Alabama Supreme court rules embryos are children

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/23/politics/gop-candidates-reaction-alabama-ivf/index.html

GOP lawmakers and candidates race to distance themselves from Alabama court decision​

A number of congressional Republicans running in 2024 are swiftly distancing themselves from a controversial Alabama Supreme Court ruling seen as infringing on IVF, the latest obstacle for GOP candidates in the post-Roe era.

From House to Senate races, new candidates and incumbents alike are aggressively trying to neutralize Democratic attacks that the decision in Alabama is just the latest in attempts by the GOP to crack down on reproductive rights and the party is encouraging members to get ahead of the issue.
 
I think since we're just making up shit about non people..... Can we declare certain people to not be people?
 
Talk about reading comprehension issues; you dipsticks seem to believe I support the decision.

How about going back and seeing where I posted that it will be overturned on appeal.
Any time a government decision, or new law results in clamping down or taking away individual freedoms, you generally support it. Sometimes wholeheartedly. So it was a logical assumption you supported this decision.
 
Any time a government decision, or new law results in clamping down or taking away individual freedoms, you generally support it. Sometimes wholeheartedly. So it was a logical assumption you supported this decision.


Again, this is because of YOUR reading comprehension failures.

A situation which, for some strange unknown reason, isn't uncommon with you fuckwits.
 
You've being vague and evasive.

Demonstrate the difference between what she thinks she said and what you think she actually said.


Based on the actual words she used, she didn't say what you claim she said.

Basically you're reading more into her statement than what's there and them blaming me for pointing that out in my comments to her. Instead of fixing the problem, she's letting you play Lancelot to her cheating bitch ass Guinevere.
 
Based on the actual words she used, she didn't say what you claim she said.
You need to break this down for me. Show me the words she used, the understanding I got, and how that isn't a valid interpretation.
Basically you're reading more into her statement than what's there and them blaming me for pointing that out in my comments to her.
You understand that what a person writes can say more than what just those specific words mean, right?
 
You need to break this down for me. Show me the words she used, the understanding I got, and how that isn't a valid interpretation.

You understand that what a person writes can say more than what just those specific words mean, right?


Sorry, you asking me to do your homework for you isn't going to fly. You had your opportunity to go back and actually read what was posted at the time and didn't. You failed to do that and that's on you. If you want to try and pretend that she said something she didn't, that also is on you.

Notice too how she's letting you fight her battle for her. A conflict she intentionally created just so someone like you would come to her rescue and clarify her words while telling the world that she said things she didn't.

You've been played Sir Knight.
 
Sorry, you asking me to do your homework for you isn't going to fly. You had your opportunity to go back and actually read what was posted at the time and didn't.
I actually did, several times, and what she said is quite clear, and you refuse to explain how it isn't.
You failed to do that and that's on you. If you want to try and pretend that she said something she didn't, that also is on you.
Someone says something, other people understand them, but you declare what the person said and others understood is somehow incorrect.

Seems quite clear cut it's you who doesn't understand, because even when honestly asked to present your own alternative understanding, you refuse.
 
I actually did, several times, and what she said is quite clear, and you refuse to explain how it isn't.

Someone says something, other people understand them, but you declare what the person said and others understood is somehow incorrect.

Seems quite clear cut it's you who doesn't understand, because even when honestly asked to present your own alternative understanding, you refuse.

How it isn't is clear, the words you believe she posted aren't there. If you believe she said ALL RELIGIONS then quote those words. Don't bother quoting what you believe she implied, quote the actual words.

You, like Sisyphus, will find that an impossible task.
 
God must hate these women who can’t get pregnant through the normal method.
according to religious nuts, he doesn't 'hate' but it goes against 'his will' to interfere... reminds me a bit of that saying:

a man was drowning in the ocean, hundreds of miles from land. A boat came past and a man offered to take him on board to save him. He refused. This happened twice more. The third boat's captain asked him why wouldn't he get on board, and the drowning guy said 'If God wants to save me, he will.'

the religious p.o.v totally ignores the one that 'god' (no, i'm not a believer) sent the drowning man aid 3 times, using his human vessels in their vessels to save the idiot.
 
She said she prefers secular law. That by definition excludes all religions.

How do you not know that?

*sigh*
Her words (with some emphasis):

I'm a fan of secular law for a reason.

What the heck is it with you all or nothing dramatic folks? The judges didn't quote the koran. They quoted the bible.

Do you think you can dial it back a bit?

JFC

NOTICE how she singled out the Bible and the "Koran"? NOTICE how she DIDN'T MENTION A SINGLE OTHER religion as if "secular" only means Islam and Christianity.

It's almost like you added words in your head to the effect that when someone says "secular" and immediately limits the coverage to "Bible and "koran" they still mean "every religion" despite obviously not meaning that at all.
 
The Satanic Church should invoke scripture about the Devil's spawn. Now that there is no separation between church and state, maybe I can claim each sperm as a dependant on my tax returns.
Can a 17 years, 3 month old person now legally demand be to serviced alcohol?
I'd say that in Alabama this means YES!
These FO*K&** idiots.
 
NOTICE how she singled out the Bible and the "Koran"?
She did not. The bible is the book of the original religion topic, someone else brought up Islam to which she responded. She didn't single them out, did you not read what she was responding to?
NOTICE how she DIDN'T MENTION A SINGLE OTHER religion as if "secular" only means Islam and Christianity.
She was responding to the religion examples brought up by other people, she did not single them out.
It's almost like you added words in your head to the effect that when someone says "secular" and immediately limits the coverage to "Bible and "koran" they still mean "every religion" despite obviously not meaning that at all.
She referenced the two religion examples brought up by other people. That is not her defining or implying the term secular excludes only the two religion examples brought up by others.

How do you not understand this?
 
Can a 17 years, 3 month old person now legally demand be to serviced alcohol?
I'd say that in Alabama this means YES!
These FO*K&** idiots.

Someone did try that one in Missouri a few years ago. The courts didn't buy it, of course. I think there may also have been a case where a pregnant woman tried to get out of a ticket for driving solo in the HOV lane, and who similarly lost.
 
Back
Top