Abortion is in the constitution.

That is correct. It means nothing by itself. The claim hinges entirely on the previous arguments I have made.

I think I already did make all my arguments, with my previous sarcastic comments.

It shouldn't take too much thought to realize how a single sarcastic comment can tear apart someone else's argument in a single statement or represent a long complicated argument of its own.

My posts are all on page 1, so it shouldn't be too difficult.

 

Because they can.

 

Why would they have an object that does nothing?

 

Did you know that all inanimate objects do nothing, or was it just guns that you thought were different?

 

Answer the question.

 

I normally do when they aren't stupid

 

Well since they don't do anything you won't mind if we confiscate them right?

 

Sorry but the 9th Amendment is self defining and self evident. I didn't write it or make it up. It's fact whether you like it or not. And I'm far from the only person who understands the 9th Amendment, it isn't rocket science. What kind of mish mosh SCOTUS wants to make out of it and you want to follow along with is their issue and your personal problem. I get my interpretation from the English language dictionary and it's quite clear, there is no ambiguity. The 9th Amendment protects ALL unenumenated rights as it is clearly written, and that still means ALL rights including but not limited to the right to have an abortion. I'm well aware of SCOTUS' deliberate dismissal and/or marginalization of the 9th Amendment, it serves their criminal purpose via their phony "interpretation".

I don't give a rat's ass if you take me seriously or not. I'm sorry but I don't bend over to or declare people in positions of power "smart" or better educated or better prepared just because they are in positions of power and/or authority as you readily do. If that were the case Trump would have been the smartest person on the planet when he was President according to your mindset. Bend over as you wish, that's not me. I've beaten hot shot attorneys in 2 federal lawsuits as a suis juris plaintiff and defendant respectively. That doesn't make me a brilliant attorney, it just means I did my homework and learned their game. I know many SCOTUS justices who were and are brilliant and I also know many who are just plain phony tyrants. The problem is the entire 3rd branch has been corrupt since Marbury vs Madison (1803) and I have no respect for it. Unfortunately the same is true for the other 2 branches as well in our pretend government.

No many believe or were indoctrinated to believe as you do. They invented (i.e. bent) the rules of the game and you're playing along with those "many", that's quite obvious.

Sorry but I'm starting to run low on interest in this discussion so I won't bother with the rest.

I'm not here to convince you of anything nor is it my job. You are correct on one thing, everything I post is my opinion as is everything everyone else posts, including you of course. I do support my opinion with fact (the 9th Amendment is fact not fiction). The difference is I don't bend over to authority and have rejected the majority of my phony indoctrination over the last 7+ decades of my existence. And I long ago learned what inherent rights are, maybe you will also one day.

 

No, it's not...

/thread

 

I don't mind if you try.
If you think you have the balls for it.

 

Why do people own vehicles that can do 150+ miles per hour when the speed limit is 75? Because they can...

 

I have no problem following the nra motto.

 

Except that vehicle is doing something, guns don't do anything.

 

By all means, start with the thugs and gangbangers in Chicago and Detroit. Let us know how it works out for you...

 

What motto would that be

 

A vehicle does nothing, just like a gun. Did you have a magic vehicle?

 

Basically, the issue is viability.

Most of america supports a woman's right to abortion per the parameters set by Roe/Casey.

That, in my view, is perfectly consistent with her liberty, bodily autonomy, and privacy, that abortion is, therefore, a penumbra of those constitutional principles.

 

Without a government to guarantee those rights, it's just talk.

 

Your problem is obvious.

 

dharbert said it was moving at 150 mph so that's something.

 

Capable of. So why own a vehicle that is capable of moving at 150 miles per hour when the speed limit is only 75?

 

Whatever.

 

That's not the question.

 

Fun fact: The word abortion doesn't appear in the Constitution. Neither do God, Jesus, or Christianity. Not even once...

 

Sure....

" Learned person-s " with an S, as in more than one person. That would be plural, btw.

Speaking of a vacuous declaration, you and the woman you speak of have that in common.

Nowhere in the constitution is abortion mentioned at all, nowhere.

Now facts are things that you can demonstrate and repeat .... Such as the weight of a gallon of water this is a known fact and it will always remain the same.

You calling someone's opinion a fact does not make it so.

Can you quote a single court case that ever agreed with her erroneous opinion?

I'll bet you can't or you already would have.
This argument will fail in court you watch and see.

And as far as my analogy I can also use examples of things that are perfectly legal like you have pointed out abortion is.

Smoking cigarettes is legal. You folks like to tell us that rights always have limitations right?

Can you smoke a cigarette wherever you please?