumstances for the pending born or if we're talking about a minor?

Deal with that, you fucking Oather/Threeper BS coward!
 
Taichiliberal said:
Check yourself Guillermo. You previously made a flat statement that alluded to NO Republicans supported Roe v. Wade.

You were wrong.

GTFU and deal with it, because the MAJORITY OF AMERICANS REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL AFFILIATION SUPPORTE Roe v. Wade. Thanks to the Orange Oaf and the Bush crime family, we got the type of SCOTUS that preferred ideology over logic and the premises of the Constitution.

That makes dumb MAGA toots like you happy....so much for your wailing against a "nanny state". Carry on.
Click to expand...

I did no such thing. People of all stripes like convenience. If you can maybe you should quote me saying that.
 
Taichiliberal said:
What's that got to do with the question of the ultimate nanny state allowing local gov'ts to force women to carry a pregnancy to term regardless or rape or fatal circumstances for the pending born or if we're talking about a minor?

Deal with that, you fucking Oather/Threeper BS coward!
Click to expand...

as expected, you either have no clue about reality or you just willfully ignore it...............go have a real female athlete explain it to you, if you can overcome your desire to deny her her rights
 
gfm7175 said:
You are largely describing Democrats, once again.
Click to expand...

You are playing opposites again, wrongly and childishly. How can you think that makes sense or is a compelling response? I suppose saying no I didn't you did it is a good well thought out answer. This is how I view your responses.
 
Last edited:
SmarterthanYou said:
I've not seen the republicans push to have biological males compete against women, forcing them to accept that they are not as good as men............are you unaware of that?
Click to expand...

That is not the Dem platform. However, you think a tiny little issue like that shows the party is anti-woman? You are not being honest. The Dems fight for equal pay. They fight to protect a woman's choice in abortion. They have lots of women in powerful political positions. But you actually think trans in women's sports shows they are anti-women? You do not think well.
 
Nordberg said:
That is not the Dem platform. However, you think a tiny little issue like that shows the party is anti-woman? You are not being honest. The Dems fight for equal pay. They fight to protect a woman's choice in abortion. They have lots of women in powerful political positions. But you actually think trans in women's sports shows they are anti-women? You do not think well.
Click to expand...

tiny little issue? that tells us you hate women as well...........to think that decimating women in sports and showing them that they are inferior in every way to biological males is the ultimate in the war on women. The Dems treat women the same way they treat blacks.....as brainwashed, but glorified, slaves..............by you supporting this, it shows that you participate in the war on women or you do not think well........maybe both.
 
Guille said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Check yourself Guillermo. You previously made a flat statement that alluded to NO Republicans supported Roe v. Wade.

You were wrong.

GTFU and deal with it, because the MAJORITY OF AMERICANS REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL AFFILIATION SUPPORTED Roe v. Wade. Thanks to the Orange Oaf and the Bush crime family, we got the type of SCOTUS that preferred ideology over logic and the premises of the Constitution.

That makes dumb MAGA toots like you happy....so much for your wailing against a "nanny state". Carry on.
Click to expand...



I did no such thing. People of all stripes like convenience. If you can maybe you should quote me saying that.
Click to expand...


Post #50, folks.

Guillermo is in full MAGA mook troll mod. That means that he can infer, suggest, allude to anything so long as he doesn't make a declarative, plain statement. That way, he plays the game of "Well, I didn't say exactly that", despite the logical conclusion of their assertions/statements/questions/declarations on any topic. Yet they are quick to hold all who contradict or oppose their interest to the exacting standards they themselves dismiss.

Now in typical troll mode, Guillermo will just repeat his blather in various ways, with a few insults and attempted detours thrown in. But as always, the chronology of the posts will always be his undoing in the eyes of the rational, mature & objective reader.

Carry on.
 
Last edited:
SmarterthanYou said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
What's that got to do with the question of the ultimate nanny state allowing local gov'ts to force women to carry a pregnancy to term regardless or rape or fatal circumstances for the pending born or if we're talking about a minor?

Deal with that, you fucking Oather/Threeper BS coward!
Click to expand...

as expected, you either have no clue about reality or you just willfully ignore it...............go have a real female athlete explain it to you, if you can overcome your desire to deny her her rights
Click to expand...

Whom do you think you're fooling, Einstein? Obviously, you CANNOT honestly answer the question in the OP (although directed to women....I think there're only a few on this site). So in typical MAGA troll fashion, you want to change the subject.

Sorry chump, that dog of yours won't hunt in a printed medium where the chronology of the posts can be followed by the objective reader. You can either join other threads dealing with your question or start your own. The OP is NOT on that subject.

So answer the question, ya Oather/Threeper punk....why would a woman vote for a political party that dictates to them that they MUST bring a pregnancy to term regardless of their personal circumstance or age or health? Is that not the "nanny state" that your ilk have been wailing against these many years? The reading audience awaits.
 
Nordberg said:
That is not the Dem platform. However, you think a tiny little issue like that shows the party is anti-woman? You are not being honest. The Dems fight for equal pay. They fight to protect a woman's choice in abortion. They have lots of women in powerful political positions. But you actually think trans in women's sports shows they are anti-women? You do not think well.
Click to expand...

It's his detour. Intellectually dishonest/limited MAGA mooks do this when faced with the solid evidence that their policies are contrary to their stated platform, and have a negative effect on the public and are not welcomed. STY will keep on this tact with insipid stubbornness.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top