Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Very

6 (50%)

Some

4 (33.3%)

Not sure

0 (0%)

Not really

1 (8.3%)

Not in the slightest

1 (8.3%)

Total Members Voted: 11

Voting closed: February 15, 2022, 10:51:36 AM

[Espnthree]

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-there-are-no-women-in-the-constitution

Misinformation.
It should be referred to the Ministry of Truth.

[LarryBnDC]

Democrats will once again refuse a compromise legislation that wuld be to their - and the nation's - benefit


https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/3713/text?r=1&s=1

And well they should. This is bullshit.

Not at all.This is actually quite fair.

a) In General. A State

(1) may not impose an undue burden on the ability of a woman to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy before fetal viability;

(2) may restrict the ability of a woman to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability, unless such a termination is necessary to preserve the life or health of the woman; and

(3) may enact regulations to further the health or safety of a woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy.

(b) Clarification. For purposes of this Act, unnecessary health regulations that have the purpose or effect of presenting a substantial obstacle to a woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy impose an undue burden.

(c) Rule Of Construction. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to have any effect on laws regarding conscience protection.

No.

It is bullshit.

You do not negotiate and/or compromise on the basic right of body autonomy.

This Roberts court is as fucked up as the Taney Court.

This (the Collins-Murkowki bill) has nothing to do with the Court.

Stupid

[Holly Martins]

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-there-are-no-women-in-the-constitution

Misinformation.

We're not going to take your word for that.   Show what statements in the article are misinformation or STFU. 

[LarryBnDC]

There have been a  few pretty good press secretaries under Dem presidents.  Psaki is not one of them. 

Best I can recall have been Fleishcer and Perino - but I also liked Josh Earnest - of recent times.

Ari is a motherfucking liar.   

[Espnthree]

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-there-are-no-women-in-the-constitution

Misinformation.

We're not going to take your word for that.   Show what statements in the article are misinformation or STFU.

Within a matter of months, women in about half of the United States may be breaking the law if they decide to end a pregnancy.

Nope, not even close


Legally, most women did not exist as persons.( at the time the Constitution was adopted)

Embarrassingly ignorant


abortion is likely to become a crime in at least twenty states this spring


Misinformation if not an outright lie.

Women are indeed missing from the Constitution. That is a problem to remedy,
we had a women elected to Congress BEFORE women could legally vote.
See: 19th Amendment passed a hundred odd years ago.

[josh]

[josh]

[josh]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/07/us/california-water-shasta-oroville-climate/index.html

I think we (the nation, at a minimum) have a problem.

[kidcarter8]

Nobody is telling a woman what to do with her body.

Exactly the opposite.

[Holly Martins]

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-there-are-no-women-in-the-constitution

Misinformation.

We're not going to take your word for that.   Show what statements in the article are misinformation or STFU.

Within a matter of months, women in about half of the United States may be breaking the law if they decide to end a pregnancy.

Nope, not even close


Legally, most women did not exist as persons.( at the time the Constitution was adopted)

Embarrassingly ignorant


abortion is likely to become a crime in at least twenty states this spring


Misinformation if not an outright lie.

Women are indeed missing from the Constitution. That is a problem to remedy,
we had a women elected to Congress BEFORE women could legally vote.
See: 19th Amendment passed a hundred odd years ago.

The statements you dismiss are factually correct.  And "missing from the Constitution" was in context of referring to the original document.  The fact that it can be amended is part of their point that the original document was incomplete and in need of remedy, you CPH.

[Espnthree]

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-there-are-no-women-in-the-constitution

Misinformation.

We're not going to take your word for that.   Show what statements in the article are misinformation or STFU.

Within a matter of months, women in about half of the United States may be breaking the law if they decide to end a pregnancy.

Nope, not even close


Legally, most women did not exist as persons.( at the time the Constitution was adopted)

Embarrassingly ignorant


abortion is likely to become a crime in at least twenty states this spring


Misinformation if not an outright lie.

Women are indeed missing from the Constitution. That is a problem to remedy,
we had a women elected to Congress BEFORE women could legally vote.
See: 19th Amendment passed a hundred odd years ago.

The statements you dismiss are factually correct.

None of them are.   

And "missing from the Constitution" was in context of referring to the original document.  The fact that it can be amended is part of their point that the original document was incomplete and in need of remedy, you CPH.

Also wrong.
Women were accounted for in the original document

[josh]

[josh]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/02/opinions/georgia-grand-jury-trump-legal-challenges-honig/index.html

[Holly Martins]

Also wrong.
Women were accounted for in the original document

Nope.  Never mentioned and "persons" did not include women.  No women were at the convention, either.

The principle of coverture prevailed at the time the Constitution was written and adopted.  A married woman was simply not a person under the law - her legal existence was bound up with that of her husband.

Time to hit those history books.

[Espnthree]

Also wrong.
Women were accounted for in the original document

Nope.  Never mentioned and "persons" did not include women.  No women were at the convention, either.

The principle of coverture prevailed at the time the Constitution was written and adopted.  A married woman was simply not a person under the law - her legal existence was bound up with that of her husband.

Time to hit those history books.

I suggest you read Article One of the Constitution.