I am a male who can read the writing on the wall. I think abortion is wrong but should remain legal with restrictions based on stage of development.Are you a male who defends this?
I am a male who can read the writing on the wall. I think abortion is wrong but should remain legal with restrictions based on stage of development.Are you a male who defends this?
Congratulations!I think abortion is wrong but should remain legal ...
Yes, abortion gets rid of the evidence in statutory rape cases.Supporters of socially acceptable pedophilia are counting on idiots like you!
You are straying from the main issue. Literary tests almost uniformly lead to injustice when it comes to voting. Designers of such test intentionally or inadvertently bake bias into them. Look at the poll tests historically used in the south, for example. They were obviously in effect to exclude black people. The questions were culturally biased.
There is no God-given right to abortion any more than there is a God-given right to loot stores because of slavery. Never mind that leftists typically justify sin and condemn righteousness in their depraved state of delusion, like this ungodly writer proves:pro
What the founders thought is only tangentially helpful. More important is precedent and modern day application of principles. Age is relevant in interpreting civil rights of all kinds. Free speech is different when it comes to people under 18 years old although not completely barred as is the case with voting. There is whole line of cases involving children in public schools and after-school activities. The results are different than those involving adults. You cannot really declare one right more important because of this sort of thing. That would be like saying the right to abortion is of lesser importance because it only applies to women while other rights apply to both genders.
Voting is considered a fundamental right along with speech, but it has been treated like a red-headed step-child by the court.
Abortion has always been and always will be murder and God has always condemned murder and will always condemn murder.You could be correct in the very near future.
And abortion rids sexual partners of any responsibility to care for babies they create through their carnal passion.Yes, abortion gets rid of the evidence in statutory rape cases.
God is angered by those who murder innocent babies in the womb, and God determines what "murder" and "shedding the blood of innocents" means, not rebels against God.I am a male who can read the writing on the wall. I think abortion is wrong but should remain legal with restrictions based on stage of development.
At the current moment, God has no standing in American courts.God is angered by those who murder innocent babies in the womb, and God determines what "murder" and "shedding the blood of innocents" means, not rebels against God.
You foolAt the current moment, God has no standing in American courts.
I know. The atheistic fools now running the courts mistakenly think they can overrule God and God will be powerless to do anything about it. What idiocy.At the current moment, God has no standing in American courts.
Exactly. I'd still support the rights of the MAGA! crowd to vote as intelligence isn't the factor here. Ironically, those who wish to suppress the rights of people to vote are the same who accuse the "left" of suppressing free speech which is kinda hilarious...You would not be allowed to vote as a result of your answer to this question. This is a trick question because the amendments to the Constitution are NOT a top ten list. The thirteenth amendment is the most important! The prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure is arguably equal to or more important than free speech.
Your biased example of a question is precisely why barriers to voting are repugnant. Such questions can serve a particular political bend and be self-serving. The right to vote is as fundamental as free speech via the Constitution according to the Supreme Court.
What do you think the punishment should be for a person who thwarted someones' first amendment right?Exactly. I'd still support the rights of the MAGA! crowd to vote as intelligence isn't the factor here. Ironically, those who wish to suppress the rights of people to vote are the same who accuse the "left" of suppressing free speech which is kinda hilarious...
How could "a person" thwart it exactly? Take it up with congress...What do you think the punishment should be for a person who thwarted someones' first amendment right?
Requiring voting integrity and security does not suppress legitimate voting, just illegitimate voting.Exactly. I'd still support the rights of the MAGA! crowd to vote as intelligence isn't the factor here. Ironically, those who wish to suppress the rights of people to vote are the same who accuse the "left" of suppressing free speech which is kinda hilarious...
Biden was right when he suggested that it is no longer a matter of who votes but who counts the votes . Dishonest precinct workers will add fraudulent votes and remove other legitimate votes if they think they will not be caught.How could "a person" thwart it exactly? Take it up with congress...
As a person with your moniker you should know the bill of rights creates safeguards against government oppression and control not between citizens per se. The private person who impedes your freedom by reacting or talking over you can do so in the public square.What do you think the punishment should be for a person who thwarted someones' first amendment right?
Even though some would prefer that 'public square' still include stocks...As a person with your moniker you should know the bill of rights creates safeguards against government oppression and control not between citizens per se. The private person who impedes your freedom by reacting or talking over you can do so in the public square.
Well, pretty safe to say that a literary career isn't the best vocational choice no matter what but given Trump's history, hey, yeah, let's have some more ego driven insanity! (As long as it's properly punctuated and observes regular syntax).I wonder if the document was doctored to say Fox host. I suspect the writer was one of Trump's family.
Leftists believe Trump was a horrible president. He believed in arresting and jailing crooks. He opposed killing helpless babies in the womb. He believed in honoring and obeying the Constitution. He opposed violence and looting in the streets. He supported law enforcement officers and opposed replacing them with social counselors. He was very patriotic and saluted the US flag. And much more.Well, pretty safe to say that a literary career isn't the best vocational choice no matter what but given Trump's history, hey, yeah, let's have some more ego driven insanity! (As long as it's properly punctuated and observes regular syntax).