19th amendment annulled

[timmystool]

IF women cant decide their own health choices, this is great reasoning to take away their right to vote!


Passed by Congress June 4, 1919, and ratified on August 18, 1920, the 19th amendment granted women the right to vote. The 19th amendment legally guarantees American women the right to vote. Achieving this milestone required a lengthy and difficult struggle—victory took decades of agitation and protest.




IF R V Wade is overturned, then is the next step




FYI:

I dont agree with any removal of rights,
its a women's body, her choice

[Jackie S]

Originally Posted by timmystool

IF women cant decide their own health choices, this is great reasoning to take away their right to vote!


Passed by Congress June 4, 1919, and ratified on August 18, 1920, the 19th amendment granted women the right to vote. The 19th amendment legally guarantees American women the right to vote. Achieving this milestone required a lengthy and difficult struggle—victory took decades of agitation and protest.




IF R V Wade is overturned, then is the next step




FYI:

I dont agree with any removal of rights,
its a women's body, her choice

This is a good example of the train of thought that occurs when all semblance of common sense is abandoned.

What in the world does a woman’s right to vote have to do with abortion?

[timmystool]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

This is a good example of the train of thought that occurs when all semblance of common sense is abandoned.

What in the world does a woman’s right to vote have to do with abortion?

look harder


if a women cant make her own choices, why should she make choices for someone else?


if the supreme court changes from making laws based on right/wrong and is all about who is in charge, then by overturn R V Wade, why couldn't they overturn the 19th amendment?


IF a women cant control her own body, why does anyone think she should be decide about the fate of others?
ya know, like I said already

,

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Can always tell when the circus rolls in to town and set up their tents. They always have a parade right after they set up the tents to drum up customers and this mid-term election year's Parade of Horribles is spectacular as ever. Get your smores kits and popcorn ready. Sit by the mostly peaceful protest fires and enjoy.

Welcome back, my friends
To the show that never ends
We're so glad you could attend
Come inside! Come inside

There behind a glass
Stands a real blade of grass
Be careful as you pass
Move along! Move along

Come inside, the show's about to start
Guaranteed to blow your head apart
Rest assured you'll get your money's worth
The greatest show in Heaven, Hell, or Earth

You've got to see the show, it's a dynamo
You've got to see the show, it's rock and roll

Right before your eyes
We'll pull laughter from the skies
And he laughs until he cries
Then he dies, then he dies

You've got to see the show, it's a dynamo
You've got to see the show, it's rock and roll

Soon the Gypsy Queen
In a glaze of Vaseline
Will perform on guillotine
What a scene! What a scene
Next upon the stand
Will you please extend a hand
To Alexander's Ragtime Band
Dixieland, Dixieland

Originally Posted by timmystool

IF women cant decide their own health choices, this is great reasoning to take away their right to vote!...
IF R V Wade is overturned, then is the next step...

[Yssup Rider]

[texassapper]

Originally Posted by timmystool

if a women cant make her own choices, why should she make choices for someone else?

That's exactly what she is doing when she kills the life in her womb. Making a decision for that baby...

Originally Posted by timmystool

if the supreme court changes from making laws based on right/wrong and is all about who is in charge, then by overturn R V Wade, why couldn't they overturn the 19th amendment?

Tell us you failed High School Civics without telling us you failed High School Civics.

Originally Posted by timmystool

IF a women cant control her own body, why does anyone think she should be decide about the fate of others?

She DOES control her own body... she can choose to use (or not use) birth control. But when she is pregnant she is carrying a human life... She doesn't get to kill a human just because it's little and inconvenient.

And inconvenience and laziness is what this is all about. People like you don't want to have to bear the responsibility for their decisions. Time for you to grow up and learn that actions (or inactions) have consequences.

[Yssup Rider]

Convenience=the Hobbyist
Laziness=the Hobbyist
Restricting freedom=The mind addled RWW.

You’re a hypocrite.

[texassapper]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Convenience=the Hobbyist
Laziness=the Hobbyist
Restricting freedom=The mind addled RWW.

You’re a hypocrite.

LOL.. you wouldn't know the first thing about responsibility or duty you over aged hippie.

[00 gauge]

And on top of that, Yssup hasn't made a relevant response to anything or added anything of substance to say since January 2, 2010 .....

[offshoredrilling]

vote yes, she should abortion happens to much.

hay hay hay Op Sir, would you be ok with

then

as a woman's right ???? just askin

[rexdutchman]

Wow I quest the world gonna stop turning too ,,,, to much cnn

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by timmystool

IF women cant decide their own health choices, this is great reasoning to take away their right to vote!


Passed by Congress June 4, 1919, and ratified on August 18, 1920, the 19th amendment granted women the right to vote. The 19th amendment legally guarantees American women the right to vote. Achieving this milestone required a lengthy and difficult struggle—victory took decades of agitation and protest.




IF R V Wade is overturned, then is the next step




FYI:

I dont agree with any removal of rights,
its a women's body, her choice

No legal scholar here but I will offer an opinion none the less. The right for women to vote is clearly spelled out in the Amendment. Abortion is never mentioned in the Constitution but that didn't stop activist Judges from finding it in "right to privacy" but if right to privacy was taken literally, women would have the right to sell their body for sex, sell an organ, marry as many men as they want or be one of many women married to one man and more issues that do not come to mind right now. The right for women to vote is completely different than these other things found in the right to privacy and due process clauses IMHO



If something such as a woman's right to vote is "clearly" explained in the Amendment, it can't be changed by Justices.


If the court were to say that Gay and interracial marriage was also never mentioned specifically, yes, they too could be struck down by the Court but could easily IMHO, be put into the Constitution with a specific Amendment just like the right to vote. If the vote by 37 states would vote for Gay marriage it could easily be made an Amendment to the Constitution..

Before Friday's ruling, gay marriage had already been made legal in 37 states and the District of Columbia — by either legislative or voter action or by federal courts that overturned state' bans.

I welcome any flaws in my thinking here. I'm not always right but more often than not.

[rexdutchman]

Yup that's the real issue ^^^^^^ the LSM is stupid trying to push crazy narratives

[WTF]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

[SIZE=3]No legal scholar hl


If the court were to say that Gay and interracial marriage was also never mentioned specifically, yes, they too could be struck down by the Court but could easily IMHO, be put into the Constitution with a specific Amendment just like the right to vote. If the vote by 37 states would vote for Gay marriage it could easily be made an Amendment to the Constitution..



I welcome any flaws in my thinking here. I'm not always right but more often than not.

Please remind us the last time a constitutional amendment passed.

Plus I do believe marriage falls under inalienable rights. Although one could argue that marriage and the pursuit of happiness are opposites.


https://legaldictionary.net/inalienable-rights/

[WTF]

Originally Posted by rexdutchman

Yup that's the real issue ^^^^^^ the LSM is stupid trying to push crazy narratives

Crazy narratives?

Is it not fact that Mitch McConnell has not already discussed a national ban on abortion.

So on one hand Republicans argue it a state right and yet on the other they argue it is a Federal right.