It doesn't make any sense. You would think birth control is far easier than an abortion.
If the government forces you to give birth to a child,
- Thread starter BidenPresident
- Start date
It doesn't make any sense. You would think birth control is far easier than an abortion.
]2epo]v[an
Banned
Between me and heath, which one is dead now?
If you want a world is too small scenario with me, I'd like to play that game with you.
If you're in
Sign here
_________________
Oh. I always thought they were upset when people fucked just for the fun of it. (?)
]2epo]v[an
Banned
You're the one that brought up marmosets, faggot.
]2epo]v[an
Banned
There is no "separation" clause in the Constitution you willful idiot.
It's standing law tho and dates to our founding fathers.
]2epo]v[an
Banned
The ruling against legal abortion shouldn't be a theist ruling and there's no reason why it would need to be.
ThatOwlWoman
Leftist Vermin
Ra-men, Brother Diesel, ra-men.
Real men have no need or desire to know what others are doing with their parts, nor do they feel any need to control other ppl. It's only the insecure, weak men who use their religion or just their feelz to try to dictate how others live their lives.
What do you think the typical RW white male reaction to *my* modest solution to the abortion issue would be? We should mandate that all males get a vasectomy when they turn 12. We'll pay for it. Once the young man has matured, gotten an education and a decent job and can show that he can support a family, then we'll pay to reverse it. No more taking chemicals/hormones for young women, no more unwanted pregnancies, no more children growing up in poverty. Well, fewer, at any rate.
There is NO "separation" clause in the Constitution. It's the "establishment" clause. That term you mistakenly refer to was a painfully stupid quote from a LIBERAL leftist Justice.
First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
]2epo]v[an
Banned
See? Misandrists working with pederasts and both funded by heroin.
It has NOTHING to do with theist. It's about the mistaken and false inference that it is a Constitutional right.
]2epo]v[an
Banned
There is NO "separation" clause in the Constitution. It's the "establishment" clause. That term you mistakenly refer to was a painfully stupid quote from a LIBERAL leftist Justice.
First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Nope, it was found in original correspondence between our founding fathers.
The prevailing argument was and ~is, "separation of church and state is the only way to keep both honest and free of corruption."
I think it was James Madison but might be wrong.
]2epo]v[an
Banned
It has NOTHING to do with theist. It's about the mistaken and false inference that it is a Constitutional right.
Whatever, so we can agree we don't need to make it a theist argument, yes?
You're dead wrong. I gave you the exact wording of the First Amendment. Did you see "separation" anywhere in it? Of course, you didn't. Because none ever existed.
This is a fabricated, moronic leftist narrative.
You find anything credible from Madison that supports your laughable stupid claim and we'll debate it.
Wrong; no one is calling it a theist argument but you. Do you know what STRAWMAN argument/Claim means?
straw man
noun
1: a weak or imaginary opposition (such as an argument or adversary) set up only to be easily confuted