/mlpol/ - My Little Politics

>>343476
I hate to say this - actually I don’t hate to say this - but I’ll believe they’ve actually overturned Roe when it’s released publicly. I don’t trust leaks.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-00029473
>>343478
A fair take.
I'm skeptical too, but I will still lick the salt.

>>343479
>Sex boycott
How to announce you're a woman without saying you're a woman.
This is exactly what men have wanted for 62 years, and would be a small step in fixing women.

This has a very simple solution for all parties involved:
CLOSE YOUR LEGS, WHORES.

>>343490
It is going to be an INSURRECTION!!!!
Call the FBI and DHS!!!
Kidnap them all!!!
KEK

>>343490
Why didn't this embed?
Don't tweets embed on /mlpol/?

>>343493
fxtwitter is a link (like a wrap) used in Discord to show Twitter videos.

Dissent has not been leaked. Here's the leaked document:

>>343476
This won’t really have any effect on women’s abilities to obtain abortions, since telehealth, especially across state lines, is becoming more popular and abortion pills are now able to be sent through the mail. Congress is the authority that regulates interstate commerce, so there is little states can really do outside of their own borders.

>>343505
Wait a minute. In the States, isn't murder a crime prosecuted across State lines?

>>343510
Yes, but it would be very difficult for state governments to obtain evidence related to abortion pills being sent through the mail, since postal carriers can’t be prosecuted for discharging their duties as federal employees and interfering with the postal service is a crime of its own. And good luck convincing a pro-choice state to cooperate with a pro-life state in gathering evidence.

Though one thing to keep in mind is that this congressional power over interstate commerce has been used in the fight against segregation, with one of the first landmark cases against it ultimately banning the practice on trains that cross state lines.

>>343511
>And good luck convincing a pro-choice state to cooperate with a pro-life state in gathering evidence.
Evidence can be gathered upon suspicion of a femoid has committed murder by means of a gynecological inspection.

>>343512
So how bad do you think a judge would look if he tried to obtain a warrant to search a woman’s vagina in such manner? And it is something that is easily portable and physically hard to inspect, especially without express consent and/or resistance.

>>343516
>without express consent and/or resistance.
In a criminal investigation, sedatives might be used.

>>343517
This.

>>>343511
>Yes, but it would be very difficult for state governments to obtain evidence
They do this shit all the time for giggle switches.
It's trivial.

/mlpol/: “Muh Geneva Convention says tha gubmint can’t give us medicine by force!”

Also /mlpol/: >>343517

You know the drill.

>>343519
Would a pro-choice state government really hand over order details for abortion pills to a pro-life state government?

>>343520
>Muh Geneva Convention
I would like to remind you that women per se, lack men's agency and a designated tutor should decide for them.

>>343524
That’s probably not going to happen if the 14th Amendment says that all citizens have equal protection under the law. Plus, women have an average GPA of 3.5, while men have an average of 2.5, which is barely above passing. 70% of all tenured positions in tech are also held by women, so if anything, men should be the ones who ought to be chaperoned.

Interesting, this could be interpreted such to change the landscape of 5th ammendment protections, specific to body cavities.
I mean, if a person has a right to be secure in their persons and property against unreasonable searches and seizure, as well as the right to not self incriminate, excepting when there is probable cause to determine a crime has been or is being committed,... this is gonna get messy

>>343505
Honestly I don’t care that much whether or not some bar skank can actually get an abortion. The important thing here is the rollback of federal power. That and watching lefties seethe.

>>343529
The problem is that the federal power already exists and will exist following Roe. The UNHRC has previously made abortion an essential human right and Article VI of the US Constitution effectively makes UN charters and international treaties the US is a party to equivalent to federal law or the Constitution itself.

>>343532
>Since it’s nearly exclusively men who create culture and civilization
And that is because women were mainly excluded from doing so or you just have not heard enough about them. For instance, the western frontier was settled thanks in part to brothels opening up and women showing themselves off. While it may sound dirty today, it was a moment of female pride back in the day. In fact, the state of Wyoming refused to become a state unless the federal government allowed women there to vote. And let’s not forget about women such as Ada Lovelace, Agatha Christie, the Supremes, and even Queen Elizabeth II.

>>343534
I'm speechless. Are you a femoid?

>>343536
Says the man who posted a picture of a cartoon pony from a little girls’ show.

>>343536
If the shoe was on the other foot and your right to have sex with a woman following intercourse that resulted in one conception was at stake, how would you react?

>>343537
Where do you think you are?

Let us analyze the subject and their role in society to make a fair assessment.

>>343538
Wait are you asking us if we would be bothered because we wouldn't be able to get endless hookup sex and have to only have sex with the partner we choose to have kids with and spend our lives with? If so then you clearly don't know that is the majority of men's real dream, the idea of endless sex with countless women is only available to a select few and a lot of those few don't even do that. It appears only women seem to go around for quick fucks these days

>>343545
>>343546
I take it you both have had some bad breakups, but I don’t see how they should play a part in shaping abortion law.

But now imagine you were raped by a stripper during your bachelor party and no one bothered to call security to get her off you before you released your seed. Now imagine this got her pregnant and you were then legally forbidden from ever having sexual intercourse again. What would you do?

>>343550
People unfortunately never imagine enough and that is what allows unjust laws to take away liberties we take for granted. It is how the Nazis used existing antisemitic sentiment to move the goalposts further and further for Jews and undesirables and how the communists enacted policies that excluded anything that was remotely capitalist in nature and were willing to set the bar even higher than it was. People need to imagine more or else we’re doomed to have less and less freedom.

>>343551
>bait bait bait
I see.

>>343552
>bait bait bait
I also see.

>>343549
Well with it being a rape case she would be found guilty and put in jail, where she would be sure to be looked after well so she can give birth and then the care of the child would come to the father who would take on sole responsibility with no involvement from the convict mother. It's not the best case scenario but why would removing the right to kill a baby in the womb mean I wouldn't have the right to ever have sex again? And like I said if I got full custody of the child if that was the case, then it would still be ok since I'd have a generation to pass my heritage to.

Also have some fitting horse pussy

>>343554
They're trying to conflate women not being able to murder rape-babies with women raping dudes and the dudes being unable to have sex ever again.
Cuz they're totally comparable.

>>343556
This.
The shill is trying to flip the narrative.

>>343556
Oh I know, I'm just using it as an excuse to post impregnated horse pussy, simple as.

Also mods can't remember if I asked this before but are we ever going to add comparability for ponerpics links to be used here instead of uploading files? Could help bring activity to both sites with pictures here linking to their ponerpics equivalent

>>343554
>>343556
>>343561
The post never said it would; it was a hypothetical scenario where men had most of the burden of reproductive restrictions instead of women. It would be regarding a hypothetical law that would forbid sexual intercourse by males following a conception.

Start telling the Karen's about the clot shot and how they tried to force something into your body then say "My body, My choice.

>>343520
>Implying /mlpol/ is one person
Fuck off.

>>343569
Virtually none of this is about whether babies live or die, since they would be slated to die anyway in the vast majority of abortions. This is about the reproductive freedoms of individuals based on gender and such hypothetical requirement for men would only be equally as damaging.

>>343570
And here we see revealed, the true purpose behind this move. Up until this moment, all signs pointed to a conservative landslide in the '22 election.
Now its not gonna be a referrendum on all the horseshit from the past 2+ years, not the 2020 voter fraud, none of that matters anymore.
Its gonna be all about narrative control, cuz bitches gotta be able to kill babies. FFS

>343571
>more false equivalence
Good goy

>>343571
Point to me the lines in the constitution where it guarantees abortions as a right.

>>343489
You are implying that no one would be strong enough to pry them open by force.
>>343575
Please see >>343530.

>>343576
That is not how Article 6 works, nor is it how the UN charter works.

>>343549
Liberals always have a need to psychologize and come up with crazy hypotheticals.

>>343572
This is entirely possible. It may just be that all this winning in April has been a sophisticated ploy to get the Right to adopt faith in the system again. I doubt that, though, and in any case they wouldn't be able to do so unless if they let Trump be elected in 2024. If that happens it will be a serious blow to our movement.

>>343530
>UNHRC
Which UNHRC are you talking about? The United States hasn't ratified all of them.

>>343580
Please see >>343551. Also, this sounds very anti-intellectual and counterproductive to government policy, since we’d essentially otherwise be looking down at our feet rather than up at the road ahead.
>>343578
>>343583
Even if it is not, an interpretation of the UDHR as well as potentially the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments would say that outlawing abortions would do women extrajudicial harm.

>>343534
>the Supremes
I refuse to believe this post is serious.

>>343505
>This won’t really have any effect on women’s abilities to obtain abortions
That was NEVER what made the ruling so damn important.
The significance of RvW is that it created an American legal right out of thin air through nothing more than a legal fiction decided upon by a group of justices, WHICH IS NOT HOW THE U.S. GOVERNMENT WORKS! The rights of the people are outline in the Bill of Rights, and each respective states constitutions. In addition to that, laws are created by Congress, or the respective state legislature, and no one else. On top of that, issues such as abortion and gay marriage was NEVER the responsibility of the federal government to decide. It was always an issue for the respective state governments to decide upon themselves.

So, with the continued existence of RvW, it sets the precedence that the legal law can completely bypass the legislative process as justices can create new laws out of thin air, in addition to making the state governments subservient to the federal government. HOWEVER, with the overturning of the ruling, that returns the government process to how it originally functioned, where laws can only be made by Congress and the legislature, and and states have a significant level of autonomy separate from the federal government.

>>343549
In this hypothetical scenario am I armed or is the stripper armed?

>>343591
Stop in the name of love!
>>343592
>The significance of RvW is that it created an American legal right out of thin air through nothing more than a legal fiction decided upon by a group of justices, WHICH IS NOT HOW THE U.S. GOVERNMENT WORKS!
Ninth Amendment: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

Tenth Amendment: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

In essence, the Constitution was designed to be a more permissive document than a prohibitive one as far as the rights of the citizens are concerned, so the people should not only have the right to their own lives, as expressed multiple times, but also have the right to an abortion should one be necessary. It was not made-up; it always was there.
>HOWEVER, with the overturning of the ruling, that returns the government process to how it originally functioned, where laws can only be made by Congress and the legislature, and and states have a significant level of autonomy separate from the federal government.
Would you be fine with people of your race being excluded from certain establishments or accommodations? Would you be fine with the next MLP con excluding people of your race? Because segregation was also a states’-rights issue. Would you also be fine not attending because your owner wanted you to work an extra five hours in the tobacco field? Because slavery was also a states’-rights issue.

>>343592
This.
Roe v. Wade was the pinnacle of judicial activism and legislating from the bench. It set a dangerous precedent and it had to be overturned.

>>343595
>also have the right to an abortion
Citation needed.
Abortion isn't anywhere in the constitution. It never was. The suggestion that it was is a joke.

>>343572
>>343580
It's probably not going to be enough even if that's what it is. The main reason people are predicting a Republican landslide in 2022 is that the economy is in the shitter and that's what people care about. I wouldn't be surprised if this leak was a hail mary from the left, but it won't work for the same reason that trying to hype up the Jan 6 "insurrection" narrative hasn't worked. These kinds of cheap theatrics only work in elections where nobody is paying attention. There are far more normies who care about gas prices and inflation than there are sluts who care about losing their stupid abortions, and that isn't likely to change in the next few months. Probably the only thing that could prevent Republicans from retaking both houses is if the economy magically recovers between now and November, and of all the unlikely things that could possibly happen, that is by far the least likely.

A bigger and more legitimate concern is that it's not going to matter if Republicans take back Congress, or even the Presidency, because even if they do they will just fuck it up and waste their chance like they usually do. My worry is that they actually WILL waste the next two years trying to pass some kind of nationwide abortion ban, or some bipartisan "help the Ukraine" bullshit, instead of addressing election fraud and corruption and all the other shit that actually matters.

>>343601
><Catherine the Great used her massive power for spend he free time getting fucked by stallions and mustangs
So now you’re disparaging the original horsef*cker on a horsef*ckery website?

>>343587
>an interpretation of the UDHR as well as potentially the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments would say that outlawing abortions would do women extrajudicial harm.
It's the SCOTUS's job to interpret those, and the SCOTUS says otherwise.
Also, which UDHR are you talking about?

>>343571
>This is about the reproductive freedoms of individuals
Then why is it a woman can rape a tennager, come to term, and then sue the teen for unpaid alamony despite the teen never wanting to have a child (Much less ever wanting to have sex in the first place?

>>343603
>>343601
Catherine wasn't that bad.

>>343595
>so the people should not only have the right to their own lives, as expressed multiple times, but also have the right to an abortion should one be necessary
So the Constitution says that woman, who consented to have sex, have the right to deprive another human being of their right to exist, without any input from the father of the child, because they suddenly change their mind and regret having not used any contraceptives earlier prior to having sex, or not even having sex at all?
>Would you be fine with people of your race being excluded from certain establishments or accommodations? Would you be fine with the next MLP con excluding people of your race?
Yes, because then I could spend my money elsewhere with a company who doesn't care about my skin complexion.
>Would you also be fine not attending because your owner wanted you to work an extra five hours in the tobacco field?
They do that already, my race has jack shit to do with it. My boss can call my up right now and demand that I come into the office to work despite the day being my day off. I've had that happen working in restaurants, factories, and offices. And, if I don't want to continue working under those conditions, then it's my responsibility to find another job for source of income.
>Because slavery was also a states’-rights issue.
Except slavery outlawed by the 14th amendment, which was passed by congress, signed by the president, and ratified by the state governments.

>>343595
Fun fact: the Constitution was meant to apply to the federal government only. A number of states had state churches well into the 19th century despite the 1st Amendment, so clearly that didn't apply to them. The idea that the Constitution applies on every level of government is a modernist and progressive interpretation. Though in reality, it's only a piece of paper which is reinterpreted according to political whims. You don't see prohibitions on guns across the country being struck down in the same way as prohibitions on abortions.

>Would you be fine with people of your race being excluded from certain establishments or accommodations?
THIS ALREADY HAPPENS. There are black-only spaces, hispanic-only spaces, Jewish-only spaces, etc. There is only an enforced prohibition on white-only spaces, and affirmative action programs essentially mean whites are excluded from positions in favor of more "disadvantaged" people.

>Because segregation was also a states’-rights issue.
It was, and most people were opposed to getting rid of segregation when Brown v. Board of Education happened. Federal troops had to force students to go to school at gunpoint. SCOTUS has always been a top-down power apparatus.

>Because slavery was also a states’-rights issue.
Though immoral, it was not an issue worth fighting a war over. Moreover, at the end of the war most of the slaves didn't want to leave the plantations. That sounds weird but consider that poor white southerners were worse off economically even than the average slave.

>>343601
>Catherine the Great
To be honest, at least she had good taste.

>Marie Antoinette
Didn't say "Let them eat cake," that was the wife of Louis XV. She was actually a decent person irl.

>>343610
>Though immoral, it was not an issue worth fighting a war over. Moreover, at the end of the war most of the slaves didn't want to leave the plantations. That sounds weird but consider that poor white southerners were worse off economically even than the average slave.
Slavery is actually a rather humorous subject when you begin to study how it functioned.

For example, the person who started the slavery as an institution in the United States was a nigger and former indentured servant by the name of Anthony Johnson, majority of the citizens in the Southern government didn't own slaves and those that did were around 25% of the population, the most unethical slave holders where niggers and kikes, the kikes are over-represented in being the ones maintaining the slavery in the South, the Southerners actually lobbied the federal government to recognize the slaves as citizens so that the slave owners could dictate who their slave voted for, then-recent technological advancements like the cotton gin actually started making slavery unprofitable in comparison to traditionally hiring employees, etc.

>>343610
>Didn't say "Let them eat cake," that was the wife of Louis XV.
Correct. That's a common misconception derivative of propaganda that emerged during the French revolution to disparage her.
>She was actually a decent person irl.
Eh, that's debatable.

>>343611
Slavery was a mistake. If it had never happened, niggers would not be 14% of this continents population. The cheap labor wasn't worth the demographic damage, even with the then-intent of keeping them as a permanent underclass.
Things would have been so much better if they'd stuck with white indentured servants.

>>343626
>He did it again
KEK

>>343595
>Would you be fine with the next MLP con excluding people of your race?
Your hypotheticals are silly, whites are already second-class citizens in their own homelands denied opportunities from their skin tone and excluded from nigger-only places.
Jew, learn what a "Swedish" No-Go Zone is.

we live in an age of mindless flesh automatons animated by neurotransmitters. most people lost their soul and integrity not caring for responsibility or others. Only chasing their next neuron activator. this will change.

>>343632
KEK

>>343549
I'll answer that question with a question of my own:
What percentage of abortions actually occur as a result of proven rape or sexual assault? Pro-choice advocates always argue about "we need abortion because rape victims shouldn't be burdened by bearing a bastard child!" but in reality it seems that the VAST majority of abortions are simply done by women who can't keep their legs closed. It's used as a get-out-of-jail-free card for people riding the cock carousel.

>>343505
I'm a bit of a filthy moderate on this issue, if a pregnancy is early on I don't really care if an abortion pill or something can terminate it, it's when it's further along that it seems barbaric to me as in the second and particularly third trimester the child has brain activity and responds to stimulus, I don't see much difference between a newborn and a baby still in the womb in the third trimester. Some of the more recent and more permissive laws allowing abortion deep into the third trimester and even shortly after birth I consider completely grotesque.

>and even shortly after birth
Please tell me you're exaggerating. Surely even the left wouldn't kill actual babies outside the womb?
Oh who am I kidding, of course they would.

>>343645
NYC made it so that if a baby survived an abortion attempt they'd kill them anyways.

>>343600
>Its probably not gonna be enough
To overturn the election results? No. To galvanize the left into more extreme levels of narrative gaslighting, civil unrest (remember thatbinc8dent where a twacked out nigger OD'd under a cop and there were months of riots?), and outright violent disobedience under false pretenses?
Yes, for the next 2 years. God only knows what happend in 2024
>>343613
Should have stuck to white, irish slaves yes, that was a thing, in spite of the 'oppressed black slaves by white masters' narrative
>>343639
Imo, this is the greater evil of abortion. Yes, killing babies is bad, but ngl, Im mot so opposed to nigger babies being killed.
The more onerous problem is having generations of women growing up with the perception that they can abdicate all responsibility and consequence from degenerate choices.
Ngl, I kinda like the idea of dumb bitches dying from illegal abortions.
Moreover, I look forward to abortion sanctuary states (you KNOW its coming) and watching them rot from the inside out through those and other leftist policies.
But the gaslighting narrative manipulation, thats the part Im worried about.

>>343649
>Moreover, I look forward to abortion sanctuary states (you KNOW its coming) and watching them rot from the inside out through those and other leftist policies.
Not really needed, repealing Roe v Wade doesn't make abortion illegal, it just allows for states to make abortion illegal to the extent the individual state wants to. The democrats will also probably try to get a federal law through and it has a fair chance of passing considering how few republican votes it would need in the senate, depends on how the midterms go.

>>343651
>it just allows for states to make abortion illegal to the extent the individual state wants to
Uh huh, now play the tape forward. Red states (some) make abortion illegal, and some blue states make it legal, on principle alone. Consequently, the left and media in tandem demonize red states and further the cultural divide, while animating more radical leftists cuz they just gotta have their dead babies.

>>343649
If the enforcement of a federal law against marijuana of all things varies by state, I wouldn’t be surprised to see a federal abortion ban enforced similarly if one were to ever come about.
>>343654
We already have the culture of being a hick and the culture of being a person with a fedora and a Tommy gun in each others’ minds.

>>343654
I think you're unaware of what the term "sanctuary state" means then, a sanctuary city/state is one in which a federal law prohibiting something intentionally goes ignored and unenforced as policy.

>BOMBSHELL: Leak Shows Roe v. Wade To Be OVERTURNED, ENRAGING The Left Who Want To Kill Babies!!!
>The US Supreme Court has just voted to strike down and overturn the Roe v. Wade decision according to an internal draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito who states that “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,”…he said “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” he writes in the document, labeled as the “Opinion of the Court.” “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”
>In this video Dan Dicks of Press For Truth covers this unprecedented move by the SCOTUS which has outraged many on the left enough to show their hypocrisy when it comes to bodily autonomy.
https://odysee.com/@PressForTruth:4/Roe-v-Wade-Overturned:7
Mirrors:
https://rumble.com/v13etux-bombshell-leak-shows-roe-v.-wade-overturned-enraging-the-left-who-want-to-k.html
https://www.bitchute.com/video/cymx4h6MIegq/

>>343658
And I think you underestimate the left's wont to disingenuously label things; the 'dont say gay' bill being exhibit A.
My concern, admittely probably premature or overblown, is that this will be another 'leg' by which the truth is dilluted and whittled away. It doesnt/wont matter that not killing babies is the issue, because the left is gonna take this for all its worth, and push a narrative for years in spite of the fallacious nature of it. Just like they did last time.

>BABY KILLERS BIG MAD
>Shitlibs wet the bed.
https://odysee.com/@PaulJosephWatson:5/baby-killers-big-mad:f
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/iBWMU-M9r7s/
Entertainment value.

>>343647
Tbh, a baby that survived an abortion attempt is probably severely mutilated (chopped up) and unlikely to survive more than a few hours outside the wound.

>>343654
>Consequently, the left and media in tandem demonize red states and further the cultural divide
This could be a good thing. It could prevent liberals from moving to red states, keeping red states red.

>>343669
Dude, that was the plan anyway.
It wouldn't have mattered if Roe v. Wade were overturned. There would always be another culture war topic for them to screech about, and if there were none they'd invent more.

>>343677
But it could also mean conservatives move to blue states and turn them red.

>>343675
>Abortion is a jewish value
So true, so true.

>>343476
The news came out May 2nd, the day after the end of the Moloch ritual.
Taking in count that the "Court" is (((masonic))) to its core, I would very careful not to be naive and believe this is a promising sign.

>>343684
I know you lads like to "IDS THUR MAYSONSES!!!" but,... eventually you'll grow uo and realize whobthe adversary is.

>>343688
I believe everyone already knows.

>>343676
Actually, because of advancements in medical technology, fetuses can finish developing outside of the womb months before delivery. In fact, they've actually run several trials on having animal infants develop completely in artificial wombs. So, when you get down to it, there is ZERO reason to kill the fetus if the woman is seeking an abortion. Just extract it from the woman's womb, have it develop artificially, and then sign the kid up for adoption.

>>343677
>It could prevent liberals from moving to red states, keeping red states red.
Tell that to Texas, who's being flooded with Rapefugees from California.

>>343521
There's no need for The State to snitch on people.
And it's already happening.
Data Broker Is Selling Location Data of People Who Visit Abortion Clinics
https://archive.ph/J0c11

>>343690
It was more of a question of the baby having already been mutilated/maimed by the attempted abortion than of fetal viability.

>>343690
>Tell that to Texas, who's being flooded with Rapefugees from California.
Maybe the abortion bans and anti-troon laws will get them to fuck off.

>>343693
No, they'll just either bitch and moan about it and never do anything, or start subverting and making Texas' government like California's and then leave for the same reason they left California and start it all over again somewhere else.

>>343618
>>343617
>>343616
>Those crystal caps
Wew.

>>343694
Or what if Texas simply refused to honor driving licenses of those from other states? Certain states actually do make new residents retake their driving tests, so Texas could join their ranks.

>>343698
So what would other colors of Sharia look like? How is white Sharia different from red or blue Sharia?

>>343699
With a bit of rightness and another of morality, you'll find out soon enough.

Apparently Jane Rowe lied on the stand about being gang raped.

Commies, liberals and women are also a bunch of cells.

>Amazon Offers U.S. Workers $4,000 Reimbursement for Out-of-State Abortions
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/amazon-offers-u-s-workers-4000-reimbursement-for-out-of-state-abortions/
Not sure of the legal terminology but I believe this is called conspiracy to commit homicide.

In case it isn't clear, this is ZOG throwing a bone to conservatives in order to give them the illusion that they are represented, and stabilize the domestic situation in muttland. 90000 Pfizer court documents were also released today, meaning that any attention towards the vax scam will be drowned out. Conservatism is weaker than ever, and everyone has realized by now that Hitler was one of the good guys, so they throw boomers a bone to give them the illusion that they are represented.
>>343704
>>343703
Abortion should only be illegal in case of healthy white babies. In National Socialist Germany, it was mandatory for disgenic freaks.

>>343706
>In case it isn't clear, this is ZOG throwing a bone to conservatives in order to give them the illusion that they are represented
I totally agree with that.
This SCOTUS circus is another psyop.

>>343706
One thing is clear, nothing has been done yet. It is only a draft, an intention.
Child Sacrifices are at the core of ZOG policies and it is very likely this is bait and switch, like the Trump's wall and anchor babies. So, cheer when is done, not before.

>>343710
This. The Canaanites practiced child sacrifices on idols of their god Malech and outlawing abortion may mean people do something similar to their unwanted children.

End Child Sacrifice.

>>343775
So do you think people performed child sacrifices because there was no access to abortion?

>>343639
If you believe that biological men are stronger than biological women in general, you should also believe that some women simply can’t keep their legs closed because they would be pried open. Also, different people would have different understandings of how “open” is “open” and women would be restricted in how they dress and how they behave.

Attention deficiency in NPCs and many people means these sorts of distractions are effective. The sort of longish term sees it as a balance from previous choices that put it leaning 'left' to now lean 'right'.
It also happens after the department of misinformation.

>>343777
>and women would be restricted in how they dress and how they behave.
Not only is this a good thing, it is a hard requirement for the rise of civilization.

>>343779
So now imagine men were forbidden from sexual intercourse after conceiving one child. Would you dress up in your golf shirt or tux after that? After all, you could be found attractive by a sexy woman in an alley or on a beach somewhere and she could rape you. Not only would she be arrested for the incident, but you would be arrested for having sex after conceiving a child.

>>343777
>If you believe that biological men are stronger than biological women in general, you should also believe that some women simply can’t keep their legs closed because they would be pried open.
But the average abortion haver isn't a rape victim, is sheeeee? Will the extra eeeees help you listen?
>Also, different people would have different understandings of how “open” is “open” and women would be restricted in how they dress and how they behave.
So desperate, so confused. A healthy society restricts men and women from eating human flesh, raping, unjustly killing, and more. Is it really so unthinkable to forbid women from killing their young?
>So now imagine men were forbidden from sexual intercourse after conceiving one child.
Your hypothetical fantasy sessions are as pointless as they are retarded. Just like the niggery admins of Derpy booru, you must look to your own fantasies before the nonsense you represent and argue for can make any kind of sense to you. Fucking NPC.
>Would you dress up in your golf shirt or tux after that? After all, you could be found attractive by a sexy woman in an alley or on a beach somewhere and she could rape you. Not only would she be arrested for the incident, but you would be arrested for having sex after conceiving a child.
Stop with the retarded what-iffing. Raped women are still able to have children after giving birth to their rapist's baby even if they cannot abort it. Facts don't support you. The fantasies you concoct to make a case for you only serve to reveal how incompatible your feelings are with reality.

Whores do not deserve the right to murder their kids. Certainly not if they will deny men the right to save their kids despite their whore mother's wishes.

>>343781
>So now imagine...
No. That is not how it works.

>>343781
The biggest flaw with this "Imagine if X was happening to you" shit you say is that it's not happening to the whores/jews you defend.
Raped women aren't socially or legally punished for being raped. They can still reproduce afterwards, whether they get abortions or not.

>>343790
You really need to learn about the potential ramifications of actions such as this. Perhaps Congress may one day also pass a law cutting federal funds from arms manufacturers and gun dealers who are neither active supporters of right-to-abortion organizations nor located in abortion-friendly states. Perhaps the states may also decide that if interpreting the Fourth and Fifth Amendments is up to them, the Second may follow.

>>343810
>The way the Left describes it, you'd think the child in the womb is a disease. A mass of offending matter that must be removed.
To them it IS a disease. Its the first tier of Misandry, where the all-perfect and righteous wamen is 'infected' with the biologically masculine contaminant. It furthers the biological tyrranny against troons and others, by forcing them to realize that nature and gender and biology are a real thing that they can only attempt to destroy.
Moreover, the comparison to older religions is spot on. Think about it. The body is a temple right?
So what are the genitals, in that they are the source of creation? Correct, the altar.
What do you think happens when you pervert the altar through sexual degeneracy, and especially when you destroy the altar and THEN construct a flesh sculpture in defiance of nature?
The left is galvanized against abortion because its a shatterpoint; a point of convergence where veritably all of the various entropic agendas intersect.

Prof. Edward Dutton: The Jolly Heretic
>What Kind of Women Have Abortions?
https://odysee.com/what-kind-of-women-have-abortions:c
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/BPUFn7sgGrqR/

>>343813
This.

>>343778
I'm taking notes and digging into it.

>>343818
>>343812
>>343778
>whataboutism
Cringe.

>>343781
>Not only would she be arrested for the incident
No, she wouldn't. Woman rape men all the time, and any attempt to file a court case get's thrown out because it's "impossible" for a woman to rape a man, and the logic of "If the dick gets hard, the man consents."

>>343825
>It’s not rape if his pupils turn into hearts; ask any lawyer.
You do realize that some of that is an involuntary reflex, no?

>>343826
So you’d rather have the military be forced to effectively fund abortion by purchasing firearms from pro-choice states?

>>343830
>You do realize that some of that is an involuntary reflex, no?
Tell that to the courts.

>>343831
That isn't how shit works, you idiot.

>>343832
>Tell that to the courts.
Then let me explain by using “rule 10”. It could also be judged as duress or temporary insanity, but this is not legal advice.
>That isn't how shit works, you idiot.
Why? The federal government is already on track to only purchasing electric vehicles in coming years and has banned several apps from federal employees’ phones.

>>343815
Glad to see assent, cuz Im about to shit all over this bitch.

How is masturbation - the willful and deliberate discarding of the Masculine essence and function of creation - any different than abortion - the willful and deliberate discarding of the Feminine essence and function of creation?
Not to downplay the appropriateness of abortion being seen in its proper light - that of child sacrifice - one could argue the point that a male who masturbates or engages in hedonistic sex practice is LIKEWISE and EQUALLY engaging in child sacrifice - from the male perspective and context.
So, while we discuss the degeneracy of women, we could do well to recognize it in ourselves, when it is present.
Stop Masturbating

>>343833
>Why?
Because companies make money buy selling products to the consumer!
If the company can only make money because of the government subsidizing them, then they're making a product that people don't want to buy and should go out of business. That's not to mention the fact that state laws on how they view abortions has absolutely NOTHING to do with how, in this particular instance, firearms manufactures make money.

>>343834
>How is masturbation any different than abortion?
Because sperm expire within a week unless they find an egg to fertilize, and are reabsorbed into the body if they're not used. Not to mention the fact that masturbating is actually closer to women having a period, where their body expels wasted eggs that are not fertilized (Except, without all of the pain and craziness that happens as a byproduct).

>>343834
And you say that on a site where “rule 10” says you’re allowed to post literal pornographic pictures of ponies.
>>343836
>That's not to mention the fact that state laws on how they view abortions has absolutely NOTHING to do with how, in this particular instance, firearms manufactures make money.
Then how do states make money for their highway funds from raised drinking ages?

>>343839
>Then how do states make money for their highway funds from raised drinking ages?
Taxes and license registration.

>>343840
The point is that states were threatened with their federal highway funds being taken away if they didn’t raise their drinking ages. Sales to firearms manufacturers could be one route at retaliation against overturning Roe.

>>343841
>Sales to firearms manufacturers could be one route at retaliation against overturning Roe.
Except the federal government cannot regulate firearms per the 2A.

>>343842
The Franchi SPAS-15 shotgun was once illegal to import into the United States. Therefore, the federal government does indeed have that power.

>>343842
except they do anyway. Starting in 1936 with the NFA tax, that, back then, more than doubled the overall cost of certain scary firearms and firearm accessories.

>>343844
>>343843
>The Franchi SPAS-15 shotgun was once illegal to import into the United States.
Because no one it to court that the AWB was a violation of the second amendment, and all the court cases that did occur was over everything BUT the 2A: https://infogalactic.com/info/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Legal_challenges
And, since the law expired in 2004, the SCOTUS DID rule 4 years later that such a ban is unconstitutional: https://infogalactic.com/info/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

>>343844
>>343845
But that is like saying a federal or state tax on liquor violates your right to drink booze as enshrined in the 9th and 10th Amendments, which basically give everyone and/or the states whatever rights were not reserved by the federal government in the “supreme laws of the land”.

>>343846
>that is like saying a federal or state tax on liquor violates your right to drink booze
No, it doesn't, because the constitution, since the start, grants Congress the right to to levy taxes.

>>343847
So it also gives Congress the right to levy taxes on firearms.

>>343846
>>343847
In fact, the 18A legally and Constitutionally outlawed liquor across the land, until it was repealed by the 21A.

>>343848
Yes, and?
What does this have to do with abortion?

>>343837
Its not about expiring sperm, its about the discarding of sperm for a few minutes of penile convulsions.
You may not like it, but the two are on par with one another. One could argue that nocturnal emissions (wet dreams) are likenable to a woman's period, but not the fapping. Face it, masturbation is degenerate.
>>343839
>you say that on a sitewith rule 10
Yes, I do. Rule 10 was about implementing a defensive response to outsiders and detractors who history has shown are mostly put off by horsepron. And while there will always be a significant percent of horsefuckers who literally clop to ponies, its still degenerate escapism.
Call it what you want, masturbation is a symptom of a lack of self discipline.