MakBuff

Advocate for reproductive rights. The basis of my position is that govt has no legitimate duty or purpose for denying access to abortion.

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

The Supreme Court's Dobbs decision will be overturned in time because it makes a critical error: it interprets the Constitution as conferring rights to the people (see screenshot) rather than conferring powers to the government. 1/x

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@MiscreaRichard @DoomScroling @DoleTom @LilaGraceRose The living developing humans you are crying for are there b4 fertilization waiting for you to give them the fertilization they need to survive, and you are perfectly fine with killing them then. But you will come back at me with a justification so you can kill without guilt

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@KatelynTweeter So does abstinence

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@ElizabethLann1 @DoomScroling The core of the issue is anti-aborts support govt usurpation of authority. You condone govt denying liberty without a legitimate legislative purpose. It is antithetical to everything this nation was founded on.

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@MiscreaRichard @DoleTom @LilaGraceRose Apologies, the implication of calling abortion evil is that you support govt-imposed gestational servitude.

So are you saying you're against abortion bans?

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@MiscreaRichard @DoomScroling @DoleTom @LilaGraceRose Abstinence also kills a living developing human being. Is that also evil or will you come back at me with orwellian newspeak so you can kill without guilt?

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@nukedaddy777 @frfrankpavone Don't misquote the Constitution, then I won't have to correct you, and you won't have to ask the Lord to rebuke me.

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@nukedaddy777 @frfrankpavone "It was well known when it was written what it meant."

Agreed. It meant born, socially situated individuals engaged with the civil order. And we established govt to effect our safety and happiness.

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@nukedaddy777 @frfrankpavone Your quote of the Constitution illustrates my point that govt may not deny a PERSON the liberty to seek an abortion.

The context of the Constitution (as with every human rights doc in history) is that persons are born, socially situated individuals engaged with the civil order

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@nukedaddy777 @frfrankpavone Yes the definition of person is clear: it's at birth

No one denies that unborn humans are human

And the 14th makes it clear govt may not deny a PERSON liberty without a legitimate legislative purpose

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@MartinLogicing @redherringdraws I don't know, you tell me. What do you do each month when your own "children" (as you call developing humans) present to you needing fertilization to survive? Do you fertilize them or do you deny them so that they die bcuz u don't want them?

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@MartinLogicing @redherringdraws Why is it a bad thing that govt usurps powers never conferred by the people?

Bcuz it is usurpation. It is denial of the people's liberty without a legitimate legislative purpose. It is antithetical to the principles of liberty this nation is founded on

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@CodecDetection @Drewder @japan_nobunaga Perhaps you should try it, too. It might keep you from posting ignorant comments

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@MtRushmore2016 @frfrankpavone No one has a right to the use of another's blood and organs to sustain their life. *My body, my choice" means the body owner alone chooses who can use their body in that way

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@nukedaddy777 @frfrankpavone The 14th Amendment does not grant personhood to the unborn. On the contrary, it makes it clear that govt may not deny liberty without a legitimate legislative purpose. Govt has no duty or jurisdiction to the unborn and so may not deny access to abortion.

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@MartinLogicing @redherringdraws BTW, do you not also kill your own unborn "children" for no reason other than your own convenience by denying then the fertilization they need to survive simply because you don't want them? If so, you're a hypocrite. If not, you must have 30+ children

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@MartinLogicing @The2Margarets @redherringdraws Disagree. Protecting Mom's life & health is the principle desired outcome & the only one relevant to govt duty. The death of the unborn child (to whom govt has no duty or jurisdiction) is the foreseen but unintended outcome. Ur making it clear the fetus is the principle life 4u

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@MartinLogicing @The2Margarets @redherringdraws I quoted you. You said there is no scenario in which abortion is just. The implication is even if Mom will die without abortion, you support her dying over saving her life via abortion

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@MartinLogicing @redherringdraws I did not misunderstand. The people do not need permission to seek abortion, govt needs permission to deny it.

[MakBuff @realbuffhole]

@MartinLogicing @redherringdraws The people don't need permission to seek abortion, that's not how rights work.

Govt needs permission to deny access to abortion, and the people never conferred that authority