Is Roe v. Wade "widely accepted by legal scholars as settled law"...What is "widely accepted"?

[healthmyths]

The country is not ready or willing to absorb 750,000 more babies a year.

And so I take it you are in favor of this?

U.S. Births Dip To 30-Year Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level
There were 3,853,472 births in the U.S. in 2017 — "down 2 percent from 2016 and the lowest number in 30 years," the CDC said.
The general fertility rate sank to a record low of 60.2 births per 1,000 women between the ages of 15 and 44 — a 3 percent drop from 2016, the CDC said in its tally of provisional data for the year.
The results put the U.S. further away from a viable replacement rate – the standard for a generation being able to replicate its numbers.
"The rate has generally been below replacement since 1971," according to the report from CDC's National Center for Health Statistics.
U.S. Births Dip To 30-Year Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level

In terms you might be able to understand.
If there are fewer births and the population grows older, where will the money come to support the Federal/state/local governments?
Where will the employees come to work the jobs... robots? Oh of course.
Or are you traitorGator too old to care about the country, Americans,etc.?
Not any statement supported by facts but my observation.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The country is not ready or willing to absorb 750,000 more babies a year.

Better in the trash heap then? Or sold for parts?

What a stupid argument.

I am not making an argument, I am stating the reason the SCOTUS will not over turn RvW.

You're saying Roe vs Wade is in place for population control? Really? You may want to back that train up

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The country is not ready or willing to absorb 750,000 more babies a year.

And so I take it you are in favor of this?

U.S. Births Dip To 30-Year Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level
There were 3,853,472 births in the U.S. in 2017 — "down 2 percent from 2016 and the lowest number in 30 years," the CDC said.
The general fertility rate sank to a record low of 60.2 births per 1,000 women between the ages of 15 and 44 — a 3 percent drop from 2016, the CDC said in its tally of provisional data for the year.
The results put the U.S. further away from a viable replacement rate – the standard for a generation being able to replicate its numbers.
"The rate has generally been below replacement since 1971," according to the report from CDC's National Center for Health Statistics.
U.S. Births Dip To 30-Year Low; Fertility Rate Sinks Further Below Replacement Level

In terms you might be able to understand.
If there are fewer births and the population grows older, where will the money come to support the Federal/state/local governments?
Where will the employees come to work the jobs... robots? Oh of course.
Or are you traitorGator too old to care about the country, Americans,etc.?
Not any statement supported by facts but my observation.

You are just not a very smart person at all. Which is ok, the world needs ditch diggers also.

I am pro-life/anti-abortion. My statement was not one of support for abortion but one of explanation as to why the SCOTUS will not end RvW.

 

[Hiryuu]

The country is not ready or willing to absorb 750,000 more babies a year.

Better in the trash heap then? Or sold for parts?

What a stupid argument.

Liberty. Is that a stupid argument?

Freedom to choose means you have the freedom to make bad choices. I have to support Roe v Wade, but I don't really support abortions, or neglecting the opportunity to address concerns before abortions are required.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The country is not ready or willing to absorb 750,000 more babies a year.

Better in the trash heap then? Or sold for parts?

What a stupid argument.

I am not making an argument, I am stating the reason the SCOTUS will not over turn RvW.

You're saying Roe vs Wade is in place for population control? Really? You may want to back that train up

Practicality is why it is in place and why it will not be removed. It is not unlike why the unconstitutional anti-discrimination laws that are in place.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The country is not ready or willing to absorb 750,000 more babies a year.

Better in the trash heap then? Or sold for parts?

What a stupid argument.

Liberty. Is that a stupid argument?

Freedom to choose means you have the freedom to make bad choices. I have to support Roe v Wade, but I don't really support abortions, or neglecting the opportunity to address concerns before abortions are required.

Why not let the baby choose after it is born and old enough if it wants to be killed or not?

Seems only fair

 

[Hiryuu]

The country is not ready or willing to absorb 750,000 more babies a year.

Better in the trash heap then? Or sold for parts?

What a stupid argument.

Liberty. Is that a stupid argument?

Freedom to choose means you have the freedom to make bad choices. I have to support Roe v Wade, but I don't really support abortions, or neglecting the opportunity to address concerns before abortions are required.

Why not let the baby choose after it is born and old enough if it wants to be killed or not?

Seems only fair

Fair is the first four letters of fairytale.

 

[TNHarley]

The country is not ready or willing to absorb 750,000 more babies a year.

Better in the trash heap then? Or sold for parts?

What a stupid argument.

Liberty. Is that a stupid argument?

Freedom to choose means you have the freedom to make bad choices. I have to support Roe v Wade, but I don't really support abortions, or neglecting the opportunity to address concerns before abortions are required.

I dont support the action itself, I just support people making their own bad decisions over the govt forcing you to go against your will when you arent hurting anyone else.
I think high abortion rates reflect our crappy society.
I always prefered just pushing the women down the stairs. Much more humane than sucking the fetus out with a vacuum

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The country is not ready or willing to absorb 750,000 more babies a year.

Better in the trash heap then? Or sold for parts?

What a stupid argument.

I am not making an argument, I am stating the reason the SCOTUS will not over turn RvW.

You're saying Roe vs Wade is in place for population control? Really? You may want to back that train up

Practicality is why it is in place and why it will not be removed. It is not unlike why the unconstitutional anti-discrimination laws that are in place.

Silly me, here I thought it was all about choice, women's rights, etc and now I find out it's about population control. Sounds a little Nazish

 

[TNHarley]

I have no doubt eugenics is our future.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The country is not ready or willing to absorb 750,000 more babies a year.

Better in the trash heap then? Or sold for parts?

What a stupid argument.

I am not making an argument, I am stating the reason the SCOTUS will not over turn RvW.

You're saying Roe vs Wade is in place for population control? Really? You may want to back that train up

Practicality is why it is in place and why it will not be removed. It is not unlike why the unconstitutional anti-discrimination laws that are in place.

Silly me, here I thought it was all about choice, women's rights, etc and now I find out it's about population control. Sounds a little Nazish

That is what they tell you people to keep you happy. Come on now, does anyone with a brain really think that killing a baby falls under privacy?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The country is not ready or willing to absorb 750,000 more babies a year.

Better in the trash heap then? Or sold for parts?

What a stupid argument.

Liberty. Is that a stupid argument?

Freedom to choose means you have the freedom to make bad choices. I have to support Roe v Wade, but I don't really support abortions, or neglecting the opportunity to address concerns before abortions are required.

Why not let the baby choose after it is born and old enough if it wants to be killed or not?

Seems only fair

Fair is the first four letters of fairytale.

On that I agree 100%. But I still think the baby should have a say in whether it gets killed or not

 

[TNHarley]

Better in the trash heap then? Or sold for parts?

What a stupid argument.

Liberty. Is that a stupid argument?

Freedom to choose means you have the freedom to make bad choices. I have to support Roe v Wade, but I don't really support abortions, or neglecting the opportunity to address concerns before abortions are required.

Why not let the baby choose after it is born and old enough if it wants to be killed or not?

Seems only fair

Fair is the first four letters of fairytale.

On that I agree 100%. But I still think the baby should have a say in whether it gets killed or not

Then just ask the fetus. If it doesnt respond in 10 minutes, it loses its choice.

 

[jknowgood]

Here come the anti-abortion freaks.

Make no mistake.

This IS an attack on choice.

They would outlaw any and all abortions and take us back to the 1950s and back alley abortions (well not for the rich...they always "go on vacation"

Science will soon prove a baby is not a fetus.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Here come the anti-abortion freaks.

Make no mistake.

This IS an attack on choice.

They would outlaw any and all abortions and take us back to the 1950s and back alley abortions (well not for the rich...they always "go on vacation"

Science will soon prove a baby is not a fetus.

What does that even mean?

A fetus is just one stage of human development, no different than toddler or adolescent.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Liberty. Is that a stupid argument?

Freedom to choose means you have the freedom to make bad choices. I have to support Roe v Wade, but I don't really support abortions, or neglecting the opportunity to address concerns before abortions are required.

Why not let the baby choose after it is born and old enough if it wants to be killed or not?

Seems only fair

Fair is the first four letters of fairytale.

On that I agree 100%. But I still think the baby should have a say in whether it gets killed or not

Then just ask the fetus. If it doesnt respond in 10 minutes, it loses its choice.

Well, if that is the way to go let's apply that rule to new borns and 1 year olds. You down with that?

 

[TNHarley]

Freedom to choose means you have the freedom to make bad choices. I have to support Roe v Wade, but I don't really support abortions, or neglecting the opportunity to address concerns before abortions are required.

Why not let the baby choose after it is born and old enough if it wants to be killed or not?

Seems only fair

Fair is the first four letters of fairytale.

On that I agree 100%. But I still think the baby should have a say in whether it gets killed or not

Then just ask the fetus. If it doesnt respond in 10 minutes, it loses its choice.

Well, if that is the way to go let's apply that rule to new borns and 1 year olds. You down with that?

So you want to murder human babies? WTF is wrong with you?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Why not let the baby choose after it is born and old enough if it wants to be killed or not?

Seems only fair

Fair is the first four letters of fairytale.

On that I agree 100%. But I still think the baby should have a say in whether it gets killed or not

Then just ask the fetus. If it doesnt respond in 10 minutes, it loses its choice.

Well, if that is the way to go let's apply that rule to new borns and 1 year olds. You down with that?

So you want to murder human babies? WTF is wrong with you?

I am not the one that supports abortion, that would be you.

 

[TNHarley]

Here come the anti-abortion freaks.

Make no mistake.

This IS an attack on choice.

They would outlaw any and all abortions and take us back to the 1950s and back alley abortions (well not for the rich...they always "go on vacation"

Science will soon prove a baby is not a fetus.

What does that even mean?

A fetus is just one stage of human development, no different than toddler or adolescent.

There is not a difference between a fetus and a human being?

 

[TNHarley]

Fair is the first four letters of fairytale.

On that I agree 100%. But I still think the baby should have a say in whether it gets killed or not

Then just ask the fetus. If it doesnt respond in 10 minutes, it loses its choice.

Well, if that is the way to go let's apply that rule to new borns and 1 year olds. You down with that?

So you want to murder human babies? WTF is wrong with you?

I am not the one that supports abortion, that would be you.

I dont support the state forcing people to go against their will when it doesnt infringe on another human being, actually.