Republicans won’t be satisfied with overturning Roe

[initforme]

That’s because you are an ideologue who totally dismisses the rights of genetically distinct human beings in the womb. Which in effect makes them chattel to you.

The voters shall decide as it should be.

 

[toobfreak]

prohibits parents from legally providing gender-affirming treatment and therapies to their children

1. Children have no "gender" to speak of until the onset of puberty. And children are at the most confused state of their lives to be making life decisions on things they don't even know anything about yet.
2. There is nothing "affirming" about gender transitions. It is all based on the whim of a child who guesses he thinks he was somehow magically just born in the wrong body.
3. There are no therapies. Statistics show that a large percentasge of kids who grow up after gender-brainwashing and mutilation end up very unhappy with many committing suicide.
4. Until a child reaches 18, they are a minor not able to make serious decisions for themselves. They can't vote, drink, drive nor go to war, why in the world would we trust their ever-changing views on what gender they think they are this week?

 

[ding]

The voters shall decide as it should be.

And they shall base their votes on the dictates of their conscience.

 

[daveman]

And they shall base their votes on the dictates of their conscience.

That's what Democrats hate most about it.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

1100 25 rwbsw …~… I agree with the 28 states with fetal homicide laws …~… Saint Ding says I don’t

ding says mcxx …~… That’s because you are an ideologue who totally dismisses the rights of genetically distinct human beings in the womb.

whut I say mcxxv …~… I do not totally dismiss the rights of genetically distinct human beings in the womb. Your Catholic upbringing has failed to teach you not to bear false witness against thy neighbor.

whut I say XIII,xxxviii …~… I agree with the 28 states with fetal homicide laws (Ohio California New York Illinois erc ) in that they include explicit language precluding charging pregnant women in relation to their own pregnancies

 

[whutTHEYsay]

1100 26 rwbsw …~… Nowhere is it recognized as a genetically distinct human beings until birth; including in the Dobbs decision.

ding says mcxx …~… That’s because you are an ideologue who totally dismisses the rights of genetically distinct human beings in the womb.

Sam Alito cm wrote in summary of the Dobbs Decision …~… “For our part, we do not question the motives of either those who have supported and those who have opposed laws restricting abortion,”

whut I say mcxxvi …~… what Sam Alito is telling you Saint Ding is that a genetically distinct human being in the womb does not have a right of protection from the potential birth mother if she herself refuses to take the risks of full term gestation until natural live birth. Do you think Sam Alito is an ideologue?

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

What complexity? There is no complexity when you respect that every woman has the same rights as you ~ the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

.


Except when she's in the womb.



.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Until a child reaches 18, they are a minor not able to make serious decisions for themselves. They can't vote, drink, drive nor go to war, why in the world would we trust their ever-changing views on what gender they think they are this week?

.

Or trust them to have the judgment to know when they're not being brainwashed by their peers or today's sick popular "culture".


.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

1100 29 rwbsw …~…. American Civil Society is in agreement that the womb does not protect it’s inhabitant from the one single person who provides it.

Except when she's in the womb.

Whut I say that is the TRUTH …~… The exception is granted to pregnant women in the Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe versus Wade. The pre-porn have a right to life protections against every single human being on the planet, except for the one human being, capable of gestating a developing human being in her womb, to full term and then and only then is a baby given full protected life after separation from the mother at birth.

That includes post~utero protection from his or her birth~mother !

 

[Frankenstein]

What complexity? There is no complexity when you respect that every woman has the same rights as you ~ the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

And the rights over her reproduction, as in do not get pregnant it's simple. Nobody is forcing her. Men play and equal part, and get no say, that is some B.S right there.

 

[Frankenstein]

1100 29 rwbsw …~…. American Civil Society is in agreement that the womb does not protect it’s inhabitant from the one single person who provides it.



Whut I say that is the TRUTH …~… The exception is granted to pregnant women in the Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe versus Wade. The pre-porn have a right to life protections against every single human being on the planet, except for the one human being, capable of gestating a developing human being in her womb, to full term and then and only then is a baby given full protected life after separation from the mother at birth.

That includes post~utero protection from his or her birth~mother !

Civil my arse

 

[Frankenstein]

“Republican senators are giving us a glimpse of the culture war clashes to come. There are already warning signs — including the Texas directive that prohibits parents from legally providing gender-affirming treatment and therapies to their children, as well as various state officials’ questioning whether the Constitution sanctions contraceptive use. Indeed, some Republican senators have gestured toward these future conflicts. In his questions to Jackson, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) repeatedly sought her views of Obergefell v. Hodges, the court’s 2015 decision legalizing same-sex marriage, pressing her as to whether the decision was properly decided. Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) took her turn at the microphone to criticize Griswold v. Connecticut, the 1965 case that legalized contraception use. It’s not a stretch to imagine this revisionism extending to Loving v. Virginia, the ruling that legalized interracial marriage. A Republican senator recently said he was open to overturning that ruling. He later walked back his comments.

All this underscores that abortion was never the conservatives’ endgame. It is merely a way station on the path to rolling back a wide range of rights — the rights that scaffold the most intimate aspects of our lives and protect the liberty and equality of marginalized groups.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/03/25/ketanji-brown-jackson-roe/

Republicans’ assault on citizens’ rights and protected liberties has just begun.

Good, stop the wholesale slaughter of babies in the womb you ghoul!