@DeezyAZ81 I was simply pointing to the fact that OJ was found not guilty in his murder trial and so my factual perspective is that he was exonerated for the crime. So just to be clear on this important matter..... You do believe OJ did NOT commit a double homicide ?? He was found not guilty by a jury of his peers, yes. I know and believe he was found not guilty..... knowing and believing he makes human PEZ dispensers as a side hobby is also true... If you sincerely believe that there is a different double murderer responsible for those actions then I have another website you may be interested in.... https://theflatearthsociety.org/home/
I have watched a couple of documentaries and read a couple of books on the case and trial (Not OJ's book ha). I believe OJ was there and involved in the murder somehow. I do not think he acted alone though. If you remember the timeline I do not think OJ had enough time to kill them both alone (Goldman was half his age at the time), get rid of clothes and weapons, go home (5-6 minute drive), take a shower, change clothes, and get in his limo for his flight all in 31 minutes without being seen or noticed. I know OJ is a scumbag of a person and domestic abuser, so he was involved for sure in my opinion. I watch a lot of crime series too and the whole cuts on his hand from someone else's fingernails that was mentioned by a forensic expert in the civil trial also does not add up. In nearly 99.9% all fatal stabbings, the perpetrator has cuts on his or her hands from the knife because there is so much blood on the knife that the killer cannot effectively hold onto the knife. However, the gloves (deemed to be planted), nor either of OJ's hands had knife cuts on them. To kill two people with the knife violently with all of that blood on the scene that had to be flying around and for him to not have a single knife cut on his hands is highly unlikely. Forensics in civil trial actually confirmed that the one cut on his knuckle was indeed NOT caused by a knife cut. So this does not add up either. Everyone paints OJ was the sole killer because of the obvious history of abuse and his loose cannon, violent personality. I just do not think he acted alone, although I truly believe he was there and involved. If LAPD had not botched it, I also think it should have been a conviction. Anyway, we can go back and forth on this somewhere else.
It is obviously still a highly controversial trial and event in American history.
4
Quote Originally Posted by kcblitzkrieg:
@DeezyAZ81 I was simply pointing to the fact that OJ was found not guilty in his murder trial and so my factual perspective is that he was exonerated for the crime. So just to be clear on this important matter..... You do believe OJ did NOT commit a double homicide ?? He was found not guilty by a jury of his peers, yes. I know and believe he was found not guilty..... knowing and believing he makes human PEZ dispensers as a side hobby is also true... If you sincerely believe that there is a different double murderer responsible for those actions then I have another website you may be interested in.... https://theflatearthsociety.org/home/
I have watched a couple of documentaries and read a couple of books on the case and trial (Not OJ's book ha). I believe OJ was there and involved in the murder somehow. I do not think he acted alone though. If you remember the timeline I do not think OJ had enough time to kill them both alone (Goldman was half his age at the time), get rid of clothes and weapons, go home (5-6 minute drive), take a shower, change clothes, and get in his limo for his flight all in 31 minutes without being seen or noticed. I know OJ is a scumbag of a person and domestic abuser, so he was involved for sure in my opinion. I watch a lot of crime series too and the whole cuts on his hand from someone else's fingernails that was mentioned by a forensic expert in the civil trial also does not add up. In nearly 99.9% all fatal stabbings, the perpetrator has cuts on his or her hands from the knife because there is so much blood on the knife that the killer cannot effectively hold onto the knife. However, the gloves (deemed to be planted), nor either of OJ's hands had knife cuts on them. To kill two people with the knife violently with all of that blood on the scene that had to be flying around and for him to not have a single knife cut on his hands is highly unlikely. Forensics in civil trial actually confirmed that the one cut on his knuckle was indeed NOT caused by a knife cut. So this does not add up either. Everyone paints OJ was the sole killer because of the obvious history of abuse and his loose cannon, violent personality. I just do not think he acted alone, although I truly believe he was there and involved. If LAPD had not botched it, I also think it should have been a conviction. Anyway, we can go back and forth on this somewhere else.
It is obviously still a highly controversial trial and event in American history.
@DeezyAZ81 My whole point was throwing religion into the far left does not make much sense. Should have just said radical far left extremists and left the religion out of it. I concur My other point, which is more philosophy or view, is that the radicals on either side of extremism spectrum fall into the same intolerant thinking of the religious extremists. The intolerance of these groups is what makes them so dangerous. There is no discussing view points or common ground, they essentially only wish for the "destruction" of those who think and believe differently. You have people exactly like this in this cesspool sub. It is their "religion" and they identify as people with that far end of the spectrum.
Right on agreed. On both sides of the aisle. I tend to think most Americans fall somewhere in the middle, but this forum makes me re-think things quite often.
3
Quote Originally Posted by kcblitzkrieg:
@DeezyAZ81 My whole point was throwing religion into the far left does not make much sense. Should have just said radical far left extremists and left the religion out of it. I concur My other point, which is more philosophy or view, is that the radicals on either side of extremism spectrum fall into the same intolerant thinking of the religious extremists. The intolerance of these groups is what makes them so dangerous. There is no discussing view points or common ground, they essentially only wish for the "destruction" of those who think and believe differently. You have people exactly like this in this cesspool sub. It is their "religion" and they identify as people with that far end of the spectrum.
Right on agreed. On both sides of the aisle. I tend to think most Americans fall somewhere in the middle, but this forum makes me re-think things quite often.
Axios report that Biden administration plans to shield medical records from criminal investigations for women who cross state lines for abortion.
Yea, ok....does our government really need to be involved with this...it's kind of ridiculous
maybe we should have our government find Waldo too...maybe they can get Bluey on the case...just stop already...this abortion issue is getting out of hand....eliminate sex altogether is the next step and since many in these forums aren't getting any I'm sure the government can gather many posters on COVERS to help in their research of how not to get laid....everyone should be prepared for this call when it comes and you must press 2 to hear it in English
COVERS allows u to tell someone they are sexually frustrated so long as ur hands are clean
0
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
Axios report that Biden administration plans to shield medical records from criminal investigations for women who cross state lines for abortion.
Yea, ok....does our government really need to be involved with this...it's kind of ridiculous
maybe we should have our government find Waldo too...maybe they can get Bluey on the case...just stop already...this abortion issue is getting out of hand....eliminate sex altogether is the next step and since many in these forums aren't getting any I'm sure the government can gather many posters on COVERS to help in their research of how not to get laid....everyone should be prepared for this call when it comes and you must press 2 to hear it in English
So you do not support the concept of women being able to have consistent rights with regards to abortion since it is their body and all? States cannot make proper decisions and we are seeing it right in front of our face. Morons down here pull out some 1800s relic on the books and now we dropped back 200 years in time. Even if you are against certain guidelines for abortion there needs to be a minimum standard that any citizen in any state can know exists not based on what screwball state legislature thinks.
The reason why the federal government steps in is for this exact cause, extremists make awful legislative decisions based usually on religious intolerance and that is not what this country is about, extremists in all directions are not representative of society as a whole and even if you might disagree with abortion in your home it is the purpose that government is to exist and that is to protect the greater good and those who might not agree with religious beliefs.
3
@ABooksNightmare
So you do not support the concept of women being able to have consistent rights with regards to abortion since it is their body and all? States cannot make proper decisions and we are seeing it right in front of our face. Morons down here pull out some 1800s relic on the books and now we dropped back 200 years in time. Even if you are against certain guidelines for abortion there needs to be a minimum standard that any citizen in any state can know exists not based on what screwball state legislature thinks.
The reason why the federal government steps in is for this exact cause, extremists make awful legislative decisions based usually on religious intolerance and that is not what this country is about, extremists in all directions are not representative of society as a whole and even if you might disagree with abortion in your home it is the purpose that government is to exist and that is to protect the greater good and those who might not agree with religious beliefs.
....does our government really need to be involved with this...it's kind of ridiculous
On ABC news, Trump tries to deflect blame by saying it's up to states whether they want to prosecute women for abortions. However Biden says abortion isn't about state rights. This is about women's rights. Now elections determine whether women have reproductive freedom. Or whether states continue assault to control women.
1
Quote Originally Posted by ABooksNightmare:
....does our government really need to be involved with this...it's kind of ridiculous
On ABC news, Trump tries to deflect blame by saying it's up to states whether they want to prosecute women for abortions. However Biden says abortion isn't about state rights. This is about women's rights. Now elections determine whether women have reproductive freedom. Or whether states continue assault to control women.
@ABooksNightmare So you do not support the concept of women being able to have consistent rights with regards to abortion since it is their body and all? States cannot make proper decisions and we are seeing it right in front of our face. Morons down here pull out some 1800s relic on the books and now we dropped back 200 years in time. Even if you are against certain guidelines for abortion there needs to be a minimum standard that any citizen in any state can know exists not based on what screwball state legislature thinks. The reason why the federal government steps in is for this exact cause, extremists make awful legislative decisions based usually on religious intolerance and that is not what this country is about, extremists in all directions are not representative of society as a whole and even if you might disagree with abortion in your home it is the purpose that government is to exist and that is to protect the greater good and those who might not agree with religious beliefs.
What I am saying is that our nation was created on freedom and being able to make choices. If the female wishes to abort their child for any reason it should be their choice. It is their body and theirs alone. you can create arguments either way for when life should or shouldn't be aborted but until it is born it should be the females choice. Now, if we want to get into another discussion about whether some should have child altogether that is a different story. You SHOULD be mentally, physically and financially stable to bring or want to bring a child into this world. This is the topic that is not discussed enough or at all. I see zero reason for children to be born just to give them up for adoption or create broken homes. This is a proven fact that this does not work. Why we allow people to have children that are not capable of caring for themselves is beyond me, but as I stated we are a nation based on freedom and choice. It doesn't make it right though, however, to give birth to unfortunate or horrible circumstances as those kids are not given their best chance at life. Some make it and some prevail, but there are far more stories about those that don't. This should be addressed more instead of taking away an option to abort that should be allowed.
And let's face it, most abortions are early on in the stage and not in the last trimester....and I am not saying that abortion should be used as a form of birth control either. We need sensibility in the situation not government hands....choice, as in life, is critical....
And the religious argument is a joke...
COVERS allows u to tell someone they are sexually frustrated so long as ur hands are clean
2
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
@ABooksNightmare So you do not support the concept of women being able to have consistent rights with regards to abortion since it is their body and all? States cannot make proper decisions and we are seeing it right in front of our face. Morons down here pull out some 1800s relic on the books and now we dropped back 200 years in time. Even if you are against certain guidelines for abortion there needs to be a minimum standard that any citizen in any state can know exists not based on what screwball state legislature thinks. The reason why the federal government steps in is for this exact cause, extremists make awful legislative decisions based usually on religious intolerance and that is not what this country is about, extremists in all directions are not representative of society as a whole and even if you might disagree with abortion in your home it is the purpose that government is to exist and that is to protect the greater good and those who might not agree with religious beliefs.
What I am saying is that our nation was created on freedom and being able to make choices. If the female wishes to abort their child for any reason it should be their choice. It is their body and theirs alone. you can create arguments either way for when life should or shouldn't be aborted but until it is born it should be the females choice. Now, if we want to get into another discussion about whether some should have child altogether that is a different story. You SHOULD be mentally, physically and financially stable to bring or want to bring a child into this world. This is the topic that is not discussed enough or at all. I see zero reason for children to be born just to give them up for adoption or create broken homes. This is a proven fact that this does not work. Why we allow people to have children that are not capable of caring for themselves is beyond me, but as I stated we are a nation based on freedom and choice. It doesn't make it right though, however, to give birth to unfortunate or horrible circumstances as those kids are not given their best chance at life. Some make it and some prevail, but there are far more stories about those that don't. This should be addressed more instead of taking away an option to abort that should be allowed.
And let's face it, most abortions are early on in the stage and not in the last trimester....and I am not saying that abortion should be used as a form of birth control either. We need sensibility in the situation not government hands....choice, as in life, is critical....
Quote Originally Posted by ABooksNightmare: ....does our government really need to be involved with this...it's kind of ridiculous On ABC news, Trump tries to deflect blame by saying it's up to states whether they want to prosecute women for abortions. However Biden says abortion isn't about state rights. This is about women's rights. Now elections determine whether women have reproductive freedom. Or whether states continue assault to control women.
It is about women's rights and their choice....it is their body and should be their choice whether they wish to bring a human into this world and a man has zero say so in the matter on whether or not that woman wants to give childbirth or abort it. Let that resonate with most....men have no say in the matter even if you want the child. It is solely up to the female. That will never change unless you want laws to be implemented to the contrary. Good for Biden if that is the case and bad for Trump.
COVERS allows u to tell someone they are sexually frustrated so long as ur hands are clean
2
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
Quote Originally Posted by ABooksNightmare: ....does our government really need to be involved with this...it's kind of ridiculous On ABC news, Trump tries to deflect blame by saying it's up to states whether they want to prosecute women for abortions. However Biden says abortion isn't about state rights. This is about women's rights. Now elections determine whether women have reproductive freedom. Or whether states continue assault to control women.
It is about women's rights and their choice....it is their body and should be their choice whether they wish to bring a human into this world and a man has zero say so in the matter on whether or not that woman wants to give childbirth or abort it. Let that resonate with most....men have no say in the matter even if you want the child. It is solely up to the female. That will never change unless you want laws to be implemented to the contrary. Good for Biden if that is the case and bad for Trump.
Trump says he is open to states restricting birth control. But restricting reproductive freedom is the problem. Allowing states to restrict abortion has wrecked havoc on women healthcare. Also doctors and IVF are threatened. If Trump is re-elected, republicans would continue to push to end Obamacare contraception mandate and prosecute anyone who mails abortion and contraceptive medicines.
0
Trump says he is open to states restricting birth control. But restricting reproductive freedom is the problem. Allowing states to restrict abortion has wrecked havoc on women healthcare. Also doctors and IVF are threatened. If Trump is re-elected, republicans would continue to push to end Obamacare contraception mandate and prosecute anyone who mails abortion and contraceptive medicines.
A Texas doctor who said 9-year-olds can safely give birth has been appointed to a Texas health committee tasked with reviewing maternal deaths.
“If she is developed enough to be menstruating and become pregnant and reach sexual maturity, she can safely give birth to a baby,” To the House oversight committee in 2021.
A Texas doctor who said 9-year-olds can safely give birth has been appointed to a Texas health committee tasked with reviewing maternal deaths.
“If she is developed enough to be menstruating and become pregnant and reach sexual maturity, she can safely give birth to a baby,” To the House oversight committee in 2021.
In senate, democrat bill to protect right to contraceptives failed in 51-39 vote because of republicans opposition. 60 votes are needed to move bill forward. After overturning of Roe versus Wade, millions of women have been robbed of their reproductive freedoms. Now democrat Warren warns US supreme court may do the same thing to contraceptives. In Virginia, Nevada and Arizona, republican lawmakers threaten access to birth control. But Gallop poll reveals 88% of Americans say birth control is morally acceptable.
1
In senate, democrat bill to protect right to contraceptives failed in 51-39 vote because of republicans opposition. 60 votes are needed to move bill forward. After overturning of Roe versus Wade, millions of women have been robbed of their reproductive freedoms. Now democrat Warren warns US supreme court may do the same thing to contraceptives. In Virginia, Nevada and Arizona, republican lawmakers threaten access to birth control. But Gallop poll reveals 88% of Americans say birth control is morally acceptable.
I'm just curious as to why the same people that are such ardent supporters of abortion are against capital punishment. If they want abortion to be legal nationally, should capital punishment be as well?
2
I'm just curious as to why the same people that are such ardent supporters of abortion are against capital punishment. If they want abortion to be legal nationally, should capital punishment be as well?
Good news is that supreme court has ruled in favor of access to abortion pill. Bad news is that senate republicans have blocked access to intro vitro fertilization bill from democrats. Polls show vast majority of Americans say IVF is a good thing.
2
Good news is that supreme court has ruled in favor of access to abortion pill. Bad news is that senate republicans have blocked access to intro vitro fertilization bill from democrats. Polls show vast majority of Americans say IVF is a good thing.
After supreme court ruling, Biden administration reminds states that hospitals must be allowed to perform emergency abortions to save women at health risk. Every year, thousands of women face pregnancy complications and some need abortions. If hospitals turn away patients, they are subject to federal investigation, fines and loss of medicare funding. Problem is that abortion bans confuse doctors and discourage their proper duties.
1
After supreme court ruling, Biden administration reminds states that hospitals must be allowed to perform emergency abortions to save women at health risk. Every year, thousands of women face pregnancy complications and some need abortions. If hospitals turn away patients, they are subject to federal investigation, fines and loss of medicare funding. Problem is that abortion bans confuse doctors and discourage their proper duties.
I'm just curious as to why the same people that are such ardent supporters of abortion are against capital punishment. If they want abortion to be legal nationally, should capital punishment be as well?
the mugg. As astute as it gets.
Until the wallet is full.
0
Quote Originally Posted by THEMUGG:
I'm just curious as to why the same people that are such ardent supporters of abortion are against capital punishment. If they want abortion to be legal nationally, should capital punishment be as well?
Good news is that supreme court has ruled in favor of access to abortion pill. Bad news is that senate republicans have blocked access to intro vitro fertilization bill from democrats. Polls show vast majority of Americans say IVF is a good thing.
@thirdperson as astute as it gets
"I'm the MOST HONEST HUMAN BEING that God has EVER created!!" - Donald Trump
1
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
Good news is that supreme court has ruled in favor of access to abortion pill. Bad news is that senate republicans have blocked access to intro vitro fertilization bill from democrats. Polls show vast majority of Americans say IVF is a good thing.
Texas anti-abortion law has led to an 13% increase in infant mortality rate compared to 2% increase nationwide according to Journal of American medical association. Yet G.O.P. claims to be pro life?
1
Texas anti-abortion law has led to an 13% increase in infant mortality rate compared to 2% increase nationwide according to Journal of American medical association. Yet G.O.P. claims to be pro life?
100% of abortions near even reach infancy. So, is that an 100% mortality rate
Unlike born humans, a fetus cannot survive on its own. Right to Iife doesn't imply a right to mother's body. Also it doesn't imply right to threaten mother's life. Women should control their own bodies instead of government. 95% of women who had abortions say it was the right decision. Fact is banning abortions increase risk of maternal mortality for both mother and children.
1
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
100% of abortions near even reach infancy. So, is that an 100% mortality rate
Unlike born humans, a fetus cannot survive on its own. Right to Iife doesn't imply a right to mother's body. Also it doesn't imply right to threaten mother's life. Women should control their own bodies instead of government. 95% of women who had abortions say it was the right decision. Fact is banning abortions increase risk of maternal mortality for both mother and children.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: 100% of abortions near even reach infancy. So, is that an 100% mortality rate Unlike born humans, a fetus cannot survive on its own. Right to Iife doesn't imply a right to mother's body. Also it doesn't imply right to threaten mother's life. Women should control their own bodies instead of government. 95% of women who had abortions say it was the right decision. Fact is banning abortions increase risk of maternal mortality for both mother and children.
Fact is it increases the risk of a 'fetus' not surviving until it can survive on its own.
0
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: 100% of abortions near even reach infancy. So, is that an 100% mortality rate Unlike born humans, a fetus cannot survive on its own. Right to Iife doesn't imply a right to mother's body. Also it doesn't imply right to threaten mother's life. Women should control their own bodies instead of government. 95% of women who had abortions say it was the right decision. Fact is banning abortions increase risk of maternal mortality for both mother and children.
Fact is it increases the risk of a 'fetus' not surviving until it can survive on its own.
Fact is it increases the risk of a 'fetus' not surviving until it can survive on its own.
Abortion is not murder. Under the law, a fetus has no independent legal status until after being born alive. Person hood isn't granted to fetus before viability. Pro life movement promotes an irrational morality that turns back the sexual revolution and considers embryos equal to adults.
1
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
Fact is it increases the risk of a 'fetus' not surviving until it can survive on its own.
Abortion is not murder. Under the law, a fetus has no independent legal status until after being born alive. Person hood isn't granted to fetus before viability. Pro life movement promotes an irrational morality that turns back the sexual revolution and considers embryos equal to adults.
Age measures how long something has been in existence.
I want to force one of these tyrranical "pro-life" (LOL) bastards to take a polygraph test with a shotgun pointed at his head. He should be totally aware that if the needle quivers more than minutely, the shotgun will automatically discharge. The question he will be forced to answer is, "Did you claim your child (or you yourself) was one year old three months after birth?"
Of course the correct answer is "No," because fetal life is not human life. Humans (like all mammals) breathe in air. Fetuses are incapable of breathing because their lungs are filled with fluid.
I have never met one person who added nine months to what is typed on their birth certificate because fetuses are not living, breathing human beings.
It's not up to family members, rapists or the government to make women's reproductive choices. Women are not livestock.
1
Age measures how long something has been in existence.
I want to force one of these tyrranical "pro-life" (LOL) bastards to take a polygraph test with a shotgun pointed at his head. He should be totally aware that if the needle quivers more than minutely, the shotgun will automatically discharge. The question he will be forced to answer is, "Did you claim your child (or you yourself) was one year old three months after birth?"
Of course the correct answer is "No," because fetal life is not human life. Humans (like all mammals) breathe in air. Fetuses are incapable of breathing because their lungs are filled with fluid.
I have never met one person who added nine months to what is typed on their birth certificate because fetuses are not living, breathing human beings.
It's not up to family members, rapists or the government to make women's reproductive choices. Women are not livestock.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
