How Many Republicans Are Pro Choice

[Dagosa]

There is no right written anywhere that you have a choice what to do with your body.

Wow. So people aren’t free to do with their body what they want to protect their own health ? The civil war was in vain ? You’re quite constitutionally illiterate.

 

[Dagosa]

it would fall back to the age old argument if s fetus is a human being or not which of course is subjective.

Get real. You’re Making up shit.

 

[whitehall]

One thing is clear, there are no pro-life democrats.

 

[Dagosa]

There is no right written anywhere that you have a choice what to do with your body. If there was, that would make laws against suicide illegal, and laws against using recreational narcotics. Slavery is what you are doing to another body, not yours. And we never fought any war over what you can do with your own body.

States could never bring back slavery because freedom to live without servitude is in the Constitution. But even if there were some right to do with your body as you like, it would fall back to the age old argument if s fetus is a human being or not which of course is subjective. Then we would have to go down that road again. In my state if you kill a pregnant woman, you are charged with two murders.

Abortion is not a constitutional right, it is a medical procedure no different than getting a bad tooth removed by the dentist. We don't make proclamation of rights, there are procedures to make them constitutional rights, or a majority of judges on the Supreme Court decide if there are X rights or not.

Wrong..

In varying contexts, the Court or individual Justices have, indeed, found at least the roots of that right in the First Amendment, Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 557, 564 (1969); in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 8 -9 (1968), Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 350 (1967), Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616 (1886), see Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 478 (1928) (Brandeis, J., dissenting); in the penumbras of the Bill of Rights, Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S., at 484 -485; in the Ninth Amendment, id., at 486 (Goldberg, J., concurring); or in the concept of liberty guaranteed by the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment, see Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399 (1923). These decisions make it clear that only personal rights that can be deemed “fundamental” or “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty,” Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319, 325 (1937), are included in this guarantee of personal privacy.
They also make it clear that the right has some extension to activities relating to marriage, Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 12(1967); procreation, Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535, 541-542 (1942); contraception, Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S., at 453-454; id., at 460, 463-465 [410 U.S. 113, 153] (WHITE, J., concurring in result); family relationships, Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158, 166 (1944); and child rearing and education, Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 535 (1925), Meyer v. Nebraska, supra.

 

[Dagosa]

One thing is clear, there are no pro-life democrats.

There are no pro women among repugnants.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Because, abortion is freedom of choice over one’s own body. We founght a war declaring states did not have the right to take fundamental freedoms of people that included slavery and the choice over their own destiny. and their own bodies. Slave owners refused to allow slaves freedom to protect their own bodies. The right must be afraid of women or they must hate women.

If they had their way, they’d let states to be able to adopt slavery again under the guise of state’s rights, which is denying people’s their freedom and right to choose. States allowed owners to punish and murder their own slaves and others in the name of denying choices to protect their own bodies.

They must also hate the idea that everyone should equal access to healthcare. too. States have a history of denying right to choose for their citizens.

That’s why we have Medicare and Medicaid and federal invention as decided by the constitution.
Life, LIBERTY and the pursuit of happiness. We have decided long ago that women have that right OVER the unborn...the right can’t fking deal with it.

You literally are promoting ownership of those human beings you are bigoted against.

 

[jotathought]

Wrong..

Not really .. there are no enumerated rights in the constitution for pro-choice outcomes. Period. The 1973 Roe v. Wade was poorly predicated on a weak majority opinion mischaracterizing English Common Law regarding the status of abortion, did not include unborn children as "persons" as used throughout the constitution and had the Supreme Court assuming the role of the legislative branch with the definition of the trimester framework (among other things).

Sorry .. abortion was a made up "right" and even Ginsberg criticized that abortion should have been grounded someplace different in the constitution.

 

[Dagosa]

Not really .. there are no enumerated rights in the constitution for pro-choice outcomes. Period. The 1973 Roe v. Wade was poorly predicated on a weak majority opinion mischaracterizing English Common Law regarding the status of abortion, did not include unborn children as "persons" as used throughout the constitution and had the Supreme Court assuming the role of the legislative branch with the definition of the trimester framework (among other things).

Sorry .. abortion was a made up "right" and even Ginsberg criticized that abortion should have been grounded someplace different in the constitution.

The preamble to the constitution is ment to outline the full constitution. Read it. The unborn are not persons and are not protected.

 

[Dagosa]

You literally are promoting ownership of those human beings you are bigoted against.

Sure, reading is not your strong suit.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Get real. You’re Making up shit.

How am I making it up when it's the foundation of the abortion argument? Pro-choice people believe that a fetus is not a human being and pro-life people believe that it is. From a legal standpoint it can't be determined one way or the other. Again, it's subjective. If it could, then it could be determined if abortion is murder or not.

 

[Dagosa]

Pro-choice people believe that a fetus is not a human being and pro-life people believe that it is.

Wrong….pro choice people believe the unborn is not protected and promote the “general welfare” of the mother and her doctor to make any decision during pregnancy.
Considering 9/10 abortions have been during the first trimester, it has generally been used with due consideration.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Wow. So people aren’t free to do with their body what they want to protect their own health ? The civil war was in vain ? You’re quite constitutionally illiterate.

No they are not. We have various laws about that and nobody ever challenged it from a constitutional point of view. For instance seat belt laws do what? They protect you from harm of an accident. It's your body. How is the law allowed to determine what you must do to protect your own body? Biden tried to force people to take the vaccine or lose their job. The court ruled it is only constitutional to mandate that if you work in a healthcare facility, work for government, or in the armed services. Apparently the Supreme Court disagrees with you. You do not have the right to do with your body as you wish.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Wrong….pro choice people believe the unborn is not protected and promote the “general welfare” of the mother and and her doctor to make that decision.

And it's not protected because they don't consider a fetus a human being. They don't consider it a human being until the baby is born and takes it's first breath. The pro-life argument is that a fetus is indeed a human being, and ending it's life is murder.

 

[Dagosa]

And it's not protected because they don't consider a fetus a human being.

And for that reason in promoting the general welfare, the fetus is not protected by the constitution. . Thanks for promoting pro choice.

 

[Resnic]

I guess I'm not anything on it and I am a republican.

On one hand I know abortion is ending the life of a child intentionally prematurely. That's what an abortion is, if there was no baby then you can't have an abortion. Even if it's just a brainless blob if you leave it alone it will be a baby one day because it takes 17 to 19 years from it to go from a blob to an adult. And I also know murder is wrong.

On the other hand, I don't care what other irresponsible and people with no morals do. I am 47 and never wanted a baby so I was careful and never got someone pregnant. There are 7.5 trillion people in the world, I can't pretend I care about them. So murder your baby if you want, but I won't pretend you're not murdering it when you abort even if you do.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

And for that reason in promoting the general welfare, the fetus is not protected by the constitution. . Thanks for promoting pro choice.

If it were legally determined that a fetus is indeed a human being all abortion would be illegal because ending the life of another human being is murder.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I guess I'm not anything on it and I am a republican.

On one hand I know abortion is ending the life of a child intentionally prematurely. That's what an abortion is, if there was no baby then you can't have an abortion. Even if it's just a brainless blob if you leave it alone it will be a baby one day because it takes 17 to 19 years from it to go from a blob to an adult. And I also know murder is wrong.

On the other hand, I don't care what other irresponsible and people with no morals do. I am 47 and never wanted a baby so I was careful and never got someone pregnant. There are 7.5 trillion people in the world, I can't pretend I care about them. So murder your baby if you want, but I won't pretend you're not murdering it when you abort even if you do.

And that's the point I was making. Whether ending the life of a fetus is murder or not is an individual opinion, which of course you and everybody else are entitled to. It's why I'm more or less pro-choice. A fetus being a human life is between you and your God--not you and your government. It's all a matter of what you believe.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Anyone who is pro choice should never vote for a Republican state house, senate, governor, national senate, house seat or president ever again unless he or she swears she's pro choice. Don't think Republicans got the message in November.

I don't give a flying **** at a rolling donut. I am pro-abortion, but it has little (if any) influence on my voting.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Sure, reading is not your strong suit.

You literally use slavery - where human beings were the victim of prejudice and legal discrimination to the extent of being denied personhood - as an excuse to deny personhood, promote prejudice, and have legal discrimination against the unborn.

Slavery was wrong because innocent human beings were reduced to the property of others... and you want human beings to be reduced to the property of others.

You pro-aborts are as rotten as promoters of slavery could ever be, but don't literally copy the position of the slavers and pretend you're somehow the opposite - that's beyond disgusting.

 

[sealybobo]

I don't give a flying **** at a rolling donut. I am pro-abortion, but it has little (if any) influence on my voting.

I don't care about abortion either. Don't plan on getting one. I'm a dude. But I won't vote for a party who kisses religions ass like Republicans do.