On that we agree completely!!!!!!

Actually I have no 'belief' on when a cell is
or isn't a person whatsoever.

I object to the fedgov imposing the 'greater good' on everyone.
I feel the same way about state gov, too.
People need to learn to defend themselves and their rights without
mommy in D.C. telling everyone what to do.
That is what has been happening since 1860 and it's time it ended.

Better than Reagan?

Objections to abortion are religious, yes. Virtually 100% correlation. Thus, prohibiting abortion is instituting religion in government, yes.

If not, in accordance with our beliefs here, instituting government force against a person (the mother, in this case compelling her to 9 months of pregnancy, then childbirth and then dealing with the a baby), is inappropriate. Except in the case you and others "believe" a single cell, and small collections of cells constitutes a human. Your beliefs forced on another. Believing a single cell, or 2^n cells is a human being with rights, is nothing but religion. It can't think, doesn't have a heartbeat for months, can't survive on it's own, the very definition of a parasite.

Belief, belief, belief. Forced, forced, forced. Complete Libertarian hypocrisy.

Next we'll be arguing every cell in one's body is a human, because we can clone one from a cell. Then hitting your own finger with a hammer will be murder.

In spite of his imperfections and all the lies and harassment hurled at him during and after what I hope to be his first of two terms, he's the best president of me dino's lifetime.

HE DID CLAIM THAT the tariffs he imposed on items brought in from china were PAID BY CHINA. THIS IS TOTALLY UNTRUE, AND I HAE DEBITS FROM OUR ACCOUNTS TO PROVE IT. Tariffs are paid by the importers, NOT the shippers

Virtually 100% correlation. Give me a break.

Because I can afford to live there and the governments are very weak in comparison.
(Perhaps the former is a result of the latter.)
Little money being wasted fighting foreign wars, too.

Which do you think is worse for the people?
The US fedgov or the drug cartels in South/Central America?

The problem is that the so-called vaccine (that wasn't by any measure actually a vaccine) has been shown to :
1) be not effective in killing the virus, stopping transmission of the virus, or lessening symptoms of the virus
2) have harmful side effects
3) change human dna and that could have devastating side effects
Trump hasn't acknowledged any of these issues and continues to take credit for the "miracle" non-vaccines.
In this way Trump is proving himself again to be a poor choice for any position.
I wouldn't invest in Trump's company knowing how poorly he manages and how often he distorts the truth.

All objection to abortion is religious? Really?
I don't buy that argument.
And the founders who wrote that amendment certainly weren't writing it considering abortion.
But they certainly were considering limitation of powers to the central government.
I think the 10th amendment applies.

To be honest, I would rather just move to southern Mexico in a fairly remote area and live our a nice life. All this political nonsense with woke ideology is a bit over the top for me.

Right.

I think the indian dude would make a good VP. He could learn the ropes and be a good President if the need arose. Forget the governor of S Dakota, and the black dude from Georgia. @nd choice would be Kari Lake IMHO.

Trump performed pretty well, given that he was under the gun ALL of the time no matter what he did. The other idiots we have had as presidents were pretty much useless but got away with it. Particularly Biden, who in his demented maze doesn't even know what they are telling him to say, and he is making terrible mistakes.

Not so sure the dems wont find someway to defeat Trump, either before the election, during the election, or after the election. Any alternative I can see is a true disaster that the country will never recover from.

I think Trump was being attacked from every angle and chose to start on a vaccine (good idea actually), and leave it up to the state governors to lock down the country IF they wanted to. Its hard for me to blame him since this was really a one-off thing and there was a past pandemic of Spanish flu which killed off a LOT of people over 4 waves...Looking back on it, I never got the virus in spite of being over 75, admittedly stayed away from crowds and avoided wearing a mask unless forced to.

I don't buy your say-so on this matter, either (Zygote is not human is one of those pulled-out-of-the-ass assumptions I don't buy when it is human fertilized ovum). I started on my post to point out your insistence on the religious argument for pro life isn't the only one. I got more verbose so others know my position. Let them read. Let them decide their own positions.

We do seem to get along well on much else, though.

Cynical me understands completely, FFA.

OK, I have to ask. Why bother moving to South America when it seems to be moving here? LOL

We have been down this road, but I reject the assertion, and find it cognitive dissonance. Sorry.

1 Zygote is not a human. That is ridiculous. You "believing" in this, is NO BASIS for you to force another person to pregnancy and childbirth. It just isn't.

All resistance to abortion is based on religion. The rest is just BS. That is why. A law prohibiting abortion is the government instituting a religion. Therefore a federal or state law prohibiting abortion is Unconstitutional.

Simple.

Thor, you still insist the only pro-life argument is religious. You and I have been down that road and I have clearly explained my pro-life position is NOT religious nor does it need to be, leaving your religion argument irrelevant. True, the most vociferous pro-life advocates are a religious people who use their religion as a chief argument, but that is irrelevant as well.

Here's an overview reiteration of my position as follows so others reading this have an understanding of what it is:

Are we a civilized people? I say we are or, at least try to be, and a defining characteristic of a civilized people is respect for the life and value of each human individual within the civilization and that value is (or should be) protected by the laws of the society claiming to be civilized. This is very objectivist, I might add.

So, what is this individual? This living human that has value within a civilized environment? Biologically (scientifically if you will) it is a living organism that transitions through various phases from its beginning at conception. A normal life cycle of our species includes a gestation phase, childhood phase, adolescent phase, adult phase, and finally a geriatric phase (if I left any out please feel free to fill in). I argue to be civilized the gestation phase deserves the same protections as any of the other phases.

I've seen plenty of arguments, including from Ayn Rand, that the gestation phase is fair game to willy-nilly kill off a human being and such killing has taken place by the millions within our so-called civilization. The criteria defending such practice is normally some pulled-out-of-the-ass fetus or cellular characteristic that has to be met to finally admit it's a human life. IMHO, the ONLY way to be sure of its humanity is at conception.

A few thoughts at large:

Pregnancy is a normal and natural condition of the female members of our species who are sexually active. Redefining natural pregnancy as a rights violation of the mother or redefining a fetus (human in gestation phase) as a parasite and therefore deserves a death sentence on a whim is patently absurd, at least if you want to claim yourself civilized.

There can be exceptions, such as self preservation of the mother, but these are serious decisions not to be made "willy-nilly".

The cancer cell argument is irrelevant as, even though they contain human DNA, they will never pass through the life phases of our species. Even if they could they would fall into the self preservation exception of the person carrying them. Yes, you can kill cancer cells with human DNA and still be civilized.

I am not able to understand your reasoning on the act of abortion being a right under the first amendment.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
??

Making sure states don't violate the Constitution is a function of the Federal Government, SCOTUS, and various extremely bad decision by states have been overturned recently.

Abortion is another one. Making it illegal violates the First Amendment, quite clearly. The rest of the arguments against it are the most egregious, fabricated cognitive dissonance ever constructed. 100% correlation to religion is evidence enough. Arguing a single cell is a human, without a brain, is the most non-technical, religious, soul-based, pile of nonsense ever constructed.

I've been thinking I need to start a religion. Might be time. Nonhypocrtiticalistic - One who believes a cosmic continuum demands individuals to have complete freedom, until those freedoms are proven, unequivocally take freedom from another without their consent. The cosmic continuum teaches that mortal beings are just that and no more. After death there is nothing. Life, upon which these freedoms are granted, is a incremental scale, measured by intellectual ability and uniqueness (e.g. from virus to humans). Higher beings can control lower beings as they choose. Life as a higher being, begins when one demonstrates capacity beyond lower beings.

That should do it.

I'm ok with the states and their citizens passing laws for themselves on both abortion and cannibalism.
But I'm not ok with either being a federal law. Neither is part of the constitution and unless there is an
amendment formally passed they shouldn't be powers of the feds.

Trump is the best 'cause he aint a politician. He is a business person. Maybe he does run his mouth when maybe he shouldn't. EVERYBODY on this board has the same problem. Even.....me.