Joe--Here are some domestic terrorists to get after
- Thread starter mushroomgod_1
- Start date
She did. Won't reply to me. This has happened before with her.
It’s called “tapping out”. It’s what she does when she’s unable to keep up or make a valid argument.
You don't deny it.
I don't need to look up sedition. I see it in Democrats every day. Same as when I look up hypocrisy.
Look who finally sobered up and joined in.
Look for about 20 posts in the next 5 minutes.
A
anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
Guest
so it's ok for conservatives to protest outside school board meetings and homes of election officials (and make death threats towards them) but draw the line for the supreme court?
There's a specific federal statute in play, 18 USC 1507, that specifically applies to judges, juries, witnesses:
www.law.cornell.edu
Now, I've heard people say that it is illegal to picket outside a Judge's home per se.....that's not really correct. You have to do so with the intent required under the statute for there to be a crime. That intent may be inferred (or not) from the specifics of the situation. Now, everyone with a functioning brain (not you) understands that if the situation were reversed, and pro-lifers were picketing the houses of the SC justices under similar circumstances, that Garland, the most worthless human being ever to hold his office, would find merit in charging the demonstrators.
I'm not aware of whether or not there are specific federal statutes protecting school board members or election officials. Certainly people threatening such individuals can be charged under state law (In Indiana, the crime of Intimidation). In Indiana, intimidating judges is an additional element that dramatically elevates the level of the charge to a serious felony. Any kind of threat of physical force is a felony (the federal charge above is only a misdemeanor). There's also a section that gives additional protection to any individual who is intimidated due to the nature of his job.
Try harder.
18 U.S. Code § 1507 - Picketing or parading
Now, I've heard people say that it is illegal to picket outside a Judge's home per se.....that's not really correct. You have to do so with the intent required under the statute for there to be a crime. That intent may be inferred (or not) from the specifics of the situation. Now, everyone with a functioning brain (not you) understands that if the situation were reversed, and pro-lifers were picketing the houses of the SC justices under similar circumstances, that Garland, the most worthless human being ever to hold his office, would find merit in charging the demonstrators.
I'm not aware of whether or not there are specific federal statutes protecting school board members or election officials. Certainly people threatening such individuals can be charged under state law (In Indiana, the crime of Intimidation). In Indiana, intimidating judges is an additional element that dramatically elevates the level of the charge to a serious felony. Any kind of threat of physical force is a felony (the federal charge above is only a misdemeanor). There's also a section that gives additional protection to any individual who is intimidated due to the nature of his job.
Try harder.
Last edited:
Yep and the man made that same choice, knowing he could be responsible for a child and support for 21 years. You do know that often the men are also supportive of the choice of an abortion?
Why do you keep wanting to give the man all the woman's power? You seem to want the man to be responsible for the woman's body.
If you want me to agree that we should hold the man responsible for the pregnancy, I am all for that. Wage garnishment, leins....whatever it takes.
But ultimately, only one of the 2 participants will have to carry the child for 9 months, visit doctors, and give birth. And it isn't going to be the man.
With abortion, you eliminate all the responsibility by the woman and the man by destroying a life. Makes no sense.
