another scotus 4 trump R.B.G.

[MyLadiesDaddy]

2 hours ago, Shabibilicious said:

  I simply can't believe it's God's will to torture an innocent woman like that to produce a child

I was just gonna let our cordial conversation go at this point but then you said this to nstooman1,

 

40 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

....and then what, chalk the whole thing up to "God's will"

Why the need to come down like that?

You say that you don't believe God will allow a woman to suffer as described but you think he's okay with the murder of a baby. So who's suffering the most, the woman or the dead baby? 

Life begins at conception. 

 

Jeremiah 1:5

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before you were born I sanctified you;

 

Psalm 139: 13-14

 

13For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb.

14I will praise thee; for I am fearfully andwonderfully made: marvellous are thy works

[Shabibilicious]

58 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

I find that very confusing....advocate for the life of the baby and in the same breath punish the father for his part in creating the baby....and then what, chalk the whole thing up to "God's will"?    

 

GO RV, then BV  

 

8 minutes ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

I was just gonna let our cordial conversation go at this point but then you said this to nstooman1,

 

Why the need to come down like that?

You say that you don't believe God will allow a woman to suffer as described but you think he's okay with the murder of a baby. 

 

That's not what I said, please reread it and recognize the question mark.

 

GO RV, then BV

[MyLadiesDaddy]

2 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

 

That's not what I said, please reread it and recognize the question mark.

 

GO RV, then BV

I  did recognize it and also your dodging my point, about the suffering baby. 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

14 minutes ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

I was just gonna let our cordial conversation go at this point but then you said this to nstooman1,

 

Why the need to come down like that?

You say that you don't believe God will allow a woman to suffer as described but you think he's okay with the murder of a baby. So who's suffering the most, the woman or the dead baby? 

Life begins at conception. 

 

Jeremiah 1:5

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before you were born I sanctified you;

 

Psalm 139: 13-14

 

13For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb.

14I will praise thee; for I am fearfully andwonderfully made: marvellous are thy works

 

[Shabibilicious]

1 minute ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

 

 

I don't remember my own point of conception, so I can't speak to the baby's suffering.  One thing is for sure....this conversation is every bit as painful as it's supposed to be.  

 

GO RV, then BV

[MyLadiesDaddy]

Just now, Shabibilicious said:

 

I don't remember my own point of conception, so I can't speak to the baby's suffering.  One thing is for sure....this conversation is every bit as painful as it's supposed to be.  

 

GO RV, then BV

It's irrelevant whether one remembers that or not, I gave you God's word above on the subject matter. 

[Shabibilicious]

7 minutes ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

It's irrelevant whether one remembers that or not, I gave you God's word above on the subject matter. 

 

Then let me simply say, I didn't dodge your question.

 

GO RV, then BV

[nstoolman1]

1 hour ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

I find that very confusing....advocate for the life of the baby and in the same breath punish the father for his part in creating the baby....and then what, chalk the whole thing up to "God's will"?    

 

GO RV, then BV  

 

I don't find it confusing at all. The child is innocent of the act. The man is an animal that committed a terrible act of selfishness and evil.

You are saying that we should respect the will of women. I am sure no woman wants to be raped. 

If God has allowed it to happen He must have a reason. If justice does not meet up with the perpetrator then God will in the end. 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

Just now, Shabibilicious said:

 

Then let me simply say, I didn't dodge your question.

 

GO RV, then BV

Thank You, but I've got another one I'd like you to consider. 

What is most commonly considered a sign of life? For example, paramedics come on the scene of a bad accident with a body in the street. What is the first thing they do to decide whether or not that body is alive or dead?

They check for a pulse. Just see if the heart is beating. It is considered medical science for there to be life  the heart must be beating. Now consider this, 

 

https://blog.bhf.org.uk/when-does-our-heart-first-start-to-beat-36bcbac072c1

 

Until now, researchers thought that the first time our heart muscle contracted to beat was at 8 days after conception in mice or around day 21 of a human pregnancy.

Now, a team funded by the BHF at the University of Oxford has demonstrated earlier beating of the heart in mouse embryos which, if extrapolated to the human heart, suggests beating as early as 16 days after conception.

 

Thus if a fetal heartbeat can be detected as little as two weeks from conception then there must needs be life. The problem with your argument Shabbs is that at 2 weeks it's too soon to tell if the woman is pregnant in most cases.

[Shabibilicious]

9 minutes ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

Thank You, but I've got another one I'd like you to consider. 

What is most commonly considered a sign of life? For example, paramedics come on the scene of a bad accident with a body in the street. What is the first thing they do to decide whether or not that body is alive or dead?

They check for a pulse. Just see if the heart is beating. It is considered medical science for there to be life  the heart must be beating. Now consider this, 

 

https://blog.bhf.org.uk/when-does-our-heart-first-start-to-beat-36bcbac072c1

 

Until now, researchers thought that the first time our heart muscle contracted to beat was at 8 days after conception in mice or around day 21 of a human pregnancy.

Now, a team funded by the BHF at the University of Oxford has demonstrated earlier beating of the heart in mouse embryos which, if extrapolated to the human heart, suggests beating as early as 16 days after conception.

 

Thus if a fetal heartbeat can be detected as little as two weeks from conception then there must needs be life. The problem with your argument Shabbs is that at 2 weeks it's too soon to tell if the woman is pregnant in most cases.

 

But you believe life begins at conception, so all you just posted means nothing to you, but backs up my belief that the time from conception to a beating heart is the fail safe time for women to abort in cases of rape and incest.  All that said, I do appreciate you turning to science to make your point.

 

GO RV, then BV  

Edited August 27, 2019 by Shabibilicious

[MyLadiesDaddy]

1 minute ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

But you believe life begins at conception, so all you just posted means nothing to you, but backs up my belief that the time from conception to a beating heart is the fail safe time for women to abort in cases of rape and incest.

 

GO RV, then BV  

I do believe that life begins at conception,  but I used your beliefs and scientific fact to make a point. Let's make it illegal for a woman to get an abortion after 15 days from conception across the board. I'll GLADLY take that given no other choice. 

Think of the MILLIONS of lives I just saved. 

[umbertino]

Quote

It is not a woman and a baby it is a woman her husband and a child all 3 one. Just like the Holy Trinity. What you are suggesting is that it is okay to murder the Holy Spirit.

End Quote

 

That's a very strong one, LGD.. And ( as you seem to love stating at times)....Uncalled for...JMHO

 

Everybody has the right to think differently on anything and the mere fact they do ( think differently) doesn't necessarily mean they're worse than us or bad or whatever and that instead we are better and Superior just cos we think that way ( our own way, a different way)...Some humbleness should be due........

 

We ( all of us, myself first)  should at least try and understand ( but try for real, not just pretending to try) that the way we judge things and we see things applies to us only and mainly ( generally speaking) and so if / when in many cases  the act of someone else toward any issue happens to differ from our way of doing / considering that same thing...does not have to mean the said other person is bad or wicked or whatever....JMHO

Edited August 27, 2019 by umbertino

[umbertino]

8 hours ago, learning all i can said:

Umb, I think we that are totally against abortion base our belief in what is right in the eyes of God.  The Bible makes clear that this is sin.  Once God changes your heart your whole being and mind thought process changes.  You want to do all things and think all things that are pleasing to Him and in His will.  Before I was born again, abortion did not matter to me one way or another but of course my thought process was what was pleasing to self instead of honoring God and His standards.  We make our mistakes by looking at mans standard as right instead of Gods.  Of course Gods standards are unreachable for us and one must be perfect for Him to look upon us and become His children.  We will never meet His demands and that's why we need a saviour.  He sent His only Son that was sinless to live the life that you and I could never achieve so we may become His very own.  Jesus died for that right.  He has given that right to all that may believe in His precious Son and the work He did for us on that ole cross.  The Holy Spirit now gives a born again believer the heart to do things Gods way instead of our own.  Once again our minds and hearts are transformed to do and think the way God would have us to.  Yes, we still fall and sometimes very badly but we repent and keep on plugging along to live for Him.  We try to stay away from sin in body and thought. We earnestly want to be more like Him and be pleasing in His eyes.  God is against abortion.  God is against the killing of the innocent  and for me to even think it was ok, I would be going against His very word.  I would have to question my own salvation.  We continue to be a work in process for His kingdom.  Some slower than others but still a work.  The struggle is never ending and our sanctification is daily to live everyday for Him.  But hey, the good news is that I am His and He will see me thru.

I just wish that all could see that abortion is sin, it will not go unpunished.  God is just and we must realize that it's either our way with all the judgement  and doom of eternal life in hell or His way with the glory of His presence in His kingdom.  All sin can be forgiven and this one must be put away.  He has given us chance after chance to change our beliefs and behaviour. It is time the world wakes up.

 

I respect that...That's all I feel like saying.....

 

Let's agree to disagree ( at least in some parts...not in all of it)

 

Best to you

[MyLadiesDaddy]

1 hour ago, umbertino said:

Quote

It is not a woman and a baby it is a woman her husband and a child all 3 one. Just like the Holy Trinity. What you are suggesting is that it is okay to murder the Holy Spirit.

End Quote

 

That's a very strong one, LGD.. And ( as you seem to love stating at times)....Uncalled for...JMHO

 

Everybody has the right to think differently on anything and the mere fact they do ( think differently) doesn't necessarily mean they're worse than us or bad or whatever and that instead we are better and Superior just cos we think that way ( our own way, a different way)...Some humbleness should be due........

 

We ( all of us, myself first)  should at least try and understand ( but try for real, not just pretending to try) that the way we judge things and we see things applies to us only and mainly ( generally speaking) and so if / when in many cases  the act of someone else toward any issue happens to differ from our way of doing / considering that same thing...does not have to mean the said other person is bad or wicked or whatever....JMHO

Shabbs and I have had a very direct and divergent conversation where both have shown total respect for the others opinions 

and you say it's "uncalled for" and accuse me of claiming to be "Superior" to Shabbs? I'll have you know that I have not always been 

a Spirit Filled Christian, in fact I was a pathetic womanizer as a younger man. Something that I'm not proud of. I am so staunchly against 

abortion because I know without a doubt that my past actions have resulted in the act of abortion. As I stated, I carried my previous 

children with the partners I had at the time and I consider myself to be as guilty of the murder of said children when those "partners" deemed 

it fit to do so. I take full responsibility for my actions and pray that my God will be as forgiving as claimed. So for you to suggest in any way form 

or fashion that I would think myself "Superior" to Shabbs {or anyone else on this site} is completely ludicrous. 

I consider myself to be the lowest of all 50 thousand plus members here. And I'm not just saying that. I mean it. 

So please rethink who it is that you're talking to. Because Pain is something that one never gets completely over. And suffering 

is something that last long after the forgiveness of sins. 

[Shabibilicious]

15 hours ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

I do believe that life begins at conception,  but I used your beliefs and scientific fact to make a point. Let's make it illegal for a woman to get an abortion after 15 days from conception across the board. I'll GLADLY take that given no other choice. 

Think of the MILLIONS of lives I just saved. 

 

Well done, LGD....and we set a good standard of reasonable debate with this difficult subject I believe.  I can't help but notice though that you would prefer to have a "choice"....ironic, don't you think?  

 

GO RV, then BV

[MyLadiesDaddy]

1 hour ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

Well done, LGD....and we set a good standard of reasonable debate with this difficult subject I believe.  I can't help but notice though that you would prefer to have a "choice"....ironic, don't you think?  

 

GO RV, then BV

Life is the only real choice. But if through strict regulations millions of babies can be saved, then yes I'll take it. And follow up with EXTENSIVE public education of the spiritual benefits of morality in treating women with the utmost dignity and respect. 

 

In a prefect world. 

[umbertino]

Quote

 

No...Sorry, LGD.....My fault as I wasn't able to express myself more properly, evidently...

 

I had already moved the issue to a more general one ( agreeing / disagreeing on each other diff.stances/ positions on anything ) and I do apologize if I didn't it make that clear enough...

 

In that I wasn't referring to you specifically...I was trying to say ( but I did it wrongly apparently, I didn't succeed in that) that at times some folks judge other folks  only cos they think differently from them/us and from our way of doing things and/or operate/manage things, problems, issues...Which does not specifically mean the others thinking differently are better than us and we should feel superior compared to them ( talking in general...not personally addressng anyone)

 

My post was already way beyond you and Shabbs...Sure I did start from that...But then I evolved and enlarged the issue..Or I tried to, at least...

 

 

Best

Edited August 28, 2019 by umbertino

[Synopsis]

1 hour ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

In a prefect world. 

 

 Yes, Yes, YES!!!, LadyGrace'sDaddy, AND ALL The Very Best!!! 

 

In a MORE perfect world, THEE PUTRID MAIDS would "relieve" THEMSELVES "freeing" THEIR "cognitions" FROM THEIR "safe" "spaces" AND "walk" "uprightly" IN THEIR God Created AND Given Upright Posture WITH Dignity AND Honor LIKE ALL True The United States Of America Patriots.

 

Go four (4) Textual Cornerstones FOREVER!!!

 

Go E Pluribus Unum FOREEVER!!!

 

Go MAGA FOREVER!!!

 

Go True The United States Of America Patriot President Donald J Trump THROUGH 2024!!!

 

Go True The United States Of America Patriots FOREVER!!!

 

(A Special Thank You To ALL The Red Rubymeisters IN ADVANCE For ALL The Red Ruby Citations As Badges Of Honor For ME For "Display Of Intellectual Speed And Power" Who THINK (misnomer, of course) The True The United States Of America Patriot President Donald J Trump IS A POS!!!)!!!

 

Go Red Rubymeisters (ELSEWHERE!!!)!!!

 

Go Moola Nova (YEAH AND YEE HAW, BABY, READY WHEN YOU ARE BROTHER (OR SISTER) - LET 'ER BUCK!!!)!!!

   

[MyLadiesDaddy]

 

It’s not a good sign when you have to assure the audience that you have a pulse.

 

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 86, said on Saturday that she is “alive” and on her way to “being very well” after her latest cancer treatment for a “malignant” tumor found on her pancreas.

“This audience can see that I am alive and I’m on my way to being very well,” Ginsburg said at the annual National Book Festival in DC.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 86, underwent three weeks of radiation treatment for a “localized malignant tumor” found on her pancreas on July 31st.

The US Supreme Court disclosed last Friday that Ginsburg received treatment this summer at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.

The treatment included the insertion of a stent in Ginsburg’s bile duct, according to a statement by the court

Ginsburg in December of 2018 also had surgery to remove cancer from her left lung.

According to doctors, further tests have shown that the disease has not spread throughout her body, however a “bile duct stent” is a treatment typically used in advanced cases to provide end of life care.

Ginsburg looks very feeble and after two cancer scares in one year, she should respectfully resign from her position as a Supreme Court Justice

[Shabibilicious]

The Notorious R.B.G. is awesome, as are any judges who've managed to rise to the epitome of the United States Judicial System through the nomination and confirmation process, even when it's ugly.....It's sad to see some U.S. citizens actually salivating for her demise.  Pathetic really.

 

GO RV, then BV 

[umbertino]

On 8/27/2019 at 3:21 PM, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

Nothing justifies those heinous acts. But the part that represents the Holy Trinity is the unborn child that was conceived. For God has made us in His image. God the father is a mind, God the Son is the flesh and God the Spirit is the Holy Spirit. We are made in the image of God. You seem to forget the earlier scripture I told you about, offenses coming let God take care of the person who would commit such a crime let us take care of the children that are born because of the crime.

And the Part you  have the biggest problem with is the fact that you refuse to admit it is a child.

 

 

All true and right in principle..But again (imvho) issue is so complex and depending on  a lot of various facts and affected by a multitude of psychological issues ( depending on those facts) that it's really very difficult ( again imvho) to give judgments about it as every case will be different and it involves a TON of painful feelings, sentiments, fears etc....

 

 

I humbly believe ( for instance) that we  ( it it was ever possible....) should try and live into a woman body and soul and heart who got raped ( and theoretically  we also also should live ourselves that very rape  fear, rage, hate and violence trying to be that woman and notice how that tragedy changes a person deeply 99% of the time )  for at least 2 / 3 months before we allow ourselves to judge her ( possible) decision to have an abortion....Me thinks......

[Muleslayer]

On 8/27/2019 at 6:22 PM, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

Because Pain is something that one never gets completely over. And suffering 

is something that last long after the forgiveness of sins.

Amen

[MyLadiesDaddy]

 

[umbertino]

Quote

You are saying that we should respect the will of women. I am sure no woman wants to be raped. 

End Quote

 

Exactly nstoolman1....That wasn't a difficult one.........

[coorslite21]

RBG......you don't need to agree with her......but you have to respect her for  fighting for what she believes in.....(seems we have a few of those here on this site...)

Justice Ginsburg recently discussed the electoral college in Chicago.....her feelings....as well as the reality of it ever being changed....    CL

 

Elite Daily

 

Alex Wong/Getty Images News/Getty Images

 

Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Comments On Eliminating The Electoral College Are Depressingly Real

BY YVONNE KIM

SEPT 11, 2019

In recent election cycles, the Electoral College has proven controversial. In several presidential elections in the past 20 years, the election winner has managed to claim the presidency without winning the national popular vote thanks to the system, which assigns votes by state. With so much controversy about whether this centuries-old system accurately represents national opinion, it's only natural that both voters and lawmakers have been speaking out about it on both sides. Recently, one of the biggest names in American law chimed in, when Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg commented on eliminating the electoral college — which, spoiler alert, probably won't happen any time soon.

At the University of Chicago on Sept. 9, Ginsburg said changing the Electoral College system would be “more theoretical than real,” according to the Chicago Sun-Times. In fact, she took it one step further and said that, because amending the Constitution is very difficult, “it’s largely a dream. … I know that from experience.”

It’s a harsh truth, but that doesn’t mean Ginsburg is opposed to the idea in general. In 2017, Ginsburg said she would support removing the Electoral College. At Stanford University in February 2017, she said that one thing she would like to change is the Electoral College, according to CNN. Even then, she echoed similar sentiments that “that would require a constitutional amendment, and amending our Constitution is powerfully hard to do.”

Donald J. Trump

 

✔@realDonaldTrump

 

 

....just the large States - the Cities would end up running the Country. Smaller States & the entire Midwest would end up losing all power - & we can’t let that happen. I used to like the idea of the Popular Vote, but now realize the Electoral College is far better for the U.S.A.

 

118K

10:17 PM - Mar 19, 2019

Twitter Ads info and privacy

 

47.6K people are talking about this

 

 

 

In presidential elections, the winner is decided based on electoral votes, rather than the national popular vote. In most states, whoever wins the state's popular vote also wins the state's electoral votes, which range from three votes in less-populous states, to up to 55 votes in states with higher populations. An absolute majority of 270 votes is required to win. However, the system means that someone who doesn't have nationwide majority support can win — for example, in 2016, Donald Trump won the presidential election with 306 electoral votes, despite Hillarious Clinton winning the popular vote by more than 2.8 million votes nationwide. This has happened before in American history, most recently when George W. Bush defeated Al Gore in 2000.

After President Donald Trump’s election in 2016, a slim majority of American voters preferred the popular vote to the Electoral College system, according to a Marist Poll. This opinion remains popular today. As for Trump himself, he has recently come out as a proponent of the Electoral College, saying he changed his mind about his previous support of the popular vote.

However, Ginsburg is right about how difficult it would be to change it up. Changing the Constitution first requires a two-thirds vote in the House of Representatives and the Senate, and then a ratification by three-quarters of states. Another possible way could be the state level. If enough states individually committed to the popular vote by giving their electoral college votes to the winner of the national popular vote — without considering who was most popular in that state — they could in effect elect the popular president.

In August 2019, the system returned to the forefront of national controversy when a federal court of appeals ruled it was unconstitutional for states to throw out the vote of a faithless elector. Essentially, the court was ruling in favor of a state elector in Colorado who decided not to vote for Hillarious Clinton despite her being the state’s more popular candidate. The court ruled that Electoral College members can vote for whomever they wish — meaning that, theoretically, a handful of Americans can decide the results of an election.

Bernie Sanders

 

✔@SenSanders

 · Dec 19, 2016

 

Trump received 2.5 million fewer votes than Clinton, yet he'll soon be president. Clearly, in a democratic society, this shouldn't happen.

Bernie Sanders

 

✔@SenSanders

 

We need to change the electoral college.

 

10.5K

5:57 PM - Dec 19, 2016

Twitter Ads info and privacy

 

4,104 people are talking about this

 

 

 

 

Elizabeth Warren

 

✔@ewarren

 

 

The way we make sure that every vote is counted is by getting rid of the Electoral College and making the national popular vote a central part of our democracy. https://twitter.com/ConnieSchultz/status/1107978069468463104 …

Connie Schultz

 

✔@ConnieSchultz

 

“Every vote matters, and the way we can make that happen is that we can have national voting, and that means get rid of the Electoral College.”

— Elizabeth Warren https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/18/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-town-hall-electoral-college.html …

 

5,902

12:17 PM - Mar 19, 2019

Twitter Ads info and privacy

 

1,892 people are talking about this

 

 

 

Especially with the 2020 Democratic presidential race in full swing, many politicians have spoken out with opinions similar to Ginsburg’s. While it’s unclear whether candidates plan to follow through with the laborious task of amending the Constitution, they’ve surely thrown around ideas about it. Sens. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Cory Booker, as well as Mayor Pete Buttigieg, have denounced the Electoral College.

There's almost no chance the Electoral College is going away before it gets to decide next year's presidential election. For years, conversations about doing away with the system have just been talk with no real action. But, like RBG, a girl can dream, and hopefully it won't take another unpopular presidential victor for the system to change.