Federal Judge: Late-term abortion ban unconstitutional

[ajwps]

Originally posted by Hannitized
Holy shit! Now she's not even responsible if she gets pregnant?
Damn men should know how to control their sperm!! Bastards!

Holy feces!

Who carries the responsibility in the process of impregnation?

There is an old saying, "men have the hard and painful part in the act of conception while the woman has the easy part in simply carrying and delivering the baby in torment!"

 

[NewGuy]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by NewGuy
The supreme court has no authority over the Constitution.

Therefore, they are invalid in making such a decision.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by ajwps
Please be so kind as to point out in the US Constitution just where it says that women have no right to have abortions? That would be a real coup alright.

In your usual fashion, you have tried to take a complex subtopic and derail the entire issue because you have no reality based answer to it.

I SAID the supreme court has no authority over the Constitution.

YOU want to have me prove something different when you cannot adress the issue instead. You like to introduce tangents to threads when you know you cannot deal with the discussion so people choose to not read because of your chaos.

Open another thread, or wait until this topic is over before introducing more.

By the way, the Constitution does give the right to the Supreme Court to define the meanings in this document and to pass make decisions that affect all American's lives.

Prove it.

The Constitution says it is the highest authority to the land and ALL judges and courts must submit to its authority.

That point right there makes yours stupid and invalid. Add the Amendment addition clause and you simply have a process to DEFINE the Constitution where no set rule has been determined.

IE: The Ammendments in the Bill of Rights were CLARIFICATION as to what power the CITIZENS had over the government. Since the COnstitution gave citizens the highest authority over government branches, the Bill of Rights defined those powers.

-YET IT HAD TO BE IN CONTEXT WITH THE CONSTITUTION or else it would be invalid.

Prove this is NOT the case, using only the Constitution, and you will have won the point.

Since that is a physical impossibility, I await your typical name calling and topic switching.

This makes anything the supreme court says regarding abortion, when the Constitution claims murder illegal, USELESS.

 

[dilloduck]

Originally posted by ajwps
Actually I did not portray fatherhood and/or child slavery in any way to be similar or fact.

But the fact is that abortion is probably as old as recorded history and no amount of mental gymnastics about who decides what and when is moot.

You made the comparison between a baby and a potential farm hand. Is this how you believe fathers view thier children?

The point is not moot simply because you say it is. Abortions will occur. The discussion is the ramifications of it's legality , who is responsible, whose rights should be considered,etc. You act as if pregnancy is something a man does TO a woman. Have you ever considered it is something he helps her achieve? If you are tired of the mental gymnastics, I suggest you stop posting on this thread.

 

[HGROKIT]

Originally posted by NewGuy
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by NewGuy
The supreme court has no authority over the Constitution.

Therefore, they are invalid in making such a decision.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



In your usual fashion, you have tried to take a complex subtopic and derail the entire issue because you have no reality based answer to it.

I SAID the supreme court has no authority over the Constitution.

YOU want to have me prove something different when you cannot adress the issue instead. You like to introduce tangents to threads when you know you cannot deal with the discussion so people choose to not read because of your chaos.

Open another thread, or wait until this topic is over before introducing more.



Prove it.

The Constitution says it is the highest authority to the land and ALL judges and courts must submit to its authority.

That point right there makes yours stupid and invalid. Add the Amendment addition clause and you simply have a process to DEFINE the Constitution where no set rule has been determined.

IE: The Ammendments in the Bill of Rights were CLARIFICATION as to what power the CITIZENS had over the government. Since the COnstitution gave citizens the highest authority over government branches, the Bill of Rights defined those powers.

-YET IT HAD TO BE IN CONTEXT WITH THE CONSTITUTION or else it would be invalid.

Prove this is NOT the case, using only the Constitution, and you will have won the point.

Since that is a physical impossibility, I await your typical name calling and topic switching.

This makes anything the supreme court says regarding abortion, when the Constitution claims murder illegal, USELESS.

Alas, I predict much gnashing of teeth and maybe some wailing from AJ.

 

[UsaPride]

Originally posted by ajwps
Who carries the responsibility in the process of impregnation?

Am I needing to explain the birds and bees here?

There is an old saying, "men have the hard and painful part in the act of conception while the woman has the easy part in simply carrying and delivering the baby in torment!"

I'd say my husband had it pretty hard while I was pregnant, emotionally and physically. Then again, he's a responsible man. He had to work, take care of me, cook, clean, and get everything ready for the babies. I had heartburn and morning sickness. Yes, I had to give birth, the whole time he hovered over me worried I would die.
I don't remember the pain of labor, but I do remember how hard my husband worked to prepare us for the births.

 

[HGROKIT]

Originally posted by dilloduck
You made the comparison between a baby and a potential farm hand. Is this how you believe fathers view thier children?

The point is not moot simply because you say it is. Abortions will occur. The discussion is the ramifications of it's legality , who is responsible, whose rights should be considered,etc. You act as if pregnancy is something a man does TO a woman. Have you ever considered it is something he helps her achieve? If you are tired of the mental gymnastics, I suggest you stop posting on this thread.

you go duck!

 

[UsaPride]

Originally posted by dilloduck
You act as if pregnancy is something a man does TO a woman. Have you ever considered it is something he helps her achieve?

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by dilloduck
You act as if pregnancy is something a man does TO a woman. Have you ever considered it is something he helps her achieve? If you are tired of the mental gymnastics, I suggest you stop posting on this thread.

Considering this wingnut has proclaimed himself a physician, you would think he knows the female anatomy well enough to realize it is a two person process requiring cooperation in the most natural sense.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by Hannitized
Mr. Shawn? I'm "Hannitized" not "Hannity". But thanks for the compliment. I need to keep MY thoughts straight? I was going off of YOUR post. One paragraph right after another.

I hope you were going off on my post in a moral way!

You even asked "is this what you wish to be responsible for during your lifetime?" meaning (and this is how it looks to me) that if abortion should be made illegal again, then women are going to go around having abortions with coat hangers and it would be the anti-abortionists fault. Is that not what you were saying? Why not blame the woman whose allowing a coat hanger to be shoved up in her?

Next line you want to let women be responsible for their own actions, well hell, if they're actions lead them to a coat hanger up their ass then shouldn't they be responsible for it?

It doesn't matter who guided the hanger, they allowed a hanger to be used. So first it's the anti-abortionists fault, then the lay people, and the responsiblility never falls on the women who did this? Way to "pass the buck". I'm glad I'm female, I don't have to take responsibility for shit. WooHoo!

I am really getting OFF on your thought processes here.

1) Yes if the anti-life (anti-abortionists) get the Wade vs Roe law reversed, women will just go back to back-room abortions and yes those who reverse these laws will ultimately be responsible for women's deaths. If you think abortion in the USA will stop because the law changes, you should as well believe in Tinkerbell.

2) Women are not concerned with what or who shoves anything 'up them' but simply for whatever reason drives a woman to an abortion will remain the same.

3) Everyone (men and women) take responsibilty every day for what they do and that includes undergoing abortion. And yes, as a woman, you are responsible for any actions that you take which harms other human beings. Its just that when it comes to abortion, no one knows if there is harm done as the forming fetus, according to Genesis 2:9 does not have a human life during its time in the womb.

Blame the fetus....

So, more women had abortions because they were illegal? Is this what you're saying?

Statistically that is correct.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by ajwps
....Otherwise he should not have caused a woman to have to carry and incubate a possible human being.

In the last sex ed class I had several years ago, I understood that a woman had to spread her legs to get pregnant. So my point is, if the decision to have sex is a woman's, and then if the decision on whether or not to take a fetus to term is the woman's, then the responsibility for the child that results from HER decisions should also be the woman's.

So my question is clearly, why is there a double standard. Why does the woman have all the rights but yet the men have all the responsibilities. It is a very simple question.

 

[dilloduck]

Originally posted by ajwps

Originally posted by Hannitized
Mr. Shawn? I'm "Hannitized" not "Hannity". But thanks for the compliment. I need to keep MY thoughts straight? I was going off of YOUR post. One paragraph right after another.

I hope you were going off on my post in a moral way!

You even asked "is this what you wish to be responsible for during your lifetime?" meaning (and this is how it looks to me) that if abortion should be made illegal again, then women are going to go around having abortions with coat hangers and it would be the anti-abortionists fault. Is that not what you were saying? Why not blame the woman whose allowing a coat hanger to be shoved up in her?

Next line you want to let women be responsible for their own actions, well hell, if they're actions lead them to a coat hanger up their ass then shouldn't they be responsible for it?

It doesn't matter who guided the hanger, they allowed a hanger to be used. So first it's the anti-abortionists fault, then the lay people, and the responsiblility never falls on the women who did this? Way to "pass the buck". I'm glad I'm female, I don't have to take responsibility for shit. WooHoo!

I am really getting OFF on your thought processes here.

1) Yes if the anti-life (anti-abortionists) get the Wade vs Roe law reversed, women will just go back to back-room abortions and yes those who reverse these laws will ultimately be responsible for women's deaths. If you think abortion in the USA will stop because the law changes, you should as well believe in Tinkerbell.

2) Women are not concerned with what or who shoves anything 'up them' but simply for whatever reason drives a woman to an abortion will remain the same.

3) Everyone (men and women) take responsibilty every day for what they do and that includes undergoing abortion. And yes, as a woman, you are responsible for any actions that you take which harms other human beings. Its just that when it comes to abortion, no one knows if there is harm done as the forming fetus, according to Genesis 2:9 does not have a human life during its time in the womb.

Blame the fetus....

So, more women had abortions because they were illegal? Is this what you're saying?

Statistically that is correct.

NO ONE KNOWS IF HARM IS DONE TO THE FETUS??????

 

[brneyedgrl80]

Originally posted by freeandfun1
In the last sex ed class I had several years ago, I understood that a woman had to spread her legs to get pregnant. So my point is, if the decision to have sex is a woman's, and then if the decision on whether or not to take a fetus to term is the woman's, then the responsibility for the child that results from HER decisions should also be the woman's.

So my question is clearly, why is there a double standard. Why does the woman have all the rights but yet the men have all the responsibilities. It is a very simple question.

Here is something I wrote earlier in this thread that may help answer your question:

I think that while the child/baby/fetus, what have you, is in the woman, it is her responsibility to see that it is carried to full term (unless she were to get an abortion) and also to have a healthy baby. Granted I understand that sometimes a baby is born with handicaps that have nothing to do with the mother being irresponsible in any way i.e. drinking, smoking, drugs, etc. I don't think the man can do much in that sense seeing as that the baby is developing inside the woman.

If the baby is born, it is now both the man and the woman's responsibility because the baby is now outside of the woman's body and now the man has access to be responsible over the future of the baby as well. Hence child support. But this is just my opinion.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by NewGuy
[The Constitution says it is the highest authority to the land and ALL judges and courts must submit to its authority.

That point right there makes yours stupid and invalid. Add the Amendment addition clause and you simply have a process to DEFINE the Constitution where no set rule has been determined.

IE: The Ammendments in the Bill of Rights were CLARIFICATION as to what power the CITIZENS had over the government. Since the COnstitution gave citizens the highest authority over government branches, the Bill of Rights defined those powers.

-YET IT HAD TO BE IN CONTEXT WITH THE CONSTITUTION or else it would be invalid.

Prove this is NOT the case, using only the Constitution, and you will have won the point.

Since that is a physical impossibility, I await your typical name calling and topic switching.

This makes anything the supreme court says regarding abortion, when the Constitution claims murder illegal, USELESS. [/B]

I'm thinking that this will be a thread in the Political forum, not the Religion forum. But, NG, I think I will take you up on this one a bit later.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by brneyedgrl80
Here is something I wrote earlier in this thread that may help answer your question:

It still does not answer the double standard question. The guy has no say but responsibility, the womany has all the say but if she doesn't want it, she doesn't have to take responsibility. That is a double standard. Either both parties are equal in their responsibilities and their rights or they are not. Women want it both ways and that is wrong. It is a double standard.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by NewGuy

:

.................
I SAID the supreme court has no authority over the Constitution.

YOU want to have me prove something different when you cannot adress the issue instead. You like to introduce tangents to threads when you know you cannot deal with the discussion so people choose to not read because of your chaos.

Open another thread, or wait until this topic is over before introducing more.



Prove it.

You are really a funny NewGuy.... I asked where in the Constitution is abortion referrenced. The Supreme Court has found itself in the position of taking sides in this very devisive issue.

http://bensguide.gpo.gov/9-12/government/national/scourt.html

The Constitution established the Supreme Court as the highest court in the United States. The authority of the Court originates from Article III of the U.S. Constitution and its jurisdiction is set out by statute in Title 28 of the U.S. Code.

One of the Supreme Court’s most important responsibilities is to decide cases that raise questions of constitutional interpretation. The Court decides if a law or government action violates the Constitution. This is known as judicial review and enables the Court to invalidate both federal and state laws when they conflict with the Constitution. Since the Supreme Court stands as the ultimate authority in constitutional interpretation, its decisions can be changed only by another Supreme Court decision or by a constitutional amendment

This makes anything the supreme court says regarding abortion, when the Constitution claims murder illegal, USELESS.

Where exactly in the US Constitution does it say that abortion is murder?

WHAT are you talking about? Do you have idea of the difference between murder, killing, abortion and the right of citizens to make decisions about their own bodies?

You are the one who equates murder with abortion.

Where ignorance is bliss, ‘Tis folly to be wise.

ATTRIBUTION: Thomas Gray (1716–1771)

 

[brneyedgrl80]

It still does not answer the double standard question. The guy has no say but responsibility, the womany has all the say but if she doesn't want it, she doesn't have to take responsibility. That is a double standard. Either both parties are equal in their responsibilities and their rights or they are not. Women want it both ways and that is wrong. It is a double standard.

I'm sorry, but I disagree. I do not think it is a double standard at all and I'm not really sure where you are coming from on your opinion.

I do think the guy has a say, but ultimately it is up to the woman considering she is the one who will be carrying the fetus for 9 months and giving birth to it. It is the woman who has to make sure that no harm comes to the fetus for 9 whole months, not the man. And given certain scenarios, sometimes the man isn't even around anyways. So, for 9 months, the woman is solely responsible for the fetus. What can the man do to take responsibility of the fetus for those 9 months? Make sure the woman eats right? Make sure she doesn't smoke? Make sure she doesn't drink? Well, if the man is even around he can't monitor the woman every waking moment. If the woman wants to eat things that may not be healthy, she's going to do it. If she wants to smoke or drink, she's going to do it, right or wrong. But she is ultimately responsible, not the man. Unfortunately, the man can offer very little as far as responsibility for the fetus during the first 9 months.

Where the man can step in and finally be able to have the chance to be responsible is when the child is born. Now it is physically possible for the man and the woman to both be responsible for that child. If the man is with the woman, then he can be there for and with the child. If the man is seperate from the woman, he can at least pay child support and visit if he wants.

That is what I think and I just don't see it as double standard. But who knows, you may still disagree and that is fine, just though I would clear up my above quote.

 

[NewGuy]

You didn't adress but ignored the point that the Constitution says ALL COURTS must bow to the authority of the Constitution.

Any law made after, if counter is illegal.

Your argument about the supreme court and its authority have no weight.

Back to the topic at hand, shall we get into the same discussion about the Constitution justifying ALL have the right to life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness?

Shall we get into the discussion you lost on when life begins?

Which way do you want to lose?

 

[freeandfun1]

I am not sure how you don't see the double, triple or whatever, standard.

Decision 1 - Have sex or not.

Woman decides yes.

Man decides yes.

Woman: 1
Man: 1

Decision 2 - Take fetus to term or not

Woman decides yes.

Man decides. . . . no, no, no, the man has no say oops!

Woman: 2
Man: 1

Decision 3 - to keep the child or give up for adoption

Woman decides yes.

Man decides. . . . no, no, no, the man has no say oops!

Woman: 3
Man: 1

Decision 4 - Man in child's life or not

Woman decides yes.

Man decides yes or no

Woman: 4
Man: 2

Decision 5 - Man pays child support whether he decides to be in child's life or not

Woman decides yes.

Man decides. . . . no, no, no, the man has no say oops!

Woman: 5
Man: 2

Now there are five decisions the woman gets to make and only two for the man.

You focus on the 9 months but then you equate that to 18 or more years of child support the man has to pay. In my opinion, the man should take precautions not to get a woman pregnant. Especially one he does not plan to marry. But at the same time, I look at the above outline and I see five decions being made by the woman and only two by the man. If women are equal, then shouldn't the decisions have equal weight? If so, then it is obvious the woman's responsibility should be more than the man's. She is the one that was able to make the most decisions along the way. She is the one that is responsible for her body and what it brings forth.

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by freeandfun1
I am not sure how you don't see the double, triple or whatever, standard.

Decision 1 - Have sex or not.

Woman decides yes.

Man decides yes.

Woman: 1
Man: 1

Decision 2 - Take fetus to term or not

Woman decides yes.

Man decides. . . . no, no, no, the man has no say oops!

Woman: 2
Man: 1

Decision 3 - to keep the child or give up for adoption

Woman decides yes.

Man decides. . . . no, no, no, the man has no say oops!

Woman: 3
Man: 1

Decision 4 - Man in child's life or not

Woman decides yes.

Man decides yes or no

Woman: 4
Man: 2

Decision 5 - Man pays child support whether he decides to be in child's life or not

Woman decides yes.

Man decides. . . . no, no, no, the man has no say oops!

Woman: 5
Man: 2

Now there are five decisions the woman gets to make and only two for the man.

You focus on the 9 months but then you equate that to 18 or more years of child support the man has to pay. In my opinion, the man should take precautions not to get a woman pregnant. Especially one he does not plan to marry. But at the same time, I look at the above outline and I see five decions being made by the woman and only two by the man. If women are equal, then shouldn't the decisions have equal weight? If so, then it is obvious the woman's responsibility should be more than the man's. She is the one that was able to make the most decisions along the way. She is the one that is responsible for her body and what it brings forth.

By your new math, what happens when 3 guys rob a bank and two hold weapons?

Do you only charge 2 and say the third was "just along for the ride"?

Old Testament scripture does not bear you out on your version of justice.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by NewGuy
By your new math, what happens when 3 guys rob a bank and two hold weapons?

Do you only charge 2 and say the third was "just along for the ride"?

Old Testament scripture does not bear you out on your version of justice.

Not sure what you mean by your last sentence.

As for the charges, actually, the law does allow for different charges based on the actions taken during the course of a robbery, murder, etc.

Let's say the third didn't know the other two had guns, or maybe he didn't even know when they went into the bank that the other two were going to rob it, do you still charge the third guy? Do you charge him with armed robbery or just robbery? There are too many variables and decisions to be made and punishment is dished out based on the level and number of decisions.