Over 200 Lawmakers Ask SCOTUS to Reconsider Roe v Wade

[Weatherman2020]

The time is nigh.

200 lawmakers urge Supreme Court to reconsider Roe vs. Wade

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

You mean Roe v Wade installed by Republican Warren Burger?

Republicans have a nasty habit of shooting themselves in the foot.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Look, overturning RvW would be bad.You religious wacks think you have a monopoly on morals and ethic. Fact is you don’t. You’re not going to stop women from getting abortions, and banning abortions will just make some abortion providers criminals while endanger young women. Why don’t you put your efforts to making adoption more prevalent?

 

[Weatherman2020]

Look, overturning RvW would be bad.You religious wacks think you have a monopoly on morals and ethic. Fact is you don’t. You’re not going to stop women from getting abortions, and banning abortions will just make some abortion providers criminals while endanger young women. Why don’t you put your efforts to making adoption more prevalent?

Californians can continue to butcher babies if it’s overturned.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Look, overturning RvW would be bad.You religious wacks think you have a monopoly on morals and ethic. Fact is you don’t. You’re not going to stop women from getting abortions, and banning abortions will just make some abortion providers criminals while endanger young women. Why don’t you put your efforts to making adoption more prevalent?

And people go overseas because of limited number of US adoptees.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

The time is nigh.

200 lawmakers urge Supreme Court to reconsider Roe vs. Wade

View attachment 298168

BTW- 207 lawmakers is less than half of the 535 members of congress. Apparently most lawmakers don’t want RvW overturned.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The time is nigh.

200 lawmakers urge Supreme Court to reconsider Roe vs. Wade

View attachment 298168

BTW- 207 lawmakers is less than half of the 535 members of congress. Apparently most lawmakers don’t want RvW overturned.

Democrats love dead babies.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Look, overturning RvW would be bad.You religious wacks think you have a monopoly on morals and ethic. Fact is you don’t. You’re not going to stop women from getting abortions, and banning abortions will just make some abortion providers criminals while endanger young women. Why don’t you put your efforts to making adoption more prevalent?

And people go overseas because of limited number of US adoptees.

So spend your time and effort promoting adoption here in the states rather than restricting the constitutional rights of women.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Look, overturning RvW would be bad.You religious wacks think you have a monopoly on morals and ethic. Fact is you don’t. You’re not going to stop women from getting abortions, and banning abortions will just make some abortion providers criminals while endanger young women. Why don’t you put your efforts to making adoption more prevalent?

And people go overseas because of limited number of US adoptees.

So spend your time and effort promoting adoption here in the states rather than restricting the constitutional rights of women.

Why? Kids are adopted here. Time to save babies.

 

[jwoodie]

So spend your time and effort promoting adoption here in the states rather than restricting the constitutional rights of women.

Ho hum, another libtard straw man argument.

 

[rightwinger]

The time is nigh.

200 lawmakers urge Supreme Court to reconsider Roe vs. Wade

View attachment 298168

That is not how it works

It is not a popularity contest. A specific case impacting Roe v Wade must be brought before the court and it will be decided based on Constitutional law and legal precedents

 

[rightwinger]

Look, overturning RvW would be bad.You religious wacks think you have a monopoly on morals and ethic. Fact is you don’t. You’re not going to stop women from getting abortions, and banning abortions will just make some abortion providers criminals while endanger young women. Why don’t you put your efforts to making adoption more prevalent?

And people go overseas because of limited number of US adoptees.

So spend your time and effort promoting adoption here in the states rather than restricting the constitutional rights of women.

Why? Kids are adopted here. Time to save babies.

How many have you adopted?

 

[BuckToothMoron]

So spend your time and effort promoting adoption here in the states rather than restricting the constitutional rights of women.

Ho hum, another libtard straw man argument.

Libtard? Jwoodiesucker I am more conservative than you. I’m just not a religious idiot.

 

[The Banker]

The time is nigh.

200 lawmakers urge Supreme Court to reconsider Roe vs. Wade

View attachment 298168

BTW- 207 lawmakers is less than half of the 535 members of congress. Apparently most lawmakers don’t want RvW overturned.

Democrats love dead babies.

Republicans love dead innocent people killed in mass shootings at Walmart, and they love taking people's rights.

 

[pknopp]

Overturning RvW doesnt make abortions illegal.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The time is nigh.

200 lawmakers urge Supreme Court to reconsider Roe vs. Wade

View attachment 298168

That is not how it works

It is not a popularity contest. A specific case impacting Roe v Wade must be brought before the court and it will be decided based on Constitutional law and legal precedents

Read linky poo!

“in a brief supporting a Louisiana law that would severely limit access to the procedure”

 

[Weatherman2020]

Overturning RvW doesnt make abortions illegal.

It’s the end of the world. Millions of dead women laying in the gutter.

 

[jwoodie]

You mean Roe v Wade installed by Republican Warren Burger?

Republicans have a nasty habit of shooting themselves in the foot.

Roe v Wade was the worst SCOTUS decision since Plessy v Ferguson (separate but equal). To reach that decision, the Court had to invent a phantom right to "privacy" and ignore medical evidence regarding the increasing viability of less-than-full-term babies. (The idiotic "trimester" analysis is now considered junk science and universally ignored.)

The bogus right to privacy rationale was only supported by four Justices; three Justices wrote concurring opinions based on other Constitutional arguments, while two dissented outright. As for Chief Justice Warren Burger, he wrote a concurrence in which he wrote that he thought it would be permissible to allow a state to require two physicians to certify an abortion before it could be performed.

The bottom line was that a group of would-be social scientists decided to override the right of individual states to write their own criminal statutes and replace them with one of their own.

 

[evenflow1969]

The time is nigh.

200 lawmakers urge Supreme Court to reconsider Roe vs. Wade

View attachment 298168

BTW- 207 lawmakers is less than half of the 535 members of congress. Apparently most lawmakers don’t want RvW overturned.

Democrats love dead babies.

Wrong! I am a democrat and would be over joyed to see roe v wade overturned. I am not alone. It will not happen the republicans are not truely interested in doing it. We will see what happens.

 

[pknopp]

The time is nigh.

200 lawmakers urge Supreme Court to reconsider Roe vs. Wade

View attachment 298168

BTW- 207 lawmakers is less than half of the 535 members of congress. Apparently most lawmakers don’t want RvW overturned.

Democrats love dead babies.

Wrong! I am a democrat and would be over joyed to see roe v wade overturned. I am not alone. It will not happen the republicans are not truely interested in doing it. We will see what happens.

This is indeed little more than a campaign stunt.