What will happen when Republicans overturn a woman's right to control her own body?

[JOSweetHeart]

Maybe they will start using birth control! What a novel idea, huh?

Amen to this.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. Or even better. There is this thing that I love to call abstinence.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

My guess is women will not stand for it.

You know if old white men could get pregnant this wouldn't even be an issue.

No, women won’t.

It’s a classic example where Republicans and conservatives should be careful what they wish for.

 

[night_son]

The new GOP nominee said birth control is "abortion in a pill".

Birth Control didn't become legal for married couples until the late 1960's.

Birth Control didn't become legal for single people until the 1070's.

When abortion was illegal, women died going to what was called "backstreet butchers".

Today's women are NOT the women of the 1950's.

I believe Republicans will manage to overturn Roe vs Wade. Even if they don't actually overturn the law, they will put so many restrictions on the law, it will basically be overturned.

Then what? Will it stay overturned forever?

Will women be thankful that old white men control their bodies?

You have fallen for swallowing the same falsified science and history as has every other American who believes in the abortion lies you have posted in your OP. That radical Leftist ideology is a poison of the mind which has convinced millions of otherwise decent, law abiding American citizens such as yourself that the dismembering of unborn children developing in the womb is normative, morally acceptable behavior, and has cost the lives of over one hundred million unborn babies, any one of which could have been the next great scientist, astronaut or philosopher or President of our Age. Below I will present abortion truths. Whether or not you can handle the truth is up to you.

The root social culture and philosophy of induced abortion/abortion on demand can be traced to the feet of one Marquis de Sade and his work: La Philosophic dans le boudoir which was published in 1795 and among other sadistic observations, proposed the use of induced abortion as a means of population control. Marquis de Sade was a human monster who hated God and developed the idea that once the moral facts associated with Christianity were abandoned, any taboo of sex or violence with or against another human being could deemed just and good. He believed that hurting someone else physically could be sexually gratifying and even therapeutic. Further, he philosophized that humans should abandon God and all moral constraints in order to be able to explore Mankind's savage inner animalistic nature.

deanrd, does Marquis de Sade's sadism sound to you like a good practice for Americans to follow or apply to their social culture and political theories?

And then, speaking to your back alley abortion claims, there was a man named Dr. Bernard Nathanson who helped found the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws, now known as NARAL. He was an abortion activist who aided in the establishment of the largest abortion clinic in the world. After reforming his abortion beliefs to Pro-Life he wrote a number of memoirs in which he confessed that the statistics on back alley abortions used by NARAL and the abortion movement to argue for legalization of Abortion in America had been falsified. In other words, all those numbers of illicit back alley abortions fools such as yourself refer to in smug self-serving confidence to justify your belief in a woman's right to murder her unborn child, never happened. All lies.

Abortion on demand will be ended. In fact, I would wager that the process has been in the works for a couple of years now. What women want, regarding the independent human being growing in their wombs, is irrelevant. An unborn child is the same beautiful, infinitely complex human being as any other child, with same potential to become anything he or she puts their mind to achieving. No one should have the right to take another's life from them. This insanity must and will end.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Whatever.. another Rderp "the sky is falling" thread. Row v, Wade isn't going anywhere.

 

[fncceo]

Even in the highly unlikely event that Roe is overturned, this would in no way criminalize abortion. It would merely remove a Constitutional guarantee to the right of an abortion.

Prior to Roe in 1973, abortion on request was legal in 13 states, legal in certain cases, in three more.

If this decision were passed back to states, I have no doubt most laws would remain just as they currently are.

It would however, have implications to public funding for abortion which, I believe, is the issue that most troubles anti-abortion advocates.

 

[Jackson]

Even in the highly unlikely event that Roe is overturned, this would in no way criminalize abortion. It would merely remove a Constitutional guarantee to the right of an abortion.

Prior to Roe in 1973, abortion on request was legal in 13 states, legal in certain cases, in three more.

If this decision were passed back to states, I have no doubt most laws would remain just as they currently are.

It would however, have implications to public funding for abortion which, I believe, is the issue that most troubles anti-abortion advocates.

The cost of the abortion is important and should not be passed on to taxpayers. But the critical element is the fact that innocent human lives are being butchered at the request of selfish women. There is no other way top put it.

 

[fncceo]

Even in the highly unlikely event that Roe is overturned, this would in no way criminalize abortion. It would merely remove a Constitutional guarantee to the right of an abortion.

Prior to Roe in 1973, abortion on request was legal in 13 states, legal in certain cases, in three more.

If this decision were passed back to states, I have no doubt most laws would remain just as they currently are.

It would however, have implications to public funding for abortion which, I believe, is the issue that most troubles anti-abortion advocates.

The cost of the abortion is important and should not be passed on to taxpayers. But the critical element is the fact that innocent human lives are being butchered at the request of selfish women. There is no other way top put it.

I view abortion as a medical procedure. Which is why I think it's strange that there is a Constitutional guarantee of elective abortion but none for an elective appendectomy or tonsillectomy.

 

[deanrd]

Maybe they will start using birth control! What a novel idea, huh?

Your nominee calls contraceptives "abortion in a pill".
You haven't watched the hearings?

How long before conservative make contraception illegal?

 

[deanrd]

Even in the highly unlikely event that Roe is overturned, this would in no way criminalize abortion. It would merely remove a Constitutional guarantee to the right of an abortion.

Prior to Roe in 1973, abortion on request was legal in 13 states, legal in certain cases, in three more.

If this decision were passed back to states, I have no doubt most laws would remain just as they currently are.

It would however, have implications to public funding for abortion which, I believe, is the issue that most troubles anti-abortion advocates.

The cost of the abortion is important and should not be passed on to taxpayers. But the critical element is the fact that innocent human lives are being butchered at the request of selfish women. There is no other way top put it.

I view abortion as a medical procedure. Which is why I think it's strange that there is a Constitutional guarantee of elective abortion but none for an elective appendectomy or tonsillectomy.

No one is trying to regulate an appendectomy or a tonsillectomy.

 

[fncceo]

Even in the highly unlikely event that Roe is overturned, this would in no way criminalize abortion. It would merely remove a Constitutional guarantee to the right of an abortion.

Prior to Roe in 1973, abortion on request was legal in 13 states, legal in certain cases, in three more.

If this decision were passed back to states, I have no doubt most laws would remain just as they currently are.

It would however, have implications to public funding for abortion which, I believe, is the issue that most troubles anti-abortion advocates.

The cost of the abortion is important and should not be passed on to taxpayers. But the critical element is the fact that innocent human lives are being butchered at the request of selfish women. There is no other way top put it.

I view abortion as a medical procedure. Which is why I think it's strange that there is a Constitutional guarantee of elective abortion but none for an elective appendectomy or tonsillectomy.

No one is trying to regulate an appendectomy or a tonsillectomy.

Precisely my point. a doctor ultimately makes the decision with the patient to perform any elective procedure. Poliiticians and legislators should have no involvement.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

The new GOP nominee said birth control is "abortion in a pill".

Birth Control didn't become legal for married couples until the late 1960's.

Birth Control didn't become legal for single people until the 1070's.

When abortion was illegal, women died going to what was called "backstreet butchers".

Today's women are NOT the women of the 1950's.

I believe Republicans will manage to overturn Roe vs Wade. Even if they don't actually overturn the law, they will put so many restrictions on the law, it will basically be overturned.

Then what? Will it stay overturned forever?

Will women be thankful that old white men control their bodies?

I'm guessing that the majority of the men making these decisions for women have wives who are beyond child bearing years and therefore probably think this is no big deal because it doesn't personally affect them.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

 

[my2¢]

If Roe versus Wade is reversed then abortion becomes a state issue and access to a legal abortion for some will require travel to another state.

 

[night_son]

Even in the highly unlikely event that Roe is overturned, this would in no way criminalize abortion. It would merely remove a Constitutional guarantee to the right of an abortion.

Prior to Roe in 1973, abortion on request was legal in 13 states, legal in certain cases, in three more.

If this decision were passed back to states, I have no doubt most laws would remain just as they currently are.

It would however, have implications to public funding for abortion which, I believe, is the issue that most troubles anti-abortion advocates.

Actually, all we need to eliminate the legality of abortion on demand is either the passage of a sanctity of life bill which identifies and defines prenatal human life as protected from elimination by due process federally; which would ban abortion on all levels, or a case similar to Roe, which is argued and won in the Supreme Court on the protection of the sanctity of unborn human life.

 

[deanrd]

Even in the highly unlikely event that Roe is overturned, this would in no way criminalize abortion. It would merely remove a Constitutional guarantee to the right of an abortion.

Prior to Roe in 1973, abortion on request was legal in 13 states, legal in certain cases, in three more.

If this decision were passed back to states, I have no doubt most laws would remain just as they currently are.

It would however, have implications to public funding for abortion which, I believe, is the issue that most troubles anti-abortion advocates.

Actually, all we need to eliminate the legality of abortion on demand is either the passage of a sanctity of life bill which identifies and defines prenatal human life as protected from elimination by due process federally; which would ban abortion on all levels, or a case similar to Roe, which is argued and won in the Supreme Court on the protection of the sanctity of unborn human life.

In other words, you want it based on a lie.

Got it!

 

[night_son]

Even in the highly unlikely event that Roe is overturned, this would in no way criminalize abortion. It would merely remove a Constitutional guarantee to the right of an abortion.

Prior to Roe in 1973, abortion on request was legal in 13 states, legal in certain cases, in three more.

If this decision were passed back to states, I have no doubt most laws would remain just as they currently are.

It would however, have implications to public funding for abortion which, I believe, is the issue that most troubles anti-abortion advocates.

Actually, all we need to eliminate the legality of abortion on demand is either the passage of a sanctity of life bill which identifies and defines prenatal human life as protected from elimination by due process federally; which would ban abortion on all levels, or a case similar to Roe, which is argued and won in the Supreme Court on the protection of the sanctity of unborn human life.

In other words, you want it based on a lie.

Got it!

No worries dean, I understand now your roleplaying as devil's advocate to logic for kicks and the uselessness of rational attempts to reason with you. I'll stand down outside of your threads for now on; I've dirtied my boots enough in them. You mistake maturity for naiveté and lies for the truth. To date, the longer responses I've made to your posts have been done out of respect for a fellow veteran. Some believe the expression of their opinion online is a roleplaying joke, and while I can be just as playful as the next when the mood strikes, I always take seriously the words I type here. There's important value and meaning in every strata of expression, and each one belongs to a hierarchy of even greater meaning--a self-narrative. Perhaps one day you will thaw out.

Until then enjoy your anti-human, anti-American, anti-Life rants. They speak volumes about their author.

 

[blastoff]

The new GOP nominee said birth control is "abortion in a pill".

Birth Control didn't become legal for married couples until the late 1960's.

Birth Control didn't become legal for single people until the 1070's.

When abortion was illegal, women died going to what was called "backstreet butchers".

Today's women are NOT the women of the 1950's.

I believe Republicans will manage to overturn Roe vs Wade. Even if they don't actually overturn the law, they will put so many restrictions on the law, it will basically be overturned.

Then what? Will it stay overturned forever?

Will women be thankful that old white men control their bodies?

With a little luck all you liberal clowns will walk off a cliff in protest.

 

[dspahn]

The new GOP nominee said birth control is "abortion in a pill".

Birth Control didn't become legal for married couples until the late 1960's.

Birth Control didn't become legal for single people until the 1070's.

When abortion was illegal, women died going to what was called "backstreet butchers".

Today's women are NOT the women of the 1950's.

I believe Republicans will manage to overturn Roe vs Wade. Even if they don't actually overturn the law, they will put so many restrictions on the law, it will basically be overturned.

Then what? Will it stay overturned forever?

Will women be thankful that old white men control their bodies?

With a little luck all you liberal clowns will walk off a cliff in protest.

Like a “real” Die-in...
Speaking of which do you think there might be a reason that pro-choice advocates don’t use that method of protest at crisis pregnancy centers?
I mean besides the fact that the government is already on their side?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[martybegan]

What will happen when Republicans overturn a woman's right to control her own body?

They won't "overturn" it. The matter will simply return to the states, where it belongs.

And in the States where most women care about it, nothing will happen.

In places like Alabama though, changes will occur.

 

[martybegan]

The new GOP nominee said birth control is "abortion in a pill".

Birth Control didn't become legal for married couples until the late 1960's.

Birth Control didn't become legal for single people until the 1070's.

When abortion was illegal, women died going to what was called "backstreet butchers".

Today's women are NOT the women of the 1950's.

I believe Republicans will manage to overturn Roe vs Wade. Even if they don't actually overturn the law, they will put so many restrictions on the law, it will basically be overturned.

Then what? Will it stay overturned forever?

Will women be thankful that old white men control their bodies?

Most states will continue to recognize a woman’s right to privacy.

In states that don’t continue to recognize that right and enact measures which compel a woman to give birth against her will through force of law, the issue will move to the political realm, where advocates of privacy rights will work to remove from office state lawmakers hostile to privacy rights.

Indeed, Republican state lawmakers will be exposed to a political backlash should they support measures compelling women to give birth against their will.

In 40 or 50 years the right to privacy will likely be again recognized in all 50 states, the consequence of either Republican lawmakers voted out of office with measures hostile to privacy rights repealed, or by a future Supreme Court with a majority of justices appointed by Democratic presidents.

Yes, authoritarian conservatives will succeed in denying women their right to privacy – allowing for more government and bigger government to interfere in citizens’ personal lives – but ultimately conservatives will fail, defeated by the American people and their desire to possess their comprehensive rights and protected liberties.

Why do you have to use newspeak? It's a right to abortion, if you support it, at least be honest about it.

The people of Alabama and such States evidently want to ban abortion because they keep electing people that want to ban abortion.