US Politics - 2020 Presidential Election - GOP v Dem cage fight (ENTER AT YOUR PERIL)

[chemiclord]

Wow... you wrote approximately five paragraphs to completely dodge the question.

You asked why Whitley thinks contraception is in danger, and when he gives you direct quotes from Republican politicians, you claim precedent will protect it? Precedent that the GOP dominated Supreme Court has already wiped their asses with once and one justice outright declaring they should continue to do so?

This is just willful ignorance on your part. You don't want to face the truth, so you just deny it. Go back to bed, old man.

[Da Geezer]

Wow... you wrote approximately five paragraphs to completely dodge the question.

You asked why Whitley thinks contraception is in danger, and when he gives you direct quotes from Republican politicians, you claim precedent will protect it? Precedent that the GOP dominated Supreme Court has already wiped their asses with once and one justice outright declaring they should continue to do so?

This is just willful ignorance on your part. You don't want to face the truth, so you just deny it. Go back to bed, old man.

My goodness.

If Whitley wants to believe nonsense out of the Pew Trust, then so be it. You have a committee in LA's House saying something, and then a guy from Idaho saying something and none of it means anything. So what if Mike Pence wants to outlaw abortion? Republicans always say that. Have they EVER proposed such a law at the federal level, EVER? No.

WHAT MATTERS IS WHAT THE SUPREME COURT SAYS AND IT SAID IN DODD THAT GRISWALD IS NOT AFFECTED BY THE DODD HOLDING.

What Whitley is doing is what all the Democrat functionaries are doing which is trying to scare people about the availability of contraceptives, or gay marriage for that matter. She/he doesn't have the intellectual integrity to read the Alito decision. If she did, she would see Alito, speaking for five of the Justices specifically addresses contraception and says it is constitutional.

And if you want to see what Justice Thomas said about revisiting all the jurisprudence that has been based on the "penumbras and emanations" of the 5th and 14th Amendments, we can have that discussion. Frankly, you are not bright enough to even understand what Thomas said.

[chemiclord]

You mean like how Roe vs. Wade was settled law?

This court has already demonstrated they don't give a shit about precedent. Clarence Thomas is on the record saying things like gay marriage and contraception should be reconsidered. Republican politicians are on the record about banning them, and several state legislatures are already trying to do so.

That's not "nonsense from the Pew Trust." That's public fucking record. And you damn well know it; you just want to pretend it's not.

Take some warm milk, get your favorite book, and call it a night. It's past your bedtime, old man.

[CGVT]

Why you all bother to engage with this guy is beyond me.

[froot loops]

Yeah, use the ignore list for that bigoted fool.

[chemiclord]

I guess I find it therapeutic.

[Marko69]

I say this partly in jest, but sometimes i do wonder what the immediate pre-thought of an American mall shooter is.
This conv here probably ain’t too far from events……..
“go to bed old man……”
”RIGHT, Fk this shit.” ….. click clack!

sorry, apologies……. My humour. Humor for Jaadam.

[froot loops]

I guess I find it therapeutic.

Ok, but let me say, if that is therapy you must be dealing with a lot of demons.

[Da Geezer]

I guess I find it therapeutic.

Chemi: Me too.

You know what I think would be good for the country would be for persons with wildly divergent political views to sit down and argue. It used to happen all the time in coffee shops and barber shops all around the country. Now there are two camps and they are becoming more insular. Why not argue in a setting like this where we don't know much about each other and there is no fear of hard feelings with someone we meet on the street every day?

CGVT and froot don't have the intellectual firepower to follow a philosophical debate, so their answer is "CANCEL HIM". Some of you here can and do follow along. Deb has informed me about abortion, although we disagree.

And Chemi, you still haven't told me which Seminary you attended.

[CGVT]

You are a dumbass Geezer. A card carrying member of the Christian Taliban.

You trot out the same old tired bullshit and ignore any counter arguments or facts presented in rebuttal.

You got your ass kicked by Chemiclord on your stupid assed book's views on abortion, completely ignored it and continue to spew you rbullshit. Your only response is "what seminary did you attend?"

You are not worth the time.

[froot loops]

I'm telling you fellas to use the ignore list on the creepy, bigoted old fool.

[chemiclord]

Chemi: Me too.

You know what I think would be good for the country would be for persons with wildly divergent political views to sit down and argue. It used to happen all the time in coffee shops and barber shops all around the country. Now there are two camps and they are becoming more insular. Why not argue in a setting like this where we don't know much about each other and there is no fear of hard feelings with someone we meet on the street every day?

CGVT and froot don't have the intellectual firepower to follow a philosophical debate, so their answer is "CANCEL HIM". Some of you here can and do follow along. Deb has informed me about abortion, although we disagree.

And Chemi, you still haven't told me which Seminary you attended.

Calvin College and Seminary, if you must know. Started at the college initially, then to the seminary, where I decided it wasn't the place or profession for me. I didn't mesh with the community of believers and it was straining my faith. So we had a mutual parting of ways (that and about $20,000 paid to them).

[wcfwtf]

It doesn’t matter what I say, and I don’t believe abortion should happen in most cases but I do believe women should have the right to choose, Obama did run on the policy that he would codify abortion laws but didn’t fulfill his promise.
I believe Biden said “it will be one of the first things I do if I’m elected.
and he also then sat on his hands.

[chemiclord]

"Codifying" Roe is on Congress's hands, and the House did indeed try. It failed to reach the 60 votes necessary to end debate in the Senate (because of some fairly ridiculous procedural rules).

[froot loops]

Yeah as long as the filibuster is in place, there is no chance of Roe being codified. Sinema and Manchin are against removing the filibuster and it's unclear how many senators would commit to making an exception to pass a Roe-like law. Currently it's more than 40 and less than 48. There are afew senators who are willing to let Manchin and Sinema take the arrows for something they wouldn't be in favor of either.

A lot of people can run on things but it's very hard to get anything passed that can't be done on a reconciliation bill.

Obama had a very short window of 60 senators but I'm not even sure if they were alll pro choice then. And at the time they were fooled into thinking believing this justices when they said it was settled law that they weren't lying. And all of those candidates were lying.