Another in the never ending stream of Republican vote frauds.

https://videosift.com/video/Republican-Election-Official-Arrested-For-Vote-Fraud-Again

Funny how many 100% pro life no-exception Republicans have erased their abortion position from their websites and campaigns and now claim to be totally pro choice despite decades of anti abortion legislation and positions. ROEVEMBER is going to be a hoot. Thanks Graham for publicly tipping your hand before the election and putting forth a national federal abortion ban bill so no one could honestly say Republicans don’t plan to ban abortion nationally, can’t sit on the “states rights” lie they’ve used for decades to fight against and erode a federal right….not that anyone was fooled for a second, but now the lie that they won’t outlaw abortion nationally, and won’t ban contraception nationally, and won’t outlaw gay marriage nationally, and won’t outlaw interracial marriage nationally are all dead by their own hands.

BTW- Kemp was caught on tape saying if the legislature is willing (if there’s enough Republicans elected) he’s on board with banning chemical contraception and will try. He’s not the only Republican governor saying it. I wonder….who’s going to pay for these hundreds of thousands of unwanted children? Do red states have a surplus to spend opening state orphanages? You people like to bemoan single parent households and parentless children, saying it’s creating criminals, and then you legislate away rights and self autonomy to create hundreds of thousands more unwanted children every single year. Just asinine.

Funny they want to imply these are far left liberal anti vaxers because they’re Californians, but they all spouted far right wing talking points verbatim. I wish, when they bring up body autonomy, he would ask “so you’re pro choice, right?” I think their answers would clear up who many of these people really are.

FYI, Jordan, there are tons of bat shit crazy right wingers in California , especially in the LA area.

Lol…their idiotic law is being enforced, much to their shagrin, by out of state, pro choice, disbarred convict lawyers who hope to lose their cases.
Anti choice groups are outraged, 1) because this law was designed for them to steal money from their political rivals, not for pro choice people, and 2) they know the law is unconstitutional and that actually using it will expose that in court, then they won’t be able to scare people out of providing health care services in Texas under threat of lawsuit and fines.
LMFAHS!!

Trust this; you and your words are a better reason for being pro-choice.

Why not push vasectomies? If American fathers took their sons down to the clinic for reversible vasectomies it might be the key to this entire debate. Couple this with mothers taking daughters for contraception, the country might become a squirrel paradise.

A nut anytime they felt the need.

Not all "Christians", and not the top for most. Don't like abortions, don't have one works for most people.

If it had come out that Trump paid for 100 abortions for his various mistresses and daughters it wouldn't change one Christian vote.

Like I mentioned, America is by far mostly Christian, and firmly pro choice. You really don't understand American Christians. They work on Sundays, wear blended fabrics, eat shellfish, etc. Fundamentalists are frowned upon.

If you insist on being a child, I'll have to give you a time out.

You certainly pretended to be, and pretended to have first hand knowledge of the situation, and knowledge of what all Texan Christians all think on the subject. Turns out you don't know shit first hand, and are arguing based on uninformed opinions you hold, not knowledge. It's called a lie by omission.

Texans didn't vote for this, their representatives did. You are telling Texans what to think and do....insisting because a majority are Christian they must be anti choice, and since pro choice people lost one battle they should just leave Texas, but the same doesn't go for Texans who are anti choice and had lost every battle until this one. See how infantile your argument is now?

America is a representative democracy....a democratic republic, not a democracy. Some places like California have direct voter approved laws, so are partly democratic, but mostly representatives choose our laws and path. Assuming that because one person wins an election means all their voters approve of everything they do shows a naivete usually reserved for pre kindergarten kids.

*quality reminder of what real republicans looked like once upon a time. *promote

Just waiting for @bobknight33 to claim Reagan was a RINO, only Trump, a pro choice Democrat at the time and for decades after, is a true Republican despite being against everything Republicans historically stood for.

And you want this guy to pick? And you want this guy to pick? And you want this guy to pick?
Bobski, that's just not an English phrase. It's a horrible translation from Russian. Pedotroll.
Edit: lol....embarrassed? I see you rushed back to edit your bad Russian translations.

Flip flopper, like going from a massive Clinton supporter and friend, pro choice democrat to a crazed rabid Clinton hater, now an anti choice Republican?
Biggest loser Trump flipped his position on just about everything to run as your guy, and you didn't even notice.

Your opinion carries so much weight you create a new Biden vote every time you whine about landslide mega....hilarious after "Red Tsunami 2018".
Americans are done with Moscow's Emissaries Governing America, no thanks. Biden is 10000 times the American Trump is, and 1000000 times the man.

Caught red handed again.
After getting caught perpetrating the idiotic #walk away fraud in 2018 where Republicans created fake accounts to spread their fake message that Democrats were leaving the Democratic party in droves, complete with multiple fake personal stories and stock photos attached, you're at it again with another walk away campaign, this time targeting black people on Twitter and other social media with fake bot run accounts again using stock photos pretending to be people leaving the Democratic party for Trump. I'm surprised you haven't used them as proof Republicans aren't racist.

When will constant lies and frauds be too much for you? What if I remind you Trump is a pro choice Democrat that embodies the 7 deadly sins in one flabby package, but couldn't get any Democratic votes so switched to Republican, and adopted all the most hateful, xenophobic, and conspiratorial parts of their platform.
Remember how happy he was to have the Clintons at his last wedding? Wasn't Epstein there too?

And you realize you say that as a man who has no womb. You can only base your argument with science without having an incubator of your own.

I realize there are times when a woman can make a decision to abort as in rape but I also realize a woman may not abort in the case of rape.

I can't even imagine what it would feel like to be pregnant.

A decision I would not want to make. But I say that as a man.

For the record "Pro choice."

Leave it up to the incubator. After all, she's the one that has to live with her decision. The father is secondary. If she makes a decision you don't like, cowboy up. That's why you're the man. If she makes a decision she regrets, support her. That's why you're the man.


EDIT: newt's profile page.

I once threatened to sue my parents for depriving me of the bliss of non being through a willful and wanton act of conception.

BTW, did you get any money out of them?

Sorry.

I'm calling him pathetic because he gave two pro choice arguments believing they are anti choice arguments.

I don't believe a thing that breaths liquid is a human being. A child, imo, must have taken a breath to be a living human child. Until then, it's only a potential human requiring an actual human to be it's life support system and sustenance. That's worse than any other form of slavery.

I'm so pro choice, I support 7th trimester abortions, like Spartans. In ancient Greece, it wasn't a human until it was a year old, and killing it wasn't murder until then.

At 6 weeks, it's indistinguishable from a chicken or newt, so not a human. It must evolve completely before I grant it that status. Until live birth, it's just a parasite.

Personally, I am Pro Choice for women to make their own decision on the gestation of biological cells growing in their own bodies up to a certain age of the fetus.

What I don't understand is, are you calling this man pathetic because he "gave two arguments FOR pro choice"? - based on principals laid out by Lincoln in his example?
Or because
Pro Choice doesn't align with your beliefs?

Sorry, you wrap your words up in several ways but you don't come out and say what side you're arguing for so I can't tell the tone or nature of your comments.

I personally don't feel the entity, the biological growth of cells is a person just because it has a heart beat. Does it have consciousness? Is it a thinking being with self awareness? Because I don't remember anything from when I was a fetus. In fact, I don't think the brain is developed at all ...

"not until the end of week 5 and into week 6 (usually around forty to forty-three days) does the first electrical brain activity begin to occur." ~'The Ethical Brain' - The New York Times.

And even then, it's still in development and not a an organ that can contain consciousness.

So, the argument is two fold.
One, this issue of personal freedom/choice is important enough that it can't be left to states who might eliminate individual choice in favor of a state's choice. This is the liberal position on this issue, that states will take the choice away from individual woman in favor of the choice made for them, usually by groups of old men. That's why Roe V Wade is essential, it denies the states the right to enslave women to their unwanted, potential, in some cases forced upon them, offspring.

Second, he argued we can't allow laws that take away the freedom of individuals to choose, which slavery did...as do anti abortion laws. You cannot crush the choices of another person....this includes the choice to not be an incubator for another "person" (to misuse the word, assuming they're incorrectly insisting a blastocyst or foetus is a person, all medical and scientific evidence notwithstanding). The "developing life" (doesn't realize he just blew the "life starts at conception" argument with that phrase) cannot take away the rights of the womb's owner, cannot make them a slave to the blastocyst/foetus. The right to life argument fails when you realize no person is forced to donate blood or organs, which people need to live. Real right to life would extend beyond birth and require people become medical slaves to those who need them or their parts.

If it can live without help, fine, develop an abortive processes that allows that at any point in pregnancy, fund it across the board, and start the debate again. Until then, this dumbass just made two arguments for pro choice.
Pathetic.

Fair point, and I would agree with you that if one of your core beliefs are pro-life/pro-choice, of course you want the law to reflect that because you care about the people affected by the law.

That said, it's hard to simultaneously urge the liberals need to stop tip-toeing AND fret that a right-leaning majority on the Supreme Court might overturn Roe vs. Wade. Not because you can't want to uphold Roe vs Wade, but because Roe vs. Wade has stood a long time under a left-leaning majority which tends to argue that the liberals haven't exactly been tip-toeing.

I just wish people would place live and let live much higher up in their value systems. I've got plenty of really strong beliefs that I don't believe should be enshrined into law. The reason being that merely not sharing those beliefs doesn't need to affect anybody else, so to each their own. I believe society is better if I try to convince others of most beliefs voluntarily and not through force of law.

Thanks to asshats abusing their religious privileges, that's where we are today. Many places do require businesses offering a service to not discriminate based on personal preference.

If that Muslim baker makes Buddha cakes and Jesus cakes on request, yes....so he should limit his creativity across the board or not at all....or work in his mosque bakery.

If they make made to order pro choice cakes, yes, they should make made to order anti choice cakes.

If they make on request cakes for other notable figures, no....but I would expect Hitler to look pretty horrible.

Easy solution here, stop doing made to order cakes. Offer only what you're comfortable making, not requests, not personalized...have a catalog. Once you offer to make what the customer requests, you give up your right to be offended by it, for cash.

Edit: Keep in mind, this is often about being offended not by what they're asked to make, but who the customer is. Not rainbow wedding cakes with leather clad grooms and cocks everywhere, but fancy white cakes with flowers for a gay wedding.
Side note, Jews can't refuse service in their public establishments to any German, can they, and they have a much better reason to do so.