Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 6:
Line 6: − *Liberals argue that the [[Equal Protection Clause]] was meant only to protect certain politically favored groups. That interpretation defeats the whole point of that clause. − *Liberals will glady tear down real [[family|families]] to support the concept of the institution of the family as they understand it.
→Examples: these are also stupid liberal ideas, but not examples of SC
*[[Pro-abortion]] activists argue that since there are no such things as [[unalienable rights]], there is no [[right to life]], so that there is an unalienable right to [[abortion]].
*[[Pro-abortion]] activists argue that since there are no such things as [[unalienable rights]], there is no [[right to life]], so that there is an unalienable right to [[abortion]].
*Liberals justify [[special rights]] as furthering [[equality]] and oppose genuine equality as a special right.
*Liberals justify [[special rights]] as furthering [[equality]] and oppose genuine equality as a special right.
*[[Evolutionists]] use the [[argument from poor design]] to attempt to disprove [[creationism]]; however, according to evolutionism, natural selection should have selected out all suboptimal designs.
*[[Evolutionists]] use the [[argument from poor design]] to attempt to disprove [[creationism]]; however, according to evolutionism, natural selection should have selected out all suboptimal designs.
==See also==
==See also==