God I hope the GOP Supreme Court overturns Roe

Baby murder or infanticide is not defensible.

Killing babies?
Somebody actually wants to defend the right to kill children?

What kind of immoral person defends killing the defenseless?
The person avoiding questions on this thread, for one.
 
I'm no a proponent of eugenics. I am merely pointing to all of you people who fear whites losing power in the USA, that 70% of the women who have abortions are poor. The people who are the poorest in America are black and Hispanic women.

You don't want to pay welfare, food stamps, or education expenses for the poor, and yet you want to force all of these non-white women to give birth to babies they can't afford to raise. When abortion is banned, the middle class white women will continue to get abortions, because they've always gotten abortions.

If I had gotten pregnant while in high school, I would not have had the money to get an abortion, even if had known where to go to get one.
So you would have relied on your government to provide you with an abortion? Sounds typical for a libtard.
 
Leftist judicial sweet heart, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, called Roe V. Wade horrible law and something to be reworked.

There is no doubt Roe v Wade should be revisited and scrapped and I doubt the "giant minds" we have on the court today are up to the task however. Modern technology has smashed many of the assumptions
about children in utero that Roe used to form it's bad law.

It's time for something better and to stop the epidemic of filicide that the sham law Roe v Wade
has brought upon the nation.
Lincoln gave us the Emancipation Proclamation without partisan political considerations.

I doubt today's leaders are nearly so high minded.
You don't get to cite RBG for why the law is "bad", and then take the 180 degree opposite stance she took. Her argument was that the law was not strong enough. She would spit on your comments.
 
Too bad ghouls like you never think about a safety net for unborn children.
Oh, and before this rancid fart of a thought floats away for good... let's check the scoreboard and remind everyone who is pushing for universal prenatal healthcare, and who is pushing against this.



Let's check who the largest provider of free prenatal healthcare is: community health centers, followed by organizations like Planned Parenthood.

And who is blocking bills like this one from Senate vote?:

H.R.1943 - Community Health Center and Primary Care Workforce Expansion Act of 2019​



Why, that would be Republicans, blocking the democrats.

Who is trying to defund Planned Parenthood? Easy answer. Who is pushing against that? Democrats.

Who is pushing for public option? For universal health insurance? Not republicans.

So, which party is trying to provide the safety net for unborn kids? Healthcare and food for pregnant women?

Check the scoreboard. It's not even CLOSE.
 
Oh, and before this rancid fart of a thought floats away for good... let's check the scoreboard and remind everyone who is pushing for universal prenatal healthcare, and who is pushing against this.



Let's check who the largest provider of free prenatal healthcare is: community health centers, followed by organizations like Planned Parenthood.

And who is blocking bills like this one from Senate vote?:

H.R.1943 - Community Health Center and Primary Care Workforce Expansion Act of 2019​



Why, that would be Republicans, blocking the democrats.

Who is trying to defund Planned Parenthood? Easy answer. Who is pushing against that? Democrats.

Who is pushing for public option? For universal health insurance? Not republicans.

So, which party is trying to provide the safety net for unborn kids? Healthcare and food for pregnant women?

Check the scoreboard. It's not even CLOSE.

The utter shamelessness of democrat hypocrisy is appalling. Anyone who doesn't support every democrat policy "doesn't care" about whomever they happen to be talking about, but at the same time their most passionate issue is the "right" to mercilessly kill the most innocent and vulnerable human life in the world.
 
True. I think the GOP went for the low-hanging fruit but missed the long-term implications of gerrymandering.

I figured that if the gerrymandering had a major impact I'd find a bunch of states where the governor, elected at large, would be of a different party than the legislature. I did a search and it didn't seem to be born out by the data (I'm not qualified but what the hell). My conclusion is that the gerrymandering pushes candidates to the extremes since there are no swing voters they need to attract.

I think I see this in the election of candidates like Marjorie Taylor Greene. The long-term implications seem to point to the GOP becoming an embarrassment to the majority of voters and eventually even the gerrymandering won't keep them in power. Maybe just wishful thinking on my part?
Kentucky has a Democrat governor and hardly any other elected offices are Democrats. Republicans control the legislature and almost every county government in the state. Only the two largest cities have Democrats as mayors and they will probably be thrown out after the next election.
 

Forum List

Back
Top