Answer me this, what part of government has ever worked, such as the dept of education, when the states were in control of their collective educational systems we were rated in the top 5% and now we are in the nearly bottom 5% in the world, another example is social security, they have borrowed money from it and never pay it back and now those of us that have paid into it our whole lives may not get what is due us because of mismanagement
@Prison1203 ... that's why they use words like 'deflection' 🙄🙄🙄 if they actually read your replies, which they DON'T, they wouldn't need to use the word 'deflection' {a technique used for a few reasons} ... turn the tables on them and do what i do to them, ask them why it's 'deflection' ... these nutjobs use to say:
"you're lying"
When asked "what lies, just cut and paste those lies into your response" ... deadly silence from them ensues 🙄🙄🙄
{... what usually happens then, is they go offline or don't respond, but all hell breaks loose if YOU don't reply to THEM ...
ALSO ... they seem to think that giving examples to illustrate your viewpoint is 'deflection' ... and they also use the term 'whataboutism' ...
... but they do that because they're happy to IGNORE it when Sleepy does it and the Cackling Hyena, but call Trump out on things when he does it ...
@Pikachu 1. Money is money. If, say, you owned a landfill, and a confused Trump threw money at you for hosting a conference there while convinced it's a 5* hotel, would you decline?
2. The whole thing spectacularly backfired on Trump and was essentially the peak of his ridiculousness, so as someone who doesn't Trump you'd be even more motivated to say yes.
you are right though about not wanting the government to infringe on our human rights to govern our own bodies ourselves. laws are made in the interest of our protection though. more so in a societal sense than a personal sense apparently. when the federal government gets involved though theres all kinds of stuff to consider. i mean, if its our human right then oohh of course the government will need to provide it! then theres concerns like suicide, bodily mutilation etc.. so we cant mutilate anyone else but we can do it to ourselves? we cant kill anyone else but we can do it to ourselves? we cant force anyone else to have an abortion but we can do it to ourselves... then there's transgenderism now that its scientifically possible. why should the government pay for that?? not saying it shouldnt be protected that people can if they want, but its just very complicated. as far as it being up to the states i think its a happy compromise that could have good outcomes. people need ot get more involved in their own governance myself included. i think it might help.
@Penny I’m sorry but you can’t scientifically change a person’s DNA you can mutilate their body to make them look like the opposite gender but they are still the sex they were born as , if you were buried and 100 years from now after you mutilated your body and they did a dna test it would say that you were born either a man or a woman, not the sec that the person thinks in their mind they were
@Prison1203 im not talking about transgenderism as mutilation if thats what you mean. i was more thinking of like the more grotesque body modifications that people have been getting.not saying people cant do what they want to their own bodies...
This is not what I think, but I think that Trump supporters in particular and perhaps even conservatives in general tend to think that taking power away from the federal government and giving it to the states is almost always a good thing. I think they believe that too much federal power leads to a one-size-fits-all government when one size doesn’t fit all, especially in a country as big in both area and population as ours. What works in New York doesn’t always work in say Oklahoma and vice versa because New York and Oklahoma have different climate, terrain, history, and culture. If New Yorkers believe women should have legal access to abortion and Oklahomans don’t, then giving the issue to the states allows both states to pass abortion laws that make them happy. I think that’s their reasoning. If you don’t stop and ask questions or think about it too much it kind of makes sense, it has surface plausibility lol.
...you're still arguing my point. Do you really not get that? 🤭😆😂 The exact point is that the government SHOLD NOT get to decide that you don't have basic human rights. You Understand that the state legislation is still "GuBbERmENt", yes?
lol seriously, stick to the cartoons. As much as i make fun of you for it....this is just embarrassing.
But some states are pretty big. What if people in rural California want to outlaw abortion? Or people in Dallas-Ft. Worth want to legalize it? Better let each county decide. Or go even smaller and let each woman decide.
@Prison1203 The 4th Amendment requires that people be secure in their persons and not subject to unlawful search and seizure. This could be taken to allow privacy in medical care, including abortion.
The 13th Amendment prohibits slavery. Forcing a woman to gestate against her will is a form of slavery, same as forcing her to pick cotton against her will.
Life doesn't begin at conception since sperm and egg cells are alive. Saying that legally protected life begins at conception is arbitrary. Show me in the Bill of Rights where it says legal personhood begins at conception. In fact, the 14th Amendment says all persons born in the United States are citizens, not all persons conceived in the US, so according to the Constitution, legal personhood begins at birth. You can't deduct a fetus on your taxes, you have to wait until it's born.
It does not have to be a “good thing.” Laws neither need to be good nor bad. It is constitutional, and it is fair. This is what you call real diversity.
@emiliya "Baby" is the term for after it's born. "Fetus" refers to before birth.
If a fetus is a separate body from the woman, than take it out and put it in a crib so someone else can take care of it. What you aren't addressing is how you want to force women to gestate fetuses when they don't want to.
You obviously didn't go to medical school because a 12 week fetus isn't "dismembered," it resembles a heavy period. Later abortions are done when the pregnancy either threatens the mother's life or the fetus won't be viable after birth. The fact that you find this gruesome isn't relevant. Open-heart surgery is gruesome but that shouldn't stop doctors from performing it.
I'm glad you can't vote in the U.S. We have enough anti-abortion fanatics here.
@LeopoldBloom Is there a difference between a baby and a fetus? Is a baby who still has its umbilical cord not a baby? If a fetus does not matter, how do you explain the Unborn Victims of Violence Act in the US? When I was pregnant, I never called my babies fetuses. They are my babies. You will be asked: “what are you going to name your baby?”, and “are you excited about your baby?” In the medical reports, it will say fetus. When you talk to a doctor or a nurse, they will say baby. It is only those who are pro abortion who believe that a fetus is not a baby and call babies fetuses. The word “fetus” means offspring, the bearing of life.
The dismemberment starts between 12 and 13 weeks. This is a medical reality.
Prior to this gestational age, a woman takes two different pills. The first pill stops the body from making progesterone the pregnancy needs, and second pill causes the womb to contract, baby coming out soon after. This is what causes heavy bleeding. You will also bleed heavily if your baby is surgically removed. Where I live, a baby can be surgically removed (you can see what this entails) for ANY reason up to 24 weeks. In most of Europe, an abortion is legal up to 12 weeks.
In heart surgery, you are trying to save the life of a patient. Abortion is the taking of life, innocent life.
and the baby is not making a choice to use “another body against their will.
Doesn't matter. Either the fetus has the rights of a person or it does not. If it does not then there is no issue, if it does then the fact is that no person has the right to make use of another person's body against their will and the choice of the violator does not factor into it.
The woman chose to get pregnant. If you have sex without preventing the pregnancy, conception will happen
And how does that help the little girl raped by her family member? How does that help the woman who wanted a baby but for whom the pregnancy has become life threatening?
Do you understand? Letting a state decide to take away a woman's right over her own body, letting a state put a woman's life in danger....this is not right.
You make no concessions for abuse, rape or even danger to the woman's life. You have no compassion for the real life experiences of actual people.
You have a commitment to an idea divorced from and without connection to reality.
@Pikachu yes yes. Pikachu. I am the type to just lay down and take it. I dont expect anyone to fight for me. If they do I am very appreciative but if I cant fight for myself than to repeat I dont expect anyone else to do it for me. Maybe why I admire and appreciate the police and our military so much or those willing to fight for or protect others. Not saying Ive never defended anyone else about something on a personal level or wouldnt at least try to change things if it was inportant to me, but as far as abortion goes... Its still legal, its just up to the states. The fact that the US wont protect abortion on a federal level is not ideal for me but its not a magna carta issue for me. If it became illegal in my state, Id probably have issue though I'm sure I wouldnt be spearheading any campaigns butif someone else did probably try to help a little. I'm not a lawyer and dont know much about governance. I dont know the effects or consequences of Roe vs Wade being legal or not. Its not my battle. I'd rather not get involved.
It doesn't affect you...yet. So you don't want to participate on behalf of those people who it does affect. You want to stay out of it while women are losing their live over this. Got it.
As he explained, it puts the vote back to the people. Each state gets to decide by the vote of the people. If you want to change the laws in your state or then get a petition to get in on the ballot and change it.
States make up the government, the government doesn’t make up the states. Each state has its own constitution.. so it should be up to the individual state to decide on their own abortion, rights laws
There are still plenty of states who love their legal abortions
@Pikachu I’m not saying special, rights I am saying equal rights. No human life has the right to not die but every human life has a right to not be intentionally and deliberately murdered
in your opinion, what qualities does a human life have to possess for you to consider them a person?
I would rather my choices be determined based on local representation than some massive representation that has no clue who I am I think most choices education everything should be given back to the States I don't think you should have a large bureaucratic government that controls everyone. Allow local states to make the decision if you don't like what your local state does you can move. But you can also reach out and actually talk to your local representatives in your state level have you ever tried to reach out and talk to Nancy pelosi or reached out and tried to talk to one of your us congressman or US senators it's next to impossible
Actually in many cases it IS "your" body that is in danger of death or injury, so let's get that straight.
Whether or not one considers the fetus to be a person with the same rights as any other person, what we're discussing is the government taking away the right to bodily autonomy, to make determinations for yourself, your body and y our health.
Additionally, abortion bans and restrictions have been increasing the number of women getting abortions so how's that "states rights" working out to the good of the unborn?🤔
SW-User
Giving choice back to the states, that's the Republican line. Unless, of course, it's clear that in doing so the state will uphold the right to choose.
@SW-User They have this new invention, by the name of birth control pills, costs 10 bucks at Wal-Mart, that way you can screw all you want and it costs the taxpayer nothing. Amazing!
@Adrift Yes, you're right, they had no right (the government, that is) to coerce people into accepting an experimental concoction, the unknown side-effects of which they were concerned, when the commie-virus came along.
@Zaphod42 *sits down next to you with my popcorn* ah yes... the ole abortion issue where one side argues bodily autonomy and the other about protecting life. And they never agree. This'll be a fun one😎🍿
I'm not "MAGA", but I'll respond anyway. It's a good thing because issues like abortion always were the responsibility of the states from the beginning anyway; then along came 'Roe versus Wade' and the federal government usurped that right. The overturning of that disgraceful decision is just the restoration of what was before.
@Burnley123 Really? Where do I say I support Donald Trump? Come on, show me. I don't like either "side" in this ridiculous charade! Trump may be the better choice in this contest, the lesser of the two evils, but that's not saying much.
