Roe is dead
- Thread starter NJlonghorn
- Start date
The broader point he's trying to make is that he's the candidate who will beat support the mission of the Border Patrol, which is securing the border. And honestly, he is probably right. But it was a lie either way. (Of course, Biden also lied about this.)
Yes, if you have to bring up who agrees with you, that is an appeal to groupthink. It's trickery, but it often works.
I know this thread is about Roe v Wade, but we're talking about Trump's style now and Biden's impairment. Here are the comments of a long-time (45 years) friend of mine from Laredo. He is a born and raised in Laredo Latino:
What do y'all think of that? I'm thinking he is referring to the phone calls made to the Georgia Sec of State and Jan 6th. There are people in good faith (my friend) who truly believe Trump was trying to over-turn the election (and constantly saying, "Stop the steal").
The decision was right. The Demx spin was funny
These Dem Reps didn't get the memo to call this a victory for Biden
Congressional Dems blast ruling on Trump immunity: 'Extreme right-wing Supreme Court'
These Dem Reps didn't get the memo to call this a victory for Biden
Congressional Dems blast ruling on Trump immunity: 'Extreme right-wing Supreme Court'
Last edited:
I know we like to discuss a specific person, but this certainly isn't the exception. I don't go to surly anymore because 99.9% of the people over there think like this, and there are probably thousands over there posting. There are plenty of very educated people with the common sense of roadkill that just lick up all the MSM lies.I know this thread is about Roe v Wade, but we're talking about Trump's style now and Biden's impairment. Here are the comments of a long-time (45 years) friend of mine from Laredo. He is a born and raised in Laredo Latino:
What do y'all think of that? I'm thinking he is referring to the phone calls made to the Georgia Sec of State and Jan 6th. There are people in good faith (my friend) who truly believe Trump was trying to over-turn the election (and constantly saying, "Stop the steal").
A perfect example is thing mornings ruling. Trump has been repeating over and over again and made if perfectly clear that he wants to protect the constitution. Yet, I've seen a couple of articles claiming Trump said he wants to eliminate the constitution and make himself dictator. Someone needs to show me one example of Trump ever saying anything remotely like that. Yet, I'm sure those types are eating it up just like the sheeple they are.
Did he ever do anything to try to eliminate the constitution when he was president before?? Hell no!
Funny, I've decided that about Hillary, Barack, SlowJoe, Pelosi, Schumer, and countless other democrat power whores.
I’ve tried to point out this irony to my Democrat (TDS victim) friends to no avail.
Ha, you mean like Clinton?
Monahorns
10,000+ Posts
I don't think Trump wants to eliminate the Constitution. My belief though is that neither political party truly respects it in total, because it is violated constantly in a large variety of ways by both sides.
They didn't read the opinion, didn't understand Roe, and don't understand federalism.
I've been saying this all along. If Roe v Wade hadn't been overturned, I think Trump wins in a landslide. It's a huge issue and the Christian right element scares a lot of people, me included. My ex, of whom I've written about here, a lawyer, is a Christian zealot and has been fighting for a complete ban. She has testified before panels. And it's all about Jesus. Well, that ain't in the Constitution. We have to be reasonable.
I always thought the age which the earliest premature baby survived and lived a healthy life (all fingers and toes) was the starting point of when we can abort and not abort. Three months is possibly too early based on my benchmark (20 weeks or so?) but we need to consider it.
We can be idealistic about it and lose all power to the Left over this one issue or compromise.
I always thought the age which the earliest premature baby survived and lived a healthy life (all fingers and toes) was the starting point of when we can abort and not abort. Three months is possibly too early based on my benchmark (20 weeks or so?) but we need to consider it.
We can be idealistic about it and lose all power to the Left over this one issue or compromise.
My hope is that Trump wins, the abortion debate at the federal level goes nowhere, there is some positive action at the state level, and abortion is removed as a federal issue starting in 2028 election.
That would be good but Texas is at risk. Maybe I'm over-reacting, but I think it bears consideration, but if we lose the state to the Dems, then it's game over forever and our leadership is very aggressive on abortion.
Just so I understand, your Catholic wife is stating she's okay with abortions up to 9 weeks?
I actually view abortion like your wife does, but it's not a Jesus thing for me. It's a science and reality thing for me. I never bring religion into the debate, because it's not relevant. I'd view things the same way if I was an atheist.
But I don't advocate her strategy for the same reason an abolitionist wouldn't have pushed for a slavery ban in South Carolina in 1800. It is destined for failure and long term political defeat. Making a big, fundamental change in the law takes strong advocacy for a long period of time. Hearts and minds have to be changed first. If you don't do that, you'll lose, and where you get victories, they'll be hollow and short-lived.
It was a political comment because I insisted that a total ban would result in a Liberal central government. We discussed keeping it legal up to the day of true viability. We have to pick a point in time if there is not a total ban. So 9 weeks is two months or so. (one month with four weeks and one month with five weeks). It's a compromise position which gives women the time to discover they are pregnant and to do something about it. After that it would be banned.
I can understand the thought regarding abortion as a medical decision - there are cases where the woman's life is endangered by the pregnancy, and that is a medical decision between the woman and her doctor. Using abortion as after-the-fact birth control is a totally different matter. I expect this discussion to continue for many years. And IMO, the SCOTUS got it right - this is a matter for the voters of each state to decide.
I have no problem with the legal ruling by SCOTUS.
But I think it is a political disaster and the issues in Texas (did we literally try to prevent a woman from getting an abortion out of state?) means the Left will prioritize flipping Texas which will then be GAME OVER and for many things other than abortion. That's where I'm coming from.
Once Trump and Cruz win, it’s a dead issue.
I don't think the ruling itself is a political disaster, but I think the actions of a lot of pro-life activists and state legislatures are making it a disaster or certainly at a major risk of making it so.
In Texas, maybe. Nationally, no.
The two abortion questions to ask (in order):
1. When a pregnant woman is murdered, that results in two murders.
so
2. If 1 is true, then if the "baby" is aborted why isn't that a murder?
My position, outside of saving the mother's life or medical evidence that the baby has zero chance of surviving birth, is that if the woman can live with the knowledge of what she did, so be it.
1. When a pregnant woman is murdered, that results in two murders.
so
2. If 1 is true, then if the "baby" is aborted why isn't that a murder?
My position, outside of saving the mother's life or medical evidence that the baby has zero chance of surviving birth, is that if the woman can live with the knowledge of what she did, so be it.
10 states voting on it
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
