US Politics Thread

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Seems Walt Disney have seen the potential for a profit.

 

[Bigga]

I see this is a potential minefield, so with that in mind for the men in the US (or anywhere since this is a broad question), what rights do they have?

A man wants the child, it's not his choice and a woman can abort.

A man doesn't want the child, she gets to keep it and he pays.

Or the woman, who controls sex, can make him wear his protection whilst she makes sure she's using contraception or don't have sex.

Would this not be logical?

Just posing the question.

 

[Dax777]

Oh. So then you know you’re quite wrong about what “no one is saying”.

No I am not. I'd explain the use of 'no one is saying' but I'm absolutely certain you already understand how it was used. The Smart guy that you are and all.

Once again, not even a peep about stare decisis. Not even troubled, are you?

Better that Thomas get his “43 years of revenge on the liberals”, as he (allegedly) said in 1993.

Really? I thought I already acknowledged that yesterday when i agreed it was the one point at issue against overturning.

Was gonna follow up by asking you a question on how you feel Stare Decisis should be treated and under what circumstances you think overturning precedent is legitimate.

But you hate when I ask questions, so I didn't bother.

 

[Dax777]

No, you’re focussing on the legalities, rather than the infringement on womens’ rights.

You are right. I am focusing on the process. I think it matters. But also, I think there is a legitimate claim to be made regarding restrictions on the absolute right to extinguish a potential life. Even Roe acknowledge this.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

You are right. I am focusing on the process. I think it matters. But also, I think there is a legitimate claim to be made regarding restrictions on the absolute right to extinguish a potential life. Even Roe acknowledge this.

You go man. It gives more of your mentally ill to shoot at in schools.

I find it unbelievable that you‘d just go, “yeah, that’s legal process”.

What if the next law is minorities in New York will all be deported?

Will you still be “yeah, it’s the legal process”.

 

[lloydie]

It's not a good look for the women. That country gets worse every day. Getting like a one party state. Glad l am here with any British politician in charge from any party.

you're stupid.

 

[Dax777]

I see this is a potential minefield, so with that in mind for the men in the US (or anywhere since this is a broad question), what rights do they have?

Same rights as everyone else. The right to take care of your responsibility.

A man wants the child, it's not his choice and a woman can abort.

In First World Countries where abortion is a right, the man has the right to not sleep with a woman who might abort his child.

A man doesn't want the child, she gets to keep it and he pays.

Again, he can choose not to sleep with the woman, wear a condom or get a visectomy or whatever that procedure is called. Take responsibility if you don't want a child.

Or the woman, who controls sex, can make him wear his protection whilst she makes sure she's using contraception or don't have sex.

Both partners control sex. He can wear his protection without prompting like a big boy or don't have sex if he doesn't want a child.a
.

Would this not be logical?

Just posing the question.

Depends on your view.

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

No I am not. I'd explain the use of 'no one is saying' but I'm absolutely certain you already understand how it was used. The Smart guy that you are and all.


Really? I thought I already acknowledged that yesterday when i agreed it was the one point at issue against overturning.

Was gonna follow up by asking you a question on how you feel Stare Decisis should be treated and under what circumstances you think overturning precedent is legitimate.

But you hate when I ask questions, so I didn't bother.

I know how it was used. Without thought. As with most absolutes. In fact, a very important point is that one of the nine people in the nation who actually could be responsible for immediately altering the availability of contraception has suggested that such could be a logical outcome of his thought process. So in fact, “no one” is completely fucking wrong.

You agreed stare decisis was A point. Wow, how in-depth. A whole sentence. What an analysis. So glad we had that fascinating chat. What an intellect. Amazing. Applause all around. Way to move the discussion forward.

Of course, you haven’t agreed nor suggested that it’s the most important point. Maybe you don’t think it is, but if you did, then you’d be in a pickle because then you’d have to agree with me. As you’d prefer to try to “own” nearly everyone on the board and as this is, in my opinion, your most important if not only reason for being here, the two options you offer are either (1) nothing, or (2) disagreement. So, yeah — not a peep.

Finally, I don’t hate it when you ask questions. I just don’t answer your questions because I don’t like you very much.

 

[The perfect fumble]

Seems Walt Disney have seen the potential for a profit.

How so?

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

Same rights as everyone else. The right to take care of your responsibility.


In First World Countries where abortion is a right, the man has the right to not sleep with a woman who might abort his child.



Again, he can choose not to sleep with the woman, wear a condom or get a visectomy or whatever that procedure is called. Take responsibility if you don't want a child.



Both partners control sex. He can wear his protection without prompting like a big boy or don't have sex if he doesn't want a child.a
.


Depends on your view.

All your points that refer to contraception are now at risk because of the decision in Dobbs per Thomas and his comments re: Griswold and due process. And the wrecking ball taken to stare decisis is going to make it very hard for the majority who ruled in Dobbs to somehow get out of overturning Griswold IMO.