 
     |
| Abortion thread (Page 35/43) |
|
Hudini
|
MAY 07, 06:50 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Patrick:
Like maybe with something that has to do with your comment that I took exception to.
So I repeat... What "mandate" am I living under that you aren't?
[QUOTE]Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
That's because you live in Canada.
We the People of the United States got our vaccine mandates overturned, as well as the mask mandates, and all the other mandates.
|
|
[/QUOTE]
"Mandatory vaccination to board
If you’re 12 years of age plus 4 months, or older, you’ll need to be fully vaccinated in order to board:
domestic or international flights departing from most airports in Canada, including charter and foreign airlines carrying commercial passengers "
|
|
|
|
Patrick
|
MAY 07, 07:41 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Hudini:
"Mandatory vaccination to board... If you’re 12 years of age plus 4 months, or older, you’ll need to be fully vaccinated in order to board: domestic or international flights departing from most airports in Canada, including charter and foreign airlines carrying commercial passengers"
|
|
Are you Todd's stand in?
Seeing as how I have no plans to board a plane for who knows how long, that is irrelevant to me.
| quote | Originally posted by Patrick:
Tell me, what "mandate" am I living under that you aren't?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rickady88GT
|
MAY 08, 12:04 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by ray b:
how many
how many will die
in the states that ban the option
as not everyone will be able to travel
so some the poorest will try the unsafest ways
and some will not survive
so how many
how many will this rule kill |
|
How many more will.die because of the option
|
|
|
|
Hudini
|
MAY 08, 05:08 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Patrick:
Are you Todd's stand in?
Seeing as how I have no plans to board a plane for who knows how long, that is irrelevant to me.
|
|
Complete deflection. Your country has a vaccine mandate where the government tells you what to do with your body. The purpose is irrelevant.
You are not fooling anyone with your hypocrisy.[This message has been edited by Hudini (edited 05-08-2022).]
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
MAY 08, 07:53 AM
|
|
Happy Mother's Day!
If you are reading this, it's because your mother didn't decide to kill you as she carried your fetus in her womb.
Feeling lucky?
You should.
63 MILLION of your aborted fellow Americans didn't have that chance.
|
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
MAY 08, 08:58 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Patrick:
Are you Todd's stand in?
Seeing as how I have no plans to board a plane for who knows how long, that is irrelevant to me.
|
|
He got you pretty hard there, admit it buddy.
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
MAY 08, 10:19 AM
|
|
|
|
|
82-T/A [At Work]
|
MAY 08, 11:45 AM
|
|
Yeah, I mean... I UNDERSTAND that Democrats want the freedom of abortion... but I think so many people simply do not understand how law or the Constitution works. Back in... what, 1973? The Rowe V. Wade decision was oddly enough, based on the idea of privacy. That a person has a right to privacy. It predated the Privacy Act of 1974, and with that ruling, caused Nixon to give a speech during his SOTU address... which, while he wasn't the one to actually sign it into law (Ford was), the Rowe V. Wade decision was the catalyst for our modern internet privacy rights.
But it was a failure of a ruling, sure... people have the right to privacy. But that still doesn't mean that there's a right for or against abortion... the fact that you deserve privacy while doing it is totally aside the point. So this article is very correct... they're righting a Constitutional wrong.
IF... the Democrats passed a law that allowed abortion at the Federal level, then it would obviously allow abortion. But we do not make law by court decision in this country.
THAT'S ALL THIS IS ABOUT...
There's no Constitutional crisis, or this or that... the Supreme Court is not the place to pass law... the legislative branch is. This pending court decision by the Supreme Court justices will LITERALLY be returning this decision back to the states for them to legislate. Which is how it should have been. There is absolutely no reason why the Federal government needs to be involved unless one day this becomes a Federal law for or against.
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
MAY 08, 12:18 PM
|
|
The way I see it, there are two things happening here, neither of which has anything to do with the abortion question.
First, there is the "leak". I believe it was a planned political move to further divide the American people.
Second, and this is important for some to understand: Nothing has happened. Nothing has changed. There has been no decision. Yet the left is up in arms. Why?
The left is fond of saying, "Think globally, act locally." That can be good advice, so why are they protesting at the homes of Supreme Court Justices? Go home and demonstrate at your state capitol. What? You say your state legislature hasn't done anything? See above.
It is another election year and the left is again threatening violence. You are being manipulated. Wake up.
|
|
|
|
ray b
|
MAY 08, 01:09 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by olejoedad:
If I had wanted to say 'moral majority', I would have.
You quoted my words, and them reinterpreted them in your reply.
Don't try to twist what I said to fit your narrative.
It's rude, dishonest and misleading.
But, hey, it's exactly what I see the Left wing news media do, so I suppose I should expect it from you, given your political views.
|
|
dude the grey bit is your part
I agree changing quoted words is wrong
I DID NOT DO THAT
NOW THE SPACE BELOW IS MY SPACE
TO SAY WHAT EVER i WANT
SO NO YOU ARE OFF ON A STRANGE QUEST TO CON-TROLL OTHERS WORDS
SOMETHING YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO DO
btw I always thought the nixon scums claim of being moral was a smokescreen
and they used moral and or silent interchanged by whim
I did note then as now
they were NOT silent
they were NOT moral
and they were never ever a majority
much like today the right wing claims what they do not and never had a majority
but like your post they did seek to CON-TROLL others
btw2
nixon only ''won'' by cheating LBJ caught him bribing the S V N government not to allow peace talks to start in 68
that is how moral they were prolong a war for political advantage[This message has been edited by ray b (edited 05-08-2022).]
|
|
|
|