• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Kamela Harris tries to ask a "stumper"

wig

Well-known member
Forefather
Contributor
Joined
Jun 10, 2014
Messages
10,999
Reaction score
13,092
Points
113
Harris in the 2nd to last question of the night asked Kavanaugh if he new of any laws or rulings “that the government has power to make over the male body?”

Kavanaugh appeared confused, but that was likely because it was such a stupid question.

I can think of several great answers for Kamela that would probably irritate her a great deal.

"Yes, there are laws governing whether the male body can be used to kill another human being."

"Yes, there is currently a law on the books that makes it legal to murder a male fetus after conception."

"Yes, there is a law on the books about whether or not the male body can be used as a sexual tool on an unwilling partner."

Technically, these laws extend to females as well. That's actually ideal as the law should be impartial. It shouldn't hold the rights of one gender above the rights of another any more than the law should hold the rights of one race above the other or the rights of a born fetus over the rights of an unborn, viable fetus.

I would argue as well that Harris would be hard pressed to provide me with a specific law that the government has made "over the female body".
 
California sure knows how to pick them. WTF is wrong with those people?
 
Harris in the 2nd to last question of the night asked Kavanaugh if he new of any laws or rulings “that the government has power to make over the male body?”

Kavanaugh appeared confused, but that was likely because it was such a stupid question.

I can think of several great answers for Kamela that would probably irritate her a great deal.

"Yes, there are laws governing whether the male body can be used to kill another human being."

"Yes, there is currently a law on the books that makes it legal to murder a male fetus after conception."

"Yes, there is a law on the books about whether or not the male body can be used as a sexual tool on an unwilling partner."

Technically, these laws extend to females as well. That's actually ideal as the law should be impartial. It shouldn't hold the rights of one gender above the rights of another any more than the law should hold the rights of one race above the other or the rights of a born fetus over the rights of an unborn, viable fetus.

I would argue as well that Harris would be hard pressed to provide me with a specific law that the government has made "over the female body".

Really? Your equating whether or not a man should be able to rape or kill someone to a woman having the right to decide if she wants to have something growing inside of her or not? I’ve heard some very good arguments against abortion.... but this sure as hell ain’t one of ‘em.
 
Really? Your equating whether or not a man should be able to rape or kill someone to a woman having the right to decide if she wants to have something growing inside of her or not? I’ve heard some very good arguments against abortion.... but this sure as hell ain’t one of ‘em.

No, I believe he's trying to expose the idiocy of Harris' question. Because it was...well...idiotic.
 
Technically, these laws extend to females as well. That's actually ideal as the law should be impartial. It shouldn't hold the rights of one gender above the rights of another any more than the law should hold the rights of one race above the other
Quit being racist and sexist. Some groups are more protected than others. Get your *** on board.
 
Those folks are nuts. Just nuts. They just love killing those babies. Which makes the border nonsense laughable as if they actually give a **** about anything other than being in power and control. Just mind blowing nuts. I can't even put my brain into a mode that can understand their warped logic. Just pure garbage.
 
giphy.gif
 
Harris and Booker are emblematic of everything that is wrong with our government. Their pictures should be posted with "what not to do" type instructions.
 
Those folks are nuts. Just nuts. They just love killing those babies. Which makes the border nonsense laughable as if they actually give a **** about anything other than being in power and control. Just mind blowing nuts. I can't even put my brain into a mode that can understand their warped logic. Just pure garbage.

You know you are siding with the losing party when they scream and yell and demand a woman has the RIGHT to separate a living baby from her womb yet in the next breath they scream and yell that it's unconscionable for border guards to separate a woman from her child.
 
what do you mean African or European male?
 
I actually feel sorry for very stupid people who try to make themselves look really smart in front of groups. It usually ends much like this.
 
Really? Your equating whether or not a man should be able to rape or kill someone to a woman having the right to decide if she wants to have something growing inside of her or not? I’ve heard some very good arguments against abortion.... but this sure as hell ain’t one of ‘em.

Something?

Like a parasite, or tumor?

You people are such nimrods.
 
Last edited:
Something?

Like a parasite, or tumor?

You people are such nimrods.

Impossible logic to deal with. This same group leaves botched late term baby murder to die on a cold table. That is the deepest heartless cold you can reach. Then they start quoting the bible when we stop criminals at the border. They should really hope there's no God, because they're in deep when they cross out of this realm.
 
Impossible logic to deal with. This same group leaves botched late term baby murder to die on a cold table. That is the deepest heartless cold you can reach. Then they start quoting the bible when we stop criminals at the border. They should really hope there's no God, because they're in deep when they cross out of this realm.

Im fairly neutral on the whole early term abortions thing mostly cause its two sides arguing two things based on whether they think life starts at conception or later, but science should say definitively that late term abortions are certainly murder...
the real sick ones are the ones that think until their first or second birthday they still aren’t fully functional humans so parent who don’t want their kids should be able to kill them... its a very small but very sick group of people....
 
Really? Your equating whether or not a man should be able to rape or kill someone to a woman having the right to decide if she wants to have something growing inside of her or not? I’ve heard some very good arguments against abortion.... but this sure as hell ain’t one of ‘em.

Not "something", "someone". It's a VERY important distinction.
 
Im fairly neutral on the whole early term abortions thing mostly cause its two sides arguing two things based on whether they think life starts at conception or later, but science should say definitively that late term abortions are certainly murder...
the real sick ones are the ones that think until their first or second birthday they still aren’t fully functional humans so parent who don’t want their kids should be able to kill them... its a very small but very sick group of people....

I dont think the dems care if it is "life" or not. Otherwise, they wouldnt fight tooth and nail to make sure that the pregnant woman isn't required to look at a sonograms, etc. Nor would they fight tooth and nail against later term restrictions when it is so very clearly a "life".
 
Not "something", "someone". It's a VERY important distinction.

Want to test how they view life?

Find and endangered bird. Get a group together. Give them a "nobel" goal. Find the main prey of that bird. You group name is "Protectors" of that prey. The way you protect that prey is by finding those birds nests and destroying the eggs.
 
Here is a nice derisive reference to the Constitution by a Senator in a filmed public hearing -
“I’m gonna ask you about unenumerated rights,” Harris said. “‘Unenumerated rights’ is a phrase that lawyers use but I wanna make clear what we’re talking about. It means rights that are protected by the Constitution even though they’re not specifically mentioned by the Constitution.”
“So they’re not in that book that you carry,” she said derisively. (RELATED: Close-Up Images Of Brett Kavanaugh’s Constitution Reveal That It’s No Prop)
Kavanaugh replied to Harris’ assertion with a smile.

“The Constitution — it is in the book that I carry,” Kavanaugh retorted. “The Constitution protects unenumerated rights, that’s what the Supreme Court has said.”

dailycaller.com/2018/09/07/kamala-harris-dismisses-kavanaughs-pocket-constitution/

This idiot is one of the democrat hopes for 2020. Along with Mr, Spartacus, Corey Booker.
 
Last edited:
Two very big laws governing the male body are conscription and VaWa.
 
Top