X
xavier7995
I concur stu.
I'm in it to restore my right to own fully automatic firearms, if you get an abortion or not makes no difference to me.
In the majority of the United States, Class III firearms are still transferrable to civilians, provided they comply with the May 19, 1986 legislation that stipulated they were initially transferrable to begin with, and 80% or more complete by midnight, May 19, 1986, and on a Form 4, or other applicable Federal Paper by that day at midnight.
But most of the NRA members I've known were the most quiet over the USA PA, and any number of other fascist laws aimed at the boiling frog principle where Big Brother's unquestioned powers are concerned.
Gun Owners of America, on the other hand, knew what was up during that time period, sided with 'us,' and publicly said so..
I'm mostly staying out of political threads/posts since returning for my own pressing reasons, but thought some clarification was in order.
Like with most things in America, if you can pay the tax or fee, you have most of what you want or need. Class III weapons and 'destructive devices' (technical category) are no different.
I consider the decision to carry a fetus to term or not, to rest with the woman exclusively - it is her body, her autonomy, and the choice must be hers and be freely made - not dictated by either law or custom. I consider the right to own one’s own body, and to make the choices and decisions regarding it, to be FAR a more fundamental matter than any “right” to own ‘fully automatic firearms...and I frankly find it outrageous to link those two: they are both questions of ownership, but the right to own one’s own body has unquestionable priority in my mind over a choice of personal possessions.
People need to realize that the right to own one’s self is THE uninfringeable right...and a community of cannabis farmers, processors, and users should understand that in their bones. I call attention to the NINTH amendment to the constitution, and I assert that *liberty* is intrinsic to the rights of humans - and liberty is alienated if one cannot be at liberty to make fundamental personal choices and decisions.
As I see it, the “right to have an abortion” is a politicized mis-statement of the principle of personal ownership of self: it is a right to authority over one’s self, and abortion is only one out of many choices the individual MUST be free to make for themselves. Outlawing “abortion” goes far beyond abortion: it outlaws the very principle of the individual’s right to choose and decide - it makes the citizen into chattel, subject to the legislative whim of others.
I was not invited to participate, I hope my contribution to the thread will not be taken amiss.
As a man and mostly conservative I’m not a fan of abortion BUT I very strongly support a woman’s right to choose. If I had my way for starters every girl that goes into puberty and has the ability should be on birth control until 18. Don’t say what about the guys cause it’s simply easier to block the eggs than the swimmers for sure. But that’s not gonna happen. That’s why I also support free birth control and wish it was used more. That’s pretty much the goal to not need abortions. I also support free abortions for those least able to pay for them. If you can’t feed em don’t breed em.
Yes I agree, it's a woman's choice. She can either choose to not have sex, which is literally the only way to become pregnant, or she can slut herself around all she wants consequences be damned because she can then choose to vacuum her unborn child from her uterus. It's her choice.
So she either has no sex or is a slut and didnt fear the “consequences” enough? Are you kidding me? Its her body and yes a woman should be able to choose and be respected. Your crass, barbaric attempt at an explanation of choice here is beyond awful.
Its a hypothetical point and were it possible with no side effects sure. It pretty insensitive and STUPID for ANY woman under 18 to even consider having a child on purpose or accident. Why is it you turn every comment to a fucking argument. Add to ignore.So all women who are capable of bearing a child until 18 should take hormone altering birth control or have something installed in them such an an iud? That is pretty insensitive imo. Look up birth control side effects. It can be serious.
Yes I agree, it's a woman's choice. She can either choose to not have sex, which is literally the only way to become pregnant, or she can slut herself around all she wants consequences be damned because she can then choose to vacuum her unborn child from her uterus. It's her choice.
No. What specifically did you disagree with?Were you waving your bible around while you typed that ignorant shit?
Its a hypothetical point and were it possible with no side effects sure. It pretty insensitive and STUPID for ANY woman under 18 to even consider having a child on purpose or accident.
Hardly fair to put it on the woman of whatever age: too many ‘men’ refuse to restrain their desire to deposit sperm in women - plenty of stupid insensitivity there. If only there were some way to penalize / disincentivize / prevent such ‘men’ from ‘winning’ the ejaculation prize...without punishing the women who unsuccessfully fight them off....
Yet another post that just seems to want to argue. Tell me do you think its a good thing for ANY woman/girl under 18 to become pregnant and have the responsibility both financially and emotionally to have a baby? Please explain how its such a silly notion to not think its a bad idea for a young woman to totally derail her life by becoming a mother when she is in no way shape or form really ready for it regardless of what the woke folks say.Hardly fair to put it on the woman of whatever age: too many ‘men’ refuse to restrain their desire to deposit sperm in women - plenty of stupid insensitivity there. If only there were some way to penalize / disincentivize / prevent such ‘men’ from ‘winning’ the ejaculation prize...without punishing the women who unsuccessfully fight them off....