Confirmed what ? Yeah, I got you a timeout. And you've learned nothing. It ain't always about just snitching; it's often enough about the who and the what. By a show of hands, who else says I'm wrong and sides instead with his o mighty one ?

Posted by Mwett on 12/1/2021 6:48:00 PM (view original):
Confirmed what ? Yeah, I got you a timeout. And you've learned nothing. It ain't always about just snitching; it's often enough about the who and the what. By a show of hands, who else says I'm wrong and sides instead with his o mighty one ?

There you go again as always.
The pot calling the kettle black.
Such a boring and tireless refrain.

So, that's an admission of being a kettle ? Tell me I've made my point and I'll go away and you can continue being boring and tirelessly repetitively predictively irritating but without me around. At the very least, your sheets have been officially finally properly yanked. If I put my mind to it, I can be here 24/7 in rebut to any of your silly who cares drama king pettiness. Or, I can be Three Doors Down (non boring Pat Boone Debbie Gibson et al I've inaccurately been accused of reveling in, cuz you're a music genius, which actual aficionados find hilarious).

Needed some distance.

onto my posting.

On The Supreme Court Case Today

With the dust cleared and the analysis settling in I think that these are the takeaways from this very
very important case.

1. I think only 3 conservative judges are ready amd wanting to eradicate Roe and the right to choose in any state that outlaws abortion.

2. Roberts and Barrett did not seem to seem to want to go that far but seemed very intent to give Mississippi what they asked for - a ban after 15 weeks.

3. This case did not seek an outright ban but 3 strongly implied that they would allow a state that would ban abortions to do so and did not agree with the woman having a constitutional right of any kind in federal law.

4. Roberts spoke about the 15 week threshold as being common across the globe including China.
It is possible that he and Barrett could lower it even more if asked to in another case.

5. The Supreme Court is now just 2 Justices away from allowing a federal ban on abortion by Congress and every state to ban it outright.

6. Until the above happens a state could have full rights one day and no more then 15 weeks the next
and maybe the following year back to full rights etc.

7. The case wont be decided until the summer but one can expect all state elections for legislature and governor to suddenly take on existential importance to women who want to retain the right to choose.

Posted by Jetson21 on 12/1/2021 7:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Mwett on 12/1/2021 6:48:00 PM (view original):
Confirmed what ? Yeah, I got you a timeout. And you've learned nothing. It ain't always about just snitching; it's often enough about the who and the what. By a show of hands, who else says I'm wrong and sides instead with his o mighty one ?

There you go again as always.
The pot calling the kettle black.
Such a boring and tireless refrain.

Preserved. Admits being a kettle. I win.

Posted by Jetson21 on 12/1/2021 7:24:00 PM (view original):
Needed some distance.

onto my posting.

On The Supreme Court Case Today

With the dust cleared and the analysis settling in I think that these are the takeaways from this very
very important case.

1. I think only 3 conservative judges are ready amd wanting to eradicate Roe and the right to choose in any state that outlaws abortion.

2. Roberts and Barrett did not seem to seem to want to go that far but seemed very intent to give Mississippi what they asked for - a ban after 15 weeks.

3. This case did not seek an outright ban but 3 strongly implied that they would allow a state that would ban abortions to do so and did not agree with the woman having a constitutional right of any kind in federal law.

4. Roberts spoke about the 15 week threshold as being common across the globe including China.
It is possible that he and Barrett could lower it even more if asked to in another case.

5. The Supreme Court is now just 2 Justices away from allowing a federal ban on abortion by Congress and every state to ban it outright.

6. Until the above happens a state could have full rights one day and no more then 15 weeks the next
and maybe the following year back to full rights etc.

7. The case wont be decided until the summer but one can expect all state elections for legislature and governor to suddenly take on existential importance to women who want to retain the right to choose.

WRT #7 - isn't it really only existential for fetuses who want to live?

Maybe we have different definitions of the verb "to exist."

Mine is correct.

Posted by dahsdebater on 12/1/2021 11:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jetson21 on 12/1/2021 7:24:00 PM (view original):
Needed some distance.

onto my posting.

On The Supreme Court Case Today

With the dust cleared and the analysis settling in I think that these are the takeaways from this very
very important case.

1. I think only 3 conservative judges are ready amd wanting to eradicate Roe and the right to choose in any state that outlaws abortion.

2. Roberts and Barrett did not seem to seem to want to go that far but seemed very intent to give Mississippi what they asked for - a ban after 15 weeks.

3. This case did not seek an outright ban but 3 strongly implied that they would allow a state that would ban abortions to do so and did not agree with the woman having a constitutional right of any kind in federal law.

4. Roberts spoke about the 15 week threshold as being common across the globe including China.
It is possible that he and Barrett could lower it even more if asked to in another case.

5. The Supreme Court is now just 2 Justices away from allowing a federal ban on abortion by Congress and every state to ban it outright.

6. Until the above happens a state could have full rights one day and no more then 15 weeks the next
and maybe the following year back to full rights etc.

7. The case wont be decided until the summer but one can expect all state elections for legislature and governor to suddenly take on existential importance to women who want to retain the right to choose.

WRT #7 - isn't it really only existential for fetuses who want to live?

Maybe we have different definitions of the verb "to exist."

Mine is correct.

If you think you are correct and it makes you happy then I am happy for you.

BTW i was referring to a philosophical existentialism relating to the ability to make a choice in major life decisions freely.
I am correct but in my case i dont really care.

and existential is an adjective.

You are a VERY intelligent guy but too literal and carping esp when it comes to me but what else is new.

Something can exist and still not be considered "human."

Pigs exist, are living, are extremely intelligent, and feel pain, yet we willingly kill and eat them.

I've criticized the pro choice rhetoric and I'll do the same for pro-life. Abortion isn't murder. No one truly acts as though the two are the same.

If you believe abortion is murder yet would still befriend someone who has aborted a fetus, ask yourself if you would do the same if that person had willingly and knowingly killed an actual child. No way.

We would also treat miscarriages far differently.

Did I say abortion was murder? Existential is a verbal adjective of the verb "to exist." The abortion question is not existential for adult women. I've been pretty clear about being pro-choice for over a decade in this forum. If there were an impending debate on a law outlawing all pork products, that would be an existential debate for pigs. Unfortunately (for them), they still would not be allowed to vote. Neither, for that matter, are fetuses.

If Jetson is going to persistently use overtly superior and self-important rhetoric, I'm going to call him out when he says dumb ****. Or dumber than his usual at least.

Posted by dahsdebater on 12/2/2021 10:18:00 AM (view original):
Did I say abortion was murder? Existential is a verbal adjective of the verb "to exist." The abortion question is not existential for adult women. I've been pretty clear about being pro-choice for over a decade in this forum. If there were an impending debate on a law outlawing all pork products, that would be an existential debate for pigs. Unfortunately (for them), they still would not be allowed to vote. Neither, for that matter, are fetuses.

If Jetson is going to persistently use overtly superior and self-important rhetoric, I'm going to call him out when he says dumb ****. Or dumber than his usual at least.

This is nuts and weird.
Now Im not allowed to use a word as I choose.
WEIRD and VERY WEIRD! But if it thrills you go at it.

I respect the pro life people but I believe that fetus does not get the right to choose before viability.

Posted by dahsdebater on 12/2/2021 10:18:00 AM (view original):
Did I say abortion was murder? Existential is a verbal adjective of the verb "to exist." The abortion question is not existential for adult women. I've been pretty clear about being pro-choice for over a decade in this forum. If there were an impending debate on a law outlawing all pork products, that would be an existential debate for pigs. Unfortunately (for them), they still would not be allowed to vote. Neither, for that matter, are fetuses.

If Jetson is going to persistently use overtly superior and self-important rhetoric, I'm going to call him out when he says dumb ****. Or dumber than his usual at least.

That used to be my generalized response to both He and Dino. I respectfully submit it doesn't work that well, and it can get you banned.
Dumb is generally connected to intelligence and questioning sanity/mental health is considered to be "offensive" and beyond the limits on these forums...........at least when Jetson/dino complains about it. Thus, you might ought considering the block method, like many of us I reckon.

Or continue to post away.
I'd prefer to read your responses myself, but please don't use the quote function, THAT makes us all read his post!

For the record on self important
I would say that a whole bunch of you come across that way. I would never mention it because everybody has a different writing style and just because
it sounds a certain way does NOT mean the person
thinks they are self important.

Every time someone goes into a pro jesus or anti religion rant i cringe in a certain unpleasant way - maybe it sounds self important or something to me.

Personally since I am always accused by Dadebator who I always and constantly and effusively praise and compliment is incited by how I write i want to say without any disrespect that you come off as self important and didactic. Which is fine.

Once i even said about him that the apple does not fall far from the tree because his father is a minister and I respect that so complimenting our chemist i said the apple does not fall far from the tree.

I no longer try to one up my haters
but I have no idea why people hate me.
I come to peoples defense. I offer interesting posts and I have fun.

The whole thing is so weird.

The way I walk is just the way I walk.
The way I talk is just the way I talk.

we are not in school getting our spelling check or a rap on the knuckles because a nun doesnt like a word selection.

Posted by dahsdebater on 12/2/2021 10:18:00 AM (view original):
Did I say abortion was murder? Existential is a verbal adjective of the verb "to exist." The abortion question is not existential for adult women. I've been pretty clear about being pro-choice for over a decade in this forum. If there were an impending debate on a law outlawing all pork products, that would be an existential debate for pigs. Unfortunately (for them), they still would not be allowed to vote. Neither, for that matter, are fetuses.

If Jetson is going to persistently use overtly superior and self-important rhetoric, I'm going to call him out when he says dumb ****. Or dumber than his usual at least.

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I wasn't claiming that you said abortion was murder; I was generally talking about pro-life rhetoric.