John McCain vows to overturn Roe v Wade

Damocles said:
:rolleyes:

Again this inanity. Saying that having people safely stationed there like in Korea is not "unending war".

However, my vote wouldn't be in support of the war or against it, IF, and this is a big if, I voted for the old guy. I want an end to the WPA specifically so that those responsible for declaring war will take responsibility.
Click to expand...

Right... and his "there will be more wars my friends" and his "bomb bomb bomb Iran" all also, misunderstood.

Well, being misunderstood so often would make him a good candidate for you.
 
Dixie said:
Uhmmmm..... She certainly DID suggest that McCain not only could and would, but literally had 'vowed' to overturn it by himself. Had the title of this thread been; "McCain vows to appoint judges who will overturn Roe v. Wade" it would be a different matter, but that wasn't what she posted. I am not the one playing word games here, or lying about the facts.
Click to expand...

STFU. It's the same thing. Ass.
 
Darla said:
Right... and his "there will be more wars my friends" and his "bomb bomb bomb Iran" all also, misunderstood.

Well, being misunderstood so often would make him a good candidate for you.
Click to expand...
Not really. I'd prefer to vote for somebody with my ideals rather than settle for whatever is left after using the process of elimination.

I would also say that there will be more wars, I'd just prefer they went through the process of Declaration. And singing a song that jumps into your head that you remember from the 70s isn't a war policy.
 
Dixie said:
Uhmmmm..... She certainly DID suggest that McCain not only could and would, but literally had 'vowed' to overturn it by himself. Had the title of this thread been; "McCain vows to appoint judges who will overturn Roe v. Wade" it would be a different matter, but that wasn't what she posted. I am not the one playing word games here, or lying about the facts.
Click to expand...

Saying that it "must be overturned" is pretty damn close to being a "vow".

and she never stated that McCain would do it on his own. Not once. Nor did she imply any such nonsense.

again, you are playing word games.
 
Superfreak said:
Saying that it "must be overturned" is pretty damn close to being a "vow".

and she never stated that McCain would do it on his own. Not once. Nor did she imply any such nonsense.

again, you are playing word games.
Click to expand...

McCain ----meaning, literally, John McCain.
Vows--- makes an individual promise to...
Overturn--- what the promise applies to.
Rowe v. Wade--- The Supreme Court ruling, which McCain Vows to Overturn.

I think it is abundantly clear and stated in plain English, that McCain vowed to personally overturn Roe v. Wade. I agree, it's nonsense to conclude a president would have the ability to overturn a Supreme court ruling, or that he would be ignorant enough to vow to do so, since it is not in his power.

You want to have a legitimate conversation on McCain's pro-life stance? That is fine! Let's have it! You want to post a thread about McCain's intentions of appointing originalist judges and not activists to the court? Fine, let's have that discussion! But don't post outright lies and outrageous nonsensical ones, at that! Show that you at least have .333 of a brain!
 
Desh said:
If elected he will do all in his power to overtrun it huh?
Click to expand...

He says he will now, but with McCain, who knows... he's a Maverick, he could do anything... you never can tell about Mavericks, they just roll that way.

The point is, the President can't do much about Roe v. Wade. They can nominate SC justices, but as we saw with Bush, you have to get your nominee past Congress. McCain doesn't control Congress, the Democrats likely will. So how is he going to be in any position to effect Roe v. Wade, even with a SC nominee?
 
Dixie said:
He says he will now, but with McCain, who knows... he's a Maverick, he could do anything... you never can tell about Mavericks, they just roll that way.

The point is, the President can't do much about Roe v. Wade. They can nominate SC justices, but as we saw with Bush, you have to get your nominee past Congress. McCain doesn't control Congress, the Democrats likely will. So how is he going to be in any position to effect Roe v. Wade, even with a SC nominee?
Click to expand...

With the court we have now all you would need is a couple more people who will ignore the law and the will of the American people.
 
Desh said:
With the court we have now all you would need is a couple more people who will ignore the law and the will of the American people.
Click to expand...

When were courts support to rule based on the will of the people? Isn't that what the legislature is for?
 
froggie said:
You will see women march on Washington in droves.
Click to expand...

Probably so, IF the Supreme Court ever overturns your precious 'right' to kill unborn human beings. I highly doubt it will represent a "majority" of women, or decent American people. That's the whole problem I have with the issue of abortion, liberals will refuse to allow the American people to vote on it and decide what they want. You've gotten your way through liberal activists on the bench, not the will of the people, and that isn't how this society should function.
 
froggie said:
I bet you liked slavery, too!
Click to expand...

No, actually I am the one who opposes slavery and wants to fight against oppressive regimes which still enslave millions. You are the one who wants us to mind our own business and leave them alone to continue doing as they please. I am also the one speaking for those who can't speak for themselves in the abortion issue, and you are the one who doesn't want to give them the basic dignity of being considered human beings.
 
Dixie said:
No, actually I am the one who opposes slavery and wants to fight against oppressive regimes which still enslave millions. You are the one who wants us to mind our own business and leave them alone to continue doing as they please. I am also the one speaking for those who can't speak for themselves in the abortion issue, and you are the one who doesn't want to give them the basic dignity of being considered human beings.
Click to expand...

I don't have to make the decision and never will, yipee!

My daughters, so far haven't had to make the decision.

It is none of my business what a woman, and her doctor decide. I only get involved when it is a breathin, viable, human. No death penalty, no war, no slavery!

You guys protect them in the womb so you can turn them into cannon fodder for Iraq!
 
froggie said:
I don't have to make the decision and never will, yipee!

My daughters, so far haven't had to make the decision.

It is none of my business what a woman, and her doctor decide. I only get involved when it is a breathin, viable, human. No death penalty, no war, no slavery!

You guys protect them in the womb so you can turn them into cannon fodder for Iraq!
Click to expand...

A fetus is a living human being, it doesn't yet breathe because it hasn't developed to that stage yet, but it is a viable human being nonetheless. You are just like Waterhead Baby, you are a selfish little twit who doesn't give a shit about anyone but yourself. So what if a million humans are sucked down a tube each year? You don't have to hear them, you don't have to see them, you can just keep on denying they are humans, just like the racist forefathers did with the slaves. You are really no different at all, in fact, I think you are worse. Innocent human life is the most precious life of all, and should be protected, especially over some silly woman's "right" to kill it!

btw... there are no cannons in Iraq, unless they belong to the US Military.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top