What isn't justified in any state? Walking up to some random, innocent guy in a shop and shooting him in the head for no reason whatsoever. This is illegal everywhere and if it somehow isn't it should be.
The benefit of living in the present is that we can take what we have now and what we had in the past and mesh them together into something altogether better, to get the best of both. Just because a law or way of thinking/viewing things is older doesn't mean it's better. Conversely just because something is newer it isn't necessarily better either.
"we can take what we have now and what we had in the past and mesh them together into something altogether better"
That's the problem though. The left wants post birth abortions and I the right treats the morning after pill as murder. People are galvanized in untenable positions.
"and shooting him in the head for no reason whatsoever."
Except they aren't. There's plenty of people in the middle. The problem is partly that the left has pushed the "middle" so far away from where it used to be that now the middle is practically on-demand abortion all the way up to birth. Leftism is a fully degenerate and an unnatural and forced ideology that shouldn't be considered when making decisions. What they want really isn't important until they stop supporting the grooming of children.
What we need is to bring the country back to reason and then the two sides that are actually reasonable can debate and discuss on what the best way to implement these policies and rules are. Even just on the right there's plenty of range in opinions to have discussions over how to do things. We need to get back to people agreeing on what they want and disagreeing on how to achieve it (agreeing that protecting children is paramount and working to find out how to best do that vs one side wanting to protect children and the other wanting to murder than after birth and groom them).
You seemed to be responding to my claim about murder being illegal at the federal level with the claim that it's already broken up by the different states. My response was to make a nice and simple scenario that wasn't up for interpretation and would be clearly illegal in all jurisdictions. The scenario is also almost identical to what abortion is. I don't see the strawman.
Nobody shoots someone in the head for "no reason" either. The implication is that the reason is bogus and unjustified and therefor basically non-existent, just like murdering an unborn baby has no justifiable reason.
I also said "almost identical". Either way the end result is the same and that was my point. The unjustifiable murder of an unborn baby.
What isn't justified in any state? Walking up to some random, innocent guy in a shop and shooting him in the head for no reason whatsoever. This is illegal everywhere and if it somehow isn't it should be.
The benefit of living in the present is that we can take what we have now and what we had in the past and mesh them together into something altogether better, to get the best of both. Just because a law or way of thinking/viewing things is older doesn't mean it's better. Conversely just because something is newer it isn't necessarily better either.
"we can take what we have now and what we had in the past and mesh them together into something altogether better"
That's the problem though. The left wants post birth abortions and I the right treats the morning after pill as murder. People are galvanized in untenable positions.
"and shooting him in the head for no reason whatsoever."
Case and point. You created a strawman.
Except they aren't. There's plenty of people in the middle. The problem is partly that the left has pushed the "middle" so far away from where it used to be that now the middle is practically on-demand abortion all the way up to birth. Leftism is a fully degenerate and an unnatural and forced ideology that shouldn't be considered when making decisions. What they want really isn't important until they stop supporting the grooming of children.
What we need is to bring the country back to reason and then the two sides that are actually reasonable can debate and discuss on what the best way to implement these policies and rules are. Even just on the right there's plenty of range in opinions to have discussions over how to do things. We need to get back to people agreeing on what they want and disagreeing on how to achieve it (agreeing that protecting children is paramount and working to find out how to best do that vs one side wanting to protect children and the other wanting to murder than after birth and groom them).
You seemed to be responding to my claim about murder being illegal at the federal level with the claim that it's already broken up by the different states. My response was to make a nice and simple scenario that wasn't up for interpretation and would be clearly illegal in all jurisdictions. The scenario is also almost identical to what abortion is. I don't see the strawman.
"The scenario is also almost identical to what abortion is."
No, nobody gets abortion for "no reason."
Nobody shoots someone in the head for "no reason" either. The implication is that the reason is bogus and unjustified and therefor basically non-existent, just like murdering an unborn baby has no justifiable reason.
I also said "almost identical". Either way the end result is the same and that was my point. The unjustifiable murder of an unborn baby.