488
Comments (243)
sorted by:
70
LRAD 70 points ago +70 / -0

This "leak" has to be one of the biggest booms we've seen. The DS are certainly playing this game too and will nuke the entire board in hopes their play creates a "mistrial" if you will.

Keep in mind this is desperation on their half and these types of moves create chaos in the interim but always fall flat when the dust settles.

This should be a good sign to all of us that are paying attention. They are losing and rapidly running out of moves at each turn.

25
ashlanddog [S] 25 points ago +25 / -0

Valid observation, nicely stated and framed....

17
DrFatsides 17 points ago +17 / -0

This is a super desperate move by a cornered adversary.

Also, check out the pro-life protestors that are in the photos this morning. They look like hired folks. Not your normal March for Life attendees. Stand by for possible false flag / fences go back up in DC. Also slandering all Christians and Catholics as violent extremists.

15
Corse46 15 points ago +15 / -0

We’re in the second movie now. Remember the movie posters?

4: Guardians of the Pedophiles (Disney, Ketanji, Hunter, Florida bill)

5: Panic in DC (quite literally with this news)

6: FISAGATE “they never thought she would lose”

8
DrFatsides 8 points ago +8 / -0

I heard somewhere that 4 = April, 5 = May and 6 = June / July. Not an expert or a major researcher - just passing along what I heard.

7
djmarcone 7 points ago +7 / -0

this is a cry for help, they know the end is near. This is a call to action, all the blackmail, all the threats, all the assassins, all the paid protestors, rioters, domestic terrorists, false flag operators, all hands on deck.

11
DrFatsides 11 points ago +11 / -0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLpmswBKVN4&ab_channel=Movieclips

Hedley Lamarr : I want rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers and Methodists!

7
Phishhed44 7 points ago +7 / -0

Without watching the video, and just reading through…I envisioned Yosemite Sam spittin fire at Buggs. 😂. Harvey was da bomb…

4
TheTroof 4 points ago +4 / -0

No mention of wanting yellow bellied sap suckers or long eared pole cats, so you might be right.

-13
Voteordie -13 points ago +5 / -18

Can we stop playing the wannabe victim for one single day? It’s such a bullshit leftist tactic that is used to justify extreme retaliation. There will be no anti-Christian sentiment, it is anti-conservative sentiment which is par for the course from the left.

As for the protests, this decision is something a lot of conservatives have asked for, but something that is not popular for the majority of America. You can claim polls are fake if you want to bury your head in the sand, but there’s a reason this stood as a republican talking point in primaries that always disappeared come the general. There will be real protestors because people see it as an infringement on woman’s rights, they have every right to protest and be upset about it just like we had every right to be upset and protest about masks and vaccination rules.

If anything, this release could’ve easily been done to judge public response and if it is bad enough they will change their opinion to strike down part, but not all of the law (13 week ban similar to Mississippi federally mandated).

21
Th4rd_R3ich 21 points ago +23 / -2

What an asinine statement to claim that it's not BOTH Christianity AND Conservatism sentiment that is par for the course.

Additionally, you reek of controlled opposition if you're trying to claim that the majority of America is pro abortion. Many people, largely the young and uneducated (like I was not too long ago), believe the bullshit about "muh reproductive rights", or "muh bodily autonomy", both of which are innately contradictory terms.

A) you are doing the opposite of reproducing by halting a life B) you are directly infringing on another humans bodily autonomy

Additionally, it's always still been the pro lifers who have been willing to compromise, including making exceptions for rape AND Incest, as well as moving the marker of when life begins to the moment a heartbeat can be detected which is around 6-8 weeks if I recall correctly.

How could you possibly go that long without taking a pregnancy test and continuing to have a guy finish inside you as many times as possible? That shows complete lack of all responsibility and if you aren't using the basic of contraception you forsake the privilege of escaping the consequences of your actions.

-11
Voteordie -11 points ago +4 / -15

You don’t think rape and incest exceptions should be no brainers? That’s fucking stupid.

You obviously have never talked to a women before:

  1. you don’t start to have symptoms until 6-8 weeks in, and if you take birth control a missed period isn’t all that rare, it’s a side effect of the hormones

  2. condoms break, birth control fails, IUDs fail, these aren’t teenage whores running around and getting knocked up, they are people who make mistakes but are mature enough to realize they don’t want be bad parents and suck the government tit for the rest of their lives.

  3. situations change, a potential parent may have thought they could handle the responsibility early on but realized that certain life choices have made that impossible (significant other leaves/gets sick/passes, sickness that make a live birth unlikely or puts the mothers life at risk, change in monetary standing where raising a child is unaffordable and would put the child and mother at risk.)

  4. don’t let the bombastic far right evangelicals get to you with their fake-news, there is a very very small minority of women who use abortion as a form of B.C. or have more than 1 in their entire life.

I’m not arguing it needs to be legal in all situations, but making it illegal in all situations will have a negative impact on society both socially and monetarily.

Also, don’t claim you are “educated” you are indoctrinated by the church, same way people are indoctrinated by the left or indoctrinated by the right.

7
SpaceManBob 7 points ago +7 / -0

You don’t think rape and incest exceptions should be no brainers? That’s fucking stupid.

No. Murdering babies should absolutely be illegal in all situations. What it comes down to is do you think abortion is murder. If yes, it's always murder and not ok. If no, it's never murder and should be perfectly ok at any point before birth.

Also, don’t claim you are “educated” you are indoctrinated by the church, same way people are indoctrinated by the left or indoctrinated by the right.

Fucking yikes.

-4
Voteordie -4 points ago +1 / -5

I don’t think it is murder, I think it is immoral, because I only see it as immoral I can understand that there are situations where an immoral practice can have a resounding positive effect on one person and nearly zero effect on society.

4
MAGAdeburger 4 points ago +4 / -0

Have you run out of crayons to eat? You seem hangry.

2
gb1787 2 points ago +2 / -0

If it’s not murder, it’s not immoral.

1
SpaceManBob 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why is it immoral? What makes it immoral?

7
Knight-errant 7 points ago +7 / -0

Back to reddit with you.

4
Th4rd_R3ich 4 points ago +4 / -0

You know what? How about I rape you, voteordie? And then abort you afterwards so you cease to be able to exist because you are unwanted lmao.

-2
Voteordie -2 points ago +3 / -5

What kind of argument is that? Those are two separate people under very different circumstances. When you are raped you have no choice in the matter, if you become pregnant why is it the woman’s duty to carry that child and risk her life giving birth? Would you want your daughter or wife to go through that?

How about you push for legislation that the rapist has to pay all of the woman medical bills and pay her child support for the rest of her life, and if he can’t afford it then the woman has every right to go after the families.

0
Th4rd_R3ich 0 points ago +1 / -1

You sound like you've never had sex before. With the huge advances in technology today, you have to be a complete baboon to get pregnant.

3
MAGAdeburger 3 points ago +3 / -0

Even crayon eating retards know the possible consequences for having sex. Worried? THEN DON'T FUCK.

-2
Voteordie -2 points ago +2 / -4

You know as well as I do that is a non-starter as an argument. I see that you ignored my points though so you could make make the tired old abstinence argument. If you want to live in a perfect world where everyone only thinks of the consequences then a free country is not for you. The goal of a free country is to mitigate societal impacts of actions, not eliminate them entirely because that is not effective. Banning abortion will not stop people from having sex, all it will do is increase our taxes as more money goes to supporting welfare.

Great idea though.

4
MAGAdeburger 4 points ago +4 / -0

You didn't make any valid points to address.

Destruction of innocent life is murder. Unborn children are guilty of no crime. Therefore, the taking of their lives is murder.

Be gone Satan.

2
CasuallyObservant 2 points ago +2 / -0

I take exception to much of what you claim.

I successfully practiced vigilance (for 16 years!) to prevent unwanted pregnancy, and when financially stable and married, we chose a day of ovulation to have unprotected sex, and within 10 days, I had clear indication of impregnation both times, even before my next period was due.

~ The female body makes very clear changes that are completely obvious. Any woman who is paying attention can tell something has happened. Those who say they didn't know are in willful denial or sadly ignorant of their own body.

~ You say, "These aren't teenage whores running around getting knocked up". Some are. Some are not. And you say, "...there is a very very small minority of women who use abortion as a form of B.C. or have more than 1 in their entire life."

Let's look at the statistics:

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/ss/ss7009a1.htm

"Among the 44 areas that reported the number of previous induced abortions for 2019, the majority of women (58.2%) had previously had no abortions, 23.8% had previously had one abortion, 10.5% had previously had two abortions, and 7.5% had previously had three or more abortions."

And this:

https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/unintended-pregnancy-and-abortion-northern-america

In 2015–2019, there were a total of 5,660,000 pregnancies annually.

Of these, 2,590,000 pregnancies were unintended.

And this:

https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states

Eighteen percent of pregnancies (excluding miscarriages) in 2017 were reported to have ended in abortion.

Approximately 862,320 abortions were reported to be performed in 2017, vs. 926,190 abortions that were reported in 2014.

Note: Abortion reporting is voluntary. Many facilities and states do not report their abortion demographics; thus this number is lower than the actual total and is only reflective of the reported abortions performed in the US.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/ss/ss7009a1.htm

Among the 42 areas that reported by marital status for 2019,

14.5% of women who obtained an abortion were married, and

85.5% were unmarried.

The abortion ratio was:

46 abortions per 1,000 live births for married women and;

394 abortions per 1,000 live births for unmarried women.

-2
Voteordie -2 points ago +1 / -3

You waited 16 years because you wanted to, that was your choice. Amazing how you get a choice to do one thing but others shouldn’t get a choice to do the opposite.

It’s funny how we can claim we are fighting tyranny that is reducing bodily autonomy and limiting personal choice while in the same breath eliminating bodily autonomy and criticizing/limiting the choices of others. Freedom is a two way street.

If you can’t see the irony then you’re just as brainwashed as most leftists.

2
CasuallyObservant 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think it is you that is missing the point. Nowhere did MY CHOICES kill an innocent person. YOUR CHOICES to have unprotected sex and then an abortion for convenience, did. "Limiting the choices of others" is solely limiting them from committing infanticide, not preventing them from having sex or using the birth control of their choice. I also would like to limit your 'choice' to kill your husband, boyfriend, neighbor or dog. Those 'choices' would be objected to.

Bodily autonomy ends when it harms another. If you can't see the irony in your statements, well then you are beyond my reasoning.

12
DrFatsides 12 points ago +12 / -0

Really and truly - not popular with the majority of America?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/americans-support-abortion-restrictions-poll

Also - there are plenty of decaffienated products out there that taste just as good as the real thing. Worth looking into.

-13
Voteordie -13 points ago +3 / -16

What exactly do you think that poll is telling you? It’s saying exactly what I said would be the eventual result: the Mississippi ban would be where end up. That aligns perfectly with the polling.

The argument made on this forum isn’t that abortion should be restricted, it’s that it should be banned and the doctors should be tried as murderers.

Thank you for proving my point though.

12
DrFatsides 12 points ago +13 / -1

Following me - responding to everything I have to say...that's kind of obsessive psycho stuff. Seriously - you may want to take it down a peg. You certainly wouldn't want to come across like one of these people:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDYLZuR5NU0&ab_channel=JudeAugusta

3
MAGAdeburger 3 points ago +3 / -0

Voetordie must apparently work at an abortion clinic and is bummed he's going to lose his job.

2
AtomicBlonde 2 points ago +2 / -0

FYI: Debate is a back and forth thing, right? You say something, I say something. If you don’t want debate, go talk to yourself in the mirror.

-4
JessWithTheMess -4 points ago +2 / -6

👎

-6
Voteordie -6 points ago +4 / -10

Don’t flatter yourself, I don’t even look at usernames when I respond. If I’m responding to you more than others, odds are you are making some pretty asinine points that are easily refuted.

3
inspir3dgenius 3 points ago +3 / -0

#lowenergy

-4
JessWithTheMess -4 points ago +1 / -5

You are seeing it for what it is.

49
marcellapalaferri 49 points ago +49 / -0

This being leaked before it’s ready to be published is a huge problem. I agree with Pilgrim this is to create division and unrest.

29
p8riot 29 points ago +29 / -0

SUPER KEK

They brought this on themselves. The defendants (Abortion clinic, doctor) said in their defense that "no half measures" were possible, the court must strike down the state's 15 week law or "overrule Roe and Casey". FAFO

11
Wtf_socialismreally 11 points ago +11 / -0

Gives them time to intimidate SCOTUS freely though, with the government's permission.

16
Island_Photo 16 points ago +16 / -0

Wanna see the left really lose their minds? Point out how were it not for the vast over reaches of the past two years then these opinions would never have been written as the more wide scale issues of Rv.W would not have been shown to the public in such stark relief...

5
GA_Logic 5 points ago +5 / -0

And a major distraction.

2
JessWithTheMess 2 points ago +2 / -0

100%. The Dems will use this to go scorched earth and either A) get rid of Biden and use Harris if he’s unwilling. B) get rid of the filibuster and pack the SC until no more vacancies. This is gonna be a hill that a lot of Dems are willing to stand dying on.

0
axrevolutionai 0 points ago +4 / -4

Everything about abortion is to create division. Both parties use it as the single greatest distraction.

I wish Q was still around, very well knew how abortion was being used, knew the cost of a fetus and what they were used for, told us to research the political party donations, etc. and I hate that liberals discredit Q when he was also addressing them and their concerns ("not about a women's right to choose")

But people on here and PDW just get immediately blindsided at the "hope" of "abolishing" abortion even though it's pretty clear WHY the uniparty will even do it. No one wants to answer the socialism question and no one wants to follow the money (PPH, march of dimes, united way, state cps depts, etc)

4
billbuckner 4 points ago +4 / -0

They pulled the abortion issue to fire up their base. The race issue must be losing steam. Anyone for life will be labled a terrorist who is a threat to our democracy(communism)

3
Strelnieks 3 points ago +3 / -0

Agreed. They are just shifting narratives. Recycling actually. Remember when there was the huge inorganic social media push of "erh muh gerd Drumpf is going to overturn R Vs W!?!?" back during the 2016 primaries?

Most likely bot networks pushing ideas and then social media addicted normies ran with it. Clearly that's not the case this time around, but it's the same game theory: Cause a clamour amongst the normie leftist base and let them go all pussyhat and freak out for the media to use.

31
SmolPedeBestPede 31 points ago +35 / -4

The next step (after making abortion illegal without exception on day 1) is to start enforcing abortion laws against the women who choose to murder their babies. They are murderers, plain and simple.

27
PowderRoomPolitics 27 points ago +27 / -0

It's not that black and white, except in the 'shout your abortion' cases. Coercion, and even forced abortions can and do happen, even in America: https://theunchoice.com/coerced.htm

Don't get me wrong- I'm as anti-abortion as any of you out there. But just as we weigh the evidence to see if a case is murder , manslaughter , or unintentional, we need to find out just what the woman (or girl) knew before she walked in, was she coerced, and other factors.

http://www.theunchoice.com/pdf/FactSheets/PortraitsOfCoercion.pdf

the Doctor should hold at least some responsibility as well.

24
MAGAdeburger 24 points ago +24 / -0

Prosecute the real villains, the abortionists. Don't waste time trying to get all the fish, just the big fish.

15
Wtf_socialismreally 15 points ago +17 / -2

But also, to be honest, this should not even be a federal allowance. This is a state's rights issue from the beginning, and SCOTUS should honestly never have ruled on it.

Say Texas wants it completely gone and illegal, that's fine because the voters (supposedly) decided it.

Say Seattle now wants to make it legal. If that's what the majority wants there, it's up to citizens there to fight it off.

But the federal government has no right to enforce this on any level against a state that doesn't want abortion.

The people decide, and do so without permission.

7
MAGAdeburger 7 points ago +11 / -4

No, it's not a states right issue, just like slavery was never truly a "states rights" issue because such criminal act is a crime against nature, a violation of the most basic natural rights to liberty and property in one's one being and existence. No amount of people, at any level, get to vote to deny any one else these basic God-given rights.

That is why the basic right of LIFE is protected for ALL people, including the unborn PERSON, by the Constitution under the 14th Amendment and 5th Amendment.

The evil people,of Seattle, even if a majority within that region, have NO right to vote to permit evil upon other citizens of the United States.

As Lincoln so aptly put it, "'a house divided against itself cannot stand' [...] It will become all one thing, ot all the other."

12
PhDinNY 12 points ago +12 / -0

It's no accident that the preamble to the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, claims that the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", is the foundation for all our rights, with life being the utmost right; all other rights are not possible without life.

5
Wtf_socialismreally 5 points ago +5 / -0

It is up to the people to decide that collectively. Do you believe in the death penalty? That requires a suspension of rights, which can easily be twisted -- and does -- in favor of the leftists, and that gets us in this situation.

At least if you leave it to the states to sort out at an individual level, you never have to deal with the looming pressure of another state influencing yours.

So now, if abortion is further cemented with this ruling due to pressures from the resident and his Gestapo and guerilla whores known as AntiFA, then all states have to adhere to it.

That is why it's an issue for the states to decide. Not every ruling will go the way of freedom or morality in this government. They don't give a shit about you, or me, or our feelings.

But at least if it were a state's rights issue, they couldn't be compelled by the federal government to do it.

5
MAGAdeburger 5 points ago +8 / -3

No, it's not up to the people to collectively do as such... this country is NOT a democracy. Please take that neocon collectivist shit elsewhere. The USA is a constitutional republic founded on the rule of law. Said law protects the rights of the unborn persons whose only "crime" is their mere existence.

Capital punishment has nothing to do with this argument. Murderers are criminals. Unborn children are not. Stay on topic.

The federal government must enforce the law (including Public Law 108-212) and the Constitution, no matter whatever states might wish to disregard said law and Constitution.

-8
Voteordie -8 points ago +2 / -10

Where in the constitution does it say that criminality suspends the right to life? His argument is directly related, if not more paramount, considering the conscious nature of the person being murdered.

1
SpaceManBob 1 point ago +1 / -0

Is first-degree murder being illegal a state's rights issue and up to the people to collectively decide?

9
Monomial 9 points ago +9 / -0

The doctor is the assassin. The woman is the one who hired the assassin. Lots of case law regarding these types of arrangements. Both are put on trial for murder.

Extenuating circumstances can always be considered, but it is hard to imagine a situation where it could be considered anything other than 1st degree murder. It can never be an "accident", and claiming self defense against a harmless baby is a real stretch. It is always premeditated, and "that person was inconvenient for me" is not a defense. I suppose there might be a case where temporary insanity could be involved. But ultimately, if I agree to hire a hitman to kill someone, even if I am being coerced, that is still my decision.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
4
Monomial 4 points ago +4 / -0

Alternate scenario: Parents tell a 15 year old minor "take this gun and go shoot that store clerk". Minor does as he is told. Is the minor guilty? Should the minor have known this is wrong? Were they competent to think for themselves?

Our justice system already has the ability to deal with minors committing murder. Coercion to commit murder does not absolve a minor from the responsibility of committing murder. The punishment may be different depending on circumstances. Temporary insanity and diminished capacitiy are already available to the defense as possible pleas. The crime doesn't change because of the age of the victim who was killed.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
Monomial 2 points ago +2 / -0

No scenario is ever a precisely "equivalent" scenario. The trick is to find analogies and through that bring clarity to the discussion. You claim there is a major difference basically due to emotional distress of the murderer. That is certainly a mitigating factor that could argue for diminished capacity in some instances, but it absolutely does not legally change the crime that has been committed.

My point is we do not need to make any special laws for this. We already have everything we need in the existing justice system. It is simply murder no matter how you look at it. We should not treat murder due to abortion any different than any other murder. Murder of anyone already has a plethora of case law that can be argued by the defendant in cases of diminished capacity. And certainly, if someone is an accessory to murder they can and should be charged as well.

Trying to claim that murder by abortion is somehow a different thing than murder by other weapons is not a legally defensible position in my opinion.

26
PilgrimFarAway 26 points ago +26 / -0

Seems like this could fit well in the cucks plan to create civic unrest in the lead up to the elections.

18
Cheesemaker 18 points ago +18 / -0

Yes, exactly. The democrats in charge don't give a shit about whether abortion is legal or illegal. All they care about is getting people on their side out to vote, which this will do. The left has literally no motivation to vote right now and this gives them an issue to rally behind.

21
Wtf_socialismreally 21 points ago +22 / -1

They don't need voting. They demonstrated that.

What they do need is the illusion of majority, and in so doing, the illusion of voting.

What the illusion of majority does is make people stop opposing them and feeling like it's hopeless or they're simply outnumbered.

This is also demonstrably why they constantly refer to our country as a democracy, when it's a form of but not strictly one.

With the illusion of majority, they can shut people up and flex conformity on the masses.

8
DeathRayDesigner 8 points ago +9 / -1

I agree completely. I would only add, for the sake of enlightenment, that we need to understand the proper definition of "democracy": government by Democrats. it is so simple when you think about it.

2
Th4rd_R3ich 2 points ago +3 / -1

Of course. They really mean "our ruling class oligarchy".

2
TheBRAINz 2 points ago +2 / -0

Spot on. +1

3
mac1221 3 points ago +3 / -0

Agreed. They would also love to see Trump back on Twitter to revive Orange Man Bad. They are desperate for issues to motivate their base.

13
UncontrollableQueef 13 points ago +13 / -0

Yep I agree. The St. Floyd fiasco also started in may of the last election cycle

2
LongTimeListener 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yup this will be a summer where our cities burn.

16
TrumpsTower 16 points ago +16 / -0

Will rioting leftist be treated as terrorist like the jan 6 protesters? Will be fun to see what happens.

12
ashlanddog [S] 12 points ago +12 / -0

...no, just good American citizens exercising their right to be heard....

6
p8riot 6 points ago +6 / -0

Some people did some things

-11
NeuroticFisherman -11 points ago +2 / -13

If they stay outside of government buildings, especially during any government precedings, and they'll probably be fine. Jan 6 protesters would have been fine if they hadn't intruded into the building.

14
Canadianguy17 14 points ago +14 / -0

The doors were open in many cases. Police have been shown to have moved out of the way. Agent provocateur's are on camera all over the place coordinating damage and violence. Reddit is that way ->

3
DrFatsides 3 points ago +3 / -0

Even Canadian guys can recognize khaki pants 😁

-6
deleted -6 points ago +3 / -9
2
Zeitreise 2 points ago +2 / -0

Do you know mobs contain more than one person?

Now you know. (Turn off your TV)

2
Th4rd_R3ich 2 points ago +3 / -1

Antifa=leftist provocateurs=people like John Sullivan & Ray Epps.

Don't miss the forest for the trees, fucker.

-7
Voteordie -7 points ago +1 / -8

So Jan 6th protestors were gullible and easily manipulated? That’s a much better reading…

5
PompeiusMagnus 5 points ago +5 / -0

Been reading your comments on this thread.

Question: why are you even here? This group of people doesn’t really seem to mesh well with most of your beliefs.

As another anon stated previously, perhaps Reddit is more your speed?

4
Knight-errant 4 points ago +4 / -0

Definitely a lost redditor.

4
MAGAdeburger 4 points ago +4 / -0

Voteordie is likely a baby killing shill.

-2
Voteordie -2 points ago +1 / -3

I post here because this is a place for free speech, I post my opinions just like you all post yours. Maybe I’ll change one or two of you and make this a real movement instead of a echo chamber filled with angry old men.

2
Zeitreise 2 points ago +2 / -0

The ANTIFA/BLM people that were on film with Jade Sacker and John Sullivan and the fed faggots like Rhodes? Yes.

That's what happens when you're in a satanic cult...you get manipulated.

2
Th4rd_R3ich 2 points ago +3 / -1

Yes and no. They walked right into a trap and were gaslit systematically by the concerted efforts of the federal agents, leftist provocateurs dressed in MAGA gear, congressmen feigning fear and threats to their life, capitol police officers beating people with night sticks while claiming they were fearing for their lives, and mainstream media assets who were conveniently set up in the perfect areas already within the capitol building so they could capture the perfect footage of "a violent trespassing", as the capitol guards opened doors for them, and openly guided them through the building.

2
ghostsage 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah, but I think they curb-stomped a lady outside. Anyway, its OUR building.

1
kish-kumen 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ha... Keep telling yourself that. People demand to be heard. It's hard be heard from a designated protest zone. When a leftist enters a building, it'll be legal. Guaranteed.

14
SuckaFree 14 points ago +14 / -0

It's a draft. It isn't final yet. That's why it was "leaked." To show division and cause havoc to put enough pressure on the weaker members to "rethink" and "reevaluate" their decision, and then to rescind said draft.

2
DrFatsides 2 points ago +2 / -0

And to distract from the 2000 mules movie.

-4
deleted -4 points ago +2 / -6
2
ashlanddog [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

...much ado about nothing....

13
deleted 13 points ago +13 / -0
9
kkthxk 9 points ago +9 / -0

outside of the antifa cities, its unlikely anything of note will happen. It will just fall to each state to pass legislation for themselves.

5
PhDinNY 5 points ago +5 / -0

The only people who will be outraged will be the radical "feminists". I don't see that this would produce widespread protesting. Who, other than the radical feminists, would want to be seen protesting a ban on the murder of unborn children?

4
dontbanus 4 points ago +4 / -0

Because they’ve convinced much of the youth and common citizen that abortion is a sacred right.

4
MegaMAGAMichiPede 4 points ago +4 / -0

Hell there’s a Bernie Sanders tweet out there that abortion is a “constitutional right”. No it isn’t you communist grifter. This is the problem, people worship politicians and celebrities instead of God and get led astray BIG TIME.

1
Knight-errant 1 point ago +1 / -0

Technically overturning R v W doesn't ban abortion. It just returns the right to ban it or not back to the states.

1
JessWithTheMess 1 point ago +1 / -0

People don’t see a fetus as a baby, I’ve had someone tell me you wouldn’t call a seed, a plant.

2
ashlanddog [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

...absolutely....

13
Redpilled 13 points ago +13 / -0

"Abortion presents a profound moral question. The constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each state from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to the people and their elected representatives."

"The judgement of the 5th circuit is reversed, and the case in remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion."

8
Iceman80 8 points ago +8 / -0

Maybe they can settle for just k i l l i n g each other???

6
PowderRoomPolitics 6 points ago +6 / -0

That would be a Jehoshaphat situation - we can pray....

2nd Chronicles 20

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20chronicles%2020&version=NIV

(you can change the version if you like, the default is NIV)

2
ashlanddog [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

...apt analogy....

3
ashlanddog [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

...I don't see the "pro life" people as advocating murder of the opposition...

...but of course, that is not a two way " intellectual street"....

1
spicyfries 1 point ago +1 / -0

Top kek

5
10lbsBass 5 points ago +5 / -0

Wow, this is big. I wasn't expecting this. :)

3
ashlanddog [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

...wags tail...

...I am on my second pot of coffee and at page 35....

5
ARandomOgre 5 points ago +9 / -4

See, this is why I try not to speculate on elections too far out. A Republican wave was likely for the midterms, but now Democrats got handed an issue that is guaranteed to increase voter turnout.

It was going to come up before the election either way, but now it’s probably going to be the issue that defines the election cycle from the beginning.

Let’s see what happens.

10
basilpesto 10 points ago +10 / -0

The assumption is that our election system is fair, this is further from the truth and we know it.

But let’s assume the white hats actually do fix the election system, it will come down this way…

100% of Conservatives will be on the side of anti-abortion, very much in keeping with Christian and Religious values.

The above make up ~90% of the Republican vote (the other 10% are RINOs and the establishment following sheeple)

~50% of Democrats will be on the side of anti-abortion — these are the people who actually hold Conservative values but have been so bamboozled into believe the LIE of the Democrat party. There are at constant odds with themselves. These are the folks who are slowly bleeding into the R party… these people we can reach.

The other ~50% of Democrats… well, these are the lunatics of America. They are the Leftist, the people who are so drunk on the koolaid they will gladly destroy the country to ‘feel good’ about themselves. These are the WOKE crowd who want their young kids to be groomed in school, love CRT, and believe men are women and women are men, … yes, that people. Because they hold no conservative values, they do not care about the life of a fetus. These are the people who truly believe a fetus is just a ‘thing’ to be discarded because it’s an inconvenience.

6
crane2shoreVjames2hu 6 points ago +6 / -0

Babies
Lives
Matter

Believe
Liberals
Madness

Best of
Luck
Murderers

Just off the top of my head.
Easy stuff to print in black and white on printer paper!

0
Th4rd_R3ich 0 points ago +1 / -1

Honestly. Fuck putting everything in the "white hats", hands all the time when we want things to end up just and righteous.

That's what God is for.

1
basilpesto 1 point ago +1 / -0

God uses His tools … “white hats” possibly? :)

-2
ARandomOgre -2 points ago +2 / -4

You and I probably agree philosophically on abortion, but I disagree with the attributions you make to liberals as to why they are pro-choice, and I think that will result in you underestimating the number of people willing to vote against you.

Which, of course, would then result in you assuming you have far more support for your position than you do, which means that voter fraud seems a more likely reason for you to lose on an issue than being outvoted.

The fact is that conservatives are absolutely right that abortion is a right-to-life issue.

And the fact is that liberals are absolutely right that abortion is a women’s rights issue.

And the two sides are rarely arguing the same point, or acknowledging the other side’s point, which is why this issue is ongoing.

I agree with conservatives that abortion kills people. I am not a fan of that. But I also can’t fathom how we can possibly have a free society when a man can decide the entire future for a woman just by impregnating her with a baby she isn’t allowed to take any action to remove from her life. Whether it’s common or not, it’s a knife that hangs over the head of every woman in this country, and I don’t see how they can ever be equal citizens when abortion is illegal.

I’ve spent time pissing off liberals by insisting that pro-lifers have other motivations than enslaving women. I think it would behoove you to make similar appraisals about liberals in this case if you have any genuine interest in resolving this problem in this country.

6
Qlue 6 points ago +6 / -0

A woman can decide too by not having sex in the first place. A man's penis doesn't accidentally land into a vagina. You're removing all personal responsibility from women.

Men have to pay child support and suffer all the consequences once a woman is pregnant. Either

  1. Men should not be liable for a woman's pregnancy in any shape or form. Once she's pregnant that kid is hers unless a man willingly wants to pay child support. (Liberals would never allow men to have the upper hand, restores order)
  2. Women need to be far more selective with who they have sex with.
1
Hellann 1 point ago +1 / -0

There are times when the fellow wants the baby and the woman still chooses to kill it.

-5
ARandomOgre -5 points ago +1 / -6

I think given the subject matter on this board, you realize that not every woman chooses to have sex when they get pregnant. And not every woman who chooses to have sex chooses to get pregnant.

A man who sabotages the condom can make that choice for her, for instance.

It’s also worth noting that if a woman can’t get an abortion, that allows rapists an enormous amount of power over their victims, if they’re willing to go to jail for it.

“Sure, I’m going to jail. But nobody was having sex with me. Now, my genes are going to be passed on by Natalie Portman. I’m okay with it.”

Sure, we could allow abortions in the case of rape, but why? If we’re prioritizing the life above all else, the fetus didn’t commit the rape. So I can’t think of a logical reason to allow rape victims to get abortions under a purely pro-life approach.

I’m not going to sit here and defend abortion, because I don’t believe in abortion. But let’s not oversimplify the pro-choice position here. It’s about far more than sluts being slutty.

2
Qlue 2 points ago +2 / -0

Rape is a fraction of a fraction of all abortions. As long as we can agree that the other 99%+ of women are being irresponsible and that they're murdering a child then we can agree on the fraction of women who become pregnant from rape should be able to abort that child.

Some hard-core religious conservatives would see to it that the woman should carry the child of her rapist, I think the woman has a choice there because she did not choose him as a partner. I am also pretty sure if a woman reports a rape right away, rape kits are given to ensure semen doesn't penetrate or some kind of plan b is given.

0
ARandomOgre 0 points ago +2 / -2

As someone who has interacted with rape survivors in a professional setting, I can tell you firsthand that the vast majority of women who get an abortion in order to erase a rape from their lives are not usually going to take time to talk about that situation with someone taking statistics over it.

Data over sexual assault is incredibly hard to mine, because it requires people who want to talk about it (after taking measures to forget it completely), and so a lot of data involving this population is severely underreported.

There's not a good way to take reliable data over why a woman is getting an abortion in the US, so I'd be careful with statistics suggesting rape as such a low percentage.

I don't know what statistics you'd trust, but look up on your own how many women experience rape or rape attempts. The sources I'm seeing say between 1 in 5 or 1 in 6 women report this.

Now ask yourself if you honestly believe that with so many of those, the number that result in pregnancy is inconsequentially small. Your answer may agree with mine.

1
Qlue 1 point ago +1 / -0

No because you're not presenting any evidence of your claim. You're essentially saying 10%+ women are aborting because of rape

4
Zeitreise 4 points ago +4 / -0

Why am I not surprised by your response?

enslaving women.

Only a liberal would think a woman was such a slut she couldn't wait until she was married to spread her legs.

Fucking unreal.

This is what grooming children does to the brain.

-3
ARandomOgre -3 points ago +2 / -5

It’s this sort of aggressive, straw-manning oversimplification of important issues and unprovoked, unnecessary, and unproductive ad hom attacks that leads me to not discuss these things with you anymore, Zeitreise.

2
Zeitreise 2 points ago +2 / -0

Contrary. Oversimplification is marking population control, child sacrifice, slush funds, and bio research as "Women's choice."

/u/#q2686

1
Th4rd_R3ich 1 point ago +2 / -1

I agree with you here Random Ogre. People like me know very well that it's not the woman's fault I'm so charming and charismatic that their rate of successfully stopping me from being able to slide into their panties is very low.

They aren't sluts just because I opened their legs. The ones who are sluts are the ones who open their legs for anyone and everyone and take no precautions to ensure the risk of pregnancy is as minimal as possible.

2
Zeitreise 2 points ago +2 / -0

Eliminate child support and I'm all for this.

I'm well aware how easy women are. But if they can abort children, then men should be able to abort finances.

0
Th4rd_R3ich 0 points ago +1 / -1

Ooh that's a tough one haha. I wouldn't be necessarily opposed because I believe in egalitarian values being the solution to most societal problems.

Therefore a real man who cares about the child he had would support it nonetheless even without a court order. And if he wont, then why did you sleep with such a shitty man?

2
basilpesto 2 points ago +2 / -0

I’m focused on the root of the issue, and the necessary hurdle Dems would need to scale/cross to vote ‘the right way’.

The issue with the arguments the Left (the lost 50% of Dems) always make is to focus on the extremities of the issue — rather than look at factual data, they force the narrative, focus only on the extreme and make that the pivotal argument points, then lather on a thick dose of ‘Women’s Rights’ on to that. It’s THE Playbook that is used for all issues we face today coming from the Left e.g. Equity, the ‘pay gap’, systemic racism, climate change, vaccines, etc. etc. etc. list goes on.

But these people are considered ‘lost’ imo, there is always redemption for sure. But we will never be able to see eye to eye on this issue. Just assume they will vote against you, period. No need to waste your time on them, unless of course you’re just out to piss them off for sport :)

The other 50% of Dems, who actually hold conservative values … those are the ones you can have a meaningful conversation about, for the fact that they are standing on the same foundation and you and I. These are the same people who would vote Democrat, knowingly going against their Principles, because they think “well, at least they’re not Nazis”.

2
Zeitreise 2 points ago +2 / -0

Just so we are 100% clear: Women don't just get sneezed on and become pregnant. They have to participate in the activity which creates life...and then willingly terminate that life.

They made the choice to have sex.

They made the choice to terminate the result of sex.

You don't get to dictate reality because you've been groomed into sex pests.

1
Th4rd_R3ich 1 point ago +3 / -2

I appreciate your comments once again Rando. As a former pro choicer myself, it constantly befuddled me that the pro choicers were seemingly never willing to even remotely compromise.

As someone who's loathed condoms and went on a pretty savage kill streak throughout my 20s, I can truthfully say, it is actually an infinitesimally small likelihood to ever get a woman pregnant if she is both, on birth control, AND plan B. Even if you're an animal like me and intentionally refuse to pull out (unless she kindly requests, in which case I'll be a gentleman lol).

And even then, the Texas heartbeat bill STILL makes exceptions for both Incest AND rape. ALSO in considerations for the mothers life, AND even moved the marker for when life starts to 6 to 8 weeks.

If you would seek to be so many more magnitudes irresponsible than even myself, and STILL refuse to be on birth control, AND refuse to take Plan B, AND willfully ignore any pregnancy test for over 6 weeks after you've been inseminated, then you have demonstrated yourself to be objectively and intentionally reckless and deserve to have your privilege of having sex whilst avoiding the consequence of pregnancy, revoked.

The pro lifers have compromised at every step. As a reasonable human being who would be in quite a predicament if I suddenly had to raise a child right now, I would really not like to raise anyone's child especially if I didn't actually love the girl.

But alas I have gone as far as spending 800$ on plan B in two months one summer, and even skipped an important lecture once to drive out an hour each way to get that pills in a woman's mouth because she didn't want to spend the money.

As the man doing the slaying, how far are you willing to to to preserve your freedom to not have to raise a child? For myself, I will go as far as possible, because I refuse to get someone killed as a result of being unable to keep it in my pants.

2
ARandomOgre 2 points ago +4 / -2

So here is a question.

Why should rape and incest be exceptions? The fetus didn’t rape anyone. Are we punishing the child for the sins of the father?

1
MAGAdeburger 1 point ago +1 / -0

You going to be the one to tell every rape pregnancy and abortion survivor that their life is worthless? Please record these interactions for posterity.

1
Th4rd_R3ich 1 point ago +2 / -1

Well personally I don't think that rape should be an exception. For exactly the reason you stated, and also because the idea that rape is morally wrong is a relatively new idea that came about with the increased civility and standards of a progressed society. Rape exists commonly amongst other animals, and its just another factor in the evolutionary competition amongst organisms as they fight for access to the females in their species.

However when it comes to Incest, I'm definitely a bit more lenient because of the significant increase in birth defects and developmental delays, along with permanent resentment of the child from the mother.

Nonetheless, my point was that the Texas bill DID allow compromises be made in these areas. And thats a fact that I feel is often overlooked by the framing tactics used by the media publications who cleverly craft these narratives as an "all or nothing", situation in which the pro choice people's feelings are being completely disregarded which is not the case.

0
ARandomOgre 0 points ago +3 / -3

I mean this with absolutely no malice or negativity, but it's exactly that attitude that makes liberals dig their heels in so much on this.

Because these compromises aren't real compromises. Because your argument against abortion is absolutist, and doesn't permit compromises.

"The life of the unborn child is prioritized above anything that doesn't immediately threaten the life of the mother."

And if I accept that foundation as a valid legal basis, then yes, I not only can make the argument that babies from rape and incest must be protected from abortion, but I MUST make that argument.

Because it follows from the argument we already accepted, the one that justified banning abortion in the first place. There's no way to avoid going further with it. The argument itself demands to be taken as far as possible.

And so when Gaetz or Greene or someone else brave enough inevitably does introduce measures designed to outlaw abortion across the spectrum, the liberals know that not a single person offering us this compromise is going to fight to protect it.

Nobody around here is going to say, "Now wait a minute, we said we weren't going to do that. Even though we've accepted this is a life-or-death issue and the life of the baby comes before everything."

We know that, because the Justices that are voting in favor of overturning Roe pinky-swore that Roe was settled law during their hearings. It wasn't true, even if it felt true when they were saying it. It's called a "foot-in-the-door technique."

There was zero chance that they could ethically stand by their promise if they actually believed in their own pro-life absolutism.

So... yeah. I don't hold it against you. I just recognize that your argument doesn't allow you to protect a compromise. I wouldn't be able to in your position, if I was being loyal to my own argument.

For that reason, you really shouldn't be surprised that liberals are willing to fight hard for this. They know losing ground on this is going to cascade.

Because there isn't a world in which we can accept "the unborn baby comes before everything" and not eventually see in that same world men irreversibly tying themselves to a woman for life without her consent.

I don't blame women for being utterly terrified of such a world, even if you consider the possibility of such scenarios to be rare.


Which is why, despite not liking the cost of abortion, I am not uncomfortable voting liberal (for non-abortion related issues). I simply can't find a means of banning abortion that doesn't have potentially irreversible consequences for the rights of women in our society, given our current level of technology and resources.

I understand their argument. And I understand your argument. And I think that both sides don't really understand the argument of the other side. And until you admit they have a point, and until they admit you have a point, there will be no constructive progress made on this issue.

0
Th4rd_R3ich 0 points ago +1 / -1

I kind of see what you're saying but the majority of pro choicers only put a fraction of a percent of the thought into their arguments as you do. You are a thinker. They are followers.

Anyways, what would be an example of a "compromise", in your eyes? I don't see what you could have in mind.

3
bubble_bursts 3 points ago +3 / -0

Texas passed their heartbeat law in May 2021, taking effect in Sep 2021.

This was taken to supreme court, and most challenges thrown out in Dec, with only one remaining challenge that was thrown out just a month ago.

Mississippi passed the abortion ban law in Sep 2021.

Mississippi law was challenged in Supreme Court and oral arguments started in Dec 2021. Now in May, the ruling is being issued.

Do you think, for a moment, this timeline is a coincidence ?

Now, let's look at it from another angle. Do you think if Roe vs Wade is not repealed, Dems would sit quietly without any other nefarious plans to build up their base? Do you think if the Red wave is imminent, Dems wont do everything in their power to either stir up a civil war, or destroy the country or even destroy the whole world, just to make sure that wont happen?

We have come so far, and do you think the Patriots don't know how to play this game? My guess is, just like Jan 6th, this event was handed to them as a trap. They are letting the Cabal willingly throw away Roe vs Wade in the hopes of stirring up one hell of a riot and ginning up their voters to show up to vote.

Once they give up RvW, they will realise the battlefield is much different than they expected. Here are some wild cards:

  1. Their terrorist assets, all primed for this planned civil war, who were imported from Afghanistan, will be exposed (PV is just talking about this). Cabal already knows Antifa/BLM has been mapped out after 2020, hence they had took the first bait of Afghanistan and imported their terrorists. Guess what? Every single one of them is being tracked. The Judges (on gab) had been saying this for months now, and I didnt believe it. Right now whats playing out, makes perfect sense.

  2. The Planned Parenthood will be exposed. PV had already done an expose of them before 2020 (When Kamala Harris punished them for exposing the crime rather than PP for selling baby parts). Its been on the ice. I am sure they have plenty more from that, ready to go.

  3. Putin will use this distraction to do something in Ukraine OR Xi will use this to move against his deep state. The power struggle between Xi and the CCP has been running hot in Shanghai (power base of CCP Cabal). There was a decode that Xi might invade Taiwan on May 5th. Kinda coming together.

I think RvW is an extremely powerful loaded weapon for the Cabal, that needs to be defused sooner than later, but also allows multiple openings in this chess game.

I would urge all Anons to sit tight and watch the battlefield carefully. I believe we will have our jobs cut out very soon.

3
ashlanddog [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

..."time the avenger"...

1
Zeitreise 1 point ago +1 / -0

Except they blew their load to early with regards to this tactic. Democrats have the attention span of goldfish. The TV outrage only lasts a little while.

Most Q researchers are aware of what abortion is: Child sacrifice for the cult and a source of money and population control. Gates/Sanger created PP and pushed abortion on the "problem races" (Whites/Blacks).

/u/#q4552

/u/#q2686

5
Tewdryg 5 points ago +5 / -0

In Alito's draft opinion, he mentions the fact that the Constitution, American law, and common law is never referenced as a Right in the Roe v. Wade decision.

The U.S. Constitution is based upon common law, which in turn is based on the natural law. From St. Thomas Aquinas work, he understood Christianity is based on natural law or God's law.

There is an early Christian book that was very prevalent in its usage. It is called the 'Didache'. In it clearly says abortion is murder. Chapter II, states--

Now the second commandment of teaching is this:

"2. You shall not murder; you shall not commit adultery; you shall not corrupt the youth; you shall not commit fornication; you shall not steal; you shall not practice magic; you shall not use sorcery (Gr. 'pharmakeia'); you shall not kill a child by abortion; neither shall you slay it when born; you shall not covert the goods of your neighbor."

Notice that it commands us not to permit abortion.

The genuineness of the the Didache can hardly be doubted. It was cited by Clement of Alexandria in his "First Stroma" by Eusebius, who speaks of it in his "History Eccl.", 3:25; and by Athanasius in his 39th "Festal Epistle". Though mentioned in these Apocryphal books of the New Testament, the Didache had not , since the time of Nicephorus in the 9th century AD, been known or quoted. It was found in the library of the Holy Sepulcher at Istanbul (Constantinople) in 1873. All chronological evidence indicates the Didache was compiled at a date as early as 70 AD, while most critics place it about 80-90 AD. This would mean it is as old or older than the Book of Revelations and the Letters of the Apostle John.

St. Thomas Aquinas understood the natural law as -- “[E]very human law has just so much of the nature of law as is derived from the law of nature. But if in any point it deflects from the law of nature, it is no longer a law but a perversion of law"1 ”, “Summa Theologica”, I-II,, Question xciv.

For anyone seeking better understanding, the Didache is a valuable supplement to the Bible. IMHO, it's a complete 'head-scratcher' why it isn't part of the Bible.

1
MAGAdeburger 1 point ago +1 / -0

Indeed, Alito well chronicled American and Western (Christian) history of how abortion had always been considered criminal. He condemned the Roe Court for not only ignoring this easily discovered history, but in 2 cases blatantly accepting as legitimate, 2 "academic" publications attacking the motives of Coke and Blackstone, publications which were later utterly exposed for having fabricated said fallacies to support the pro abortion views of their writer.... the irony right?

1
ashlanddog [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

...nice background, thank you for sharing....

3
Tewdryg 3 points ago +3 / -0

You're very welcome. I believe there is a great need for understanding what St. Thomas Aquinas (1225 -1274 AD) expounded on. If any one, he is the model teacher of Natural Law as it pertains to mankind. All our laws of the past are based directly or indirectly on the Laws of Nature. These are the laws of life and survival. As Aquinas said, at any time human law deflects from the Law of Nature, it is a perversion of law. We are increasingly seeing this occur.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
ashlanddog [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Absolutely....

5
ditzee58 5 points ago +5 / -0

UMMM, this is biblical!

2
ashlanddog [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

...it is very interesting reading....

5
MAGAdeburger 5 points ago +6 / -1

"The inescapable conclusion is that a right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation's history and traditions. On the contrary, an unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on pain of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest days of the common law until 1973."

2
v8power 2 points ago +2 / -0

Any idea why there was a big change in abortion stance?

I'm not sure if it's the reason or an outcome, but abortion appears to be the greatest example of racism because it effects the races at hugely different rates - and has the effect of population control of those races.

1
MAGAdeburger 1 point ago +1 / -0

Big change to the proabortion sentiments of the free love 1970s generation, or the bigger change of returning to pre-1970s normal America that understood basic biology and knew that a pregnant woman was with child?

Sanger pushed contraceptives and abortion as a means of black population control, arguably because of her racism and positive iews on eugenics. One thing that always baffled me was the left's diehard support for abortion, which literally killed off millions of potential, likely Democrat voters. It would have been like 1840s Democrats aborting half of their unborn slaves. Terrible strategy, from a strictly business perspective. One almost has to wonder, could some 1960s onwards "conservatives" have actually thought that because it was more likely that a black adult would vote Democrat, then it would be better to support abortion in hopes that future Democrats be eliminated in the womb? Sounds sick, but could people really think that way? If so, wouldn't Democrats consider this, thus making it even more important to be against abortion for the sake of saving their own future voters? It's true that an unplanned pregnancy could more disproportionately cause more hardship for the average low income black mother/family compared to a white mother/family, and yet I seem to recall that the higher proportion of actual abortions leans towards more white mothers aborting children than black, even proportionally speaking. So is race really the driving factor in the abortion debate? There has always been a very strong socially conservative, family-centric Christian ethic in the American black culture. I contend that more black people have always been more antiabortion than the media leads on. And yet the Democrats continue to harp on the pro abortion train, firmly believing that their black constituents want it.

I think more than race, the overarching appeal of abortion is what I call the "mulligan" culture, which knows no color divide. Watch 4 golfers all put their tee shots in the water and offer them all a free redo, a mulligan. Doesn't matter their color. Think any of the will reject the offer for a do over to make up for their mistake? The abortion camp has spent 50 years offering mothers and fathers unlimited mulligans, and have gaslit millions into sincerely believing that taking these mulligans wasn't by any means immoral.

But 50 years of technological development and spiritual awakening absolutely proving, without any doubt, the unborn child's humanity, like proving the humanity of a black man, has caused mass change in the hearts and minds of millions. Eventually, it's impossible to continue denying such obvious truths.

2
v8power 2 points ago +2 / -0

The divide looks to be narrowing, but there is a clear difference in abortion percentages among the races:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7436774/

https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/infographic_attachment/ajph_social_revise.pdf


To your point:

One thing that always baffled me was the left's diehard support for abortion, which literally killed off millions of potential, likely Democrat voters.

That is baffling. One has to wonder if there was an intelligence behind the push for abortion. If there was an intelligence behind it, then they found the proper emotional triggers for support.

4
surfrchick22 4 points ago +4 / -0

My lefty sister was so worried that this would happen under Trumps presidency It's delicious to see it happen during Biden's....can't wait to call her today !

4
PhDinNY 4 points ago +4 / -0

Praise God! At least the entire country won't be associated with wanton murder of unborn children! It will only be select states which will be known as the "murder states". And not coincidentally, those same states will also continue to have the highest number of adult murders.

1
ashlanddog [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Valid observation...

...ignoring the sanctity of life isn't limited to unborn children....

3
Sniping88 3 points ago +3 / -0

Everyone already forget about 2000 mules?

3
portuguesemama123 3 points ago +3 / -0

the obvious -- so obvious logical incongruity of the left must be more apparent to today's youth. They fight tooth and nail to kill the unborn in the name of protecting the powerless. Until it comes to the sexual pleasure of those who have power over the powerless.

2
ashlanddog [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Truth....

3
2ndenthusiast 3 points ago +3 / -0

Leak could be white hat to bring more organizers out of the woodwork and add to the indictments. Same as Trump allowing the steal. And covid jabs. And rampant censorship, etc.

4
mac1221 4 points ago +4 / -0

No, I do not think this was anything but some leftist clerk that wanted to put pressure on the court by making it public. This gives time now for leftist radicals to organize and protest the court before the decision is officially entered and released publicly. SCOTUS does not like the limelight. This kind of pressure may work on Roberts, but I am not sure about the others.

The fact that the court even took the case means they were ready to make a ruling on this issue - for better or worse. Otherwise, they would have never agreed to take the case. So, there has been an internal shift of some kind to finally take this issue on. Later after the decision has been released, we can speculate as to the timing of such a decision.

In addition, this gives the Dems an issue to rally around for the upcoming midterms. Up until this leak, there was nothing to motivate their base to get out the vote. The comments out there on social media right now are showing that this SCOTUS leak has gotten their attention and it is an issue that will get them out to vote when they would have otherwise stayed home.

2
2ndenthusiast 2 points ago +2 / -0

you're talking like all the old political dynamics and crap we've been brainwashed into believing actually means something. it's all lining up. we're watching a movie.

1
mac1221 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sometimes there is not some grand conspiracy behind what happens - sometimes it is just stupid people being stupid because they believe all the brainwashing.

1
2ndenthusiast 1 point ago +1 / -0

Before Q+ came down the escalator I would have agreed.

1
Canadianguy17 1 point ago +1 / -0

Talk about having a ground level view and being proud of it.

1
mac1221 1 point ago +1 / -0

Occam's Razor and knowing something of the Court.

3
MetalThatMatters 3 points ago +3 / -0

When you understand that the whole abortion industry is an on-going sacrifice to Moloch, this is super significant.

I still don't trust the SCOTUS but this is step in the right direction. It makes me cautiously optimistic.

3
PowderRoomPolitics 3 points ago +3 / -0

Just saw this at Politico! Thanks for the heads up!

3
ashlanddog [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

...at 98 pages, this is going to be a 3 pot of coffee night...

...doggy winks....

3
BitcoinZaavid 3 points ago +3 / -0

Doge is such meme wow. (I’m guessing you know nothing of the doge language).

2
ashlanddog [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

...howls....

1
BitcoinZaavid 1 point ago +1 / -0

🤦🏼‍♂️ (Old people on the internet tryin to be hip)

It’s time to lose the doge image.

3
basilpesto 3 points ago +3 / -0

Hah, I read that as … “a 3 potty night”

It will definitely take me more than 3 shitters to get through this beast of a document!

3
ashlanddog [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

...howls...

Scientists No Closer To Figuring Out How 12 Ounces Of Coffee Turn Into 6 Gallons Of Pee

https://babylonbee.com/news/scientists-no-closer-to-figuring-out-how-12-ounces-of-coffee-turn-into-six-gallons-of-pee

2
MAGAdeburger 2 points ago +2 / -0

Only 67 pages of the opinion itself, plus the appendix 😜

Got through it all in 20 min. Alito dropped a 67 page legal, historical and rational 🔨.

1
ashlanddog [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

...dogs are infamous for their slow digestion of legal documents...

...howls....

2
MAGAdeburger 2 points ago +2 / -0

too distracted by chasing the mailman... or chasing tails (😯😉)... WOOF WOOF WOOF!

2
ashlanddog [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

...don't forget squirrels...

...howls....

2
MAGAdeburger 2 points ago +2 / -0

Those damn squirrels! 😂

2
ashlanddog [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

...squirrels!!!! where where where....

3
polish_snausage 3 points ago +3 / -0

Baby killers are losing their shit on twatter.

3
lsvogel 3 points ago +3 / -0

This is Jane Roe's baby. Roe v. Wade. Jane Roe did not have the abortion and once born gave the baby up for adoption. Roe v. Wade was basically a lawyer's tug of war power-play to allow abortions to be legal under Federal Constitutional law.

Legalizing abortions is the progressive- liberalism's agenda and the Satanic cult human sacrifice under the guise of 'women's health rights and a right to privacy'.

This allowed all the rise of the abortion clinics and specifically Planned Parenthood to legally perform these Satanic sacrifices to their evil G*d and using Fed Tax Payer funding to do so. The Roe v. Wade push has now morphed in these abortion clinics to harvest these aborted fetal parts and created a commodity to buy & sell for profit. Think about that.

We see this evil agenda so clearly now...

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/09/jane-roe-v-wade-baby-norma-mccorvey/620009/

1
lsvogel 1 point ago +1 / -0

IMO: Roe v. Wade will be overturned as unconstitutional and the individual States will be once again allowed to govern it's own citizens on abortions and it's laws.

2
CoolFoooo 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is terrible for the left. Why would they leak it? I'm assuming here the constitutional judges are going to be really bringing out the big stick.

I don't think scotus likes others trying to force their hand. What dumbasses!

2
BadMamaJama 2 points ago +2 / -0

Will be interesting to see if the Pope applauds this move or stays silent.

2
StormRanger 2 points ago +2 / -0

They left it up to the states.

2
ravonaf 2 points ago +2 / -0

Millions upon millions of innocent lives lost based on something that was egregiously wrong. Very very sad.

2
GuerroRanchero 2 points ago +2 / -0

My body my choice, but everyone must get vaxxed!

1
ashlanddog [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

..."isn't life strange?...

2
Datadude 2 points ago +2 / -0

I understand the victory against "Legislation by Judicial Activism", and always thought Roe v. was wrongly decided. At its most contentious, it's a state issue with the underlying question of when does life begin that qualifies that life as human, thus entitled to all protections guaranteed by the Constitution (I have my opinions, but don't pretend to have all the answers).

The question I have is, If the vaccine is a sterilization agenda, as the studies and statistics clearly indicate, is this a hollow victory with no real world consequences?

What practical good is the legal framework to protect that which can no longer be conceived ?

Is this just a distraction from the real issue at hand ?

While I acknowledge some obstacles have been placed in (their) way, I'm not so naive as to think they have abandoned their designs for population control.

As the dark forces of evil are working to finalizing the legal frame work to roll out mandatory / compulsory vaccinations. Set aside the billions, world wide that have already been jabbed, is this nothing more than just Hegel at work?

2
ashlanddog [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Valid information, nicely stated and framed....

2
Datadude 2 points ago +2 / -0

My new friends keep me on my toes.

I have to wake early enough to eat two bowls of sugar bombs each morning just to keep up.

It's a good post OP, keep em coming.

1
ashlanddog [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

...where we howl 1, we howl all....

2
Datadude 2 points ago +2 / -0

Howwwll

Howwwwll

Howwwwwwwll

1
ashlanddog [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

...wags tail joyously....

2
CovfefeAmericano 2 points ago +2 / -0

It is going to be a hot summer.

1
ashlanddog [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

...dog days...

...howls....

2
AlexJonesNeckFat 2 points ago +2 / -0

It’s just a distraction from 2000 mules

2
unruly 2 points ago +2 / -0

Amazing how this comes out on election day?

1
ashlanddog [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

...tis....

2
MAGAdeburger 2 points ago +3 / -1

If Roe and Casey are overturned, then the section (c) abortion exemption within Public Law 108-212 no longer applies. It is voided. And thus, any killing of an unborn child, in any and ALL cases (including at the hand of a "doctor") is a felony. Federal statutory law reigns supreme over any state law that might attempt to legalize "abortion" which was only "legalized" by a Court who invented this fictitious "constitutional right."

Whoever engages in conduct that violates any of the provisions of law listed in subsection (b) and thereby causes the death of, or bodily injury (as defined in section 1365) to, a child, who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place, is guilty of a separate offense under this section [...] As used in this section, the term "unborn child" means a child in utero, and the term "child in utero" or "child, who is in utero" means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb

2
TheRoyalRob 2 points ago +4 / -2

idk, conservatives don't abort their kids.... abortion only happens mostly in inner cities and from democrats.... whom I don't want raising kids in the first place, because we will just end up with more leftist LGBTQ+ trash and indoctrination....

The 13% of the population that commits more violence in American then any other demographic, would probably be 20-25% if it wasn't for abortion.

I mean you can down vote me to shit, but it is what it is, the lefts propensity to murder it's offspring is doing the country a solid at this point.... and we are still rapidly losing or lost the culture war.

4
ashlanddog [S] 4 points ago +4 / -0

...mankind creates problems...

...God will have the solution to those problems....

2
dtreadonme17 2 points ago +2 / -0

I believe this is when America became accursed Nation, it is a millstone around our necks. Once we accepted the murder of God's innocents, His creation - we were done. Strife, division, economic anxiety and rampant crime.

The media support will be over the top in their attempt to perpetuate the matrix world they've fabricated and sheep revel in.

2
DaBirdisDaWord 2 points ago +2 / -0

I’ve not seen anyone bring it up yet, but the Left wants to pack the Court and Roe vs Wade getting overturned is the signal they’ve been waiting for to get started on that. I suspect Biden will announce a plan to pack the Court very soon.

2
WeAreThePlan 2 points ago +2 / -0

The problem that Deep State is having now is the one they had during the Virginia election last year: They believe their own bullshit. They are living inside the matrix, and have absolutely no clue how we outside the matrix see things. They believe in killing unborn babies, especially if they are black. In their warped mind, killing little babies is a good thing. They have NO IDEA that normal people do not see killing babies as a good thing. So they leak the Supreme Court draft, thinking that we think like they do, and want to kill lots o' babies. WAY MISCALCULATED THERE! They assume everyone is a demon like they are.

2
ashlanddog [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Valid observation....

2
WeAreThePlan 2 points ago +2 / -0

Dogs always know best. By the way, there seems to be other dogs on this board, plus the usual Catturd, although I think those posts are copied from elsewhere.

2
ashlanddog [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

,,.but only 1 Adog...

...a patriot's best friend...

...catturd is a copy/paste post...

...where we howl 1, we howl all....

2
xbonesny 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think their hope is to usher in Martial Law...put everyone on lockdown/curfew in time for midterms. Mail in only ballots.

2
redtoe-skipper 2 points ago +3 / -1

First: All who are interested in this draft-ruling should read Roe v. Wade ruling carefully.

Second, an opinion on that ruling should therefor also include a valuation of the arguments regarding any of the liberty amendments, as was done by the Roe v. Wade ruling. Simply relying on high level views, does not cut it.

Opinion of citizens is a fickle thing. See prohibition amendments.

Claiming that there is no root fails to address a central claim in the Roe v.Wade ruling. See for further explanation:

https://searchvoat.co/v/AskVoat/2774063/14348413

https://searchvoat.co/v/GreatAwakening/2780187/14407172

https://searchvoat.co/v/GreatAwakening/3065664/17096090 (!!!) juncto: https://digital.nls.uk/encyclopaedia-britannica/archive/144133900

https://searchvoat.co/v/GreatAwakening/3395510/20387803

Logical thinking.

1
ashlanddog [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

...excellent material....

1
EuropeNeedsFixing 1 point ago +1 / -0

It's a trap.

?