Worried about crazy libs

WHo needs 50 years of objective Supreme Court verdict when we have Boilerman.....and a new court vetted by sleazy special interest money?   Liberals didnt have to buy their verdict from a sleazy special interest group -  Conservatives did.     Pretty sad that can happen isn't it?

Well, the current Supreme Court appears to agree with me............and most importantly, the Constitution.

Yes - the ones pre vetted by a pro-life Special Interest group.     

You keep bleating about the Constitution. Please indicate to us where the Constitution or its Amendments mentions abortion.

I'm waiting.

Kevin doesn't grasp the concept that the Constitution mandates that rights not specifically addressed within the Constitution are to be handled at the state level.  You are right..............abortion is not mentioned within the Constitution................and do you now know what that means?

Boilerman choosing to ignore the 14th Ammendment doesnt mean its not in the Constituion,

Yesterday I just read, actually reread, the 14th Amendment.  What am I ingoring?

We read and discussed the Constitution when I was in high school.  All views are allowed and listened to.  I'm confident that many, if not the great majority of Liberals would argue against teacher today's school children about the Constitution.  If it was taught, the Liberal teachers would want to put their spin on it, verses leaving it to the kids decide what they liked and don't like.  After all, Lib teachers believe it is their job to indocrinate childen with Liberal views, WHEN SUCH THINGS SHOULD BE LEFT TO PARENTS.

Since Boiler's reading comprehension skills need a little work:

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Forcing someone to remain pregnant for 9 months, go through childbirth risking their own health and then having to deal with the permanent changes to their body for the rest of their life is a deprivation of liberty. 

I remind Boiler most conservatives think having to wear a cloth mask in public during a pandemic or not being able to get a haircut is a deprivation of their liberty. 

Well, Boiler is an ignorant clown, so maybe the concept of fundamental human rights is really over his head...?

The states do NOT have the power to take away such rights.

I've listed the rights mentioned within the Constitution, and none apply to abortion.  PJ and others wish to stretch the truth, and the Constitution in this situation, to suit their desired outcome.  Kevin keeps mentioning "fundamental human rights", and abortion is plainly to be handled at the state level.

Kevin, would you cheer if pro pot laws were mandated at the federal level?  We all know the answer to that is "Yes!, because we all know that Kevin doesn't give a shit about the Constitution.

Some seem to think that abortion is only a religious level discussion.  I'm not religious, and the idea that on some random day, the person growing is suddenly a human, when one before that date it was not a human.  This argument is illiogical.  The same illogical argument could be used for a child of one month or one year.  Why not say that the growing person is a Zimbot and it remains a Zimbot until 21 months after conception?  Kevin could then say "It's not a baby, but instead a Zimbot, and everyone knows that we should be able to kill a Zimbot whenever we like."