This one feels different, almost as if this is something you can’t speak up about at all. If you said to anyone “I support this” I feel like there would be serious consequences and the government would just say “well you support the overturning of Roe so there’s nothing we can do.”

Also the way the TV and media and corporations are taking for granted that NO ONE supports this is definitely a click in turning the temperature up a bit.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44746944)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44747882)

God supports honor culture, Conservatives are a type of lib that support out-of-wedlock births. If you want to cut down on out-of-wedlock births (including rape) you need abortion/infanticide.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44747523)

Edit: also we need to bring back slut shaming

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44747540)

If you don't want 'sluts to be sluts' ban fornication, but the anti-abortion people will never do that as women will get abortions to cover up acts of fornication as they did back in the day and the anti-abortion people are singularly obsessed with abortion.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44747593)

Drowning infants was common when high quality abortifacients weren't available.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44751091)

This is only exacerbated by conservatives turning the dial straight to 100 and treating it like murder, without a biological or theological basis for doing so. of course there’s going to be a lot of furious people who (probably rightfully) feel threatened and lash out.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44747032)

Freedom to raise your children includes freedom to limit their activities. Freedom to sell life insurance (edit: brainfart, obviously meant health insurance) that doesn't meet PPACA requirements includes freedom to limit what kinds of procedures people can get. Freedom to keep and bear arms includes freedom to limit what kinds of governments may be imposed. And, not to put too fine a point on it, but freedom to get an abortion is freedom to remove, finally and irreversibly, all freedoms the child could ever exercise.

So what the fuck are you going on about?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44747881)

No. What are you talking about? Ignoring the fact that you have your defined terms wrong (PPACA life insurance?) you seem to have no comprehension of freedom as espoused in the Western tradition. The establishment of mutual cooperation and, ultimately, government is the voluntary surrendering of freedoms. You have a god given right to walk down a road, whether there is a government or not, and regardless of my freedom to assault you while doing so. Our mutual decision to limit sidewalk assaults isn’t granting you a freedom to walk; it’s removing the freedom to assault.

And if that is your argument for abortion, then by your own logic isn’t choosing not to fornicate morally identical? You have deprived of life a being which has yet to be ensouled. In one case, fertilization has occurred, and in the other, you deprived the person of even being conceived.

So, by being a Lawrence v Taylor dependent homosexual, how, by your logic, are you not equally morally culpable as a would-be mother who takes a morning after pill?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44748307)

Explain to me how you'd walk down a road in a state of nature, fuckface.

Lastly, your idiotic moralizing is not a good substitute for legal analysis. Equal protection is clearly in the constitution; substantive due process, not so much. If you can't even wrap your head around that, then you don't belong on this board.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44754329)

lol the entire purpose of the federalist papers was about how limited the federal government would be and how the states would still retain almost all power. many states had literal state churches, whose ministers were paid by the government, and there were church courts that had the power to compel people to do things which was enforced by the state.

this is one of the most retarded takes of all time. the bill of rights was only added because people were worried that the federal government would do shit like take guns or take away the press, so the BOR was added explicitly to guarantee the federal government did not do that. but the states were free to do whatever the fuck they wanted.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44748029)

This statement might be the single dumbest thing ever written on XO; it is completely unforgivable for anyone with a JD to type that out. The Rights you cited are guaranteed for all citizens of the United States and can’t be usurped by a state government. I’m sure you know that, but your above comment makes it sound like those rights are just guaranteed to the states, who can in turn overrule them to create their own little fiefdoms. The Bill of Rights was as much about guaranteeing the rights and liberties of all men as it is about about expressly stating the limits of the federal government relative to the states.

Now please explain how the comment I was replying to is consistent with, for example, Federalist #10

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44748365)

please explain how massachusetts had a state religion until 1833?

please explain why the incorporation doctrine is necessary if the BOR always applied to the states?

please explain barron v. baltimore (1833) that explicitly held that the state governments are not bound the BOR?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44753499)

My interpretation of Barron is that it was ruled on the basis of a technicality: that the laws were not written explicitly enough to apply the intentions of the writers. Plus the courts were trying to weave their way through issues like the rights of free Black men, etc., and couldn’t stir the waters too much without triggering a civil war (which happened anyways). The original writings in the Federalist vs Anti-Federalist debates make it clear that the purpose of the Bill of Rights was to guarantee rights and individual liberties. Thankfully, both Barron and Cruikshank have been rendered obsolete, though this is also ultimately due to a technicality (the 14th’s “Due Process” clause).

I’m not familiar with Massachusetts’ state religion, but it looks like it was overturned in part due to court cases. It’s fairly irrelevant, though, since states do unconstitutional things all the time, hence why the Supreme Court exists and has to make these rulings fairly regularly.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44753764)

i think it's clear that the BOR was not intended to apply to state legislatures. i think that's made clear in the federalist papers. and i think that is strongly evidenced by shit like states having their own state religions in 1789 that continued for about another fifty years, along with early scotus opinions explicitly holding they don't apply to the states. care to find me some scotus opinions that strike down state law because of the BOR before the 14th amendment?

saying that this was rendered obsolete by the 14th is completely irrelevant. of course scotus has decided that the BOR applies to the states *now*. what we're arguing about is what they meant in 1789, and i've provided a lot of evidence that they thought it only applied to the federal government.

how can you say that's it's embarrassing for a jd holder to believe this when that's exactly what scotus unanimously held when it first decided the issue?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44753917)

In regards to your point about the BOR applying to states, James Madison’s early drafts of the 5th Amendment were more explicit. If I remember correctly, he ultimately watered it down, and then warned that the clause was too watered down to actually be effective, though I could be thinking of someone else.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44754057)

*suction cups fetus*

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44747072)

Crazy Clarence decided to throw a bomb at it and choose violence.

Just because you are right doesn’t make it good policy or good for the general direction of the country. Should have had some common sense like Roberts.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44747276)

it was done by a panel of unelected bureaucrats

it was done by a panel of unelected bureaucrats

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44747470)

You’re going to outlaw people from interstate travel because they seek abortions? Absolutely madness to put states against each other for this shit.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44747299)

"Do you want a Civil War?!"

Yes. Yes, I do. PS: Many people are saying this!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44748138)

Read my post again.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44749657)

Sorry ur a pussy

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44747169)

Thomas and Alito have likely been thinking EVERY DAY about how and when they will overturn that ridiculous gay "marriage" mandate.

No, they won't overturn Loving. Though when DeSantis replaces Thomas with Ted Cruz all bets are off

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44748265)

And if anything it's more "acceptable" to support this issue than other conservative issues, because when you bring up the baby's rights, what do they have? And if they come after you be ready to beat the shit out of them. You live once, do it as a man.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44747558)

In Rome it was also mandatory to execute handicapped infants.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44747825)

In the 15th century Pope Sixtus IV commissioned a fresco of him receiving drowned infants from the Tiber River.

https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/V0030916/full/1338%2C/0/default.jpg

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44747852)

It's just a matter of time before the court takes up an AA-related case. It'd be hard to see this court not striking down AA.

And if AA is declared unconstitutional, most Fed DEI initiatives would become illegal, with major ramifications for institutions and higher education aka Harvard. Then all hell will break loose.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44748168)

Does it take federal funding?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44748528)

They did a preview

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44749343)

Good, Evangelicals are by and large cucks in 2022.

Kikes seem to think that what lies next after they mow down the Evangelicals is a 1000 year reign of endless and basically unchallenged Jewish communism power.

I think that what lies next after they mow down the Evangelicals is a rising and increasingly angry and paranoid resurgent mass white racial consciousness that is far less burdened than ever before in modern history by the slave-religion mentality otherwise imposed by "Christianity."

"That's retarded and you're stupid and wrong about everything as always," screamed all of the totally-not-Jewish XO pumos. Maybe so. Noted Jewish-German philosopher Heinrich Heine didn't think so nearly 200 years ago, however:

"In 1835, 98 years before Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party seized power in Germany, Heine wrote in his essay 'The History of Religion and Philosophy in Germany':

'Christianity – and that is its greatest merit – has somewhat mitigated that brutal Germanic love of war, but it could not destroy it. Should that subduing talisman, the cross, be shattered, the frenzied madness of the ancient warriors, that insane Berserk rage of which Nordic bards have spoken and sung so often, will once more burst into flame. This talisman is fragile, and the day will come when it will collapse miserably. Then the ancient stony gods will rise from the forgotten debris and rub the dust of a thousand years from their eyes, and finally Thor with his giant hammer will jump up and smash the Gothic cathedrals. ... Do not smile at my advice – the advice of a dreamer who warns you against Kantians, Fichteans, and philosophers of nature. Do not smile at the visionary who anticipates the same revolution in the realm of the visible as has taken place in the spiritual. Thought precedes action as lightning precedes thunder. German thunder is of true Germanic character; it is not very nimble, but rumbles along ponderously. Yet, it will come and when you hear a crashing such as never before has been heard in the world's history, then you know that the German thunderbolt has fallen at last. At that uproar the eagles of the air will drop dead, and lions in the remotest deserts of Africa will hide in their royal dens. A play will be performed in Germany which will make the French Revolution look like an innocent idyll.'"

Crazy... nothing like that would or could ever happen, surely! Anyway, guess we'll see who's right, haha yeah haha.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44750249)

(Based yet blackpilled totally-not-Jewish pumo who definitely has it all figured out, and, incidentally, he definitely foresaw the election of Donald Trump, the fact that "White Replacement Theory" would go mainstream among Boomer Normies in 2021, the SCOTUS outcomes in Bruen/Dobbs this term, etc etc etc etc.)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44751204)

This "country" is quickly balkanizing, and it will cease to exist as a "country" at some point within the next few decades. The demographics of the conservative state(s) that break away at that point won't exactly look like Manhattan or Los Angeles, in case you can't figure out how this will play out.

You're not nearly as smart as you seem to think you are, Jew. Actually, that appears to be a systemic issue with you people.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44752346)

New country map: https://imgur.com/a/UVzVkxV

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44755436)

http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4653326&forum_id=2#41132755

This is not sustainable, and while it may not get here for several years yet, a day of reckoning is coming. Hope you're prepared/preparing.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5139883&forum_id=2#44751847)