such political pundits promote an elimination of negative liberties for abortion
such political pundits expect violations of us 10th and 9th amendments
such political pundits seek a violation of non aggression principles to forsake negative liberties
such political pundits seek a violation of non aggression principles to forsake positive liberties
such political pundits promote strict control over positive liberties
such political pundits represent a majority of public opinion
such political pundits represent a majority of registered and active voters
such political pundits represent an inconsistency for constitution lists regarding abortion wrights
such political pundits should seek non nomian legalism
such political pundits do represent entitlements to participate in abortion
| || |
" Grinning Machine Lathe "
For those lauding themselves as antifederalists , welcome to individualists lauding themselves as antistatists , as well .
It is not a state issue it is an individual citizen issue , per the 9th , 10th and 14th constitutional amendments of us .
As individualism emphasizes negative liberties as independence from government and independence from other individuals , whereby , each individual citizen is entitled to self ownership .
Now , are your interests in violating non aggression principles to affect an individual responsibility for self determination ?
* Fore Nubile Ideologues *
Last edited by Monk-Eye; 17th November 2016 at 07:27 PM.
2. Is a fertilized human egg one second after fertilization a "baby"? Yes or No? NO...not "human life" or "potential life"....you used the word "BABY"....is it a "baby"? Yes or No?
3. Under a situation where abortion is banned? Explain IN DETAIL...not just "same as any other crime"....what METHODS a State could use to enforce and punish violators of an aboriton ban?
4. Roe has stood for 43 years....through Republican Presidents, Republican Congresses, Republican Presidents WITH Republican Congresses, and a Supreme Court where the MAJORITY were nominated by a "pro life" Republican President.
BTW, a clear example of how an abortion ban would be discriminatory on gender?
Suppose some radical anti-sterilization group passed a ban on....voluntary vasectomies?
Would that be Constitutional?
" Gaming Rules Changers "
An after life means literally - the passing on of ones identity through genetics that includes those opportunities to secure\/assure continued introspection as some sophisticated physical state of a haploid resemblance .
A wright to life is dependent upon a greater individual such as a state of government to implement retorsion\//\reprisal against a perpetrator .
A perpetrator violating a wright to life loses its own wright to life through a law of equal protection ; and , it is dependent upon social justices whether to issue a reprieve from retorsion/\\/reprisal .
* Forth Hence Fourth *
If a vasectomy were a guaranteed benign and reversible , perhaps as some tubal ligation , would it be possible to issue a legal order requiring a reversible vasectomy until such time as is allowable to procreate , such as an inclusion as part of criminal punishment for violating a wright to life of some other individual entitled with equal protection ?
Last edited by Monk-Eye; 18th November 2016 at 12:08 PM.