Total posts: 287
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
How can you conclude that one mass containing life has more significance than another.
Here rests the United State Constitutional issue. For years people have settled for only having a criminal law regulating pregnancy. The people have not the added benefit of a United State Constitutional Right as law describing the connections already made by the known justification of lethal force when separating pregnancy from birth. That reason known by the people was the delivery of posterity of a nation by the expected mother may cost the people her life upon its deliverance or before the crossing of a boarder into that nation.
The legal issues of abortion as aticles of criminal legilsation and the writing of Articles of United States Constitutional Right are two completly different principles of political expectation made by the people, for the people.
Is the boarder part of the women’s body? No, it is airspace which is not part of the women’s body. As far as criminal legislationof law is the inuendo of abortion the best connection to be made with established justice as criminal law? What is the official order to abort stopping, who is it being given to, and why, who is following the order?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
In 2016, scientists announced they had directly detected gravitational waves, literal ripples in the fabric of spacetime. It was a huge validation of Einstein’s work, which had predicted their existence almost exactly 100 years prior. The find also heralded a new era of astronomy, as researchers now have a new way to study the Universe.
I'm not sure a sound of a ripple in the cosmological constant from two black holes quaifies as a gravitational wave. I am sure the cosmological constant is not a mathmatic demonstration of what is. If correct and it is a gravitational wave it should be heard on all mass which demonstrates gravity at some point. We will keep our finures crossed. Validate Einstein's work? F.Y.I. Einstein's work will be validated or corrected by descovery in mathematics changing a theory of times relativity to a mathematic fact of proportional energy, The Law of relativity.
The validation of Einstein's contribution will be made in that General Relativity clearly establishes that Pi is responsible for the crossing of time zones. Keeping in mind that the mathematic creation of time using the Pythagorean Theorem set lines around the Earth as a circumference in contradiction to those magnetic North and South Pole circumference in the use of the compass for navigation.Every wave form is a cross section of a circle and is described by a measurement of circumference of some kind when it comes to light.
To answer a complex question in a simple way Pi is found with division therefore it can also be found with basic multiplication. We do not find the circles circumference by multiplying we find Pi again by the process of multiplying. Time is never infinite as a mathematical law of its findings a curved line does not extend forever it can only complete an orbit where energy only expands the circumference till the curve is broken or creates an oval till the curve is broken.
Created:
Posted in:
"The biological line of existence of each individual, without exception begins precisely when fertilization of the egg is successful."
The beginning of personality does start with successfulfertilization.
Human life begins atthe creation of the egg.
Human life begins atthe creation of sperm.
Youmake an argument on why a woman is the ambassador of the child by law of naturenot executive order
And the rest of your argument is a rant about how we control the constitution. And we do. I agree. But you don't even touch on the moral and other scientific principles that I talk about.
My argument is a filed grievance does not rant Congress and other political forces have placed the process of filing this grievance out in the public not me. Another part of the grievance is over discrimination as the declaration of independence describing all men as created equal has been targeted as a type of discrimination. Even after literally having been written as part of a declaration of independence before a court of law. All women are created equal by their creator is also a declaration of independence and is detailed as grievance by the removal of how a life is extended by fertilization before the people, incourt or out of court.
You make an argumenton why a woman is the ambassador of the child by law of nature not executive order. We are debating a scientific theory about the beginning of life not science fact. You are then explaining why the theory should be used as a guideline for legislation of criminal law. Ignoring why the word abortion is not to be suitable as legislationin United States Constitutional Right. The reason is self-evident and is due to abortion is criminally legislated and crime always means either guilty or innocent and is a poor united state of a right in which all women are held innocent until proven otherwise in courts of law using both types of laws. America and the voters have simply never been given a chance to vote on United States Constitutional Right which is also a form of law. Is it not? Has anyone ever in America voted on a United States Constitutional Right dealing with the Constitutional issue of female only immigration into America? No, they have not, yet the American United States Constitution is blamed for the lack of abilities for the people to do so even after over a hundred years of argument about criminal law.
If only one person agrees that a pregnancy can be aborted under acceptable use of lethal force, there should have been written a United States Constitutional Right. A United State Constitutional right in no way must match criminal law as a second criminal accusation. There is more than one person who agrees that there is cause forsuch use of lethal force therefore there is a call for United State Constitutional right as a state of the union. Infertility is an illness which is scientifically treated while there is also incest and medical disease that are other concerns for justification of safe medical amputation.
Wrong:
You make an argumenton why a woman is the ambassador of the child by law of nature not executive order.
Fertilization is the common defense toward the general welfare to ensure tranquility otherwise we may say cloning is the start of all human life. Whereas science does in fact fertilize human eggs with human sperm collecting both as a start for human life at the youngest possible age. The same is done by science with several other life forms on the planet earth.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
What does rape have to do with immigration. Sexual asault may be the cause of a immigration which palces only the female of certian ages at risk of death by the process of adding a male or female life to a nations posterity. It is only a women who is asigned a ambasadorship by the laws of nature directly with that life as the child itself has a form of diplomatic imunity also created by the laws of nature. It is only the women who is to give birth who is held at risk of life to add to the posterity of a nation.
The argument of law is over why Pregnancy abortion isor is not a United States Constitutional law based on an explained perfect right. Citizen ship of the very youngchild does not start at conception, life of the very young child doesnot start at conception, Life begins at two places the creation of the humanegg and the creation of human sperm then the creation of life is extended beyond an age limitalso set by law of nature. The idea of when the diplomate assigned by law ofnature becomes responsible for its own actions and is found capable by aconnection to justice already made or as described in American Constitutionknown as the word established.
Whatmight be reason for refusal of facts as whole truth to establish a UnitedStates Constitutional Right of equality between all women married, unwed, womenof all colors and race? The whole truth in this matter would also influence howa person is to be considered born as a part of nations posterity officially asa citizen when a woman pregnant is constitutionally made a diplomat of hernative country. This whole truth also accounts for a reason of logic why allwomen may not desire to held by United States Constitutional Right with allother women as created equal by their creator, Presadera.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
I'm not fighting abortion. I am attempting to pointing out that abortion is a act of criminal legislation and not a United States Constitutional Right. To which a United State Constitutional right of the people to remain silent is taking place. A piece of criminal legislation that is unmatched with a united state constitutional right is unconstitutional in its connection to established justice for the general welfare of the common defense towards all posterity.The addition of the principles of Pro-choice and Pro-life are not United States Constitutional Rights they are interpretations of logic made on criminal law and not United State Constitutional law.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
What Forum Topics do you think would attract women?
Do the foot work go out in the world and just ask woman to participate on the forum, they either will or they will not. It is the best way to find out.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
I will pray for you.
Do you know by united state of criminal law rape is a form of attempted murder?
The question was is the sexual assault before or after the accused left the accuser?
Abortion is an unreliable admission to make to a murder...
Don't pray for me, just answer the question truthfully. A religious belief is not a legal grievance to make against the establishment of United States Constitutional Right as due process. This is what is to be assembled as it has not taken place in the normal functions of the practice of law globally. In fact, it is a provable violation of the 1st Amendment in the balance of freedom as this word is and can be used in such a way to place a cost of criminal action against another person by not listening to them, was a rape before or after the accused left the company of a women? The question is asked because the idea of sexual assault occurs as a united state of law first as an alibi for abortion even before a women may be old enough to think about sexual activity. Is this not part of a whole truth? The argument never made before in or outside of the courts was a freedom of religion describes how a person will listen and interpret those people who have spoken and written as the other two states of the union made with the one-word freedom.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." The perfect right held by the union made with American Constitutional preamble the practice of criminal law, be it licensed or unlicensed by the people. The perfect right is created by identifing that Speech, Press, are bound with the goal of no cost. The only no cost assosiated with and in religion and peaceful asembly is the the two acts of listening and understanding.
Female-specificamputation is not linked to pregnancy or the beginning of life directly FSA islinked to the only right available as a United State between all women futureand past, this one state is immigration. It is this fact science is burdened with as a witness toprove and disprove as fact. They have been placed under an oath of truth, whole truth,and nothing but truth by the courts to do so.
Thank you by theway.. for you prayers. There is no shame in understanding our own limitations nor is there shame in pushing our own limits.By the way a man isnot fired from his role as President of the United States of America "He" is relieved of command or dismissedfrom duty the voters and the courts have very limited powers in this respect.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Great. It wouldnt be the first time Christians have justified rape.
The United State Constitutional question: Was it rape before or after the accused left?
A 2nd United States Constitutional question: What does rape have to do with immigration?
3rdUnited State Constitutional question: Outside the start of the immigration process outside marriage what part does sexual assault play on any facts relating to the termination of the immigration?
4th United States Constitutional question: GOD describes Marriage as a vowl to love, honor, and obey untill death do we part from those vowls as whole truth to each other. Immigration as a United State held with all women and no men how is a man to be included in the argument of the endagerment of human life birth creates?
Is this just a way to distract the courts and misinform the jury pool about the writing and creation of United States Constitutional Right?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Human life begins at conception and should be treated as such. Anyone who denies that claim, even after hearing the substantial amount of research and evidence, cannot, and should not be taken seriously on the subject matter. 2:
Human life begins with the creation of a human egg and sperm. Are you saying science has evidence and has proven that a pregnancy can take place without human egg or sperm? The argument is not about the practice of law and why pregnancy abortion had been legislated as a crime. People know it is a crime otherwise there would be no alibi for the use of the description like risk to life. What does the argument have to do with not establishing a United State Constitutional Right. Say or arguing that abortion is a crime is no excuse for the delay. Is it because women according to American Constitutional Right cannot be a President of the United States either? Pregnancy abortion is only unconstitutional because no one has described it as a United StateConstitutional Right. What a waste of time.
Female-specific amputation is a description of a United States Constitutional process which at this moment has no legal objection to be legislated as a United States Constitutional Right still no movement in that direction at all. We are not in court, we are not lawyers, we are the people who have a constitutional right to establish a state of the union described by America Constitutional preamble facts. Stop voting for people who come up with excuses to not do the job we have had a legislated crime on abortion of a very long time, we do not have a United State Constitutional Right over this form of immigration. Let’s ask science together when does immigration start? Why it starts at conception.
the point or time at which something begins : a starting point — usually singular
the first part of something
an early stage or period
the origins or background of a person or thing
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
I don't care if a person "choses to wear" a bacteria collection factory on their face. If you or anyone else would force someone to wear one, I hope you die. Is that clear enough?Well stated.
You don't see that as a mixed message everyone who regulates fashion by law is wished dead?
Well stated, can't say that in any better way maybe with some kind of connection to established justice?
Created:
-->
@sadolite
I don't care if a person "choses to wear" a bacteria collection factory on their face. If you or anyone else would force someone to wear one, I hope you die. Is that clear enough?
I know I am going to die someday as the process of death is half of all living and I do not force anyone to wear a hijab. However, it is anarticle of fashion and is part of a dress code by law. The law was legislated by a form of democracy and is now viewed by some as repressive as a resistance to a change of fashion. I am looking for a more perfect solution to address the crime other than public flogging by officers of the law. I do not believe you do not care. What I believe is you do not know how the influence a change for the better on the laws that have been legislated and the response created by some in law enforcement.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Capitalism is in communism the communist republic owns the Capital.
Created:
-->
@sadolite
I don't care why they are worn and don't care. You can wear shit stained under ware on your face for all I care. But with that said, don't even think of telling me I have to wear some bacteria collecting shit rag on my face. For the ones who want to wear them, good for them. For the ones that don't and are forced to. I pity them and wish they had the power to kill everyone who forces them to.
I can't tell if you are trying to understand the wisdom behind United States Constitutional Right or just trying to pass a criminal law governing the washing of the hijab. To be clear you know the hijab is anarticle of close a fashion statement and just do not care. You feel it is not hygienic meanwhile as you do not care there is also a portion of the world community who have spent billions of dollars on facial recognition software who have otherreasons for women not to wear them.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgim
I would agree that it's not so far fetched to think Jesus might have really meant that generally, only sexual deviance was the only grounds for divorce. People r not always precise in what they say plus this is just a recording and translation anyway even if Jesus was precise
The issue is that the vowels of marriage have a greater bearing on the verbal contract or likelyhood over the Bible and what Jesus said as witness to GOD, as the creator and not just father. Meaning not only influencing Jesus or some people. I get the feelling some of this argument is about homosexuals and lesbians that cannot be married due to religion while in whole truth they are only stopped by their own action of picking the wrong person. By GOD and vowel of Marriage any couple preserving the likelyhood they enter can declare a man and man couple Binvir. Just as by GOD and vowel of Marriage a couple can also declare any female and female couple UnosMulier or even Mulierfemina. These are not the only choices but the limitation by oath of love, honor, obedience,with death describes them as whole truth.
Created:
-->
@sadolite
Your experience tells you a hijab is not article of fashion?
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
A teenage girl allegedly attacked by Iranian authorities for not wearing a hijab
The issue here is not religion it is fashion as a criminal law...
Created:
-->
@sadolite
And nothing, I simply explained why I believe Ideologies, cults and religions are at their very core evil. I get there is no way to avoid them. But I can undermine them every chance I get. That's all a free thinking person can do. I used to be part of them, I finally became enlightened and know why they exist now. It took a better part of 45 years to figure it out. As a matter of fact my journey to enlightenment started the first time I visited a debate site.
Capitalism does not create wealth it describes who owns Capital and who holds the greatest risk as it might lose or gains in value.
Created:
-->
@sadolite
Capitalism creates wealth. It isn't an ideology or way of thinking about the world. Capitalism is a proven tool for all people to use to generate wealth and income. It is a win/win for both sides. One side offers goods or services, one side offers goods or services in return. If no agreement is made, they part ways. All religions, cults and ideologies were created to forcibly confiscate wealth from those who create it to spend it what those who created it don't want it spent on. 95% of all money that my govt spends my confinscated wealth on is abhorrently immoral and disgusting from my point of view. That is why religions, ideologies and cults exist. They could never convince people to spend their hard earned dollars on their abhorrently immoral and disgusting desires. They point a gun in your face, take it and tell you that you are a worthless piece of sub human shit for not agreeing to give up your wealth for things you find abhorrently disgusting and immoral.
O....kay. And?
Created:
-->
@n8nrgim
those are big walls of texts, but you didn't do much to address the yes and the why of domestic abuse not being a grounds for divorce and remarriage.
It is unnecessary. It is a violation of law as a United State Constitutional Right held in a state of the union with the 1st Amendment as a unbroken self-evident truth.
The verbal oath between women and man is to love, honor, and obey, until death do we part. As one whole truth in a verbal contract abuse is the termination of the condition between the words love, honor, obey, and death. A person can be sent away fromthe Marriage as they failed the holding of the contract, as the vowel had been broken. The couple is to honor and obey one another and any harm must be by permission in an act of love. Domestic abuse without doubt fills that condition as do many things a person might do during a natural lifetime. A death must involve love, and honor with obedience or be selfless these are a very big limitation on use of lethal force.
: the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (such as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
A basic startingplace for debate here is that Iran like Japan still carries punishmentsrelating to public flogging as a result of committing a crime. The UnitedStates of America has since stopped such forms of punishment leaving a gap inUnited States Constitutional Right. There is a significant amount of work whichwould need to go into describing a series of self-evident truths governing overflogging itself. In basic though for quick understanding flogging as a UnitedState Constitutional right can dictate the force and ways in which someone mightbe struck after conviction in relationship to criminal accusation. What we thepeople do as a United State Constitutional Right is describe how someone mightbe better off spanked for some crimes in a controlled fashion instead of havingtheir hand cut off or be placed in an adult prison full of convicted felons.
It is my understand that you feel helpless and the similaritybetween American along with many other nations police brutality and Iran policebrutality are too close for comfort. The problem comes from the use ofcriminal law without United States Constitutional law as a balance on thescales of Justice.
Created:
-->
@sadolite
Never heard a parent argue with a child over what they are wearing in public, it is simply a more dramatic responce to the basic issue the same is said with alcohol in this region of the world. Finding the most complete truthful United State of law may be strongly influenced if lack of representation is allowed to continue with religion being a alibi for dismissal of introduction of facts into the established judicial process.
Created:
Morality police? It is just what might be the larger imperfect state of the union made with criminal law and established justice there is. The democratic argument is over public alcohol consumption, fashion, a female United State Constitutional Right. United State Constitutional Right meaning United States of law as right in connection to established justice, insured tranquility, the common defense as general welfare with blessings of liberty.
America looks very hypocritical when it cannot legislate female United State Constitutional Right for itself while suggesting that the criminallaw be a GNP.
Created:
F.W.Y.
The American 1st Amendment describes a state of the unionwith established justice which describes the act of listening to words spoken and words written and read as a freedom of religion. For we the people must hear or understand in some way, and it is religion being the largest united state to describe a shared belief system of understanding of the people, for the people. Lawyer, judge, or tradesman or tradeswoman, President or Presadera.
Created:
Divorce does not exist to GOD nor Holly Marriage the argument is based on an interpretation of Marriage by Jesus and not GOD. We are Married once for life and that is it under GOD. This doesn't mean the GOD commands either male or female die as the pardon of the vowels taken with Marriage. It only means any second male and female Holly union would have been described by GOD as being named something else by the couple or by witness to the couple’s holly union.
Love, honor, and obey until death do you part. The fact of self-evident truth in this matter is that a husband and wife cannot love honor and obey someone who has passed away. It is self-evident truth we can only obey, honor and love what once was a wish befoe death and the wishes of those to whom we share the creation of life with.
Obedience is not astate of the union held in America United States Constitutional Right, where it can be broken as a verbal contract by a lawyer practicing law at will using criminal law. Love, honor and obey until death do we part, the words of the couple who enter the verbal contract. The words are bound together by the oath not the male and female who are pledging a condition by words to eachother. The condition of this state of the union describes a limitation on all three conditions of the verbal contract in a time frame, a vowel by man and women taken together at one time before GOD. Something not often described in whole truth by many people practicing law or religion.
Created:
-->
@Double_R
Correct, because accepting them is a necessary precondition of intelligible thought.
The issue here is that Best. Korea’s principle has a logicto it is based on a foundation of a description of insets. Is incest true or is a condition of interpretation. A woman is a mother is the women described as a mother by everyone. Grammar may say no but literal sense may say yes every man many at some point be intimate with their own mother as word without being intimate to a relation made by birth as incest. This connection is made by speaking the truth and speaking the whole truth in faith. In the case of a united state of religion or freedom of religion a person may not know how to best describe their own beliefs in a logical way to others. Not everything is a test of knowledge for those who wish to become part of a religion. The logic in Christianity is aform of mechanism to give a false appearance of incest when such tactics had been undertaking by some cultural societies for whatever reasons.
Our wives as a united state are mothers when she has a child with a husband in the literal sense, she is also that husband’s mother and not just the child’s mother. As truth and whole truth, it just sounds wrong by English grammar. As a man people might be asked is your wife a mother? Yes, without the context to English grammar a woman who is a mother is also the mother to the father of that child. In contradiction to not being the mother of a child, the husband had before the wife had wed him.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Its called being all powerful.
In fact, all powerful more importantly would mean power obtained without sin, or criminal laws. We might agree it is a power derived by the people as a perfect "Right." All self-evident truth is all powerful and by the way logical.
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
The originating question is not valid, you don't explain existence, existence just is.
The question is valid how do you explain the existence of everything? Everything is a self-evident truth our argument is based on GOD being a self-evident-lie and I will not make that argument at this point.
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
How do you explain existence?
Existence is a self-evident truth.
All existence is still a self-evident truth.
A self-evident truth is not a simulation, something for nothing, nor is it magic. A self-evident truth can make sense to always exist and while it is neither he nor she.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
He created himself, obviously.
So you think being a self-made man is GOD and not Lucifer?
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
How can you explain the existence of God?
Are we explaining GOD as only a religion or as animal, vegetable, and mineral ?
Created:
-->
@sadolite
People who need laws to govern them and their behavior deserve no freedom at all.
Untrue, freedoms are best regulated by a diffrent type of law then criminal law. Freedom is the removal of cost, cost is a level of regulation that can be proven and measured as a united state. We compare freedom to liberty when something has been found to have a cost it is then described as a liberty.
Created:
Furthermore,how can they not respond?
Likeyou, I am not condemning or supporting the use of lethal force applied during self-defense.
Areyou a supporter of death to innocent people?
This is a much more complicated subject matter than explained by this question. The subject matteris over United States Constitutional Rights versus a Constitutional argument based on legislation of criminal law by democracy. The focus point being how ademocracy might inadvertently place citizens of a Nation in harm’s way by use of proposition, measure, and ballot question linking them possibly to ArmedServices. Linking is a freedom of the meanings of wording to say United State.
Hamasin an election and polling states they have about 50% support of their messageto wipe Israel off the map as of 2022.
This statement is about oneof the best examples given of a poorly regulated democracy where voting makes aconnection to civilian and Armed Services. A person might make a observation that Criminal legilsation that is both imported and exported to nations as a GDP might be a risk to peace.
Created:
-->
@sadolite
I can only control what is within my front yard. If Israel doesn't want rockets launched into its cities 4 times a year there is only one solution
There is only one solution as a united state of global nations we reprimand them both and separate them in outer space?
Created:
-->
@sadolite
Well they declared war now the consequences of war will now take place. They took the wrong side in WW2 and lost. Now they will loose this war. Wars have consequences. They will have nowhere to live now. Fuck around and find out level 10.
We do not argue the Constitutional United State of Right we argue the criminal burdens of self-defense.Israel has an ability by criminal law to defend itself as a collection of victimsin a United State of Israelites. Do they have the right to commit racism in a civil court by proving every person born Palestinian is or is not in the same and equal United State of criminal law?
Israel of all Nations should understand it can only try to keep legal ownership of the land obtained in a War and there will be anissue of POWs possibly who are held indefinitely due to War . War is an application of Marial law addressed at a combatant directly, the people who share a nationality with another group who are unable to uphold a level of United State Constitutional Right as law or a level of constitutional criminal law such as their own are not instanly soldiers. Not all Palestinians are Armed Service personnel and there is the argument of forced enlistment of a population, does a birth signify a willing participation in criminal act, along with other issues of United State Constitution created by the declarations of War. This describes a basic common connection between both sides in relationships to imperfect regulations of democracy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
Some of us wish we were aborted, and those who were aborted so far didnt complain, so abortion is always good.
You had been aborted as a point of United States Constitutional Right, a mother who preserves the life of a egg to allow it's migration into a nation is performing a form of abortion. What it is not is a pregnancy abortionis how the legislated criminal act explains and holds on file a grievance against the act of abortion. Like with crime, there is an issue with wording which can become important. This is probably one of it not the largest united state in the American 1st Amendment if not broken by the practice of criminal and civil law.
1. FLRW and I both hear you, and it is okay to complain a bit,but it is a misunderstanding of the freedom of speech in the 1st Amendment which may fog the principle of who is complaining, so far that is, and obscure how they express their grievance as free for all of us. Maybe spend time to volunteer at a hospice can add some experience and depth to an overall understanding of United States you share with all people. Break the boredom. It is a hard subject matter and can build many different points of view.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
We debate who can assume the office of Presidency either bycriminal law or by American United States Constitutional Right with little restriction other than being second generation citizen. This condition does hold a united state with executive office.
Created:
Posted in:
It is not that I suffer, its just that life itself seems kinda boring. There is no point in it. You can get drunk with alcohol or with water, but other than that, whats the point?Was I just born to drink?
C.) It is not that I suffer, its just that life itself seems kinda boring. There is no point in it. You can get a drink of alcohol or with water, but other than that, whats the point?
Was I just born to drink?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
That isn't necessarily accurate for the following two reasons:
Abortion is a United State Constitutional First Amendment Right to admit to murder. Well written in a very elegant way. Both women and men for decades have sought to write a criminal action to say an event is legal. That is clearly not the right way to detail a danger held as united state to all women created by pregnancy and birth. The law sought after is aUnited States Constitutional Right and not a judicial criminal law. Abortion isa criminal law Female-specific amputation is a United States Constitutional Right. A woman defending her body with force which can intentionally end lifeis describing a criminal action dependent on an alibi. A medical event only women can have performed to stop immigration is a United States Constitutional Right.
The actions of the Supreme Court to send abortion down to State criminal legislation is also not establishing a United State Constitutional Right for the risk of pregnancy and birth as a United State of law for all women. They the women as a United State are not looking to write a crime making abortion legal, they are to be seeking to write a United State Constitutional Right about the danger of pregnancy and birth. Then the hard task of having that United States Constitutional Right ratified into an Article of American constitution must take place. The supreme Court ruled abortion was unconstitutional as an invasion of privacy. Then the court was relieved of command of the criminal loss of privacy an the opinion was given that a new United States Constitutional violation was found made against the child who was only in care of an ambassador not assigned by powers of the Executive office.
While with the current administration the argument is to keep government out of women’s basic Right to perform immigration not reproduction. Keep Government out of reproductive rights for women, no how about add to American Constitutional protection to medical privacy already criminal law. As a United States Constitution Right pregnancy,birth, and immigration are not used in relationship to Constitutional made with the wording female-specific amputation directly only criminal law and abortion does this. FSA is connected to Constitutional ensures, established justice, and other qualities of American Constitutional Preamble. Which is the goal in the creation of Constitutional rights it would also be a state of the union address to Congress made by a President of the United States of America.
Created:
Posted in:
If I believe my wife is cheating on me and want to evaluate whether my belief is rational, I need to consider what evidence I have; text messages, receipts, etc. and determine whether my belief is justified or if I'm just being paranoid. Same exact process, nothing to do with criminal statues.
All of what is being written by me is to explain that a vote does not make a person a President they are elected as a officer of polotics. There are several kinds of officers in the political arena.
"Same exactprocess"I question, a wife cannot cheat on a husband as a husband cannot cheaton a wife. The truth is a women may dishonor a man in a marriage and a man may dishonor a woman, and both man and women may dishonor marriage itself. Cheating is a legal description of a way to bestow dishonor by infidelity and is considered a crime in many jurisdictions or states of law.
I would like to point out how a higher form of law isdescribed as a self-evident truth. A criminal law is argued before a form of hearing as right or wrong. We as people do have a choice to say innocent orguilty, right and wrong as we are connecting it to the practice of law or the preservation of American United States Constitution as Constitutional Right. The practice of law is simply a way to form a state of union with established justice that may be better or worse than other ways attempted. Like using the abilaty to inteligently explain how a group of people much larger than yourself can be right under a wello detailed set of circumstances.
An Executive officer is required to display an ability of President which requires a method of forming a United State of Right to established justice larger scale of justice for the people. It is easy to confuse the principles of guilt and innocence found in criminal civil law with right and wrong. Though as self-evident truth criminal civil law is about the evaluation of wrong as a crime and punishment onconviction.
Created:
Posted in:
Proof, evidence, etc. are not terms exclusive to criminal activity, they're terms of logic from which the criminal justice system bases itself upon.
You are speaking of which past exsecutive officer should be given a new chance to sit as Exsecutive officer addressing all other officers of federal governing. Two words Constitutional Analysis.
Okay you just had written the terms proof and evidence are not exclusive to criminal activity, yet they are terms of way to think about only criminal justice system. logic saing it's meaning might connect to something else is not a perfect connection to established justice. Yes, I agree the criminal justice system is based upon crime and how it is orginized. Orginized Crime that just sounds wrong but it is the literal description of what is said with Criminal justice system of filing greivance. Doesn't sound like the most perfect connection to established justice to me. How would you describe the difference between criminal justice and United State Constitutional justice?
Asking for proof is asking for common defense describing, then demonstrating how the process works. Evidence is describe how the object demonstated is collected it is collected as evidence. In criminal law it is always evidence of a crime. You are going on to say that America is not based off of a United State Constitutional system of justice, the United States Criminal Justice system is based off crimes directly and how they are held as filed grievance said in the broken parts of the First Amendment damaged in the pratice of criminal law. The only thing Constitutional is the United State made with the description of how courts are run and how judges are elected office inside Articles of American Constitution. Prove something is right, provide evidence that it is right, there is no crime used to describe right. The self-evident truth is no crime can be used to ever describe right, Never ever, ever, ever, ever let alone a perfect right made with established justice.
Still has nothing to do with "practicing law".
It always did have something to do with the practice of law, how we speak and write in public in America is based on the four practices of law. There are four clear choices practice criminal law applied or not to civil law. Practice Constitutional Right as a more perfect established connection to justice, and finally practice martial law. How these types of law are delt within the First Amendment is based on if the Amendment is left in its original state of the union, or if it is interpreted by the practice of law having been disected broken apart and no longer in a state of the union with established Justice. We are getting off topic but this is a matter of what is failing the Justice system or a balance of right working in the justice system?
Who can assume the presidency of the United States of America any man as part of the American Declaration held in a United State with American Constitution. Getting elected to the political Exsecutive office is something diffirent. Getting elected to the political Executive office issomething different. There are some changes required in Constitutional Right to include women All women are created equal by there creator is to be added into the American Declaration of Independence and he word "she", for total lack of better word Presadera is to be added to American United State Constitution.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
No, criminal law is an entirely different subject.No, we're not. We're talking about evidence of wrongdoing, and whether the evidence supports the claims. That's about logic, not criminal law.
It doesn't make any sence to seek proof as evidence in writing if you are not writing about a crime. Unless you do not know what you are writting about, I presumed you do know though may not agree with me.
And even if the conversation about the president's actions was had in a legal context, this still would not qualify as "practicing law". To practice law, by definition, requires one to do so within the judicial system. This is not the judicial system, it's a debate site.
The American United States Consitution is a judical system The Preamble of the American Constitution tells us specificly in order to form the more perfect union with established justice. No insualt meant but this is straight forward in that the people and all courts of established justice all in thier many forms are indeed part of this process, as United State.
None of us were talking about that
The topic of the room is based on process which describes a man as President of the United States of America.
I asked you to briefly summarize your case.
In summation theUnited States or other word summation is made between Executive officer and presidentialoffice of the United States of America. A man can display an ability to achieveand hold just one office without ever holding both. It is due to a practice oflaw which is most often used to elect and hold a man or now a woman in theExecutive office. It no longer is a United States Constitutional Right to bePresident for a man in this Country as argument of law of United StatesConstitutional Right has been discredited and is no longer observed as typelaw, such as with in many cases Martial law. It is an attempt and at onlymaking a criminal legal claim publicly by use of the practice of criminal orcivil law. We the people practice criminal and civil law, or we do not andpractice United States Constitutional law.
The United States of America consists of three branches of govrement and four states of law.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
In short, the vote of the people and the electoral college only chose an Executive officer who sits and works in the Oval Office of the White house. What you would need to understand is how only men had been in the political process without judicial prejudice as an officer of American Constitution, meaning all those men in Senate office, Congressional office, and the one man in Executive office had been created equal. This was by the Oath of office they all took as they all agreed as a single state of law by verbal contract to protect, serve, and defend the United States Constitution. All political figures had taken this oath, all those men as political officer at the time had been created equal in Constitutional Right as a “He" is only described in Article II.
To shorten a long explanation criminal law used a creation of crime to establish a short cut for those people blazing enough to self-represent themselves in criminal and civil acions outside a court as their own legal council. Breaking the United State between the American Declaration of Independence phrase "all men are created equal by thier creator" from the American United States Consitution. By a use of criminal law not consitutional right.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Not a single thing you said made sense or applies to our discission.
That is true, however I am writing things down not saying them. Doesn't this sound like you are admitting to practicing criminal law as you say none of what is talked about is Constitutional. Being a President of the United States of America is a Right described in American Constitution. Trump was an Executive officer who had been elected by the people to sit in the Oval Office not President. Have you ever read "all men are created equal by their creator." self-evident truth in combination with an Article of Constitution naming word of writing as a declaration of Independence. Those words are President of the United States of America. The self-evident truth is united state is because there are many states each different and not like the other states. Of course, we are left to wonder if we are speaking as in state of property like "NewYork" or like states as in states of law criminal, civile versus constitutional. Most assumed is the state created as property like New York. What I have written does apply.
We're not talking about the practice of law, we're talking about evidence and if there is any sufficient to justify the claims.
You are practicing law as you are publicly speaking of criminal laws and making claims of greivance as criminal conduct. As there is a United States Constitutional Right to act as your own lawyer in a court of law it does make sense to understand you can do the same outside the courts of law. Does it not? Know this fact or not?
None of what we're talking about has anything to with the constitutionality of Trump being president.
Doesn't this sound like you are admiting to practicing criminal law as you say none of what is talked about is Constitutional. Being a President of the United States of America is a Right described in American Constitution. Trump was an Exsecutive officer who had been elected by the people to sit in the Oval Office not President. Have you ever read "all men are created equal by their creator." self-evident truth in combination with a Artivle of Consitution naming a words as a declaration of Indepences. Those words are Presdient of the United States of America. The self-evident truth is united states is because there are many states each can be different and not like the other states. Of course we are left to wonder if we are speeking as in state of property like "New York" or like states as in states of law criminal civile versus Consitutional. Most common assumed is the state created as property like New York.
What on earth are you talking about?Who is "us the American voters"? Last I checked I was an American voter.
Simple, I am talking about the Oath of office of President in Article II which describes how a man elected must show as his ability to serve, protect, and defend United States Constitution to be a President of this office. Not just one of the above as described by many rights broken by council in a court of law. Otherwise, he is just another Executive officer in the oval office writing out Executive orders. Orders, which by the way can be disputed as unlawful including unconstitutional in an American Armed Service or other court.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
What was the USA thinking?
Acting on a realityshow is political experience.......lol
Thanks for the goodlaugh I needed it...
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
The arguement is over Chemical Warfare. The threat of use of any Atomic missiles is a threat to use Chemical weapons globally.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@IwantRooseveltagain
@Vegasgiants
What does assuming the ability of being an economic advisor have to do with the ability of being a President of the United States of America?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@FLRW
@IwantRooseveltagain
@Vegasgiants
None of you are describing what makes a man a President your describing what makes a person an economist. lol.......
Not that I do not agree with your view of any of these men not being an economist....
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
@Public-Choice
Thank you both for taking the time out of your busy day to coach us the American voters on the practice law by self-representation outside a court of law. Not how to evaluate a man's United State Constitutional ability by oath to be President of the United States of America. Do you even know what you both are doing? Can you please tie this into the question who can be assume the powers of President of the United States of America as described in article II as "He" ,and in the 19th Amendment when women had been conditionally allowed to vote. That condition is if she is discounted on the grounds of her sex,as in gender. If a women is not discounted by her gender she can be removed by proper judicial process. The United States Constitution does not want this as it is contradictory to a common defense between her and men, however this should not be confused with the process as being connected to American Constitutional Preamble or that it is a Constitutional right.
The word"He" is used in Article II to reflect the self-evident truth all men are created equal by their creator. In established justice this creatoris civil and criminal grievance described in State law that is not derived from a United State Constitutional Right of their own. Just in the way a word like Presadera can be said to hold all women in a united state of equal before all other women by the use of their creator grievance before the court. A constitutional creation in America. Thank you for your attention and views.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Public-Choice
Simply because your argument felt kinda similar to theist contacts I had in the past.
Interesting, I was baptized Protestant with exposer to the Orthodox Church, also Quaker beliefs.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Public-Choice
Can I ask if you consider yourself a Christian Nationalist or part of the monarchist or theist movement?
I consider myself a republican due to this principle was explained to me at a young age along with how American holds me as republican without causing me or the nation harm. I was named John so I learned at a young age some people think that means they can in religous sence deficate on me like a toilet. Why do I seem Christian?
Created: