Would you still defend the Constitution?

[Agape93]

I keep hearing conservatives and Republicans say they would always support and defend the constitution and all that comes with it whenever the left talk about taking guns away. So, if abortion was amended into the constitution as being fully legal and access is not to be made hard, would you still protect the constitution, or are you selective to when it suits you?

[ohshee]

Our forefathers I think did a really good job on the Constitution whatever is in the Constitution I'm going to back as for abortion I am 100% pro-life that's me for me now

Also for me I am a person who believes that a woman has the right and the choice to do what she wants to do at any given moment whether it's a bushing whether it's skydiving whether it's jumping off of a building it does not matter it's her choice and nobody else has as if people were giving her shit and bullying her in front of me I would stand in front of her to protect her and tell everybody to fuck off because it's none of their business whether it's right or wrong or indifferent it's none of their business it's her business in her business only

[Anpu23]

I am a believer in both gun and abortion rights so... No conflict.

[Anpu23]

Thanks for MHO

[Roxxy99]

When you hear conservatives talk about defending the constitution, they’re usually talking about gun rights or religious freedom. They didn’t care so much for the constitution on Jan. 6th or when gay people wanted to marry. It’s only a situational support. Liberals are just as hypocritical though.

[goaded]

How are "Liberals... just as hypocritical"?

[Roxxy99]

@goaded Liberals are great when it comes to the equal protection clause or the 4th amendment but they aren’t particularly kind to the 2nd amendment or the 10th. Each side wraps themselves in the constitution when it suits their agenda and dismisses it when it doesn’t.

[goaded]

I've been away, sorry. I disagree. Liberals are against a particular interpretation of the second amendment that says anyone should be able to have guns all the time; historically, that hasn't been the way it was read until quite recently. Nobody had a problem with Dodge City holding people's firearms while they were in town, for example. Conservatives didn't even have a problem with Governor Reagan's introducing regulations in the 1970's.

The 10th is trickier. Wasn't it SCOTUS that decided what was constitutional or not?

[goaded]

In addition, this "hypocrisy" is supposed to be equal to a party that's refusing the accept the results of an election that was certified by all the states according to their standards?

Trump wanted the federal government to seize the ballots!

[Roxxy99]

@goaded I’m not disagreeing with you on the election. That was about as blatant a disregard for the constitution as you could get. Luckily enough conservatives refused to go along with the plot. We would have had (and still might have) a constitutional crisis on our hands. Guns are a trickier issue today because the Bill of Rights did not apply to the states until the 14th amendment. States and localities had more leeway in enacting regulations depending on the wording of their state constitutions. Today “shall not be infringed” applies across the board but it doesn’t stop liberals from pushing gun control. We’re to believe that “common sense regulations” are reason enough to ignore the amendment. It isn’t. Yes, SCOTUS does decide 10th amendment issues and the conservative majority has been guilty of chipping away at the amendment in favor of federal power in certain cases. However, liberals generally believe the federal government has plenary power and can pass whatever legislation they have a majority vote to pass. The feds only have certain enumerated and implied powers and everything else falls to the states. For instance, where is health care a federal power in the constitution?

[goaded]

Dismissing democracy is infinitely more dangerous than any discussions about health care which is good for the general welfare of the people.

"Congress has the power to tax, borrow, pay debt and provide for... the general welfare"

Both sides are not remotely equal.

[Roxxy99]

@goaded I’m not really interested in debating which constitutional abuse is perceived as worse. All of it is bad and sets precedent for further abuse. I’m familiar with the constitution’s preamble but that preamble doesn’t grant the government any authority. It just states a general purpose for the powers it does grant them. It’s not a license to play fast and loose.

[Subarugirl]

constitutionally everyone has the right to life and liberty, which should include bodily autonomy and the right to chose not to or to be forced to endure an unnecessary, life-threatening condition.

[Subarugirl]

Thanks for MHO

[Agape93]

Anytime love

[Lliam]

I 100% support the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and the sentiments in the Declaration of Independence. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness includes women's reproductive rights.
The Bill of Rights is an incomplete list of some of the natural rights are self evident, unalienable and endowed upon every person. The Bill of Rights does not grant those rights. It lists things that the government may not infringe upon. It doesn't specifically mention women's rights, LGBT rights, or the rights of different races and ethnicities, but those things are self evident, and the language in our founding documents guarantees them.

Unfortunately some people love infringing upon the rights of others.

[t-8900]

I'm still a Christian before I'm an American, so no. I would never willingly and knowingly support murder. You can say it's not murder till the baby is born but I have my own set of beliefs and to me I believe life starts at conception and the Bible makes it clear you are already a life when sperm meets egg. Imho I believe a lot of the bad things happening to us is because we are such a twisted society. If you think it's about something nefarious than consider this, Republican families are having more kids than Democrat families and that is translating to more future voting power for Republicans. So really by being against abortion I am not only saving lives but creating more Democrat voters. So if all's I care about is the politics I would be all for murdering Democrats in the womb, but that's just not the case

[Friendlybro79]

@t-8900 I understand and respect your beliefs here. If saving lives is important, which it is, why do so many pro lifers/Republicans disregard life once you're born? To be clear I'm not accusing you of this. I don't know you but many Christians, republicans and conservatives don't care about saving the lives of people from COVID when a vaccine that a republican president got for us. If you're pro life you need to be pro do anything to save life which is to be vaccinated. If you're pro choice after birth I'm confused.

To be clear again, I'm not saying you feel this way, but if you do or don't, I'd love to understand more.

[t-8900]

Lots of reasons for both. But just because you call yourself a Christian doesn't make you one. You back that claim up with action. Jesus said to give to the needy not shut them away. I've participated in many food drives. I risked life and limb as a white boy to go into the ghetto to feed hungry kids through Freedom Outreach. But the Bible teaches also to teach a man to fish. Those with idle hands will go hungry. Basically the lazy shouldn't be getting help. Feed the kids, make sure or that, and that they are safe. But don't give a dime to lazy druggies and the like. They gotta sort themselves.

[t-8900]

The mask thing is easy to people and God knows what their motives really are. You can say it's just a conspiracy theory, sure. But when you get lied to by actual media outlets constantly who do you believe anymore?

[Friendlybro79]

@t-8900 I do have to say thank you for having a discussion that has substance. I'm not sure if it specifically answers my question. It's a little vague and what you did say does sound conspiratorial, but that being said, I do think being Christian doesn't have to mean science is evil. The media is messed up for sure. The scientists are not the media. The media demonizes them which is unfortunate. I have family and one friend who is a scientist and you'd be surprised how many religious people are chastising her for saving lives.

I think my concern is, to your point, saying you're Christian, doesn't make you one or a good one at least. I really appreciate that comment and it makes sense. My other concern is though that many Christians have closed their minds to science and haven't thought, maybe God, who gave us free will, allowed us to discover, what is modern day medicine. Maybe it's right in front of us the entire time. I believe we need to trust God's creation, being us, a little more.

I do believe he created us knowing we'd have challenges, and that we could overcome them. When a disease hits us he gave us the ability to save ourselves. God helps those who themselves. He wants us to help ourselves and each other the vulnerable.

I hope this comes off politely and not disrespectful but what do you think a good Christian is when there are many branches of Christianity? It appears that most Christians can't agree on it completely.

[Friendlybro79]

I should state I don't mean you think science is evil but I've heard this from Christian family members and obviously here.

[t-8900]

Science is not inherently good or evil. It's how it's used that matters.

[t-8900]

I don't feel disrespected you came off well intentioned. I have my line in the sand and it's abortion and 2 A rights

[Friendlybro79]

Very good. Have a good day.

[RealMarek]

The problem with the constitution is that nobody in the ruling elite, regardless of political affiliation, takes it seriously. Even the judiciary plays fast and loose with its interpretation. How many wars fought by the US since WW2 have been declared by Congress? The abandonment of free association rights, due process rights, the abuse of the commerce clause, the imposition of states of emergency, the assumption of unenumerated powers that belong to the states (like abortion), and the recent end-run around free speech rights by allowing a cartel of platforms, web services, and banks that are heavily funded by the government to police speech, has been a bipartisan project. This is because the US is an oligarchy inhabiting the husk of a republic, and the oligarchy will not respect a document that was simply a promise from a long-dead elite to govern within certain limits.

[RolandCuthbert]

That's an interesting point. And we used to think it would be impossible for such a small minority to enforce its views on the larger population.

We were wrong.

But no, I could not support the Constitution if such a change was made. I am against abortion, but I would never want to enforce my view on others via the state.
Many folks here have no issues doing that.

[Sixgunsound]

An ar chilly for the win. The state ruins everything it touches, full stop.

[RolandCuthbert]

@Sixgunsound I am not for destruction of the state. That is anarchy. It is just that when you use the state to infringe upon people's rights, then that society will eventually crumble. The problem is many folks at GaG have no understanding of that.

They confuse the state with privately held companies. Companies have no mandate to enforce rights and freedoms. That is the jurisdiction of the state only.

[Sixgunsound]

Far be it from me to argue with a fellow dark tower fan. I just don’t see the state as a long term bet for people’s rights and freedoms as it exists to grow itself, feed itself, and dominate anyone not in the club.

[RolandCuthbert]

@Sixgunsound I ain't a communist man. You have to have a state of elected officials. And sure, maybe that is a pipedream too. We see that Trump almost overthrew an elected government. So yeah, we may be a few years away from the collapse of America. And along with it, the collapse of the West.

But it wouldn't matter. Communism would not replace Democracy. The U. S. would just be a brutal dictatorship that would eventually get overthrown for another dictatorship.

[shortster]

I support the constitution, just not everything in it. If I remember correctly, I want to repeal the 16th Amendment, the one about income tax. Do you really need a constitutional amendment to allow abortion. For as many states that are trying to restrict it; there are just as many that allow it for all 9 months. If you don't like your states abortion laws move to one that you do like. The constitution isn't supposed to be a suicide pact or make all of the states the same. Voting with your feet needs to be brought back.

[Miristheiss]

The constitution would have to be amended.
That is very heard to do. It takes a vast majority of all people and states.

Also... the government doesn't fund any of our other rights.
We have the right to bear arms. The government doesn't supply us with guns or buy us guns.
The government funds abortion.

You issue you flippantly try to analogize is way too complicated and has too many differences.

[Agape93]

It's a a scenario, it doesn't have to be realistic. But for the sake of it, let's say the government doesn't fund it but makes it a constitutional right, like firearms and free speech. Would you support the constitution still?

[NorthwestRider]

The freaking Republicans hate this county and the constitution while they love Putin. This meme fits Republicans very well as I have zero respect for them

[Sixgunsound]

What republicans? There is only one party, the haves. And it’s them and all their power and money and legalized beating and murder and kidnapping and torture and fiat currency domination etc. against the have nots, which in their eyes are obver 90% of the population of the world. They need to keep enough of us around to run the machines and take out their garbage, but the rest of us can die and do long as the survivors can incinerate the bodies fast enough to keep them from having to endure unpleasant smells they are unlikely to notice from inside their gated communities.

[Sixgunsound]

And it doesn’t really matter much to the haves which of their peasant playthings survive social strife. Can you tell individual cows apart? Some people who work with them can, but they are few. The survivors will still show up dutifully to run their machines and clerk their data and take out their trash. So long as the population of useless eaters is culled and cowed sufficiently to enable their disgusting rate of consumption to continue uninterrupted and they still have peasants to lord over, little will change for them. This red and blue color war is simultaneously the stupidest and most dangerous thing I have ever heard of, and we’re falling for it every day. Don’t give our masters the satisfaction.

[Sixgunsound]

The young poor people ride out to die, the rich old people signed the treaties. Why is that?

[libsaretards]

Abortion is NOT in the Constitution. It is a court ruling that can be overturned. When people talk about defending the Constitution, they are referring to the current 27 Amendments. Also, note that the entire point of the Constitution is to protect human rights, NOT aid in murder.

[Agape93]

According to the scenario, abortion was added to the constitution as an amendment. So would you still support the constitution?

If you won't answer yes or no, your comment stream will be deleted b

[Agape93]

Also in the UN charter of human rights, abortion is listed as one of them.

[Friendlybro79]

@libsaretards Would you mind sharing your thoughts on how a minor that is raped and impregnated should have to birth a rapist's child?

[BCA6010]

That's not going to happen, but if it did, you would see the conservative narrative shift towards repealing that amendment and "restoring the pre-woke constitution" or something to that effect. Which would also become mainly a talking point, because if you haven't noticed, the conservatives have not made any serious effort against abortion at the federal level, even when they have the power to do so.

[HighlyVolatile]

Yes, I'd support that. In general, I'm in favor of all sorts of protections from the state whether it's gun rights or abortion rights. I prefer to place strong limitations on what the government is able to mandate.

[HighlyVolatile]

I don't always look favorably upon abortion as one who has somewhat conservative values and ideals, but I don't look at the force of law as a weapon to control other people's behavior and intervene in the complexities of their lives. I see the purpose of the law in protecting our basic freedoms and property.

[HighlyVolatile]

If I come across a pregnant woman seeking to abort, then I see my job if I want to sway her otherwise as peacefully persuading her, perhaps offering to help, not threatening her with the prospect of imprisonment or death if she resists.

[captain_voidwalker]

You leftists sure love murdering children, almost as much as you love grooming them in schools. But to answer the question no I wouldn't support it. But that dosen't mean I whould try taking that person's rights away. I might not like it but the law is the law.

[Friendlybro79]

@captain_voidwalker Have you ever thought it's not that people love murdering children? Or do you actually believe in generalized point of views that they're purposely getting pregnant to murder a fetus? Please tell me you at least understand seriously awful things can happen to a woman and understand why she might want to abort?

[captain_voidwalker]

I understand that she could have chosen to use birth control. As for complications from pregnancy sure but thats not an abortion that falls under the term miscarriage and it happens. Thats not whats bieng discussed here.

[Friendlybro79]

@captain_voidwalker what's your thoughts on horrific events like a minor being raped and becoming impregnated? This might be very rare but these children do not deserve this fate and to be told by others she needs to be forced to bear a child as w technical child? I hate that I have to draw from such an extreme example but it can happen. I would have no idea how that could feel.

[Friendlybro79]

@captain_voidwalker also Christians do not approve of birth control. Also seriously think a little past the fact that a woman was just careless in your eyes. She might have been forced.

[captain_voidwalker]

Here is my thoughts in the rape angle. Allow the woman a choice to get an abortion and if she does charge her rapist with murder aswell

[Friendlybro79]

@captain_voidwalker Thanks for sharing your opinion. I also believe in a female having a choice too.

[captain_voidwalker]

Also Christians do permit the most effective form of birth control. Abstinence

[caitycat21]

I don’t believe that a couple of signatures on a piece of paper give me freedom. I’ll be free once the oppressive chains of capitalism free my people

[caitycat21]

I will not be free as long as institutions run by the state like the police and military exist. They prohibit my freedom and maintain power through oppression

[Agape93]

Exactly

[NamerOfStars]

Given how fond they were of the first Amendment during the Dubya era, I doubt it; it's mostly a convenient way of bludgeoning their opponents politically.

[worldscolide]

Yes I'd still support the constitution.. The hard part about that, you would need every single state to ratify the amendment.. which is harder than you think.

[Agape93]

Oh I've no doubt on that, considering several abortion laws or bills are deemed unconstitutional. The right wing doesn't care.

[worldscolide]

Keep in mind I'm not trying to justify it.. But the pendulum swung too far left.. Like so far that some states were trying to legalize pedophilia and discrimination based on skin color (California is the one that comes to mind).. Which is why it is swinging back to the extreme right.

For example, because the approval rating of the dems, due to pushing identity politics, and other idiocy and completely forgetting about those of us middle class people.. Is in the toilet.. You're bound to see more of this.

It's scary because the pendulum should not swing so far left or right, we need balance... Or this country will tear its self apart. There is a strong chance that in November 90% of the Democrats will lose to the republicans, and in 2024 we will end up with a republican president.. Neither of which is good. If the democrats hadn't treated those of us that would vote for them, like absolute garbage, it would not be like this.

You know me, im a classical liberal, but I don't have much in common with either party any more.. It's just too much. I'd rather burn it to the ground and outlaw political parties..

[Agape93]

It's why I'm wanting out of this shithole country. I'm tired of this.

[worldscolide]

You and me both. I just can't leave.. I mean I could, but I would have to start completely over elsewhere.

[Agape93]

That can be a good thing

[worldscolide]

Maybe, but for my wife not so much. She has aspergers.. And pulling her from her family would make her leave me.. And I promised her mom, may she rest in peace, that I would always take care of her.. I don't break my promises even when the person I made the promise to is dead..

[Agape93]

Good man

[worldscolide]

Thank you!

[Agape93]

Anytime hon. You're a better person than I am.

[Waldoe]

The Constitution has NEVER been amended for 1 issue... But I would defend it... All men were created equal, led to the abolition of Slavery, it was Not a New Article that was added, just one that was enforced...

[nawtee_me]

Amendment’s are not a part of the original constitution. The right to bare arms is. The fore fathers did not foresee children being taken from their mother before they were born.

[Agape93]

Answer the question

[Friendlybro79]

You do understand the right to BEAR arms and it is the second AMENDMENT right? The bill of rights are the first amendments to the original constitution. Meaning none of them were part of the original constitution.

Excerpt
Why wasn’t the Bill of Rights included in the original Constitution?

Toward the end of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, George Mason, a delegate from Virginia, proposed adding a bill of rights, which would, he argued, give great quiet to the people” and “might be prepared in a few hours.”

constitutioncenter-org.cdn.ampproject.org/.../everything-you-ever-wanted-to-know-about-the-bill-of-rights-2

[Agape93]

Lmao

[Friendlybro79]

This means you believe you shouldn't believe in the bill of rights which includes free speech and the right to bear arms. Republicans forget this at times and really mean we like to pick and choose what parts to enforce and also to ignore.

[TyLeeAndPink]

Mostly we are supportive of the ORIGINAL Constitution.

[TyLeeAndPink]

By “we” I mean people who endorse the Constitution in general.

[Agape93]

So none of the ammendments to it, those are not in the original constitution. Am I correct?

[Agape93]

Well?

[TyLeeAndPink]

Sorry. I think I worded this incorrectly. “Original” was the wrong word. I support most of the amendments too, but some of the later amendments have been… corrupt? I don’t know how to word this. Sorry.

[TyLeeAndPink]

I worded this very poorly. Please ignore it.

[Agape93]

Lol you're fine

[josephinelcajon]

I fully support the original document I do not fully support all of today's version

[SignedAutographs]

Republicans are always defending it, only when it suits them

[Friendlybro79]

Exactly. This is also why they will pay for abortions when it happens in their family.

[Pterodon]

We’ll cross that bridge when abortion is in the constitution

[Likes2drive]

I fully support the constitution

[wittymilf]

I don’t even know what a constitution is 😂😂

[llorando]

As a independent, can say that I would.

[Joker_]

I defend the Constitution no matter what

[MrTaboo]

Yes. It's about coming to that.

[QuietRunner]

yes i would