LeviF

You know, I was almost ready to have a serious conversation with you until you dropped this and demonstrated how unserious you really are.

How is this issue analogous?

There is no moral imperative to educate or persuade those who would toss their children into Moloch’s gaping maw.

And Cleveland has to be being stubborn on that point. As mentioned above his salary is fully guaranteed, everybody knows he isn’t their guy, and Cleveland has earned zero favors from anyone in the league at this point.

Before modernist/postmodernist thinking we had bastardy laws on the books and bastard trials where the father most likely responsible was determined and care for the child arranged for. Leftists are constantly reinventing the traditional ways that they are trying so hard to forget. lol this idiot. We can put capital punishment on the table for rape. You good with that?

If you let them keep going long enough, they re-invent traditional marriage. Leftists: “Well, if men are going to pass laws outlawing the killing of pre-born children, they should pass laws that the fathers of the children can’t leave and need to take financial care of the mother and child!” Trads: “…ok then.”

And the answer to that question is still "yes." But then you change the question. You add caveats and qualifiers and pretend as if I'm the unreasonable one for asking that you just not. And ignore the fact that abortions legally fall under the same category as another example you provided yourself - stop signs - while firearms explicitly do not. That the answers to the initial questions are inconvenient to your backwards political "thinking," if one can truly call it that, really isn't my problem. If you wish to know my more complete thoughts on how the AR-15 is found in the Constitution, we have a reasonably active gun thread in this subforum that you may ask your silly questions in.

Why do you keep changing the question? If you don't like the answer to the original question perhaps you should examine why that is rather than play silly games.

And I can. And again, that's a different question than asking for the location of an "explicit" quotation, isn't it? Now is you done or is you finished?

Hm, but see, I responded to a different question. You don't get to change the question and maintain that I have the same answer, or even that the new answer would be relevant to the initial question.

Ah, see, now we're playing the motte and bailey again. Nice try, but this is not what I said.

In your experience, do homicide victims typically testify at trial? Yes, I could. And yes, I do. Because my state has passed a law mandating that I stop at them, as is their right under the 10th Amendment since, as you say, stop signs aren't in the Constitution.

"Now do guns." No you. The right to own firearms is enshrined explicitly in our Constitution. If you want the same for abortion get the ball rolling on an amendment. The two issues have literally no legal commonality.

It's funny you mention MTG. MTG and Madison Cawthorn have basically the exact same platform. They're both obnoxious. Both make the establishment Republicans feel embarrassed and/or annoyed. But only one is being subjected to a dripping kompromat campaign. The same one who has publicly talked about drug parties and orgies frequented by GOP leaders. The G is far less ideological than most think.

I'm not sure it's been impressed how serious the leaking of a SCOTUS draft opinion is. It's one of the worst possible things that can happen in our government, and that statement would only be slightly mitigated if it turned out to be the work of a hacker rather than a source inside the Court itself.

Cawthorn: “yeah these old guard Republicans love cocaine and Eyes Wide Shut parties” Kompromat drops constantly within a month of this allegation of his. Coincidence?

Haven't seen a dude get stomped out on stage like that since the old Source Awards.

What’s really incredible is that they clearly put thousands of man hours into a hit piece and couldn’t up with a single accusation of racism or other heresy against the state religion. Considering the low bar for those I can only conclude that Carlson is like the nicest dude on the planet.

Overturn Griswold while you’re at it. The Warren Court was a disaster.

Why so serious?

Dudes taking upskirts.

The home of women-only train cars and phones you can't silence the camera "shutter" sound effect on.

Maybe not "free" in the sense that you don't have to play the game at all but yeah they're very open to the idea of hanging with American/European guys.

For any decent looking American dude Japan is basically a sex tourism destination without the need to break any laws.

Observe the classic motte-and-bailey doctrine at work in the leftoid's playbook: Boring, but easily defended motte: the Florida bill is a solution in search of a problem What they desire, the bailey: it's good and right for government employees to talk to children under the age of 9 about sex, sexual preference, genitalia, and gender dysphoria. By substituting the motte whenever someone attacks the bailey, they believe they make the attacker out to be unreasonable for not wanting government employees to authoritatively tell small children where a penis might go. This classic concept-swapping was famously all over Michael Foucault's work, a primary influence on the left's insistence in driving the west straight off a cliff.