Oh Alabama
Comments
-
Facts not feelings
I posted facts
And I'm not 300 miles from the border
You seem to be struggling here -
Irregular migration, on the other hand, by which a foreign national enters the United States illegally between the ports of entry, does not provide any of those safeguards. Once they are here, they are here, regardless of whether they are apprehended and detained, or make their way to their final destinations without apprehension. -
How far are you?RaceBannon said:Facts not feelings
I posted facts
And I'm not 300 miles from the border
You seem to be struggling here -
WHO is that fag on first?
-
It's a tough one.MikeDamone said:
How do you propose this consensus would be established?creepycoug said:Fair enough. But I go back to what I said yesterday: the entire nation ought to come to some consensus on whether a fetus has agency, or personhood, and if it does, when it acquires it. Because if there is ever a time when it doesn't have that status, that state - no state - should be able to intrude. If it always has that status - from the moment it is conceived - then there should be a national ban on abortion at all times and under every single circumstance.
I'd say, consult the Tug? -
But if that fails, or doesn't appease the masses, then the Supremes need to find it in the Constitution. Of course it's not there ... a lot of things aren't there. I guess that leaves us with Congress.creepycoug said:
It's a tough one.MikeDamone said:
How do you propose this consensus would be established?creepycoug said:Fair enough. But I go back to what I said yesterday: the entire nation ought to come to some consensus on whether a fetus has agency, or personhood, and if it does, when it acquires it. Because if there is ever a time when it doesn't have that status, that state - no state - should be able to intrude. If it always has that status - from the moment it is conceived - then there should be a national ban on abortion at all times and under every single circumstance.
I'd say, consult the Tug?
But with Congress it should be. It should be the law of the land, either way, I don't care. I can live with either answer. What I can't live with, or at least what I found intellectually lazy and crazy, is that the answer varies by state or region. We tried that with slavery and came to the conclusion that the Union isn't a union if you can hold slaves in some places and not others. Some things are so very fundamental that, if we can't agree on them, we ought not to be associated at all.
That's my take. -
You're just begging for a Septic War, aren't you Creepy?creepycoug said:
It's a tough one.MikeDamone said:
How do you propose this consensus would be established?creepycoug said:Fair enough. But I go back to what I said yesterday: the entire nation ought to come to some consensus on whether a fetus has agency, or personhood, and if it does, when it acquires it. Because if there is ever a time when it doesn't have that status, that state - no state - should be able to intrude. If it always has that status - from the moment it is conceived - then there should be a national ban on abortion at all times and under every single circumstance.
I'd say, consult the Tug? -
I trust @creepycoug mor on matters of pretend jurisprudence than I do some of you guys. Just saying...creepycoug said:
But if that fails, or doesn't appease the masses, then the Supremes need to find it in the Constitution. Of course it's not there ... a lot of things aren't there. I guess that leaves us with Congress.creepycoug said:
It's a tough one.MikeDamone said:
How do you propose this consensus would be established?creepycoug said:Fair enough. But I go back to what I said yesterday: the entire nation ought to come to some consensus on whether a fetus has agency, or personhood, and if it does, when it acquires it. Because if there is ever a time when it doesn't have that status, that state - no state - should be able to intrude. If it always has that status - from the moment it is conceived - then there should be a national ban on abortion at all times and under every single circumstance.
I'd say, consult the Tug?
But with Congress it should be. It should be the law of the land, either way, I don't care. I can live with either answer. What I can't live with, or at least what I found intellectually lazy and crazy, is that the answer varies by state or region. We tried that with slavery and came to the conclusion that the Union isn't a union if you can hold slaves in some places and not others. Some things are so very fundamental that, if we can't agree on them, we ought not to be associated at all.
That's my take. -
Signs point to "yes"UWhuskytskeet said:
So you can just say random things and assume it's true?RaceBannon said:
And you didn't link anything to dispute thatUWhuskytskeet said:
You tell me, you said they don't have vaccinations.RaceBannon said:
And the dirt farmers at the border?UWhuskytskeet said:
Mexico and most of Central America have a much higher vaccination rate than the US.RaceBannon said:I like to complain about people not getting vaccinations while opening the border to people who don't have vaccinations
I'm a democrat
Facts > Feels
https://www.cato.org/blog/migrant-caravan-central-america-vaccination-rates
Look up the rise of disease in border areas
Like I said Democrats welcome them in -
Except I backed up my assertion and you didn't
