• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Waltz family members are supporting Trump.

F1fan

Veteran Member
"Limit women's reproductive rights"

Do you mean..

Limit people's reproductive rights.
No, women. I don;t want to dilute what the republicans are doing to women's reproductive rights. These political forces on the right are taking away the right for women to make their own life decisions, and often results in life threatening consequences when they find themselves in medical distress during pregnancy, and can't get the medical care they need.

I prefer to keep the language precise and accurate.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
No, women. I don;t want to dilute what the republicans are doing to women's reproductive rights. These political forces on the right are taking away the right for women to make their own life decisions, and often results in life threatening consequences when they find themselves in medical distress during pregnancy, and can't get the medical care they need.

I prefer to keep the language precise and accurate.
Lol.

You don't want to call them people's reproductive rights but the left can dilute pregnant women/girls to pregnant people and that's ok.

Btw, a transman isn't a woman right?
So do they have women's reproductive rights or do they have people's reproductive rights?
 

We Never Know

No Slack
Here you go again with more of your weird tangents. You having a bad day?
Oh. I put you in a spot didn't I.

So again...

You don't want to call them people's reproductive rights because its will dilute women's reproductive rights but the left can dilute pregnant women/girls to pregnant people and that's ok.

Btw, a transman isn't a woman right?
So do they have
1. women's reproductive rights?
2. people's reproductive rights?

If you pick 1 then you are referring to transgender men as women.
If you pick 2 you are diluting women's rights.

Women's reproductive rights aren't exclusive to women any more because there are trans men who aren't women.

People's reproductive rights will include trans men that aren't women/girls.

Its a pickle isn't it but its what you all created.
 
Last edited:

F1fan

Veteran Member
You can add amendments… It takes a Convention of States to change it.
Right, the electoral college could be eliminated. Of course it is the only way for the republicans to have any chance to get a president elected given how bad their nominees are. Republicans can't get a popular win for president.
It is the beginning of it. We are working towards it.

Marx is irrelevant to USA politics. There is no Marxism.

Fake news, inflammatory and gaslighting.
I wrote:

Sorry, no. There are civil rights. You Christian conservatives might want slavery back, but ALL humans have rights, including migrants. Interesting you bring up wanting slavery as it is condoned by your God. DDo you oppose slavery even though your God condones it? Or do you think slavery is OK?

What is fake news? That slavery existed? That your God condones slavery in the Bible?

What is inflammatory? That your God condones slavery in the Bible? Do you support what your God condones, or oppose it?

And what am I gaslighting you about? That your politics are often contrary to what Jesus taught? That civil rghts exist?
Moving goal posts?

It seems like quite a few people resort to these tactics.
You claimed you support science, and I am asking you to prove it. If you are resisting to answer two simple established conclusions in science then I suspect you don't accept them. It's not uncommon for far right people to reject science, reject reputable media sources, and show poor judgment in political candidates. Here's your chance to prove you aren't in that category.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
I disagree… Have you ever seen the dictates of The Communist Manifesto ever work effectively in a nation?
I doubt you ever read it. I was in a philosophy class in college and we were assigned to read it. Most everyone had a negative impression of it since it had the word "Communist" in the title. When the class gathered again after reading the professor took a vote of how many actually thought the Manifesto offered good ideas. About 90% of us thought it had good ideas.

Now like any other idealist political theory it doesn't ake into account human flaws like greed and cheating, and how humans are very competitive by nature with very primitive brains. But the CM was an evolution of sociopolitical theory that was evolving naturally in the world, and that was larger and larger societies pooling resources to help create an infrastructure that supports all the citizens. What right wingers call socialism is the basic framework for most every society in the world. The difference between democrats and republicans is the DEGREE of pooled resources and how they are distributed. Democrats want universal healthcare so all citizens have access, which in the long run will be cheaper since those without healthcare access won't wait until problems are chronic and more costly to cure. Republicans oppose this, among other pooled advantages, becaus eof their idealistic attitude about wealth and taxation. This has allowed the wealthy to accumulate more and more wealth and the middle class and poor struggle to pay increasing insurance costs. The republicans fail time and time again to explain how the rich accumulating more wealth helps the ecomony as a whole, or elevates the prosperity of the middle class.

I think the looming housing insurance crisis will become an issue in the next few years and will force republicans into an uncomfortable dilemma. They will have to decide if they will subsidize the insurance markets, and along with it subsidize health insurance as well. If they don't want to compromize their ideals they will have a hard time getting elected, and that's the way conservatism becomes irrelevant in America.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Personal life? We're not talking about some relationship he had with a woman.

We're talking about SEXUAL ASSAULT.

And you're fine with that. MAGA is fine with that. Because it's "his personal life" ... ? Really?
But it's the rest of us that have TDS? Suuuuure.
How disgusting.
Should have showed up there as a witness. You make it sound like you were actually there.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
It's only 120 pages. You let me know so I know we're talking about the same thing.
Or look at the CPUSA website. You will find that everything Democrats stand for almost mirrors word for word everything the CPUSA stands for.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
He's an adjudicated rapist according to the verdict of the e Jean Carrol trial. That's as good as we are going to get due to the statute of limitations regarding rape
The woman can't even remember dates names and places for God's sake. All she did was win the money lottery to which she did wonderfully well in doing so, I'm sure the money shut her up well as she can live a life of opulent luxury, and never have to work or do anything ever again.

What a score.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
The woman can't even remember dates names and places for God's sake.
Me neither. I was raped when I was 14. I don't remember the address and I don't remember the date.
I remember what happened though. And who did it to me. That tends to happen when a person has been deeply traumatized. And it's not the big win you seem to think it is.
All she did was win the money lottery to which she did wonderfully well in doing so, I'm sure the money shut her up well as she can live a life of opulent luxury, and never have to work or do anything ever again.

What a score.
Yeah and all she had to do was be sexually assaulted by a dude who brags about sexually assaulting people. Sweet deal, eh?

Whatever you have to tell yourself to continue supporting Dear Leader.

Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Yeah and all she had to do was be sexually assaulted by a dude who brags about sexually assaulting people. Sweet deal, eh?

Whatever you have to tell yourself to continue supporting Dear Leader.

Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting.
Yeah winning lawsuits so you can hit the jackpot. Clearly we know the intent and im willing to bet if Trump never ran for president this fiasco would have never happened.

We know what the real goals are.
 

Soandso

ᛋᛏᚨᚾᛞ ᛋᚢᚱᛖ
The woman can't even remember dates names and places for God's sake. All she did was win the money lottery to which she did wonderfully well in doing so, I'm sure the money shut her up well not for she can live a life of luxury and never have the work or do anything ever again.

What a score.

Why do you assume the survivor is lying vs. the rapist? The guy literally brags about grabbing women by their genitals, which in itself is molestation. In your mind is the leap from molester to rapist a gap too far to cross? Trump has a long history of women who brought up his predatory behavior in the past


You're going to act like it's so out of left field?

According to all of the evidence brought forth in the trial, it only took 3 hours of deliberation for the jury to be convinced by that evidence. Some of those guys on the jury were even Trump supporters before they sat through that trial. Just so there's no confusion though, we are talking about rape


But the jurors' conclusion that Trump sexually abused Carroll "necessarily implies" that they did, in fact, believe he penetrated her with his fingers, Kaplan said.

Here was his reasoning:

Kaplan noted his instruction to the jury that, for Trump to have sexually abused Carroll, Trump needed to have touched her sexual or intimate parts. The only allegations from Carroll that could possibly fit that bill were forcible kissing, pulling down her tights, and vaginal penetration, he said.


How can you be ok with that?
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Why do you assume the survivor is lying vs. the rapist? The guy literally brags about grabbing women by their genitals, which in itself is molestation. In your mind is the leap from molester to rapist a gap too far to cross? Trump has a long history of women who behave brought up his predatory behavior in the past


You're going to act like it's so out of left field?

According to all of the evidence brought forth in the trial, it only took 3 hours of deliberation for the jury to be convinced by that evidence. Some of those guys on the jury were even Trump supporters before they sat through that trial. Just so there's no confusion though, we are talking about rape


But the jurors' conclusion that Trump sexually abused Carroll "necessarily implies" that they did, in fact, believe he penetrated her with his fingers, Kaplan said.

Here was his reasoning:

Kaplan noted his instruction to the jury that, for Trump to have sexually abused Carroll, Trump needed to have touched her sexual or intimate parts. The only allegations from Carroll that could possibly fit that bill were forcible kissing, pulling down her tights, and vaginal penetration, he said.


How can you be ok with that?
Because it's just not that convincing an argument. I am OK with her having her day however. She won the jackpot, and now that's the end of it. She can live her opulent existence now.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
Here you go again with more of your weird tangents. You having a bad day?

Btw, I asked this question on another thread...

"Should we change 'women's rights' to just 'people's rights'?"

The answer/reply was "Sure, why not?"

Maybe you don't line up with the left as much as you think.
 
Top