LEFT WING LOONS
See other LEFT WING LOONS Articles
Title: The Dirty “little” Secret Of ...The Natural Born Citizen Clause --- Revealed.
Source:
naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com
URL Source: http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress ... -born-citizen-clause-revealed/
Published: Jan 27, 2012
Author: Leo Donofrio
Post Date: 2012-01-27 14:14:32 by BorisY
Keywords: native, naturalized - immigrant, natural - parents
Views: 102138
Comments: 232
Natural Born Citizen Respecting the Constitution The Current INS Officially Recognizes A Delineation Between Natural-Born and Native-Born. The Dirty “little” Secret Of The Natural Born Citizen Clause Revealed. I have emphasized the word “little” because the truth of the law on this issue is very simple, folks. So simple that the mystery is deciphered by application of one of the most clear, concise and undeniable rules of law; the code of statutory construction governs, and therefore, “natural born Citizen” must require something more than being born in the United States. Let me put it to you in appropriately simple language: Clause A = “Only a natural born Citizen may be President.” Clause B = “Anyone born in the United States is a Citizen.” (While these two clauses reflect Article 2, Section 1, and the 14th Amendment, I shall refer to them as “Clause A” and “Clause B” for now.) The code of statutory construction is learned by every student in law school, and every practicing attorney has confronted it. Every judge is required to apply the rule equally to all statutes, and the Constitution. There is no wiggle room at all. The rule states that when a court examines two clauses, unless Congress has made it clear that one clause repeals the other, the court must observe a separate legal effect for each. More specifically, regardless of the chronology of enactment, the general clause can never govern the specific. Clause B is a general rule of citizenship, which states that all persons born in the country are members of the nation. Clause A is a specific clause that says only those members of the nation who are “natural born” may be President. According to the rule of statutory construction, the court must determine that Clause A requires something more than Clause B. It’s truly that simple. This is not some crazy conspiracy theory. It’s not controversial. This is not rocket science. Every single attorney reading this right now knows, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that I have accurately explained the rule of statutory construction to you. Any attorney who denies this rule, is lying. The rule cannot be denied. And its simplicity cannot be ignored. Now let’s see what the United States Supreme Court has to say about the rule: “Where there is no clear intention otherwise, a specific statute will not be controlled or nullified by a general one, regardless of the priority of enactment. See, e. g., Bulova Watch Co. v. United States, 365 U.S. 753, 758 (1961); Rodgers v. United States, 185 U.S. 83, 87 -89 (1902). The courts are not at liberty to pick and choose among congressional enactments, and when two statutes are capable of co-existence, it is the duty of the courts, absent a clearly expressed congressional intention to the contrary, to regard each as effective. “When there are two acts upon the same subject, the rule is to give effect to both if possible . . . The intention of the legislature to repeal `must be clear and manifest.’ ” United States v. Borden Co., 308 U.S. 188, 198 (1939).” Morton v. Mancari, 417 U.S. 535, 550-551 (1974). This is what I mean by no wiggle room – “The courts are not at liberty to pick and choose among congressional enactments…” Any court construing Clause A is not at liberty to assume that Congress intended to put the words “natural born” into Clause B. The general does not govern the specific, and the rule requires the court to “give effect to both if possible”. Is it possible to give separate effect to both Clause A and Clause B? Yes. The Constitution tells us that any Citizen can be a Senator, or Representative, but that to be President one must be a “natural born Citizen”. The Constitution specifically assigns different civic statuses to “Citizens” and “natural born Citizens”. Therefore, not only is it possible to give separate effect to both Clause A and Clause B, it is absolutely required by law, and no court has the ability to circumvent the rule. Had the original framers intended for any “born Citizen” to be eligible to the office of President, they would not have included the word “natural” in the clause. Additionally, had the framers of the 14th Amendment intended to declare that every person born in the country was a “natural born Citizen”, then the 14th Amendment would contain clear and manifest language to that effect. But it doesn’t. Therefore, each clause must be given separate force and effect. Deputy Chief Judge Malihi explained the rule of statutory construction in his denial of candidate Obama’s Motion to Dismiss, wherein his opinion of the Court stated: “Statutory provisions must be read as they are written, and this Court finds that the cases cited by Defendant are not controlling. When the Court construes a constitutional or statutory provision, the ‘first step . . . is to examine the plain statutory language.’ Morrison v. Claborn, 294 Ga. App. 508, 512 (2008). ‘Where the language of a statute is plain and unambiguous, judicial construction is not only unnecessary but forbidden. In the absence of words of limitation, words in a statute should be given their ordinary and everyday meaning.’ Six Flags Over Ga. v. Kull, 276 Ga. 210, 211 (2003) (citations and quotation marks omitted). Because there is no other ‘natural and reasonable construction’ of the statutory language, this Court is ‘not authorized either to read into or to read out that which would add to or change its meaning.‘ Blum v. Schrader, 281 Ga. 238, 240 (2006) (quotation marks omitted).” Order On Motion To Dismiss, Deputy Chief Judge Malihi, Jan. 3, 2012, pg. 3. (Emphasis added.) Therefore, the term “natural born” must be considered as requiring something more than simple birth in the country. And Judge Malihi states, quite clearly, in his ruling above, that the Court “is not authorized to read into or to read out that which would add to or change its meaning.” The rule is the same for election statutes in Georgia as it is for the Constitution of the United States. The rule of statutory construction, with regard to the Constitution, was best stated by Chief Justice Marshall in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803): “It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect; and therefore such construction is inadmissible, unless the words require it.” Id. 174. (Emphasis added.) If the 14th Amendment was held to declare that all persons born in the country, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, were natural-born citizens, then the “natural born Citizen” clause would be rendered inoperative. It would be superfluous. And its specific provision would, therefore, be governed by the general provision of the 14th Amendment. The United States Supreme Court has determined that it is inadmissible to even make that argument. Any genuine construction of the “natural born Citizen” clause must begin from the starting point that it requires something more than citizenship by virtue of being born on U.S. soil. Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), tells you exactly what that something is; citizen parents. Leo Donofrio, Esq. [For a more detailed analysis of this issue, please see my Amicus Brief entered in the Georgia POTUS eligibility cases.] [See commenting rules here.]
Poster Comment: People who can't figure this out shouldn't be allowed to vote - citizenship !
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-181) not displayed.
.
.
.
#182. To: war (#180)
sue = lawsuit
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Or perhaps you're paranoid. Or perhaps you're naive....
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
More like kicking the can ! Eventually a republican senate will decide !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Abortion was legal in over 20 states before the "sexual revolution".
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
No one was sued. It was a ballot challenge. Berfers know how gullible their audience is. They've made this out to be something it is not.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
www.guttmacher. org/statecenter/spibs/spib_SFAM.pdf State Funding of Abortion under Medicare.....
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
Whew! That is Medicaid, not Medicare - for a minute I was wondering how many elderly pregnant women could there be. From your link: First implemented in 1977, the Hyde Amendment, which currently forbids the use of federal funds for abortions except in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest, has guided public funding for abortions under the joint federal-state Medicaid programs for low-income women. At a minimum, states must cover those abortions that meet the federal exceptions. Although most states meet the requirements, one state is in violation of federal Medicaid law, because it pays for abortions only in cases of life endangerment. Some states use their own funds to pay for all or most medically necessary abortions, although most do so as a result of a specific court order. As part of her internship a friend worked with a group that provided services to homeless women. One client, a paranoid schizophrenic, pregnant as the result of rape (homeless women get raped a lot) and taking medication that was known to caused birth defects presented a moral dilemma for the staff, my friend said. They were in a position to get an abortion for her, but were not happy about doing so.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
PP gets NO Fed monies for abortions. They do get it for other procedures and administrative costs. And the Feds do regular audits and reviews to check that the monies are kept separate and the facilities are up to licensing and accreditation standards.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
CZ knows differently. He says So you don't think they have been circumventing the (cough....cough) law for years???? because, you know, liberals love abortion. CZ is part of the conservative ilk that doesn't respond to reality, but creates it.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
CZ seems to be another practitioner of that Black and White 'thinking'.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
LOL..... I didn't even notice that I mispelled that till you just mentioned it.....
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
What you call the sexual revolution was only ending the cultural cognitive dissonance about sex and who was having it. Girls got pregnant in the good old days just like they do now. They either had abortions or gave birth, just like they do now. The difference is that abortions are safe now, the girl who decides to carry her baby to term is more likely to keep her baby, and families tell the truth.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
They shouldn't be safe. I long for the days of the back alley abortion and the coat hanger. That way they can reap what they sow.
Again you show your contempt for the poor. Women with money had access to safe abortions either in the US, or abroad - it was only poor women who got the back alley, coat hanger abortions.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
Your post is insanity. Why should murder be clean and safe. Screw that let the bitch die. Any woman having an abortion deserves that.
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
It doesn't surprise me that you believe that...... It's so easy to "launder" the money by transferring it from account to account to account till it gets to where you want it to be even though it shouldn't be there..... We used to do it all the time in the military...... It also explains why you vote, you believe certain things you are told by some people..... Oh by the way PP are currently under investigation for doing exactly that, using federal money for abortions!!!!!
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
Oh, how DARE you... That you would expect someone like loonybitch to be held accountable for her actions, is outrageous! Of course, the pro-abortion crowd never mentions the third option... for girls to keep their damned knees together. Noooo..... We can't have that, now, can we? Feh.
To: mcToejam, rat-boy, drippy, Alzheimer Fred, whitesands, t-bird, loonymom/ming, e-type jackoff, goober56, wreck, cal-CON, rabid dog, dummy DwarF, biff and meguro. You're on the "a waste of human flesh" list. Piss off.
Kill anyone not agreeing with you exactly on the issue of abortion, heh..... Yeah, right, sure you are pro life; that is if you want to call pro control of women pro life that is.
Not only are you anything but pro life, you are pro sadism and pro blood revenge. The Mormons believe in Blood Atonement, that is, the policy of murdering someone before they can soil their soul with sin. So, this means you are Mormon now too?
Kill anyone not agreeing with you exactly on the issue of abortion, heh.... If someone is trying to kill someone. Someone else has the right to stop that killing and kill the aggressor. You are a phoney pro life person. You would let the baby die. You also are for allowing people to murder adults to not be put to death. It is no wonder you call yourself a witch. You are on the wrong side of almost every issue.
So, if you burst into a room with a gun, stopped the doctor from doing the procedure, murdered anyone there in the room as a guilty party to a murder that was about to happen, you are pro-life? Look in the mirror sonny boy; that is where you can see the phony pro-lifer.
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." Mahatma Gandhi, Indian political and spiritual leader Damn right I care enough about human life not to kill as a way to say killing is wrong. And that is not just a Wicca principle, you'll find people in all religions agreeing with me.
Look in the mirror sonny boy; that is where you can see the phony pro-lifer. I am pro innocent life. Someone who takes innocent life has forfitted their right to life. It is very calice and uncaring of you not want to punish the murderer. Lets go back in time to the month before your child was born. Scenario A. A bad person is going to harm your woman. He is robbing her. He is almost certainly going to kill your unborn child. The only way to stop him is to kill him. Would you kill him or would you let your unborn child die and never get to know the person you now know? Scenario B. Your woman is going to get an abortion. They only way to stop him is to kill the abortionist. Would you do it to save your unborn kid so that you can let him live?
No it doesn't.
Scenario B. Your woman is going to get an abortion. They only way to stop him is to kill the abortionist. Would you do it to save your unborn kid so that you can let him live? Either scenario you list, requires a man to take action. rat-boy is not a man, he's a brain-dead socialist. You want a good analogy? Think of the feckless Michael Dukakis, you've got rat-boy... rat-boy doesn't have a woman, because he's not a man... he's just another frustrated, testicularly-challenged socialist.
To: mcToejam, rat-boy, drippy, Alzheimer Fred, whitesands, t-bird, loonymom/ming, e-type jackoff, goober56, wreck, cal-CON, rabid dog, dummy DwarF, biff and meguro. You're on the "a waste of human flesh" list. Piss off.
If you were what masculinity was about, most women would choose celibacy.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
It was the pill, not abortion that liberated women sexually. For women, likewise, the sexual revolution concerned the rules of engagement, rather than the act of sex itself. Premarital virginity had been going out of fashion for decades before the declaration of sexual liberation. It started in the 1920s, as middle-class Americans converted from Victorianism to Freudianism and began to accept that a desirous woman was perhaps not so depraved after all. There- after doctors and psychologists counseled America’s women that a happy marriage was sustained by mutual sexual satisfaction. Experts encouraged women to explore their natural desires, but to start the journey in the marital bed. Women accepted the prescription and ignored the fine print. At the high noon of fifties traditionalism, 40 percent of women had sex before they married—compared to just 10 percent who did in the reputedly Roaring Twenties. Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
Unlike you stonie, I'm sane. I don't play judge, jury and executioner based on my own singular judgment. According to your own religion, only your God can pass the ultimate judgment on people. And you are not your own higher power. I do know I would never trust you armed and in the same room with me. You are too far into the insanity zone to feel safe in that situation. I'd only shot someone who pulled a dangerous weapon on me. That is the only situation I would take a life. I wouldn't even shoot someone stealing my bicycle or car. Property is not worth taking a human life for. I wouldn't interfere with a legal abortion procedure with deadly force either. Nonviolent civil disobedience yes, bt violence only hurts the cause of ending abortions. The backlash from it serves to strengthen the resolve to preserve the practice, and I am too mature and savvy to the methods of sound political action to be an insane cowboy like you.
Wow. You would have let your son die. Go tell him that.
It has workd out so well. How many women head a one parent household?
Just a sec buddy. You said judge not. You're a hypocrite. You would kill someone to save your own life but not your kids. Shame on you mike, your'e insane.
And dramatically raised the amount of anti-depressants prescribed..... And is screwing with the genetics of numerous species of animals/mammals..... So is it really worth it???
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
"rat-boy doesn't have a woman, because he's not a man... he's just another frustrated, testicularly-challenged socialist." If you were what masculinity was about, most women would choose celibacy. Okay. That is a keeper. You are also correct about the pill.
Don't blame the pill, blame Dr. Freud. Premarital virginity had been going out of fashion for decades before the declaration of sexual liberation. It started in the 1920s, as middle-class Americans converted from Victorianism to Freudianism and began to accept that a desirous woman was perhaps not so depraved after all. There- after doctors and psychologists counseled America’s women that a happy marriage was sustained by mutual sexual satisfaction. Experts encouraged women to explore their natural desires, but to start the journey in the marital bed. Women accepted the prescription and ignored the fine print. At the high noon of fifties traditionalism, 40 percent of women had sex before they married—compared to just 10 percent who did in the reputedly Roaring Twenties. In any case, women heading single parent households do, so in part, because they didn't have abortions.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
And is screwing with the genetics of numerous species of animals/mammals..... You are off the rails now.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
I was a teenager in Stone's good old days.
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
I swear we have another BPDer here with all this black and white magical thinking, but this one seems more female. Women were taking antidepressants sometimes in the form of opium, way before there was such a thing as the pill. I guess CZs never heard of the common malady of years gone by that doctors called 'Hysteria' for which a certain operation she would not approved of, was commonly performed.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
You would endanger the lives of countless thousands of kids by making sure abortion stays legal by creating martyrs. Every time some idiot takes the law into their own hands and murders a doctor because they oppose abortion, they make it easier to justify keeping it legal by making opposition to it seem like irrational terrorists. As for myself, I had my planned offspring and had a vasectomy a long time ago, so I made sure I was not going to leave a woman in the awkward position of an unwanted pregnancy, so your example is moot anyway. Even were I still able to get a woman pregnant, it's still her body, and the law is what it is; I would not make martyrs that would help keep abortion legal. In your example, you could kill a doctor, go to prison or to your execution for murder, the woman could still in the aftermath if your murderous rage still opt for an abortion. Not to mention that pregnancies that would have been spared abortion were the procedure to have been made illegal before additional murders of people over the issue happened polarized the issue making it easier for pro abortion proponents to keep it legal would be terminated. In your example, the pregnancy could still wind up being ended, and you would insure many more pregnancies could go by making martyrs to the cause of the pro-abortion side, improving the climate to insure abortion stays legal. You have to work the issue the right way, or abortion cannot be make illegal, it's as simple as that. You are just too pig headed and arrogant to see the cause and effect of your murderous intent. Your act would fall under the heading of an act of terror and intimidation and make all others against abortion have to work in an even more difficult and polarized climate. Your act would make it harder to make abortion illegal, not easier. And I am a responsible adult that had my offspring, and took a measure to insure I don't have unwanted additional kids. Because it's not just the woman who has the responsibility to practice birth control if they don't want to become pregnant, it's the man's job too. . Family planning is not a one gender deal.
My son is an RN who works in trauma medicine and supports the pro-abortion cause. We have argued the issue; me opposed, him for the procedure to be made even easier for any woman to get. So, what is it the fuck you want me to say to him, sport? I already know I am right on the issue, and he is wrong.
And there was Lydia Pinkham's (40-proof) for female complaints. What "real man" would want to return to the days when sex was a man's right and a women's duty?
Post-Conflict Regime Type: Probability of Being a Democracy Five Years After the Conflict Has Ended; Violent Campaigns - 4%, Nonviolent Campaigns - 46%. Erica Chenoweth, Ph.D., Stanford University,
Comments (223 - 232) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#183. To: lucysmom (#176)
Don't forget that's one of the reasons ObamaCare was created, as a way to legally get around that (cough....cough) law!!!!
#184. To: war (#181)
#185. To: CZ82 (#183)
#186. To: BorisY (#182)
#187. To: lucysmom (#176)
Or perhaps you're paranoid.
#188. To: CZ82 (#187)
State Funding of Abortion under Medicare.....
#189. To: lucysmom (#188)
First implemented in 1977, the Hyde Amendment, which currently forbids the use of federal funds for abortions except in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest, has guided public funding for abortions under the joint federal-state Medicaid programs for low-income women. At a minimum, states must cover those abortions that meet the federal exceptions. Although most states meet the requirements, one state is in violation of federal Medicaid law, because it pays for abortions only in cases of life endangerment. Some states use their own funds to pay for all or most medically necessary abortions, although most do so as a result of a specific court order.
#190. To: mininggold, CZ82 (#189)
(Edited)
PP gets NO Fed monies for abortions. They do get it for other procedures and administrative costs. And the Feds do regular audits and reviews to check that the monies are kept separate and the facilities are up to licensing and accreditation standards.
#191. To: lucysmom, CZ82 (#190)
CZ is part of the conservative ilk that doesn't respond to reality, but creates it.
#192. To: lucysmom (#188)
Whew! That is Medicaid, not Medicare - for a minute I was wondering how many elderly pregnant women could there be.
#193. To: CZ82 (#192)
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
#194. To: lucysmom (#193)
The difference is that abortions are safe now
#195. To: A K A Stone (#194)
They shouldn't be safe. I long for the days of the back alley abortion and the coat hanger. That way they can reap what they sow.
#196. To: lucysmom (#195)
#197. To: lucysmom (#190)
(Edited)
#198. To: mininggold (#189)
PP gets NO Fed monies for abortions. They do get it for other procedures and administrative costs. And the Feds do regular audits and reviews to check that the monies are kept separate and the facilities are up to licensing and accreditation standards.
#199. To: A K A Stone (#194)
They shouldn't be safe. I long for the days of the back alley abortion and the coat hanger. That way they can reap what they sow.
#200. To: A K A Stone (#196)
"Any woman having an abortion deserves that."
#201. To: A K A Stone (#194)
"They shouldn't be safe. I long for the days of the back alley abortion and the coat hanger."
#202. To: Ferret Mike (#200)
Any woman having an abortion deserves that."
#203. To: A K A Stone (#202)
(Edited)
#204. To: A K A Stone (#202)
"You also are for allowing people to murder adults to not be put to death."
#205. To: Ferret Mike (#203)
So, if you burst into a room with a gun, stopped the doctor from doing the procedure, murdered anyone there in the room as a guilty party to a murder that was about to happen, you are pro-life?
#206. To: Ferret Mike (#204)
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."
#207. To: A K A Stone (#205)
Scenario A. A bad person is going to harm your woman. He is robbing her. He is almost certainly going to kill your unborn child. The only way to stop him is to kill him. Would you kill him or would you let your unborn child die and never get to know the person you now know?
Dukakis was against the death penalty, and the question asked by Bernard Shaw invited him to show some passion and fire about crime — what if your wife were raped and murdered? — and Dukakis stayed doggedly on his track, expressing coolly rational rejection of the death penalty.
#208. To: Capitalist Eric (#207)
rat-boy doesn't have a woman, because he's not a man... he's just another frustrated, testicularly-challenged socialist.
#209. To: CZ82 (#197)
Leftards only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.
#210. To: A K A Stone (#205)
#211. To: Ferret Mike (#210)
I wouldn't interfere with a legal abortion procedure with deadly force either.
#212. To: lucysmom (#209)
It was the pill, not abortion that liberated women sexually.
#213. To: Ferret Mike (#210)
I'd only shot someone who pulled a dangerous weapon on me. That is the only situation I would take a life.
#214. To: lucysmom (#209)
(Edited)
It was the pill, not abortion that liberated women sexually.
#215. To: lucysmom, Ferret Mike (#208)
To: Capitalist Eric (#207)
#216. To: A K A Stone (#212)
It has workd out so well. How many women head a one parent household?
#217. To: CZ82 (#214)
And dramatically raised the amount of anti-depressants prescribed.....
#218. To: harrowup (#215)
You are also correct about the pill.
#219. To: lucysmom, CZ82 (#217)
(Edited)
You are off the rails now.
#220. To: A K A Stone (#213)
(Edited)
#221. To: A K A Stone (#211)
(Edited)
"Wow. You would have let your son die. Go tell him that."
#222. To: mininggold (#219)
Women were taking antidepressants sometimes in the form of opium, way before there was such a thing as the pill. I guess CZs never heard of the common malady of years gone by that doctors called 'Hysteria' for which a certain operation she would not approved of, was commonly performed.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]