I'd say  , but that'd be a waste of perfectly good popcorn...

This is actually quite entertaining. Seeing a one legged person really trying to compete in an asskicking contest. Esp one that “seams” to think they are up to it. More like a 10 watt lightbulb trying to enlighten the world.

Y'all still arguing with some millennial with a smartphone and Gargle to keep looking up stuff?  What is this now, up to four clowns that seem to come here just to argue?

I quit giving those types the time of day over a decade ago when I realized it was like arguing with a spoiled little kid, pointless.  If I bother, it will be with someone of similar life experience, not a child.

Y'all still arguing with some millennial with a smartphone and Gargle to keep looking up stuff?  What is this now, up to four clowns that seem to come here just to argue?

I quit giving those types the time of day over a decade ago when I realized it was like arguing with a spoiled little kid, pointless.  If I bother, it will be with someone of similar life experience, not a child.

It's not a simple problem, but he makes it sound as if he's got it all figured out.

I like to watch people with self-inflicted wounds suffer ....

I guess this is the wrong forum to say any different views. I'm probably the only one here using a cell phone.  Enjoy your echo chamber but realize there are all types of gun supporters and the future of your rights are those of my generation. Try not to alienate them all.  We are the future.

I guess this is the wrong forum to say any different views. I'm probably the only one here using a cell phone.  Enjoy your echo chamber but realize there are all types of gun supporters and the future of your rights are those of my generation. Try not to alienate them all.  We are the future.

Meh.  I disagree with folks on here all the time.  You're just frustrated because no one sees the world the way you do.  I mean you're free to think how you want to think, just don't get all frustrated when folks don't agree statements that you make can can't back up. 

Think #notarealdoctor is still waiting for you to cite an example. . .

Meh.  I disagree with folks on here all the time.  You're just frustrated because no one sees the world the way you do.  I mean you're free to think how you want to think, just don't get all frustrated when folks don't agree statements that you make can can't back up. 

Think #notarealdoctor is still waiting for you to cite an example. . .

True everyone has their own opinions but the gang up heard mentality isn't helping the gun cause.  The way to expand gun rights is to be more inclusive not exclusive.  Most young people view civil rights and freedom very highly.  Personal freedoms to abort, fuck or be with whoever or whatever you want or any number of things regarding personal freedom.  Its a bit hypocritical of the right to be so called pro freedom, but at the same time be so anti-freedom.  You can have your own opinions about anything but you shouldn't force your opinions on another.  If you think abortion is against god, then just don't do it.  Its simple.  Don't make others follow your personal rules. 

https://www.newsweek.com/amy-coney-barrett-abortion-roe-v-wade-judicial-precedent-her-own-words-1533707

True everyone has their own opinions but the gang up heard mentality isn't helping the gun cause.  The way to expand gun rights is to be more inclusive not exclusive.  Most young people view civil rights and freedom very highly.  Personal freedoms to abort, fuck or be with whoever or whatever you want or any number of things regarding personal freedom.  Its a bit hypocritical of the right to be so called pro freedom, but at the same time be so anti-freedom.  You can have your own opinions about anything but you shouldn't force your opinions on another.  If you think abortion is against god, then just don't do it.  Its simple.  Don't make others follow your personal rules. 

https://www.newsweek.com/amy-coney-barrett-abortion-roe-v-wade-judicial-precedent-her-own-words-1533707

That's certainly debatable - the "right" to terminate a pregnancy. As you can see there are many issues with this "freedom". I think it is beyond the right of a woman. This is not as simple as the rights of woman. Owning firearms is a right - the moment you murder another human being with that right then it becomes a crime. There is a responsibility. I agree with Reagan. The ones who are calling for an abortion, withstanding a pregnancy as a result of a rape or one that would endanger the life of a woman; are ironically the ones who are already gifted life.

I don't agree with everyone here on everything. I think ARs are superior over the commie AK. We can argue all day. In the end it was a good day....

True everyone has their own opinions but the gang up heard mentality isn't helping the gun cause.  The way to expand gun rights is to be more inclusive not exclusive. 

Kid, get off the iFag and learn to spell.

"gun cause"  Since when is that of interest to you?  Proselytizing about leftwing narratives seems to be your focus.

As i recall, you first showed up here wanting to argue endlessly about the globull warming farce.   You vanished and now come back wanting to trash a supreme court candidate.  Same modus.

It is clear you just like arguing like a teenage girl.   You to my view, are another millennial with a smartphone, google, and an attitude that you are more smart and clever than all those geezers. 

Now you are whining you get no respect?

That's certainly debatable - the "right" to terminate a pregnancy. As you can see there are many issues with this "freedom". I think it is beyond the right of a woman. This is not as simple as the rights of woman. Owning firearms is a right - the moment you murder another human being with that right then it becomes a crime. There is a responsibility. I agree with Reagan. The ones who are calling for an abortion, withstanding a pregnancy as a result of a rape or one that would endanger the life of a woman; are ironically the ones who are already gifted life.

I don't agree with everyone here on everything. I think ARs are superior over the commie AK. We can argue all day. In the end it was a good day....

Let's switch arguments then because it's impossible to argue if it's alive, too much opinions. Let's agree that a baby in a way is a parasite as it can't live without the mother with our current level of technology.  Is it your right to force someone to do something for 9 months against their will?  Then force them to live with the repercussions for another 18+?

If you went swimming in the lake and there was this magical parasite like leech that latched onto your balls but if you leave it for 9 months it turns into a baby should society force your to keep the leech?  Or should it be your decision  because no one other than you has that right to make that decision.

Kid, get off the iFag and learn to spell.

"gun cause"  Since when is that of interest to you?  Proselytizing about leftwing narratives seems to be your focus.

As i recall, you first showed up here wanting to argue endlessly about the globull warming farce.   You vanished and now come back wanting to trash a supreme court candidate.  Same modus.

It is clear you just like arguing like a teenage girl.   You to my view, are another millennial with a smartphone, google, and an attitude that you are more smart and clever than all those geezers. 

Now you are whining you get no respect?

I wrote in for laws,  showed up to protest and vote for those who support 2a? What more shall I do?  Do you want me to wave my dick around saying how much I love guns here. It's pretty obvious everyone here supports gun rights. Not sure why you are hating on young people. I vanished because it was clearly not a topic I could win with this group. Still believe but I did my best to try and convince others,  but after a while it was time to move on the conversation was too toxic.

Guns aren't my only opinion or thing I value.   I'm not a one issue voter or person. Echo chambers are not healthy.  We should be more inclusive of others if we want to keep our gun rights.

True everyone has their own opinions but the gang up heard mentality isn't helping the gun cause.  The way to expand gun rights is to be more inclusive not exclusive. Most young people view civil rights and freedom very highly.  Personal freedoms to abort, fuck or be with whoever or whatever you want or any number of things regarding personal freedom.  Its a bit hypocritical of the right to be so called pro freedom, but at the same time be so anti-freedom.  You can have your own opinions about anything but you shouldn't force your opinions on another.  If you think abortion is against god, then just don't do it.  Its simple.  Don't make others follow your personal rules. 

"The way to expand gun rights is to be more inclusive not exclusive", with folks who are articulate and can speak intelligently about gun rights.  You "seam" to want to set "presidents" with your statements about "heard" mentality.  Ok, spelling, grammar, and hooked on phonics aside.  Mr #imnotarealdoctor likes to call me out on that as well, but I like to think I back up my statements with rational arguments.  You seem to just want to "do what you like" and not get called out when you say things that are way out there.  That's not hypocritical, that's called living in society.  You must not have many friends.  All I know if I said some of the things you said, I'd be immediately called out on it. 

Let's switch arguments then because it's impossible to argue if it's alive, too much opinions. Let's agree that a baby in a way is a parasite as it can't live without the mother with our current level of technology.  Is it your right to force someone to do something for 9 months against their will?  Then force them to live with the repercussions for another 18+?

If you went swimming in the lake and there was this magical parasite like leech that latched onto your balls but if you leave it for 9 months it turns into a baby should society force your to keep the leech?  Or should it be your decision  because no one other than you has that right to make that decision.

See, that's YOUR opinion about what YOU think it means to be alive.  Consciousness?  I think not.  Baby as a parasite?  Then an analogy with a leech?  GMAFB. . .

Let's switch arguments then because it's impossible to argue if it's alive, too much opinions. Let's agree that a baby in a way is a parasite as it can't live without the mother with our current level of technology.  Is it your right to force someone to do something for 9 months against their will?  Then force them to live with the repercussions for another 18+?

If you went swimming in the lake and there was this magical parasite like leech that latched onto your balls but if you leave it for 9 months it turns into a baby should society force your to keep the leech?  Or should it be your decision  because no one other than you has that right to make that decision.

The way I see it, it is a personal responsibility thing. 

Women cannot get pregnant without having sex.  Men are just as responsible for that act as well.  Problem is these arguments neglect any and all responsibility for the act itself and it's consequences.    The left has, and always will be, the side that wants to destroy any and all sense of personal responsibility for one's actions.  We see it in EVERY thing they take issue with from crime, politics, race, abortion, EVERYTHING.  Everything is always someone else's fault, NEVER one of someone's OWN poor choices.

The way I see it, it is a personal responsibility thing. 

Women cannot get pregnant without having sex.  Men are just as responsible for that act as well.  Problem is these arguments neglect any and all responsibility for the act itself and it's consequences.    The left has, and always will be, the side that wants to destroy any and all sense of personal responsibility for one's actions.  We see it in EVERY thing they take issue with from crime, politics, race, abortion, EVERYTHING.  Everything is always someone else's fault, NEVER one of someone's OWN poor choices.

That's what I was getting at earlier when I said a woman has rights to make decisions with her body, but that also includes being accountable for those decisions and to accept the consequences when they happen.  "Sex without consequences" sounds like a good thing, until you find our that even if you don't make a baby, catch - and infect others with - a disease, or get falsely accused of rape, there's the emotional side of trusting someone with a part of yourself that's very vulnerable only to find out they are just playing you.

Maybe Omni will understand this one day after he's actually had intercourse ..... with a woman.


And, if being a "parasite" were a reason to give someone a one-way ticket to paradise, there are millions dependent on the government (aka tax payers) to live.

Let's switch arguments then because it's impossible to argue if it's alive, too much opinions. Let's agree that a baby in a way is a parasite as it can't live without the mother with our current level of technology.  Is it your right to force someone to do something for 9 months against their will?  Then force them to live with the repercussions for another 18+?

If you went swimming in the lake and there was this magical parasite like leech that latched onto your balls but if you leave it for 9 months it turns into a baby should society force your to keep the leech?  Or should it be your decision  because no one other than you has that right to make that decision.

It is not impossible to argue. A fetus from the moment of conception is most definitely “alive”. What is debated is whether or not the fetus has rights.

Just because the baby cannot survive without the mother does not make it a parasite. A parasitic relationship is characterized by the fact that nutrients is consumed at the cost of its host. By your definition my 3 year old is also a parasite considering he could not live without me taking care of him.

Your analogy is so preposterous it’s difficult to imagine you Put any thought into it. However I’ll play along. Does this hypothetical man who jumped in the lake know that by swimming in this lake a leech will attach to his balls? Was there another activity he could have done besides swimming in this lake? Was there something he could have put on his balls to keep the leech away? Do you see where this is going? A little bit of personal responsibility goes a long way.

True everyone has their own opinions but the gang up heard mentality isn't helping the gun cause.  The way to expand gun rights is to be more inclusive not exclusive.  Most young people view civil rights and freedom very highly.  Personal freedoms to abort, fuck or be with whoever or whatever you want or any number of things regarding personal freedom.  Its a bit hypocritical of the right to be so called pro freedom, but at the same time be so anti-freedom.  You can have your own opinions about anything but you shouldn't force your opinions on another.  If you think abortion is against god, then just don't do it.  Its simple.  Don't make others follow your personal rules. 

https://www.newsweek.com/amy-coney-barrett-abortion-roe-v-wade-judicial-precedent-her-own-words-1533707

"Preventing a state statute from taking effect is a judicial act of extraordinary gravity in our federal structure," the dissent read.

wow, she is obviously using her catholic beliefs strongly in this position...

"Preventing a state statute from taking effect is a judicial act of extraordinary gravity in our federal structure," the dissent read.

wow, she is obviously using her catholic beliefs strongly in this position...

Obviously, voting against the majority on a panel of judges is tyrannical and based on nothing BUT religious dogma.

It CAN'T be based on anything else, like her interpretation of the facts of the case and the law.   

it's obvious that the Pro-Choice/Pro-Abortion people are terrified of opening the Roe decision for review.  The decision was released in 1973.  This is 2020.  There have been a TON of new medical findings in that field over those 47 years.  If new SCIENCE contradicts the facts used back then, it could prove that the law was based on erroneous scientific arguments, and that we should reconsider whether or not what we now know changes that decision.

You know, kind of like how the Left loves to say how the Second Amendment no long applies, or the electoral college is outdated?  "Times change, and so should our laws."

Obviously, voting against the majority on a panel of judges is tyrannical and based on nothing BUT religious dogma.

It CAN'T be based on anything else, like her interpretation of the facts of the case and the law.   

it's obvious that the Pro-Choice/Pro-Abortion people are terrified of opening the Roe decision for review.  The decision was released in 1973.  This is 2020.  There have been a TON of new medical findings in that field over those 47 years.  If new SCIENCE contradicts the facts used back then, it could prove that the law was based on erroneous scientific arguments, and that we should reconsider whether or not what we now know changes that decision.

You know, kind of like how the Left loves to say how the Second Amendment no long applies, or the electoral college is outdated?  "Times change, and so should our laws."

If I’m not mistaken, Barrett has said that RvW is a done deal at that the only question that needs answering is whether or not abortions should be government funded.

As for "privacy", Ginsburg said that the Roe decision did not establish a woman's right to have an abortion (so nothing about "my body, my choice" applies).  It instead protected a doctor's right to perform abortions (something that was illegal in many states).

The Supreme Court shoehorned the practice into the Constitution as a woman's "right" based on privacy between herself and her doctor.  There's no such thing as an individual's right to privacy in the Constitution when it comes to abortion.  If there were, then ANYTHING a person, male or female, wished to do with their own bodies could not be made a crime.  We all know that's not the case.  Deductive reasoning tells us that the right to privacy argument is bullshit.

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,
shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly
describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

This in no way says that the individual has a right to privacy.  It says the GOVERNMENT can't gather evidence of you committing a crime without a valid warrant based on probable cause.  Nothing more, nothing less. 

The Roe v Wade decision was bad law on its face.  It should have remained a state matter.  Arguing that people in this state can't move to another state to get what they want ignores the other stance -- that the people in this state have every means at their disposal to pass the laws they want.  If the majority decides against it and you lose, that's tough.  Why should the MINORITY be allowed to FORCE THEIR BELIEFS ON THE MAJORITY through a bad SCOTUS ruling disguised as a Constitutional right?

People who are against any kind of abortion are usually the first to sneak the neighbors 16yo daughter to the Planned Parenthood clinic and forge her parents signature after accidentally knocking her up. The Catholic church has a history of allowing pedophilia, and right wing politicians and public figures who rallied against gay rights were regularly getting caught in seedy hotel rooms with their boyfriend and a bag of crystal meth. Life is not the issue, but control, and similar to the radical leftists and their racist ideological purge of racism, it is usually the right wingers who scream loudest about how every life is precious that end up respecting life the least.