XPost: alt.abortion, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh   
   XPost: sac.politics   
   From: NoBody@nowhere.com   
      
   On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 11:16:36 -0400, Attila  wrote:   
      
   >On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 10:27:18 -0400, NoBody   
   > in alt.abortion with message-id   
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 02:49:42 -0400, Attila  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 15:56:50 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth   
   >>> in alt.abortion with message-id   
   >>> wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>On 9/7/2024 3:37 PM, Attila wrote:   
   >>>>> On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 14:10:26 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth   
   >>>>>  in alt.abortion with message-id   
   >>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On 9/7/2024 1:53 PM, Attila wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:32:14 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth   
   >>>>>>>  in alt.abortion with message-id   
   >>>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> {snip}   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> The legislature made a tradeoff between the rights of a   
   >>>>>>>> (non-person) animal and a person, and came down on the side of the   
   >>>>>>>> animal. And, that's legally permissible.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Similarly, a legislature can also (now that Roe has been discarded)   
   come   
   >>>>>>>> down on the side of a non-person fetus over the rights of a woman.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Are you saying a fetus has the same rights and   
   >>>>>>> responsibilities as a born individual?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Under the Constitution, no. Nonetheless, abortion can be outlawed. That   
   >>>>>> was the whole point of discarding Roe, and some states have done so.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> It's as if you think Roe is still good law. Weird!   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> No, it isn't but I think it should be.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>Right! Like it or not, Roe is gone. And therefore, legislatures can ban   
   >>>>abortion even though a fetus is not a person.   
   >>>   
   >>>True.  But that can be reversed with the proper legal steps.   
   >>   
   >>Nothing like trying to remove states' rights.   
   >>   
   >>Just like a good lib.   
   >   
   >It appears you are truly an idiot.   
      
   What did I say that was incorrect?   
      
   > Abortion is one of the   
   >two positions of the Republicans I find repugnant and   
   >reprehensible.   
      
   The NERVE of those Republicans, protecting life!   
      
   /s   
      
   > The other is the constant involvement (and   
   >mention) of religion and religious components.   
      
   Liberalism is a religion as well and Democrats have no problem   
   preaching in churches when it suits their needs.  Republicans aren't   
   allowed to do that naturally.   
      
   >   
   >Generally speaking I loathe liberals and especially   
   >progressives.   
      
   You've not displayed this thus far so you'll have to forgive me if I   
   don't believe you.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)