SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[Kathandira]

That sounds incredibly dangerous. How would such a war be fought in 2022+ within the country with the biggest military might? How would our geo political rivals respond to such an event? The damages would be immeasurable.

Dialogue within a democracy is always the strongest weapon.

Burn. It. To. The. Ground.

War is ugly. Cities would be destroyed. Massive casualties will pile up. Our infrastructure and economy would be ruined. This is how empires fall, and they all eventually do.

[Edge-]

https://www.salon.com/2022/06/28/did...st-pro-choice/

Just a casual reminder in light of the DHS warning about violence at protests over the weekend.

There was violence. Almost all of it perpetrated by "pro-life" folks or law enforcement.

[Kathandira]

The separation of powers and the separation of church and state ensure that religious zeal doesn't get away with such heinous manipulation of the state. It has worked so far.

"separation of church and state" is a suggestion. It is not actually documented in any legal way other than people have a right to exercise their religious freedom without discrimination from the government. There is nothing on the books that says a law cannot be made in the name of religion, so long as it does not impede on another's, which would have to be fought in court. However since the majority of our higher government are christian, guess which they favor, and which they will fight against.

[tikcol]

https://www.salon.com/2022/06/28/did...st-pro-choice/

Just a casual reminder in light of the DHS warning about violence at protests over the weekend.

There was violence. Almost all of it perpetrated by "pro-life" folks or law enforcement.

All violence should be admonished regardless of attire. Regardless of protest or celebration, violence on the streets is a blemish upon the nation.

- - - Updated - - -

"separation of church and state" is a suggestion. It is not actually documented in any legal way other than people have a right to exercise their religious freedom without discrimination from the government. There is nothing on the books that says a law cannot be made in the name of religion, so long as it does not impede on another's, which would have to be fought in court. However since the majority of our higher government are christian, guess which they favor, and which they will fight against.

As long as those leaders keep in line with their Christian values instead of Religious Doctrine. Every human has some kind of bias that follows them. We shouldn't discriminate on religion either.

[Miffinat0r]

The separation of powers and the separation of Church and State ensure that religious zeal doesn't get away with such heinous manipulation of the State. It has worked so far. Good men and woman work everyday to ensure this basic principle and it is our civic duty to be a part of this lawful process.

You know separation of church and state is not in the constitution.

It was a letter from I think Adams or Jefferson about the US.

The US cannot pass laws recognizing a faith per the 1st Amendment. But that doesn't mean you can't write laws that are based around that faith, you just cannot acknowledge a separate religious institution as the official faith of the US.

But hey conservatives are what now only 8 short of a constitutional convention where they can toss the 13th, 14th, 16th, 17th, and the 19th if they feel spicy. They can amend the first to drop the recognition line then reinstitute religious tests for office like the South used to have.

Pretty obvious now that Australia, Canada, Ireland, and Germany seem to be the leaders of the West. The US while having a big military is just a backwater, old colony from the UK that's obsessed with religion.

[Kathandira]

Our nation is a blemish on the globe currently.

Imagine two brothers on a playground crying to their mom

Jimmy wants to go on the slide
Kyle doesn't want to go on the slide
Kyle tells Jimmy that he isn't allowed to.
Jimmy and Kyle are fighting about this.
Kyle and Jimmy's mom tell both kids no one is going on the slide.

Parents on the bench are looking at them like, why doesn't Kyle just not go on the slide, and let Jimmy do what he wants?

This is basically us right now, and the parents on the bench are other developed first world nations. We look like we have no idea how to manage our people, and we are being laughed at.

[Endus]

All violence should be admonished regardless of attire. Regardless of protest or celebration, violence on the streets is a blemish upon the nation.

And, like a surgery that leaves a scar, at times a necessary blemish. Because sometimes, nothing else can solve the much more serious problems that violence can, actually, address.

The only people who claim violence is untenable or doesn't solve anything are those who are so invested in the status quo that said violence threatens their position. It's a lie predicated on self-interest, not an actual philosophical take, and it's ahistorical to boot.

The Civil Rights movement in the USA would have never gotten to black (legal) equality without the use of violence. Something even Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was able to admit.

https://timeline.com/by-the-end-of-h...e-4de177a8c87b

We can hope that the religious extremists seeking to control and subjugate women will realize the error of their ways and stop. We can hope that enough will turn out in the next election cycle to make meaningful changes and reverse course. But, when those hopes fail, violence is the alternative.

Because the only remain alternative to violence is submission. Which is not acceptable, not to that kind of fascism. That kind of submission of complicity and cowardice, and nothing more.

[tikcol]

And, like a surgery that leaves a scar, at times a necessary blemish. Because sometimes, nothing else can solve the much more serious problems that violence can, actually, address.

The only people who claim violence is untenable or doesn't solve anything are those who are so invested in the status quo that said violence threatens their position. It's a lie predicated on self-interest, not an actual philosophical take, and it's ahistorical to boot.

The Civil Rights movement in the USA would have never gotten to black (legal) equality without the use of violence. Something even Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was able to admit.

https://timeline.com/by-the-end-of-h...e-4de177a8c87b

Even though I believe there are better avenues, I'm happy to hear your take on that.

What are the issues which you believe afflict the US could be resolved through violence right now? What kind of violence? Who would profit from said violence?

Why do you believe all the other avenues are not worth the time and why did it come to the point where violence is the only way?

A poster a while back was talking about War. "Burn it all to the ground" he said. Is that a good approach?

[Endus]

Even though I believe there are better avenues, I'm happy to hear your take on that.

What are the issues which you believe afflict the US could be resolved through violence right now? What kind of violence? Who would profit from said violence?

Why do you believe all the other avenues are not worth the time and why did it come to the point where violence is the only way?

Asked and answered. You're trying to bait me.

[tikcol]

Asked and answered. You're trying to bait me.

I do not believe you gave me any examples of any kind of issue plaguing the US right now that has exhausted the peaceful ways to get resolved. If it hasn't exhausted those ways, why resort to violence?

I believe it's a pretty fair question in the spirit of this thread.

[Endus]

I do not believe you gave me any examples of any kind of issue plaguing the US right now that has exhausted the peaceful ways to get resolved. If it hasn't exhausted those ways, why resort to violence?

I believe it's a pretty fair question in the spirit of this thread.

It's bad-faith bait, and it's asked and answered, because I was describing a near-future hypothetical, and referencing historical examples. I never claimed there was such an issue this immediate second, so you demanding that of me is a form of bait.

[tikcol]

I was describing a near-future hypothetical, and referencing historical examples. I never claimed there was such an issue this immediate second

I couldn't know that without asking which is why I did

I'm happy you don't feel like there's any need for violence, at least, right now.

Communication is crucial, now more than ever.

[Machismo]

I do not believe you gave me any examples of any kind of issue plaguing the US right now that has exhausted the peaceful ways to get resolved. If it hasn't exhausted those ways, why resort to violence?

I believe it's a pretty fair question in the spirit of this thread.

No it's not, considering you were already called out for being disingenuous from the very beginning. Your own claims about your supposed stances and beliefs were refuted by your own posting history.

Nobody is obligated to pander to someone who is acting in bad faith.

[Rasulis]

If you are pregnant, God made you completely capable to be a mother, and he will provide for you, as you strive in life and become a mother.

Motherhood will be the most incredible journey of your entire life, bringing you continuous joy you’ve never known.

The secret is this.

Marjorie Taylor Greene

On the other hand, according to the US Department of Agriculture, the average cost of raising a child to 18 is $284,570. That's based on annual 2% inflation rate. Much higher based on current inflation rate.

I am assuming that estimate does not include the cost of hiring a lawyer because your 15 years old boy drove your '67 Mustang without a license, drunk like a skunk, and wrapped the car around a tree. Nor the cost of the car and the hundreds of hours that his father spent restoring the car after he bought it from a junkyard in the early 80s. At least nobody got hurt. That was the true miracle.

[tikcol]

No it's not, considering you were already called out for being disingenuous from the very beginning. Your own claims about your supposed stances and beliefs were refuted by your own posting history.

Nobody is obligated to pander to someone who is acting in bad faith.

I'm happy to clarify any and all misconceptions about my stances if you'd like. In the spirit of Unity I believe it's crucial to do so, at least, that much.

Still haven't heard your stance on the SCOTUS decision. I believe we're on the same page, as liberals but there's always room for some specificity.

[Machismo]

I'm happy to clarify any and all misconceptions about my stances if you'd like. In the spirit of Unity I believe it's crucial to do so, at least, that much.

Still haven't heard your stance on the SCOTUS decision. I believe we're on the same page, as libertarians but there's always room for some specificity.

No need to clarify, I already clarified it with your own posts. There is no misconception, you simply got caught lying and misrepresenting your own stances.

You claimed to support abortion, bit your own words proved that wrong.

You claimed to not want violence, but your support of violence against gay people and their supporters shows that to be wrong.

You claimed to be a long-term left-libertarian, but your stances on those two issues show you to be wrong.

The receipts were already provided.

As people have stated... there is no reason to seek people who are acting in bad faith, or who simply have malicious intent.

[tikcol]

there is no reason to seek people who are acting in bad faith, or who simply have malicious intent.

I understand and respect your position.

[Machismo]

I understand and respect your position.

Meanwhile, you were proven to be disingenuous, and your avatar is of a neo-Nazi, Trump-supporting internet troll.

That's a little on the nose.

It's a good thing we have your post history to turn to, so everyone knows you are acting in bad faith.

[Smitzelplix]

No...I thought Bluff was being optimistic. I was disagreeing with their post - I do not think this will galvanize the Democrats, and if it does, it won't be enough. I think the GQP smells blood in the water, and can see the fruits of their decades long labor paying off, and they will double down to keep winning.

If we were going to see a YUGE influx of voters coming out of the woodwork, that would have happened in the 2020 election, voting down ticket.

I think, will all due respect, perhaps my point wasn't clear to you. I could be missing something though - just shout.

I'm confused, because the first word that you wrote in your reply to them was the word Agreed, but now you're saying that you were disagreeing with their post.

Agreed. People are saying this will galvanize the Democrats, but I disagree. I think overturning Roe will bring the GQP out in droves, and they will take the House and the Senate.

After that - it's Impeachment votes every two weeks, and national abortion laws sent up for Biden to veto. Harris can't beat the racist misogynism, so Trump/DeSantis will win in 2024. And then we can start printing Gilead flags.

[Endus]

Marjorie Taylor Greene

On the other hand, according to the US Department of Agriculture, the average cost of raising a child to 18 is $284,570. That's based on annual 2% inflation rate. Much higher based on current inflation rate.

I am assuming that estimate does not include the cost of hiring a lawyer because your 15 years old boy drove your '67 Mustang without a license, drunk like a skunk, and wrapped the car around a tree. Nor the cost of the car and the hundreds of hours that his father spent restoring the car after he bought it from a junkyard in the early 80s. At least nobody got hurt. That was the true miracle.

Not to mention the same God is the one that has a 17-year-old brother rape his 12-year old sister and impregnate her, leading to an ectopic pregnancy for which she was denied an abortion, and which ruptured, eventually killing her (and the fetus, FWIW).

That's the problem with these "God's Will" types. God's just as responsible for the worst horrors as his is anything good. If your interpretation of God does not incorporate that understanding, then you don't actually have the first damned clue what you're talking about and do not have an informed understanding of your own faith.

Do not take that as an attack on religion, either. It's a simple logical necessity of the theology. While I'm only familiar with Christian approaches to the question, it's been on the minds of theologians for longer than Christianity has been around. But no theologian would make such absolutely brutally hurtful statements as MTG did, there. It's an attack on that kind of outright harmful condescension, which serves as nothing but a form of intentional, deliberate abuse.

Anyone expressing such things is a terrible, abusive shithole of a person.