Roe V. Wade to be Overturned - Page 69 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15236857
@Pants-of-dog
Any person whose body is being used without consent can "give medicine to another perfectly healthy person without their consent in order to kill them" if that is the safest and healthiest way for the person wanting to exercise personal integrity.


I wonder how long it will be before an adult explains to you that people in the US do not have what you describe as "personal integrity" and others describe in other ways.

It is funny to me that you are describing a right that in others you would be violently opposed to. I am referring to the sovereign citizens movement. Like these crackpots you are advocating that a woman has a right that is absolutely unassailable and uncontrollable. In this you imagine a right that is unique among rights; in that all of the others are constrained by law. But somehow abortion is the only absolute right.

You claim "body integrity" but I will presume you support the government's right to control what you put into it when it comes to controlled substances like prescription drugs. You do support that I hope. You would not have chemotherapy drugs sold over the counter. We control voting. We control speech. We control gun ownership. You name a right and we control it. But. Somehow like a unicorn in the garden, nothing controls abortion. Not the will of the vast majority of Americans. In this alone the beliefs and desires of 2/3 of the population must be ignored. Why?

Now, as an American hater, you have found another trolling technique in referring to the US as a third world nation. I know you have fun insulting Americans. You have been doing it for years. This, however, is not worthy of you. You can do better than this. The US is a powerful, wealthy, relatively free democratic republic. The fact that you disagree with it on a few issues does not change that at all.

I also understand that you @Pants-of-dog do not understand our confederation of states. I do not fault you for that because, frankly, a considerable number of Americans do not fully understand the fundamental nature of our republic. Do try to understand it though. You will be far more effective in affecting the changes you desire.

Today I was asked to sign a petition to put an equal rights amendment to the state constitution on the state ballot this fall. It included, as one of its tenants, a woman's right to choose. This is what will work if it passes as it will take that decision (and others) away from the state legislature. Game, set and match. That is how it is done. Does that sound like a third world country? Not to me. It sounds like direct democracy to me. And Pants it is a great example of how states rights could yeild a vast improvement over a federal law. Under Roe a woman's "right" to have an abortion did not exist. What existed was some convoluted notion that a woman could choose an abortion because her doctor had to respect her privacy. If this law passes, a woman in Arizona would have the right to an abortion for the first time....ever. And it will be a right they could NEVER have at a national level. So before you slam states rights remember that it has always been the states that guaranteed any woman's prerogative to choose at all.
#15236868
Drlee wrote:So if the mother (who is mother of nothing by your definition) decides to keep the, shall we say organized mass of desperate cells, since there is no father, he should not think himself responsible for the mobile Petri dish's medical care. Nor, since he is not a father, should he feel in any way responsible for the "mass". And it is OK for him to feel no responsibility for this tumor.

Absolutely.
Last edited by snapdragon on 04 Jul 2022 09:15, edited 1 time in total.
#15236869
Drlee wrote:
To continue:

But wait. There comes a day when this tumor is expressed and suddenly it is a) a human with rights the same as yours and I and b) the person who is, suddenly as lightning, now a father, is required to pay for the organized mass of cells until it is 18 years old.


By George! He’s got it!

That is beyond absurd. Care to rethink your position?


Thanks for compliment, but it’s not my position. It’s the way it is.

I actually have no problem with the father, prior to birth, deciding that he does not want a child and formally asking the mother to abort. If she refuses then it is on her. She can raise the child as she pleases. He would have no claim, right or privilege to be in the child's life at all. In fact, if he does demand abortion, he should be restrained from ever seeing the child.


Once a child is born he or she becomes a person with the right to have both parents support his or her upkeep, whenever possible. If both parents agree to give up the child for adoption, then other people take on the role of legal guardians. Basic stuff.

And here lies the reason that trying to make some logical argument when faced with the dilemma of abortion is pointless. Woman want absolute rights to run their lives as they please. They do not want men to have the same rights WRT children.


Some woman would prefer the father to bugger off, but a father has the same responsibilities as the mother, unless it’s in the child’s best interests that they don’t.

There is a reason that certain conventions have worked for, oh, say, 100,000 years. Yet we collection of monumental egos believe we should simply ignore that without an alternate plan.


100,000 years! What are they?

By the way. Since I believe in body integrity, I believe that a person should have the right to refuse the invasive procedure of having blood drawn for any reason. Let me know how that works out for y'all's paternity suit.


The man’s paternity will automatically be assumed by the courts. He has the right to provide a DNA sample to prove he isn’t.
The courts act on behalf of the child.

I think women are not making their case very well. Feminism is a failing philosophy. That is not to say that feminists do not have some good ideas. It is to say that they are very bad at explaining them and/or selling them politically. So far, other than some vague claim of "fairness" there is little in modern feminism to attract the interest of the greatest majority of men.


I think you’re wrong, there. In my experience the majority of men have no problem with equality between the sexes.
It’s tough for the ones that do have a problem with it, but they’re going to have to lump it.

And there you go again. Attempting to subjugate women by your philosophy of ‘men know best and real women accept it’.
Not attractive.

It’s not the 1950s any more.
#15236894
Pants-of-dog wrote:No.

This thing where I pretend a clump of insensate cells is the equivalent of a person is merely a concession to avoid pointless debate about personhood. Most abortions occur before 22 weeks. The fetus probably does not develop the ability to feel pain until at least the 27th week.

It does not seem to make sense to say we assault something that has no ability to sense or react to pain.


Do you have a source for this or are you just pulling it out of your ass? I'm sure it feels great for the unborn to be ripped apart limb by limb if the abortionist doesn't have access to the head for the injection.
#15236933
Unthinking Majority wrote:The ability to feel sensations like pain doesn't have anything to do with the right to be free from physical violence. ie: You're not allowed to go up to a disabled person who can't feel their legs or a person in a coma and stab them in the leg.

Assault and violence refers to touching someone else with the intent to physically harm them without their consent.


Emotional language is not good debate.

If you want to describe all attempts to free oneself from being used by another person as “assault and violence”, feel free. I will simply ignore this as it is not actual argument.

———————-

@Drlee

Please rewrite your post so it is not so openly rude and I might address it.

But I do see that you agree with me that your constitution is a bit of a failure here since you do not actually have certain rights enumerated that are common in developed countries.

Have you ever lived in a developed country?

————————-

terrapinsfan wrote:Do you have a source for this or are you just pulling it out of your ass? I'm sure it feels great for the unborn to be ripped apart limb by limb if the abortionist doesn't have access to the head for the injection.


Yes, I have sources.
#15236942
"Come feed the little birds, show them you care
And you'll be glad if you do
Their young ones are hungry, their nests are so bare
All it takes is tuppence from you"
"Feed the birds, tuppence a bag
Tuppence, tuppence, tuppence a bag
Feed the birds", that's what she cries
While overhead, her birds fill the skies

Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.

43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.”

A robin feathering his nest
Has very little time to rest
While gathering his bits of twine and twig
Though quite intent in his pursuit
He has a merry tune to toot
He knows a song will move the job along

A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down
The medicine go down
Medicine go down
Just a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down
In a most delightful way

Early each day to the steps of Saint Paul's
The little old bird woman comes
In her own special way to the people
She calls, "Come, buy my bags full of crumbs"

Walt was a very devoted Congregationalist Christian, his family’s religion. In fact Walt owes his name in a sense to religion. But the one thing Elias was extremely strict about was Religion. And it was this early introduction to Religion that shaped Walt throughout his life and it played an important part in his Animated Features and later on, in Disneyland Park. Walt’s father Elias was a very good friend of Reverend Walter Parr, who preached at the Saint Paul Congregational Church, where the family attended church. ”He was a very religious man, but he did not believe you had to go to church to be religious. He respected every religion. There wasn’t any he ever criticized. He would not even tell religious jokes”
#15236950
I don't understand the concept that the unborn child is not a person before it is born.

No one has been able to provide any sort of adequate explanation for why it isn't.

And this is what the abortionist fanatics like to claim, that a foetus is not a person, but then why does it resemble a person?
#15236957
@snapdragon

You do realize that you confirmed every one of my points as logical and your own position illogical.

All of a sudden you confirmed that the person in the womb has rights. You even acknowledged that it is the duty of the courts to protect them. And, of course, you decided that the rule of law does not apply to men in a paternity suit. Nor does body integrity.

But we are still stuck on stupid. None of it matters to the end conclusion that we must acknowledge:

Women have no right to what is described in this thread as "body integrity". Not under US law. (They have it in one state.) It is not guaranteed by the US Constitution.

The states regulate abortions. They also regulate speed limits, health rules, property ownership, the schools, taxes on sheep, weights and measures, how tall flagpoles can be and whether or not one can have fireworks to celebrate today. This is what the founders wanted and has been the basis of our laws since the beginning. The SCOTUS decision should have been thought of as "DUH. Of course they ruled that way." Even ultra liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg acknowledged that Roe V. Wade was not about a woman's body integrity or equal rights under the law. Even she saw it as bad legislation from the bench.

The solution for abortion rights, is now and always has resided with the state legislatures. In that regard nothing changed except some quirky work around about doctor patient privacy that unleashed, you guessed it, SOME state legislatures.

When that lady yesterday, asked me to sign a petition for an equal rights amendment to the Arizona Constitution, she did more to further the rights of women in the US than all of the blather about body integrity and the potential for woman being allowed to have reasonable access to abortion than did all the whining and lecturing in this thread.

@Pants-of-dog Have you ever lived in a developed country?


Tell your mommy that you have been naughty again and are annoying the adults.

@Political Interest
I don't understand the concept that the unborn child is not a person before it is born.

No one has been able to provide any sort of adequate explanation for why it isn't.

And this is what the abortionist fanatics like to claim, that a foetus is not a person, but then why does it resemble a person?


It is an inconsistency with which they cannot deal. And it is the reason why the majority of Americans, including women, do not favor unlimited abortion rights. In many states the injuring of an unborn child in a criminal act is murder. Even in liberal California, killing a fetus in anything other than an abortion is murder.

Then we have the barbaric colonial backwater, Canada, which smugly allows a mother to murder her viable unborn child days before natural birth, which could not reconcile their beliefs and make an "killing in the act of birth" law that is beyond stupid yet carries the penalty of life in prison.

But let's pause about arrogant Canada and set the record straight. Abortion is not legal in Canada in the sense that it is a right under their constitution. Until the 80's Canada had a law on the books banning abortion. Then a court struck the law down leaving Canada with no federal law on abortion. Exactly as in the US, it is left up to the provinces. As late as 2021, the central government, penalized New Brunswick for not providing a full range of abortion practices. Many provinces have this same issue. From the left of center Global News:

"...abortion is already allowed — though often inaccessible..."

As it stands right now, abortion access in Canada is a patchwork.

While the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the federal law criminalizing abortion in 1988 as unconstitutional, no government has put in place legislation to replace it.

That means there is no law about abortion in Canada: abortion is legal at all stages of a pregnancy but it is effectively left up to the provinces to decide where people can access abortion and what services are exempt from being publicly funded through provincial health-care plans.


Hmmm. Sound familiar?

Frederique Chabot, health promotion director with Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights, noted that while abortion is legal, many Canadians do not have access to it.

“The Canada Health Act already ensures that health-care services, including abortion, should be accessible to all people in Canada,” she said. “This is already the law in Canada when it comes to health care and can be enforced to ensure that all people can access the services that they need.

“We welcome that all parties, or the majority of parties at this point — we’re still looking at how the conversation unfolds — are moving beyond being pro-choice or not and taking a deeper dive in terms of what access or what barriers to access have looked like across the country.”


Well how about that? The much ballyhooed Canada absolute right to an abortion is more honored in the breach than in the observance it appears.

Sexual health advocates have long warned that multiple provinces fall short in meeting the requirement under the act to make sure that insured services like abortion are accessible.

Global News has also documented how dozens of Canadian women are forced to travel to other provinces or the U.S. for abortions each year out of a lack of access to the time-sensitive service at home.

Chabot noted barriers to abortion have been “persistent” in Canada for decades, particularly for those who live in rural areas or don’t have the money to travel to larger urban centres for abortion.

“We have seen problems that have been longstanding and that we need to see addressed in all of their complexities,” she said, noting lack of access to birth control remains a challenge for many.


Canadians coming to the US for abortions? :lol:

Here is a big eyeroll to all the smug Canadians who have been posting on this thread. :roll:

So you are right @Political Interest This is a dicey issue. One even that self-proclaimed, first world, bastion of women's rights can seem to get right. And they are pretty queasy about the thing. In a recent poll a vast majority (78 per cent) favour a law requiring doctors to inform patients about alternatives to abortion before performing the procedure.

So there you have it. They are not much better off than we are. The only real claim they can make is that they do not have a national law deciding the issue either way. Just some medical regulations. And that those are seriously being ignored in a lot of places.

But hey Snapdragon and Pants. If you can't get a timely abortion where you are, feel free to come to the US where it is legal and available in most places.
#15236974
Drlee wrote:Tell your mommy that you have been naughty again and are annoying the adults.


So you have no rebuttal to my well supported point that, in terms of abortion, the USA is far more similar to a developing country than a developed one.

In fact, you pride yourself on telling others how you have no right to personal integrity in your country; a right that people in developed countries take for granted.

We already looked at maternal mortality rates.

Access to contraceptives is spotty.

Access to medical care for pregnant people is based almost entirely on class.

If you bring up the fact that the USA has very good quality of care, for those who can afford it, please note that this is the same for many developing countries with a rich upper class.

It is an inconsistency with which they cannot deal. And it is the reason why the majority of Americans, including women, do not favor unlimited abortion rights. In many states the injuring of an unborn child in a criminal act is murder. Even in liberal California, killing a fetus in anything other than an abortion is murder.


As I have repeatedly said and which many have ignored: treat the fetus as a person since it does not matter: a person with full rights still cannot use the body of another for life support without their consent. (Unless this person is a fetus and lives in a place where body autonomy rights are limited, in which case, they fetus person gets special rights.)

Then we have the barbaric colonial backwater, Canada, which smugly allows a mother to murder her viable unborn child days before natural birth, which could not reconcile their beliefs and make an "killing in the act of birth" law that is beyond stupid yet carries the penalty of life in prison.


No, it makes sense if you read the pertinent case law. I have mentioned it several times in this thread. Have you read it?

Also, Canada has 15.2 abortions per 1000 women, while the USA has 20.8.

If abortions are bad and we should reduce them as much as possible, then the USA is doing significantly worse than a “ barbaric colonial backwater”.

Canada has less abortions and more freedoms for its citizens.

But let's pause about arrogant Canada and set the record straight. Abortion is not legal in Canada in the sense that it is a right under their constitution. Until the 80's Canada had a law on the books banning abortion. Then a court struck the law down leaving Canada with no federal law on abortion. Exactly as in the US, it is left up to the provinces. As late as 2021, the central government, penalized New Brunswick for not providing a full range of abortion practices. Many provinces have this same issue. From the left of center Global News:

"...abortion is already allowed — though often inaccessible..."



Hmmm. Sound familiar?



Well how about that? The much ballyhooed Canada absolute right to an abortion is more honored in the breach than in the observance it appears.



Canadians coming to the US for abortions? :lol:

Here is a big eyeroll to all the smug Canadians who have been posting on this thread. :roll:

So you are right @Political Interest This is a dicey issue. One even that self-proclaimed, first world, bastion of women's rights can seem to get right. And they are pretty queasy about the thing. In a recent poll a vast majority (78 per cent) favour a law requiring doctors to inform patients about alternatives to abortion before performing the procedure.

So there you have it. They are not much better off than we are. The only real claim they can make is that they do not have a national law deciding the issue either way. Just some medical regulations. And that those are seriously being ignored in a lot of places.

But hey Snapdragon and Pants. If you can't get a timely abortion where you are, feel free to come to the US where it is legal and available in most places.


We have laws on the boos that respect rights.

Access to abortions can be spotty simply because we do not have the required medical equipment and specialists in every small town.

It is economics, not the misinformation and seeming misogyny of your leaders.

So yes, when it comes to what happens on the ground and what happens in the legislature, Canada is miles ahead of you.
#15236992
We have laws on the boos that respect rights.

Access to abortions can be spotty simply because we do not have the required medical equipment and specialists in every small town.

It is economics, not the misinformation and seeming misogyny of your leaders.


I see. So very much like a third world country. In fact very much like what you slammed the US for. In Canada, like the US, if you have the money abortion is not a problem.

Funny thing POD. Not much different at all. Except that most of our states ban the barbaric practice of killing viable children as a matter of law. And the overwhelming majority of us approve. That is what democracies do. They have laws rather than the absence of law.

Go ahead and continue sending your people who need an abortion to us. We don't mind.
#15236993
@Drlee I think all Canadian provinces ban abortion viability as well.

Some ban abortion before the 20th week, if anything - so they are more restrictive than the Roe standard.

We went through this ITT.
#15237000
Drlee wrote:I see. So very much like a third world country. In fact very much like what you slammed the US for. In Canada, like the US, if you have the money abortion is not a problem.


No, you misunderstood.

Access to abortion depends almost entirely on how close you live to a hospital equipped to do it.

There is no cost for the procedure, and federal law guarantees that all provinces have to provide it.

Funny thing POD. Not much different at all. Except that most of our states ban the barbaric practice of killing viable children as a matter of law. And the overwhelming majority of us approve. That is what democracies do. They have laws rather than the absence of law.

Go ahead and continue sending your people who need an abortion to us. We don't mind.


You do realise that US citizens also go to Canada for abortions right now, I hope.

And what you as barbaric seems to work better than your system of taking away the rights of people. You do not seem to disagree that we gave more rights and less abortions, while you have the opposite.

——————-

@wat0n

The provinces are not allowed to create legal restrictions on access to abortion in Canada. Thus, there are none.

At best, the misogynists are limited to creating regulations about funding.
#15237002
Pants-of-dog wrote:
@wat0n

The provinces are not allowed to create legal restrictions on access to abortion in Canada. Thus, there are none.

At best, the misogynists are limited to creating regulations about funding.


Don't see why not. They cannot treat it as a crime, but they could issue heavy fines.

PS: Actually, no, you're right. It seems fines are also a form of criminal punishment in Canada.
Last edited by wat0n on 04 Jul 2022 22:12, edited 1 time in total.
#15237003
Drlee wrote:@snapdragon

You do realize that you confirmed every one of my points as logical and your own position illogical.


How did you work that out? Your mind works in mysterious ways.

All of a sudden you confirmed that the person in the womb has rights. You even acknowledged that it is the duty of the courts to protect them. And, of course, you decided that the rule of law does not apply to men in a paternity suit. Nor does body integrity.


You didn’t read what I posted properly. I was speaking of actual born children.

Before that, I confirmed for you that before birth, the prospective father has no obligations at all to his future child.

But we are still stuck on stupid. None of it matters to the end conclusion that we must acknowledge:

Women have no right to what is described in this thread as "body integrity". Not under US law. (They have it in one state.) It is not guaranteed by the US Constitution.


Which is shameful. Hang your head, Dr Lee

The states regulate abortions. They also regulate speed limits, health rules, property ownership, the schools, taxes on sheep, weights and measures, how tall flagpoles can be and whether or not one can have fireworks to celebrate today. This is what the founders wanted and has been the basis of our laws since the beginning. The SCOTUS decision should have been thought of as "DUH. Of course they ruled that way." Even ultra liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg acknowledged that Roe V. Wade was not about a woman's body integrity or equal rights under the law. Even she saw it as bad legislation from the bench.


It’s disgusting. All those other restrictions you mention apply to everyone and the reason you have those restrictions is to protect other people.

Surely, anyone can work that out for themselves?

It’s pretty basic stuff.

The solution for abortion rights, is now and always has resided with the state legislatures. In that regard nothing changed except some quirky work around about doctor patient privacy that unleashed, you guessed it, SOME state legislatures.


A lot of states. I repeat it’s disgusting and shameful.

When that lady yesterday, asked me to sign a petition for an equal rights amendment to the Arizona Constitution, she did more to further the rights of women in the US than all of the blather about body integrity and the potential for woman being allowed to have reasonable access to abortion than did all the whining and lecturing in this thread.


I’m not holding my breath. It’ll take more than a petition. It’ll take real political will. Still, I agree it’s a step in the right direction.

Tell your mommy that you have been naughty again and are annoying the adults.


That is nothing but naughty temper and deeply unattractive.
Why are you forever throwing strops ?
Last edited by snapdragon on 04 Jul 2022 22:42, edited 2 times in total.
#15237004
Political Interest wrote:I don't understand the concept that the unborn child is not a person before it is born.

No one has been able to provide any sort of adequate explanation for why it isn't.


People or persons do not occupy the body of another person.

And this is what the abortionist fanatics like to claim, that a foetus is not a person, but then why does it resemble a person?


Which person?
#15237005
wat0n wrote:Don't see why not. They cannot treat it as a crime, but they could issue heavy fines.

PS: Actually, no, you're right. It seems fines are also a form of criminal punishment in Canada.


Again, no legal restrictions at any stage of pregnancy, only lack of funding and red tape for providers.
#15237006
Late term abortions can be difficult to access, especially in a geographically large country.
They are so rare, not enough surgeons are able to safely carry them out as they simply don’t get the practise.

It’s not always possible or desirable to kill the foetus in utero and then for it to be delivered vaginally, especially when the pregnant girl is a 12 year old.

My niece delivered her severely abnormal foetus. It was very harrowing for everyone concerned, but it’s much the safest way. The hospital staff did what they could to make my niece as comfortable as possible, but even so.

I don’t believe late abortions are anyone else’s business. I don’t believe the law should have anything to do with controlling what is a personal and often tragic decision, other than from a public health position.

That the termination is carried out in a properly equipped hospital or clinic by a competent and qualified practitioner.
#15237062
snapdragon wrote:Late term abortions can be difficult to access, especially in a geographically large country.
They are so rare, not enough surgeons are able to safely carry them out as they simply don’t get the practise.

It’s not always possible or desirable to kill the foetus in utero and then for it to be delivered vaginally, especially when the pregnant girl is a 12 year old.

My niece delivered her severely abnormal foetus. It was very harrowing for everyone concerned, but it’s much the safest way. The hospital staff did what they could to make my niece as comfortable as possible, but even so.

I don’t believe late abortions are anyone else’s business. I don’t believe the law should have anything to do with controlling what is a personal and often tragic decision, other than from a public health position.

That the termination is carried out in a properly equipped hospital or clinic by a competent and qualified practitioner.


Most of what you said is untrue. But we can let the medicine go for a moment.

I and the majority of Americans disagree with your assessment. We believe that late term abortions are ghastly and should be illegal. So, because we are a democracy, we constructed our laws to reflect the moral compass of our people. If you wish to kill viable babies, then the US would not be a good fit for you.

For the record though. Late term abortions in Canada are hard to get because there are very few doctors who will perform one. And they are not hard. Any OB GYN could do one in his/her sleep. They just wont.

I have to keep reminding myself that you and Pants are Canadian and apparently do not understand our system of government. When we put off Britain we did not retain the queen as head of government. We are not one thing. We are 50 independent states joined in a confederation with a constitution designed to protect certain rights, provide for defense and constrain the power of the central government. That is just about the opposite of your system.

So you both like to slam the US when in fact, with regard to abortion, the US Federal Government does not have a dog in the fight. In actuality there is no US position on abortion. There are 50 state positions on government. They range from even more access than you have to draconian.

In my state, now that the court has ruled that it is a state issue which has allowed the state to restrict abortion, it is difficult to get one here. Unlikely that a woman could get one as a matter of fact. But maternal and prenatal care in my state is free to those who cannot afford it. In fact it is free to any women in the US who do not have insurance or whose income falls below certain levels. In fact, for a family of four, (because those were the easy to find numbers) living in an average state in the us, Medicaid would be available covering prenatal and maternity care if the family earned about the Canadian median annual wage for said family of four.
Last edited by Drlee on 05 Jul 2022 15:57, edited 1 time in total.
#15237070
That’s absolutely not true, Dr Lee.

It just shows how little you know about, which is disgraceful for someone who claims to be a medical practitioner.

It takes a great deal of skill to remove a foetus from a uterus with causing damage.
  • 1
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 93
Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Ukraine's actions motivated by the US make peace l[…]

Mar-a-lago raided by the FBI

Actually this is a manipulation ahead of the midte[…]

Regarding 'scarcity': In economics, overprodu[…]

Roe V. Wade to be Overturned

Americans are terrible people, in general. All of […]